User talk:Steven Crossin/Archive 3

Vandalism template
I changed it because the template hadn't been updated in seven hours or so. A quick look at recent changes showed nothing out of the ordinary (4 is used for "normal levels of vandalism") and the backlog of AIV mentioned in the old summary was gone - in fact, AIV was empty. So I changed it to 4. Xenon54 22:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Reversion of 7805
I notice you undid the vandalism warning you left on my talk page about my change to 7805, but you did not undo your revert. I believe this was a legitimate change I made. Is there some reason you left it reverted, or should I simply redo the change? -- Foogod (talk) 02:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * To be honest, the revert I made should stay in place. As the article has been proposed for merging, a clear consensus in favour of merging must be established. I reverted the warning, because what you did was not vandalism, just not a following of procedure, that is, unless a consensus has been established. Steve Crossin (talk) 02:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I put up a proposed change, announced it on both Talk:7805 and Talk:7812, requested feedback, and waited a week before making the actual change. The only comments I got were in favor of the change. The previous discussion on the talk page (for over a month) appeared to be largely in favor of the merger as well, the only dissention being from a single anonymous user who did not respond to earlier comments regarding his/her statements, and as far as I can tell probably hasn't even been back to Wikipedia since. There appears to be more than adequate consensus to me. Do you believe that these pages should not be merged? If so, please explain why so that we can discuss it properly, instead of just reverting the change.

As is noted in WP:CON, consensus is generally achieved specifically by making changes, and it even explicitly encourages being bold to this end. I fail to see how my changes deviated in any way from this stated accepted practice. -- Foogod (talk) 23:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * No, you're completely right, and you have every right to make the merge. I actually didn't review the merger discussions, which I probably should have. But as consensus is clear, go ahead with the merges. I was only pointing out that consensus should be achieved first, possibly an edit summary of something like "merged as a result of merge discussion" would help people patrolling recent changes. Cheers. Steve Crossin (talk) 00:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for confirming.. Sorry if I seemed a bit abrupt, but it is a little frustrating to try to make contributions, in what I understood to be the appropriate way, just to have them instantly reverted with no idea of why or what I did wrong.. I can see how it might not have been entirely obvious from your perspective, though, and I'll try to be more careful about my edit summaries in future.. -- Foogod (talk) 21:50, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (numbers and dates) —Random832 21:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Dansville
Hello, I edited out the section about Dansville library because I know the guy who put that there (editing under IPs in the subnet 131.111.x.y); he's been adding nonsense with citations referring to books admins are unlikely to check; I'm trying to revert his edits. For more of his work, see Solitude (the edits by Jon Wilson), Manufacturing (IP 131.111 edits which add a paragraph about the difference between manufacturing and fabrication) and Woodworking (edits by Jon Wilson again, relating to Aztec wood preservation techniques which are again entirely fictitious and cite an obscure book on South American archaeology which in fact has no bearing on the subject). 131.111.250.142 (talk) 12:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah yes the books certainly exist. Unfortunately, he isn't in fact acting in good faith. 131.111.250.142 (talk) 21:02, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Evidence re: Dansville: See how the referenced pages are about a broad history of Michigan under British control in the 18th century, and not much to do with libraries or municipal funding. 131.111.250.142 (talk) 13:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, in regards to that book, I personally checked the existence of the book, and I informed them of my opinion here. It's on your user page, strangely enough. I would suggest you create an account, warnings on a large subnet, such as yours, could affect a few people, such as yourself. And I don't want people to get warned/blocked who do not deserve it. I acted in good faith here, I couldn't check the fact in the book, but seeing the books existence, was enough for me to assume it was probably a true fact. Regards, Steve Crossin (talk) 13:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't understand... you can check the fact. Click the link; it's a Google "preview" which lets you view every page. Reading the pages in question shows they have nothing to do with the topic in question. 131.111.250.142 (talk) 14:10, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism
I got so mad because people keep removing my Edits on the Linux article. and I got so mad i didnt take it very well. i was wondering if you had any tips on forcing people to leave my edits alone. they contain verifiable facts from on the record sources. I did intend to vandalize those pages, but only becuase i was upset my legit edit kept getting removed by hard core sticklers. what can i do to make them stop? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpolster2005 (talk • contribs) 06:13, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, well, first of all, if they are reverting your edits, which you believe to be true and factual, then you must cite a reliable source backing up your statememnt, an I'm sure you know, content on Wikipedia must be verifiable. However, you should never vandalise a page, just because you are mad. I would suggest you stay cool when editing. Discuss your concerns with the editors, and if you are unsatisfied by their reverts after discussion, seek intervention from an administrator. Feel free to post a message here anytime. Steve Crossin (talk) 06:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Since You Have Two of Those...
I figure I'll award you this one instead :):

Nomi Deutch
Hi Steve,

Earlier today I placed a CSD A7 on Nomi Deutch. I see it's been removed. From my reading of the revision history, it appears that the creator of the article removed the tag out of process. Would that be correct? Best regards, Xdenizen (talk) 06:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi again! Thanks for that. I'm a vandal fighter and New Page patroller as well, so I appreciate how busy you've been. I can't count how many articles I've tagged today and vandals I've reverted and reported. Cheers for double checking my suspicions on that one. Best regards! :) Xdenizen (talk) 07:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm very grateful for your help today, actually. I don't have much direct contact with other Wikipedians. I suspect that's the lot of the Wikignome. ;) I was granted +rollbacker on January 10th and prior to that I used Twinkle. I use a combination of the two now, rollback in blatant cases (with TW for warnings) and TW where rollback might not be constructive or appropriate. I've been around Wikipedia since 2004, but I created my account in early 2006. I enjoy foiling the efforts of vandals and others who make the 'pedia a collection of crud rather than a useful resource.

I suspect I may have deletionist tendencies. :) Cheers! Xdenizen (talk) 07:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Yikes! That's one hell of an +count bump! Makes me feel like a slacker. ;) Xdenizen (talk) 07:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * As for Huggle, no can do mate. I use Fedora 7 Linux, so I'm stuck with rollback and Twinkle as far as I can tell. Still, we struggle on. ;) Be well and if I can ever be of assistance don't hesitate to drop me a line! Xdenizen (talk) 07:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd be much obliged for any tools which can improve my ability to can the vandals. :) Xdenizen (talk) 07:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that. I have the full Java doo-dad installed on my box, so I think I'll give VF a go. Be well! Xdenizen (talk) 07:50, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Jeremy Michael Boorda
I see you encountered user:72.204.219.46, aka. He's a banned user who never tires of promoting himself and his heroes. As with all banned users, his edits may be reverted on sight. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 08:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for notifying me of this. I was reluctant to revert his edits, as they seemed OK. I will now know that he is a vandal, and will do so. Could you provide me a diff of his edits? I've reverted like 200 vandal edits today and seem to have forgotten. Steve Crossin (talk) 08:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Here's your revert of his long sequence of edits:
 * Here's his sock drawer: Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Harvardlaw
 * Thanks for your patrolling work. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 09:10, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Good grief! I don't even have that many socks in my drawer! Well, it's what I do on Wikipedia. I revert vandalism. Sometimes for more than half of the day. It's something I take pride in, and I have my adopter to thank. Ever since I did my Anti-Vandalism course, ive been at war with vandals, and that will never stop. Steve Crossin (talk) 09:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Why was a given a warning for editing my own message in a discussion page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiwiki718 (talk • contribs) 10:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Abate
I've blocked Poverty78 temporarily to stop the edit-warring; there actually is such a rap artist though whether he's notable is dubious and I'm looking into it now. Black Kite 10:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks for that. Could you let me know the outcome? Sorry if my reverting of their edits was overkill, it was just my gut instinct, and I'm using Huggle, they appeared to be a vandal, as per their edit history displayed in Huggle. Steve Crossin (talk) 10:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I've fixed the article and unblocked Poverty78: I'm still not sure whether he meets our notability guidelines though he's been mentioned in WP:RS, as placed in the article. Black Kite 10:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

IRC
thanks for the Barnstar, and yeah I was in my IRC channel as "Warpath".. :P ..-- Cometstyles 10:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Mistake
Obviously, I made a mistake. It seems that I wanted to revert the same Vandalism as you did, and you were faster than I am. Also, it seems that I failed to realise that you had already reverted the edit. Sorry for this. I apologise. Kind regards, --Abrech (talk) 12:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Royal S. Copeland
Thanx for reverting that unanonymous UNDOing of my edit. Ironically, he UNDID your work claiming that you didn't give an explanation, though he only complained about my grammar. Such are the dramas from people who dislike homeopathy. Ironically, they seek to defend "science" and "medicine" by deleting references to history and to research. DanaUllmanTalk 19:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I would appreciate your advice here
Hi Steve,

Yesterday I nominated an article for deletion. Looking through the history things seem to have gone rather askew. I suspect sockpuppet. Would you review this for me? Thanks in advance, Xdenizen (talk) 21:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey
Sorry about dropping off the face of the earth, I just wrapped up to FAC's and have two in progress right now with another one coming up soon, and in real life I had a big audition (I'm an actor). So, you wanted help with Karen Hayes? Let me know if there is anything else, I'll work on it tomorrow around 4-7 PM Eastern. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 06:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * All your references have to look like this if they are just repeats of other references, include QUOTES and the forward slash in order to keep the reference from eating the rest of the article. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 06:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my talk page
I just reported the vandal to WP:AIV. Hey, another 24 fan!  Enigma  msg! 08:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you...
for reverting the Vandalism on my talk page! Kind regards, --Abrech (talk) 08:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

South African Patriot
Many thanks for your kind offer of help. I would be very grateful if you could take necessary steps to protect the article and talk against continuing edit war/vandalism Mark Hasker (talk) 09:51, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Reborn doll
Regarding my edit to Reborn doll, I certainly did leave a descriptive edit summary. Note that a user called "Almostbabies" added links to the Almost Babies website and an eBay search that specifically looks for their items for sale. WP:Linkspam seems to cover it. Why did you revert my change? If it is because I did it from my IP address and not from my regular account (sorry, I am not on my laptop, and can't remember my password which is stored on it), I think you were a little too quick on the draw there. 66.235.57.247 (talk) 10:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply; no hard feelings, these things happen. (I'm actually user ManekiNeko when I bother to log in, which isn't often anymore.) I've just fixed the page; hopefully someone else won't revert it now. 66.235.57.247 (talk) 10:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Faraday's Law
Regarding you reversion of my edits to Faraday's law, I can assure you that there is only one Faraday's law. I was not experimenting and there is no need to mention the sandbox. Steve Byrne's edits constituted a gross misunderstanding based on the fact that the partial time differential version of Faraday's law that is found in Maxwell's equations omits the vXB effect. He seems to think that this means that there are two Faraday's laws ie. one that includes the vXB effect and one that omits it. We cannot re-write an article because of this kind of confusion on the part of one person. 202.69.178.230 (talk) 10:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Response
Thanks for the reply; no hard feelings, these things happen. (I'm actually user ManekiNeko when I bother to log in, which isn't often anymore.) I've just fixed the page; hopefully someone else won't revert it now. 66.235.57.247 (talk) 10:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Which page are you talking about?202.69.172.92 (talk) 17:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Rudy Gay
Hi,

I would like to know why you reverted my edits on Rudy Gay : I just added a link to the french wikipédia page about Rudy Gay.

MIjy (talk) 10:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok. MIjy (talk) 10:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help
Thanks for your help on the FIS Nordic World Ski Championships reversion on the medal table. There is an IP user from Russia who is trying to change the Soviet Union and merge it with Russia though they do not seem to understand. Again, thanks. Chris (talk) 14:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * You're most welcome. Actually, I reverted it because I saw User:Sceptre revert the same editors edit a few minutes before I made my revert. But I'm glad I could help. I'm sure you will see me around, I live to fight vandalism. Steve Crossin (talk) 14:17, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

RE:3RR
Hey there, no problem! I'm happy to help. I've blocked the guy for edit warring. In the future, can you supply diffs of edits instead of just the versions? That would be much appreciated. Cheers, Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! ☺  14:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * You don't have to get them from the user's contributions page; you may also jump into the page's history and get diffs from there. The way to do so is shown here; if you could click the "Compare selected versions" button there, you'd see a diff between the version on the 18th of May and the one on the 19th. Also, thanks for repairing my userpage! And I guess admins do get a bit more attacks, probably because we're the ones who carry out blocks and deletions. Cheers, Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! ☺  22:37, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, and sure, reverting to the last good version (commonly called the LGV) is acceptable. Just make sure you include any positive changes that may have been affected. Also, in the case of suspected sockpuppets, see WP:SSP; there are steps there to help if you think another user has puppets and is using them malevolently. Hope that helps! Master of Puppets  Call me MoP! ☺  22:38, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Garfield
Hi Cro0016, what was the purpose of this edit? F u si on  mi<font color="#191970">x  15:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * That was a complete accident. I'm using Huggle to fight vandalism, and another editor must have reverted a split second before I did. I promise you, I do not vandalise Wikipedia. See my userboxes and my barnstars for proof. It was just a case of being beaten by another vandal fighter. Steve Crossin (talk) 15:10, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Alright, I had dropped a warning, but realized that you must be a fairly experienced editor, removed it, and wrote a note instead. I've made the same mistake several times before, but thankfully I use Twinkle, which stops reverting when an edit by a different user has been done in the interim. Thanks for clearing that up, I just wanted to make sure. Cheers, <font color="#00bfff">F <font color="#1e90ff">u <font color="#4169e1">si <font color="#0000ff">o<font color="#0000CD">n <font color="#0000AF"> mi<font color="#191970">x  15:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Experienced? Me? No way! :P I just really have a passion for fighting vandals. And many people ask, why do I do it? I say, because the purpose of Wikipedia is good, and I believe in it. So I'll do all I can to fight vandals. Steve Crossin (talk) 15:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
for that little help of yours;-) Malteser.Falke (talk) 15:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * You are most welcome. I just fight vandals because I believe in the purpose of Wikipedia. And I'll do anything to keep it clean. When people thank me, it helps me continue fighting the never ending vandals, so thank you :) Steve Crossin (talk) 15:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Requested articles
I'm confused by your edits of Wikipedia talk:Requested articles on 29 Feb. You reverted an edit that blanked the page but then reverted your own edit, so the page is currently blank. The page was getting a bit long — maybe you intended to archive it but got interrupted? Would you like to go back and complete the process perhaps? Regards, Qwfp (talk) 17:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was actually an accidental revert/unrevert of the page. However, I am embarrased to say, I am not sure how to archive that page, only my talk page. And I reverted it because Huggle displayed this in the diff, and I thought it was vandalism, so I reverted it. Anyway, I have undone the edit that blanked the page, could you archive it for me? Thanks alot. Sorry for any trouble I caused. Steve Crossin (talk) 17:36, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for undoing that. I had a look at archiving it but it turns out that there are already four archive pages, though it appears there was was no link to them. I may try to sort it out but don't hold your breath. Qwfp (talk) 17:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅. As there were no active discussions I moved everything to Wikipedia talk:Requested articles/Archive 5. This is only the second time I've archived a talk page myself. There are clear step-by-step instructions on 5Q5's user page. Qwfp (talk) 19:27, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
for reverting vandalism on my talk page. Oda Mari (talk) 17:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)