User talk:T3h 1337 b0y/Archive 1

Reviewer permission
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   20:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

How can I be bold?
How can I overcome the fear inside me and be bold?
 * Try Christ? --MZMcBride (talk) 06:14, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm a little curious
...why would you request an unblock for another user? ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 09:23, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Because it's a false positive and I want to help him. T3h   1337   b0y  21:16, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:T3h 1337 b0y deletion guidelines
Category:T3h 1337 b0y deletion guidelines, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. — ξ  xplicit  23:18, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Guideline
Your guideline seems to be a little off. Please see this page for why this isn't a good deletion rationale. — m o n o   23:30, 26 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I have stricter standards of notability (1M hits as opposed to 351,000) than WP:AADD depicts. I will change the lower bound to be more accepting. T3h   1337   b0y  01:32, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't think you got my point. Google searches can be useful in determining how common or well-known a particular topic is, however a large number of hits on a search engine is no guarantee that the subject is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. WP:AADD says nothing about a particular number of hits needed, and the notablility guideline clearly states "Wikipedia covers topics that have been "noticed" to a significant degree by reliable sources." (What is a reliable source?) It says nothing about Google hits, as the way to determine whether a topic is notable is to check whether it has received significant coverage in reliable sources. —  m o n o   03:39, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Whoops. = T3h  1337   b0y = 19:44, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 20:20, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I know T3h   1337   b0y  20:45, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

RC Script to show all tagged edits other than refs removed in last 60 seconds?
This is pretty much what I'm doing. I want it to be faster than the dumb F5 wait. T3h  1337   b0y  00:04, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Something
Hello there! I am the same user as I requested you to make my own sandbox several days ago. (Including redirect sandbox) The redirect sandbox has been deleted so can you please restore it or create another one? Thanks

8y 98.177.155.42 (talk) 15:41, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I did. Thanks for asking!!! T3h  1337   b0y  15:50, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks :)
Thank you for creating the sandbox. Also the reminder to not delete that sandbox was so important. 8y 98.177.155.42 (talk) 16:00, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * All to avoid what happened last time. T3h   1337   b0y  16:01, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

George Goyan
Can you explain why you reverted my edit to George Goyan? According to Category:Possibly living people "Individuals of advanced age (over 90) for whom no documentation has existed for a decade or longer [can be placed in Category:Possibly living people]". Nothing in Goyan's article indicates that he has been alive since 1961, let alone the last decade. 96.52.5.187 (talk) 21:21, 29 June 2010 (UTC) To be on the safe side, assume alive if not proven dead and under 110. T3h  1337   b0y  21:27, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That's not at all what the category says. Why even have a "possibly living people" category if that was the case? My edit was perfectly acceptable, I ask that you revert your reversion of it please. 96.52.5.187 (talk) 21:28, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. 96.52.5.187 (talk) 21:30, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi...
...And thanks for reverting vandalism! However, here, I fear you missed your target... ^_____________^ Salvio ( Let's talk 'bout it!) 22:45, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Puku ltd
User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow A tag has been placed on Puku ltd, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. ERK talk 00:52, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Note
Hi, T3h 1337 b0y, you'll likely not be pleased about this but I have suppressed a number of edits to your userspace which reveal too much personally identifiable information about yourself. I've done this per policy and for your own protection and safety on-line as you are a self-declared minor. I'm really sorry about that and I know it's annoying, but it's for the best. Please don't re-add it. For some useful information on privacy and safety, take a look at Guidance for younger editors. Thanks, and sorry for messing about with your pages - Risker (talk) 00:41, 10 July 2010 (UTC)