User talk:TheEpTic/Archive 1

Speedy deletion declined: Metgal
Hello TheEpTic. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Metgal, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 16:44, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, fair enough. Thank you for your time. :) TheEpTic (talk) 16:45, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should ease off on trying to delete things, until you've had time to work through deletion policy and WP:OUTCOMES. -- 101.119.14.156 (talk) 23:51, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should read up on how to use a talk page before you post. WP:TP TheEpTic (talk) 15:47, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Rollback
I have not been a very active Admin recently, and am not totally up on current best practice. But I notice that you were just declined rollback privileges on a page that strongly suggests that you have 200 edits under your belt. I am not inclined to counter the decision of other Admins, who have been more active in this area. -- &#x2611; Sam uelWantman 20:50, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I do have 200 posts under my belt. http://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/pcount/index.php?name=TheEpTic&lang=en&wiki=wikipedia TheEpTic (talk) 20:53, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, for the record, you have 238 edits. (Via Navigation popups) Epicgenius (talk) 02:10, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, but only 100 of them were edits to articles. When I read "200 edits", I think 200 contructive changes to the main space... -- &#x2611; Sam uelWantman  22:33, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Space habitat gravity requirements
Hi there,

I was just testing to see if deleting the section would work. The section should be reviewed and most likely deleted until sourced information is provided. While the content currently written regarding artifical gravity generation seems well thought out, it has no factual basis that I could find.

Thanks! I'll be sure to use sandbox next time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.181.255.38 (talk) 04:36, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay and good, the sandbox is the best place to test edits. :) TheEpTic (talk) 04:40, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for signing my guestbook! Cheers!--  Allied Rangoon‧talk   16:08, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Rollback granted
I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3ATheEpTic granted] rollback rights to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. Mifter (talk) 04:42, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Mifter. I will be sure to make good use of the feature and not abuse it. TheEpTic (talk) 05:10, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Kudos
Hey TheEpTic, I saw your recent changes and want to give you some "virtual kudos" for the recent edits you've done, faith in humanity restored. XBytez (talk) 16:55, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you kind sir? :P TheEpTic (talk) 16:55, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

American Idol 14
I contributed to the article because there was useful information on it that could be helpful. Please do not delte. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buoydog (talk • contribs) 22:07, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I see your view but from what I can see is that there is a redirect for a reason. And I'd also appreciated if you 1) Signed your posts 2) Didn't post 3 sections at a time. TheEpTic (talk) 22:10, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your perspective. --BuoyDog (talk) 22:14, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Could you assist me in making a graph tho for the auditon info, like the others seasons?--BuoyDog (talk) 22:20, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I can't help you there as I'm not very experience when it comes to formatting articles. Help:Contents might be able to help though. TheEpTic (talk) 22:23, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Ashley Kafka
"Hello, I'm TheEpTic. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Ashley Kafka, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks."

Well, yes, I do think you made a mistake--the character being based on a real person was the subject of an entire article in Vanity Fair. What was the need to delete that? How was it unconstructive? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.99.18.252 (talk) 04:05, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Yo this is LucasPOPO123, unedit this after reading but im sorry for what I said, it was bad. Im just really bored. Hope you forgive me! please respond wiht something other than that basic message. Thanks! Ily

LucasPOPO123 (talk) 21:22, 12 May 2014 (UTC) 
 * The message is automatic. I pick up the vandalism, revert it and automatically warn you for the vandalism. If you don't want me to leave you message like that I recommend you stop with the vandalism. And being "bored" is no reason to vandalise Wikipedia. Thank you TheEpTic (talk) 21:25, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Pyrrolidine
I noticed you rolled back the change I made to pyrrolidine, and although it sounds like a joke, it is in fact correct. The source, The Good Scents Company, previously used seems questionable at best, and is wrong in this particular case. 129.67.62.56 (talk) 21:46, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Then by all means add it again, but to me it seemed like a bit of vandalism as it had no edit summary as to why you removed the data. TheEpTic (talk) 21:56, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Juan Almeida Bosque
You definitely did make a mistake in undoing my edit to the page of Juan Almeida Bosque unless you don't consider getting rid of vandalism as constructive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.187.245.137 (talk) 01:25, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * What the IP said. You should really be much, much more careful. Reverting on sight without looking at content is not wise, and in this case it was an abuse of Twinkle as well. If you left a warning, I hope you will remove it. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 01:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh my, I didn't realise I made that mistake. I do apologise and I'm sure this won't happen in the future. TheEpTic (talk) 01:31, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Alright, thanks. IP, I hope that is good enough for you. EpTic, I saw you reported some Roboshoe or something like that; I indef-blocked them. Thanks for the report. Drmies (talk) 01:34, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. I've noticed quite a lot of vandalism tonight and it looks like the IP's good faith in removing vandalism got caught up in that. We all make mistakes and I'm sure I've learnt from this one. :) TheEpTic (talk) 01:37, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer
Hi.

I made the edit to this page partly because I felt it inflated their box office successes (outside of the Scary Movie franchise, their success has been middling at best), but mainly because I feel the opening sentence is worded VERY awkwardly. Even if the context of the sentence remains as is, the sentence definitely needs to be reworded.

Cheers. 209.90.140.72 (talk) 01:51, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * My apologise, I tend to make errors and it's nice when people point them out and let me know where I've gone wrong. :) TheEpTic (talk) 01:54, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Revision of my contribution to Female child molestors
Hi TheEpTic.

Your reason for revising my contribution isn't adequate.

My edit dealt mainly with rewording or removing certain statements that aren't supported by citations, or are indeed contradicted later in the text e.g. Females who sexually abuse children are statistically rare - this is later contradicted by research in the same article suggesting females who sexually abuse children aren't statistically rare: "as many as 63% of sex abusers may be female "

An article that contradicts itself isn't a good article, so that's one positive contribution.

I also removed highly questionable claims that weren't in any way supported by references.

Unless you can give me a good reason why my changes were vandalism or 'not constructive', I will return the article to my revised state 77.99.12.140 (talk) 01:56, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I seem to be making a lot of errors tonight, I do apologise. Feel free to change this article again. TheEpTic (talk) 01:57, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * No problem - I understand the edit was made in good faith, and in all fairness I didn't add an edit summary, which may have helped you determine if it was vandalism or not. Thanks for the prompt response 77.99.12.140 (talk) 02:01, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Cool! Yes, that maybe where I could of been thrown off. May I also recommend you create an account, you seem to be making some good edits and at any point in time somebody on the same ip could throw that record off for you. :) TheEpTic (talk) 02:04, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Your revert of my edits to Gregory White Smith
I think your autoflagging bot is having issues. My additions to the bio page for Gregory White Smith were helpful, if not exactly extensive. I'm reverting your revert: if you still think the page is better as a stub than a fleshed-out bio, please message me on my talk page before deleting again. Lizpetit (talk) 14:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't run an autoflagging bot. I do it all manually and there's quite a lot of vandalism happening at the moment, and it just seems your legitimate edit got caught up in the fire. I apologise and you're more than welcome to revert it. I just try to do the right thing and sometimes I'm wrong. :) TheEpTic (talk) 14:51, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * With my edit before, this is the third incorrect revert you have don't lately. Check everything before reverting. Do not do it again. riahc3

Concerning to the alleged vandalism on the page of Donetsk People's Republic
I beg your pardon, but the language is called "Ukrainian" in English, not "Ukrainan"Mondolkiri1 (talk) 14:38, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I do apologise. Feel free to revert this. I've also removed the warning from your page. TheEpTic (talk) 14:40, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the apology! No problem! I've corrected the spelling again.Mondolkiri1 (talk) 14:52, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Your revert of a Science Reference Desk question
I undid this edit of yours, which used Huggle to remove what appears to be a perfectly reasonable question on the Science Reference Desk. I have no clue why you would delete it. Red Act (talk) 16:25, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * You're correct, I did make an mistake. And like I said, this happened during a period where there was a lot of vandalism. I've removed the warning and would like to apologise. Thanks :) TheEpTic (talk) 00:22, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Your good
you got a bot lol124fg45 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 02:44, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Nope :) WP:HG <--- I use that :) TheEpTic (talk) 02:45, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

On Henrik Lundqvist
I understand the editing of what I wrote, however he only allowed 3 goals on 106 shots in the last three games of the Rangers defeating the Pittsburgh Penguins. (He stopped some amazing shots and turned the game for his team's favor in those three games). Something should be put in on his page regarding this amazing feat. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.109.249.120 (talk) 03:28, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * If you're unsure on how to implement it on to the article in an constructive way, please mention it on the article's talk page and somebody will do just that. I just asked that you don't put "King Henrik is a god, and played godlike against the Pittsburgh Penguins in Game 7, 2014 Eastern Conference Semi-Finals." as that can fall under the category of Vandalism and get you banned from editing articles on Wikipedia. Thank you. TheEpTic (talk) 03:34, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * No Problem and I see something was already added. (I Didn't mean it as vandalism, purely as a fan of the sport, watching that is nothing short of spectacular) Thanks again! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.109.249.120 (talk) 03:38, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! And thank you for coming to me about this! :) TheEpTic (talk) 03:40, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to STiki!

 * Ermm... Thanks? --TheEpTic (talk) 12:43, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Ah, thank you--saw your profile note about reverting the reverts, so I shall do so re Ashley Kafka
Never heard back from you and the section here has gone away, so I thought I'd repost

"Hello, I'm TheEpTic. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made with this edit to Ashley Kafka, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks."

Well, yes, I do think you made a mistake--the character being based on a real person was the subject of an entire article in Vanity Fair. What was the need to delete that? How was it unconstructive?

Here is the relevant info, posted on the Talk section of the page in question:

Ashley Kafka based on real individual

My edit was removed, but I think this is important, and one line about the nature of the character being added--when so much exhaustive detail about appearances in the comic--seems acceptable to me.

Ashley Kafka was inspired by therapeutic hypnotist Frayda Kafka and was created by writer J.M. DeMatteis and artist Sal Buscema.

http://www.vanityfair.com/vf-hollywood/spider-man-real-life-dr-kafka

"The Real-Life Inspiration for a Spider-Man Character Reacts to Being Turned Evil...and into a Man by Jordan Hoffman May 5, 2014 11:56 am" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.99.18.252 (talk) 00:31, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Feel free to re-add your edit. :) TheEpTic (talk) 08:47, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

BAGBot: Your bot request HBC AIV helperbot12
Someone has marked Bots/Requests for approval/HBC AIV helperbot12 as needing your input. Please visit that page to reply to the requests. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 03:41, 31 May 2014 (UTC) To opt out of these notifications, place  anywhere on this page.

Why did you undo my edit to Walk Of Shame
It makes no sense to undo my edit to walk of shame when if you visit the IMDB page, it clearly states the actors and which character they do.

Therfore, I am undoing your revert. Please do not touch it again. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.35.124.12 (talk) 19:11, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I do apologise, warning removed. :) TheEpTic (talk) 00:23, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * This isnt your first, second, or third mistake. Review before you make edits or use the sandbox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.35.124.12 (talk) 17:42, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I read the Hesiod and my edit was correct. I also added that because someone else deleted those lines of him being god by some other person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TenshinG (talk • contribs) 19:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
yo

LordJiine (talk) 15:55, 25 September 2014 (UTC) 

Re: Best of Breed revision 627709280
My correction of "gender" to "sex" in the Best of Breed article was constructive; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_gender_distinction (this is why the award is "Best of Opposite Sex," not "Best of Opposite Gender," per dog shows' own nomenclature). 96.36.104.238 (talk) 18:21, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Michael Banducci wiki page
Hi, you apparently made me a wikipedia page, and I went in yesterday to change my hometown which is Traverse City, MI not toronto ontartio. Im going to change it again, will you please leave it, thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ducci015 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Your request for WP:AWB
Hello TheEpTic. Certainly you have been around a while and you do good work on anti-vandalism. The usual criterion for AWB is 500 non-automated edits, which is thought of as deliberate changes to articles, not just reverting vandalism. For instance, adding content or improving the wording. Please consider re-applying after you've done more of that kind of work. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 00:41, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Oi
Ce.ase your actions ag.ainst the m!i!g!o!s!y!r!n! c!l!a!n or fa.ce the cons.quences you tw.at — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solidliquidsolidus (talk • contribs) 16:51, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
 * What? TheEpTic (talk) 16:54, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

September 2015[edit]
(Your Opinion) Hello, I'm TheEpTic. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —the one you made with this edit to Contest to kill 100 people using a sword— because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. TheEpTic (talk) 17:12, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

(My answer) Thank you for your opinion.This is the most important points of "Contest to kill 100 people using a sword" issue. One time "Contest to kill 100 people using a sword" was called as false story and the 2 officers did not kill the Chinese soldiers cruelly. The reason is that "The hand-to-hand fightingclose combat with Japnese swords were unrealistic at the modern warfare, by Mr.Yamamoto, Shichihei, a famous Japanese Journalist. In addition, only three persons could be cut ,for a short battle, with any Japanese sword, he said referring to the book written by a sword smith." But, it became later the real one, after the specialist studied as follows,"But, the sword contest was not a kind of hand-to-hand combat but the killings were more likely executions of Chinese war prisoners, as Tsuyoshi Noda (野田毅) said publicly to the Japanese Citizens . In addition, Ikuhiko Hata, a conservative historian also received information on what Tsuyoshi Noda (野田毅) spoke to the Japanese citizens in Kagoshima, Japan, at his home town's public meeting that the victims were only Chinese POWs and other testimonials includng 'by Shintaro Uno' in above mentioned "Postwar Accounts". The dispute is showing whether "Contest to kill 100 people using a sword" is real or not.  42.146.214.173 (talk) 12:01, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

im not doing vandalism
this is with respect to the message u just left for me after my edit of Ambedkar Memorial Park. Do u even know Hindi? If no then how can u say im indulging in vandalism?101.56.187.26 (talk) 23:43, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

edit
the correct term is not "Human ResourceS Management"? JozeSlb (talk) 00:17, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

AIV
I just turned down one of your AIV requests: NOT vandalism. Drmies (talk) 02:25, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I apologize for any inconvenience caused on the false report. TheEpTic (talk) 02:26, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Many of your recent reverts are concerning. Please be more careful or your rollback privileges will be revoked. Huggle, STiki and Twinkle all allow you to do good-faith reverts &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  03:07, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey
Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:


 * 1) Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
 * 2) Editor-focused central editing dashboard
 * 3) "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
 * 4) Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
 * 5) Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded User wikipedia/RC Patrol (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, — Delivered: 01:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

A goat for you!
get bonked

SakkeV (talk) 16:48, 1 July 2018 (UTC) 