User talk:Tollund man

Welcome to Wikipedia
PhilKnight (talk) 16:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Inappropriate warnings to vandals
The warnings you have been placing on vandals' talk pages such as these: are unacceptable, and threats are not appropriate even against vandals (also IP addresses may be shared by other users so it's not necessarily the vandal who sees the message). See WP:UTM for templates that can be used, you don't need to use the templates but they save time, and are more likely to be noticed by other users who revert their vandalism. — Snigbrook 16:09, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Fully agree with Snigbrook. In addition to his comments, I suggest you have a look at Deny recognition. PhilKnight (talk) 16:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Please please please read WP:RBI. Threats of violence will help NO ONE, especially since they are almost certain to cause you to be blocked, not the vandals. We need people like you to clean up vandalism; the more working in that area the better. However, the edit summaries and warnings you have been giving help nothing. Please consider using the standardized templates mentioned by Snigbrook above, or at least similar manually-typed messages. Also use neutral edit summaries like "revert vandalism by user A" or use the undo button and its automatically generated edit summary. The bottom line is vandalism is annoying, but abusive and threatening language causes more harm to the project than the vandalism that is irritating you. There will always be vandalism on Wikipedia, and the best way to deal with it is to revert and ignore it, and report users who vandalize to be blocked at WP:AIV after a final warning. Threatening them only takes attention off of the vandalism and puts it on you, and will result in you being blocked. Again, your reversion of vandalism is appreciated, but please use appropriate warnings and edit summaries in the future. thank you. The  Seeker 4   Talk  16:29, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Your comments
Hi and thanks for your welcome messages, I'm sorry I'm being overly hard on the vandals, Ive not been an administrator on wikipedia before and they were just riling me up with their god damn destroying knowledge I might have set out a bit heavy handed in breaking their spirits and them down - im' a hot tempered man and sometimes I might come across a bit like I'm going to hurt someone but my bark is worst than my bite - I've never hurt anyone that badly ever in my life apart from in the boxing ring

I'll try to keep ny words under a bit of control in the future - much as I want to see the little bastards suffer I see what you mean - no actual threat of violence, right! Tollund man (talk) 16:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Correct, no threats of violence or other abusive language is certainly a good idea! The thing about trying to break their spirits as you say, is that it backfires. If some, for example, immature junior high student (not that all junior high students are vandals by any means, just an example) vandalizes a page and it is quickly reverted, he is warned and eventually blocked, vandalism becomes boring to him and he finds something else to do online.  However, if the same vandal gets you riled up, gets a rise out of you, vandalism becomes exciting and your warning gets him to tell his friends "look at what I can do on Wikipedia, lets see what he says next." The point is, vandalism annoys us all. However, making a big deal out of someone vandalizing an article has the opposite of your intended effect; instead of discouraging vandalism, it makes it "fun" to them and they are more likely, not less likely, to repeat.


 * That said, you are more than welcome to revert vandalism, warn and report users and otherwise contribute to the building and maintaining of this encyclopedia. The easiest thing though is to revert, warn and request blocks for vandals. If you don't make a big deal out of their vandalism, they are less likely to repeat it, not more likely. Any other questions feel free to let me know, and good luck editing.  The   Seeker 4   Talk  17:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Greetings and Salutations! My handle here in Wiki is Edit Centric, and I am a mediator at Wikiquette Alerts. Recently, my attention was drawn to some aspects of your vandalism warnings. First, allow me to applaud your agressive stance to reverting and combatting vandalism here at Wikipedia. If we had more people with your drive, chances are we'd never even see the vandalism, it would be reverted so quickly!
 * When warning vandals, the first thing that you want to remember is not to take it personally. Sometimes, we tend to get too invested in some of the things we do, and need to find that point of separation. Once that wall has been built, everything else comes into perspective, and your warnings become;
 * Patient, but firm.
 * Civil, but not gracious.
 * Equitable and realistic, not overboard or pretentious.
 * I recommend that you add these to your Favorites in your browser, for easy reference;
 * Wikipedia Vandalism Templates
 * WP:VANDAL, especially the section on "How NOT to respond to vandals".
 * I wish you all the luck in Wiki in your mission, friend. Sternness, tempered with patience is the best approach. Edit Centric (talk) 19:06, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your messages and for helping me out, like I said I am new, ahd keen to help - I'm not much of a writer but I want to stop the articles being vandalised...  hope lately my comtributions have been improved. i just cant' stand the idea those kids are destroying a valuable resource and wjhen I see a page with "MATT HAS A BIG COCK" or that I get angry - hut am looking forward to getting the hang of the thing and not threaten anyone Tollund man (talk) 20:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Stop
You need to stop immediately with all abusive language, or it's quite likely you'll be blocked from editing. If you can't revert vandalism without resorting to namecalling, don't revert it at all. Friday (talk) 18:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Listen I told them I am not using the abusive language or threatening anyone any more so just leave it out, I'm doing it and I don't need you coming here and telling me not to revert vandalism? you want to see a page all full of teenage garbage then you do that but I'm going to get those kids out of this wikipedia Tollund man (talk) 20:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, you said that.. and then you continued doing what you'd been doing. You need to understand that you're on thin ice here.  Friday (talk) 21:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Please use our templates at WP:Vandalism or something like that, and avoid edit summaries that say anything other than that you are reverting vandalism or something similar. Your edit summaries are often not acceptable. Friday is absolutely correct, if you want to fight vandalism that's really great, but you have to watch your language or an Administrator, possibly me, will block you. dougweller (talk) 21:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

A Tip
When you revert vandalism, like you did on American Badger, make sure you get all the edits. If you can cut down on the harshness to vandals, I think you'll find yourself right at home around here. There's always room for more recent change patrollers. :3  Lychosis  T / C  19:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your kind words I am full in favour of being a recent changes patroller Tollund man (talk) 20:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * On that case, welcome aboard! Let me also recommend Deny recognition in dealing with vandals. / edg ☺ ☭ 21:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Listen mate a little word of advice while it is very commendable that you are fighting vandals and I have to admit some of your edit summaries and warnings made me laugh believe me you wll end up blocked and that would be a shame, so please keep up the vandal whacking but tone down the attacks thanks and happy editing. BigDunc  Talk 22:38, 3 March 2009 (UTC)