User talk:Trusilver/archive2

Sale, Greater Manchester FAC
Hi. I'm sorry to bother you, but as a LoCE member, I just wondered if you would be willing to have a look through the Sale, Greater Manchester article. It is currently a Featured Article Candidate and needs a copy-edit for grammar by someone who hasn't yet seen it. Any other ways to improve the article would also be welcome. Thank you very much, if you can. Epbr123 16:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Sure, I've got a few things to do this morning first, but I will take a look at it. Trusilver 16:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. Epbr123 16:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Would you be able to also have a look at Sheerness sometime? Thanks. Epbr123 10:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Cheers
Thanks for the revert on my user talk page. Dust Filter 18:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


 * You are most welcome, don't let the vandals get you down. :-) Trusilver 18:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting my user page. I would never have noticed that vandalism until I checked my watchlist, which has so many pages in it that I would still never have noticed it. Bart133 (t) (c) 18:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem, glad I could help! Trusilver 16:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Reverting my blanking
Hi, noticed you reverted my blanking of a section of Launceston Church Grammar School and marked your reversion as undoing vandalism. Would you mind taking another look? Thanks. CIreland 05:32, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, you already did. Thanks. CIreland 05:33, 5 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Heh, no problem. I had two pages open and I reverted the wrong one. Oh the pitfalls of having multiple monitors. sorry :-) Trusilver 05:34, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

What are my options?
The same anonymous user (with slightly varying IP addresses) keeps editing my comments in the Talk page for Wade Keller. What are my options to take action against him? --Magmagirl 16:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I've put out two warnings to the IP addresses committing the vandalism. I'm going to be watching the page closely for this individual to return. I'm also putting in a report for sockpuppeting. Hopefully this will get it taken care of. Send me a message next time you see him vandalizing, just to make sure I notice it. Trusilver 16:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you! I appreciate your help.  :-) --Magmagirl 17:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

AIV report
Trusilver, you must mean a different IP. .--Chaser - T 04:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Ouch! yes I did! got moving a little bit too fast for my own good. Trusilver 04:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Was it this one?--Chaser - T 04:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep, thanks for catching it :) Trusilver 04:19, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Columbia Law School
Please don't jump to conclusions with accusations of vandalism. I'm simply aligning the Columbia Law School article with those of its peers (see Yale Law School, Harvard Law School, and the rationale I outlined on Talk:List of Columbia Law School alumni). Cjs2111 06:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * See your talk page - It's been the page-blanking sockpuppet from hell night. Sorry if I'm a little bit punchy. Trusilver 06:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

You have deliberately deleted sourced materiel
You have deliberately deleted sourced materiel from the Anna Anderson page and replaced it with your own sourced materiel and had the page locked down so that nothing could be added. An objective article allows for all sourced materiel to be presented, not just what you want to be presented. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.136.71.163 (talk)


 * I reverted the vandalism that was deliberately POV and directed the author of said edit to remake it, only this time do it so he's not removing other people's sourced information in favor of his own. If you don't like that, I'm terribly sorry. I suggest that if you want to make the article better, you work with the two editors that are on the discussion page right now planning on how to best write the article neutrally. However, if you would prefer to continue vandalizing my talk page... you can do that to, just understand that you will be blocked from editing. I would prefer it not to go that way because the article needs someone with a counter view, but that's really up to you. Trusilver 08:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If I can do anything to facilitate an easier time with the process, I'm happy to - including petitioning to have the protection lifted after a consensus is reached. I have no problem with anyone who is devoted to writing the Anna Anderson page, but at the same time I am a strong believer in the WP:PII policy. I'm am willing to help anyone that wants my help on the sole condition that they play by the rules. Trusilver 08:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Personal Attacks
Well I do not think that I "attacked" Ryan the Gerbil man. I just taught him how to spell a little bit. He has an arrogant little essay, and I think by being so arrogant he was attacking me. He says he is smarter than "any 30 people" about politics and if that is true then how come he can't even spell his own political philosophy? He said Liberterian and everyone who knows about politics knows it is Libertarian. So he was not being civil and I was just helping him to stop embarrassing himself. Maybe I am his best friend who stops him when he is being stupid. So not an attack. Why don't you give HIM a scary, threatening message about his mean essay? And tell him that he should try to tell the truth and try not to be arrogant. So please do not block me because I am here to help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.200.150.23 (talk)


 * Your edit was a personal attack, which is why I gave you a warning. I don't care if at some point he made a personal attack against you, that doesn't give you the ability to make one back. "Don't feed the trolls" is a good policy to use - If someone makes obnoxious statements, then it's probably for the best to just ignore them. EVERYONE in the project is required to adhere to the WP:CIVIL policy. Trusilver 15:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Admin
Are you an Admin? I only ask because you beat me to a LOT of reverts. Peace.  Sp art an- Ja mes  18:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hah, nope :). I am fast because I use TW to start with. And second because I have dual monitors. I'm set up to have the primary article in my left monitor and the offending user's talk page opens up in my right monitor. It lets me basically be both sending warnings and going back to look for new vandalism at the same time. In other words, when I hit 'submit', I don't have to wait for the TW command to process, I'm already gone and working on something else. Trusilver 19:02, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * and even then, you've beaten me to a few yourself. Trusilver 19:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
 * O.O ... *James grovels to Trusilver's vandal-whacky-uber-dedication =). Peace.  Sp art an-  Ja mes  19:09, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the ...WIA barnstar =). Peace.  Sp art an- Ja mes  01:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem, nice working with you. Trusilver 06:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

About the links to the Blog of the reds and Futurama Fans
The Blog of the reds and Futurama Fans is a good web site and provides a reliable commentry on Australia First Party, Patriotic Youth League and Figh Dem Back. You should keep the links to the web site on the articles. --59.100.16.188 13:09, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


 * No, your links are political sites that diametrically oppose the position and viewpoints of the article's subject. Wikipedia expects a neutral point of view in its articles, it's not a place for you to push your own political beliefs and motives. Trusilver 14:31, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Images
One guy can't know everything, and I don't know much about how to deal with images. But I can do the simple stuff, and I did. For anything more complicated, you'll do better with someone who contributes images, or at WP:CPDGG (talk) 19:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I stumped the somewhat omnipotent DGG? woo-hoo, I'm off on a roll today. Thanks for your help though. :) Trusilver 19:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Carlos Prio-Touzet
Even though the article was taken out of AfD I will still add on to it the info on the buildings that he designed and I also found that he has been written up in various mags and wil be adding those in too. Callelinea 19:55, 9 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Excellent, I'm looking forward to reading it. I think that will also be enough to squash any attempts to re-nominate it. Trusilver 19:56, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Francesca Gagnon
No problem. I had a free moment so I figured I'd help. Wizardman 02:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I will let you know after I have added to it. A lot of my references are in French and I'm not terribly fast at translating, I am hoping to put enough content into it over the next few weeks to bump it up to B class. Trusilver 02:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Question
Hey again buddy. Hope all's well, and no one's making you fly anywhere crazy right now. On the Wikipedia side of things, I've taken a keen interest in you as an editor (hope that doesn't come across odd at all), and have seen you grow a lot over the past couple of months. I find it few and far between when someone comes into anti-vandalism and Wikipedia work so fast and easily. I know this isn't solicited, but have you considered any coaching? I think with a bit of work and such, you could easily be a great admin someday, and was keen to over my services. Look around and think on it a bit, and read up on what being an admin is all about if you like, and get back to me :). Jmlk  1  7  05:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * (Whoa... thanks for blocking that guy. you know you are doing something right when they start gunning for you.) I certainly appreciate the offer and I would like to take you up on it. I've been starting to get interested in Adminship for the last couple weeks now and have been trying to identify places where I need to better my skills. One of those things is to get away from anti-vandalism work every now and then and actually produce something. Just let me know what to do to get started. Trusilver 05:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Excellent, and you're very welcome. I'd say take a look around the virtual classroom we have set up, and read through some stuff that may interest you.  You have started article writing/building, which is always a good thing, and I say continue that.  I personally just had to take the time to build up good, strong editing skills (anti-vandalism, article-building, etc.), but always took the time for the little stuff that always matters (being a gnome, copyediting, sourcing, etc.).  Also, start getting heavily involved at the rfa process, as this will help you meet and work with others, especially our most well-known admins.  If you have any other thoughts or ideas, (or even if you think my suggestions are pure crap), just let me know!  Jmlk  1  7  05:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have two LAX-->LAS-->LAX runs tommorow. When I get back from that I'm going to jump into the virtual classroom and start reading. I would do it tonight except that all of the crazies seem to be out tonight...and they are all vandalizing articles. I didn't check, is it a full moon? Regardless, I will also read a couple RfA's and get involved with that. If you have any suggestions, let me know. Trusilver 05:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Sounds good! There do seem to be quite a lot of weirdos out vandalizing tonight...hey, the tools come in handy, what can I say?  Good luck with the runs tomorrow, and the reading as well.  I think that is a great start, and we can go at a pace that suits you of course.  Jmlk  1  7  05:54, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for barnstar
Hi Trusilver,

Thanks for the Barnstar! I hope also that you will consider voicing your thoughts on the talk page. We need a few more intelligent editors to balance out the crazies. ... Kafkaesque Seabhcan 08:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Emily Hagins
Interesting to see a note from Emily's mother. It makes me wonder where all the activity is stemming from. For the record, at CONvergence I mentioned the debate to my two girlfriends and my three teenaged children. I'm pretty sure my kids haven't commented because they all have user accounts, but they may well have talked to their friends about it. Frankly, some of the comments seem to be using teen logic. It wasn't my intention to cause a crusade, but my actions may have inadvertently had a similar effect. So, sorry about that. It would be nice to close the discussion and move on to more productive work. Anyway, thanks for your objectivity - the article is much better sourced now. --Appraiser 15:13, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, oh well. Personally, I would like to have the AfD restarted to get a legitimate discussion and consensus. But at the same time I feel that had the article been reviewed as is right now, the nomination would never have happened to begin with. I'm actually impressed with Emily's mother and how she didn't jump into the dog and pony show, demanding that her daughter be recognized. That was all this would have taken to make this a full-fledged three-ring circus. But instead she just clarified her position, gave a lot of information that I WISH was sourced because it would be fantastic in the article and then left. The woman's got character, I like that.
 * I'm not sure which was the reviewing admin is going to swing. He's going to either say that the consensus has been reached to keep or that the entire AfD needs to be restarted minus the circus. Either way I have no doubt at this point that it will result in a "keep". Good work on writing this article, by the way. In a couple weeks it has gone from a poorly sourced stub to a well sourced article that I'm interested in seeing expanded more. I have very little doubt that we are going to see more from her...and soon. Trusilver 17:40, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your interest and help.--Appraiser 12:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

AFD
As you participated in Articles for deletion/Miss Wisconsin's Outstanding Teen, you may be interested in voting at Articles for deletion/Miss America's Outstanding Teen state pageants. PageantUpdater 02:01, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I still question the notability of the subjects individually, but seeing that pretty much all of us with the exception of the nominator had reached a consensus to place these into a new article, I feel the article should be retained. You have my support. Trusilver 02:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

ONSTAR
Hello Trusilver,

Adding the link to Ring s.o.s website is not vandalizm! Ring S.O.S IS an Israeli company similar to Onstar. The link should be under "SEE ALSO" exactly like "bmw assist" website. Shani Levi


 * I'm sorry, but I tend to make 100 - 150 vandalism reverts a day and since you only have four contributions, I'm assuming that whatever revert you had an issue with came from using an anonymous IP address. I have no recollection of the revert you are speaking of or even which article it was, if you could give me that information I would appreciate it. I will look over it and see if we can clear up any misunderstanding. Thanks! Trusilver 16:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see that I had edited the ONSTAR article after you did. However, if you look closely you will see that I didn't revert anything you put on the article. The vandalism revert I did was the person whose revision came directly after yours. Let me know if you have any further questions. Trusilver 16:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Trusilver. i'm sorry for the misunderstanding. i will add again the link that was removed. Shani Levi

Bothering again
Sorry to bother you again about Bengali Language Movement. Kyoko has asked for shorter sentences to the article. She also thinks that the article does not flow very well. Can you do anything about this? If you can, please do. Thanks in advance. --Tarif from Bangladesh 18:38, 11 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I will take a look at it some time today and see what I can do. I'll get back to you. Trusilver 18:47, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Trusilver, thanks for your great work at the Bengali Language Movement page. If you feel that the article is not FA-worthy, can you please comment in the FAC page? Thanks in advance. --Ragib 18:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I sincerely hope that you get your FA, but I don't give a position statement in the discussion of any FA candidate article that I have worked on. Some people disagree, but I see it as a violation of WP:COI. Now if there's someone specifically you would like me to comment to about a concern he has with the article being given FA status, let me know and I will look into it. Trusilver 18:58, 12 July 2007 (UTC)


 * What can I say. I've thanked you a lot times. Take plenty of those again and I'm really grateful for your help. See you. --Tarif from Bangladesh 17:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Not a problem at all, Tarif. I'm glad to help. Trusilver 19:27, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Well, I was looking for a prettier way to do this, but I'm not very artistic, so I'll just say thank you for your support in my RfA, which was closed as successful. I look forward to serving the community in a new way. Take care! -- But | seriously | folks   09:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

It's a pleasure. Good luck to you. Trusilver 14:08, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Anna Anderson
Thanks for the Barnstar. Very kind of you. --Bookworm857158367 23:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Daniel Radcliffe
Hah! You beat me to reverting that picture because I was laughing so hard I could get the cursor over the save page button :) Trusilver 02:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah...that kinda caught me off guard too...it's a good thing I was already sitting down or I would have fallen down laughing. Peace.  Sp art an- Ja mes  02:48, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

re: Kinnucan's. the page had been flagged for deletion since last december
so there is NO reason not to go ahead and delete the durn thing. it IS blatant advertising. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunshine 35749 (talk • contribs)


 * And yet there's no deletion tag on it. Good day. Trusilver 06:16, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

This article got vandalized again by User:Sunshine 35749. I put a final warning on the user's discussion page. I didn't know what else to do. -- Mark @ DailyNetworks  talk  12:25, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks Mark. And yeah, that's totally appropriate. He has to be given a level 4 "Final Warning" before he can be blocked from editing. I've considered AIV'ing him for a temporary block as a vandalism-only account, but I'm not totally sure that he is. I think that he's really just somewhat misguided and uneducated about how Wikipedia deletion policy functions. Unless he continues to vandalize the article, I don't see any reason to take this a step further. Trusilver 15:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Star Wars
Thanks for reverting that I.P.'s blanking. I didn't want to get hit by the 3RR and the edit war thing. Cheers, friend! Scar ian Talk  06:44, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * FYI, 3RR does not apply to vandalism. You can revert a page a hundred times as long as it's because it's being vandalized and not because it's part of a revert war. The 3RR rule is to prevent unproductive editing, not to prevent us from protecting articles. Have a good evening. ~ Trusilver 06:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh right... thanks. Scar ian  Talk  06:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Lal Masjid
Please can you help again on this page, user Sanam121 keeps deleted cited info. with uncited personal opinion. Sue Wallace 00:00, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It seems unnecessary right now seeing that this user has been blocked for violating the 3RR policy. However, I don't have any doubt that he will be back, I've put him on my watchlist and I will keep an eye on him tomorrow after his block expires. Trusilver 00:53, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, much appreciated :o) Sue Wallace 01:00, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Just saying hey
Hey buddy, just checking in to say hello, and see how it's all going. I've been doing a bit of work at AIV tonight, and have seen you there a couple times with good reports. Keep up the great work! You're growing into a great editor! Jmlk 1  7  07:33, 14 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Want to see something a little odd. Take a look at the comment I erased from my talk page. Cryptic and at least from my perspective, it sounded a little on the threatening side. Trusilver 07:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Whoa, crap. That's a little freaky lol.  Jmlk  1  7  07:45, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Hah, that was my feeling about it too. I've considered that I need to add a comment to vandals on my user page. Just to let them know that vandalism reverters don't really read the vandalism that they spent so much time thinking up. We just scan it enough to say "yup...vandalism". I wonder how many would stop if they knew that the only people reading their work is basically them. Trusilver 07:47, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I was wondering though, how do you guys detect vandalism? I usually look for edits that appear with 700+ characters (regardless of content removal or addition), and then look at comments for the edit. And by the way, I've noticed you around quite a bit Trusilver. Are you ever going to pursue and RfA? Elenseel 07:50, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Eh, it's something to think about :). I broke my jaw about 4 months ago, and was confined to bed and a chair for about a month, and basically just edited here, watched TV, and ate through a damn straw. But I got really got into vandal-fighting during the time-off, especially with VandalProof, and have seen a ton of different kinds of vandalism. I think just so many people hear about Wikipedia, that they think their vandalism will be seen by millions and cause catastrophic meltdowns or something! By the way, seems you have a support !vote coming from Elenseel above there ;).  Jmlk  1  7  07:54, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * For me it's a lot of just intuition I've gained over time. I look first for large changes in the article's size. Really big changes are pretty often page blanking. After that I look for anonymous IP's. In a way it's not fair to basically single out the anon's for scrutiny...but then again it's the anonymous contributors that make most of the vandalism. After that it's just past experience and intuition. I have learned over time what articles are going to be vandalized more often than others. Stephen Hawking? - probably not. Paris Hilton - score. As for an RfA? Sometime in the future probably. I don't see Admin rights as a trophy, just more work for me to do :). Trusilver 07:55, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Elenseel, One thing to think about, if you haven't already, is to use some type of script for reverting vandalism. I use twinkle. I was skeptical at first about it, but it lets me get rid of twice the vandalism with about half the work. Trusilver 08:04, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I do use Twinkle. My version seems to be slightly hindered by my firewall and Firefo'x pop-up blocking, but I'm working to fix that. However, one thing that somewhat annoys me about some users is that they give warnings for vandalism reverted by other users. I feel that those who revert the vandalism should give the warning. Also, are there any qualifications needed to be able to give barnstars? Elenseel 08:06, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * What happens a lot of times is two people with Twinkle will revert vandalism at the same time and from both people's perspective they had done the rvv. The talk page will open up for both people as well. It's not until you check later in your own contributions that you find out who it was that really did the revert. As for barnstars, anyone can give them. If you haven't seen already, there's a full list at WP:BARNSTARS. Trusilver 08:09, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, thanks for clearing all that up, you and JMLK. I'm off to bed, goodnight! Elenseel 08:15, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You have a good night too. Any other questions, feel free to ask. If I can't answer them then I'm sure that Jmlk can. Also...I hope the two of you are doing better anti-vandal work than I am tonight. I'm only doing a half-assed job because I'm writing an article...which is to say I'm basically not doing any writing at all. I'm staring at my sandbox and willing the article to start writing itself after I've been staring at a white screen for three hours. Trusilver 08:17, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Penllergaer
Thank you for quickly seeing the light on Penllergaer. Yes it was a big edit and I'm sure you realise it was a load of nonsense when you tried to roll it back again. I will post a warning to that user about their vandalism. (WelshBloke 08:59, 14 July 2007 (UTC))
 * No problem, I will try to keep an eye on that article and make sure that it isn't vandalized again. The most difficult vandalism to deal with is that which appears to be legitimate on the surface until you really read into it. That is the kind of stuff which frequently sneaks its way past the recent change patrollers. Have a good day. Trusilver 16:07, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Makemoneymoney
Thanks for the revert. The vandal must have thought Jack Thompson (attorney) was coming for his copy of Grand Theft Auto!  Acroterion  (talk)  00:17, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hah! not a problem :-) Trusilver 00:20, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage.--P4k 06:09, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, have a good evening! Trusilver 06:10, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you very much for your participation in my recent unsuccessful RfA. I am very grateful for all of the advice, and hope that it will help me grow as an editor. Happy editing! Sincerely,  Neranei  T / C  11:38, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Good luck. Take to heart what you have learned this time and I have no doubt that you will be more successful next time. Trusilver 20:36, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have been busy processing oall of the advice, and am already starting to work on it. Thanks again,  Neranei  T / C  21:42, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll take over
An anonymous user, as we've seen, is vandalising the article Rodrigo Palacio. I would like to talke over the reverting, if that's OK. I love reverting vandalism. Savie Kumara 01:46, 16 July 2007 (UTC)... ...and I'll get the Hellogoodbye vandal too.


 * I suggest a better way of doing things would be for you to start checking recent changes. I don't single out articles to watch for vandalism, I just revert it as I see it. Sorry, but I really can't see taking the time to inform someone that an article they are watching has been vandalized when it basically takes me one mouse click to revert it myself. Trusilver 02:12, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

The problem is, I have been checking recent changes. Whenever I come across a vandalized article, however, I try to revert it, but by the time I click "Save", I notice that someone else has beaten me to the punch. It happens way more often than not. Savie Kumara 02:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Out of curiosity, how are you reverting vandalism? Are you using a script or are you doing it manually? Trusilver 04:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I just recently installed popups so that I can get to the Recent changes vandalism more quickly. Savie Kumara 03:16, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have never used popups myself, I use Twinkle. But talking with editors that have used both, they all seem to agree that Twinkle is more functional and faster than popups is. I wish I could say that it wasn't true, but there is more than enough vandalism to go around. I've made about a hundred reverts so far tonight. Trusilver 03:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

The thing that stinks is that I use Internet Explorer and so I can't use Twinkle. Otherwise, I would gladly install it. Savie Kumara 03:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I use both Opera and Firefox. I prefer the functionality of Opera, but some of Twinkle's functions don't work with Opera. I downloaded Firefox just for vandal fighting. If you are completely against getting another browser, I suggest you look into Vandalproof. Trusilver 03:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Pierre Rossier is being vandalized. I would like to continue reverting that too. Savie Kumara 05:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Too late. That particular vandal was blocked about two minutes ago. Trusilver 05:36, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Proposer (website)
The Prosper Lending website article has been changed numerous times to remove criticisms of lending practices. You were involved before and I'd like ot let you know that I'm reverting it to include the criticisms section.Mbisanz 01:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Go for it. Apparently it looks like I reverted a vandalism there once, aside from that I don't think I've ever even heard of this article. Trusilver 01:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Trusilver! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page.  Daniel  04:16, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Respect – The Unity Coalition
Your recent reversion on this article, far from removing vandalism, reinstated vandalism by an editor with a clear racist agenda. Please be more careful in future! Guy Hatton 07:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry but no dice. When someone with zero edit history blanks out very large blocks of text without edit summary, it's going to get reverted as vandalism. Maybe you should school your friend in correct procedure for editing, which involved leaving a summary to explain their actions. Especially in the case of ambiguous blanking of pages or sections thereof, the main thing I rely on is how suspicious the activities of the user appear. Good day! Trusilver 13:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Absolutely disagree. To proceed merely on the grounds stated above is careless and irresponsible. It is the duty of all editors to ensure that their edits are constructive, and this applies as much to you as anybody else. Guy Hatton 16:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * And everyone is required to explain their edits, this is more important than ever when removing information from articles. This is why we have the nifty little box at the bottom of the edit screen. That is part of 'constructive editing' as you put it. Had this edit been properly tagged with as little as "rvv POV", I still would have scrutinized it but I wouldn't have reverted it. A statement of intentions is very important, One of the biggest vandalism problems is blanking of material and unfortunately I and ever other CVU member lacks the time to familiarize ourselves with the issues and politics surrounding nearly two million articles. Therefore, we have to make a lot of decisions based on what we see, what edit summaries tell us and what discussion pages tell us. Does this mean that my ability to discern vandalism from a good-faith edit is infallible? of course it isn't. But considering that out of the last hundred reverts of blanked material I've executed, 99 haven't had anyone coming back saying that they were mistakes, I'm not losing a lot of sleep over it. To keep wikipedia clean from vandalism, I'm willing to accept a 1% error rate. I'm sorry that we disagree on the matter,but still have a good day and happy editing. Trusilver 16:04, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you for your support in my successful RfA. I appreciate the trust you and the WP community have in me. Carlossuarez46 21:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem, congratulations. Trusilver 21:56, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you for your comments on my unsuccessful RfA. I appreciate the trust you and the WP community have in me; however, this time around things just didn't work out. TomStar81 (Talk) 22:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

User talk:68.0.125.230
LOL, that is so true. This is the third edit war I have been in with him in the past few days. The first two were Tulsa Channels and my own user page. He's deadicated, I give him that. --FrankCostanza 02:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speak of the devil, he's back at it vandalizing both articles I mentioned 15 minutes ago. The amazing thing is he hasn't been blocked again.  One of the admins blanked his talk page and protected it.  --FrankCostanza 03:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Geez!
Damn dude...69.225.31.29 sure as hell had it out for you! THAT is how you know you have a good vandal fight going on lol. Jmlk 1  7  04:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * He seemed to have some non-specific issue with Riana too. I'm not absolutely positive, but I think he might have been upset about something...I guess we will never know. Oh well... Trusilver 04:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Eh, I blocked him for a few days, and I might have to end up protecting the page if they get even more worked up. But eh; part of the job.  Good fighting though :).  Jmlk  1  7  04:54, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * This is the night for entertaining vandals. FrankCostanza and I spent like an hour and a half reverting this guy who kept deleting the warnings on his talk page. I had no problem with this whatsoever, him reverting his talk page meant he wasn't off reverting real pages. It's all about keeping small minds occupied sometimes :) Trusilver 04:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Budokai Tenkaichi 2
Sorry, I honestly don't know what happened. I was trying to add the Wii remote in the input and when I was done for some reason the whole page was gone. Can't really explain it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darth G (talk • contribs)
 * Heh, no problem. Accidents happen, I will withdrawal the warning. Have a good night. Trusilver 05:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the understanding!

AIV report
uw-aiv (Just read the template if you're so inclined.) The issue is that this is the only vandalism for days. We don't block unless they've done something after a warning (usually several warnings). Anyway, besides this your counter-vandalism is really excellent. Keep up the good work.--Chaser - T 05:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Noted. typically I escalate if it's within a week of the last violation, otherwise I start over from the beginning. I'll keep a closer watch on those final warnings. Trusilver 05:51, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Wade Keller
I appreciate all your help with the semi-protection. However, someone or something called DumbBOT removed the semi-protection on the main article and the discussion page...and though the vandalism on the main page is not as bad as it was when I first contacted you, the anonymous people are back to their old tricks. I don't understand why the semi-protection was removed. Any ideas? --Magmagirl 14:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Page protection is rarely indefinite. The average vandal has a relatively short attention span, so protection is usually put on for a short period of time until they get bored and go away. That's apparently not happened this time. There have only been two vandalisms since the page was removed from protection and they were both reverted almost immediately. Two is not enough to justify putting the page back under semi-protection. I'm watching it though, and if it starts to turn into a chronic situation again, I'll try to get it back to a protected status. Trusilver 15:13, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Comments from 69.234.200.234 from your user page...
I can't find a place to send you a message, so I'll leave it here. My comments on Oxford Academy are not negative comments or anything like that. They are facts, and I have the audio tape to prove it from the school's principal. Please do not edit my comments next time I post them up for Oxford Academy. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 29.234.200.234 (talk • contribs)


 * The above comments were left in an edit to your user page that I reverted. Douglasmtaylor 23:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your help, I've taken care of it. Trusilver 00:37, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Eric Whitacre
Just a quick note to inform you that I have completely reverted yesterday's edits by User:EWHITINC following Autobiography. You had also left a note on his talk page, but I felt POV issues did not go far enough. (Further discussion would probably be most appropriate either on his or on his article's discussion page.) Classical geographer 19:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I was making the assumption of good faith that the user was just a fan of the subject rather than the subject himself. But I agree that it didn't go far enough, I was waiting in hopes that he would make the corrections needed himself. But either way, I will be continuing to watch the page. Have a good day! Trusilver 20:00, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thankyou for undoing some vandalism on my userpage but the wording on the edit summary you ended up miss wording as " reverted edits by Richardson j " which had me worried at first. Any any apology's accepted ahead of time. Once again thanks Richardson j 01:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Hah, take a look at it a second time. It says it reverted to the last revision by Richardson j :). No problem though, have a great evening! Trusilver 01:31, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism in Hogwarts Houses page
Harry Potter-related pages should be locked from editing by non-users until after the book is released, at the risk of spoilers being posted. Beemer69 02:56, July 19, 2007 (UTC)

My RfA
Thank you for participating in My RfA which closed successfully. I am honored and truly more than a little humbled by the support of so many members of the community. It's more than a bit of a lift to see comments on my behalf by so many people that I respect. I'll do my best to not disappoint you or the community.

I'd like to particularly thank you for your very kind comment on the RfA. - Philippe &#124; Talk 07:26, 21 July 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem!, I think you are going to do very well.


 * Congratulations, Trusilver 18:55, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations
Dear Trusilver, I was sick in most of the times over the past week. As a result I am late to congratulate you for the nomination. I am so lucky and honered to get your help in Bengali Language Movement, it really was a pleasant experience. I am glad to know that you have wanted to work me in future. What more can I expect! I will be waiting for that oppertunity! Many thanks and regards for you man. You enjoy flying with those huge jets and keeping enjoying with Wikipedia. Tarif from Bangladesh 09:32, 21 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Very little congratulations are in order on my part, Tarif. I only did some copyediting :). I'm glad to see that you are getting the long-deserved credit for working on this article for the last year. Trusilver 18:57, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

edit question
Hi! I've noticed that you battle a lot of vandalism. I'm trying to do my part as well. I was wondering how you undo multiple edits by the same vandal? Case in point: the Guilderland High School page needs help. How would I reverse 4 edits at once rather than trying to undo them one at a time.

Thanks for your help!

Rzf3 06:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Two ways you can do it. The easiest would be just to go to the edit history and click on the date/time of the last known good entry. It will bring up the page as it was at that time with a tag at the top of the page saying that you are looking at a previously saved revision of the article. Then hit the edit tab and save it - that will save the article to that last good revision and erase all of the vandalism that has happened since then. However, beware that you aren't also deleting legitimate edits.


 * Another way, if you are interested in helping out with vandalism patrolling would be to get a utility that automates a lot of the vandalism fighting. I use Twinkle, take a look at it and see if it's something you feel could help you.


 * Any other questions you have, don't hesitate to ask me. I'm here to help! Trusilver 06:14, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:Wow
You aren't kidding! And I thought Sunday night was going to be slow. Brianga 06:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)