User talk:Zenibus

Welcome!
Hello, Zenibus, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! &mdash; Rod talk 15:13, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Introduction to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Reverting vandal edits
Thanks for spotting and reverting the vandalism on Portishead, Somerset; however the same IP address had done several edits and your action only reverted the most recent one. It is always checking if several vandal edits have been done since the last good version of an article.&mdash; Rod talk 15:15, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Are you the anti-vandalism IP, 2.121.25.31?
Are you this IP, who reverted a lot of vandalism not too long ago earlier? I'm certain that you are. But whether you are or aren't, I must state that you are stealing my thunder, LOL; I can barely get a revert in with you on the job. But good job. The anti-vandalism barnstar you received above is well-deserved. Flyer22 (talk) 00:38, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Great Job; Possible Warnings to Vandals
You are doing a great job reverting vandalism. I noticed that you have not been warning the vandals. I have started to place warnings on the pages of those whose edits you have reverted today and I will continue to go through them so you do not have to backtrack. You may wish to read through Vandalism about the different warnings that can be given and eventual reporting of persistent vandals to the administrators' notice board. The warnings may discourage vandals sooner than just reverting their edits. In any event, you are doing a fine job of discovering vandalism and reverting it. Donner60 (talk) 02:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)


 * (1) I deleted a vandal's addition. (2) I see that you have been tripped up by reverting vandalism to another bad version. This usually happens because more than one vandal has vandalized an article. So reverting one vandal may still leave a bad version. In some cases, it may appear at first glance as if you are responsible for the vandalism when in fact all you tried to do is revert a bad edit. It can happen to anyone. You can usually avoid this if you take a quick look at the edit history for any slightly earlier suspicious edits from another user or glancing through the article because a previous vandalism may stand out. Donner60 (talk) 21:32, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Recent edits to List of drugs banned from the Olympics
Hello, and thank you for your recent contributions. I appreciate the effort you made for our project, but unfortunately I had to undo your edit(s) because it did not meet one or more of our policies. The additon of the word "hi" in the article is not needed. Feel free to read more there, or contact me directly if you have any questions. Thank you!  Dspradau   → talk   14:49, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Electronic design automation with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.   Wikipelli Talk   17:34, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Careful with that axe, Eugene - a very bad example of vandalism fighting
This was not a good call. The anon editor first put some original research, in the article, then provided a bad, inappropriate source. Then he added some more original research, and finally made a rightful correction. You reverted their last edit only, undoing the only rightful edit they made, and thus leaving the article in a state of nonsense, triggering my revert for your "vandalism" and a third level vandalism warning here on your talk page. I replaced the latter with what I am writing here. As others have told you, if you want to fight vandalism, it might be be a good idea to use the proper tools (like, for instance wp:Huggle) that allow you to easily have an overview of a vandal's other edits. Cheers - DVdm (talk) 18:07, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * DVdm, it's worth noting that Huggle requires rollback and Twinkle requires (auto)confirmed, neither of which Zenibus has. — PinkAmpers  &#38;  ( Je vous invite à me parler )  22:36, 14 May 2013 (UTC)


 * You should get Twinkle. The Grand Cenobite (talk) 00:05, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I concur with The Grand Cenobite. You've hit autoconfirmed, and Twinkle really speeds up the reverting and helps with warning the guilty user. Hell, I think you'll have no problem getting rollback. Command and Conquer Expert! speak to me...review me... 01:36, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Dealing with consecutive vandalism edits
Hello, thanks for reverting vandalism, but please use Twinkle for all vandalism reverts; it can also be used to warn users semi-automatically. You didn't revert all the vandalism at Climate of Argentina and Negative gearing (Australia);you only reverted one of the two edits by the vandals in these cases. Or if you like, I could give you rollback, and then you could use Huggle, which is a far more powerful anti-vandalism tool. Graham 87 04:07, 23 May 2013 (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) 17:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)