Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Archive 8

Vegasorange

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Attempting to add a link to a link to info about the upcoming San Gennaro Feast in Las Vegas but captcha keeps loading and not allowing me to publish


 * Date and time
 * 11:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

72.130.146.149

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 22:23, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 22:23, 23 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Nope, filter was doing what it was designed to do. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 03:50, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

CMersman

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 23:12, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 23:12, 23 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

Brambles2010

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Brambles Limited


 * Description
 * Replace out-of-date information.


 * Date and time
 * 01:37, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Maybe the filter thinks pooling is a variant of pooping or pooing ? If so, there must be somehting in the code that I can't see, because it doesn't look like it should match, but I don't see any other explanation.  — Soap  —  01:42, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's what it is. Do you have a lot of these edits to make?  If so it would be best for me to get the filter changed ... in fact it should be changed anyway because otherwise other people will havwe the same problems.  —  Soap  —  01:45, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * In the meantime Ive done both of the edits.  — Soap  —  01:47, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Brambles2010

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * CHEP


 * Description
 * Replace out-of-date information.


 * Date and time
 * 01:41, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Same as above. The word pooling seems to be triping the filter for some reason.  — Soap  —  01:44, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

74.69.251.77

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 03:09, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 03:09, 24 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Nope, filter was doing what it was designed to do. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 03:48, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Sandyz999

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * LGBT Rights in Canada


 * Description
 * Adding GAY CANADA : A bibliography and videography, 1984-2008 as an External Link. Edit refused


 * Date and time
 * 22:19, 24 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

Is GAY CANADA supposed to be capitalized? It is being stopped by the filter because the word GAY in capitals is always stopped; but if it can be spelled out as Gay Canada then it won't be a problem.  — Soap  —  22:21, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

98.14.231.39

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Sword in the Stone


 * Description
 * Change decription


 * Date and time
 * 02:38, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Nope, edit filter is working perfectly. –MuZemike 02:42, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

PattisPattis

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Wikpedia is a piece of crap


 * Description
 * Hatemail of wikipedia the worlds shittest sight

I was trying to get my profile deleted because I don't want to have one on this fucked up sight
 * Date and time
 * 10:45, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Im not sure what brought this on, but vandalizing User:NawlinWiki/List of things that will get speedily deleted is not the way to go.  — Soap  —  14:37, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I've blocked the filer of this report as a VOA. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 16:32, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

192.83.228.119

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Snapple Facts,

I was correct in saying pooping in the woods can make you contract deadly diseases, this is a snapple fact, and I have received this cap.
 * Date and time
 * 14:21, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

But it's still technically correct, so not a false fact. Personally, I think the whole section should be deleted, since it doesn't help people learn about Snapple, but I want to look at the history of the article and see how it got in there first.  — Soap  —  14:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

74.12.178.218

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 16:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 16:24, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Nope, filter is doing what it's designed to do. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 16:26, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

68.48.122.219

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Duke Blue Devils Men Basketball


 * Description
 * Add more info about the basketball team


 * Date and time
 * 22:55, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Nope, filter was doing what it was designed to do. Rolling back the existing vandalism on that article as we speak; filer blocked 24h. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 23:14, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

72.66.83.252

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 23:05, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 23:05, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Nope, filter was doing what it was designed to do. Please do not file obvious bad-faith false positive reports. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 23:15, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

75.19.164.125

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 23:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 23:53, 25 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Nope, filter is working as intended. Filer blocked 31h. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 16:51, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

216.120.175.58

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 18:38, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 18:38, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize articles; as it may lead to your IP address or account being blocked.  — Soap  —  18:43, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

87.82.12.70

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 21:19, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 21:19, 26 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Nope, filter's working as intended. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 21:45, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

72.186.247.39

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 00:38, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 00:38, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

Please do not vandalize articles; as it may lead to your IP address or account being blocked.

141.155.168.232

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 01:00, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 01:00, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

Please do not vandalize articles, as it may lead to your IP or account being blocked from editing.  — Soap  —  01:01, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

74.108.34.189

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Chappelle show


 * Description
 * I was simply stating a commonly known fact


 * Date and time
 * 01:19, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Nope, filter working as intended. Any more racism from you will lead to a block. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 06:48, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

StateoftheOnion

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Goat, or Who Is Sylvia?


 * Description
 * I was adding a detailed synopsis of the play to the page. It said that it was potentially unconstructive and caught by the autofilter.  I don't believe this to be an accurate statement.


 * Date and time
 * 02:22, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

I think the plot summary is long enough already (see WP:PLOT), however that's not the edit filter's job to judge. The edit filter blocked your edit because of the sentence you wrote in all-capitals; if you write in normal sentence case it will go through. But be aware that it may be reverted by someone else.  — Soap  —  02:24, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

74.62.43.3

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * I was editing the plot for the movie 23 trying to add further understanding so people could understand the movie


 * Description
 * I was trying to help others further understand


 * Date and time
 * 17:48, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, it appears to me that you have vandalised multiple pages, including redirecting History of the United States to an article regarding the penis? See here W a c k y Wace  talk 17:55, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Nope, filter is working as designed. Filer bloked 24 hours for repeated hits. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 18:10, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

173.79.31.94

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 18:25, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 18:25, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

A vandal.  — Soap  —  18:38, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * As Soap said. Filter is working as designed. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 19:10, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

174.6.214.194

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * []


 * Description
 * I tried to talk on someone's page but forgot to add a title, when I tried to delete what I put on his talk page in the wrong section it wouldn't let me.


 * Date and time
 * 21:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Normally this is a form of vandalism; not so here. In this case, I'd advise just leaving it since he'll probably remove the part w/o the title header himself, no offense meant. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 02:00, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

184.78.180.20

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * List of Air Gear characters


 * Description
 * Updating character biographies with recent information.


 * Date and time
 * 01:37, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Yup, this is a filter problem. Based on a similar request above, it seems to be catching on an innocuous string; I'll redo the edit for you. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 02:02, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Just a note, I believe it's catching "pooling" only, because it thinks that li is a variant of i (just doubled) and thus that pooling is a variant of pooing. Just about any other word with a double o should be fine.  — Soap  —  02:23, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd agree with you, Soap, except that "pooling" isn't in the lines he's adding. "bloodflow", however, is. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 02:49, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Pooling is present in those edits, because the MediaWiki software considers the whole paragraph to be part of the "added lines" content variable, even though it isn't in the words that the IP actually wrote. The paragraph contains the sentence His size is actually caused by a large amount of blood pooling in his gut from overeating. near the top; I'm pretty sure this is what's tripping the filter and that words that have an l or an i before a double-o will not trip the filter.   —  Soap  —  18:44, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Nathanmostow

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * sdsdsd


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 01:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 01:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Nope, filter is working as designed. Trip the filter again and I'll trip the "block" switch and leave it there. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 01:55, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Bigheartproject

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * big heart project


 * Description
 * I was just trying to save the page


 * Date and time
 * 03:44, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The problem is that you're creating a page whose title matches your username, which is a big no-no because such articles tend to (a) have a major issue with conflict of interest and (b) be written in the tone of an advertisement. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 05:23, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

24.125.152.125

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 17:17, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 17:17, 29 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Note that I do tend to block libelers on sight. Filter is working as intended. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 18:11, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Steveyeu

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ultamatix


 * Description
 * Removing a single category that I added erroneously, was the only category for the page. Reporting as instructed in the editbox.


 * Date and time
 * 01:07, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, the edit filter isn't capable of telling whether someone is reverting themselves or not, or whether the categories being removed were added recently or not. If it were possible, that would be a good idea to prevent false positives such as this, but other than that I can't really think of anything. But please don't feel that you're being watched suspiciously because of these filter hits; most of our highly active users have tags like that, including myself, and we understand that it does not indicate you are a problem editor. However the filter exists because people who really are vandalizing or making accidentally destructive edits will often remove all of the categories from a page, which not only un-does other people's work but makes it harder for other readers to find the page.  — Soap  —  01:19, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * My thoughts on the matter were quite similar, but I thought it best to report it as requested, regardless. steveyeu   ../(talk)  01:24, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

99.50.120.59

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Mamma Mia! The Movie Soundtrack


 * Description
 * I am PleaseStand (talk). The IP attempted to revert vandalism but failed.


 * Date and time
 * 01:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

It's a filter that blocks out most instances of "your mom" in articles. It is very strict, and does occasionally trip up false positives like this, but the number of legitimate hits that it traps is far greater. I should be able to add this as an exception though. Thanks for reporting it to this page.  — Soap  —  01:27, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

YahushaReigns

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * []


 * Description
 * Entering verifiable content and details. I got an error that I was spamming and I do not spam.


 * Date and time
 * 02:29, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * I'm not sure what the linkspam warning was about, but that was only a warning, and can be bypassed by hitting "savepage" again. You were actually prevented from editing for typing "your mother", but I made a slight alteration to the filter so this won't happen again in this context. Thanks for reporting this. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:05, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Dottygray

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Big Bang Theory


 * Description
 * I was trying to address the fact that Leonard RAPED Penny in the third season finale, are you seriously not going to allow it?


 * Date and time
 * 04:57, 31 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * No sources about a fictional "rape" of two TV characters. Tb hotch Ta lk C.  05:02, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

unle

71.163.174.233

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 19:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * 19:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

A vandal, as can be seen by the filter log and the form in which this FP report was originally filled out.  — Soap  —  19:44, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Filter working normally. Do not waste our time with obviously bollocks false positive reports; we're not the complete imbeciles you take us for and will not hesitate to block you for a period of time based not only on your report, but also on the filter log results. tl;dr: Post shit, get hit. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 06:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

71.115.201.250

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * []


 * Description
 * I was attempting to remove the complaint thanks


 * Date and time
 * 21:27, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I have removed the edits for you and left Michael Snow a note about it. Also, I dont know the story behind this and don't have the ability to even get involved, but I should clarify that Michael Snow and the Wikimedia Foundation have no jurisdiction over other sites using our software but not using the wikimedia.org domain or any other one that is linked to directly from this page.  — Soap  —  21:36, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

83.41.126.195

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 09:41, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 09:41, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

A vandal, as can be seen in the log.  — Soap  —  10:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Filter working as normal and filer given 31h to go scrawl into a journal or loose-leaf. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 17:22, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

220.239.106.238

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * prfessor squid


 * Date and time
 * 10:29, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Another report of obvious vandalism.  — Soap  —  11:24, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Filter working as designed and this silly billy has been put on a 31h starvation diet. As I said above, post shit, get hit. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 17:25, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Shurin

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Are You "Fried Chickenz"??


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 13:49, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

An compilation album ( Are You "Fried Chickenz"?? ), fullname has question marks in it, should I remove them from article name? As it is in fact a question, are question marks allowed?
 * This is a legitimate page, but it's worth noting the filter only tagged the edit - it went through as normal, so there's nothing to redo. As an aside, the filter trips on question marks in the title, from the looks of it. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 17:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

66.142.240.42

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 18:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 18:18, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * If you're that hard up for porn, use Google, not Wikipedia. Filter working normally. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 22:30, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

66.41.102.82

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 22:45, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 22:45, 1 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Filter working normally. Seriously, channer, do you take us for fools? —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 22:47, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Waynebonney

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * I am not trying to advertise I would just like my biography included.


 * Date and time
 * 04:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The way you're going about it is all wrong, sadly. It appears that you have a stark WP:Conflict of interest. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 04:14, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

71.195.6.206

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Avacado


 * Description
 * have sex with pretty girls?


 * Date and time
 * 09:25, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

There should be a "new section" button at the top of every talk page. If not, just click the "edit" tab and go to the bottom and then type out the message you want preferably with a ===title=== header at the top. That should work for everyone.  — Soap  —  10:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

69.59.39.219

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 10:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 10:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

Test edits, vandalism, no false positives thst I can see.  — Soap  —  10:59, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Filer whacked 31h. The sooner these people realize Wikipedia isn't their own graffiti wall the better. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 19:33, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

67.35.83.193

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * the geography thingy


 * Description
 * a page


 * Date and time
 * 22:10, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism.  — Soap  —  22:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Filter working as intended. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 22:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

92.30.83.244

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * With an edit self-deleting my own comment(s) to a usertalkpg as redundant, I tripped filter 34. It requested 'confirmation you're sure', so I again clicked save. It reported it disallowed anyway. As all their banner content remained it seemed odd it tripped a page blanking filter, but that doesn't matter much. So, it's not a false positive in that there was (self) text removal, but the filter should either allow it on 2nd attempt if it's going to ask for user confirmation before it will do so, or disallow it on 1st attempt.


 * Date and time
 * 22:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * This is no less than the third time I'm aware of that an IP's sought to remove a section they created from a user talk page... Is there any way to set up the filter so that it won't stop a user removing a section they've created? (As a note, as the both of you have replied to that thread, there's no point in redoing the edit.) —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 22:58, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed; the comment turned out to be a useful heads-up for them anyway, so it's probably...serendipitous it wasn't deleted. I figured I may as well report the confirm-disallow thing anyhow. 92.30.83.244 (talk) 23:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It's possible to allow a user to blank someone else's talk page if the text they're blanking contains their username or IP address, but that would mean that they could blank anything so long as it contained their signature ... however, most of these cases could in turn be stopped by a check on how many bytes are removed. So it would be possible for most edits that just removed one paragraph by just one user to be removed by that user, but not most long  conversations.  I think this is a good idea, though I wouldn't feel comfortable making a change like that without discussion because this filter has been around for a long time and I suspect the idea has occurred before and for some reason not been added yet.  —  Soap  —  16:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Hongkongrocksmanitspro

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * the list of pokemon


 * Date and time
 * 00:50, 3 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

I was trying to help people catch the legendary Lizermon in Pokemon HeartGold
 * Filter working perfectly, and if the above sentence wasn't a complete and utter fabrication I'd tell you Wikipedia isn't a game guide. Hoaxers are shown the door quickly - especially if they cite another Wiki that's deleted their "proof". —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 01:01, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * After examining his contribs I have come to the conclusion the filer is a vandalism-only account and have blocked him accordingly. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 01:06, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Clubpenguingold

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 00:51, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 00:51, 3 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Just like we don't permit WoW goldspam, we aren't gonna permit coinspam, Neopointspam, or various other types of "get-virtually-rich-quick" schemes. Filer blocked. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 01:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Masterofwikis

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Cuntless


 * Description
 * I added this page, because this band has a lot of fans but it can't be posted online


 * Date and time
 * 14:03, 3 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Filter's at fault here - but there's an absolute dearth of reliable sources in what I'm seeing. So, while the filter is at fault here (it's catching the image name, which contains the string "CUNT"), the article could not survive AfD without a significant rewrite. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 16:46, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

75.185.91.153

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 19:51, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 19:51, 3 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Filter working normally. Please bear in mind that Wikipedia is not the United States Congress and thus the First Amendment's protections don't apply to it. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 20:02, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

173.15.164.249

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 20:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 20:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

The only recent hits for this account seem to be this and variants thereof; not really a false positive.  — Soap  —  20:21, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Congin123

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * uzi


 * Description
 * 

fix shit fags
 * Date and time
 * 23:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * You are not the Angry Video Game Nerd, stop acting like him. Filer blocked as a VOA. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 01:52, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

71.97.197.4

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Tremors


 * Description
 * I am trying to readd a reliable part to Tremors, but I not allowed, these aren't databases, wikis or blog sites either, so can I add it?


 * Date and time
 * 01:44, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * You seem to be tripping a sockpuppet filter... —  Jeremy  ( v0_0v Dittobori ) 01:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, what can I do to stop it? --71.97.197.4 (talk) 11:29, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * From the looks of it, there isn't anything you can do. The filter appears to be set up to prevent edits on specific articles from an IP range that includes your IP. I'm sorry. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 16:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You can create an account and make ten edits to non-film pages, then after four days you'll be able to edit normally. Stifle (talk) 20:58, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Not a false hit at all. IP is in fact one of many confirmed socks of User:Alexcas11 who caused said filter to be set up in the first place. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 19:47, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

ObsesiveSniper

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 16:05, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 16:05, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize articles, as even attempts at vandalism may lead to your account being blocked.  — Soap  —  16:08, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Filter working as normal. And on a personal note, I am very, very disappointed with you. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 16:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

84.163.69.234

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 20:26, 4 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Filter working normally. If you have a serious beef with the article's veracity, have the subject contact our OTRS system; don't accuse us of racism and vandalize articles to that effect. That will lead to you being blocked. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 21:48, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Gejyspa

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[Weebl's Cartoons]]


 * Description
 * Undoing a vandalism attack from october 2009. It is clearly unsubstantiated, false, and vandalism from an anonyumous IP address that has other obvious vandalism associated with it.


 * Date and time
 * 20:33, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree that text should be removed. I will remove it now. It looks like a few "Mr Stabby" related things are on the filter and because of the way MediaWiki works, even when you remove text it still considers it to be "added text" as long as some of the paragraph remains. So this is the very kind of false positive that we are trying to prevent, and I will try to find a better way to keep track of "Mr Stabby" without causing false positives (first I will find out why it is on the list in the first place).  — Soap  —  20:45, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * It was on there because of personal attacks made against another user (not me). That was a while back, so I'll remove it and we'll see what happens.  NawlinWiki (talk) 00:31, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

86.132.165.230

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Shota Arveladze


 * Description
 * Add in a reference.


 * Date and time
 * 12:22, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

It's a false positive, yes, because it's tracking the word "bastard" and "RACIST" even though they're being used legitimately. However I'm concerned that this news story doesn't even seem to appear in any other news source, so while I would have no objection to adding the edit if it were true, I'm too hesitant to do it based on just that one source which isn't a mainstream news outlet and doesn't seem to have its story reflected anywhere else.  — Soap  —  13:32, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Well, maybe you should take it to the talk page of the article, and attempt to dispute the legitimacy of Scotlands top selling newspaper there?
 * And I have to add the information back in myself after someone deleted it? Gee, thanks wikipedia!
 * Well, My objections are this:
 * 1) It's not a reliable source by itself ... almost nothing only covered by one newspaper is.
 * 2) The story was actually about him denying that it happened.
 * 3) It was in 2001 (although I didnt realize that when I wrote in here yesterday).
 * But it's not up to me; if you want to get the content into the article you should go to the talk page and see if other people agree with you. But please don't just add it in of your own intent, or it will be removed either by me or someone else.  —  Soap  —  22:46, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * So every entry into an article has to be approved on the talk page before it is inserted, with references backing it up? Gee, things sure have changed around here...
 * Also, so an article from 2001 is somehow objectionable? I must remind myself never to post references from articles written in the past decade. How silly of me.
 * Yes, anything that isn't covered by the small list of exceptions here must be referenced, and anything that is disputed should be discussed on the talk page before being re-added. If you think there are problems with this policy, such as that it would permit someone to add cn to statements like "The sky is blue"., situations like that are generally covered by other policies even if it may not be obvious at first; for example someone who insisted on adding superfluous cn tags to sentences like that would be told he was violating WP:POINT.   —  Soap  —  23:20, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Eh, it is referenced. It's listed on the talk page.I'm not sure WTF your reference to OR has to do with anything, it's been reported in a national daily newspaper. Why on Earth you would wish to dispute this, Heaven alone knows.

Harisu444444

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salakau


 * Date and time
 * 18:44, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

You seem to be adding unreferenced content to Salakau and other pages, such that it constitutes vandalism; please stop or your account may be blocked (this goes for everyone else who's vandalized those pages as well).  — Soap  —  19:52, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Hollanddavis

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * I am in process of listing two projects for informational purposes only... the one is question is entitled Healing Word that was released in 2002.


 * Date and time
 * 20:47, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

It seems you've already changed your username to get around the filter. Which works, and is not forbidden by any means, though you should put on your userpage that you were previously editing as User:Hollanddavis. That leaves only the issue of whether your albums are notable enough to pass WP:MUSIC, which based on the WoW release I think they may be, but it would be good if you could verify the information and clear up some of the potential confusion (was the first album released 2002 or 2006?). Also it is common to merge all albums into the main article for an artist if they consist mostly of just track listings.  — Soap  —  21:19, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

86.129.222.96

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 22:34, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 22:34, 5 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Filter working as intended. DMacks (talk) 23:42, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

7

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Talk:British Mandate for Palestine


 * Description
 * EF 330 - why would this edit trigger an attack on other editors filter?


 * Date and time
 * 12:10, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I've spoken with one of the people who created that filter, and he said it is deliberately written that way, and although this is a false positive of the truest sort, it isn't a bug in the code. I would change the filter, but don't feel comfortable doing so given that I've been told it's deliberately written this way. I will paste the user's edit into the page, but as for the content he wants to be added to the article, given that you didn't see it fit to be added, I won't either. I also would like to see him say why he wants it added.  — Soap  —  17:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Username

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Daisy of Love is a dummy doll


 * Description
 * Daisy of love finds love in a guy that leaves her and comes back.

Save it as a complete article that peole can see
 * Date and time
 * 16:33, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

This kind of page is the sort that will always get deleted whether it triggers a filter or not; this is not really a social networking site. Please read Your first article.  — Soap  —  17:36, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Broch11
Hi, I'm a french canadien and I has an account in the french section of wikipedia and I want to explain a problem. I talk about that here because I can't do it at another place. My article was deleted for no good reason, it was not about genealogy, but information on a family association already exists for 21 years and has members in three different countries. I was insulted to see that I have not deleted anything I can do, besides it was barely begun. I want denounced the abuse of power by administrators of wikipedia, even if there is perhaps nothing will. I have been expelled since I dared to create a page nagging administrator who deleted my page without asking any questions. I hope you can fix the mistakes you have committed. I am not alone in this situation. Several pages all at is in good standing are removed, and pages like the word "FUCK" stays there. I am disappointed with the lack of organization and justice.

Ps: sorry for my english if is not great

--Broch11 (talk) 17:12, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * You should probably speak with the administrator who deleted the article; I can't see it from here and can't answer the question of why it was deleted.  —  Soap  —  17:37, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, we don't have jurisdiction over fr.wikipedia. You'll have to deal with it over there with unblock requests explaining your case. I wager that the page you created over there was viewed as an attack page; hence the reason you were blocked. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 04:39, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

75.18.164.170

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 18:43, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 18:43, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I see only vandalism from this address, such as edits like this.  — Soap  —  19:05, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

86.184.40.250

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 20:33, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 20:33, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're trying to do here, but removing page content like that will be always reversed.  — Soap  —  20:42, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

65.24.96.176

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User_talk:69.122.174.19


 * Description
 * Tried to remove a warning I posted in error.


 * Date and time
 * 21:38, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Is User:Svanslyck you? If so, you could log in to that account and then remove the warning and the filter will not stop you.  — Soap  —  21:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Yankees Suck9

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 00:30, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 00:30, 7 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Filter working normally. Filer blocked both for repeated filter hits and username. Keep your rivalry in the pubs and stadiums and OFF Wikipedia. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 04:15, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

MrBradJones044

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * I'm trying to change the page, Charlotte Checkers (2010-) to just Charlotte Checkers because that's what the new AHL team is called & nothing else.


 * Date and time
 * 17:51, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

There is a limit set up on how many page moves a user can perform in a set amount of time; I've bumped it a bit so that you should be okay from now on. Thanks for reporting this.  — Soap  —  17:59, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

199.107.67.100

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 22:15, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 22:15, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not actually sure what you're doing here, whether it's vandalism or not, but the fact that you aren't explaining the changes would lead me to suspect that it would have been reverted if it had gone through. Could you explain?  — Soap  —  01:20, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Riittaajo

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Database_administrator


 * Description
 * I was trying to remove some vandalism at the bottom of the page.


 * Date and time
 * 00:42, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting this; I've completed the edit and warned the person who vandalized the page. As for why the filter tripped, it's a variation of the filter that traps large deletions, so it technically was doing its job. I've been worrying about this particular filter for a long time though, because it does occasionally throw up false positives like this, and I welcome anyone's suggestions on how to improve it, or even if it should be disabled altogether in favor of a general-purpose anti-blanking filter.  — Soap  —  01:18, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Aloriah

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * aloriah


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 10:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 10:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * These filters are designed to prevent users from creating articles with the same name as their accounts. They seem to be working correctly. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:24, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Waywards0ns

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Banker's Academy


 * Description
 * I was editing to make the page less of an advertisement.


 * Date and time
 * 16:00, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * This is another "Pooling" false positive on that filter. Redoing edit. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 18:11, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Can't redo the edit - it throws up a recreation message when I try, even after I've fixed the code above to include the apostrophe in the name. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 18:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

122.167.10.141

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Premenstrual syndrome


 * Description
 * Was removing the "ooo skill..." thingy in the page. Was a minor edit


 * Date and time
 * 16:10, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The problem is with your edit summary. Wear your Wikipedia cap here, not your /b/tard one. If the vandalism's still there, I'll revert it. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 18:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And done. (For reference, this is indeed a PEBKAC issue). —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 18:05, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Pchase908

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Humanity (magazine)


 * Description
 * trying to change to Journal instead of magazine as it is an academic journal


 * Date and time
 * 16:25, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Oof. You hit the unspeakable's filter... If there's consensus for the page move, I'll redo it for you. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 18:09, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Nevermind; problem seems to have resolved itself... —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 18:19, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

80.176.233.6

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Merbein, Victoria


 * Description
 * I'm not allowed to revert an addition by "WANKA 32" that says that Thomas Henderson is a Fat Kunt . So it stays there until someone gets to this backlog (it's already been there 24 hours). Well done, Wikipedia! Someone bad can add that someone's a "Fat Kunt", but someone good can't remove it. Great.


 * Date and time
 * 17:30, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * I honestly don't know how the filter sees that as vandalism in all caps, but in any case I'm redoing the edit on your behalf. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 17:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I think I've figured it out. The reason the filter stopped you was because of the user's name (I've since blocked the user indefinitely). It showed up in your edit summary and tripped the filter. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 18:00, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Waywards0ns

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Banker's Academy


 * Description
 * Trying to re-do previous edit to this page. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_filter/False_positives#Waywards0ns

How can I complete this edit? Trying to edit the page to be less of an advertisement.
 * Date and time
 * 20:45, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * You can't. The edit filter, unfortuntely, trips on "pooling" (since the filter ignores the "l" and construes it as "pooing"). I'll retry. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 21:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * NM, Soap's gotten it. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 21:40, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it should be OK now.  — Soap  —  21:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

BradfordAssay

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Pikachurin


 * Description
 * Redirect to the correct article title, EGF-like, fibronectin type III and laminin G domains


 * Date and time
 * 20:55, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

I don't see any problem with the abuse filter, worked as expected. FinalRapture - † ☪ 21:05, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Besnyy

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Kellee Maize


 * Description
 * I am creating a new page, so I made a userspace draft, but when I tried to save it, I was told that it was a unconstructive edit and that it wouldn't be allowed.


 * Date and time
 * 21:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure which filter(s) caught this; but it's so spammy, promotional, unsourced and generally inappropriate that I applaud the leet skillz of the filter programmer(s). You were not saving it as a userspace draft, but as an article. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  21:06, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I'm not an edit filter manager (so I can't see how the very sensitive "Your mom" filter works), but it appears to have caught this part: The majority of the songs on Aligned Archetypes were recorded at Emmy Award-Winning Ya Momz House Recording Studio, based in Pittsburgh, by DJ Huggy. PleaseStand (talk) 22:40, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

86.45.130.146

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Catamite


 * Description
 * I was attempting to replace the content of the article with a soft redirect to a wiktionary entry that largely duplicated its content, but the filter would not allow me to save the page despite multiple attempts. The full content of my version of the page was " ". As there is no prohibition on unregistered editors redirecting articles, this filter seems contrary to Wikipedia norms.

[added] I'll also note that when the filter was tripped, it advised me "If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page.", which was exactly what I was trying to do and was rewarded with being accused of "repeated vandalism attempts". What madness is this?


 * Date and time
 * 22:48, 8 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * My guess is that you, rather unintentionally, tripped filters designed to prevent articles from being blanked. I'll redo the edit for you. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 00:32, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And redone. My suspicions were correct; the filters you originally tripped trigger when one blanks an article, removes references from an article, and/or removes all the categories from an article. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 00:35, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks Jeremy, that was my guess too. Could you fix the filter so that replacing the content of the article with wi is treated the same way as replacing it with an intra-wiki redirect to prevent this problem from re-ocurring? 86.45.130.146 (talk) 15:01, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Doing it right now. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 08:26, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright, I've fixed two of the three to ignore . The third one was too arcane for this mudblood to figure out, so I haven't messed with it for fear of breaking it. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 08:30, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

68.214.129.10

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * This guy is the best friend of Archibald Mobcat. He is quite edible and you should get to know him.

You are not currently logged in. Editing this way will cause your IP address to be recorded publicly in this page's edit history. If you create an account, you can conceal your IP address and be provided with many other benefits. Messages sent to your IP can be viewed on your talk page. Please do not save test edits. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Warning: An automated filter has identified this edit as removing all categories from an article, which is potentially unconstructive. Please be aware that vandalism may result in revocation of your editing privileges. If this edit is constructive, please click 'Save page' again, and report this error. Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable. You irrevocably agree to release your contributions under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license. See the Terms of Use for details. Edit summary (Briefly describe the changes you have made) Cancel
 * Date and time
 * 08:21, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

This account has been blocked for spamming, though it looks to me like some of the edits, such as this one, which is presumably what the report was for, were simple vandalism.  — Soap  —  10:22, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

202.70.58.30

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 16:54, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 16:54, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

It looks like you've been blanking sections from Death Note and have been reverted multiple times. If you do not provide an explanation for the blankings, I expect they will continue to be removed and you may be temporarily blocked from editing, even if you're on a mobile IP. If you do believe the content should be removed you should explain your reasoning on talk:Death Note before again removing the content from the page.  — Soap  —  17:33, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

79.79.23.211

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * dont no


 * Description
 * it gay

deleting gays
 * Date and time
 * 18:33, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Well it looks to me like you removed content from User talk:Courcelles after he reverted an edit you made to the Joe Cole article. I would say that this is not a false positive, and consider this a warning, as if you continue to vandalize you may have your IP address blocked from editing.  — Soap  —  19:27, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Moononia

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 19:16, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 19:16, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

I see only edits like this, which is clear vandalism, and would be reverted immediately if it got through. Please stop, as even attempted vandalism can lead to your account being blocked.  — Soap  —  19:25, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Tamarapratt

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * I am editing all The National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism wikipedia pages due to a change in mission at the institute.


 * Description
 * With a new change in mission the wikipedia page for The National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism must be changed to reflect its current status and operations.


 * Date and time
 * 21:18, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

For a complete re-write of a page like this, you should first start a discussion on the article's talk page rather than doing it all at once without discussion, particularly if your edit removes large amounts of referenced content, as this is the only way that readers can be sure that what they're reading is true.  — Soap  —  22:19, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

たろ人

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Mała Moskwa


 * Description
 * Trying to move Mała Moskwa to The Little Moscow. Given redirects like Przypadek and Inkubo, this makes perfect sense. たろ人 (talk) 21:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 21:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, it looks like you got the edit through. I apologize for the disruption; this is definitely a false positive, and it was triggered by your edit summary, though it seems to me that it would be difficult to fix without taking down the filter. In fact, it was stopping a lot of other edits too. And so I have disabled the filter for now, though I plan to re-enable it soon or let someone else do just as soon as we can be sure it won't have problems like this.  — Soap  —  22:14, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

WikiMinaj

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Your Love (Nicki Minaj song)


 * Description
 * On the Rap Chart at the bottom it has the song at #7 but if you go to billboard.com it clearly has Nicki Minaj Your Love at 11 on the Rap Charts. Whoever keeps editing this page and Semi protected it is posting false info which i have been trying to correct.


 * Date and time
 * 00:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Well I believe that the listing on the Wikipedia page is for the peak position, not the current position, so I believe 7 is still correct. However, for future reference, what caused the filter to stop your edit is because you put those exclamation points at the end. Even inside of a comment, you should avoid doing that whenever possible.  — Soap  —  00:35, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

216.246.160.62

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 20:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 20:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, it looks like you were replacing one welcome template with another welcome template. But these templates should always be "substituted" by typing them as subst:welcome and the like, which will prevent them from accidentally deleting the master welcome template if they should decide to remove the welcome notice by clicking the section edit link. If you used the "subst" method, it would not trigger the filter. However the filter that was triggered was not related to the subst function, but to removing content from another editor's talk page. In general, removing content from someone else's talk page will often trigger this filter; if that user is you then you could log in and perform the same edit.  — Soap  —  20:56, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Shadow King618

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door 2


 * Description
 * I was adding sources and significant content to this page.


 * Date and time
 * 21:52, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Seems like that's been dealt with, but please note that Wikipedia is not a fortuneteller. Unless the game has officially been announced, it's just speculation and will be deleted as such. Twitter does not a reliable source make. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 22:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

173.52.227.11

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 22:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 22:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * You're gonna need a source for that. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 22:14, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, if this information cannot be reliably shown to be true, then it shouldn't be on Wikipedia in any form. I can't find that information on their website, even in this document, which seems to be the information about the Sports' Night.  —  Soap  —  22:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

66.131.57.91

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * please delete this page. I am the subject in question and DO NOT want this up.


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 00:13, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 00:13, 11 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Sorry, but you can't dictate to us to delete an article just because you don't want it up. Contact OTRS. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 02:38, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

68.115.37.221

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Was just editing Atheism.


 * Description
 * 


 * Date and time
 * 00:35, 11 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Not happening. In fact, I don't need to refer to the filter log for this one; problem clearly exists between keyboard and chair; filer blocked 31h. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 02:38, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

78.34.253.69

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Responsive architecture


 * Description
 * Removing 1 copyvio section, several advertising images and paragraphs & linkspam. At articles 1 and 2, person(s?) recently added some problematic material  . Should be undone imho.


 * Date and time
 * 00:45, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure this is a copyright violation? At least some of the text seems to be unique to us and much of the rest appears only here and on sites that look like they've copied from us. I did remove a big section that said it was from a research paper, though; even if it's unique to us on an Internet search it is still plagiarism.  — Soap  —  00:57, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yeah, that was the "1 copyvio section" I spoke of above. There are other problems that occured around the same time though: All the images uploaded and added to the article by an account named after someone involved in one of those projects constantly referred to in the articles. So, the articles do need a big overhaul sooner or later, possibly involving the removal of a lot of more or less directly self-promotional text. Anyway, thanks for removing the copyvio section, that was the most pressing issue. --78.34.195.112 (talk) 17:49, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Jaredruleshehe

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 02:11, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 02:11, 11 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Filter working as intended. Filer given a vandalism4im; his original report here tripped a filter. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 02:34, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

81.159.98.32

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 20:38, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 20:38, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

No non-vandal hits from this address, just two of these.  — Soap  —  21:01, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

87.203.87.65

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * []


 * Description
 * add a reference - Members of the group today declare a variety of ethnic identities, Bulgarian, Greek, and Pomak

reference - http://www.xronos.gr/detail.php?ID=44544 "We are Greek Pomaks" - Pomak representative, "Hronos" newspaper (in greek)
 * Date and time
 * 20:56, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

It looks like a false positive to me, but I've passed this along to someone who is more familiar with the filter than I am, as the recent hits on the filter don't seem to show a perceptible pattern that would lead me to be able to realize what it is supposed to be blocking. I apologize for the inconvenience; this should be cleared up soon.  — Soap  —  21:12, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yep, probably a false positive, sorry about that. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:16, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

72.94.52.3

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Willie Montañez


 * Description
 * Under the "California Angels" heading, I found "at suckin the meanest dick no homo" and tried to change it to "in".

You see the garbage I was trying to replace.
 * Date and time
 * 01:28, 12 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The ref's what's tripping the filter. Redoing the edit. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 02:16, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * And redone. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 02:23, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Pyroscopy

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 07:49, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 07:49, 12 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * I'm getting the impression you don't know what Wikipedia precisely is for. Please read over WP:Notability, WP:Ownership of articles, and WP:Verifiability. Those "articles" would have been deleted as A1 or A3, and I have deleted UnderWroot for the same reason. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 08:18, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

99.229.60.130

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 18:56, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 18:56, 12 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * You seem to be attempting to vandalize Knight; consider this a warning that even attempted vandalism can lead to you being blocked from editing.  — Soap  —  19:28, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Blocked 31h for probing. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 19:32, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Innes Macdonald

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 00:22, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 00:22, 13 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Filer blocked indefinitely as a vandalism-only account. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 00:29, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I have also blocked whom appears to be either a meatpuppet of this account or its sockmaster for similar behavior. —  Jeremy  ( v^_^v Dittobori ) 00:35, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Juicesk8magazine

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Juice Magazine


 * Description
 * JUICE magazine run in Los Angeles seeks to update the Wikipedia page for JUICE Magazine that was previously dedicated to a small magazine this is currently out of publication. Our magazine has been around for 17 years and have a very established staff and client base.  With connections to the high ups in Music, Surfing, and Skating JUICE Magazine (founded by CEO, President and Editor Terri Craft) should be the first Wikipedia page.  Just updating the page to make it more current.


 * Date and time
 * 02:31, 13 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Nope, this wasn't a false positive. It appears you copied and pasted the content of Juice Magazine's website, and replaced the entirety of the article's text with it. Tim  1357  talk  02:56, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

74.132.243.199

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * I was try to give real info about the show Bakugan


 * Date and time
 * 05:22, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Very definitely vandalism all the way through. User tried many times to get the same kind of edits and finally succeeded a few minutes after this report.  — Soap  —  11:20, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

BeauCherie

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * BeauCherie or Beau Cherie


 * Description
 * beginning summary for the rare name BeauCherie


 * Date and time
 * 04:55, 14 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The filter correctly warned you for creating an article with a title very similar to your chosen username. Are the "BeauCherie" described in the article? Someguy1221 (talk) 06:48, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

86.47.27.229

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 13:43, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 13:43, 14 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

i was trying to replace the whole page concerning serendipity, with the single word : penis
 * Cute. Honesty won't save you from being blocked, however.  Consider this a warning.  —  Soap  —  16:18, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

ATSDR

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Acrolein


 * Description
 * Undo edits by Beetstra


 * Date and time
 * 14:58, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

The filter is acting appropriately here; if you've already been reverted by an administrator, as you say you have, I recommend you talk the issue over with them before trying to add the links again.  — Soap  —  16:20, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Sachems7

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Middlborough, Massachusetts


 * Description
 * In the red colored region of the map provided is service to the people who need him. I was simply trying to give those people some hope, for if it was not for him, they may not have a life anymore. I was trying to save peoples lives by giving them an outlet and informing them on my town in the mean time. This was not an attempt of vandalism.


 * Date and time
 * 16:18, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

it looks like to me you were vandalizing; is this a mistake?  — Soap  —  16:22, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

74.13.45.203

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * fifa world cup


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 22:42, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 22:42, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, the filter tagged your edits because you were putting exclamation points in, but you weren't following the format of the other entries on the table;  has reverted your edits to the table now.  — Soap  —  22:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

24.68.241.7

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User_talk:24.68.241.7


 * Description
 * Adding relevant and constructive rebuttal to abusal response from editors. Used the word "gay" in all caps for emphasis purposes, got flagged as vandalism of my own talk page, even though the word "gay" was the only thing in caps.


 * Date and time
 * 03:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's possible to make this filter exclude cases of a user editing one's own talk page, but it would also allow true vandalism through, and I think in this case it wasn't really necessary for you to capitalize. Besides, the message is more likely to be seen if you post it on the talk page of the person who left the warning; I doubt they still have your talk page on their watchlist after a month. Unless you were just commenting for the sake of the people who come to your page in the future, which I understand.  — Soap  —  12:22, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

TalkPark

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * TalkPark


 * Description
 * I was trying to save and publish my article on an Internet forum. But it will not let me because it believes I am attempting to create an autobiography, which I am not.


 * Date and time
 * 04:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Not a false positive; the filer has been given a spamusernameblock by an administrator for violating the username policy. (Non-edit-filter-manager comment) -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 05:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Omgtmnt

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 04:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 04:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, the article you were trying to create would have been deleted almost instantly if it had gotten through; whether this is the same article that was created and deleted in 2006 I can't say. I would say that none of the filter hits in this case were false positives.  — Soap  —  10:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

117.254.19.233

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 18:44, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 18:44, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

The only filter hit I see for your IP is vandalism.  — Soap  —  18:51, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

24.5.184.87

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * []


 * Description
 * I was trying to move content that I mistakenly added to this section

to a section of its own. Sequence was: added new content to wrong section, copied added content to own section, tried to delete content from wrong section, was warned that automated filter suspected vandalism, clicked 'save page' again to confirm, attempted edit was then auto-rejected.

Meta-suggestion: sequence of automated filters asking for confirmation and then rejecting anyway should be replaced by immediate automatic rejection - what's the point of asking for confirmation, and then rejecting? New user feels bitten (although skin was not broken).
 * Date and time
 * 19:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

This particular problem crops up once in a while, as it did here, but there's no easy fix other than that which would allow people to vandalize others' talk pages by removing content. Even the fix I proposed in that report would have its own problems. However, we're not ignoring the issue; there just is no easy solution. I've done the edit for you (certain long-term users can override the filter; that's why I'm here). As for the sequence of warn-disallow, it's part of the software, not unique to this filter, and it makes more sense in the cases where you can easily change your edit to fix the problem that was setting off the filter, and although I agree it's a problem for not just this filter but several others as well, again, there's no easy solution. I will try to work on both of these issues when I can find some time.  — Soap  —  20:11, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

216.118.153.247

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * i was just trying to make a page more accurate and when i pressed the save button a message popped up and called me stupid and a loser. please fix this or i will discontinue my use of Wikipedia


 * Date and time
 * 20:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Nope, the filter acted correctly. Tim  1357  talk  22:46, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

72.244.203.114

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * CBS Orchestra


 * Description
 * To properly identify the source of an email-based newsletter, I cited the email address as the author within . Technically, the filter worked as designed since I could accept a cookie and it would allow the change after another attempt to check it in.  Nevertheless I'm noting it as a false positive in order to demonstrate that there are legitimate reasons for including an email address.  According to Special:AbuseFilter/247 notes, "id=" was added as an exception...perhaps within cite templates the use of an email address with "author=" should also be an exception.


 * Date and time
 * 20:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Doesn't sound like a reliable source to me. An e-mail address is not an author. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:59, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I disagree. It would be fair to criticize it as a WP:PRIMARY source, but in the case of television networks and production companies, other primary source documents, such as press releases, blog posts, etc. are commonly used.  It would be better to use an official online archive of newsletters, but withoutthat, it's valid to cite the company's email address (from in the newsletter) as the author, and important to do so as that improves the source's verifiability.  72.244.206.133 (talk) 00:11, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No, an email is not a reliable source because it was never actually published. It's not just better to use an online archive of newsletters or emails (some mailing lists publish all emails on the web), it's the only way to do it. An unpublished document is fundamentally unverifiable. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:31, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * WP policy makes allowances, with caveats, for such a source. WP:SOURCES addresses this topic in general; within that section, WP:SELFPUB is directly relevant.  Feel free to challenge the policy at at WT:V.  The point made here is that Special:AbuseFilter/247, a filter rule under test that was triggered by the edit mentioned above, needs to be refined to better align it with policy.  Thanks.  72.244.200.76 (talk) 09:47, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Hobblelee

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[Poolah is my turtle. He is cracky. He likes to steel spleen,but he is still a very good turtle. He lives withe Hobblelee(a cute little turtle)and Bob(a big turtle) . Bob tried to rip Poolah's shell off.

P.S.=Poolah is not a pet like the admins who deleted my last post said!!!!!!!!! P.S.S.=this post is constructive no matter what wiki admins say!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!]]
 * Description
 * a page about a FRIEND


 * Date and time
 * 23:22, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

In general, it is not necessary to place several exclamation points at the end of a sentence. Anyway, if your article creation attempt had succeeded, it would have been tagged for speedy deletion per speedy deletion criterion A7 as an article about an animal that does not credibly indicate why its subject is important or significant. (Non-edit-filter-manager comment) -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 00:27, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

序名三

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Kha


 * Description
 * All the other Cyrillic letters have the title "..._(Cyrillic)", where the ... is the letter. There is no need for a redirect page. Read Redirect
 * I tried moving the page "Kha" to "Kha_(Cyrillic)" because, as stated above there is no need for a complete different title format from the other Cyrillic letters. But, while i tried moving the page :to "Kha_(Cyrillic)", I accidentally misspelled to "Kha_(Cyrillic" :[
 * So, when I tried fixing the typo, it read:
 * "An automated filter has identified this edit as potentially unconstructive, and it has been disallowed. If this edit is constructive, please report this error."
 * Please understand this situation, and do not consider my actions as "vandalism" as many admins consider accidental mistakes. Thank you for your time :D


 * Date and time
 * 00:37, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the edit filter was seeing some vandalism in the edit summary that wasn't there; it had nothing to do with the page moves. I apologize for that. As for the actual page move, one of the pages will have to be deleted first; I've put Kha up for deletion and will check back in the morning if the admin who deletes the page is unsure of which page to move the title to. As am I, because looking briefly I don't see a pattern of all of the Cyrillic letters having the (Cyrillic) after their name; are you sure about that? (As a side note, I actually could have undone the move myself if I hadn't been confused by the three different pages. But now that I've edited Kha, it can't be undone.)  —  Soap  —  01:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Okay, Kha was deleted and I've reversed the move, putting it back where it was. Now I'm willing to do the move, but I think it may be that the reason those other pages have (Cyrillic) in the name is because they have other meanings.  And Kha is not the only one without the modifier; there's also Sha, Shcha, Yer, Kje, Short U, and most of the lesser-used letters in the second half of the table.  I understand the logic you're using, but I think we should either move all of them or let the ones that don't have secondary meanings stay at the shorter titles, because they're easier to link that way, and the titles that have (Cyrillic) in the name can always redirect to the short titles.   —  Soap  —  12:52, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Lockesdonkey

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Template:Fiqh


 * Description
 * My knowledge of template syntax being admittedly weak, I was seeking a way to make sure that the Fiqh template would move down the page along the right-hand side rather than move to the left. The experiment didn't work, and I tried to revert it. The system wouldn't let me. I'll admit that my edit summaries were rather flippant ("let's see" on the original edit and "nm" on the attempted undo), but that's never been a problem before.


 * Date and time
 * 02:09, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

The code that was in the template before uses a CSS function that is occasionally used to vandalize a page, and so its use is restricted except on a few templates that are for the most part uneditable. However this function is almost never useful on regular, in-line templates. Because it's a template, I can't easily see what it looked like before your change; would you say that it looks worse now than it did before? To me, I don't see any problems on the articles that it appears in, but that may be because whatever caused it to move to the left on your screen is dependent on some other setting that I don't have.  — Soap  —  11:20, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * So far as I can tell, nothing has changed whatsoever. The movement to the left only occurred in conjunction with another vertical sidebar inline template, and then only when that template was placed above the Fiqh template. So when I put Template:Islam above Template:Fiqh, the Fiqh template will stay at the top of the page and to the left of the Islam template, whereas when the Islam template is below the Fiqh template, the Islam template moves below the Fiqh template (as it should in that case). Lockesdonkey (talk) 14:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Teocomi

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * []


 * Description
 * I would like to add the following as an external link:


 * Comments
 * This is not a false positive: "linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent" is strongly discouraged. Please see External links. -- Rrburke (talk) 15:38, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Jw04bps

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Civil Rights Act of 1866


 * Description
 * I was adding a glossary for this topic to make this page more kid friendly.


 * Date and time
 * 14:43, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your wanting to help but the content you were adding was already addressed by making wikilinks in the main text. In general this sort of redundancy isn't necessary and can make the page load slower on slower computers.  — Soap  —  15:34, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Filter 135
I just noticed this edit: The anonymous user nicely added wikilinks around a single phrase and "Filter 135" tagged it with "repeating characters". Not only is this unneccessary, but it is very BITEy. I notice the filter which I normally find useful in catching simple vandalism has a number of comments on it about false positives and problems. Can it be improved? Rmhermen (talk) 17:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I could add a line so that it wouldn't tag the edit if the line being edited already had repeating characters in it to begin with. I think the only reason that this hasn't been done already is because this is a tag-only filter, so there is no warning message and no inconvenience to the editor making the edit other than that it may draw attention to a particular edit they make.   So I don't have anything against making that change, but I think it's occurred to other people to do it before and they just haven't thought it was necessary.   —  Soap  —  19:52, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
 * There is a warning in the edit summary, though. How would you feel if your first edits to Wikipedia were flagged as potentially disruptive when you did as simple a thing as a beginner could possibly do (and did it correctly). This is not good PR or welcoming behavior. Rmhermen (talk) 14:36, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't have any arguments with your logic; I'm just saying that I think that the fact that an exception like this hasn't been added to the filter already, despite its presence on similar filters, shows that it was probably left out deliberately. However I will go and add a line that will screen out examples where the repeating characters were already present if there are no objections in the next day or so.  —  Soap  —  15:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅, and I've also let Shirik know in case he has a better idea.  — Soap  —  16:05, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

69.229.174.51

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Hansel and Gretel (2007 film)


 * Description
 * I simply edited the grammar and other minor things in the plot and character summaries. Plot and character summaries must always be written in the present tense. Basic English. There were mistakes and also opinions scripted into the page and I was simply removing them. Nothing done wrong.


 * Date and time
 * 05:48, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it's the word pedophile that's setting it off, though it really shouldn't be if the word was already on the page, which in this case it was. That explanation doesn't make sense, particularly since other users have been editing the page, and even that the word pedophile was introduced by an IP back in August, when the filter was more or less the same. I'll keep looking at this. Also we don't generally put "spoiler warnings" anywhere on the page; that's been debated for ages and decided against.  — Soap  —  10:23, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

124.185.124.79

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 09:08, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 09:08, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

i Blanked A Page Cause I Want To Delete It


 * Please refer to Deletion for instructions on deleting a page. Non-administrators are not permitted to unilaterally delete a page. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:11, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Clearly a vandal, or someone who wants to delete a lot of articles. N / A  0  03:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

71.97.196.143

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Happy Feet 2


 * Description
 * I'm trying to change the name of the section from "plot" to "details" it was request, but never done. This is a minor constructive edit.


 * Date and time
 * 12:19, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with the edit. However I'm worried about the similarity between your edits (both attempted and completed) and the edits of this account which was blocked just last week. Is there a reason why you are interested in these very same pages? These pages are under a sort of protection similar to semi-protection in order to enable some types of edits but not others.  — Soap  —  12:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I saw the first Happy Feet, and I am very excited for the second that's why. Same thing with Ice Age 4, I saw 1, I saw 2, and 3, so I want to see 4, and a possible 5th. Oh, and also, I try and not be a vandilizer at wikipedia. I believe in adding true and sourced information here, nothing else.--71.97.196.143 (talk) 17:22, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Also, didn't you read the part where I said it was request, because it's a small plot detail, not the plot itself.--71.97.196.143 (talk) 12:04, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Well if you have a requested change I would go ahead and make it as you would normally; the filter that's running here isn't my work and I wouldn't feel comofrtable taking it down nor making edits that it was designed specifically to disallow. As for the Plot section, that is the usual title we use, even if it is a very short summary.  — Soap  —  12:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Jim1jim2jim3jim4

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Trying To Make My Own Page About My Brother And It Said It Is Unconstructive


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 13:14, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 13:14, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * That was a bad case of an effort to create an article about a non-notable musician, created by somebody with a blatant conflict of interest, and full of uncited and trivial nonsense ("favorite food is..."). Good catch, filter-writers! -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

74.87.11.194

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 15:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 15:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Is user:Kaalisudheer or user:Nilotpal42 you? It is generally prohibited for users to remove content from other users' pages, but if either of these is you you can login to the account and then remove the text.  — Soap  —  15:35, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

JAMALIFINEART

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Jamali Fine Art


 * Description
 * Artist's Wiki Page

I am attempting to create a wiki page for the artist Jamali. I work at one of his galleries.
 * Date and time
 * 16:15, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

I would recommend two things before you create the page: 1) Please change your username, as even just the name itself can be seen as evidence of promotional activity or conflict of interest.  Secondly, assure us that the artist meets our criteria as spelled out at WP:ARTIST, and that it is clear from the references inside the text that he does.  To paraphrase:
 * Comments
 * The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors.
 * The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
 * The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
 * The person's work either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.

Artists who do not meet the above criteria will generally have their articles removed from Wikipedia.  — Soap  —  17:23, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

67.175.104.78

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 21:07, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 21:07, 17 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * All of your attempted edits appear to consist solely of pure nonsense strings. If you were trying to make test edits, the Wikipedia sandbox is the place to carry out such experiments. (Non-edit-filter-manager comment) -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 21:30, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

JoeGreene2010

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Damon Giglio


 * Description
 * I was trying to create a page for Damon Giglio and I kept getting errors when I tried to save the article.


 * Date and time
 * 02:19, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * You're being warned for your use of the word "Idiot", which is a false positive. You can use that word safely once you've been here for four days and made ten edits. Regardless, you can always just click save page a second time to bypass the filter when you see the warning. Even more regardless, the article you were attempting to put in your user sandbox really needs a lot of work. As written, it sounds too promotional for a Wikipedia article. Articles here are written in the same way that reliable sources describe them, rather than as the subject would describe himself. If you had moved the article into mainspace, it would most likely have been deleted. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

220.101.28.25

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:Ravenmewtwo


 * Description
 * Reverting vandalism by new user, ≈ 3,400K tagged as "repeating characters", see DIFF "I can say what I want. I can say MAH BOI all day. MAH BOI MAH BOI MAH BOI MAH BOI MAH BOI MAH BOI MAH BOI MAH BOI... ", etc.


 * Date and time
 * 16:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting this. There is a filter that prevents users from removing large amounts of content from another user's talkpage; incidents like this do occasionally come up, but there isn't a good way to fix it without disabling the filter. e.g., it's not possible for the filter to detect whether the text was added by another user or not, or whether the addition tripped a filter itself or not. I've gone on to remove the text for you, though.  — Soap  —  17:30, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

W1john

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * nothing


 * Description
 * trying to say how good pizza hut is


 * Date and time
 * 18:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

Putting in personal opinions into articles are discouraged because it violates Neutral point of view, a core policy on Wikipedia. Minima c  ( talk ) 18:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Kewlbeens

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 21:37, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 21:37, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

The page was entirely vandalism and has now been deleted.  — Soap  —  21:43, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

VprDmnd

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * []


 * Description
 * Add two new additions to "festivals," the mushroom festival and the poo fest.


 * Date and time
 * 03:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The edit, while inept and semi-literate, was good-faith. The town actually does have a Poo Festival! This is a false positive. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  06:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Missinternetworld

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 03:36, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 03:36, 19 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Spamming effort properly blocked; spamusername also now blocked. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  06:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

70.29.212.131

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Village pump (policy)


 * Description
 * Trying to add a discussion section and the edit filter is refusing


 * Date and time
 * 04:11, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, "FlaggedRevs" was on the list of stopwords due to some ongoing attacks; it's already been removed by another admin. This should never be a problem in the future.  — Soap  —  11:44, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

69.181.249.92

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:Satori Son


 * Description
 * trying to revert vandalism.


 * Date and time
 * 05:41, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting this. There is a filter that prevents users from removing large amounts of content from another user's talkpage; incidents like this do occasionally come up, but there isn't a good way to fix it without disabling the filter. e.g., it's not possible for the filter to detect whether the text was added by another user or not, or whether the addition tripped a filter itself or not. Unless it's totally irrelevant, it's likely that Satori Son will be going through the diffs of his talkpage history to read the text anyway, so removing it isn't absolutely necessary. However, it has been done by another editor now.  — Soap  —  11:46, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments


 * Can the filter be set up to look at the edit summary? 69.181.249.92 (talk) 17:02, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * yes, that's a good idea. I'll add in a check like that now; if people start abusing it it can be tightened up.   —  Soap  —  17:56, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Bhawks09

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 20:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 20:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Well some of the edits might be legitimate, but most of what you were adding seems to be false. Who's Corey Benjoya?  — Soap  —  20:50, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

124.185.124.79

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Date and time
 * 02:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * 02:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

MyFalse Error Is Blanking A Page


 * In what way was it a false positive? Did you not blank At the Movies (Australian TV series) in this edit?    — Jeff G. ツ 02:36, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

86.132.163.174

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Dude, the same as last time, it's listed on this page. Are you ever going to resolve this problem, or are you going to continue to block sourced edits with your crummy bot?


 * Date and time
 * 22:24, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I and others have already addressed this.
 * Comments
 * It's only been covered by one source, ten years ago, and is apparently only visible in a third-party archive of that source,
 * It hasn't received wide enough coverage to be relevant to an article about Arveladze, and
 * The report is about him saying it hadn't happened, not affirming that it had. There's no need to repeat things that are  "maybe" true on Wikipedia, much less gossip entirely without evidence.     —  Soap  —  22:44, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Eadicevalve

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * []


 * Description
 * I added Nvidia tegra at 600 MHz, but when I put my post it says this my be distructive, although I did not delete any reflist or . I would like to make this article better and hope that this gets resolved soon. Thanks


 * Date and time
 * 00:37, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I assume this is a mistake; the filter shows you deleting everything beginning with "See also"; this includes the references, the categories, and the external links. Occasionally a vandal will do that, and another editor will come along later and work from the vandalized version, but I don't think that's happened here because this article hasn't been edited in four days besides your edits. Please check and make sure you're not inadvertently removing anything important.  — Soap  —  00:42, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

92.11.237.160

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * I was editing Prince William.


 * Description
 * I was trying to put that he was gay coz he is and he's fat an all HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!


 * Date and time
 * 00:39, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Consider this a warning; if you keep vandalizing, or even attempt vandalism, your IP address may be blocked from editing.  — Soap  —  00:44, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

188.28.172.42

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Shitdisco


 * Description
 * Adding official facebook link (http://www.facebook.com/pages/SHITDISCO/102950363090148)


 * Date and time
 * 14:21, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting; I've pasted the edit in for you.  — Soap  —  23:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

re

Pie on ear

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Witton Albion F.C.


 * Description
 * Adding a link to Wincham


 * Date and time
 * 17:15, 22 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

Pie on ear

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Northwich Victoria F.C.


 * Description
 * removing the word 'top' from 'top 100 oldest...'


 * Date and time
 * 17:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

It looks like an obvious false positive to me, but I think I'm going to wait for a second opinion, because the last time this filter tripped and I thought it was an obvious false positive, it wasn't. Sorry for the inconvenience. This will be carried on at your talk page, since you've been blocked for other reasons.  — Soap  —  22:16, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

74.106.252.239

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Tatterhood


 * Description
 * Editing spelling and grammar errors.


 * Date and time
 * 02:48, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for reporting this; I've pasted the edit in for you.  — Soap  —  23:05, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

76.127.0.75

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * gwar


 * Date and time
 * 05:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

make it more accurate and to fix previous errors concerning this band
 * Could you describe the problem in more detail? I'm not able to get to the filter log by user anymore ... this may just be a temporary change ... or it may be permanent.  But either way, searching by user has now been disabled and I can't find whatever set off the filter for you unless you tell us what page it was triggered on.
 * Reporting user is a vandal and blocked. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:30, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

74.248.252.162

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 15:09, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Consider this a warning; vandalism, even attempted vandalism, can lead to your account being blocked.  — Soap  —  09:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Screenhogonicp

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 05:21, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

The filter seems to be working well to me; even if your page creations had succeeded, things like this would be quickly deleted because they don't help educate readers and likely aren't notable either.  — Soap  —  10:24, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

IHMS-M

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 09:32, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

It looks like you made a mistake in the creation of the page, and forgot to add "Malabon" to the end of the title. That's all. However, on an unrelated issue, you might want to change your username, as we generally don't allow usernames that imply that the account is controlled by more than one person (e.g. a whole school), in accordance with the guidelines at WP:U. But using an acronym is much more favorable than a full spelling.  — Soap  —  09:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

122.173.88.184

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 12:58, 25 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * You were attempting to vandalize an article; the filter blocked you, as it should; nothing false about it. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:27, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

71.252.233.150

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 22:46, 25 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

WHY YOU REVERT MY POST MARCH 2008?!
 * Could you give more information please? All I see is you removing content from an archive of ClueBot's talk page, which is something the filter normally protects against.   —  Soap  —  22:49, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
 * In March 2008, this IP address vandalized an article and the vandalism was reversed. More recently, it attempted to vandalize an archive and was blocked. Nothing to complain about in either case. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  01:49, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

168.100.193.132

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Marvin Hamlisch


 * Description
 * The actual quote from the movie "Role Models" is "Who the FUCK is Marvin Hamlisch?!" It wouldn't let me make the change.


 * Date and time
 * 02:26, 26 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

SatanicToothpaste

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User:SatanicToothpaste


 * Description
 * The new layout I've created has been blocked for whatever reason. What is wrong with the design??? The coding minus a few lines is under User:SatanicToothpaste/app/sandbox --SatanicToothpaste (talk) 02:46, 26 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Date and time
 * 02:44, 26 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * You were blocked because you added the following:  Tim  1357  talk  03:12, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Wasim saw

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 07:33, 27 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The content you were adding is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a web-based directory for book stores. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:32, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Davidcampbellbrown

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * FIRST PAGE


 * Description
 * I WAS TRYING TO RECORD THE EXACT DETAILS ON HIS MEMORIAL STONE


 * Date and time
 * 23:44, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

This filter was set off because of the all-caps writing you used; more importantly though I don't think that putting the text of a memorial is going to help readers learn about his life and what he's famous for. If you would like to write this article please try to pattern it after the already existing George Augustus Eliott, 1st Baron Heathfield as much as possible.  — Soap  —  00:24, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Why Other

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[User:Why Other]]


 * Description
 * my user page?

All I did was try to write "Interested in decision making processes, health care, and related issues, broadly construed." on my user page, like says. How is that "interrogative"? That seems like a pretty serious false positive condition. When I looked at the filter log, I see a lot of people are getting hit with things like "new user created short article" -- isn't that what you try to encourage new users to do? Perhaps filtercruft is happening?
 * Date and time
 * 00:00, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, your username begins with the word "why"; this filter exists because a lot of people create articles with titles such as "why people wear costumes", or "why do people need to sleep?" which are unnecessary duplications of already existing pages. The filter could be made to ignore userpages, though it is rare enough that it hasnt come up before. However I will add that in right now and it can be removed later if someone else thinks it's unnecessary. As for the "short article" filter, which is filter 98, it's a good way of spotting bad articles. Note that over half of the recent hits are for articles that are deleted now. But that filter doesn't give the user a warning message, it only adds tags to the page and appears in the filter log.  — Soap  —  00:19, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Xistove

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * []


 * Description
 * As this webcomic has gained not only noteriety, but mention in other active wikipedia articles, I believe that the page should be restored. There are many other pages of lesser significance that continue to exist-as they rightly should, to document works that have affected others-within the database. This is a non-malicious attempt to bring a popular and remembered comic its recognition.  Building the page in a sandbox to have contributors work on current information, as the comic is ongoing despite past claims of inactivity.  The muse cannot be held responsible.


 * Date and time
 * 01:30, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * You'll be able to bypass the filters by making any seven edits, as your account is sufficiently old enough. However, The article will still not be accepted unless evidence is provided of notability. Mentions on other Wikipedia articles (precisely one) are generally irrelevant. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:35, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Uqe05

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Trying to wrtie an encylpedia article on a music group and it accused me of advertising


 * Date and time
 * 03:52, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Wikipedia defines advertising as an attempt to promote an entity, and not just for the purpose of selling something. The fact that you also manage the band's official youtube channel only backs up the appearance of advertising. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:45, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Uqe05- How can I advertise when there is no product to sell!?! if you check the links... There is no product just a harmless article about a band but you know what it's ok thanks anyway though i appreciate the answer.

Tdomhan

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Return_value_optimization


 * Description
 * I was removing the list of source code blocks, as a list is not mode for those, and those bullet look ugly infront of the code boxes.


 * Date and time
 * 10:57, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Ive pasted the edit in for you (choosing the more recent of the two attempted submissions). I will look for a better way to code this filter, as this is the very definition of a false positive. Apologies for the hindrance.  — Soap  —  22:37, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

180.180.98.238

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User_talk:Boing! said Zebedee


 * Description
 * I lemove my oun comment because I posted to wrong person


 * Date and time
 * 13:42, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Don't blank comments, not even your own. Instead, use a strike-out . -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:20, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

68.190.225.179

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Attempted to add Justin Liu to "List of University of California, San Diego people" under Entertainment. Liu is an former adult actor and now director of adult films as well as independent projects.


 * Date and time
 * 15:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * There is no Wikipedia article on this person, which is the minimum requirement for adding them to a list. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:18, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Blazeframe

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * i was trying to publish a userspace draft of an article i'm writing! i've edited it to contain all the right information but was denied!


 * Date and time
 * 22:44, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I've moved the page to User:BlazeFrame/BlazeFrame Industries, because I recommend you work on it a bit more before moving it back to BlazeFrame Industries. I don't know how to describe it, but your article makes me think "advertisement" more than most other Wikipedia articles about companies. See ADVERT. However, the edit filter was stopping you because you moved the page to User:BlazeFrame Industries, which would be OK if your username was "BlazeFrame Industries", but it isnt, so the filter was thinking you were trying to move someone else's page.  — Soap  —  23:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

72.214.28.236

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * []


 * Description
 * believe edit was proper, but link includes word "fuck." suspect if language in edit was proper, and only available source is that specific link, it might be unconsitutional of wikipedia to block it. this is under legal section. if in doubt, i advise you allow edit and consult legal advice before you block it again. thank you!


 * Date and time
 * 05:41, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

If you want to paste that text into the page, you should do so, not just post a link saying you've written something on some other website. However I can't see the relevance of the text of that page to the Pledge of Allegiance article. Lastly, if by unconstitutional you mean "free speech", note that free speech does not apply to privately run websites such as Wikipedia (or almost anything else).  — Soap  —  22:53, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

68.55.8.44

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 09:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

I was deleting whole lines from my user:Rprice3 page. I'm not able to stay logged in and I'm keeping a record of my attempts to be logged in. I am Rprice3 but have no way to put my signature on my edits.--68.55.8.44 (talk) 09:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Questions regarding log-in issues should really be asked at Help_desk, but as a courtesy, here's some information that should be helpful: if you are in fact the user that you claim to be, check your browser settings to make sure that your browser is accepting cookies, as refusal of browser cookies will definitely prevent you from staying logged-in. Then log back into your account and try your edits again. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 17:59, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Gewlford

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * gewlford user page


 * Description
 * i was trying to put stuff on my own user page


 * Date and time
 * 09:41, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm open to a second opinion from someone else reading this page, but I would say that that kind of content is not appropriate for a userpage and would probably be deleted if it did get through.  — Soap  —  22:54, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

94.196.247.117

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * danube


 * Description
 * edit


 * Date and time
 * 15:26, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * In general, it is not necessary to place several exclamation marks at the end of a sentence, especially if the sentence is to be included in an encyclopedia article. And in this particular case, the sentence addition that you attempted does not appear to be helpful and would have been reverted if the filter hadn't disallowed it. (Non-edit-filter-manager comment) -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 18:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

81.104.92.102

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 17:07, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

There has been a fault. I was writing some more(adding to) a piece of work, when it DELETED the whole lot of work that was there! It also would not allow me to try and 'rescue' the work, as it said it was destructive work!!! I hope you get this problem sorted.


 * All of the filter hits that occurred from your IP address today appear to be blatant, pure vandalism attempts. Therefore, this is definitely not a false positive. (Non-edit-filter-manager comment) -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 18:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way, the filer has been issued a level 2 warning for the vandalism attempts and this ridiculous false positive report. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 18:42, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

173.75.235.34

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * I was editing a Boy George article and the system stopped me.


 * Date and time
 * 17:18, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

The filter correctly disallowed the edit attempt in question. If the edit had been successful, it would have been immediately marked as unconstructive and reverted. (Non-edit-filter-manager comment) -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 17:26, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

QueenSkytamer

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * I was editing a Boy George article with a lot more information about him.. and a lot of other stuff that does not include Boy George.


 * Date and time
 * 17:51, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Your edit attempts did not appear to be constructive; therefore, the filters correctly disallowed them. The page should not include material that is completely irrelevant to the subject. (Non-edit-filter-manager comment) -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 19:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

76.236.56.246

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * []


 * Description
 * I was trying to add information about the music video because there is no info about the video even though there is an official video


 * Date and time
 * 02:12, 30 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Just don't type "Bitches" in all-caps. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:19, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

ZacAreSmart

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Zachary Bacha


 * Description
 * I was trying to create a page.


 * Date and time
 * 00:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The filter was triggered because the phrase "your mother" was in the text of the article that you tried to create. By the way, if your article creation attempt had succeeded, the article would have been subjected to speedy deletion as an article about a person that does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of its subject. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 02:23, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

178.77.64.134

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 13:06, 1 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * False report by a would-be vandal (since blocked as a Torrent account). -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:43, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

64.219.97.118

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * i was editing the Yahweh page


 * Description
 * i attempted to edit it for i felt that there was information that is needed that was left out. This i felt that i could add in. I really did not mean to be "nonconstructive", but then we must ask ourselves, what is nonconstructiveness?


 * Date and time
 * 23:48, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I've reproduced the latest version of the diff here; I'd say that while this is a false positive in the sense that it shouldnt have been stopped by the filter, it isn't really encyclopedic either. The text you added is (Yahweh)is a jealous warrior after the heart of man whom he created. God, or Yahweh is a jealous lover who is crying out without relent for the heart, affections, and emotions of all humankind since the very, very beginning. He created everyone, even you, for this purpose, to be in the most awesomely intimate relationship possible with him for eternity. The one who breathed out the stars and spoke creation into existence, loves you and formed you and knew (gnostco) you while you were still in your mother's womb. He still loves you. No matter what other's say, no matter the degrees they may have, truth cannot be changed. Your addition is in good faith, but it doesnt really fit in because you're speaking directly to the reader instead of using third person, and because it is unverifiable in the sort of "books and journals" sense of verifiability we use on Wikipedia, whereas the others are statements of fact which can be verified by checking in the sources that are referred to (e.g. the Bible).  — Soap  —  00:02, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

64.219.97.118

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Yahweh


 * Description
 * well, though you say this is mere opinion, and not verifiable, i must then tell you that in fact it is, you yourself used the bible as a way to verify, well, i shall use the bible then myself as well. read Hosea. read all the Gospels.  heck read the bible.  But before you do, pray for ears to hear, and eyes to see, may God grant you a glimpse into the heart so many ignore and sadly don't even attempt to respond to. may you be one who falls in love with God for who he truly is, a Jealous warrior in love with you.  so jealous that he cannot stand you destroying yourself or anyone else destroying you either.  This is truly the heart of God, for you and all mankind to intimately know him. maybe this wont fit on this page, but if not, then direct me to a page where it does fit for God will not relent his love so neither should the message or his passion be relented.


 * Date and time
 * 00:30, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

If your goal is to convince people to turn to God, it is an admirable goal, but I dont think Wikipedia is the best place for it. You're not teaching anyone anything they don't already know. Even if someone in the fits of desperation came across the writing you'd placed there I really honestly doubt it would convince them to give God a second chance. Please try to find a better audience, wherever it may be.  — Soap  —  01:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments