Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives/Archive 9

71.97.198.37

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was just going to put Template:Citationneeded by a actress that dosen't have a reference, not a bad edit or a major edit, I just feel like making up for all the bad things I've done hear.


 * Date and time
 * 18:52, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Well as I said the last time, I dont see anything wrong with the edit, but if youre banned, even "good" edits can't be allowed. And now youre even admitting it so I dont have any intention of following through to make these edits.  — Soap  —  10:10, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments


 * Admitting what? I just said that it isn't a bad edit or a major edit. I'm just trying to make up for all the bad things I've done here. The first few times I started editing here, I was just tweleve, and never thought about anything, but I'm fifteen now, and I don't mess around anymore.--71.97.198.37 (talk) 16:30, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Nothing false about it. You are still a vandal. Tagging and reporting. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 20:14, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Widows Rights International

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Widows Rights International


 * Description
 * I' trying to create an article about an organisation fighting for human rights of widows (www.widowsrights.org)


 * Date and time
 * 14:30, 2 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Anti-spam filter functioning as it should; spamusername account now blocked. -- Orange Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  20:41, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

81.104.17.3

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Modeste M'bami


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 21:56, 2 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

I am trying to update Modeste M'bami's page as he has currently been released and now is without a team.
 * No you aren't. You were trying to vandalize the article in a particularly childish manner. -- Orange Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  00:52, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Greencommunism

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Dieudonné M'bala M'bala


 * Description
 * i was trying to write that dieudonné's latest show, though it has anti-semitic passage, only partially talk about his anti-semitic ideas. and that it is up to the courts to decide whether it incites to racial hatred instead of journalist who jump on every scandal they have and often ruins lives, dieudonné himself was cut from the media for awhile before he eventually came back with a series of stunt with extreme-right figures. their attitude is one of the main reason why he is anti-semitic anymore, anyone who has to face violence because of their lies would hate the media.


 * Date and time
 * 04:36, 3 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The content you added to the article was your personal opinion, which is not permitted on Wikipedia articles. All content must be able to cite reliable sources. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:55, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Even so, this appears to be a false positive for Filter 17. I've been unable to find the match, but perhaps someone else could take a look. -- zzuuzz (talk) 12:24, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I found it and removed it from the filter. The vandal whom this filter is intended for will probably not know what was removed, and thus won't be able to take advantage of it; however, if he does, other solutions are possible.  — Soap  —  15:53, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Vote

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Adding basic information about a current candidate's previous campaigns and public political positions. Previous campaign information was office sought, opponent, and margin of victory. Public positions were statements reported during the present candidacy.


 * Date and time
 * 04:48, 3 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This type of false positive can't be prevented, and that's why this particular filter lets you edit through it. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:57, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Billkwando

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Trying to add a Talkback, but I'm new so I kept trying


 * Date and time
 * 06:26, 3 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * That's just...wierd. Shouldn't happen. You've passed the time limit now, so please try again. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:31, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Nudd0234

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 15:35, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Consider this a warning; if you continue to make edits like this, even if stopped by the filter, you could get your account blocked.  — Soap  —  15:43, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Sdenny123

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Template:Seventh-day_Adventist_camps_of_North_America_map


 * Description
 * Adding dots for the Canadian locations.


 * Date and time
 * 03:45, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * I just made the edit for you. Probably easier than fixing this rare, rare false positive. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:22, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

76.208.163.112

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was trying to update a conversation/apology that I posted for User:Bogdangiusca on User talk:Bogdangiusca. My IP changes every week or so and I can't go back and update posts because of the filter. I'd like to make just a few changes/elisions, thanks


 * Date and time
 * 04:07, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

It is generally discouraged to remove comments from another user's talk page, even if you're the one who originally wrote them. This is true for everyone, not just IP editors. However the filter currently is stricter towards IP editors because there is no way to verify whether a user on a particular IP is the same as one who edited from that IP in the past, and because people's IP's can change, as yours does. I would recommend (if this has not already been recommended to you) to register an account in order to be able to free yourself from some of the confines of the edit filters.  — Soap  —  10:28, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

AbiRichardSatya

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I tried to give additional info about Asian bonus AVCD with reference, but you know... :(


 * Date and time
 * 15:16, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

68.105.79.8

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 08:18, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Definitely a frivolous report; the filer is currently serving a 31-hour block for vandalism. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 09:04, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Thade86

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Changing it to Hot Rod, the original name of the character and is better known by it, therefore making it easier to identify with.The name Rodimus is a marketing name used for the toys  and other incarnation of this character. It there does  not reflect the original G1 version , Hot Rod which this page represent.


 * Date and time
 * 08:49, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

There is a limit on how many pagemoves can be performed in a certain period of time; you should be able to move the page now.  — Soap  —  11:44, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

69.108.139.58

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Reverted vandalism edit removing information and the blocker didn't let me do it for some reason this is the vandalism I was trying to undo


 * Date and time
 * 18:53, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Apologies, I fixed this earlier and forgot to post here. I hate knowing that false positives like this come up, but I really can't see a way around it, as there's no way for the filter to be able to know whether a given edit is restoring recently deleted valid information.  — Soap  —  08:50, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I wouldn't apologize too much. The same IP went on to vandalize half a dozen pages and is currently blocked. That was apparently his only good edit. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 14:53, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

99.130.160.88

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Some asshole wouldn't let me put that Pele was a Klan Grand Dragon and tell everyone about his mind boggling 7 trillion goals. He also put that he worked in tea shops, which is not true, he helped enslave fellow Brazilians as a part of the still prevalent Portuguese-Brazilian slave trade.


 * Date and time
 * 06:07, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Gunshot wound to the foot... Can we block this IP now? --Joshua Scott (formerly LiberalFascist) 06:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

92.30.41.104

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 15:38, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

It looks to me like you were vandalizing. By the way, the printing press has been in Europe since the 1400's.  — Soap  —  22:58, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

66.143.65.58

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Economic impact of illegal immigrants


 * Description
 * Just removing the bias out of the page. Major left-wing bias and misquoting in the article. Borjas did not either say some of those things or some of them are taken way out of context. The edit-war on this page shows the other side where it quotes the whole story. Please refer to the "FAIR" website or the Center for Immigration Studies to find out what the real facts are.


 * Date and time
 * 20:52, 6 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * If you hadn't deleted the material you disagreed with, in favor of inserting material from non-reliable sources, this would not have tripped the filter trigger. A drastic re-write like this should be discussed beforehand on the talk page of the article concerned. -- Orange  Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  21:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

71.80.127.202

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill


 * Description
 * I was simply removing a line that stated that BP owns no gas stations in the US, a small bit of incorrect information which was marked "citation needed" anyway. The statement seemed to be pulled right out of someone's head, and it can be proven as incorrect with facts from other internet sources.


 * Date and time
 * 21:10, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Ive done the edit for you; when I get more time I'll try to work on this filter, as it's one of our most valuable but also one of our most unpredictable as to when it will trigger and stop an innocent edit. I apologize for the difficulties. Can I ask if you were doing a lot of previews of your edit before actually saving it? That is what often sets this filter off (which is bad, because that's generally a good thing to do.)  —  Soap  —  23:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

67.240.123.141

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Beans song, lyrics.... was going to add the one my mother's side of the family sings:

Beans are good for you They make you go poo They make you feel good Eat your beans, yes, you should
 * Date and time
 * 21:37, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I have no opinion, really, I think personally that we should just have one example of the verse and then use links for the others. Yours doesn't really seem to fit the melody of those others. If someone else adds it, though, I wont object. Is this variation listed on the Internet somwhere?  — Soap  —  23:38, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

71.178.207.61

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User talk:flarn2006


 * Description
 * I tried to remove my TUSC edit.


 * Date and time
 * 02:41, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Is Flam2006 you? If so you can log in to your account and remove the edit.  — Soap  —  09:07, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

76.66.195.196

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 June 30


 * Description
 * trying to log an opinion, it got tagged as vandalism; no idea why, since nothing that I added should catch the filter. Anything that exists on the page already should not be caught as something I caused.


 * Date and time
 * 04:41, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * IP addresses and new users are not permitted to use the term "Massive cock" in edit summaries; so just change the edit summary. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:32, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

2step4nathan

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 10 Songs, album by Friend/Enemy


 * Description
 * I was trying to copy and cite information I found about the album on a different website, but it said my edit was unconstructive.


 * Date and time
 * 06:13, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

If by copying, you mean you copied it word for word, I would encorage you to re-word it and to add links like this in the text to pages about the band and members in order to make it clear who it is you're writing about. As for the filter, I've changed it so it should exempt your edit now.  — Soap  —  09:15, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

41.215.112.158

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * WTF I WAS WRITING O HOW KAREN ANGLE AND JEFF JERRET WERE NAZS BUT I WANTED TO FUCK TH MILF


 * Date and time
 * 12:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Ordinary vandalism, properly blocked; this persistent vandal just got a three-hour block. -- Orange Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  17:11, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

24.20.0.49

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 02:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

I was trying to fix an error on the page Euler's Identity, but my wikicode didn't work right and I tried to put a comment asking someone to fix my code, but the comment didn't really work right, and I didn't know what to do because if I didn't save my changes, the page would be left with a hideous error that no one would know to fix.


 * Comments (even about inaccuracies) are placed on the article's talk page, rather than the article itself. Simply click on the "discussion" tab at the top of the article, and then on the "new section" tab to open a new thread. There, you can ask someone to make the necessary fix. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:06, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

94.71.223.191

 * Artisun


 * Suniva (don't wikilink)
 * 


 * Description
 * Put up just the facts, as instructed by Wikipedia article instructions


 * Date and time
 * 17:02, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Simple vulgarism/vandalism, properly blocked by properly-functioning filter. -- Orange Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  20:08, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

EvelynWalsh

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Winnie-the-Pooh


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 11:16, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I was genuinely reporting an insight my 5 year old gave me phonically in respect of Winnie-the-Pooh
 * Comments
 * You were quite probably in good faith, and caught by a filter which looks for such things; but since it is mere speculation rather than coming from published sources, it wouldn't have been accepted in the article anyway. -- Orange Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  15:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Wgimpressionists

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Trying to add an external link to the page but the system keeps deleting it.


 * Date and time
 * 15:27, 9 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The spam filter blocked your effort to insert a spamlink; in other words, functioned just as it should. False report, good block. -- Orange Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  15:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Retaildesigninstitute

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Retail Design Institute


 * Description
 * Writing an article around the Retail Design Institute. It triggered a filter that looked as if the article was advertising. However, it is not.  The Retail Design Institute members have dictated global retail trends and designs for over 50 years. The Retail Design institute comprises members from every major retailer, architectural firm, design firm, visual merchandising, and graphic design firm. Global Retail environments, the 2nd largest industry in the United States, retail branding, retail architecture, retail design, retail education and all facets of retail environments would not exist without this historic, non-profit, volunteer organization.  The organization represents the world of retail and does not function as a business within it.


 * Date and time
 * 20:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Well, as the filter warns, your article may be deleted, but it isn't the filter's job to judge that; it's just a warning. If you're really sure, you can go ahead and create the article. This does not mean that it will or will not be deleted. But I recommend you change your username, as it is a violation of the username policy because it represents a company or organization you work for rather than you as an individual. If you choose another username at Special:UserLogin/signup you will be free of most of the troubles of the filter.  — Soap  —  20:27, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

220.101.28.25

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Removing an extra template I accidentally added to page. I put it there and the f@#$%g darn thing won't let me correct my error! 


 * Date and time
 * 22:19, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

It is generally discouraged to remove comments from another user's talk page, even if you're the one who originally wrote them. This is true for everyone, not just IP editors. However the filter currently is stricter towards IP editors because there is no way to verify whether a user on a particular IP is the same as one who edited from that IP in the past, and because people's IP's can change. I see you've made 5500 edits with this IP and may not want to leave it, so I will not bring you that advice again, but I can't make any promises with regards to whether this filter will ever be able to correctly distinguish good removals from bad. Unfortunately the filter does not yet support "if-then" type statements, which would really help.  — Soap  —  22:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Thanks Soap, I thought that could be the cause. I managed to remove it, just took 3 edits! I'll be more careful about accidentally hitting the Enter key! Regards, --220.101 (talk) \Contribs 22:50, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

142.104.215.119

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Reference desk/Mathematics


 * Description
 * Some users were having a really nerdy conversation, so I told the original poster that their mother was obese and promiscuous, but then I got a red banner saying that my edit has been blocked.


 * Date and time
 * 00:52, 12 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Anonymous and new editors cannot make "your mom" jokes. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:35, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

201.82.144.11

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 13:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * There is no record of you running into the edit filter. If you were editing while logged into an account, we'll need to know the username. Otherwise, we may be able to provide information if you tell us the page you were trying to edit. Someguy1221 (talk) 19:09, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

EveOracle

 * Username


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


 * Description


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


 * Comments
 * False report by a persistent and uninimaginative would-be vandal. -- Orange Mike   &#x007C;   Talk  19:38, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

76.66.192.55

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Articles for deletion/Back to the Future in popular culture (2nd nomination)


 * Description
 * no idea, I was registering an opinion. I don't see why edit filter 320 even exists, it would seem very likely to get alot of false positives.


 * Date and time
 * 03:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The filter responded (correctly) to the end of your comment (before the sig), which says "making out with your mother". עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:45, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Except that the film Back to the Future features a seen where Fox's character makes out with the mother character played by Thompson. 76.66.192.55 (talk) 23:25, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added an exemption even so.  —  Soap  —  00:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Mikewittenstein

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was trying to publish this page about Mike Wittenstein onto Wikipedia. It said that it seemed personal and it said that if it was constructive to click "save now". I clicked "save now" and it brought me into an endless loop of clicking "save now" and the error message. I ended up mazing out the number of times I could submit the page in hopes that it would eventually post onto wikipedia like it said it would. Please help if possible.


 * Date and time
 * 04:42, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Please see WP:COI and WP:ADVERT - Wikipedia is not the place for you to create an article about yourself. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 05:28, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Panther44

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 04:48, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Edits are clearly vandalism. Report was quite correct. --  AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 05:28, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

72.201.77.239

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User:FamousCelebsandPeople/Daniel Peter (SonicArtist3000)


 * Description
 * edit the stub


 * Date and time
 * 10:39, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This isn't a false positive; it learly does appear to be vabdalism. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:43, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Brenleymcintosh

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Tn10


 * Description
 * I am a post-doc with EcoliWiki (http://ecoliwiki.net) and have been adding external links to our site from Wikipedia for the pages that we have on transposons and insertion sequences. EcoliWiki is one of the central online resources for scientists working on the bacterium, Escherichia coli.  We are not attempting to vandalize Wikipedia, I merely thought that scientists might start looking for information on Wikipedia and find the links to our site, which has information specifically for E. coli mobile genetic elements.  If you would like to see what I have incorporated, please feel free!

http://ecoliwiki.org/colipedia/index.php/Category:Mobile_Genetic_Elements Thanks.
 * Date and time
 * 15:59, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

The filter was sticking to the programming it's been given, so strictly it's not a false positive, but because this isn't a 'disallow' filter, you're allowed to keep on going. I think the thread you've started on External_links/Noticeboard will resolve this question in a better manner.  — Soap  —  22:30, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Raavi.munaf

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 16:24, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

Its not an advertising, its sharing of info. Please Save this Contribution


 * Not everyone gets an article. The filter is working correctly. Someguy1221 (talk) 18:39, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

92.251.178.100

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Saint Garbhan stub


 * Description
 * Added his genealogy and some of his churches. Sorry if I did not do it correctly as this is the first time I have done this. Just happened to have the stub come up on a Google serach wherein you asked for more information


 * Date and time
 * 18:23, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * You did it fine, it's just that new and anonymous users are not allowed to type ASS in all capital letters. Someguy1221 (talk) 21:55, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Mohmedazim123

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 21:54, 13 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Pages do not get deleted because they have been vandalized. Simply remove the vandalistic portions of the article, or revert the article to the most recent good revision. If you are contending that the article is itself, and has always been, vandalism, then please follow the instructions for requesting deletion at WP:DELETION. Someguy1221 (talk) 21:57, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

209.196.230.72

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * The Jason Ellis Show


 * Description
 * Adding relevant content. May have flagged because of profanity, but hey, there's a lot of that on Ellis.  Everything I put up is in good faith and factual.


 * Date and time
 * 23:35, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I really am not sure what to do here. It's not so much the vocabulary, as the fact that essentially the entire article is unreferenced and likely can only be verified by listening to the show. Are there other websites, unrelated to Ellis, that talk about this show ?  — Soap  —  00:19, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

ICupcake Cutie

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 00:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Ive removed the word "AWESOME" (capitalized) from the list of watchwords since it seems to be present in that form in the original title. You should have no trouble now. Thanks for reporting this.  — Soap  —  00:23, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

83.42.226.203

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Please, be careful when letting people putting any information about Georgia or anything Georgian. The article I am trying to edit is written by Armenians pretending to be the source of everything and be the creators of everything we own.

Warning: IN THE FUTURE IF I SEE ANY OTHER ERRONEOUS ARTICLES ABOUT GEORGIANS ON YOUR PAGES I WILL START FIGHTING AGAINST WIKIPEDIA !!! so good luck with your censorship! :)
 * Date and time
 * 10:01, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

This looks like a content dispute, so I cant really offer you any advice other than to say that the filter is agnostic about who's right or wrong in a dispute and only keeps track of people removing large amounts of content. I suggest you bring up any problems on the talk page of the article, talk:Georgian alphabet.  — Soap  —  22:43, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

72.244.206.73

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * A major rewrite with double the refs, including expanded infobox details, new section with more details and new refs on her career, among other changes, prompted a tag of "Claims of Homosexuality in a BLP" by Special:AbuseFilter/339. Since I'm not allowed to view the filter, perhaps someone with such privileges can clear my name IP, untag my edit if possible, and provide a hint at what caused it to make such a misjudgment.  Thanks.


 * Date and time
 * 00:43, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This filter reacts to any anon or new user claiming that a living person is a homosexual. The tag can't be removed, but there is no need to "clear your IP" - all edit filters are assumed to catch some good edits. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

99.28.64.191

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * i was talking about some of his memorable quotes and it would not let me save the changes even though i am sure they were correct.


 * Date and time
 * 05:46, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * It appears that you're refering to this edit, which is clearly vandalism, so the filter is working correctly. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:19, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Kitfaaace

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I changed it to this because the article "National Employment Savings Trust" redirected to "Personal Account". However, the official name changed to "National Employment Savings Trust" so I am trying to change the name of the article. However, to do that, I needed to change the name of the redirect page so that I could call the main article the (now old) name of the redirect page. Because of this, I changed the name of the redirect page to free up the name. And then, Wikipedia decided the name change was deconstructive even though it's not even called "Personal Account" any more.


 * Date and time
 * 15:59, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

This was done by the "Pagemove throttle for new users" filter, which was working as it is intended to, I think. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

TimTribow92

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 17:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

An edit like this will likely be reverted as being uneducational, since it doesnt really teach us about Billy Cundiff. However if you would like to try, if you stay away from using all-caps and repeating characters the filter should not stop you. But really, this looks like vandalism to me and I'm just assuming good faith because there might be something I can't see.  — Soap  —  23:28, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

92.29.59.80

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was putting in some famous qoutes from Tom Cat from Tom and Jerry, but it disallowed my edit because it said it was unconstructive, however I thought it was constructive.


 * Date and time
 * 19:30, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

An edit like that will probably be reverted as not being very educational, but if you would like to try, just stay away from using the all-caps and repeating characters such as Eeeeeeeee and the filter will not stop it.  — Soap  —  23:25, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

98.115.66.194

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 19:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

It's generally discouraged to remove things from another user's talk page, even if you're the one who originally wrote them (in part because IP's can be dynamic and there is no way to be sure that you are the same person who has edited before). Even after you remove the comment, it still shows up as a new message to the other person, and they will likely end up going into the history of their talk page to see what it was. Even so, this filter turns up a lot of hits like this, and I have been meaning to get into writing an exception for that case when the person is removing things they themselves wrote. While not as easy as it might sound, it should be possible.  — Soap  —  23:21, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

99.239.139.184

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Fashion faux pas


 * Description
 * I was editing the wiki article on "Fashion Faux Pas" to revise the introduction and to add a new example on "plumber's butt". These edits were the result of direct feedback from my university professor, for whom we are building this article as a course assignment.  Edits to the intro reflect improvement of the organization of the paper.  The addition on "plumber's butt" was requested to take the bias away from female-only faux pas.  As I did put considerable effort into revising these sections, it would be appreciated if this could be included in the article.


 * Date and time
 * 15:11, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * It's not your fault, but I can't really say that it's a true "false positive." These edits were rejected as a series of personal insults; this is due to the nature of the article, which is basically an unencyclopedic agglomeration of personal opinions and fashionista snarkiness. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I've also corrected the name of the article; you are incorrectly capitalizing "Faux" and "Pas". -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:26, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

82.26.165.1

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I am trying to edit the listing for caltri.org as it is fake.

Bath Cancer Research Unit is a FAKE WEBSITE AS IT HAS LINKS ON THE FIRST PAGE PROMOTING HERBAL VIAGRA, THERE ARE NO CONTACT DETAILS AND THE EMAIL DOES NOT WORK

The only real Cancer research in Bath is http://www.bcusg.org
 * Date and time
 * 15:50, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

What you're doing to the page is essentially vandalism; however I have to agree that that website does not seem very impressive for a supposed cancer research group and I don't know why they are selling erectile dysfunction tablets. Someone at WikiProject Medicine may have better advice; this is really out of the bounds of anything related to the edit filter however.  — Soap  —  23:29, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Emvc

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I'm trying to create a page but its saying it might be an auto-biography, which its not. It is merely a page about a public software package that is similar to JavaScriptMVC or SproutCore, both of which are listed in the Model-View-Controller page. This software is package because it is based upon Dojo, unlike its competitor, JavaScriptMVC. I happen to have mentioned the creator's name in the. So, I removed that and then it said my edit was not valid and everything is locked.

The content I'm trying to post is along these lines:

e
 * Date and time
 * 15:59, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

You may want to change your username; otherwise these filters are going to be a bother for you and others will assume you're promoting a product called EMVC, even though it's freeware. Really, I do recommend it. I trust you but it's not really possible to turn off the tagging for you and not turn it off for everybody, and we do catch a lot of promotional activity with this filter.  — Soap  —  23:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * It appears youve also been blocked; however this type of block is one that will not prevent you from changing to a new name; in fact that's what it's designed for.  — Soap  —  23:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

WOOOT

88.105.32.6

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Was going to add appropriate banners like Software and Electronics, since the article is disappointingly a short stub.

Can't make contributions to this article.
 * Date and time
 * 13:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

I restored this flter in response to a request here. Apparerntly your edits had been seen as problematic before. Could you explain why you want to add so many templates to various talk pages, despite others not agreeing with having them there?  — Soap  —  13:22, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

IP69.226.103.13

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Ikpe Umoh Imeh


 * Description
 * Removed huge obvious copyright violation and badly written remainder of article leaving clean sub-stub, although the sub-stub probably the BrownHairedGirl sin of greatest merit. Now I'm marked forever for blanking for removing copy-vio. Won't happen again, I promise. Just today I left a copyrighted paragraph in a featured article (one that shouild have been caught). Probably it'll still be there when it runs on the front page, but, at least I won't be guilty of blanking.


 * Date and time
 * 23:26, 18 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * I really don't get what you're so upset at. The filter tagged you for deleting a substantial portion of an article as an IP. You were warned, you saved anyway, as the filter is designed to allow. You are not "marked for ever for blanking for removing copy-vio". That one particular edit is simply tagged as containing a large deletion. You deleted 68% of an article as an IP. The vast majority of simlilar edits are vandalism. It's impossible to screen out the false positives, and that's why the tag is rather benign, and why the filter lets you make the edit anyway. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:49, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * So, I was "warned," and now the filter tag is gone? Really? I don't think so, it's there, forever, in the edit history. Nowhere is there a tag that says removed tons of crap, is there? And, as you yourself admit, it was tagged thus simply because the "vast majoriry of similar edits are vandalism." Tagged thus, tagged forever. I'll leave the crap in, since, of course, you didn't ask about the plagiarism, and weren't interested. Just interested in nailing a point back. You got me! You win! It's not about wikipedia! It's about you! --IP69.226.103.13 | Talk about me.  02:02, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Hikari Takano

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was trying add a link to a very important Michael Madsen Interview. It is arguably the best one on the web considering it is an unedited 2hr plus interview.


 * Date and time
 * 07:12, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The filter correctly warned you (but did not stop you) from adding external links to your own website. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:53, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Hikari Takano

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Trying add important interview link!!!!


 * Date and time
 * 08:10, 19 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * You seem to be engaged in a relentless campaign of spamming for your own website. These are not false positives, but rather prime examples of filters working as they should. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:13, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Burndy

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * In trying to publish the page I was caught in a loop of validating the change and warning error that I cannot get done


 * Date and time
 * 15:03, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

It seems that you got the page up and it was deleted and your account was blocked, all of which is normal. Whether the page can be cleaned up or not is out of the control of the edit filter, so I would say that the thread on JamesBWatson's page is the proper place for resolution.  — Soap  —  22:41, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

MasterFooLOSA

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * It said date and location unknown so i went to fix it my grandfather was on that ship and I am holding the same picture showing date and location


 * Date and time
 * 20:32, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

This may sound embarrassing, but the reason for this error is because the filter thinks "Whang-Poo" is something to do with poop. So it's a false positive. However, we generally stick to using the Pinyin spelling, Huangpu, which will not cause any problems.  — Soap  —  22:39, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Motwera

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * i want people to give some ideas because this show will not be a scam, i'm not advertising.


 * Date and time
 * 02:10, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The filter correctly warned you for creating an article with a close relationship to yourself. And please understand that Wikipedia interprets as advertising a broader category that you would normally consider. Wikipedia considers any article that serves only to attract readers to an idea to be advertising, regardless of whether anything is actually being sold. Please refer to the notability guideline, as not every subject is permitted to have an article. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:48, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

129.3.16.158

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 13:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * False report by would-be vulgar vandal. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Jinga janga

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 16:32, 20 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Another false report by a would-be vandal. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Hutd

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User: Black Hole Shredders


 * Description
 * I was trying to move the title from User: Black hole Shredders to Black hole Shredders instead


 * Date and time
 * 21:24, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I assume User:Black Hole Shredders is an alternate account of yours? The filter stopped you because it's not generally allowed for one user to move another's page. No comment on the viability of that page as an article, but it looks like it's been deleted at least once.  — Soap  —  00:21, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

FCPOFCPO

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Complete Deletion

Censor
 * Date and time
 * 00:15, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Could you explain why you are trying to blank the page?  — Soap  —  00:22, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * The filter did exactly what it was intended to do, preventing you from censoring that article by deleting it. Are you not aware that Wikipedia is not censored? -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  23:08, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Jacobguy

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 02:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Frivolous report; a level 3 warning has been issued to the filer. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 03:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

64.134.184.212

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 03:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * This disallowed edit attempt of yours would have been marked as vandalism and reverted immediately if it had gotten through. Therefore, the filter correctly stopped you. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 04:39, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

203.58.22.26

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 07:50, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * What, exactly, were you trying to do? In the first edit that was blocked, you tried to display an image from another website. This is disallowed because it's technically impossible; the software only allows images to be displayed that are hosted by Wikipedia or the Wikimedia commons. In the second case, even if you believe a discussion thread has been resolved, it is almost never blanked, but kept as an archive. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:21, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

58.166.77.246

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Talk:Israel


 * Description
 * Trying to report a biased sentence, get some discussion going. Thanks a lot, autofilter.


 * Date and time
 * 12:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * I have done the edit for you. Thanks for reporting. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 17:18, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Acipollaro

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Wellspring Clinical Labs Inc,


 * Description
 * I was trying to submit an article about a local company which has make breakthroughs in blood testing technology


 * Date and time
 * 15:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Im not quite sure what's going on here. My guess is the filter thought "is pricked" is a personal attack, though when I pasted the same content myself it didnt seem to match the filter. I'll look at this later and in the meantime removed "prick" from the list of watch words.  — Soap  —  22:10, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Just noting that the user has apparently decided not to create the article after all.  —  Soap  —  23:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

75.71.240.92

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Under "Drugs": I was simply editing the page to properly inform those who don't already know that cannabis is NOT a drug. When I clicked "Save this page," there was an error that said my edit could not be saved because of some sort of filter that determined incorrectly that my edit was "unconstructive." Please fix this, as any sensible human being who has actually researched cannabis (Instead of blindly believing what mainstream society claims)would know it is CLEARLY NOT a drug.


 * Date and time
 * 10:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * You were properly blocked for trying to add language calling people "retards"! That's not only bigoted, but a matter of personal opinion. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:28, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Pookeo9

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User_talk:Pookeo9


 * Description
 * I was updating my archive page but wouldn't let me as it was "unconstructive editing" when all I was doing was updating my archives just to clean out my talk page a bit.


 * Date and time
 * 12:46, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

It is not generally allowed to blank or remove content another user's talk page. When you're not logged in, there is no way for the software to know it's you, so it sees your edits as being the blanking of "someone else's" talk page. If you log in you should have no trouble.  — Soap  —  22:05, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

94.1.2.205

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Leap Year (2010 film)


 * Description
 * UK-based film critic Mark Kermode commented that the only funny part in the film is when a character says the word, and that it should be renamed 'Leapy Ear'.


 * Date and time
 * 15:17, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I cannot view the source because it says it's only available to viewers in the UK. Is there anything there that isn't on the YouTube video?  — Soap  —  22:16, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

68.51.72.237

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Talk:Magda Burlix


 * Description
 * After redirecting the non-notable Magda Burlix article, it wouldn't let me redirect the talk page.


 * Date and time
 * 22:54, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The filter blocks that sort of drastic move by a non-registered user. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  23:11, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Then why didn't it block the redirection of the article itself? The talk page was shorter. 68.51.72.237 (talk) 21:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The filter allows 2 redirects to be done at a time, because moving an article often implies moving a talk page with it. Which ordinarily would be good, but unfortunately the filter has no way of telling the difference between a completed edit and one that only got to the "preview" stage, which it looks like you did.  However the time is elapsed now and it should not bother you.   —  Soap  —  22:15, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

76.83.13.221

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Talk:Mexica Movement


 * Description
 * I tried to put something reasonable on discussion page of a racist group called Mexica movement


 * Date and time
 * 23:10, 23 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * I may or may not agree with a word this person says, or with their characterization of the Movement; but this does seem like a genuine false positive. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  23:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the problem for now (email me if you want more info) and added the user's edit to the page. Thanks to the user for reporting this.  —  Soap  —  00:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

24.156.32.85

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Beavis and Butt-head


 * Description
 * removed several paragraphs of irrelevant, trivial information that contained original research.


 * Date and time
 * 00:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

It isnt really possible for the edit filter or ClueBot to be able to distinguish good removals from bad ones; this is only a "warn/tag" filter for this reason. If it were possible to remove the tags after an editor has discerned that they were unneeded, that would be great. As for ClueBot, I believe it will never revert the same user twice.  — Soap  —  00:28, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments


 * Cluebot won't revert a page to one of its own revisions, for 24 hours. It will revert the same user twice if an intermediate edit was reverted by someone else. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

62.237.141.27

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * A-25 song


 * Description
 * I was creating an article of the Fleet Air Arm squaddie song "A-25 song" and I got the error message.


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

The last line of the song was seen as obscene by the filter. I've removed that check for now. This does not mean that the article creation will be approved; only that the filter won't interfere with it. Thanks for reporting this.  — Soap  —  21:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

7 Letters

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * [[Jean Charles, Prince de Ligne de La Trémoille]]


 * Description
 * I was trying to move this page to a new title. Have done a few moves today and every so often the warning is showing up. Thanks.


 * Date and time
 * 21:48, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

This is similar to the question a few sections up, although it's a different filter. There is a rate limit on how many page moves can be done in a certain period of time. I can ask that the filter be changed but I would not want to do so myself even in the case of a clear false positive because it is a very well-tended filter and one that I have not worked on myself.  — Soap  —  22:13, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

87.194.76.9

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * changing "the clubs history" to "the club's history", FFS. Correcting the fucking punctuation is vandalism???


 * Date and time
 * 16:22, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The article was previously semiprotected and subject to this filter, which supplemented the semiprotection. Now that the semiprotection has been removed in favor of the pending changes system, I've removed the article from this filter.  Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 03:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Chaoky

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was making a wiki for my website


 * Date and time
 * 17:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The filter stopped you because at least one sentence in the article that you tried to post contained an excessive number of exclamation points at the end. Unfortunately, if the filter hadn't intervened, the article would have been subjected to speedy deletion because it did not credibly indicate the importance or significance of its subject, which is a website as you've indicated above. Furthermore, the lead paragraph seemed to have a promotional tone, which isn't appropriate for an encyclopedia article. By the way, users are strongly discouraged from writing about subjects that they are affiliated with, including their own websites; for more information, please read the page Conflict of interest. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 17:57, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Tiedau

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * just added a category "Academic journals" to "Dutch Crossing", an academic journals


 * Date and time
 * 19:18, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I wasnt aware this filter was set to "disallow", but it seems to be working properly. You seem to be using an extension for Firefox which adds phrases into your edits, and it will presumably keep on happening if you leave the extension turned on. The message is here:
 * Comments

 — Soap  —  19:35, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

76.90.205.158

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 02:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Isaiah Dale Carbo is not notable, and does not get an article on Wikipedia. Even if he was notable, that wouldn't mean you should delete an entire article to add his in its place. Someguy1221 (talk) 04:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

FCPO

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Deletetion of article


 * Date and time
 * 04:58, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Your edit shows you blanked an entire article. What were you trying to do? Someguy1221 (talk) 05:06, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

174.7.103.243

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 07:41, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The filter shows you blanked an entire article. What were you trying to do? Someguy1221 (talk) 07:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

218.186.8.244

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 11:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * You were adding what appeared to be e-mail addresses to the article. In this case, the level of trivial detail you were trying to add would have been reverted almost immediately anyway, so it doesn't matter. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:04, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

218.186.8.244

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Outram secondary wiki; Source and acknowledgement


 * Description
 * source and acknowledgement; website


 * Date and time
 * 11:35, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

It's not really possible for the filter to be able to tell the difference between a string like 'Animate@S4.RMPS' and a real email address. That's why this filter is set to 'warn' only (and it would be even if it were possible, since once in a while it's OK to add emails.) But you have nothing to worry about and no one's going to follow you around looking for more bad edits. Does that answer your concerns?  — Soap  —  22:42, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

TorFX

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Trying to add the following new content;


 * Date and time
 * 14:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * It was blocked as obvious spam, given your username. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:07, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Dxteam32

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 15:39, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

You were trying to put a string of !!!! in an article, which is absurd. Since you were trying to create a nonsensical hoax article anyway, no harm was done. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:46, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Lhn555

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * OLPC XO-1


 * Description
 * I was copying the text from OLPC's wiki to Wikipedia.


 * Date and time
 * 22:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

You really shouldnt be doing that, especially not if youre going to remove the content that we wrote about it beforehand. But really copying of any kind, even if the OLPC wiki is okay with it, is plagiarism and to be avoided at all times.  — Soap  —  23:11, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Bre Dun

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * List of home run calls in baseball


 * Description
 * "Jim Powell on WCNN/Atlanta Braves Radio Network: "2-2 pitch on the way...swing and a fly ball, left field, well hit! Nix back, at the fence, leaps...IT'S GONE!!! IT'S GONE! Brooks Conrad! It's a walk-off grand slam!! Are you kidding me?! Nix appeared to touch it... I think he got leather on it! Twenty-five men jumping on home plate! It is party time in Atlanta!"" This is what I was trying to edit it to. The wording was initially a little wrong, and I added a little to what was said.


 * Date and time
 * 05:01, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I cant speak with regards to the truthfulness of the edit, so I'll let the others watching the page handle that. The filter stopped you because you added multiple exclamation points, which is never necessary even when quoting someone. If you use just one it will not stop you.  — Soap  —  08:47, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Alexanderakabubba

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was speaking the truth about the program and I do believe that people have right to know that is going to happen to their computer if the download this program


 * Date and time
 * 08:25, 27 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The way you tried to do it was completely inappropriate. If you try it again, you'll be blocked. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:56, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

81.152.170.208

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * i removed false information


 * Date and time
 * 08:31, 27 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * No, you really didn't. If you have an issue with an article, bring it up on the talk page. Blanking entire articles will only lead to your being blocked. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:58, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

81.155.44.160

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * I was changing false information for true information


 * Description
 * I was trying to change Keeley's bar on the nominations chart, she did not walk she was ejected, it was not her choice to leave the house, some person saying that she walked is suggesting that it was her choice to leave! I have changed this many times.


 * Date and time
 * 15:40, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I cant speak for whether your edit is true or false, b ut you should use the article's talk page to point out errors in the article, rather than writing it in the article itself. Or you could change the info on the page and then explain it on the talk page.  — Soap  —  22:47, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Vincenzo551

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 21:26, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

All I see is vandalism. What were you trying to do?  — Soap  —  22:37, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

129.119.249.131

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 23:36, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

All I see is you trying to blank the whole page. What were you trying to do?
 * Comments

78.140.88.114

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Link author John P. O'Neill in Manu Parrotlet is not the correct person. Correct is John Patton O'Neill.


 * Date and time
 * 11:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The main filter which was preventing this edit was filter 313, designed to prevent edits which use the Skype extension for Firefox, as this puts unwanted material in the middle of the articles. Please see below the warning you should have read:


 * עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 19:30, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Please also note that I have done the edit for you. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Gokuluday

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * J. J. Thomson


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 12:53, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Clearly not a false positive - the user was trying to blank the whole page. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 19:25, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Anrie

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Trying to save an earlier page, effectively removing this vandalism. This was before another IP beat me to it, by simply (although not completely) changing it back via the editing function.


 * Date and time
 * 13:10, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * This edit was blocked because you inadvertently added Skype toolbar formatting to the article Feel free to retry the edit when you're not using Skype.  NawlinWiki (talk) 13:14, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Ib screwed

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Trying to make an informational page about the history, structure and aims of a not-for-profit organisation. This page was not an ad, but merely a brief history of the development of the project.


 * Date and time
 * 14:15, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * There's no indication in the proposed article that your organization meets the notability requirements of WP:ORG. Also, you shouldn't be writing about your own organization per WP:COI. NawlinWiki (talk) 14:45, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Gooblah

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Editing the See Also section. I was adding a link to the NASA INSPIRE program (which is in all-caps due to it being an acronym for the program which is in official usage and documentation), and the editor reported that I was "shouting". Don't get me wrong, it makes sense since the edit was in all caps, but it's still a false positive, and the acronym, once spelled out, would violate the style of the article and possibly take up an entire line.


 * Date and time
 * 17:38, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The filter was clearly working correctly. Please note that tags aren't clear indicators of wrong-doing - they're merely flags which help spot suspicious edts; any human reaction to the edit involved human judgement on the merit of the edit itself, not on the tag. It's clear that your edit was in good faith. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 19:22, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Stegop

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Category:Tall buildings and structures in Istanbul


 * Description
 * Trying to remove pt.iw because it's wrong: in pt.wp, the category is "Monuments of Istambul", so Category:Buildings and structures in Istanbul it's more appropriate.


 * Date and time
 * 05:12, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Right. That one happened because the cyrillic spelling of one of the interwiki links looks like the English/Latin spelling of "Cok" (i.e. Cock). I've gone ahead and made the edit for you. If this is a larger issue, someone else might want to lower the threshold for avoiding this filer. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:08, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

174.106.5.233

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 19:09, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

um well i was just trying to write due to the lack of rules in society the cavemen pooped wherever they wanted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.106.5.233 (talk • contribs)
 * Another false report by a thwarted vandal. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:30, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Doggylover101

 * Username


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


 * Description


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


 * Comments


 * So, what did you actually register an account for? Someguy1221 (talk) 04:39, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Jamiekuse

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Jamie Kuse

I was trying to publish a page about my career as a recording engineer. The report was neither a promotion or autobiography. It was simply to list my credits as a credited recording engineer. I am publishing it on my behalf, but it was written and compiled by a 3rd party. If this is not acceptable under your terms, would i be better off having a 3rd party submit the article?
 * Date and time
 * 02:12, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

For an article like this, the best solution is usually to create it in WP:Articles for creation so that it can be reviewed by others before going live. You could also change your username to avoid the filters, but the filters are just there as a warning and have no effect on whether the page will survive or not once going live. You may also want to read the criteria about notability and verifiability; from what I can see your article would probably not survive because it has no third party sources which indicate notability, but if such sources do exist, they could be used and help the page meet the criteria.  — Soap  —  09:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

78.34.201.174

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Steve Kramer (actor)


 * Description
 * What my edit summary says.


 * Date and time
 * 05:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * You were not disallowed from making the edit, only warned. If you just click "save page" a second time upon seeing the warning, it will allow you to make the edit. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:45, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

69.125.45.6

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 22:26, 30 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

I dont know how to use this wikipedia thing, so someone please correct it. In the spanish language, (all of it) bendejo doesn't exist. It's PENDEJO!
 * It was a vandal, I have fixed it now and will try to look later to see if there is a way to allow this kind of edit while still blocking the use of pendejo repeated on other pages.  Thanks for submitting this report.    —  Soap  —  23:36, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Mike.lifeguard

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * User:ST47/test


 * Description
 * Edits to this page are almost certainly from the test suite of MediaWiki::Bot, a Perl bot framework. Aside from developers running the tests, they're run every time someone installs using CPAN, as well as by automated smoke testers. Typically, the tests are run while logged out. you could add an exemption for the pages in question (User:ST47/éółŽć is edited as well), or look at the edit summary. Thanks


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

I've exempted User:ST47 and all subpages for the time being.  — Soap  —  21:24, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

24.92.114.32

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 01:41, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * What were you trying to do? Someguy1221 (talk) 06:50, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You were stopped (twice) from blanking part or all of the article. How is this a false positive? -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:21, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

142.166.195.184

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 03:20, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * I don't see any vandalism to that page recently. Regardless, the edit filter did not prevent you from making any edits, it merely warned you, a warning which you are permitted to ignore in the case of a false positive, as it's not the type of false positive we can prevent. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:48, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

122.62.243.47

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * add photos and a line of description central to the subject matter


 * Date and time
 * 07:10, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Apparently the filter doesnt believe "POO 32D" is a real license plate. This was not why your edit was reverted however; the person who removed it likely didnt even know that you had triggered a filter previously. More explanation coming in a bit; I always have trouble with \1 because I never properly learned how to use it.  — Soap  —  09:40, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Ah, it seems the \1 issue was a red herring; the filter's blocking all instances of "poo" in any capitalization. I'm sure it's catching a lot of good vandalism that way, but it seems like a problem to me because of things like Whang Poo (not an independent article apparently, but it comes up in a few places in other articles).  I've turned it down for now, but more flexible suggestions are welcome.
 * To the original poster: Sorry if this all seems a bit embarrassing. There is a long term issue with vandals writing "poop" and variants into articles largely in the belief that because children say the word all the time it won't possibly be caught by an obscenity filter.  It is actually one of the most common vandalism words of all, e.g. this recent edit which I didnt even search for, it just was on my watchlist.    —  Soap  —  10:01, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

86.178.74.214

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Laws of Robotics


 * Description
 * Android Bishop in Aliens claiming to be consistent with the First Law.


 * Date and time
 * 14:17, 31 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * You seem to be triggering filter 313, which is related to a bug in an extension for Firefox. You should try to disable this plugin, as otherwise there will have to be people checking all of your edits even if they are otherwise very useful:


 *  — Soap  —  00:23, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

71.225.61.235

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Correct the obvious error (to any statistician, or anyone with a bit of common sense) where it is concluded that the difference between a 35% incidence of smoking in France versus 25% in the U.S. is not significant. It is a typical mistake made by non-experts in interpreting statistics, but it is quite wrong. The smoking differential makes the French Paradox a much greater paradox, as normally that differential in smoking would substantially INCREASE the favorability of French morbidity and mortality, when compared to the U.S. I am a member of the American Academy of Actuaries and have been a professional mathematician/statistician for 30 years. Specializing in health contingencies, I work with differential studies of different populations virtually every day...David B Trindle, FSA, MAAA, davetrindle@yahoo.com.


 * Date and time
 * 20:40, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

A rare bug seems to occasionally prevent constructive edits from appearing when too many people try to edit the same page at the same time. I apologize for the disruption; the chances of it happening again are nearly zero, so feel free to try the edit again.  — Soap  —  00:13, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

DePiep

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Template:ISO 15924 script codes and Unicode/sandbox


 * Description
 * I am clearly sandboxing, as advised all around, and my save was blocked. Then, the message is very unspecific, so I cannot learn or improve on what possibly went wrong. So after 15 minutes of sandbox-editing and previewing, I am supposed to throw everything away. Finally, the top of this page addresses me with "... if you were doing something stupid ..." - thank you.


 * Date and time
 * 09:57, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * (adding) Well, after some research I discovered it is about using   that puts me in the same group with users that know & write about someone's mother based on an IP... :-).
 * Still don't like the language, though.
 * Anyway, if there's a workaround I'd like to know, but the table is a bit complicated so not everything works out well. I managed to save a full copy in a userpage (unfiltered then?), so nothing's lost. btw, an example of using the construct: IMO nicely & to the point in {{{tl|IPA vowel chart}}, putting text on a non-rectangular grid. -DePiep (talk) 10:44, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, there are two arguments in favor of this filter. One is that we don't really need fixed position anywhere, except possibly stylized userpages, since it can sometimes cause unpredictable results on people who have small screens, especially cellphones.  And thus that even legitimate edits like yours should be discouraged in favor of using other methods of getting things to line up. It's difficult for me to be able to have an opinion on this since the only way to see how things line up is to actually view the page on many different display types, and to even view it on my own screen I'd have to create the page first, since the filter interface doesn't show what a page would look like if the edit were completed.
 * The other argument is that even though this filter causes a lot of problems, it's worth it because the alternative would be forever risking a re-run of the fixed-position vandalism on Commons where even the admins couldn't revert it because the Recent Changes page was transcluding a template that covered the whole screen. (It had to eventually be done by a bot of some sort.)  I am open to suggestions that this filter could be pared down, or even eliminated, if others (not just other filter editors) think it's too severe.   —  Soap  —  12:54, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've made it now so that users with long-term experience will be exempt; you should be able to make the edit now. However, it may be reverted later by another editor.  —  Soap  —  13:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I get it. Causing problems in other screensizes (which I cannot check either) will cause a revert and a Talk, probably solvable then. To me this seems out of abuse-sphere. Thanx. -DePiep (talk) 14:58, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Coradoxenox

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * i just wanna add 4 more words and i click minor edit and it said it wasnt verry constructive


 * Date and time
 * 12:31, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Placing capitalized and/or large-print headers in articles, irrespective of what they say, is not proper style and will be reversed. Likewise statements of opinion, irrespective of what they are, is generally not allowed.  — Soap  —  12:46, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

173.31.78.207

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 16:37, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * It's a false/frivolous report from a would-be vandal. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 18:53, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

74.131.113.121

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 21:52, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Tried four times to delete an entire article; looks like the filter's working fine. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:14, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

75.185.75.127

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Grambling Notable Alumnae


 * Description
 * I tried to add a name to alum list, but something messed up the list layout, sorry.


 * Date and time
 * 22:54, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Please make sure you're not inadvertently removing content from an article when editing it; particularly common is to remove everything below the line you add. That is what seems to be happening here, and the filter will always block it. However don't feel you're being classified as a vandal; everyone makes mistakes from time to time.  — Soap  —  00:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Zytesy

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was trying to edit Emperor Meiji's page but it was apparently dissallowed.


 * Date and time
 * 12:37, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Attempt at childish vandalism blocked properly; another false report by a would-be vandal. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

92.233.146.23

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 12:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Petty childish vandalism properly blocked by the filters; another false report by another would-be vandal. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  21:27, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

38.107.76.198

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 21:23, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Yet another lying would-be vandal falsely reporting. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  21:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

174.126.100.104

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * tofu


 * Date and time
 * 22:44, 3 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments

I was saying tofu is nasty that is all —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.126.100.104 (talk)
 * After your 31-hour block for vandalism expires, please refrain from adding commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Such commentary violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. By the way, the filter disallowed the rather unhelpful edit in question because of the excessive usage of exclamation points in that attempted edit. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 08:30, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

203.24.9.94

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 04:57, 4 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * It's a false report from a vandal. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 07:51, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

ZirconiumTwice

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I am trying to move the page "Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10 Mini Pro" to "Sony Ericsson Xperia X10 Mini Pro" because the official name of the handset is in small letters.

See: http://www.sonyericsson.com/cws/products/mobilephones/overview/xperiax10mini?cc=gb&lc=en#view=overview On the other hand, the "Sony Ericsson Xperia X10" Wikipedia page is in small letters. Why does a page written in small letters and another page written in block letters? That's weird! Regards, Claudeemann
 * Date and time
 * 10:22, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

This edit seems to be good and so I've gone ahead and changed the title of the page to the lowercase spelling.  — Soap  —  01:07, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

POKEMANAPHY

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 18:21, 4 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * Some kiddy trying to advertise his YouTube series and being blocked by the filters; the usual false report. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  19:07, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Mattygreeley13

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * The singer for Blessthefall during the taste of chaos tour 2008 was not Aiden Louis, it was Aiden Franklin, formerly of Dear Whoever and owner of the Attic Studio in Texas. This is a change that I would like to make to the main article but for now tried to put in discussion, I'm not sure how to get it in the main article.


 * Date and time
 * 21:42, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Śometimes the filter will credit one person with what someone else wrote, especially if it's in the same paragraph. The vandalism above your edit was causing your edit to not go through. Apologies for that; there's no easy fix at this time.  — Soap  —  01:00, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * so, the outcome is? edits presumed lost? repeat edits again with another route? how to proceed? What is an answer to a true false positive? -DePiep (talk) 01:13, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If it's an uncontroversial content edit, I will usually perform it as soon as I fix whatever the problem was, but for talk pages and other things that require a signature I usually wait for the originating user to come back and re-do it themselves. If they dont come back I generally assume it wasnt very important to them.  —  Soap  —  09:53, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for replying, my question was way too assertive. My frustration should be directed elsewhere, e.i. where it comes from. I'm sorry for taking your time this way. And, since I learn about the Filter-thing, I understand & compliment the task you're taking. -DePiep (talk) 19:57, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Mosmof

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * 5W Public Relations


 * Description
 * Trying to remove promotional edits by a user with conflict of interest with the article subject. One edit was based on a press release, the other was a WP:SYNTH of a brief mention in a gossip magazine.


 * Date and time
 * 04:26, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Someone messed up their parentheses and the filter was for less than a minute blocking a whole slew of edits it wasn't supposed to. It's been fixed now. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:50, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Harjdesign

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 06:11, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The filter correctly warned you, but did not stop you, from adding a link to your own website. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

SidneyGirls

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I am trying to bond my classmates to accomplish something incredible


 * Date and time
 * 07:59, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * That's not an appropriate use for Wikipedia. We are an encyclopedia, not a free webhost. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:39, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

76.119.157.200

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 07:06, 6 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Also, it is not necessary to shout inside an encyclopedia article, as it is not intended to be used as a soapbox. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 07:50, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

122.107.235.166

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Talk:Israeli West Bank barrier


 * Description
 * I was seeking to respond to criticisms on the "Talk" page of this article, in the "Talk" page itself, as part of discussion leading to allowing me to make a contribution of a sentence clause to a part of the main article. The other editors of this page have steadily been seeking to block any contribution from me for weeks, because they strongly favor the Palestinian position and push its propaganda line that Israel is an "apartheid" state and its security barrier has not been put up for security reasons but as a racist "Wall."  My contribution seeks merely to mention that there is another view of the matter, from Israel's side, and to provide citations to the literature.  This has been blocked and now I find that I myself am blocked completely from making any constructive contribution at all, of any nature.  I would like to have an adjudication of this issue monitored by neutral Wikipedia editors.  Rabid anti-Zionism should not be allowed to take over articles dealing with Israel.  At least a pro-Israel point of view should be allowed, with appropriate citations and documentation.  This is what the other editors are prohibiting.


 * Date and time
 * 09:16, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

The text you wrote is very similar to that often used by a particular banned editor. This is not an accusation; merely an explanation that I can't tell from what Im seeing whether this is a false positive or not, and would need more information. Would you be willing to tell me under what username and/or IP address your previous contributions were?  — Soap  —  21:59, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Yes, of course. The contributions were all from this IP address, as given above.  I am probably the banned editor you refer to.  The text I wrote was not like anything I wrote before, so it could not be that.  In fact, I have been out-of-state for two weeks and did not contribute anything at all to this Talk page; the first time I sought to take up the discussion again on 6 August, my discussion was blocked.  Please note that the other editors have threatened numerous times to block me from Wikipedia, on my own IP "Talk" page, which I was unaware of until one of them provided a link to it (how do I get to it by myself?).  On the main article's talk page they continue to repudiate any contribution from me, giving spurious reasons indicating that they have not read the cited references I gave.  Nevertheless, I entered into the main article's talk page in good faith and continue to be willing to negotiate a proper wording; I also wish to add references that specifically redress the alleged deficiencies the other editors stress.  The banning I presume is behind this false positive. Actually, I would like to have a proper adjudication of this article, which is heavily slanted and needs rephrasing into a neutral POV.
 * Well, being banned means that you're not allowed to even make good edits. If you want to get back in, you should contact the person or persons who blocked you, unless you've been specifically told there could not be any appeals.   —  Soap  —  09:51, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem is not just that I have not been informed who blocked me and so cannot contact them in any case, but also that the person or persons who blocked me are not amenable to discussion. It is for them an ideological thing.  They just refuse to provide space for a countervailing viewpoint.  One editor, a Mr. Shabazz, even justified this on my talk page by saying I presented material that had a POV, and that is contrary to Wikipedia rules; he ignores of course his own and his fellow editors' strong POV, and that neutrality requires presentation of both sides of a dispute.  These people are not reasonable and I refuse to submit to their bullying.  So I would like an external arbiter to adjudicate the matter.  By the way, I continued to try to locate my own "Talk" page, after making the just previous comment, and used the link at the head of this complaint to do so: it brought me to a completely blank page.  Going back into my browser "history," I found the record of the Talk Page for my IP address, entered for 16 July, the last time I went there.  It was for a different IP address (122.107.224.148)!  However, I was using the same computer, the one I am using now, and have no idea why the IP is different.  Perhaps it is connected with my turning off my modem when I went off on my trip out-of-state for a couple of weeks.
 * There has been no response to my above comment a day ago, and I am unsure what that means. Perhaps I should just wait a bit more: it is the weekend after all (Sunday the 8th of August).  But in a just earlier complaint above on this page, "Soap" indicated that in matters relating to blocks on Talk Pages, he/she generally just unblocks the page, and waits for the complainant to post on it.  If this does not happen, "Soap" assumes that the matter was not very important to the complainant after all, and leaves it there.  But I am still being blocked, as a matter of fact, without any indication of who set this block up.  I would like to resume contructive dialogue on the Talk page, leading to acceptance of my proposed sentence clause in the main article.  Please inform me if I have been unblocked and there is any point in my trying again.  Or, if this block still obtains, please inform me, so I can go directly to an appeal for adjudication, as will probably eventually be necessary anyway.

Mocalondon

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 12:24, 6 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Per Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy, users are strongly discouraged from creating or editing articles about themselves or any entities that they are affiliated with. Furthermore, accounts that represent an entire organization and the unambiguous use of an organization name as a username are prohibited; please see Wikipedia's username policy for more information. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 18:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Therexbanner

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Northern Secondary School


 * Description
 * Attempted to delete contents of the "Notable Alumni" section, as these were moved to a separate page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Northern_Secondary_School_Alumni and tried to link to that page, but the edit filter keeps blocking the attempts.


 * Date and time
 * 15:18, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's not generally good to blank an entire section and replace it with just a link. Usually it would be better to leave at least some text there, and then have
 * Comments

at the top of the section and underneath the header. However this filter has some bugs and I can't honestly say if it would have gone off even if you had done that, or not.  — Soap  —  23:47, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

98.203.230.26

 * Username
 * Eiffel Tower
 * Eiffel Tower


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 18:52, 6 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * False report from a vandal. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 19:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

98.203.230.26

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * im trying to make this page more interesting so that more people will go to this page and it is also a fact


 * Date and time
 * 18:55, 6 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Another false report. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 19:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

98.203.230.26

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was making it more interesting so that more people would go to that page and you guys would get more money!


 * Date and time
 * 19:01, 6 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * *sigh* Yet another false report. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 19:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

98.203.230.26

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Madison Square Garden


 * Description
 * This change gives the readers more fact to look at and makes them more interested in what the whole thing says which will make them use your guys' website more for other stuff


 * Date and time
 * 19:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Enough! If you file one more false report, you will be blocked. Your vandalism attempts will not be tolerated. Got that? -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 19:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

91.106.122.65

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Eddie Johnson (English footballer)


 * Description
 * I reported this earlier but received no reply. Still can't provide a simple update of statistics.


 * Date and time
 * 19:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

We're not ignoring you, it's just that most of the work answering false positives is done by about five or six people and not all of them know the answers to all of the reports. The filter was tripped because you added a lot of consecutive exclamation points to a table. I'm not familiar with all the details of MediaWiki tables; is it necessary to type like that, for spacing purposes? If there is no other way, then an exception could be made if other table-like formatting is present, but it would not always work for small edits.  — Soap  —  22:03, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * In the meantime, Ive changed the table for you, but not the rest of the edit, because Im not sure about such things as changing arrows into question marks or using the signature for a date.  —  Soap  —  22:18, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

88.68.192.237

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * AT4


 * Description
 * I changed one word in the caption of the top picture ("large" to "significant") to avoid unnecessary repetition of the word "large".


 * Date and time
 * 19:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Please check to make sure you're not running the Skype extension for Firefox; as far as I know there is no way to run the Skype extension without messing up 'textarea' forms such as the ones that all Wikipedia edit boxes are made from, and this filter isn't the kind that would have a lot of false positives.  — Soap  —  23:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

24.223.204.123

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 03:08, 7 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Let's just say that an instablock was definitely warranted in this case. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 04:57, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

76.5.62.67

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 03:54, 7 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * What you attempted to do is called vandalism. Please refrain from making such unhelpful edits. -- SoCalSuperEagle ( talk ) 05:08, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

222.155.172.207

 * Username


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


 * Description


 * Date and time
 * 09:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * No, that was not a false positive. You are not allowed to use Wikipedia to voice your personal opinions. Someguy1221 (talk) 09:47, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Slurpee101

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * DISNEY CHANNEL  Disney Channel


 * Description
 * MINOR EDIT


 * Date and time
 * 02:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * No contribs, no filter triggered. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 02:22, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, there were filters triggered on the page "Disney Channel" by this user. The filter disallowed the edit. (Attempted edits were vandalism.) N / A  0  03:19, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Geocrimen

 * Username


 * Page you were editing (don't wikilink)
 * Crime in Mexico


 * Description
 * Vilalta, Carlos (2010). "The spatial dynamics and socioeconomic correlates of drug arrests in Mexico city". Applied Geography, 30(2), pp. 263-270. http://www.stat.purdue.edu/~zhanghao/ASS/Reference%20Papers/Drug%20arrests.pdf.

This is a refereed scientific paper which is very informative for wikipedia users in this topic. I do not know why the system did not allow the link.
 * Date and time
 * 05:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * The edit was blocked because it contained the text "ASS", and you have few edits under your belt. You were allowed to correct it subsequently, however. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:39, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Natomie

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I'm trying to create a page on the word, "Fradoodle." As silly as the name and the orgin sounds the word fradoodle is actually used in our day to day language by younger folk. The orgin, as silly as it may be, was created by teens in a small city. This word, "fradoodle" quickly became a small fad that people love to use. Now a days though people use it less and less and only to get in a quick joke.


 * Date and time
 * 08:36, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

If you can't provide refernces (and since you admit it's made up I'm not expecting you to be able to) an article like this will be quickly deleted, regardless of whether it trips the !!!! filter or not. But just so you know, that is what was stopping you ... you can't use !!!! in an article unless it's part of the title.  — Soap  —  08:51, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

94.7.88.50

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was trying to delete a comment i left on a users talkpage, but on the wrong section. It was accident.


 * Date and time
 * 14:55, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Generally it's advised not to remove comments from another user's talk page, even if they are your own, because the user will have to go through the page history anyway to see what was originally said. And to move a comment from one part of a page to another, you can edit the whole page at once, which won't be seen by this filter as a deletion and thus won't be stopped. However because this is a common problem, I've enabled a change to the filter which will allow stepped changes like this in most cases. It won't always work, but that's a limitation in the filter, not because we "dont want to" allow it to work all the time.  — Soap  —  15:11, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

69.155.46.174

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * I was adding a link to further facts about the technical aspects of evolution in biology. The site also included information regarding the different specific areas of evolutionary thought.


 * Date and time
 * 16:29, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Evolution is a controversial subject, and therefore has a FAQ detailing how the various Wikipedia policies apply to the article and its related articles. Although these policies are not unique to evolution articles, they have consequences that are. The result is that Creationism is not considered worthy to be granted equal status with evolution other than in articles about Creationism itself. The edit filter is designed to keep out various patterns of edits that a certain banned user often makes; although I don't believe you are that banned editor, the edit you were trying to make would have been reverted for the reasons given above.  — Soap  —  18:09, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Bradydane

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * <--and--> never more


 * Date and time
 * 19:18, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

All I see is vandalism related to Justin Bieber on that article. So consider this a warning that if you continue to vandalize, your account may be blocked.  — Soap  —  19:26, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments

Lovebotlenore

 * Username


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


 * Description
 * Trying to remove large section of irrelevant text at bottom of page.


 * Date and time
 * 13:37, 9 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Dealt with - thank you for reporing this. Unfortunately, to make an exception to the filter to allow this sort of edit would be complicated. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 14:42, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, that was definitely a false positive. The trigger was tripped because it was such a large deletion, by a new user account. I've removed the irrelevant text, and want to thank you for your effort and for this report, Lovebotle! -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:43, 9 August 2010 (UTC)