User talk:Codingmasters
Your request
yeah, i'll look but i am working on my own wikiproject. i'll edit when i can. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Munkee madness (talk • contribs)
supposed vandalism
Please refrain from falsely labelling valid changes as "vandalism" merely because you disagree with them. 59.167.92.90 11:41, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I second that notion.
Hello
Well i had started the project long time back. Of late i have been tied down with other things like two ArbComms. By all means assume the leadership of the project, but i dont think you have right or authority to remove anyone from participants list. It is considered impolite to do so, and is against the spirit of Wikipedia community.
Regards
AMbroodEY Reloaded 11:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
No my friend, you cant form your own rules here, you are bound by the laws of Wikipedia. There is the WP:Village Pump and WP:ANI incase you want to make a rule that says inactive participants can be removed. I have experience with several Wiki Projects. Remove others ta your own risk, you may get reprimanded for that. At any rate keeping the inactive fellas in there wont do you any harm will it? I guess you can bracket them under 'inactive participants'. AMbroodEY Reloaded 11:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- I may have to agree with him on the matter...anyway, this is my response. Sr13 17:30, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm working on my own wikiproject but i edit as i can. Munkee madness 19:55, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Winshill
I know you are trying to help, but the version you reverted to is a copyvio of www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=12371. A vandal with a dynamic IP has been inserting the copyvio there for quite a while now and they took advantage of the semi-protect expiring to do it again.--Isotope23 13:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- No problem... it is rather sneaky vandalism because the outward appearance is that it is a good expansion and I'm blanking it.--Isotope23 13:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
AIV report
Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you. Anas talk? 13:47, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Help with article
You removed some "vandalism" from an article today, "international language programs". The same vandalism has been placed there by the same IP address over 20 times. I work for the organization and try to watch the vandalism and just remove it. Is there anything else that can be done? Warning? Blanking the page? I know advertising is not allowed but is negative advertising (the vandalism is an external link to someone's blog where the person tells unsupported, biased, unreferenced negative personal experiences with our organization)? Any help you can give will be appreciated.
vandalism?
It and It (disambiguation) are the same page! Doesn't anyone notice this? Why do you keep reverting it?
Your request
Dude, you have no jurisdiction over the project; you can;t just walk in there and appoint yourself the leader... Wikipedia is not a democracy/bureaucracy; we don;t have leaders in projects. That's why it's called a collaborative encyclopedia. If you want to get things done, just do them. Try to get more involvement from the community, but don't do something totally out of process like removing people's names. Most of the users there may be editing Artemis Fowl articles, even if not regularly. Ergo, you have a list of people who are interested in editing Artemis Fowl related stuff. Removing them will do a lot of harm, and literally no good. --122.162.84.152 18:06, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
You cannot assume leadership of a wikiproject. Also, please actually say what needs doing and put it into T:WPAF and please don't put messages at tops of UT pages. Thanks. --Quentin Smith 11:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
VandalProof
I'm sorry that I chosen not to process your application, but I prefer that a more experience moderator do it :-( Don't ask me why because I don't remember :-(. Anyway, I'll ping another mod ASAP. «Snowolf How can I help?» 11:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
That edit of mine reverted was not vandalism! It might have looked like I was excising big chunks of text, but it was actually a cleanup and partial rewrite. --85.214.60.31 11:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Rooster Teeth Networks
If it doesn't have a Wikipedia article, it doesn't qualify for the List of social networking websites. Also, having researched the resource, it appears to be a sub-shoot of Rooster Teeth Productions and not a dedicated and notable independent social networking website.
More to the point, please do not introduce spam-like external links into the talk pages of articles. It has been amended to reflect only the title of the query. Thanks. Ref (chew)(do) 11:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Gnommish
Sorry - untill I read the article, I didn't know what it was about. I found the vandalism in the "Recent Changes" log, so I'm not sure how much help I could be with the content. Happy editing! PouponOnToast 12:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Codingmasters! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Daniel 05:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
International Language Programs
{"You removed some "vandalism" from an article today, "international language programs". The same vandalism has been placed there by the same IP address over 20 times. I work for the organization and try to watch the vandalism and just remove it. Is there anything else that can be done? Warning? Blanking the page? I know advertising is not allowed but is negative advertising (the vandalism is an external link to someone's blog where the person tells unsupported, biased, unreferenced negative personal experiences with our organization)? Any help you can give will be appreciated."}
REBUTTAL: This is untrue. The blog is supported, is unbiased in that it allows all to post, has references from participants of the programs and those who have dealt with them and links showing they are not just one person (and the organization is very well aware of that), and not everything there is negative--in fact, a member of the the same organzation posted their great experiences there. It's my experiences with the organization and allowing others to post there about theirs--the fact that their post is there is testimonial to the fact that I'll publish all that come in.
What's also interesting, is that the original article is not much more than an illegal, unreferenced advertisement that doesn't want to garner any negative publicity so they can continue their game, uninterrupted. Most articles on Wiki that are controversial contain external links to sites that are of both sides, right? How can they--or anyone, for that matter--expect to completely control the entire wiki article on a topic?? Was Wiki set up for free advertisers? No! Is that what this is coming to? I don't think anyone would agree with that.
To verify, the link is www.notilp.wordpress.com.
Please allow my link to remain as it can, or delete the entire topic, thanks.
-=-=-= P.S. Could someone make a clearer way to communicate? In the past, I clicked on all kinds of links taking me all over Wiki to discuss this issue (until I finally found this one and saw the specific post that let me know this might be the right place) but there was nowhere to reply/ ask. :)