| Revision as of 02:41, 10 August 2009 view sourceSmokeyJoe (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers44,373 edits →Likely attack page: was poor form. You should not be reverting without more care.← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 23:09, 10 January 2025 view source Amaury (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers98,541 editsmNo edit summary |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
<templatestyles src="User:Amaury/styles.css" /> |
|
'''''It is currently {{Utc|- 7}} where I am''''' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<div style="color: #FFFFFF; background: #001932; border: 5px solid #000000; padding: 1%;"> |
|
== January 2009 == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{editnotice |
|
===Discussions archived=== |
|
|
|
| header = Welcome to my talk page! |
|
An archive of January 2009 discussions can be found . |
|
|
|
| headerstyle = text-align: center; |
|
|
| text = Today is {{#time: l, F j, Y|now-8 hours}}<br />The current time is {{#time: g:i A|now-8 hours}} (PST) |
|
|
| textstyle = color: #FFFFFF; background-color: #324B64; border: 1px solid #000000; font-weight: bold; font-size: 200%; text-align: center; |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{editnotice |
|
== February 2009 == |
|
|
|
| header = Attention! |
|
|
| headerstyle = color: #FFFF00; |
|
|
| text = Due to persistent disruption by an immature block-evading IP, this page has been indefinitely semi-protected. Newly registered users and IPs are not able to post on this talk page. ] • 07:05, 9 January 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
| textstyle = color: #FFFFFF; background-color: #324B64; border: 1px solid #000000; font-weight: bold; font-size: 200%; text-align: center; |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Archive Statistics == |
|
===Discussions archived=== |
|
|
An archive of February 2009 discussions can be found . |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* The numbers in the cells indicate how many total discussions there are for each year, each month, and overall. |
|
== March 2009 == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{| class="wikitable" |
|
===Discussions archived=== |
|
|
|
|- |
|
An archive of March 2009 discussions can be found . |
|
|
|
! Month |
|
|
! 2008 |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! 2011 |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! 2014 |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! ] |
|
|
! Total |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| January |
|
|
| – |
|
|
| 12 |
|
|
| 11 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 8 |
|
|
| 13 |
|
|
| 7 |
|
|
| 17 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 3 |
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 2 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 84 |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| February |
|
|
| – |
|
|
| 13 |
|
|
| 35 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 9 |
|
|
| 9 |
|
|
| 8 |
|
|
| 12 |
|
|
| 10 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 2 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 105 |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| March |
|
|
| – |
|
|
| 11 |
|
|
| 24 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 42 |
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
| 13 |
|
|
| 10 |
|
|
| 8 |
|
|
| 7 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 131 |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| April |
|
|
| – |
|
|
| 20 |
|
|
| 25 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 38 |
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
| 11 |
|
|
| 14 |
|
|
| 10 |
|
|
| 14 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 2 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 148 |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| May |
|
|
| – |
|
|
| 23 |
|
|
| 13 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 10 |
|
|
| 12 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 15 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 18 |
|
|
| 15 |
|
|
| 7 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 129 |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| June |
|
|
| – |
|
|
| 14 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| 39 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 10 |
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
| 15 |
|
|
| 14 |
|
|
| 9 |
|
|
| 3 |
|
|
| 9 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 2 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 134 |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| July |
|
|
| – |
|
|
| 20 |
|
|
| 3 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| 14 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 18 |
|
|
| 12 |
|
|
| 13 |
|
|
| 20 |
|
|
| 16 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 2 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 2 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 131 |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| August |
|
|
| – |
|
|
| 8 |
|
|
| 34 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 3 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 7 |
|
|
| 12 |
|
|
| 19 |
|
|
| 13 |
|
|
| 14 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 2 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 117 |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| September |
|
|
| – |
|
|
| 8 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 9 |
|
|
| 9 |
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
| 13 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 7 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 3 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 75 |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| October |
|
|
| – |
|
|
| 24 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
| 21 |
|
|
| 16 |
|
|
| 10 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 1 |
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
| 8 |
|
|
| 2 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 104 |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| November |
|
|
| – |
|
|
| 11 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 9 |
|
|
| 7 |
|
|
| 13 |
|
|
| 9 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 3 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 75 |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| December |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 9 |
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 5 |
|
|
| 13 |
|
|
| 18 |
|
|
| 15 |
|
|
| 8 |
|
|
| 10 |
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
| 3 |
|
|
| 6 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 103 |
|
|
|- |
|
|
| Total |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 173 |
|
|
| 163 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 13 |
|
|
| 69 |
|
|
| 0 |
|
|
| 154 |
|
|
| 115 |
|
|
| 158 |
|
|
| 152 |
|
|
| 120 |
|
|
| 72 |
|
|
| 51 |
|
|
| 50 |
|
|
| 26 |
|
|
| 20 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 1,336 |
|
|
|} |
|
|
|
|
|
== April 2009 == |
|
== January 2025 == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
=== ] at ] === |
|
===Discussions archived=== |
|
|
An archive of April 2009 discussions can be found . |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Could you ] ] (]) 22:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
== May 2009 == |
|
|
|
: {{Re|Deepfriedokra}} Thank you for the message. I will start off by saying that I don't claim to be perfect, and mistakes certainly happen. |
|
|
:* Diffs 1 and 6 were already answered by other users. |
|
|
:* Diff 2 was a mistake that I did not catch. |
|
|
:* Diff 3 was in violation of ] a common word. This disruption has been a long-term problem in slow-motion from various IPs since at least September 2020, unless I missed something in the article history. I will going to ] the next time it happens. It wasn't happening frequently enough that I didn't know if a request at WP:RFPP would have been approved, but it's getting old and will be going there next time. |
|
|
:* Diff 4 introduced cast and characters that were not recurring, with the exception of Iggy and Young Alisha. Non-main cast and characters with a credit of guest star or higher need a minimum of five appearances to be considered recurring. |
|
|
:* Diffs 5, 9, and 10 introduced category/template bloat. |
|
|
:* Diff 7 broke code formatting, which is often ] that people do. |
|
|
:* Diff 8 introduced unsourced content. |
|
|
:* Diff 11 was a partial mistake, as the edit did introduce problems, so it was roughly 50% bad. This is also another area of sneaky vandalism, as people often make up or guess what characters' full names are, which is in-universe ], unless there's a reliable primary or secondary source, such as the credits (primary). |
|
|
:* Diff 12 introduced a sentence fragment, as well as intentionally breaking the formatting with that line break, despite the user claiming they were correcting grammar. |
|
|
:* Diff 13 violates ]. |
|
|
:* Diff 14 introduced unnecessary sourcing. The series' credits serve as the primary source. Once an episode airs, a source is no longer required since the episode itself serves as the source. For example, if a secondary source says John Smith as The Great Apple will appear, once that episode airs, the secondary source is no longer required, since the actor and who they portray will be listed in the primary source—the credits. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
: Having said all that, I don't appreciate a random user who I don't know stalking my edits and trying to cause trouble by blowing a potentially small problem out of proportion, especially a user who not only has ''far'' less edits than I do, but has also been around for ''far'' less time than I have. 14 edits out of my almost 90,000 edits overall or out of my almost 1,500 edits for 2024 that are potentially a problem don't show a pattern; otherwise, this would have been raised long ago. Unless I'm going around making severe personal attacks that require immediate attention, which I am not, they need to find something better to do with their time than to follow me around just to look for me to mess up. I'm only human, I'm not a robot. This isn't your fault, of course, and I do appreciate the message once again. ''']''' • 03:14, 3 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
===Discussions archived=== |
|
|
|
::Hi Amaury, I don't think anyone is saying these reverts were all wrong, so no one is asking for a long justification for each of them. They are saying (and I am too) that the edits you reverted were, with 2 exceptions, good faith edits, certainly not obvious vandalism, and so they needed more than an unexplained rollback. This is not 14 edits out of 90,000 (nor 1,500), it is 12 edits out of the 57 edits you made between 12/21 and 12/30. As I said at AARV, all that is needed is a recalibration of your "obvious problem edit/bad faith edit” criterion. But that recalibration is needed, or else someone is going to remove your rollback permission. It doesn't need to be a big deal, but it does need addressing. Nobody is asking you to be perfect; all we're asking is that you take feedback onboard. Indeed, it looks to me like starting on the 31st, you did stop unexplained rollbacks. A simple "ok, my bad, some of those times I shouldn't have used rollback, and I've started explaining the reverts" would have nipped this in the bud. ] (]) 15:56, 3 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
An archive of May 2009 discussions can be found . |
|
|
|
::: {{Re|Floquenbeam}} Thank you for the message. I could and should have clarified more, but the whole "my bad" is basically what I was at least trying to get across with my not being perfect and make mistakes comment. While I can admit that what was construed as ] by another user wasn't the best of arguments, I still personally feel that the rest of the point I was trying to make is valid. AP was trying to make a mountain out of a molehill and it's pretty clear that they were following me around just looking for me to mess up just so they could have their five minutes of fame and make a report, at least in my opinion. Why so quick to go to a noticeboard to look for possible sanctions after only one message on my talk page? Then to start out with the whole "I don't like that it had to come to this, but..." just sends the wrong vibes. I don't mean for this to sound like I'm whining, because I'm not trying to, that's just what it felt like to me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
::: I do see the point you're making about looking at the edits between December 21 and December 31, but I feel it's also important to look at my edits as a whole. That's the point I was trying to make, in which more often than not, I do use edit summaries for reverts like the highlighted ones in this report. If only looking at the edits between those two dates, it makes it look bad for me, as if I'm always that way. One final point is that I wasn't ignoring AP, I just don't edit Misplaced Pages as much as I used to, as seen by my edit statistics on my user page and the long time it took to update them and my talk page archives. (The really high edit counts are when I was regularly fighting vandalism.) It's a combination of being busy in real life and just not currently having heavy interest here, so I'll normally only get on for a bit and revert any problematic edits I see. If I see I have a message, I skim it and end up forgetting about it. I can be more careful moving forward, but I also don't want to feel like I have to walk on eggshells in fear of, so to speak, AP reporting me again. ''']''' • 20:27, 3 January 2025 (UTC) |
|
== June 2009 == |
|
|
|
|
|
===Discussions archived=== |
|
|
An archive of June 2009 discussions can be found . |
|
|
|
|
|
== July 2009 == |
|
|
|
|
|
===Discussions archived=== |
|
|
An archive of July 2009 discussions can be found . |
|
|
|
|
|
== August 2009 == |
|
|
|
|
|
===Syed9090 now Pk7311=== |
|
|
There is a new user Pk7311 now doing the same things that Syed9090 did before he got banned. Can it be somehow confirmed that these two accounts belong to the same person?] <sup>] ]</sup> 07:12, 2 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I am referring to edits on ] and ] <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 07:12, 2 August 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
===Huggle=== |
|
|
If and are representative of how you use Huggle, it might be wise that you stop doing so. Blindly reverting other editors and slapping them with warnings when they are attempting to raise a concern, even if they are doing so in a misguided manner, only adds fuel to the fire. Please be more careful. --] ] 02:04, 3 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:I understand. My apologies. Thank you for the message. - ] (]) 02:07, 3 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
===Reverting talk=== |
|
|
What the hell is with you reverting concerned talk by the subject of a BLP, ]? BLP is very serious, and censoring the subject of one who has concerns about it is quite astounding. -- ] (]) 09:30, 3 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:Please don't take this the wrong way, but I must agree. was not a good use of rollback. Why is it, exactly, that you did that? →<font style="color:black">'''javért'''</font> <sup>]</sup> 09:37, 3 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::I already got called upon for it. See above discussion. - ] (]) 14:11, 3 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Oh, I don't know what Huggle is, and didn't click the diff links. Well, between what you did, and Beeblebrox stepping on an edit by accident and then not reverting it on purpose, Jay Brannan thinks he's not even allowed to discuss the article and has gone away mad. -- ] (]) 18:25, 3 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
===Thanks for reverting user page vandalism=== |
|
|
A lot can happen when a guy leaves his desk for lunch.]] 18:21, 4 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:You're welcome. - ] (]) 18:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
===Supposed vandalism=== |
|
|
Why do people keep reverting me for supposed vandalism such as ? ] (]) 00:47, 5 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:Users and IP addresses are allowed to add or remove content from their user page and/or talk page unless it's inappropriate. - ] (]) 00:48, 5 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::Okay, so removing test edits is considered vandalism. Thanks for letting me know, I'll quit cleaning up Misplaced Pages now. ] (]) 00:50, 5 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Yes, because they're allowed to test edit on their own pages. - ] (]) 00:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Zhang He is right that the editors (IP or registered) are allowed to test on their own pages; however, KypDurron1's edit was far from ]. It is obvious that his intentions were good, so the warning really was inappropriate. A note explaining why you reverted would be great, but not a {{tlx|uw-vand4}}. Remember vandalism is only for bad-faith edits, not incorrect good-faith edits. <font color="#330099" face="Cooper Black">] <sup>]</sup>/<small>]</small></font> 01:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I have a question as to why removing invisible text placed underneath a redirect like is considered vandalism. I would also like to know why is considered vandalism, which you also reported in the vandalism report. ] (]) 01:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:As a heads-up: I have declined the vandalism report, since there was obviously no malice on the part of KypDurron1. I will also ask Zhang He to please exercise more care in making vandalism reports. I would also recommend trying to communicate directly with editors rather than relying on templates -- you can get better results that way. Thank you. ] (]) 01:17, 5 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
===Likely attack page=== |
|
|
What makes you say this is nonsense? It looks to me like the user page probably is an attack. The user's only contributions to Misplaced Pages is this user page, which certainly makes me think this is probably an attack against the individual, not the real Chris Ryan's user page. -- ] (]) 09:51, 8 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:I wasn't sure; that's why I didn't revert the IP address' edit on my talk page with Huggle, just manually. - ] (]) 15:19, 8 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::Why revert at all if you're not sure? And when the user comes to your talk page to alert you, why remove that and edit comment so surely that it's nonsense? Not only is it likely that the user page is an attack becuase the user has only edited the page, but the page contained a line about how the subject "identifies as conservative even though his girlfriend (then it names her!) had to get an abortion twice in the seventh grade". That's not something someone writes about themself. You seem to be very careless at reverting, with Huggle or not. -- ] (]) 18:18, 9 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I wouldn't say that. I've improved a lot since December 2008. Just ask ]. - ] (]) 01:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::::You have improved a lot, but I agree with AvatarMN here. The original wasn't vandalism. Then removing his note on your talk page was in poor form. He appears to be concerned for the subject of this "article". Giving him a little help and explaining why you reverted would have helped more than removing the post as "nonsense". For the past couple of weeks, it does seem that you have been making quite a few of mistakes. You really do need to be more careful. If you can't explain why you reverted when the editor asks, then you shouldn't have reverted to begin with. <font color="#330099" face="Cooper Black">] <sup>]</sup>/<small>]</small></font> 01:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I'll also note that I sent it to MfD ]. <font color="#330099" face="Cooper Black">] <sup>]</sup>/<small>]</small></font> 02:12, 10 August 2009 (UTC) |
|
|
* was poor form. You should not be reverting without more care. --] (]) 02:41, 10 August 2009 (UTC) |
|