User talk:MastaBaba

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Vandalism Accusations

Hi. Please don't accuse people of vandalism when they are innocent. It is called slander. MastaBaba

Are you referring to a specific incident? I only leave vandalism warnings on user pages after reverting an edit which appears to be vandalism. I also do not use warning messages that explicitly claim the user is committing vandalism unless it is fairly blatant. Please let me know more specifically what you are referring to. --Matthew 18:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I have not issued you any vandalism warnings at the user account User:MastaBaba. Perhaps you are referring to messages left at an IP address or another user account. It is possible that if you use a shared IP address through a dial-up or LAN connection that other people may share your IP address. When you are not logged-in you see messages left at the IP address you're using rather than those left for you at your user name. --Matthew 18:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. Of course I'm referring to a specific incident. It was related to a page on currency exchange. You're right the warning wasn't direct at my username, but at the IP address I was using. And, indeed, I saw it when I was not logged in. I'm not aware that, when logged in, messages directed at an IP address are not shown (and thus not connected to a user). If this indeed is the case, there's less of an issue here, but it's still not fully besides the point as the chances of the actual vandaliser seeing that message (when it is directed at an IP address) are minute. --MastaBaba 22:29, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

You are very right about IP talk pages being somewhat obscure, especially for users whose IP address changes. Unfortunately IP talk pages are the only tool available for warning anonymous users that they are vandalizing pages. In the interest in reviewing my accuracy in marking edits as vandalism, can you tell me what IP the message was left on, or link the talk page for that IP from here? Thanks. --Matthew 02:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not familiar enough with Wikipedia to easily retrieve the message. However, here's a link to the page which your message referred to. --MastaBaba 09:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

You can see the edit I reverted here, please take a look for yourself. It is possible the IP the message was left at is actually a shared IP (perhaps you're behind a NAT on a corporate LAN or something), so the person using the IP address you read the message from was someone else. Please accept my apologies for receiving a message that was clearly intended for someone else, IP talk pages are the only way to reach anonymous users. Feel free to ignore messages left on an anonymous talk page, any block to that IP will have no effect on you when you login. --Matthew 06:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandalised indeed. My ISP doesn't hand out static IP addresses, so each time I 'log on' (boot up), I get a new IP address. The thing is, this set up is far from unique.

Anyway, apologies accepted, of course.

We are aware of this issue. Unfortunately it is the only way we can distinguish the users that are not logged. Thanks for creating an account ;) -- lucasbfr ^talk 13:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, your addition to Afghanistan does not pass the guidelines for external links WP:EL. Links to your own website is considered a conflict of interest WP:COI and is strongly discouraged. The website you linked to seems like a fine website in its own right, but based on the limited scope of its content, I believe it is inappropriate. If you disagree, I encourage you to post the link the on the article talk page and let other editors reach consensus over its inclusions. Thanks. Nposs 06:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photomarathon

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Photomarathon, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at its talk page. Removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, but the article may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria.. The issue here is that we don't accept dictionary definitions to Wikipedia. We have a sister project that might be useful, called wikidictionary. Regards, -- lucasbfr ^talk 13:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I can't say I appreciate this practice of forcing individuals to submit work to this website. The whole idea of a wiki is that contents slowly grows through submission and addition by multiple individuals. Small topics like this, in the grand scheme of things, would have to be allowed to start small. --MastaBaba 21:52, 16 February 2007 (UTC)