User talk:Munboy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This page in a nutshell: Sign all your posts on Wikipedia talk pages by typing --~~~~ to be accountable and to help others understand the conversation. |
[edit] User:207.173.90.1
- Thanks for giving me a note. As I read the policy, it's considered unfair to block someone if they haven't been warned adequately; however, if the user vandalizes one more time, I promise to block him for at least a day. Deltabeignet 03:18, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] William S. Nye
Why did you move Bill Nye to William S. Nye? The most popular search term, by far, is for Bill Nye, and according to naming conventions, the article should go there. If you have a good reason why it should be moved as you have done, please tell me, or post it on the talk page, but otherwise, it just creates unneccisary hurdles for new users to search through. Anyways, good luck and happy editing, Mysekurity(have you seen this?) 04:13, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Image:010306_mine9.jpg has been listed as a possible copyright violation
(This was poted, but not signed, by the coward Aaron)
[edit] Image:1306_miners3.jpg has been listed as a possible copyright violation
(This was poted, but not signed, by the coward Aaron)
I believe, munboy, that you should review WP:NPA and especially WP:BITE. QBorg 23:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
- He's not new. His edits date back to December 2002. kthx. --munboy 00:01, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Your VandalProof Application
Dear Munboy,
Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact with the new 1.2 version release it has even more power. As such we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that that you have too few edits in the main article space. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again in the not too distant future. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof. —Xyrael / 20:54, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Bnsg2.jpg -RESOLVED
- Explanation on talk page of image. Anyways, this is resolved. munboy 02:23, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] reverting a non-vandal edit and issuing warning
You reverted an edit on Chrysler by an anonymous IP in which that IP had restored a large history section that previous anon IPs had removed. You then issued a final warning for vandalism on the anon IPs talk page. Please try to exercise a little more discretion when fighting vandals. Not every anonymous IP editor is a vandal. older ≠ wiser 12:32, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, in the effort to combat vandalism, some good faith edits may be reverted. I apologize for the mistake that was made, but please let me explain my position: bad edits destroy what Wikipedia tries to be, a reliable source for unvandalized information. This may mean that some collateral damage, such as your edit by an anonymous user, may take place. Again, I am sorry. Thank you for updating Wikipedia though, and may God bless you for your continued efforts in the community! munboy 02:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Reversion on Bard College page
Munboy, it seems I was not logged in when I edited the Bard College in the Media section, but the claim I deleted–-that the Richard B. Fisher Center appeared in the movie "The OH in Ohio"--is indeed false. It was the Peter B. Lewis Building at Case Western University, as I indicated in the edit summary. See IMDB. In the future, please take time to verify anonymous edits before reverting them! Clancyolincy 01:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, in the effort to combat vandalism, some good faith edits may be reverted. I apologize for the mistake that was made, but please let me explain my position: bad edits destroy what Wikipedia tries to be, a reliable source for unvandalized information. This may mean that some collateral damage, such as your edit by an anonymous user, may take place. Again, I am sorry. Thank you for updating Wikipedia though, and may God bless you for your continued efforts in the community! munboy 02:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Popover
Please bother to check my edits before you brazenly and mistakenly brand my talk page with antagonistic messages regarding the addition of things I had absolutely nothing to do with. An apology would be nice. 80.177.20.202 18:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, in the effort to combat vandalism, some good faith edits may be reverted. I apologize for the mistake that was made, but please let me explain my position: bad edits destroy what Wikipedia tries to be, a reliable source for unvandalized information. This may mean that some collateral damage, such as your edit by an anonymous user, may take place. Again, I am sorry. Thank you for updating Wikipedia though, and may God bless you for your continued efforts in the community! munboy 02:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
I agree with 80.177.20.202. 71.236.228.189 11:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Incorrectly reverting edits and claiming vandalism
Munboy, I've just noted that you have given me a final warning for vandalising the 'Lethal Injection' topic. My anonymous correction was from IP address 195.11.64.226. I removed a link to the topic 'porn' from the end of the 'Procedure in US executions' section, as the history of this topic shows. The link to pornography here was obviously not relevant.
I can't see how any level-headed user would see that my correction was in any way vandalism, far from it. However, I will stand corrected if you can just point out the relevance of a link to the pornography topic from the lethal injection topic.
If however, you simply have lower than average intelligence, please take more care with your baseless allegations. I see from the other posts here that you are doing this a lot. I fail to believe that you are applying any competence in these matters.
StrangeCargo1974 16:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
