User talk:137.155.194.38

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --nihon 20:26, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Doc ask? 22:48, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Message posted to my user page

NOTE: The following was posted to my page by the anonymous user from this IP address:
messages to user
hello, you have sent me a warning message, I have not done any thing to warrant this, I have vandalized no pages, nor performed any tests, if you cheek my editing history you will see that earlier today i removed profanity from a place it did not belong, some of my grammar or spelling may be off, but the appropriate response would be to edit it instead of threatinging to remove my privliges, I hope this was merely a misunderstanding, and that it will be cleared up soon, thank you.
  1. First of all, please post comments to my Talk page (click on the discussion tab when viewing my page). Thanks. :-)
  2. Second, I was not the one who sent you a "warning message". As it clearly shows above, my message had no warnings at all in it. The second post (the one by Doc) was the one warning you to stop. If you have any questions about why, I suggestion you ask Doc. --nihon 23:59, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding other reversions of your work

Your comment on the article Sex (disambiguation) was not particularly descriptive (for instance, a better inclusion would have said that Sex(t)- is a Greek prefix used in English to refer to the numeral 6. It does not always refer to six things precisely, but to the six-ness of something. But if this was the only problem, the appropriate action would have been not to revert but to improve your addition.

I think the other problem probably found by Doc, who reverted your edit may have been that your addition seemed more appropriate to a dictionary and was not appropriate to an encyclopedia.

In reverting your edit, Doc should have probably used a more explanatory edit summary to give a reason for the reversion, as it was not a reversion of clear vandalism or clear experimentation.

Further, while it is the job of someone who reverted what could be seen as vandalism to report it on that vandal's user-page, I also think that the standard comment used by Doc was inappropriate in this situation.

But I do and you must also understand that the job of a vandal-fighter can be stressful, searching the recent changes for things that may be people just playing with their newfound ability to edit, or maliciously making a mess of Wikipedia (which, IMO, you were clearly not doing). People have to keep up with a large backlog and act speedily, and even still some vandalism doesn't get noticed for hours and days.

I can also think of three things that exacerbated Doc in replying with a standard stencil response:

  • The sensitive content of the article in question, and its frequent vandalism (see the page history)
  • Your anonymity - users are treated as far less suspicious if they have a username, but because of the ease of getting one, new users are also treated as probational and many administrators watch them closely.
  • The vague and uncareful English of your edits (*Sex is a very common prefix in English which inferes that there are six of some thing includes two spelling mistakes and isn't clearly phrased).

-- jnothman talk 02:07, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

  • response

thank you very much, and I apologize for my hasty accusations, and understand that this was a misunderstanding, to which some of the fault is myn. But I want to make it clear I was not finsished with my edit (sex), I had left the edit page to gather some sources, and links, and planned to come back and correct the problems in my post, I came back not even 5 minutes later to discover my edit was wiped clean before it was finished. But this is probally mostly my fault for not finishing it all at once, as well as not having a user name (I guess I'll correct that soon), but as for the deletion of the Kanuni article, I can think of no good reasons.