User talk:68.101.160.213

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia, a free and open-content encyclopedia. I hope you enjoy contributing. To help get you settled in, I thought you might find the following pages useful:

Don't worry too much about being perfect. Very few of us are! Just in case you are not perfect, click here to see how you can avoid making common mistakes.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Wikipedians try to follow a strict policy of never biting new users. If you are unsure of how to do something, you are welcome to ask a more experienced user such as an administrator. One last bit of advice: please sign any discussion comment with four tildes (~~~~). The software will automatically convert this into your signature which can be altered in the "Preferences" tab at the top of the screen. I hope I have not overwhelmed you with information. If you need any help just let me know. Once again welcome to Wikipedia, and don't forget to tell us about yourself and be BOLD! -- Asher Heimermann 19:34, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Successful AFC

Your nomination at Articles for Creation was a success, and Iteratively Re-weighted Least Squares was created. Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia, and please consider registering an account. Thank you. G1ggy! 08:06, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] February 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to Conjugate gradient method has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 22:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

The recent edit you made to Conjugate gradient method constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thanks.   jj137 (talk) 22:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC))

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Conjugate gradient method. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 22:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to User talk:Jj137. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 22:37, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button Image:Signature_icon.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 08:14, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE:

Hello, You recently brought some concerns up on my talk page. Lets go over this.

  1. Your edits were reverted because they removed information from the article.
  2. Please don't discriminate against my age. I find it rude.
  3. If you won't contribute in the future that's okay, You won't be missed.

Anything else? Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 13:53, 19 February 2008 (UTC)


1) I was taking out the cruft to write about it in the proper place (article Preconditioning). Is it necessary to have poor duplication in multiple places?

2) These are your claims on your front page, not mine. You can't write, you are 13. Draw your own conclusion whether you should be policing the Wikipedia advanced math topics.

3) This attitude is juvenile. You score points but you alienate the users who can actually provide content.

4) I see you have received complaints in the past for the exact same thing.

5) Assume good faith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AGF). Deletion of a duplicate sentence is not vandalism - how are you supposed to know this? If you can't (and let me assure you you can't) then assume good faith. Also see point 2.

Why do you continue?

  1. Thats what we call blanking. Can you please point out the duplicate sentence.
  2. I'm 13. Does mean I am not a good person. No. Does that mean I'm a piece of shit. No.
  3. I say I'm not good at writing. I don't say that I can't.
  4. This is madness eh? Well, this is sparta Wikipedia policy.
  5. Yes I have received complaints, not stuff about false positive blankings.
  6. I know AGF. I know what vandalism is. Removing text from an article is vandalism. There is no need to tell me I can't. I can.
  7. Please remain civil at all times. the comment you left at my talk page here is not entirely civil, I left you a reply would have been more acceptable.

I will now notify the other editors that have given you warnings. They would like to know. Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 02:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree with Compwhizii (hope I spelled that right). For example, this edit, what reason did you have to remove that part of the article? That is considered Vandalism. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 02:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I back up both of them. Compwhizii explained all of that perfectly; removing valid content from articles is vandalism. Right now, it looks like you're on the verge of a block for disruption.   jj137 (talk) 02:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


Hey, I stumbled on this by accident (leaving a message for Krimpet)...but perhaps all four of you should take a deep breath, take the dog out for a walk and then come back. The anon editor may have been trying to make good contributions, no one gave him time and evidently, no one was reading the edit summaries...perhaps he had good points to make, but for some people editing WP is *not* nearly as easy as it is for others. You all sort of dogpiled on him on that article and now on every single post he seems to make...maybe one of you can offer to help him learn how to make a sandbox page and edit the article there? We all need to remember editing our first article...felt pretty cool huh? Wouldn't you get kind of frustrated if someone came along thirty seconds after your first edit and accused you of vandalism? Can you think, perhaps, that that is how the IP editor feels? And now y'all are getting kinda Bitey and really not helping the situation at all. As "experienced" editors, we are supposed to be the voices of reason.

Anon, you have to understand that we spend a lot of time trying to make sure that WP stays vandalaism free, and we don't know everything about every article, we are human and make errors. Its frustrating for all of us, I am not a great editor yet (I mostly do the little behind the scenes things that don't garner a lot of attention) but I would love to help you figure out how to make the changes to the article so we can improve Wikipedia...after all, thats the end we all strive for. Can I first suggest that making an account might help? Vandal fighters tend to see an anon IP and prejudge that the efforts are vandalism because there is a thought that anon editors are all vandals (its not nearly true, but the prejudice is there and difficult to overcome).

Everyone, please let me know what I can do to help Legotech (talk) 03:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)


Finally we have sanity! Thanks Legotech. I've taken the dog for a walk ;) I'll look into getting an account although I'm sure someone higher up the food chain has decided this isn't necessary... (why is that?).

Sometimes stuff just needs to get deleted. I don't care to answer to every possible query raised by any possible person at any possible time especially WHILE I'm editing an article. I'm sure Milk's Favorite Cookie can find the very next edit where I put in my reason upon his request:

(cur) (last) 22:13, 18 February 2008 68.101.160.213 (Talk) (10,250 bytes) (→Preconditioner: This is a (poor) duplicate of the Preconditioner article. Moderator wouldn't let it be deleted. Took out the link to PCG which should be orphaned and killed/merged.) (undo)

Then that got reverted too. PCG has been marked for merging for ages and I was going to do it that afternoon. Instead I got manhandled and the articles remain just as unfinished as they were before. These editors have to trust the users in the first instance - they should come back an hour later and see if they still want to revert. Don't do it in real time!

This is a learning process and so I won't complain any more. But for the record, how can I lodge an official complaint about an editor? I am reluctant to work on Wikipedia until I know there is an accountability process. Seems like you get a Gold Star every time you revert an article!68.101.160.213 (talk) 06:55, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


Welcome back :) You are correct, you do not *have* to have an account in order to edit...however it does make things easier and sometimes makes people less likely to automatically assume you are a vandal...also, with an account you can make yourself a "sandbox" page where you can edit everything until you get it the way you want it and then put it over in the article. Now that doesn't mean that you can completely change any article you want to read however you'd like. When you are trying to merge/reference a large article, its best to do it in the sandbox and then you can ask for comments from other editors to make sure it works WP:RFC so that you don't get reverted as a vandal.
Yes, you can file a complaint against an editor WP:ANI however, since you also lost your temper in this particular case, I'd write it off as a learning experience and start fresh with an account. Even tho everyone claims there is no cabal on Wikipedia, editors do tend to make friends and stick up for each other or get passionate about a topic or category just like any other club or job or group. That said, overall WP is a great place and you will find that most of the editors here are pretty reasonable people and *most* things around here work on a consensus basis rather than one or two editors doing whatever they want...it happens that vandal reversions are one of the places where people work alone and take it quite seriously...some is obvious, kids adding their own names or swear words, but some is sort of subtle and just as you get frustrated when your work is removed as vandalism, vandal "fighters" get frustrated when they see the same exact thing happening again and again...so my suggestion is to work on the merge/rewrite in a sandbox, then ask for comments on the RFC or the articles talk pages.
I'm relatively new as an editor myself, but feel free to drop me a line if you need any more help with anything. wiki@firedog.cc Legotech (talk) 19:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)