User talk:86.144.78.59

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Would some kind, passing stranger have a look at my talk page and give me an unbiased, disinterested view, please?

From my POV, I received a false positive warning from a bot (that's OK, bots don't always get it right tho I can see why it flagged a potential issue). I reported the falso positive and, per the Bot's instruction, blanked *my own* talk page. For some reason this generated another warning about blanking my own page!

Now I seem, again from my POV, to be getting needless hassle from ThePurpleMonkey who is accusing me of 'vandalising' my own talk page! Did I miss something or screw up badly here? As far as I can see, I have done the right thing, and I really don't wanna pick a fight with anyone, but this is getting annoying.

Obviously, I want to remove the false positive and (as far as I can see, unjustified) comments from The PurpleMonkey, but will not do so until someone else confirms that I'm not breaking any rules here.

Cheers!

Chris 86.144.78.59 (talk) 18:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi there - if you actually read ThePurpleMonkey's warning it clearly states that blanking your own talk page that contains vandalism warnings is against the policy. Therefore, blanking out that warning would be classed as against the policy. This is because it is fairly recent, so it has to be kept on your talk page.

--The Helpful One (Review) 19:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

So why does the Bot say "If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page."???! Report 'n' delete is exactly what i did. Either you (and The PurpleMonkey) are wrong or the bot is wrong. That or the world has suddenly stopped making sense!  :-) Chris 86.144.78.59 (talk) 19:10, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
You can remove the bot's warning.. but no other user's warning. --The Helpful One (Review) 19:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

... but his warning was BECAUSE I FOLLOWED the bot's instruction! So, let me get this right. If a bot gives a false positive, I can delete that but A. N. Other will then warn me about the removal I and I am forbidden to remove that second warning. Is that right? Everyone who removes a false positive vandalism warning is obliged to receive and not remove a second, unjustified warning!?! That's nuts, surely! Please leave HelpMe tag open as I really would like another opinion here. 86.144.78.59 (talk) 19:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah I see what you mean now, the user must have made a mistake, without checking that it was a false warning. Consider the warnings removed by me. The Helpful One (Review) 19:33, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:USER#Removal of comments, warnings says: "Policy does not prohibit users from removing comments from their own talk pages, although archiving is preferred. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. Deleted warnings can still be found in the page history." Wikipedia:Don't restore removed comments says: "If a user removes a comment from their own talk page, (legitimate or not), it should remain removed. By removing the comment, the user has verified that they have read it. The comment is still in the page history, so it is not important to keep it visible just to prove that the user was told about it." I am unaware of a policy against blanking your own talk page. I hope this helps. Bovlb (talk) 19:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sincerest Apologies

86.114.78.59:

After reading your rebuttal, I noticed that my actions were clearly wrong, and in bad faith (most of them seem to be these days...). I feel that, since my sabbatical from Wikipedia, I have grown more evil and I am making more poorly judged edits. So, I hope you can accept my apologies.

Usually, when in VandalProof, I immediately jump on high character-count removal edits, and click the button without thinking. Then, I write on the talk page without thinking. Then, after your response, I (again, not thinking) was brusque in my replies (as usual). I may not play a big role in the community, I may jump the gun sometimes, and be an overall idiot. And, I accept that. I hope that we can put this behind us, and both continue to be helpful, constructive Wikipedians.

Sincerely,

ThePurpleMonkey(talk•contribs) 22:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC) (note to self: READ!)

[edit] Talk page blanking

Per your comment at my talk page, you're right, you were justified blanking the talk page warnings, and I apologize for my error. Typically anons removing warnings from their talk pages do so in defiance of vandalism warnings, and in such cases it is valid to revert, particularly for IP talk pages that don't permanently belong to anyone like named account talk pages do. But in your case I see you were removing a false positive report apparently auto triggered by the obscenity (legitimate in your case) in the edit.

Btw, I encourage you to create an account if you haven't done so already. There's no obligation to do so, of course, but it will help you not get mistaken for a vandal in the future. Most vandalism comes from anonymous IP addresses, so edits by non-accounts tend to be met with more suspicion than edits made by accounts. At any rate, whatever you decide, welcome and happy editing : ) --MPerel 03:39, 2 March 2008 (UTC)