|
All messages posted here will be replied on your own talk page as well as saved upon mine to prevent fragmenting, unless requested otherwise. |
Why did you just take off all my references that I was adding to the page...? I am slowly trying to clean it up and you just deleted it all? Lady Raven. 10:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- My fault. The edit which was last made consisted of a rather vandalistic line of text (Something about using someone belly as a dart board). In general small additions of text that contain this kind of weirdness is a sign that the article is being vandalized. In this case, however, i can see that this is not that case due to reading the article in whole.
- In each and every case: I removed the clearly unjust warning from your talk page, and reverted the article back to its state before i rolled the entire thing back. Apologies for the inconvenience caused, and of course: Good luck with the cleanup :)
- Kind regards, Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 10:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] A clarification
"Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Etiquette of Indian dining 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. Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 10:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)"
Thanks for the welcome. But, am not very new to Wikipedia. As the case is, I have indeed provided an edit summary: "→Right hand: added the "{{fact}}" template and a hidden comment". You can verify this at [1].
Moreover, in the hidden comment I have provided the complete reasoning for my action that is adding the hidden comment. Regarding the {{fact}} template it is pretty evident (at least, so do I feel) that such a statement requires to be backed by a reference. Being an Indian I've never really heard of such an explanation. It's not just the food, but even in many other aspects like social ceremonies, the right hand is considered the "auspicious" hand.
Likewise, I have also discussed some issues in the talk page of the article.
So, I'd be glad if I'd be told more precisely how my actions have been deemed "unconstructive".
Thanks for being watchful even of a relatively neglected article.
Regards.
—KetanPanchaltaLK 11:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hmmm, this is exactly the reason why i decided to stop patrolling for vandalism for the moment. I began to notice that my current state of tiredness is affecting the quality of the patrol i am currently doing. Apart from being just in time to correct myself 3 times in 10 minutes (Which is bad enough!) i also reverted two edits which were ok. Just like the above editor this has been a case of bad judgement; In her case i missed the fact that the article in itsself was about a fairly questionable activity, which means that information added would also qualify as being rather weird.
- In your case, i completely missed the HTML comment tags which prevent the text from appearing in the article. Due to missing them, my assumption was that a user was adding a personal comment in the article, which is of course not exactly constructive. Of course, my apologies for the extra work caused :) Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 11:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- It's alright. As I mentioned in my previous reply, also good to know that a relatively obscure article, too was getting attention from some one. I was going to suggest that may be you should go slow on your patrolling as I'd seen a few more complaints on your talk page. But, refrained thinking that should not be seen as something hostile. So, what do you suggest, that you "unrevert" or that I revert your revert?
-
- Regards, again. By the way, I had once been complimented by one of the administrators for "leaving edit summaries on virtually all pages" ;)
-
- —KetanPanchaltaLK 11:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Well, you get my compliments for that to. There are SO many people forgetting to add edit summaries that it can get annoying to find out what they actually changed and why they did that. Apart from that, don't worry about my mistake ratio; I have been told to take it slow before due to the high amount of mistakes that were on my talk page.
-
-
- However, this is simply a matter of the Law of large numbers. If i have a mistake ratio of 1% (or 1 in 100) and everyone comments on it, it means that if i make 100 reverts 1 person will complain. However, if i make 1000 reverts, i will have 10 complainers, which will seem like a lot. With 4 complainers at my page as of current, and 2300 reverts this month, i don't think it is that bad :). But in this case i had 5 errors within 100 reverts, which is, in all ways, way to much. Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 12:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Yes, you're pretty right about your mistake ratio. Don't worry, every one makes mistakes. So, since you haven't made a mention of that, I'm reverting your undo. Thanks for info on law of large numbers. Happy editing and happy patrolling. Bye. Take care. —KetanPanchaltaLK 13:20, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Quick trigger finger
Is faster than mine. Blink, and you beat me to the revert. Huggle, right? :) DarkAudit (talk) 13:58, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Correct :). Good old (Well, new for me, if we look at it chronologically) is really making vandalism patrol a bliss. Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 13:59, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Mistake?
Hi Gurch, what is this [2] revert all about. I guess this was a little huggly miss? :). Apart from that, if it is an unintentional miss, could there be something wrong with the user whitelist? I am pretty sure i am on that list, and as far as i know, it should ignore/prevent reversions from trusted users. Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 18:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- After making some changes to Huggle, I was testing they worked correctly... and evidently they didn't. I intended to revert myself immediately afterwards but someone who was still trying to revert the original vandalism using "undo" did it for me -- Gurchzilla (talk) 19:11, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- I already expected something along that line, as you are one of the last i expect to vandalize. Well, good luck with solving this problem then, and if you ever need another test target for something, feel free to aim at me :). Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 19:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Well you weren't intentionally a test target. I'd only intended to change the message that came up when trying to revert a whitelisted user... somehow I screwed it up so it didn't check at all -- Gurchzilla (talk) 19:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Here's a barnstar
|
|
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar |
I hereby award you this barnstar for making this website a much better place! -- SchfiftyThree 20:39, 30 May 2008 (UTC) |
- Thank you for the barnstar! I will make sure it gets a cozy place in the galaxy to shine :) Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 08:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] WHAT?!?!? I didn't vandalize!?!??!
I was adding more info for St. George's School (Vancouver). I live in Vancouver and I know what people think...how was that vandalism!?!?
- Unsourced WP:NPOV edit. Articles should be neutral in language, meaning that any claim such as "The Best school", "The coolest kid" and "The best business' should not be on Wikipedia. Also, the claim that it is the second best high school in canada is Unsourced, which, along with the rest of the line, makes it a potentiality promotional edit. 24.82.152.201 (talk) 20:30, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
- Now, how to add the claim anyway? Leave out the first line, and make sure you can add a reference for the second line (IE: Website that supports the claim). Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 20:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Just in case you were wondering what this was, it was definite vandalism (and almost undoubtedly racially motivated). The message that replaced the article's content reads (in Romanian): "Death to the crows," with "crows" being a metaphor for the Romani people. --Kuaichik (talk) 20:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Pirate Captain
I appreciate your trying to stop advertising, as is the rules, but i was in no way trynig to advertise the pirate captain. I am simply a fan of the Pirates! in an Adventure with... series and, after 4 books, felt the Pirate Captain deserved a page. Also, I had only just started it and was certain to reword it anyway. I had only done one edit. And I was soon to sort it out properly. I'm really not anything to do with the books' publication and the sentence I'd written can't have suggested that. If there was also a problem with the content, I can only say that other characters from fiction have a page (i.e Arthur Dent, of 5 books and a tv series, first person that came to mind) and the Pirate Captain is now a willing candidate. I also had back up sources to show his truths. If this was advertising I'm sure that every character/film/dvd page is also advertising. Was there any other reasons for its deletion?
Arthur7 (talk) 21:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
- Well, it is actually hard to say why the page was deleted. jusding from your talk page i tagged it for removal at the 23th of May, meaning it was removed over a week ago. In all due honesty i have no idea what the contents were, or what it was about, as i have tagged numerous other pages in the meantime. If you have a copy, i would be glad to tell you what was wrong with it though Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 19:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
-
- To save you wondering, the following was the full text of the article:
- ((www.piratecaptain.co.uk))
- ((http://www.gideondefoe.com))
- {{Infobox character | name = Pirate Captain'''
- | first appearance = ''[[the Pirates! in an Adventure with Scientists]]''
- | other appearances = ''[[the Pirates! in an Adventure with Whailing]]''''[[the Pirates! in an Adventure with Communists]]''''[[the Pirates! in an Adventure with Napoleon]]|
- | gender = Male
- }}
- It was deleted under WP:CSD#A1, (aka "little content"). If you want to work on the article, I'd suggest creating it at User:Arthur7/Pirate Captain, then moving it to article space when it's ready. — iridescent 19:41, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
-
- Thanks Iridescent, that clears up the problem :) Excirial (Talk,Contribs) 19:48, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
|