User talk:Fogster
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have archived my old talk page, which can be seen at User talk:Fogster/Archive 1. Please place new comments below (on this page), and remember to sign them with ~~~~.
Contents |
[edit] Santa Fe Preparatory School
I am very confused about why my edit was considered vandalism. I have a long history with this school, and I can assure you that the "controversy" section has no basis in fact (not to mention that it makes no sense from a legal standpoint - private actors cannot violate the 5th Amendment of the US Constitution, only state actors can do so). It seems to have been added by someone with a grudge against the school and/or its headmaster, so I deleted it. If this was not the correct approach to take, please let me know how to go about having this inaccurate information removed from the page. Thanks!
71.213.139.224 (talk) 02:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)kgfisher
Thank you so much for your quick and helpful response (and for the advice about how to add comments to the bottom of these talk pages - I'm very new at this, obviously!). I really appreciate it. :)
P.S. Am I out of the wiki-doghouse on the vandalism charge?
Kgfisher (talk) 04:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)kgfisher
That explains it! For some reason when I was trying to figure out why the edit I made was reverted I ended up on that warning page for User talk:207.66.36.66, and I thought it was referring to the change I had made...
I really appreciate your kindness and taking the time to help me learn the ropes. I've used wikipedia for years, but just got up the courage to become more actively involved after working on a wiki as part of a grad school class this semester. I still have a long way to go before I really figure out what I'm doing, but I'm looking forward to being a more active part of this community in the months and years to come. So thanks so much - you rock! :)
Kgfisher (talk) 03:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)kgfisher
[edit] SameMarriage
Hey Fogster, thanks for the heads up! Do you think Marriage#Same-sex marriage would be a more appropriate target? GlassCobra 16:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] IP Reply
Hi! Thank you for your quick and helpful message. I was somewhat paralyzed with fear that my IP address was giving me a bad reputation. I'm relieved that it's probably a Dynamic IP situation so it was some clown that had the same address (since I share a connection with other people). Should I leave the comment on Cluebot's page? It might be helpful to others. Thank you again for your help! 132.238.170.145 (talk) 04:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Sorry
Hi! I was the user who recently vandalized the WBC (Westboro Baptist Church) Page, and I'm sincerely sorry for what I did. I felt a sudden urge of hatred, and therefore did what I should not have done, considering this is supposed to be an encyclopedia. But thanks for the warning, and I'll try my best not to do it again.
Avirji (talk) 05:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Satan/Lord Ambiguity
Hello,
I would argue that my edit to link the word "Lord" within the WBC page to the article Satan does not in fact constitute vandalism; this on grounds that the Biblical definition of "Lord" or "God" includes traits and qualities such as loving one another, forgiveness, acceptance, and other inclusive attributes. As the WBC quite clearly evidences, they are not in favour of inclusion, forgiveness, or loving one another. As they also quite publicly announce, they believe they are doing the work of God (read: Lord) by spreading their (inarguably) hateful message. As such, their true "Lord" must in fact be the antagonist to the "Lord" identified and worshiped by standardized Christianity. This antagonist, as literature will prove, is a being known as Satan.
Swamilive (talk) 00:52, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Postmodernism
Yes I've been watching with amusement you guys are sharper than I would credit, well some of you. You saw the thing on Wales' page, yes? The idea was to make a series of good and much-needed edits, but leave clues as to my identity (for I truly am an evil banned user, permanently evicted from Wikipedia for being rude to a senior member of the Arbcom). Anyway, I have some more material on postmodernism so I can reference it a bit more - but I may be banned very soon of course. 86.133.180.53 (talk) 16:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message. I was a contributor for 4 years (since 2003) to Wikipedia, and built up much of the material (such as it is) in Philosophy and particularly medieval philosophy. But what you are suggesting is against policy. I have been strictly forbidden from editing under another account (the last time I tried, on Medieval philosophy, I was blocked the same day). I would rather be honest about it. If you are an admin, you should block me. Otherwise you should report me immediately! Anyway I have tidied up the Postmodernism article quite a bit. Best 86.133.180.53 (talk) 17:26, 27 April 2008 (UTC) [edit] I shall certainly stop the edit comments - the point was simply to draw attention to the fact I was banned, and also, well, get a sense of humour! With every kind wish 86.133.180.53 (talk) 17:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
- There. Two splendid brand new articles. Villa Carlotta and Villa Cetinale. Not a suspicion of rudeness. Hinnibilis (talk) 20:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] E kala mai, if I was out of line
I see you have done great vandalism fighting, so I went ahead and asked User:Acalamari to grant you rollback privileges. I hope you don't mind. I saw you missed one version in a recent revert that I believe rollback would have caught for you. And I think you can be trusted. If you don't want it, my apologies, and just mention it to Acalamari. Mahalo, Fogster. :-) --Ali'i 17:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I had a look at your recent reverts, and you are indeed a good vandal-fighter. I would be happy to grant you rollback if you understand it's purpose is to revert vandalism, see Wikipedia:Rollback feature. Acalamari 19:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- Rollback granted. :) For the record, you can either request rollback at Wikipedia:Requests for rollback or at any administrator's talk page, but I see nothing wrong with one editor suggesting giving rollback to another editor, providing that the "candidate" would make good use of the tool. I guess that, since you're already familiar with rollback, you won't need to visit Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback for additional information and practice. :) Good luck. Acalamari 19:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Acalamari 19:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- Rollback granted. :) For the record, you can either request rollback at Wikipedia:Requests for rollback or at any administrator's talk page, but I see nothing wrong with one editor suggesting giving rollback to another editor, providing that the "candidate" would make good use of the tool. I guess that, since you're already familiar with rollback, you won't need to visit Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback for additional information and practice. :) Good luck. Acalamari 19:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Sorry
Thanks for the welcome. The business letter I wrote - which was the one on that page - only got a 60%. Pheonex (talk) 00:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] about the taunton galleria
there is a LARGE percentage of sexual offenders in the area and I am trying to make this known, for the safety of the community. I would like to repost with your permission. I promise not to be as graphic this time. Thank you for your time and consideration. 71.233.120.118 (talk) 21:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks for the help
I'm back officially. Thanks for helping. Hinnibilis (talk) 06:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Your New Userbox
So, technically, that was a constructive edit?
Damn....I think thats a first for me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.180.177 (talk) 04:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I do try to keep you guys on your feet...the same ol' Vandalism gets boring after awhile.
- Full disclosure: I (User:Fogster) have removed an image from this comment. Fogster (talk) 04:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks for your Help on the Helicos Entry
Hello Fogster! I just wanted to thank you for your help on my entry. I'll get to work fixing it right now, and appreciate the tips you sent along. Dana75.144.182.61 (talk) 14:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Hunting
It looks like on April 20 it was semi-protected for a month, so the protection just expired this morning, and I guess no one got around yet to removing the tag. jj137 (talk) 00:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)