User talk:Jab843

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Revert Query #2 2 Revert query 3 NASCAR Fan24's Secret Page! 4 Thanks 5 Hi 6 Thanks! 7 November 2007 8 New York 9 to blowjob843 10 Thank you! 11 Vandalism? 12 What's the hurry

[edit] Revert Query #2

Why did you revert the D.gray-man section on Malcom C. Leverier? If you actually read the manga he has a great resemblance to Adolf Hitler; check it out yourself if you don't believe me. Thanks.Expo377 (talk) 05:54, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Current situation. I believe the issue is solved, user has not responded.--Jab843 (talk) 22:09, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Revert query

Why did you revert on Tonsillitis (this edit), when it clearl yis "Pain intensity" rather than "No pain intensity" that is measured and the english should read "An abscess may develop" vs "Add abscess may develop". Please revert and check what you are doing (?using a revert tool or accidentally clicked for the "wrong version")? David Ruben ^Talk 02:07, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, thanks :-) David Ruben ^Talk 02:12, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NASCAR Fan24's Secret Page!

		The Secret Page Detective Award
		This user has found NASCAR Fan24's secret page! Congratulations!

NF24^{(radio me!}_{Editor review)} 00:52, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Hey, thanks for dealing w/ the vandal of my userpage. Benjamin 02:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I am against vandalism. Question, what is your view on bigotry? I personally have 0 Tolerance what about you? Or is there any official wiki policy on that?--Jab843 (talk) 03:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm very much against bigotry. I don't think that there is any specific policy against it, but WP:NPA, Wikipedia:Don't be a dick, and this all tend to say that being nice and non-biggoted is certainly preferred. Thanks again, Benjamin 14:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

Um, sorry. Which IP are we talking about? I've been going through a couple of them just recently. :S (Terra Xin (talk) 03:29, 19 November 2007 (UTC))

Oh ok. The last reversion that I made of that IP address was on the pages of Chimpanzee and Bumblebee (Dinobots was reverted because the IP provided a dead link, but the warning was an accumulation of the other two]]. This was just simply reverting text that had been removed. The recent edits in relation towards Transformers - I didn't feel the need to revert, mainly because I don't know whether they were acts of vandalism or just adding information onto the articles. (Terra Xin (talk) 03:39, 19 November 2007 (UTC))

The removal of texts from Chimpanzee and Bumblebee I thought were vandalism. These can be seen through the history section of each of the pages. I did not post comments on the talk pages of these two topics, as it really wasn't worth the hassle. It may be better to discuss the matter with Mathewignash because he will have more to do with the multiple reversions of this IP address than I have. (btw are you sure we're talking about the same person? It says that the ban was made by someone else?) (Terra Xin (talk) 03:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC))

oh lol nah that's cool. Anyway, the recent edits looked a bit too technical, and I know nothing about transformers except for the movie. There are a few of edits on this topic that mathewgnash has been reverting, I suppose they could be vandalism, I don't know, you should ask him. (Terra Xin (talk) 03:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Thanks!

Wow! My first barnstar, thank you so much! Off to fix vandalism. (And maybe get some sleep!) Icestorm815 (talk) 05:25, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] November 2007

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:SGT Tex. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Jab843 (talk) 22:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

It wasn't vandalism it was perfectly justified. I find it extremely insulting that the edits of a texan could be given precidence over mine. 91.108.221.19 (talk) 22:23, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

And what do you have against Texans? I think everyone will agree that this edit was not helping the encyclopedia, yes? Thanks Jab, for taking his rant off my page. --SGT Tex 22:30, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New York

No problem. The vandalism was severe enough that it warranted a quick block. There are some types of vandalism that I will block quicker than others; he hit one of those hot buttons. —C.Fred (talk) 23:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] to blowjob843

hey... get lost —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.251.219.38 (talk) 23:20, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage! Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 00:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for making a report on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to block users if they have received a recent final warning (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) and they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. Thank you! Jmlk17 18:35, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I would hope that when an admin makes a request, they follow through with the service that they are providing, in the requested fassion. --Jab843 (talk) 01:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism?

I'm confused... Your message says it is the last warning, but I've never heard anything before so it's also the first warning. Also, I checked your vandalism revision here and I don't see what you could possibly be referring to as vandalism. How about a little more explanation? -Mike Payne (T • C) 18:35, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What's the hurry

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary, which wasn't included with your recent edit to James D Watson. Thank you. We're trying to improve this article by seeking a consensus on the talk page. If you disapprove of an edit and want to revert, that's fine, but please summarize your rationale. AlphaEta 18:46, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I hate to point out the irony here, but did my auto-generated message seem like a bad response to your unsummarized reversion? Including James D Watson, you reverted 8 edits in 5 minutes! None of which included an edit summary. I agree 100% that we should work together on the talk page to improve the article. Why didn't you take your own advice? I'd be glad to have your help rewriting the section so it reads well and has a neutral point of view, but there's no way an objective analysis could lead you to the conclusion that an odd collection of point-by-point transpirations was worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedic article. I'm not saying my edits helped. Heck, I may have made things 10 times worse, but someone needed to do something to get it cleaned up. None of the relevant quotes were "condensed." They're all still there. I encourage you to tear the thing apart and start anew of you think it will help, but if you look closely at the older versions, I think you'll agree that something had to be done. Let me know what you think. Kindest regards, AlphaEta 02:20, 28 November 2007 (UTC)