User talk:Publius3
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
[edit] {{helpme}}
I have not done much editing and don't know how best to report vandalism, or how to report a possible 'bug' in the software. I'll explain the problem here. This is my first use of my Talk page so I suppose I may not be using it rightly, but I have to start somewhere.
The vandalism is to text I wrote on the Discussion page for the Missouri article. As can be seen from the History for the page, someone vandalized the text between
20:58, February 10, 2007 and 01:43, February 13, 2007 .
Seemingly, the vandalism was committed from someone using IP address 75.6.252.242 .
The remarks in question had been added in December 2006. At some later date, apparently February 13 2007 if the history mechanism is on better footing than the text of the Discussion page itself, someone added the word 'dumb' to what I had written. But they managed to do so without having their name, or other identifying information, injected into the visible text on the Discussion page!
What appears at first glance to be a bug is this: someone has edited Discussion text that they had not themselves originated. For this to have been possible, there is either an implementation bug (if it is not intended to be possible for one person to edit another's remarks in a Discussion page); or, a design bug (if it is intended that the design and implementation make it possible for one person to anonymously, and without even causing an explicit local notation to be provided, showing that they had edited someone else's remarks.)
If Wikipedia intends that it be possible for people to edit other people's discussions in this manner, then there is no reason for anyone ever to believe that what they are reading on a discussion page, accurately represents what was written by the person whose name is associated with it! Hence, there would also be no reason to attempt to require identification of any kind on any Discussion page remarks, would there?!?
signed, a surprised publius3 !
- What Missouri article? Please be more specific. Miranda 07:00, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
To find the Missouri article in question, enter Missouri in the search box, then click on the Go button. You get the article about the state of Missouri. As best I can determine, this is the lone article titled simply "Missouri".
- This isn't a bug; this is actually necessary in case somebody writes personal attacks/libelous material/includes inappropriate images. As for your other belief, people tend to be very watchful of that sort of thing; historically, it's never been a problem. And identification isn't technically required, it's just a convenience; the signing of posts (via four tildes, ~~~~) is not a technical requirement in order for a post to be accepted. Like I said, it hasn't been a problem in the past, and the people who do it are generally obvious about it (and in any case, the next time the person reads what they wrote, they usually see it right away). Veinor (talk to me) 07:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Redirect
When you are redirected to a page, there is a blue lettered word at the top that says what page you were redirected from. Click on that, and you will go to the redirect page without it taking you to a new page. You can then "unwatch" that page. You can also go to your master list of watched pages and remove it from there. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:40, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Curious
Hey Publius3 -
Am curious (just curious, not worried or bothered) why you removed the two non-footnoted references in Great Mississippi Flood of 1927 when doing your other edits. thanks Don'tKnowItAtAll (talk) 19:30, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for response. As for the reference problem, I've had that occasionally. What I found (from other Wikipedians) this it is usually caused by a "/" or a ">" missing from the </ref> at the end of one of the many references. One single missing instance is all it takes to kill the entire reflist. I just fixed one myself a few minutes ago. Don'tKnowItAtAll (talk) 18:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
