User talk:Aazn

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for fixing my page! -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 23:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism-X[edit]

EDIT: Made a JavaScript Bookmarklet to make life easier. Just go to their talk page and hit it, hit 1 2 or 3 (Vandalism-X), and type in the article name.

User_talk:210.243.112.139[edit]

Good catch! Just one small observation...new comments should always go at the bottom of the page so they are in order. But good work! Jim Douglas 02:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism?[edit]

I don't see it. Rich Farmbrough, 09:48 14 September 2006 (GMT).

Here you reverted the reversion of the vandal. Whoops! Rich Farmbrough, 09:53 14 September 2006 (GMT). --Must have been an edit conflict (oO)

Again the edit looks OK. Rich Farmbrough, 10:12 14 September 2006 (GMT).

This one looks OK too. Rich Farmbrough, 10:15 14 September 2006 (GMT).

This one is someone removing a proabable copyvio. Rich Farmbrough, 10:22 14 September 2006 (GMT). --Oops! I was doing this while half-awake, so I'll make sure to look at it more closely before reverting.

Your VandalProof Application[edit]

Dear Aazn,

Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that not enough mainspace edits. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof. Computerjoe 's talk 15:07, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the creator, User:AmiDaniel is. I believe it's VB6. Computerjoe 's talk 19:53, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I stated mainspace edits. You need more main/article edits. Computerjoe 's talk 20:00, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't a difference. The term is mainspace, btw, not mainstream. Computerjoe 's talk 20:03, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Comments at the top versus comments at the bottom[edit]

I guess it's a matter of convention. In email, replies usually show up at the top and the mail thread accumulates below. On Wikipedia talk pages, the convention is to add new comments at the bottom, so you get chronological order if you read from top to bottom. Jim Douglas 20:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Already reported[edit]

I've already reported matey boy 8.8.36.69 to WP:AIV so just revert anything you see, but don't bother with the wranings from now on. It'll get done eventually. Cheers muchly Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 21:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rat-Tailed[edit]

It's just more info. if you dont want it you dont want it.

--67.177.153.82 01:00, 15 September 2006 (UTC) there...any better?[reply]

Please remember to sign your name on any page other than an article, so we know who wrote it. You can do this by either hitting the signature button up there, or with four tilde's (~). Aazn 00:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC).[reply]