User talk:The Vandal Warrior

This is The Vandal Warrior's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

This user has asked for Wikipedians to give him/her feedback at an editor review. You may comment on his/her edits at Wikipedia:Editor review/The Vandal Warrior.

Block

{{helpme|Why am I blocked?}}

What's the block message?...... Dendodge.Talk^Help 19:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's no record of a block so it must be an autoblock, they usually expire in about 24 hours...... Dendodge.Talk^Help 19:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia, because of concerns that the chosen username may not meet our username policy. This is often not a reflection on the user, and you are encouraged to choose a new account name which does meet our guidelines and are invited to contribute to Wikipedia under an appropriate username. If you feel this block was made in error, you may quickly and easily appeal it - see below. Our username policy provides guidance on selecting your username. In brief, usernames should not be offensive, disruptive, promotional, related to a 'real-world' group or organization, confusing, or misleading. If you have already made edits and wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name you may request a change in username which is quick and easy. To do so, please follow these directions: Add {{unblock-un|your new username here}} on your user talk page. This is possible because even when you are blocked, you can still edit your own talk page. At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request. Please note, you may only request a name that is not already in use. The account is created upon acceptance – do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change since we can far easier allocate your new name to you, if it is not yet used. Usernames that have already been taken are listed here. For more information, please visit Wikipedia:Changing username. Last, the automated software systems that prevent vandalism may have been activated, which can cause new account creation to be blocked also. If you have not acted in a deliberately inappropriate manner, please let us know if this happens, and we will deactivate the block as soon as possible. You may also appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} on your user talk page or emailing the administrator who blocked you.

User:Nakon blocked me.

Sorry, you are blocked, I'm not sure what Dendodge was looking at - the blocking admin should be by soon, if I'm not already edit-conflicting him. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:13, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NB this is 86.29.134.252 (talk). I just reverted a huge amount of ridiculous vandal-warnings, as far as I can tell given to every anonymous user on a page of RC. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 19:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done Unblocked, the reason for blocking is that anyone with "vandal" in their username usually is here for no good. I apologize for the disruption and welcome to Wikipedia]]. Nakon 19:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification. Nakon 19:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme|It still says I'm blocked. The Vandal Warrior (talk) 19:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)}}[reply]

Please follow the instructions in your block message to contest your block. You will not be unblocked if you continue to use {{helpme}}. You were reblocked on a suspicion of sockpuppetry and disruption as noted above. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm maybe this situation would be made clearer if I set up a timetable of events:

Posted stop vandalising on IPs' talk pages on the recent changes page.[1]
Sam Korn told me to stop.[2]
I stopped and appologised on his talk page.[3]
I asked him how he's so fast at posting templates on the talk pages of users who have vandalised.[4]
He told me it was Huggle.[5]
I saw the huggle page and noticed that I had to create an account for it.[6]
I created this account.[7]
I get automaticaly blocked.

I don't know much about sockpupetry, but this seems a little unfair. It's not like I was block evading or anything, because my IP hasn't been blocked... The Vandal Warrior (talk) 19:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True, it's not blocked...... Dendodge.Talk^Help 19:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

I trust the good faith and judgment of Hersfold. I would ask that you take it a bit slow, until you become a bit more used to the place. I would also suggest you be careful to avoid alienating newcomers. If you're not sure if something is vandalism, or you have any doubt, it's probably safer to assume it's not vandalism and just leave a message on the article talk page about any questionable edits. Vassyana (talk) 21:36, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request handled by: Vassyana (talk) 21:36, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you need a little better understanding of what vandalism is before we unblock you and let you use tools such as huggle. Please read through WP:VAND, and if you would, provide a few recent "diffs" of edits you think are vandalism. To do this, on recent changes, right click on the (diff) button and copy the address, then paste it on this page below this message. Your massive number of warnings earlier was disruptive, and we want to make sure you're not going to continue that disruption after we unblock you. Thanks. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:02, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Blatant vandalism made by 71.203.104.249. I'd probably issue a level 2 vandalism warning.

Some patriotic vandalism here made by 142.31.158.5. I'd probably issue a last warning vandalism here. If someone already beat me to it I'd issue a 3 day block.

Typical vandalism made by 96.244.37.225. I'd probably issue a level 1 vandalism warning.

Low-level vandalism/stupidity made by 12.104.244.40. I'd probably issue a level 1 vandalism warning, because it's been a few weeks since the last act of vandalism. I suspect this is a shared IP.

Blanking the page made by 99.227.161.127. I'd probably issue a level 1 vandalism warning.

Blanking the page again made by 24.234.210.61. I'd probably issue a level 1 vandalism warning under a new heading "May 2008". It's been a while since this user vandalised.

I've also made a few points on how to deal with vandalism:

Don't refer to people who vandalise as "vandals".

Don't insult people who vandalise; always assume good faith.

Don't use vandalism templates when it's because of content dispute.

Looks like you've pretty much got it - I wouldn't escalate to a final warning on Ice Hotel, and certainly wouldn't block an IP just for that edit. I'll leave this for another admin to review, but keep in mind that if you are unblocked, you will be expected to keep to policy. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. By the way Doctoroxenbriery issued a last warning on the Ice hotel vandalism seen here. The Vandal Warrior (talk) 20:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should be unblocked now. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 21:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Warnings

Hi. I see you've been doing some vandalism patrolling -- this is great! I do see a couple of times when you have warned a vandal but haven't reverted the vandalism, though, do make sure you do both! Furthermore...

I know. At first I forgot, but I think I'll remember to always do it now! The Vandal Warrior (talk) 09:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, The Vandal Warrior, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 08:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re Talk:London

Hi there,

I have left a comment for you regarding the Flag for the London article on Talk:London. Please reply there.

The Helpful One ^(Review) 12:59, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tarzan II

If you take a look at the edit I made, you will agree NO text was removed, it was just reorganized and cleaned up. Perhaps you should look at your automatic responses... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.108.220 (talk) 13:32, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I try and fix minor issues whenever I see fit, but I also understand there are certain procedures you must follow. Thanks for understanding —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.108.220 (talk) 13:43, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: London FAC

Hi there,

I have worked on the comments from the user that helped with the PR.

The FAC nomination is now located here, just thought that I would let you know!

Have a great day!

The Helpful One ^(Review) 12:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just put it on hold - some problems need to be fixed first. The Helpful One ^(Review) 12:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your username

I'm really concerned about your username and am quite surprosed that another admin unblocked you rather than encouraging you to create a new account with a different name. My concern is that your name is terribly bitey to newbies. Please consider using another name. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on my talk page to keep the conversation in one place. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mistaken warning

You're quite right - I screwed up there. I'm sorry about that; I hope you don't take it personally. I've restored your content to the GTA article. Pseudomonas_(talk) 21:40, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shane Meadows article query

Hi there. I just tried to add a link to the Shane Meadows page of wikipedia, which I felt was relevant and up-to-date - a roundtable interview that was conducted at the recent Tribeca Film Festival about his latest film Somers Town. I see you have deemed it not relevant, which is, of course, entirely your perogative, but I'm not sure why. Is it because it sits better with the coverage of Somers Town itself?

Many thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.136.184.179 (talk) 23:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help desk

Isn't it so frustrating when IPs delete warnings? It feels like their getting away with it, laughing in our faces! Oh well. Cheers! DarkZorro 00:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Little educational reading for you...

WP:DRC. Later! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The general consensus is that the ONLY things that a user may not remove from their talk pages are the block notices while they are currently blocked. User may remove other comments, including warnings. The important principle is that a User Talk page is for communicating with a user. If they have deleted the warning, they have read it. We don't make users wear Scarlet letters. If the user continues to vandalize, they can still be blocked. Just make a note that the user has deleted the final warning at the AIV report (but you don't need to restore it... just note when the received it and include a dif) and thats enough. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:11, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jermaine Dupri discography

everything that seen in writing dicografia of jermaine dupri was made by me without tar connected to wikipedia. For the discography of jermaine dupri is not a great spent most of all for 1 new page of wikipedia created by myself can confirm that going here: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Jermaine_Dupri_Appearances_and_Production_discography —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dj mikv (talk • contribs) 14:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Cornwood

Fixed. It was the district and county that needed wikilinks. It looks like the co-ordinates are wrong at the moment. I can fix them if need-be.

A point of feedback for the future... please no obscene language left on talk pages. :) --Jza84 | Talk 17:39, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the co-ordinates! Good luck with future editing. --Jza84 | Talk 17:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been confirmed by a CheckUser as a sockpuppet of Bsrboy (talk · contribs · logs), and has been blocked indefinitely.
Please refer to Checkuser for evidence.

Account information: block log – contribs – logs – abuse log – CentralAuth

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

The Vandal Warrior (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Why can't I just carry on like this? I've made 500 contributions and I've reverted tonnes of vandalism. I was blocked for two weeks (my IP range) and when the two week block expired I started contributing to Ivybridge and then created this account and started revertng vandalsim - one of the reasons I was blocked in the first place. I honestly thought that this would be okay. I don't see how this is sockpupetting, since I'm only using one account; the other is blocked. I've done bad and I appologise and now I just want to carry with my work to Wikipedia. bsrboy (talk) 23:11, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Well, start with picking a single account to use; stop posting unblocks on both pages. Then we'll figure out if we're willing to unblock you, although I still don't think you understand our policies about this enough to be unblocked. — Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:15, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

(EC with above decline. Leaving my own assessment)... Given the nature of the abuse and problems propagated by your old account, you may be better served to contact the arbitration committee directly. After reviewing your prior edit history under your old account, I am not comfortable unblocking you at this point. Please see WP:ARBCOM for instructions on contacting the arbitration committee via email. — Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:18, 11 May 2008 (UTC)}}[reply]

For what it's worth, should (amongst the administrators) the consensus be to unblock you, I'd be willing to adopt you to get you back into a favourable position within the editting community. --Jza84 | Talk 12:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Image:Swastika without background.svg

A tag has been placed on Image:Swastika without background.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I8 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons under the same name, or all references to the image on Wikipedia have been updated to point to the title used at Commons.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on [[ Talk:Image:Swastika without background.svg|the talk page]] explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Deadly∀ssassin 09:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]