User talk:Wimt
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Will
I am sorry for any trouble i have caused you i was only trying to attak gilliam for taking away the squirrle tag article. I apologize cause i no you were only doin your job. I hope in the future we can be friends. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Con-61 (talk • contribs).
[edit] Responce to deletion of page
Well, the loser topic which you saw fit to delete, may have proven to be benificial to those hoping to understand the English language and words commonly used in it... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ACV777 (talk • contribs).
[edit] RfA thanks
 |
Thank you for your Support on my recent nomination for adminship, which passed with a final tally of 89/1/1. If there's anything I can help with, then you know where to find me. Cheers. - Michael Billington (talk) 11:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
|
My bad - you shouldn't have gotten the warning. for removing warning tags My apologies -- master_sonTalk - Edits 04:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] My RfA
- Thanks for the support position. However, I've decided to withdraw my acceptance because of real WP:CIVIL concerns. I will try again later when I've proven to myself and others that my anger will no longer interfere with my abilities as a Wikipedia editor. Thanks again, and I'll see you around here shortly. :) JuJube 04:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
For the revert to my userpage just then. J Milburn 22:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Football edit conflict
Sorry for reverting your revert on Football - I was trying to undo an anon's page blanking ("soccer sucks") by rv'ing to their previous edit. But then I edited conflicted with you, who rightly undid their previous three edits (which I didn't catch..). Long story short: the result was I undid your reversion. Not my intention. Sorry. :) 132.205.67.135 22:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Revert.
Thank you. :) Acalamari 23:03, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Barnstar
 |
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| For some vigorous vandalism combating, I award you this well-deserved barnstar. Already beat me to reversion a couple of times today. —Anas talk? 23:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC) |
[edit] Gratitude
Thank you for your revert of my userpage!--Xnuala (talk) 23:46, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] VandalSniper
You've been approved to use VandalSniper. Please let me know if you have any problems getting it working. --Chris (talk) 12:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] On blocking user "216.125.42.135" from editing
Wimt, thanks for notifying "216.125.42.135" of his various attempts at vandalism to my user page and various other Wikipedia entries. I'm an ardent Wikipedia supporter and want to make this an even more awesome place than it already is -- I have been notified by "216.125.42.135" that he intends to continue vandalizing Wikipedia because of a petty personal argument I had with him. Because of this, I would like to request that "216.125.42.135" be blocked from editing. Dylan Knight Rogers 01:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thank you
Thanks for reverting the vandalism from my user page yesterday. --Ann Stouter 18:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks from me as well. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 08:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Revert AGF on Treasure of Delta College by 80.134.197.248
Hi Wimt. Could you please tell me how page blanking can be considered an AGF edit? I am with CVU and in most cases, we consider page blanking as Vandalism. Could you let me know whether you meant to tag it as a Good Faith edit, since I warned the IP as I did not consider it so. Thanks! Thor Malmjursson 22:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- Hey - yeah I totally agree with you that blanking is almost always an editing test or vandalism and so certainly wouldn't merit the assumption of good faith. However, you will note in the case of Treasure of Delta College, it was made by one editor and then tagged for speedy deletion. An anon IP then came along and then blanked the page. In cases such as these, I tend to assume good faith because the anons are often trying to delete the article (as the tag states) but obviously going about it in all the wrong ways. Of course, I may have been wrong in that case as I see you have since given the anon a warning for spamming. Hope that explains my choice of edit summary. Regards. Will (aka Wimt) 22:46, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- It's chill, Will. Thanks - I added the CSD G11 to the article cause it looked like it was advertising some sort of event, which I believe it was. Some IP's can try and be helpful, but I wish they would use the edit summary like everyone (or near everyone) else does! Thanks again. Thor Malmjursson 22:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC) (aka Thor). (talk to me)
-
-
- Agreed - things would be much easier if everyone used the edit summary. But, unless there's a decision taken to enforce using the summary, I guess we'll be guessing the motives of IPs for some time into the future! Will (aka Wimt) 22:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Oh, and thanks for adding that unsigned template, by the way. Saved me some effort :-) Will (aka Wimt) 22:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- NP. HTH. Thor Malmjursson 00:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC) :)
-
-
-
[edit] Integer
That was a quick revision!! I was about to change it, but then I saw you did! Thanks :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RChris173 (talk • contribs).
[edit] Thanks
For reverting vandalism to my user page. I appreciate it. --Guinnog 06:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] RE: Vandalism warnings
NO U! --Breakthetubes 01:05, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Help
Hello, I need help with something. I've been trying to revert vandalism for a while now (a few months), and I've been able to do so fairly easily, but it is hard at times, could you point me to where there are tools to make fighting vandalism easier? Brain40 [talk] [contributions]
- Thanks! Brain40 [talk] [contributions]
[edit] Minor Information
I replied. Sancho 17:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] My userpage.
Thanks for undoing the vandalism to my userpage. -Enviroboy (Talk|Contribs) 00:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
