Profundity06

Regarding your votes on the recent RfAs. Please do not continue in this way unless you want and administrator (I am not admin) to block you underWP:TROLL. REgards, ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 08:31, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I am NOT fond of the anti-vandalism bias. I feel that my votes accurately express this fact. It is hardly trolling. I am serious. Profundity06 19:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Then you are greatly misguided and not using wikipedia for its appropriate purpose. Please feel free to edit constructively but avoid rocking the boat; your edits so far have not added anything of good use to this encylopedia. If you need any help with using wikipedia or would like to discuss anything you can contact me on my talk page. If you are not here to contribute you will be blocked appropriately by an administrator in time. michael ^talk 08:48, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism is not tolerated on Wikipedia. There is, therefore, a strong "anti-vandalism bias", something that I would hope every Wikipedia editor has. We are not purveyors of false information. If you would like a place where you can vandalise at will, I would recommend Uncyclopedia. —Cuiviénen, Wednesday, 26 April 2006 @ 14:20 UTC

They have administrators who roam around and decide whether or not your edits are funny enough and if you revert them, you get banned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Profundity06 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is a serious encyclopedia - it's not meant to be funny. There might be the odd joke on talk pages and in the wikipedia namespace (that is, pages that start Wikipedia:), but articles shouldn't have jokes in - if you edit something to add a joke, it will likely get reverted regardless of how funny it is since it isn't appropriate for an encyclopedia. We are hear to inform people, not to make them laugh. --Tango 10:59, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I think he was referring to Uncyclopedia. —Cuiviénen, Saturday, 29 April 2006 @ 02:55 UTC

That would make more sense. --Tango 10:36, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Your question about your RFA votes

Indeed, I have commented on your vote at Ezeu's RFA. In fact, later I noticed your vote in another RFA, but decided not comment on it, because it could've offended you and that RFA was quite clear-cut.

It's common on Wikipedia to treat votes from very new users (like you are now) differently. This is because a newbie may not be well acquainted with what's going on, but more importantly, because of the danger of sockpuppet votes. Person closing the discussion (bureaucrat in case of RFA) may discount the votes he deems suspicious.

So it's a good idea to hang on editing articles and reading discussions for a while before starting voting actively. BTW, be aware that some people were annoyed by your reasoning in RFA. You probably need to review what RFA is all about.

And don't forget to sign your posts on talk pages! Conscious 09:15, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

On an uneasy welcome to Wikipedia...

Hi. I saw your note at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship and wanted to express my regret over your initial experiences here being rough. Also, I wanted to extend a formal welcome to Wikipedia: the welcome template. Ready? This is gonna be great...

Welcome!

Hello, Profundity06, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

Wow, what a rush. Seriously, though, if I can do something to help with your experience here, just drop me a line and let me know. Best wishes. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa!-E@ 12:42, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I, Kimchi.sg, hereby offer you a nice cup of tea. Sorry for calling you a troll.

On hindsight, I was wrong in labelling your vote as "troll vote" in that RfA. Please accept my apologies. Kimchi.sg | talk 08:17, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Signing talk pages

Please remember to sign all of your posts on talk pages. Typing four tildes after your comment ( ~~~~ ) will insert a signature showing your username and a date/time stamp, which is very helpful. Thanks. -- MarcoTolo 19:08, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Purification theorem

Hi Profundity - Thanks a bunch for adding the article on purification theorems. It looks great. Feel free to join us at Wikipedia:WikiProject Game theory and/or work on any of the open tasks. I hope to see you around. Again, thanks! --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 17:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

A landslide victory for The JPS (aka RFA thanks)

Hey, Profundity06, thank you so much for your vote and comments in my RfA, which passed with an overwhelming consensus of 95/2/2. I was very surprised and flattered that the community has entrusted me with these lovely new toys. I ripped open the box and started playing with them as soon as I got them, and I've already had the pleasure of deleting random nonsense/attacks/copyvios tonight. If I ever do anything wrong, or can help in some way, please feel free to drop me a line on my talk page, and I will do my best to correct my mistake, or whatever... Now, to that bottle of wine waiting for me... The JPS talk to me 22:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I find your lack of faith... disturbing.

Indulge. :)

Dear Profundity06,

Thanks for voting on my RFA! I appreciate your comments and constructive criticism, for every bit helps me become a better Wikipedian. I've started working on the things you brought up, and I hope that next time, things run better; who knows, maybe one day we'll be basking on the shore of Admintopia together. Thanks and cheers, _-M o P-_ 22:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC)