User talk:Smtchahal/Archives/2013/May

Woah.

That user just vandalised my userpage, but how did you find out? And thanks for undoing it. :D Numbermaniac - T- C 08:25, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Not a problem! But you see, reverting vandalism is what I do most of the time when I'm on Wikipedia. I use a software called Huggle that helps me with this. smtchahal^(talk) 08:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

That is a lot of Huggle edits. I've been using Twinkle, but not Huggle. Yet. :) Thanks again! (actually, I guess I never paid much attention to vandalism, but with a handy Real Time Recent Changes Script, it makes it a lot easier to patrol for vandalism. :D) Numbermaniac - T- C 08:35, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Communist userbox

Not surprising...all westerners have a very strong anti-bias against Communism(Soviet Union/Russia)..so it's natural that they oppose anyone who says they are it.....Such a shame!!! TheStrikeΣagle 01:51, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

They have a very strong anti-bias against communism, fine. But what on earth makes them associate communism with intelligence or honesty? Does it really feel that good to simply oppose some things for no real reasons? Sorry I don't know much about communism, but from the tiniest bit of research I did after that issue heated up, communism is only a view some people might hold that people should own their own means of production in a classless society. Since its protagonism has only been depicted in a mere userbox a Wikipedian uses and not in their contributions (that span over a few years in Pjoef's case), why should it matter, even assuming communism is strictly against the Wikipedia policies (which, I'm more than sure, isn't true)? smtchahal^(talk) 10:46, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

The people of the First World have always hated the people of the Second World........they feel they are the only superior people in the world and the rest morons(I think the other way..:D)....they feel any anti-western or anti-capitalist view as disruptive and unacceptable...It is such a shame but we can't do anything! This wikipedia is mostly run by Americans and Western Europeans..so talk anything high and they will block us! ;)......If I were to edit the caption of wikipedia, I would change it from The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit to The free encyclopedia that any American and Western European can edit..others beware...communists fuck off.. Cheers, TheStrikeΣagle 11:57, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't say I completely agree with you on this, because the only person who's still against communism in (and has been throughout) the RfA discussion is Kiefer.Wolfowitz (who is not a sysop, it may be noted). The person who asked the question about the Communist userbox (Vejvančický) did apologise later, explaining why they asked it but Kiefer.Wolfowitz is only continuing the grossly irrelevant discussion, and he/she seems to be the only one who's doing it. I don't think that should mean Wikipedia itself is against communism or any concepts developed by the so-called "Second World" countries (I see no point in further dividing countries like that; 200 countries are already enough to divide the world). For that, I would have been expecting all of the discussion participants to have an opinion as inferior as that of Kiefer.Wolfowitz. But it would take more than just one Wikipedian to convince me into believing that Wikipedia is biased in that regard. Cheers, smtchahal^(talk) 16:17, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Nicely said! I agree with you though.......disregard my previous statements....however, many times..I do see bias againt asian users.... Strike Σagle 16:35, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Section removed

Hi, you didn't just remove a link... you removed everything I added to the section on Midtown Memphis, including the list of neighborhoods, most of which linked to other Wikipedia articles. Thanks...? :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.65.9.227 (talk) 06:28, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

:)

Numbermaniac - T- C 22:31, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! smtchahal^(talk) 09:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, I guess you're underestimating Huggle. It's not at all anything like Twinkle, which is merely a script that helps you revert vandalism and do other things with ease when you're still using your browser (not saying it's not useful; it really does save a lot of labour). Huggle, on the other hand, is a stand-alone application built purely for reverting vandalism or other kinds of bad-faith edits (see my contributions; you'd get the idea). I don't need to actually type those edit summaries, I just click on the appropriate button. After reverting the edit, Huggle can also notify/warn the user who made the reverted edit(s).

Huggle shows you diffs of edits that are potentially (though not always) vandalism edits, mostly showing edits by new or unregistered users. These are mostly very recent edits, made no more than a few minutes ago. You just click the appropriate revert button to revert it or the next button in case the edit does not constitute obvious vandalism (even though it's not a "perfect" edit) to get to the next diff of an edit that potentially constitutes vandalism on another page. While I was doing this (as I usually do), I noticed an anonymous (IP address) user had edited your userpage with obviously negative content and reverted it. So it was not really a big deal. But thanks for the kitten, anyway! smtchahal^(talk) 15:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Huggle does seem a lot better. Twinkle simply lets you undo edits, and in the form of vandalism, opens up the user's talk page for you to leave a warning. But it definitely appears no match for Huggle. Is there like a recent changes thing within Huggle? Otherwise how does it show you all the possible vandalism? And I guess that was a shocker for me, because I never thought anyone would dare to vandalise it. I was obviously wrong. :( Numbermaniac - T- C 07:57, 7 May 2013 (UTC) (And the kitten was just for fun. :D

If you're interested in reverting vandalism, I'd recommend you to try using STiki (before you try Huggle, which needs rollback right), which is quite much like Huggle, but a lot less efficient, I'd say. I received STiki barnstars because I managed to make over a thousand edits using STiki without receiving a warning about wrongly reverting an edit, and I did it in a day. STiki, though less efficient, is a lot faster than Huggle. Also, STiki does not necessarily show you most recent edits; it shows you edits suspected to constitute vandalism based or alogorithms or something (see Wikipedia:STIKI#Comparison with other tools), which are not usually very recent, while Huggle shows shows you most recent edits alone. So you could say Huggle is one of the primary vandalism-filtering applications, useful for reverting vandalism as it happens. Any vandalism edits that get through are reverted at the secondary level vandalism-filtering application, STiki (that's just my opinion).

Well, to be honest, if I were you, I would've been sort of proud to know that my userpage has ever been vandalised by someone (). But unfortunately for me, my userpage has never been edited by anyone accept myself (not considering the event when an admin had to revert my action of moving my userpage to a different name, when I was stupid enough to think doing so will change my username). Yeah it is surprising that your userpage has been vandalised when you've not been as much involved in anti-vandalism as me, but maybe it's only because your userpage is worth it; mine is already too bad no one would want to vandalise it to make it any worse, if possible... smtchahal^(talk) 14:52, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

As a regular user for more than an year and (one of the two) distributors of STiki awards.....I don't personally think STiki is much less-efficient than Huggle...of course Huggle gives only the most recent edits and the update rate is awesome..however, its hard to enable it.....whereas STiki is quite simple to use....PS:I have a strong pro-STiki bias.. :D Cheers, Strike Σagle 16:44, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

By "efficiency", here, I mean a lot of things: For STiki, there is no further classification of vandalism; it's just vandalism/test edits. For Huggle, it could mean spam, removal of content, page blanking, test edits, inappropriate biographical content and so on. Huggle can report users for their vandalism activities after the final warning. STiki can't (and I'd say it shouldn't; since the edits are not very recent, the users shouldn't be reported as they may be offline). Also there are a lot of things that can be done with ease using Huggle. You can check for new messages on your talk page, you can edit pages, you can mark them for deletion (and I'm yet to discover what else Huggle can do). Hence, considering this definition of "efficiency", Huggle is clearly much more efficient than STiki, but of course that's not how everyone defines efficiency... I don't have bias for any software; I prefer what I find truly better.

PS: Would you deny being my talk page stalker (not that I have a problem with it )? And your edit summary was totally incomprehensible. smtchahal^(talk) 17:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Interesting, I'll look into it. Thanks! Numbermaniac - T- C 08:36, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps I wouldn't deny being your talk page stalker after I posted my first message here. I have the setting on to automatically watch pages I edit, and I can't be bothered unwatching it. :P Numbermaniac - T- C 10:47, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

why

Just wondering why you have requested deletion for Sean W.? --Avoided (talk) 16:28, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Because I thought the article was — sooner or later — going to get deleted as a result of a discussion, which would have been worse. Right now, you can go ahead and re-create the article if you want and it won't get speedily deleted if you add references, write it in a good way, etc. It won't get speedily deleted for the same criteria again because the author will be a different one this time. I'm also willing to give you the source of the page (of the most recent version of the page, which isn't available to non-admins on Wikipedia anymore as it's been deleted but which I saved on my computer) if you want, but I am not going to create the page myself. smtchahal^(talk) 16:37, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

It is not spam

Plesae do not reverse the change for what I just added under Notable People. it is not spam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.7.162.210 (talk) 18:07, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

I reverted your edit because it involved the inclusion of one or more external links directly into the main body of the article. Please see WP:EL. Also, the people you added to the list were not notable (as mentioned here). smtchahal^(talk) 09:57, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

I know what I should do :)

I don't know how you saw the future and realized that an article for Neha Mehta is not going to be made. Why do you think no one has intention of creating a page for Neha Mehta? No one should jump to such conclusions, including you. I hope now you don't have any problems with the link of the actress Neha Mehta in the Jeannie Aur Juju page. And also, I never said that the other Neha Mehta is not an actress, but putting the red link actually strives people to make an article for the particular person. As I said before, it doesn't really hurt or cause any confusion. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShackMack (talk • contribs) 03:48, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Next time, remember to sign your post with ~~~~. Numbermaniac - T- C 04:46, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually, it does cause confusion. The reader is not likely to already know which Neha Mehta is being talked about on the page. Also, I noticed that you added a link to Nehta mehta (without the capital 'M' in 'Mehta'), which may cause the article to get created without the last name beginning with a capital letter. That should not happen, which is why I redirected that page to the Neha Mehta article. smtchahal^(talk) 10:36, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

Hi Smtchahal, I just wanted to let you know that I have granted the reviewer userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, please contact me and I will remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions. Happy editing! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 23:35, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations!! Numbermaniac - T- C 01:43, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! But I think having rollback flag is a bigger responsibility than having reviewer flag (I never read misusing the reviewer right will result in its immediate revocation; not that I'm ever going to misuse it, of course). smtchahal^(talk) 01:59, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

It does look like a bigger responsibility. I wish I had roll backer... Numbermaniac - T- C 02:02, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't think you should have a problem getting rollback if you make enough reasonable edits with STiki (like I did) or manually revert vandalism, providing appropriate edit summaries wherever necessary. Also, you could try stalking the rollback requests page to see what kind of users are granted the rights and what kind are not. I would really appreciate a few more Hugglers; sometimes I feel I'm the only one reverting vandalism on Huggle. I was granted the rollback flag when I appealed a second time, a month after I had been denied. So I guess rollback is a bigger responsibility than the reviewer right. smtchahal^(talk) 02:11, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, there are currently more reviewers (8,018) than rollbackers (6,851). smtchahal^(talk) 02:18, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Wow, thanks. :). I'll have to see whether I have any chance of becoming one. I've been using a real time recent changes in combination with Twinkle... I'll see. Thanks!! Numbermaniac - T- C 02:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

David J Johnson

Just wanted to say "thank you" for restoring the content of my User page. I had been away for 24hrs, so have only just picked the changes up. Best regards & thanks, David David J Johnson (talk) 10:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

User 213.189.53.99

Please do something about this user who is vandalizing my talk page! I am fed up, help if you can. Thank you! By-96.228.2.56

Why I removed the content.

Too much information, makes it confusing. I don't understand why you want to add information who coined the name of this kind of product. I don't think this content should exist there. Go to any other entry, say, bioplastics, telephone, inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy... is there info who invented the name? NO, because it's irrelevant, not necessary information, bollocks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.86.62 (talk) 18:01, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Eminem

Hi, thanks for remind me. I don't praise eminem personaly but he is listed in the list of the best selling artists of all time and i think it is so important that it should be put in his wikipedia biography, it is a good achievement for each artists in the list.

But, it is just my opinion. thanks Politsi (talk) 01:36, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

That's much better. smtchahal^(talk) 02:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to José Manuel Figueroa may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:00, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Executing STiki

Sorry if I am bothering you with questions, this is my last and it's actually on how to load STiki itself, the java application won't load on my computer, what do I have to do from here? The Grand Cenobite (talk) 04:14, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't know; just enter your username and password in the provided fields and click log in. It takes time to load, but it does load (for me). If it doesn't work, try posting your problem here. smtchahal^(talk) 04:19, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Oops… STiki needs either 1,000+ article-space edits or the rollback permission... sorry for wasting your time! smtchahal^(talk) 04:25, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Your reversion to Comfort women

Hello, I think your reversion was inappropriate. If thing are not done "just like that" and you can find a better way of linking the other article, you are welcome to show me, but do not remove the contents I added. Please restore. 106.189.85.247 (talk) 07:43, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

That was not the only issue. That section didn't need the detail. It has already been mentioned that "Some Japanese politicians have argued that the former comfort women's testimony is inconsistent and unreliable, making it invalid.", which already shows that they hold controversial issues. Accepting your edit would have meant giving unneeded preference to a particular politician. smtchahal^(talk) 07:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: Thank for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmapur,_Bihar

Thanks a lot for sharing the information. I also done some research & came to know that I will have to manually create the page & link it with english wikipedia. Can you tell me where are you from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ravikant2012 (talk • contribs) 16:01, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Rollback Again....

Hi there! I just put in a request for rollback, to assist me in reverting vandalism, last time you pointed out the flaw that really stood out, I have been working really hard on Wikipedia lately, am I ready for rollback, or will I require extensive work?. By all means feel free to check how many edits I have done, I am assuming I have over 600 edits in non-article space now (constructive and reliable). So please once you are free take the time to see if I am ready for rollback. Thanks a ton PBASH607 (The One Day Apocalypse) (talk) 22:21, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you!

For your redirection of Pakistan Green. Thanks! Faizan 14:25, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, well, you would've expected me to do it; I !voted to redirect on the deletion discussion. I wondered why everyone still !voted to delete, my !vote was supposed to remind them something. It shouldn't get deleted, because the discussion was an WP:AFD, not an WP:RFD and Pakistan Green was re-created as a redirect, not actually an article. It was not a problem! And oh, I like strawberries! smtchahal^(talk) 14:42, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Faizan 14:45, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 20

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Brahmapur, Bihar, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Place (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:26, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

{{Fixed}} smtchahal^talk 00:44, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Inserted citations in … per your suggestions.

Inserted citations in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Brahmapur as per your suggestions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ravikant2012 (talk • contribs) 11:57, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

{{Resolved}}

Gregor Mendel

What? You messed up. Arctic Kangaroo (✉ • ✎) 15:20, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, I didn't really know what was wrong… this dang slow internet won't let me revert my own edits before someone else does it… I somehow saw that your rollback resulted in addition of "monkeys eat bannannas" or something. Honestly, I didn't mean to do what I did; this was the second time it happened. I'm seeing false diffs or something; maybe I needed to purge the page. smtchahal^(talk) 15:24, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

And even the first time, it happened on the same article… smtchahal^(talk) 15:27, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry, my internet now is also not very fast (slow, actually), although that may change anytime. Sometimes, others beat me to reverting on Huggle, and if I happen to do manual warning, I may warn the wrong person. Cheers. Arctic Kangaroo (✉ • ✎) 15:31, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

What type of Internet do you have dial up, wireless or broadband? Also, how did you customize your name like that? I really like the blue background! The Grand Cenobite (talk) 08:39, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

A broadband connection that turns into a dial up one after I've used 1GB… every month.

Well, to know that, just have a look at my signature while you're editing this page! smtchahal^(talk) 08:54, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

...

Why did you delete your user page?! -- ^(T) Numbermaniac _(C) 01:08, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Because one could see my email address from the page's revision history (I had revealed it) and I didn't want that now. Then I thought it'll be sort of 'cool' not to have a userpage, which is why I didn't re-create it. But I guess it's better to have a userpage rather than not to. I'll re-create it soon. smtchahal^talk 02:17, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks. (Hopefully I get to use Huggle soon, I haven't been able to use the computer for the last two days...) -- ^(T) Numbermaniac _(C) 03:06, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

If you want, the text of the revisions containing your e-mail address can be suppressed from public view (as they are right now) and the other revisions restored to preserve the history. I don't know if it was a major part of the 153 deleted revisions that had this undesirable text? :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 04:58, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh no, visibility of my email address was not the only reason I got my user page deleted (in fact, my email address is not very hard to guess from my username); I had shown a lot of userboxes that expressed my personal opinions (which, I don't think, would qualify for oversight, but I thought hiding it from non-admins would do enough) which I didn't want available to everyone anymore. No, I don't think there is anything useful in my user page's history that I would want back (nothing more useful than some stuff that showed how stupid I used to be when I was very new). However, there is one thing I need help with; though I think it might involve oversight. I want the page's move log hidden because it reveals my real name (even though my real name is quite similar to my username, too; but still is different, anyway). That move log is not the only place that reveals my name; this talk page's history, my user page's history (which is no longer available to non-admins, of course) and my unsuccessful request to change my username (that I declined) also contains that information. I would have requested oversight, but there's just too much to hide, and I was not sure if I could get a WP:CHUS archive suppressed with oversight, so I decided not to. smtchahal^talk 05:10, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I suppressed the move log entry as requested. I read through the user talk page diffs surrounding that period and it mentions discussions, but not the exact name, thus there is no need for RevDeletion; since the userpage won't be restored, they're already hidden from public view. There are 226 revisions on the CHU page that would necessitate suppression (along with 3 summaries) and I feel this is a non-negligible request, especially since you don't seem to mind that much. If you would rather that information be really hidden, I recommend dropping an e-mail to the Oversight committee who will be able to best advise you; they might also be able to completely remove the places where your name was mentioned that are already suppressed. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 05:41, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry I didn't provide links to this talk page's history and you had to manually check it. Here's the link to the revision that reveals my real name: [1]

I don't think I really want oversight; I only think it better not to use my real name. I don't think administrators should (ab)use their tools to look for some Wikipedian's real name who prefers not to reveal it. I'm fine with that revision hidden from view (I removed that message with my next edit, so RevDeleting that one won't affect anything else). Also, I don't think one would want to go through the archives merely to find my real name, so I'm fine with that information there, and I'm barely a minor anyway. smtchahal^talk 05:58, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

On Iglesia Evangelica Unida de Criso

Hi. If I had some procedural errors on creating and editing the page Iglesia Evangelica Unida de Cristo, I am sorry because I am just a newbie here in Wikipedia. Nonetheless, if you are ever planning to delete any article, I believe that you should delete Iglesia Evangelica Unida de Criso because the page was created out of a typographical error. The real name of the denomination is Iglesia Evangelica Unida de Cristo, not Iglesia Evangelica Unida de Criso. YesuJireh (talk • contribs) 08:13, 21 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by YesuJireh (talk • contribs)

Your comments

I know you feel strongly about it, but please tone it down a bit, Did you bother to read Salvidrim's reply to Legoktm above? and your reply to User:HJ Mitchell's next comment. People are entitled to their opinions and hounding them about those opinions it's going to change. Maybe HJ, has an idea about how to write the policy which would be a little more restrictive but still achieve the goal; telling him that his opinion is wrong (not very nicely) isn't much encouragement for him to contribute to the discussion. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

My apologies to everyone for being rather rude to HJ; I do realise I shouldn't have made comments in that tone. I will ensure that starting from now, I will always maintain civility and will try my best to stick to NPOV even when favouring one side over the other, in all discussions on Wikipedia. Thanks. smtchahal^talk 13:03, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

New Page Patroller? and a Question

Hi there! just a week ago you were reverting vandalism on a large scale, and now you are a new page patroller, keep up the good work! I also have a question regarding Huggle, as you may already know, I have been using Twinkle for quite a while, and I heard that Huggle is faster than Twinkle, one major problem though, is that it says I need rollback permissions. Will I need to request rollback for this? Like the admin told me after rejecting my last request is to rack up more reverts on Twinkle, have I done enough? Thanks The Grand Cenobite (talk) 03:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, this was not the first time I was patrolling new pages. Before I was granted rollback, patrolling new pages was probably all I did on Wikipedia. I try to contribute to Wikipedia in every possible way. I revert vandalism using Huggle, sometimes patrol new pages (as I did just now; I used to do it much more frequently earlier), review articles for creation, review pending changes (now that I'm a reviewer), participate in AfD discussions and so on, whenever I feel like doing it.

Yes, Huggle is indeed a whole lot better than Twinkle when it comes to reverting vandalism, and yes; you will need to become a rollbacker to be able to use it. I would have tried explaining how it works, but I'd rather not because I'm sure I'd miss something. All I'd say is, Huggle is a very powerful anti-vandalism tool that can create chaos if not used properly. To get an idea of how Huggle works, you should try using STiki (which doesn't need any additional user rights) to make sure you really want to do it: reverting vandalism can be boring to some users. smtchahal^(talk) 03:50, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, I'd recommend you not to re-apply for rollback just yet. Persistent requests for user rights without delay are often perceived as hat collecting attempts and are likely to be denied; even if the cause is good (which I why I waited for a month before re-applying for rollback a second time, after having racked up over a thousand STiki edits). However, I'm not absolutely sure you will be denied this time too, because I must admit you have made a lot of vandalism reverts using Twinkle. smtchahal^(talk) 04:16, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

You'll need over 1000 article edits to use STiki, and you're exactly halfway there; 500. So you may not be able to use that yet. I would suggest you try using a great Real a time a recent a changes script, which, when going to User:Krinkle/RTRC, will activate the feature. You will need to install the script first; The link is at the bottom of my userpage. I don't see why you didn't get accepted; maybe you haven't been registered long enough...? I have absolutely no idea. -- ^(T) Numbermaniac _(C) 12:09, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

And just a question, how do you create a CSD log, and how does it work? -- ^(T) Numbermaniac _(C) 12:13, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I think PBASH607 should get the rollback right this time, though. His/her reason would appear appealing to any admin and not only that, but he/she does seem to have a better understanding of what rollback is, what it can do, what it can't and exactly why he/she wants it. And he/she does seem to have racked up a decent amount of reverts to prove they can use it wisely, too.

CSD log is a way of keeping track of the pages you mark for speedy deletion (CSD stands for Criteria for Speedy Deletion). Since you're not an admin, you cannot possibly know under what speedy deletion criteria you marked the page for once it gets deleted. That's primarily why CSD log is useful. Pages are automatically added to your one of your userspace pages (which is set by default to User:(Username)/CSD log; mine's at User:Smtchahal/CSD Log with the capital 'L', as I prefer it) as you tag them for speedy deletion; all when you're using Twinkle. That page can be edited manually just any other. To enable CSD log, you need to configure your Twinkle preferences accordingly (type 'csd log' in your browser's find-box when on the Twinkle preferences page, for convenience's sake). In addition to CSD log, there is an option to enable PROD log, too, which adds pages you PROD (PROpose for Deletion; see WP:PROD) to another, different userpage page (at User:(Username)/PROD log, by default). smtchahal^(talk) 13:51, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I would think so too, their Contribs show obvious knowledge of vandalism. I honestly thought that i would have no chance if they weren't accepted. Thanks for the long tip about CSD log. Thanks! (If I had known that earlier...) -- ^(T) Numbermaniac _(C) 02:36, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

I only have 287 edits to the article namespace, don't see why PBASH607 can't get it with 500. -- ^(T) Numbermaniac _(C) 00:58, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Because edit count has never been the primary basis of judgment of users; whether it is additional user rights requests, editor review or RfA/RfB. smtchahal^talk 15:37, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Valjevo

Hi,

I saw that you reverted my edits about Valjevo article. I wasn't quite sure what was your objection, but perhaps is nothing than mere misunderstanding.

First of all, I was born and raised in the city of Valjevo, so its history, as well as history of Serbia, is quite familiar to me. That was the reason why I actually made some minor edits in the text; just wanted to make sure that they mirror historical facts. Now, you may or may not be familiar with history of Balkan of XVIII and XIX century, but I am.

For example, in the article we have statement that Ilija Birčanin and Aleksa Nenadović were some kind of knights. They weren't. 250 years ago, Serbia was a part of Ottoman Empire, which was internally divided into vilayets, pashaluks, sanjkas, nahiyes... and, in today's Serbia at least, each nahiye (level of county, more or less), was divided into several knežinas (each knežina contained several villages). Leaders of those knežinas held the title of obor-knez, and both Birčanin and Nenadović were obor-knezs. Not knights, like in that text, but mere respected elders, whom others followed. Their responsibilities were to keep their knežinas in order, to make sure that no Serb attack their Turkish overlords, to pay their taxes on time, etc... Basically, it was full time police, mayoral and judicial job, all-in-one. Now, since there is no English translation for that title, I just left at as is. This is not something unusual, for example, vojvoda, another Slavic term, is also rarely translated, even though it is equal to the English term of Field Marshal...

I also changed names of Bircanin and Nenadovic in proper Birčanin and Nenadović, as they should be written. Also, it is not true that Persida Karađorđević, nee Nenadović, wife of Aleksandar Karađorđević, held the title of Queen... Serbia was proclaimed as Kingdom back in 1882, while Aleksandar and Persida ruled Serbia between 1842-1858, so they were Prince and Princess, respectively. There might be some other minor changes that I made, but cannot recall at this moment. However, I hope that this clarify a little my interventions... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.174.75.17 (talk) 23:10, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Basically, why I reverted your edits was that the information you added was not verifiable. It also did seem that you were adding information in a non-English language, even though you say you just corrected some names to write them as they should be. I'm not saying that that information was false (I admit I know nothing about the topic myself), but if that information is indeed true, it also needs to be verified by reliable sources if it has to be on an encyclopedia since we want people to know what the sources say, not what individuals know. For example (in this case), a book written by a well-known historian that contains the information you think is true or a news publication (online or otherwise) that proves it may be helpful. If you have those sources and you want to add (or correct) information in the article, just let me know and I will help you with citing those as footnotes (like the little "^[#]"s a lot of articles have). Best, smtchahal^talk 03:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject!

Faizan 08:23, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation. I will try my best to contribute to it wherever and whenever possible. smtchahal^talk 03:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Smtchahal! Faizan 11:21, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I need a help

Hello, I need a help from you. The user TheRedPenOfDoom is trying to delete most information from all of the Indian Shows' Articles. For example, he/she deletes all the cast names from the article saying in his/her opinion, those are not important. Also, he/she deleted most awards received by those shows saying he/she doesn't like those. He/she is trying to vandalize all of the articles and the only excuse he/she gives is that he/she doesn't like it. Articles which TheRedPenOfDoom vandalized are Sapne Suhane Ladakpan Ke and Sasural Simar Ka. The shows deserve awards received by them to be included in the article. Also, the cast should not be deleted. And please tell him/her that using tables for the cast section helps keep things organized. He/she doesn't like that also and always deletes tables. I am hoping you will be able to do something about it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.228.2.56 (talk) 21:42, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

From what I've seen, User:TheRedPenOfDoom is only removing information about those awards as they were given to the soap opera actors by the broadcasting channel itself, rather than a 'third-party'. Moreover, those articles are already grossly unsourced, and adding more information without sources only means potentially giving false information to the readers. If you can find reliable sources to cite those awards to show that they really are important enough to have a place for themselves in the article, please do so, but I do not think that TheRedPenOfDoom deleted those awards merely because they didn't like it, but rather that they weren't notable and moreover were not independent of the channel. smtchahal^talk 03:39, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Acceptance of pending changes in Senate of the Philippines

You accepted a pending review in that article which is factually inaccurate. Next time, please be extra careful in accepting pending revisions. –HTD 06:52, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks. smtchahal^talk 06:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Moving accounts

Hi there! I just wanted to let you know that I moved accounts, i'm ditching this account (PBASH607) because I want a new and fresh start (also because I never liked my old username), my new account is JackFrost2121 if you have any questions post them there (this is also my last message to you from me using this account). Cheers The Grand Cenobite (talk) 01:58, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

But do you know that you can change your username directly here? That way, your contributions, your user page, your talk page, your barnstars and everything gets transferred to your new username. smtchahal^talk 02:04, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

I knew that a while back, but I made up my mind and I kinda wanted a fresh start, heck I just created 5 decent articles with my new username, and i'm not making silly mistakes as I was before so I kinda like a fresh start, I may also use my old account to edit during classes or at public areas, it's not going to be permanently gone, good old 607 will edit occasionaly :) Cheers JackFrost2121(Frostbitten?/ My Work) 02:14, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

FYI

Hi, Smtchahal. I've supported your protection RFC. Just a heads-up in case you want to make a rhetorical point of how even the evil admin whose intransigence caused the whole discussion supports changing the policy. :-) Bishonen | talk 10:26, 27 May 2013 (UTC).

Well, to be honest, what you did was nothing wrong. Your action was completely in accordance with the policy (and was something I would expect from every administrator); it's only that what you did was not something a lot of other administrators would have done (which nevertheless violated the policy), so it's pointless to think you "evil" (and hence to make that rhetorical point, too). But it is true that I was not expecting you to support the proposal (not that I ever considered you evil :). smtchahal^talk 13:45, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Protection policy

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Protection policy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

What a clever bot! Bishonen | talk 10:26, 27 May 2013 (UTC).

Very clever indeed! Although that's not my RfC it invited me to comment on, I already knew about the other one on the same talk page (as one – but apparently not a bot – would have expected). smtchahal^talk 06:28, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Please review

Hello,

I saw your comment on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Michael Perkins I have corrected the link to source birthdate, could you review it please? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by B nikusha (talk • contribs) 23:03, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

 Reviewed and in fact, accepted. smtchahal^talk 06:11, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia talk:Editing restrictions

Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Wikipedia talk:Editing restrictions. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 08:15, 31 May 2013 (UTC)