User talk:Xaosflux/Archive2

Fair enough re Neo-ninja

re: Neo-ninja. I rv'ed this article back to the last coherent version, it was vandalism. Please do not blnak the rticles if suggestinog for AfD or CSD. Xaosflux 16:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

(Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SAMAS") I guess I got carried away. You did leave the deletion request, though?

It really doesn't look like a CSD to me, please re-add it if you would like, this article has been around for 10 months though, probally an AfD would be more approriate. Xaosflux 17:01, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

As it is now as of your revert, it can stay. The one before my edits, on the other hand, highjacked the article to make a personal attack on a website.

Great, Thanks for your help! Xaosflux 17:06, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Controvery Section of Orkut

Hello. Thanks for letting me know about all the reversion on that page. I went there just now to take a look, and looks like it isn't happening anymore. I'll try to keep an eye there and see if it happens again, because that section is legitimate and has no reason not to be there.--Kaonashi 17:23, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Crescent College

Thank you for helping with this article, I agree with you that this information is suitable for inclusion. Unfortunately, it seems that much of the material that was blanked was actually a copyvio from [1]. So it can't be included verbatim in the article.

Regards,

Demiurge 13:47, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Glad to help, if the blanking would have had a copyvio summary, or a copyvio template would have been put on the article it wouldn't have been rv'd; Summary lines are very helpful, THANK YOU for using them on your edits! I stub sorted that article to also have {{University-stub}}, hopefully it will help attract more contrinutors. xaosflux ^T/_C 16:47, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Who are you?

And why do you insist on referring to my editing as vandalism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.108.159.41 (talk • contribs)

Because they are? --Nlu 01:15, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are written with a Nuetral Point Of View (NPOV). Changing an article to a tone that does not refect this is considered vandalism. xaosflux ^T/_C 02:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

What's causing this?

Take a look at this edit or this one. As you can see, in addition to reverting the vandalism you are at the same time altering the syntax of these pages in a way that causes it to display incorrectly. This is obviously a problem. What do you think is causing it? Canderson7 ^(talk) 21:33, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, I've fixed the damage. I am assuming that the problem is caused by your "godmode-light". I recommend that you either alter or disable it. Canderson7 ^(talk) 21:53, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing those, I did see a few oddities, but thaught it was a display problem on my browser (was in the middle of some other browser changes), but it was due to a bug in that .js file; I've updated the file, again Thanks! xaosflux ^T/_C 23:05, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Happy to help. Canderson7 ^(talk) 23:37, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

About my rfa

I'm sorry about that- when I said I had around 1000+ edits, I was refering to my contributions as an anon before (and sometimes after) I made my acount, as well as MegamanZero. :) Anywho, sorry for the misconception, and I very much thank you for your advice, as well as your compliment on my pictures. Thanks! Regards, MegamanZero 2:46 6.December 2005 (UTC)

I didn't even think about those! Wasn't accusing you of being misleading, your current count is:

• Category:4
• Image:202
• Talk:96
• Template:2
• User talk:297
• User:50
• Wikipedia talk:11
• Wikipedia:27
• mainspace:460
• Total:1149

I did notice you have lots of minor edits, I did not look them up, are they really minor, or just marked that way?

In any event you do have good edits, even though I oppose your RfA right now, many other may not, so good luck! xaosflux ^T/_C 00:43, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar

xaosflux is hereby awarded the Barnstar of Reversion for his tireless efforts in reverting vandalism on Wikipedia
(from Izehar)

Here's a Barnstar for you, thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage. You deserve it anyway - there have been countless times while I have been on RC Patrol, I have spotted vandalism, and you have beat me to it in reverting it. Izehar 13:01, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! Glad to be of assitance. Xaosflux 16:33, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

BBE

I'm not experimenting, i'm adding a redirect. You catch me just before i can finish it!. --Academia de las Artes y las Ciencias 18:38, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

"Experimentnig" is boilerplat on the {{test-n}} template, didn't realize it was a cut-n-paste move attent. Looks like its good now after User:JoanneB finished the move. At the part I got it a #REDIR destoryed the history leading to my revert. All looks good now! Xaosflux 21:54, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

930 Porsche

Dear sir, Would you please revert to my last saved version and lock the article? The anon user is hammering the article. Thanks 0waldo 22:30, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I am not an admin, but even if I were this doesn't need protection IMHO. You ARE currently in an Wikipedia:Edit war with someone else over the article, and that can certainly be frustrating. You may want to get a third party involved by going to Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution, and if you do want to try to get the article locked please see Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection. If your edit war is still going on, the page version HERE looks like a good compromise, there's no reason you can't have both pictures IMHO. Xaosflux 23:59, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your positive response and help... bravo my friend :) 0waldo 01:10, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

P.S. BTW, I just loved the banners you had on the left side of your page - especially the No BS and No Dumbass :) So cool! 0waldo 01:37, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Microsoft

Thank you for your note. Yes, I do realize that and I fully expect to see it reverted. However, this editor is a newbie and he might not be entirely familiar with Wikipedia procedures. Anyway, just trying to be helpful here. Cheers Jbetak 20:50, 4 December 2005 (UTC) very

Great -- thanks for fixing the template text. I realize that your are quite busy, but for the record - I was not experimenting. I reverted the very same POV text you mistakenly credited to me earlier today. The anon user who has contributed it then returned with a much improved version which seemed to be a copy & past job.

Someone else has reverted it w/o giving proper explanation. I put it back in as a comment (note the XML-style comment marks around it: <-- and -->) so that this user has a chance to understand what happened. He seems to be editing from an AOL IP address, there is not much chance that he'd read a message if you or I or someone else left him one. Anyway, hope this is settled, I appreciate your antivandalism work but I believe I might have been around long enough to know a thing or two ;-) Best Jbetak 21:11, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Ah, the dangers af reverts! I've rv'ed somthing before and ended up bringing back sneaky vanadlism, then had to go remove it again, looks like you were cleaning it up and got caught in the crossfire! Microsoft is a heavily edited and vanadlized article, thanks for contributiing positively! xaosflux ^T/_C 21:16, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Point taken - enjoy your day! Jbetak 21:18, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

saddam hussein

so ur telling me i dont have proof of saddam hussein being a dictator?, lets see here he ruled with an iron fist, made his countrymen kill thousands of kurds, was for years and years the only available person to run for office, that doesnt seem like a president thats a dictator, stop being politically correct, i dont like bush or kerry i hate both, but cmon u know he was a dictator —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.239.14.176 (talk • contribs)

While he very well may have been a dictator in the common sense, his title of president was recognized by most world governments. If you have references that show that this is not so, please add them many people would be interested in them. xaosflux ^T/_C 04:47, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

"Counter Vandalism Unit"

I am learning quickly, Mr Heah.

After you attempted to lable me as a "sock puppet" earlier tonight, you have now somehow reported me as a "vandal", and my pages are apparently being monitored by the "Counter Vandalism Unit".

You play dirty -- especially considering that I am a total newbie.

Once again, heah, you have attempted to sabatoge my efforts to add to the body of knowledge on the subject of Poppers/alkyl nitrites, as you have been doing from my very first contribution two nights ago.

Anyone who reads my contributions to the subject, can readily dessearn that I am not a "sock puppet", that I am not a "vandal", and that the information I am adding is credible. I can fully support anything I add.

I ask that you halt your attacks on me personally, and instead, read what I am adding to the subject, and become more knowledgeable about it yourself. I thought that's what Wikipedia is all about. I'm certain the Internet community at large believes that's what Wikipedia is all about. It will be disturbing if it turns out Wikipedia is controlled by people such as "heah", who attacks those with whom he does not agree. If this turns out to be the case, and as the larger community learns about it, Wikipedia's image will be sullied, and it's perceived integrity diminished.

Allabout2006 07:27, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

I do not know who Mr Heah. is. I DID list your account Allabout2006 as a possible sock puppet of an IP you appeared to contribute under (209.248.254.66) in that it appears that you contributed in discussions regarding edits by your username, under that anon IP. Being listed as a sock puppet is not nesicarily a bad thing, and if it is correct makes your edits less confusing to other editors and readers. As listed on the sockpuppet info for your tag,"This may be more cluelessness then sockpupetry, but this user is using anon ips to discuss articles they started. xaosflux ^T/_C 02:15, 8 December 2005 (UTC)" all constructive edits are welcome by anyone at anytime!

I do do work on the C.V.U. project, but there is NOT a consortium of people out to monitor or attack you personally as an editor.

you left before it happened!

[04:00:26] <Vilerage> computer wl add Xaosflux
[04:00:27] <Computer2> User:Xaosflux is now a member of the whitelist federation...

It didn't recog. your entry since you're not whitelisted, but you are now! enjoy! --VileRage ^{(Reply|C|Spam Me!*)} 09:01, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, glad to help with WP:CVU

Thanks

Yay, my very first Barnstar! Thanks! Bmdavll 05:20, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert

Just wanted to thank you for the vandalism revert on my user page. I appreciate it! -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. ^{Think out loud} 05:36, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

NP! Happy to help! xaosflux ^T/_C 23:47, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

User Categorisation

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians by D&D alignment page as being associated with the Lawful Good alignment. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians by D&D Alignment for instructions. --Cooksey 15:59, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Ack LG, must have had alligment creep! Updated to TN with the cat. xaosflux ^T/_C 17:21, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my discussion page. I find it quite amusing that someone decided to proclaim their love for me there.  :) --Yamla 05:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Anytime! xaosflux ^T/_C 23:51, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reverting the vandalism of my user page today. It got popular for vandals today.Thanks again.--Dakota ^{t e} 20:48, 12 December 2005 (UTC) I'm sure you'd do the same for me, happy editing! xaosflux ^T/_C 23:51, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

RE: Talk:George_W._Bush#RESTORE

The Bush page had to be deleted temporarily as part of the process of deletion defamatory edit histories. That will happen every time that idiot who posts them comes back. It is not a matter of debate but a requirement laid out by Jimbo to protect WP legally. A non-vandalised version of the page will be available shortly. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 01:40, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification, any chance that if a highly visible page has to be deleted for any maintenance purposes that a {{Inusefor|}} template could be slapped in the article space pending corrections, or at the least, a message in the Talk section? I fully understand the need to perform operations that may take articles off-line, but do support any notification system to readers and editors that could be used. xaosflux ^T/_C 04:41, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

comment

Enough with the nonsensical vandalism! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drdeath (talk • contribs)

regarding me reverting your removal of AFD templates. This is not allowed. Please see the links on the template for information. xaosflux ^T/_C 05:14, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Max Hardcore

he's so disgusting. How can you endorse that sort of behaviour? --J7 04:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I have no feelings for the subject of that article one way or the other, however blanking of other editor's contributions, adding POV material, and adding material without sources is not allowed. xaosflux ^T/_C 04:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I think you just don't like me because im Jewish--J7 04:57, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't know you, and you don't even have a userpage, how would I know your religion? xaosflux ^T/_C 04:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Maybe you have a machine in your basement which determines people's religions from their Wikipedia usernames? --J7 05:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I was not aware I deleted any text

Xaosflux,

I was not aware that I had deleted any text (I'm almost certain I didn't). As for my edit on the first paragraph, the small change that has been made completely changes the meaning on my sentence. I'll be more careful with my edits. Can I register as a user? I usually do small edits as an anonymous, but would like to have an account so they can be traced back to me. Thanks! Ignacio ----—Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.154.179.138 (talk • contribs)

Anyone can register, just click on the Login Link to get a prompt to sign up, it is free. See Here for where it shows your removal. xaosflux ^T/_C 05:29, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

whitelist/bot

I never actually use the IRC room, but the reason I wasn't on the whitelist may be that I just changed my account name from User:Christopherparham to User:Christopher Parham. Christopher Parham (talk) 01:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Ah tricky tricky! xaosflux ^Talk/_CVU 01:50, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Comment

I didn't post nonsense. I posted facts. I know a lot more about this stuff than you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.51.97.185 (talk • contribs)

Adding non-existent categories to articles such as Anti Nazis is nonsense in my book e.g.

Category: Red-Skinheads
Category: Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice
Category: RASH
Category: Anti-Racist Action
Category: Antifa

xaosflux ^Talk/_CVU 01:57, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

message from vandal

Shut up. You aren't cool. Wikipedia SUCKS. The Seigenthaler incident has proven its falbility, and now I'm going to expose it by taking advantage of its holes. Now shut up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.133.205.8 (talk • contribs)

N.B. this is in response to reversion of uncited additions to an article by this anon xaosflux ^Talk/_CVU 05:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

DUDE SEIGENTHALER WILL DESTROY WIKIPEDIA IF WE DONT SLANDER HIS NAME, DON'T YOU SEE THAT?