I bet you forgot about this, :-) The nomination page wasn't trancluded to the candidacy page, until Nyttend happened to notice, over a year later! Maedin\talk 13:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly, and for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:26, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm really surprised no one checked this for six months. User:Marckd has a history of adding fancruft and trivial information to this and other articles. It does nothing to enhance the readability of the article, and he's been asked time and again to stop (obviously, he hasn't).
There is still some stuff remaining in your revertion that needs to be deleted, in my opinion, namely stuff about sign-on times and Field Communications' other stations. I'll delete that manually, if you don't mind. 74.108.205.127 (talk) 18:43, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can you explain why you accepted this edit to an article subject to WP:ARBMAC? It is the subject of a current edit war on that article that you have facilitated. Toddst1 (talk) 11:48, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from interfering with my user page.[edit]
This is your second warning. If you continue to ignore warnings, you will be blocked for vandalism. 173.75.231.176 (talk) 18:49, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No it isn't, it is the first time you have warned him. Just linking him to Wikipedia:DRC would probably get a better result than just threatening to get him blocked for vandalism (he won't be, anyway). Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:55, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I was just restoring a warning from earlier today that was posted to the user in question. Is that not something I should do? (Not a sarcastic question, legitimately asking.) PerryTachett (talk) 19:36, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, for reference Reaper Eternal, Tiderolls posted the original warning that I restored. PerryTachett (talk) 19:38, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It probably should be Prerry Tatchett. Or Tratchett, depending. --Illythr (talk) 00:57, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're right, preserving the "r" is better. See my new user page. PerryTachett (talk) 01:50, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, you can request to change your user name if you wish (this will preserve your edit history). Since policy lists personal preference as a valid reason for renaming, your total edit count is not in the thousands, and both targetaccounts are currently free, this shouldn't be a problem. --illythr (talk) 15:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
{{helpme}}
I patrol recent changes, and I saw Tanjung Pinang lose over 20 KiB, so checked that the content being deleted looked good, reverted, and warned with uw-delete1. However, when I double checked, I found the inserted content was inserted earlier the same day, and seems to be literally taken from http://daycass.blogspot.com/2007/05/bintan-phoenix-of-malay-archipelago.html. Being unsure of how Wikipedia usually resolves potential copyright violations like this one, I decided to just leave a warning, so I used subst:copyvio|url, which left an enormous scary looking warning. This was not what I intended, as the warning looked quite threatening, so I deleted the warning. I have clearly screwed up the response to this pretty badly, and am not sure what to do now.
Questions:
Could a more experienced Wikipedian help out in this particular case? Has been handled by Excirial.
In the future, what is the correct response to this sort of thing?
When you leave messages, please remember to "sign" your name, by putting ~~~~ (four tilde signs) at the end. This will add your name, and the date and time. You can also do this by clicking the 'sign' button, pictured to the right.
If the whole thing is a blatant copyvio, tag it for speedy deletion G11 - easiest way to do that is to use WP:TWINKLE (enabled in Special:preferences under 'gadgets') - so the user gets the appropriate warning/notification.
If there is a portion of the article that appears to be a copyvio, remove those portions (explaining the reason in the edit summary) and warn the user with Template:Uw-copyright. Check for their other contribs.
If it is a more complex case, or you have doubts, post to Wikipedia:Copyright problems (which has instructions).
Feel free to use another helpme if you need further info, and/or speak to helpers live, with this Chzz ► 20:52, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting help
The Commmunity
Policies and Guidelines
Things to do
