User talk:Glane23/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Bacon WikiCup 2010 Award

Bacon WikiCup 2010 - Participant Medal
Because of your work and dedication to expanding bacon-related content during the Bacon Challenge 2010, you have been awarded the Bacon WikiCup 2010 Particpant Medal for partipcating in the Bacon WikiCup 2010 with a final score of 73, earning yourself third place. Congratulations, and thank you for your great work! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Alice B Toklas Cookbook cover.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Alice B Toklas Cookbook cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 23:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

  • I added G7 tag as article has had a first edition cover image added to replace this image - OK to delete. Geoff Who, me? 17:55, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fudgee-O Cookies.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fudgee-O Cookies.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 00:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

  • I added G7 tag as article has been deleted - OK to delete image. Geoff Who, me? 17:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Anonymous weighs in on ?

Piss off. All you have to do is look it up it changed it's name to Calpernia once it became a tranny. It is a matter of public recorde, all you have to do is look it up in fort campbell ky where the name change was done. if i knew how to add the reference i would gladly do it, nonetheless you have an OBLIGATION to publish the truth. I now know why aggie mackenzie calls wikipedia stupedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.131.32.10 (talk) 12:35, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Near as I can tell, this bizarre note refers to a revert of what appeared to be vandalism by User:Ged UK. I wonder why commenter decided to grace my talk page with the comment as I don't think I've ever edited the article referred to by the IP user. Ah well, "stupid is as stupid does"! Geoff Who, me? 15:57, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

April 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Nick (DNA) has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. Mlpearc MESSAGE 02:03, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

You're joking, yes? This edit is the one I reverted. Geoff Who, me? 02:08, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm sure it was a mistake; Huggle sometimes reverts the wrong version of the page, whether it be a late reversion or a mis-click. It's happened to me, and many others, before. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:11, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, Super. I thought it must be something really bizarre like that. Cheers! Geoff Who, me? 02:13, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Pit Barbecue

I personally am more familiar with California pit barbecue, but if you've heard of Southern pit barbecue, you can add a paragraph about it. Also, if you can get a commons photo up for pit barbecue, that'd be great Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 06:51, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Allright, mate, I'll start working on it! Geoff Who, me? 16:16, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

My edit to Pinus greggii.

I made the edit to Pinus greggii to fix the sort order on the page Category:Pinus.

Pinus is a genus of plants--pine trees. The category page has many kinds of Pinus trees listed. Unfortunately, they've been done about three or four different ways, which means that the page has them alphabetized in three or four different systems, all interfiled.

I'll explain more fully if need be. But it's not vandalism, at the very least because it's done in good faith, to try and make things better. 71.126.140.136 (talk) 02:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza

I do apologize - I reacted too quickly to what, at first glance, appeared to be an uncommented and unsourcd edit to an established article by an anonymous user. I commend your work, which I later followed as you went through other articles. Hazard of using a particular tool on vandal-watch. Might I suggest you consider opening an account? That migth prevent such inadvertent reverts. Just a thought, mate. Geoff Who, me? 02:06, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, and don't worry--you're far from the first. My going through making the same seemingly silly mechanical change through a few dozen articles must raise flags. I had a couple on this project already. And I've had it before. I'm kind of used to it. 140.147.236.194 (talk) 12:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza (from a different 'puter!)

Flocculation

What is wrong with the edit??

70.29.208.247 (talk) 01:19, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


It's a standard hatnote template {{redirect}} . Why do you think it's wrong??

70.29.208.247 (talk) 01:23, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Do you mean this edit to Flocculation? It lacked an edit description so I couldn't tell at a glance what was being attempted, when looking at the edit view. Did you want to restore it and clean up the formatting? Geoff Who, me? 01:27, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
What's wrong with the formatting? It looks fine to me.
I think it's a rather obvious thing to need restoring.
Do you revert every edit without a description or something?
Doesn't your tool show a diff on the edit? And why did you issue a warning/revert, if you didn't know what was changed?
70.29.208.247 (talk) 01:30, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
  • (1)Take a look now: I've restored it and matched capitalizations. (2) No, I look at edits without edit summaries to assess what has been added/subtracted and revert what appears to be unconstructive. (3)Yes, Huggle shows the diff and I let Huggle issue its default, simple note warning in this case. How do you think the latest edit looks, now? (Server lag was pretty high just now, so my responses didn't show up right away.) I offer my apologies for any misunderstanding my actions caused. Please forge ahead with your editing. Might I suggest opening an account? It's painless, free and hides your ISP and location. Just a thought... Geoff Who, me? 01:43, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, lag seems to be high.
It looks OK, though I've initiated a WP:RM at Talk:Flocculent Spiral Galaxy for MOS:CAPS issues on the title, and consistency with other galaxy article titles, suggesting that it be moved to Flocculent spiral galaxy.
70.29.208.247 (talk) 01:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment by 90.219.209.60

I didn't edit this page :S ??

  • Referring to my note of 2 November 2009 on User_talk:90.219.209.60 referencing an edit to Theo Paphitis of that date, you might not be aware that ISPs often dynamically reassign IP addresses as their subscribers log on and off. It is quite likely that someone else made the edit last November and then you saw the message when you visited Wikipedia today. You can avoid the extraneous messaging by creating a Wikipedia account here. Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 12:30, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Wrong talk page mistake

Wow dude, a warning for editing my own talk page? Also I'm sorry, I was using google program and it changed my ip to that one, so I posted a question mark to test what the hell had happened before I realized. Sorry. Could you remove the warning from my talk page, as it was an accident, wasn't vandalism, and won't happen again. 82.44.55.254 (talk) 16:41, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

  • Referring to this edit: all I saw was a different IP removing the "disable Google transcoder" note on another IP talk page. Might I suggest creating an account so as to avoid these kinds of misunderstandings? Geoff Who, me? 16:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Yes, as I said that was a mistake caused by google translate. Viewing pages through google changed my ip address and I did not realize, so that is why I edited that page accidentally. You can see this effect for yourself here. So could you please remove the vandalism warning from my talk page (User talk:82.44.55.254) as it was a mistake, and won't happen again? 82.44.55.254 (talk) 16:56, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! :) 82.44.55.254 (talk) 16:58, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

For reverting the vandalism on my talk page! Twice!4 times! N419BH 01:16, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

No problem, mate! Glad to do it. Geoff Who, me? 01:19, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fiji water poster.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fiji water poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:34, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

  • Note: removed orphan tag as photo is still used in the Fiji water article. Oh bot, where is thy sting? Geoff Who, me? 17:09, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Wow

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Wow, you are too quick.. keep it up! Tommy2010 01:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
  • I could say the same about you, my friend! Ditto! Geoff Who, me? 01:09, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Great team. :) Tommy2010 03:02, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Developing yet another countervandalism collaboration tool

Hi. I see that you are actively reverting vandalism. Would you be interested to give it a test run to a a Web 2.0 countervandalism collaboration tool that I develop? It's here: http://wpcvn.com/

--Dc987 (talk) 01:01, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

  • Could be. What's involved? I looked at the site. Geoff Who, me? 18:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
    • Er, The site is supposed to be intuitive. Can you try using it, patrol a few recent changes and give me feedback?
    • Maybe ask a few more users to patrol a few changes alongside you? (Collaboration/avoiding redundant patrols is one of the major features. You can see other users patrolling and you can see pages being reverted.) --Dc987 (talk) 02:20, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism

Yes, what I did was wrong. This user is getting other users to revert my edits to circumvent the three-edit rule. It won't happen again. Confession0791 (talk) 22:38, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

trikerioti

please do not delete, and refer to designer's personal website (which you also deleted) IMDB is not a valid medium for theatre designers, and not all movies wish to be on it. I could put references from every single theatre to juxtapose each theatrical production, but this is 40 plus links, which i thought might be silly work -wise as well as for the article. This person has published interviews and articles written about and is already in many other websites, her personal remaining the most valid.

I am a theatre student part of a group that is doing this and I shall be doing this for more theatre practitioners, so please help me, don't delete.

Regards,

Martha —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marta11 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

  • Referring to revert of this edit by a deleted user - I was concerned by the edit as it (1) had no edit summary explaining what was occurring and (b) by the addition of a MySpace link. I see you've reverted my revert, so I will leave it to you as you know better than I and it appears I need do nothing further to address the issue. I can't tell you how much difference an edit summary makes when I'm watching for random, unexplained additions to articles. Geoff Who, me? 23:54, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kraft dinner package.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kraft dinner package.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Image replaced in the article with a free one from Commons. Added a db-author tag to the non-free image so it can be deleted soonest. Thanks, DASH. Geoff Who, me? 16:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Friendly advice

Just to let you know it's not uncommon for people who see clear vandalism to go ahead and skip to the third warning template (since the first two are mostly for when you're unsure of whether it's a newb mistake or vandalism). Kk. Ink Falls 02:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I do tend to err on the "lighter touch" side even for obvious vandalism and let Huggle send the default warning. It really could be their kid brother, no? I sometimes go direct to AIV to report an apparent vandalism-only new account. Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 17:43, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Reversion of my writings

Hello,

I joined Wikipedia only yesterday.Despite I don't know who youu are I'd like to write to you that I'm astounded by what is happening here.Yesterday I joined and yesterday I was censored. All I wanted to do is to clean up other people's act because they won't. BThat was essential before I would make any real contributions of my own. One thing that I'm not a big fan of is German revisionists using Wikipedia as a tool for their lust for Polish lands and brainwashing the (usually) ignorant western public that western Poland is basically eastern Germany and that Poland ought to ask the Germans for forgiveness.That is not rue and will never happen.Poland's western borders are both historically and nationally (ethnically) justifiable because those lands were Polish in both of these ways already at Poland's very beginnings. There were no Germans no any other nation between the Odra,Nysa łużycka and Wisła rivers apart from the Polish nation and the Polish nation has lived there for all the centuries afterwards.Though of course when the Germans seized western Poland they took it on themseves to completely eradicate all of the Polish nation. Maybe you have some authority over here and ca straightan the situation up. The very act of writing about Gdańsk,this Polish city of ours,and using the German name is scandalous and unheard of.I came here because of one sole reason and that is to put a stop to German (barely hidden) direct claims to western Poland No one has the right to change names of Poland's territory,neither past nor present but their souvereign-the Polish nation.

Bye


Ps.only the Germans have the nerve to impose German names over past and/or presentPolish territory.I repeat:it's outrageous and I wipe my eyes of unbelief. Many here are feeding the monster that is German revisionism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PolskiNarodowiec1985 (talk • contribs) 02:56, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

PolskiNarodowiec1985, thank you for your message. I must echo the reply by User:Marek69, on that user's talk page who also reverted a number of your revisions. As Marek69 noted, "[t]he recent edits you have been making to articles such as Szczecin, Gdańsk and History of Gdańsk etc., have, in my opinion, contravened Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. This is why I reverted them left you a message to inform you that I had. Neutral point of view (NPOV) is a fundamental Wikimedia principle and a cornerstone of Wikipedia. All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing fairly, proportionately, and as far as possible without bias, all significant views that have been published by reliable sources. This is non-negotiable and expected of all articles and all editors. For more information on this subject please read the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view article." Also, as to Gdansk, the issue was the subject of debate some time ago, ultimately resolved by a vote of Wikipedia users. I recommend that you peruse the archived discussions and result of the voting here:

.

On a side note, and for what it is worth, I have no opinion on the naming controversies, as I am neither of Polish nor German heritage, at least as far back in my ancestry as records have been traced. Geoff Who, me? 21:04, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi,

I think you just copied and pasted others' messages to me and have not read what I wrote to you. Please write why you thought what I'd written had been false or against any rules,ok? What EXACTLY had been FALSE and/or AGAINST ANY RULES because I'd only changed names to that of its past and present possesor (Poland).

Ps.You needn't call me a Polish nationalist because I am one such.But I'm no cheavinist which you would certainly mean if you called me a Polish nationalist as Westerners always do because they don't know the difference.

Thank you in advance, ~~PolskiNarodowiec1985~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by PolskiNarodowiec1985 (talk • contribs) 15:38, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Star Wars: The Force Unleashed II on the PC

The reliable source is here. And on Wookieepedia they tell that the PC version will be developed by Aspyr. 84.86.199.99 (talk) 14:47, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Geoff.

How you doing old buddy old chum old pal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.84.123 (talk) 20:37, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Krill oil.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Krill oil.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:31, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

  • File was removed from the article without explanation. It is now again being used in Krill Oil and is not orphaned. Thanks, bot. Geoff Who, me? 10:42, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
  • The rest of the story: an edit war threatened to start over different krill oil photos in the article, so rather than participate, I removed mine and requested deletion of the fair use photo I had uploaded two years ago. <sigh> Geoff Who, me? 16:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Why warning?

Dear Glane,

i have edited falafel page and wanted to edit hummus too for putting world records about this two dishes and you gave me Warning.

Any way i will leave your wiki, i have been happy putting info

Regards jim —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.91.212.66 (talk) 23:36, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

IP User 204.112.139.98 chimes in

uh hi lolz let me guess i eathier spent 32 mil hours disscusing hacking or my spellin mistakes oh by the way daniel tosh from tosh.o asks for his wikipeadia page he delibereyly asked his fans to change his wikipeadia page for comedy resions on his show so you banned it beacause everyone messed with it and made it fake well he asked them to do it so you can give him back his wikipeadia page back you have my word that to my knowlege nobody plans to mess it up further —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.112.139.98 (talk) 00:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:OLD CROW & 鍋.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:OLD CROW & 鍋.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:14, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks, Bot. Another editor added a better photo of the subject. I have added a G7 tag to the photo I uploaded. Geoff Who, me? 18:45, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Watermelon steak

Hi, and thanks for adding File:Watermelon steak.jpg to Watermelon steak! Though, is it really "watermelon steak" as described in that article (grilled watermelon) or just normal cut pieces of watermelon? I think it might be the latter; the photographer may have just labeled it "watermelon steak" due to the story that went along with it. -kotra (talk) 02:46, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

  • Yes, it was labeled "Watermelon steak" but it doesn't look grilled to me, either. I found it on Flickr and thought it looked pretty close, but I agree it does not look like it's been near a grill yet. Feel free to grill up a piece or two and take some better photos! Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 15:59, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
    Thanks! I've adjusted the image's caption to reflect this understanding, and put a new photo request on the article's talk page. I wish I knew how to make watermelon steak, otherwise I would take a picture myself... maybe this is an opportunity for me to learn! -kotra (talk) 17:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
I'll try it myself if I can find a suitable watermelon. Geoff Who, me? 17:36, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Found a watermelon, popped some slices on the barbie and fired off a suitable photo for the article. Tara! Geoff Who, me? 13:50, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks!! Now the ultimate question... how was it? -kotra (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
  • It was interesting, as the heat boiled off some of the water and carmelized some of the sugars at the surfaces. So the flavour was just a bit more concentrated. On the whole, though, I think I'd rather have a nice, chilled slice on a hot day. Geoff Who, me? 19:14, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
interesting! thanks for the description (and the nice picture). -kotra (talk)

Restaurant Notability

*Note: I am sending this to all participants of the Kebab House deletion discussion

Hello,

I recently opened up a policy change proposal regarding the notability requirements for restaurants here and I would like your input, be it in support or opposition. Thank you - Theornamentalist (talk) 00:38, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Comment by IP User 93.96.162.222

i dont know what this is, i swear. i love wikipedia. what did i do wrong ?

just a guy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.96.162.222 (talk) 00:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi. Thank you very much for reverting vandalizm on my user page. I appreciate it! PST 06:43, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Cîroc vodka.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Cîroc vodka.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 19:58, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I've posted a response on the discussion page. Geoff Who, me? 22:00, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Quick Work

Boy - that was quick work Geoff. I did note I had an apostrophe out of place - will have to dig up a reference for that newly added information. Thanks. Matt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.25.0.193 (talk) 12:35, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

... for adding that picture to the Tipsy cake page. When I put the article together, I never dreamed there was a hedgehog tipsy cake picture out there. Improves the article 100%. --Seduisant (talk) 14:42, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

  • You are welcome! When I looked for a suitable photo, I never imagined that a hedgehog-shaped cake would turn up, either! Always a pleasure to add photos to food articles, especially when they are illustrative and whimsical at the same time. Cheers! Geoff Who, me? 17:37, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Take5 candy bar.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Take5 candy bar.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:43, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks, bot. Another editor has created and uploaded a much better image, so I have speedy-tagged the one I posted (G7). Geoff Who, me? 12:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

It was helpful

It may not have been in the correct area but it was helpful to the article! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruggert1 (talk • contribs) 00:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Well, I was concerned with removal of content in this edit of yours, which was followed by this later edit to the same article in which you inserted text which seemed out of context. But don't take it personally. If you're trying in good faith to improve the articles, you'll just get better with practice. And please remember to include an edit summary when you do make edits. Good luck! Geoff Who, me? 21:50, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I'll remember to use a edit comment next time sorry! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruggert1 (talk • contribs) 00:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem. As an aside, sign your posts by putting '~~~~' (without the ' marks) at the end and add new posts after old ones, so the posts are easy to follow in context. Happy editing! Geoff Who, me? 18:18, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Wait...What? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruggert1 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

  • I meant sign your posts by putting four tildes at the end of your comment (those ~ characters on the top of the key to the left of the "1" key on a standard keyboard) which is translated by the Wikipedia software into your name and the time of your post. Ruggert1, it's easier to follow posts if you add new ones at the bottom of the section you are commenting about, like this comment I've just added after I moved your last comment (now immediately above this one) from the top of the section (and restored the section heading you must have inadvertently erased). That way, the posts make more sense, as they are in chronological order. Just keep trying and don't give up. Geoff Who, me? 21:10, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Ill try to remember. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruggert1 (talk • contribs) 22:52, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

  • Great. Feel free to ask any questions about editing Wikipedia. I'll do my best to help and/or to point you in the right directions for assistance if I can't answer.Geoff Who, me? 23:10, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Question

My edit was from credible sources, why was it taken off. It was useful information for fellow class mates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.247.249 (talk) 04:28, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Abba-Zaba.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Abba-Zaba.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:48, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks, bot. Another editor added a better photo so I added a G7 tag to the photo I had uploaded. Geoff Who, me? 22:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Spree (candy).JPG

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Spree (candy).JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 04:49, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

  • A new editor had replaced the image in the article with a (virtually) identical photo, but that new photo did not have proper fair use tagging, so it is highly likely to be deleted (see the notes at the user's talk page). Restored link to original photo and removed orphan tag from the file. Thank you, Skier. Geoff Who, me? 12:09, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Spree (candy).JPG

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Spree (candy).JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 07:51, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

  • Thank you, Sfan. DASHbot has already removed the tag from the file as it is now used in the article again. Another editor replaced the photo with one lacking proper Fair Use rationale and a proper description. I reverted as the other editor's uploads are in danger of deletion. I've left a message on the user's talk page offering to help with adding templates for Fair Use ratonal and descriptions. Geoff Who, me? 19:13, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Catfight (game)

Not a huge deal, but you should check out the edit you just reverted from me on the Catfight page. It says it's the sexiest game according to some random article, but it should be the most sexist. Also, it puts quotes around something that's not a quote, and it uses weird terminology (Number one sexist game) Not exactly sure why you reverted my edit, but whatever. Take a look. Tracer Bullet (talk) 01:11, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

  • You are correct, sir! The referenced article does indeed cite the game as the "number one sexist". I have reverted my change to yours and apologize profusely. Geoff Who, me? 01:17, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject Bacon !

Oh won't you please consider joining WP:WikiProject Bacon? :)

Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 08:37, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Fiji water poster.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Fiji water poster.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 03:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks, Skier. Another editor found a better photo of the Fiji water bottles and substituted it for mine in the article. I've added a G7 tag to the photo I uploaded so it can be speedy deleted. Cheerio! Geoff Who, me? 17:35, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Peanut Chews.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Peanut Chews.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:38, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

  • Thanks, bot. Another editor created better photos for the article to replace this one, so I have speedy tagged it. Geoff Who, me? 11:43, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

About jixi cold noodles

Hi, I think there are many kinds of Chinese noodles and they are not same, they all have theri own characters, so I think it is necessary to have this page, while , I am not a native speaker so I didn't write much about jixi cold noodles, I hope others can help making contributions to it. It is really delicious and we Jixi people really love it, so we hope this page can exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorayangsong (talk • contribs) 17:48, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

  • Personally, I agree with you, Dorayangsong. I am a fan of Chinese noodles of all kinds, though I have not yet had the pleasure of sampling Jixi cold noodles. I hope to try them some day. For Wikipedia, the standard is to have the articles based on independently verifiable third party sources, not on our own research. I tried to find English-language references for the noodles, hoping to provide support for the article. Alas, there were none to be found. That's why I thought, in order to preserve your article and the photos you uploaded, the best choice might be to merge with the Chinese noodles article. Have you perhaps thought of providing an article to the Chinese Wikipedia (中文维基百科)? Geoff Who, me? 18:14, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Lollipop

Ruggert1 has given you a lollipop! This horrible pun and delicious candy promotes WikiLove and tells the world how low you will stoop for the sake of humor. Spread WikiLove by giving someone else a lollipop, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the unrelenting joy of lollipops by adding {{subst:Lollipop}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Welcome to the Bacon Challenge 2011

Hi, Glane23, and welcome to the Bacon Challenge 2011! The goal of this event is to expand as much bacon-related content as possible, so get started whenever you can! A side event to the Bacon Challenge is the Bacon WikiCup 2011, an event where participants in the Bacon Challenge have a chance to score points for creating and expanding bacon-related content, all while trying to score as high as they can. Be sure to submit all your bacon-related contributions to the submissions page in order to score points. At the end of the Cup, the winner will get a nice trophy along with all other participants receiving a medal for their efforts (virtual, of course; don't go waiting by your mailbox for it). For any questions or comments regarding the Challenge, please head on over here, and for any questions or comments relating to the Cup, go here. Thanks and good luck. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 00:28, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

By the way, is there any particular country or state that you wish to represent in the Bacon WikiCup? Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 01:25, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
Jersey Jersey! Geoff Who, me? 06:43, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Mina

Did you read my edit summary before reverting? I think you did not - I explain very clearly. Please excuse English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.141.60 (talk) 02:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Like I said to you on my talk page please cite references. Go ahead and redo that edit only if you cite a reference saying that it's unholy if you cite a verifiable reference. WAYNEOLAJUWON 02:09, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Looks like Diannaa resolved the issue by removing the word 'holy' from the article. Geoff Who, me? 19:01, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Chips Deluxe Original.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Chips Deluxe Original.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 04:41, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again, Skier. Another editor uploaded an image to the article that is better than mine, so I tagged mine for a speedy delete (G7). Geoff Who, me? 15:12, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

License tagging for File:I Remember When I Was Young.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:I Remember When I Was Young.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 17:05, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

You know, bot, you're correct. I didn't notice that the original image never had an appropriate tag when I replaced it with a reduced image so it would comply with Fair Use guidelines. I've added the tag now. Thanks, Geoff Who, me? 18:56, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Oops

Hi Glane23, I mistakenly undid your vandalism revert to the Thomas Fiss article, I think I've set it right now. Poor Thomas Fiss (whoever he is) the article before the vandalism wasn't much better, which is why I think (other than my own stupidity) that I made the mistake. Sorry about that. Keep up the good work! TehGrauniad (talk) 02:13, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem. I make my own share of errors quite often, thank you very much, so I don't worry! Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 23:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Be careful

I just had to rollback one of your "vandalism" reverts in Reggie Jackson as that was a good faith edit and not vandalism, be careful next time. Secret account 02:32, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

My apologies! It was hard to tell, without edit summaries, what was going on. Thanks for catching my error, Secret. Geoff Who, me? 14:05, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cinnamon Toast Crunch.JPG

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cinnamon Toast Crunch.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 04:20, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Skier. In this case, a couple of unconstructive edits broke the link to the photo. I've restored the article, which again links to the photo, and I've also removed the orphan tag from the photo. Geoff Who, me? 18:24, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm not Geoff, nor user Gland 23!

I found a "new message" when I visited Wikipedia a few minutes ago. The message was about some edit one "Geoff" or "Glane23" was supposed to have carried out on an article on Thermodynamics. This is a subject I know precious little about, and is not one in which I have been interested. I know precious little physics. So I guess the message was a mistake or glitch. Possibly some "dynamic IP address" once assigned to this person "Geoff" or "Glane23", happened to be assigned by some internet system to me this morning! I want to see how I can get myself a fixed IP address to obviate such mistaken identity in the future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.38.207 (talk) 06:25, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello. There is a message at the bottom of the talk page for that IP user, User talk:122.169.38.207, about dynamic assignments of IP addresses and avoiding irrelevant messages about editing pages by creating an account. Creating an account is a simple and free way to avoid this issue. What happened was that prior user of the IP address subsequently assigned to you had made an uncontructive edit which I reverted. The notice to the IP talk page was directed at that prior user who made the edit to the Thermodynamics article. Don't take it personally as it was not meant for nor was it directed to you. Geoff Who, me? 22:35, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

My name is Todd

My name is Todd and I didn't edit anything. I only come onto wikipedia to read articles, not to edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.160.145 (talk) 07:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Todd. Someone using the same IP address, 69.171.160.145, you used to post your note, had repeatedly vandalized an article Talk page shortly after 19:00 UTC on December 10. For example, one of the posts can be found here. When you access Wikipedia via a dynamic IP address as an anonymous user, you may find yourself assigned to an address which had been used by someone else before you. That may be what happened. To avoid notices that don't apply to you, consider creating an account that only you use. It's free and fairly painless. Perhaps you'll also become an editor, as well as a reader! You're wecome to join us as an editor! Cheers, mate and Happy Holidays! Geoff Who, me? 19:18, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Celtic Sea Salt.JPG

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Celtic Sea Salt.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 15:19, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, Courcelles. The article to which this image was linked has been deleted and so I have added a G7 tag to the image. Geoff Who, me? 17:17, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

are u crazy?

only one supposed to get error is yourself. there was nothin wrong crazy! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.101.214.171 (talk) 03:23, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Referring, I presume, to this edit to Abdullah_II_of_Jordan. I stand by my revert. Geoff Who, me? 17:32, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Rudolph

Please look before you leap; see here. TIA -- Kendrick7talk 01:14, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

You mean this edit to Rudolph, which I reverted, I presume. Not being aquainted with the history of the medieval monk in question, it looked like a typical IP vandal post when I encountered it. Please accept my apology. Thankfully, WP seems to be self-correcting in this case and all is now well. Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 15:00, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

reason

Since we can't establish that he was a real figure we can't treat him like a real person) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.142.251.250 (talk) 23:32, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Referring to this edit to Apollonius of Tyana. What concerned me was the removal of references, the infobox and categories from this article which had been present since prior to 2006. I suggest discussions of such changes on the article's talk page with a view to seeking consensus before altering the article so drastically. The article as presently constituted does make it clear that the history of this particular Apollonius is not known with certainty, due to his antiquity and the paucity of definitive sources. Nevertheless, there is enough in the historical record for the article to stand as it is, whether or not he can be presently proved to have been a "real person." But do feel free to open a discussion about changes to the article along the lines you propose on the Talk page, as I've suggested. Geoff Who, me? 00:40, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Alkaline phosphatase

"If you feel that I have reverted an edit or issued a warning in error, please click here and let me know. I do make mistakes." We all know that. Please refrain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.41.197.108 (talk) 00:58, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Referring to this edit. It was a removal of content from the article without an edit summary by an IP user, so in an abundance of caution, I reverted it. Help me out in future: include an edit summary when making edits. Thanks for the heads up, mate. Geoff Who, me? 14:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
I use an IP to protect my privacy. I suspect many people do just that. I swore a thousand times I will stop editing because of people like you, ready to suspect any IP. The edit summary was a word-by-word repetition of what I corrected and you restored. Typing it again, when you should have read it, is not helping any of us. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.41.197.108 (talk) 15:18, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Oddly enough, an IP address is less secure, from a privacy standpoint, than a WP account, as anyone can trace IP addresses down to local area locations, if not actual street addresses, using readily available tools, while only those with Checkuser (and above) privileges on WP can trace the IP's used by registered users. That makes identifying information about registered users hidden from all but a very few, trusted administrators. Please don't stop editing on my account. Alas, the level of malicious vandalism, including removal of useful content, perpetrated by IP users tends to obscure useful contributions by those interested only in positive contributions. Looking at the history of edits to the article in question, you can see your initial edit had no summary, which was what threw me off. Even a very brief note, such as "removing bad grammar," or some such, would have sufficed. In all events, please accept my sincere apologies. Geoff Who, me? 16:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

IP edits to Squanto

i didnt do it!70.77.197.158 (talk) 18:02, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Referring to this edit (and others immediately previous) to Squanto. You may not have, as another user may have been assigned the IP address 8 hours before your edit, which was when the unconstructive edits to the article were made. You shouldn't blank the user page, however. To avoid those unrelated notices, may I suggest creating an account? Geoff Who, me? 19:39, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

IP edits to Manhattan Beach

Hello, just looking for a bit of assistance. I don't know much about how to edit here, but can copy some formatting, though may make a mess of it! I see you intervened recently with the article about Manhattan Beach, CA, where someone via IP address edited it by adding some rather questionable content. Looks like they did it again today, possibly their third time attempting to do this with an apparent agenda in mind -- seems like some of their addition carries a grudge somehow. Maybe if this is their third revision someone can finally block that IP address from editing? And further down in the article under "local government," there are also additional iffy statements, particularly about local parking enforcement and "snitches," etc., which basically seem improper. I don't want to try to simply revert that one as I'm concerned about legitimate edits done afterward -- so perhaps you could take a look and adjust as necessary? And maybe sic an administrator on that IP address? Thank you! (PS, am on AOL so my IP may not be fixed, so I may not see any message you leave on its talk page next time logged in! If you wish to reply, perhaps you could post here?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.130.207.52 (talk) 07:03, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello and welcome! You mean this revision from January 11, which you successfully reverted. I don't see any new edits since your revert, so all appears to be well. Good show! You might want to consider setting up an account, which you can do here. Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 01:37, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello again -- I have an account "somewhere" and just need to figure out the login, though I don't often need to edit. Just saw my "hometown" being trashed a bit. I went in and got the other section removed just now, a tirade about parking meters and meter maids etc, so I suppose that was successful -- but whoever keeps vandalizing the article seems to keep coming back. Most recently under the same IP address several times, but similar edits appeared in December under other IPs. Don't quite know how to help protect it or at least clog up the offender, so was hoping someone (like you) with more experience could toss a note to the appropriate clogger! Thanks. 71.130.207.52 (talk) 04:51, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
One thing you can do with an account is to "watch" articles. I'll keep an eye on that one for you. If you can't find your logon info, you can request your password to be sent to you via email (assuming you confirmed your email address when you created the account). All else failing, you could always start up a new account. Geoff Who, me? 01:35, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Though I see that since I did that fix, the same IP has come in and added it again three times -- two of which have been reverted (once by you). Right now it sits with that same "vandalism." I grew up in Manhattan Beach and never heard of any special designation of "East Manhattan" there as this describes. It's not that large a town! It sounds like someone's wild fantasy or something. It's a quiet town with little controversy. Can someone at least get that IP address finally banned? Thanks again! 71.130.207.52 (talk) 01:35, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

STOP

HARASSING ME. I AM NOT VANDALIZING ANYTHING.85.98.171.97 (talk) 02:39, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I beg to differ. For example, this edit. Geoff Who, me? 02:41, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism?

I propose to rv your misguided reversion of my work. Please go to User talk:72.244.204.13 for my rationale and reply there if you disagree with my simple argument for doing so. 72.244.204.13 (talk) 02:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Responded at user's page: "It looks like you've already done so. I have no horse in this race, so I don't have a strong opinion as to where the redirect should point. I was mainly concerned with the unexplained redirects done without edit summaries. Though this is "an encyclopedia that anyone can edit," the sad fact is that far too many edits by IP users are unconstructive at best and destructive at worst. It does help to see an edit summary to help distinguish reasoned edits from the other kind. It couldn't hurt to create an account for your future edits, as that might help avoid misundertandings in future, but that is your choice. Happy editing and don't take anything personally around here. G'day, mate." Geoff Who, me? 18:31, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism on my talk page

If a user or IP address vandalizes my talk page, will you please revert it? WayneSlam 00:38, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Certainly, if I happen to see it before someone else. Geoff Who, me? 01:19, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! WayneSlam 23:42, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Pages blanked by author

Hi. Though unexplained page blanking is usually vandalism and needs to be reverted, yu need to look first at the page history, because quite often the author has blanked his own page, as with Bojana N. Otrin just now. In those cases the best thing is to tag it {{db-author}}. It can be confusing for an author who realises his page is inappropriate and blanks it, if his page is at once restored and he is accused of vandalism for the blanking and told it was unconstructive. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:36, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, John. (Moving too fast, once again.) Geoff Who, me? 23:59, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Added template for SuggestBot

Hi,

Thanks for being one of SuggestBot's users! I hope you have found the bot's suggestions useful.

We are in the process of switching from our previous list-based signup process to using templates and userboxes, and I have therefore added the appropriate template to your user talk page. You should receive the first set of suggestions within a day, and since we'll be automating SuggestBot you will from then on continue to receive them regularly at the desired frequency.

We now also have a userbox that you can use to let others know you're using SuggestBot, and if you don't want to clutter your user talk page the bot can post to a sub-page in your userspace. More information about the userbox and usage of the template is available on User:SuggestBot/Getting Recommendations Regularly.

If there are any questions, please don't hesitate to get in touch with me on my user talk page. Thanks again, Nettrom (talk) 17:55, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Regarding A Page - Fantasy Cricket Matches

Hi, I created a page Fantasy cricket matches. I came to that page after a week and found that it was heavily edited. On checking the History, I found that you have done that. I just wanted to know where did I go wrong. What things were inappropriate? And how can I correct them.

I found Fantasy Cricket Matches very difficult to understand, initially. But now I have gained good control over them, I thought of sharing my experience with others. Since I do not own any website or dont have a blog or anything like that, my friends told me that Wikipedia is the best place for me.

Hoping for a quick reply.

Regards, Jaspreet big_j@ymail.com

Greatjaspreet (talk) 10:12, 11 February 2011 (UTC)GreatJaspreet

Hi Greatjaspreeet. I reverted what looked like an unexplained removal of content by an anonymous user (59.164.41.228) who had given no explanation for why the content you had posted had been removed. Another anonymous user (59.164.41.20) later removed the content I had restored. Then, you put it back. You did nothing at all inappropriate. I was just trying to protect the content you had added from being removed without explanation. Just watchin' your back, mate. Welcome and happy editing! Geoff Who, me? 21:44, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Sort code - outdated comments

I reverted the edit on the talk page because (typically), it was relating to a much, much earlier version of the page, the comment is no longer relevant (as the issue has been resolved/improved), and the comment was unsigned. Would this still merit retention?? (81.155.118.249 (talk) 00:59, 15 February 2011 (UTC))

I was primarily concerned with unexplained removal of content as there was no edit summary. On another level, it's probably better to add a comment to the talk page to the effect that the comment is not relevant, so as to preserve a history. But mainly, adding an edit summary helps those of us who watch for unexplained changes to pages. Happy editing! Geoff Who, me? 01:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Comment from IP user

i am truly sorry sir or madame wont happen again old chap —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.237.144.216 (talk) 01:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Not sure which edit you're referring to. The last edit made using IP address 96.237.144.216 was this edit to List_of_Maya_gods_and_supernatural_beings on December 1, 2010. I didn't revert that edit. Geoff Who, me? 01:36, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

RfA

1) Good luck. 2) Happy to support 3) Broken link in Q2 of your responses! Pedro :  Chat  22:26, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, kind sir. Fixed the broken link. Geoff Who, me? 22:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Ice resurfacer

i have seen one do that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.112.79 (talk) 23:49, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Er, I think you're referring to this edit to Political freedom made by someone using IP address 68.173.112.79 on January 26, 2011. That's the one I reverted. Referring to Ice resurfacer, I see that someone using the same IP made this edit which was reverted by Materialscientist on February 15, 2011 at 16:46 UTC. It appears that the revert was appropriate, looking at the edit in question. Geoff Who, me? 02:02, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

RFA (2)

Hi Glane23, with reference to my Q4 there, umm, like, do you have anything to offer? :) You seem like a really dedicated editor here, I'd like to have a further basis to make a decision. Are you saying that your only interest is indeed Huggle and images? If so, that's all cool, so long as people know. If there's more, now would be a good time to give examples of where you have engaged elsewhere. Good luck no matter what! :) Franamax (talk) 04:27, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I really don't know what to say. What I tend to do, other than using Huggle and finding/creating images, is to fix what seems to need fixing as I use/browse the encyclopedia. That may range from adding a period, correcting spelling, finding and adding references/citations, editing/rewriting to clarify and improve readability and so forth. I understand these activities to be characterized as gnome-like. That makes it hard for me to pick out examples from my contributions. For example, does it help if I point to the refs I added to 103rd Infantry Division (United States) ar the bit of cleanup I did to Battle of Château-Thierry (1918)? In carrying out these activities over the years, I've found that I may be able to further contribute by using the additional tools provided to admins to extend the areas in which I am able to contribute, in the areas of AFD, vandal control and so forth. While I take adminship very seriously, I am also aware that adminship is not the be-all and end-all of life around here. In the main, as I mentioned in my RFA, I am responding, by the application, to the articles in Signpost about the decline in numbers of admins. I don't have an agenda, an axe to grind or a POV to push - I just want to help build the encyclopedia as it matures. Does this help? Geoff Who, me? 16:03, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

RfA (3)

Hi Geoff! I've added my support, but I just wanted to pop by and ask a quick question about your opinions on deletion. I've been through a whole bunch of your AfD comments, and I've found that you sometimes show a reluctance to delete articles soon after their creation. Can I ask how this would affect your decisions when closing deletion discussions, particularly where this concern had not been raised in the discussion itself?  -- Lear's Fool 01:10, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the vote of support! In closing a deletion discussion, I would base my action on the consensus, and not introduce something that had not been raised in the discussion. It seems to me that it is better for a closing admin to act as a neutral and not interject her or his opinion. By the same token, I would not feel comfortable closing an AFD in which I participated, preferring to leave the closing to an uninvolved admin. Leaving out how I would act as a hypothetical closing admin, you can see that I tend to lean toward inclusion where I feel a newer article has potential. This is because I want to encourage new article creation, especially by newer editors. However, I'm also most definitely NOT of the opinion that absolutely everything must be included in this encyclopedia. Geoff Who, me? 18:01, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I did not edit anything.

Hi. I did not edit the page you are talking about.

Hello, 70.77.197.158. Someone using the same IP address edited Squanto a number of times in January, 2011, the last of which was this edit on January 20, which was reverted by Funandtrvl. I had reverted changes to that article earlier in the month made from the same IP address. Perhaps it is this pattern of edits you are writing about. Since ISPs commonly reassign (reuse) IP addresses to different users, it is quite possible someone other than yourself made the edits which are reflected in the messages about editing on the user page for 70.77.197.158. If you didn't make the edits, just ignore the messages. A good way to avoid those irrelevant messages is to create an account. It's easy and it's free. One more suggestion: sign your messages using four tildes in a row (~~~~) at the end. That is translated by the system into a signature with date and time. Like this: Geoff Who, me? 15:17, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Bacon Challenge 2011 coming to a close

Dear ever-so-valiant Bacon Challenge 2011 participant:

Almost a year ago, the Bacon Challenge 2011 kicked off for the third year in a row with the annual mission of expanding and bettering Wikipedia's coverage of bacon. We are almost at the end of this year's Bacon Challenge, which ends on March 1st. I am pleased to say that, during this time period, Bacon Challenge participants have done a great job. Ten new pages have been created. Two articles have been granted the status of being good articles. Over one hundred reliable sources have been placed into articles, and over 7,500 words have been added. Six articles have been featured on Wikipedia's main page under the "Did you know..." section. These are all excellent results.

The Bacon WikiCup has also been exciting to watch. Contributors have been racking up more and more points as the deadline approaches. As I post this message, Devon Worm That Turned is in the lead, with Belgium Cirt in second, and United Kingdom Acather96 in third. Belgium Cirt currently has created the most new pages, while Devon Worm That Turned has done the most work in expanding articles and achieving DYKs. United Kingdom Acather96 has done the most work with image uploads. Remember, while the Bacon Challenge is ending in just a few days, it's not too late to make any last-minute contributions to get a few more Bacon WikiCup points. Everyone who contributes at least something will earn a virtual commemorative medal, so if you haven't contributed anything bacon-related to Wikipedia, now's your chance. Contributions can be submitted up until the end of March 7th, but only for contributions that were done before the beginning of March. The extra week is provided for participants to report any last-minute contributions, and to allow for any contributions that require a timely process (such as a good article or DYK nomination) to go through. At the end of the event, scores for the Bacon WikiCup will be completed and re-checked, and prizes will be distributed. Thanks and good luck! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:11, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Your RFA

I just closed your RfA as unsuccessful. Consensus was not reached. I imagine if you address the concerns of the opposition (specifically that you develop more familiarity with policies, participate more in places such as places such as UAA, RPP, AfD, and/or AIV, and participate in more content creation and collaboration) you will fair better next time.

You are a valued member of this community, and I hope you continue to work hard on the Wikipedia project. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me on my talk page or via email. Sincerely, Kingturtle = (talk) 06:18, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Ah, you were pretty close. You should be heartened by the amount of support you received, try to heed the opposes that aren't simply ridiculous, and try again in a few months. Let's be honest: several of the opposes didn't give any legitimate reason, and several were strictly regarding your word choice of "cool off" blocks. Minor factors could have easily brought you into the 'pass' range, so I see no reason you couldn't pass another RfA. Keep up the good work. Swarm X 09:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
I agree - I think the inadvertent use of a forbidden phrase was a large part of the problem. There were some valid concerns in the opposes, but if you work on those I also think another run in 3-6 months time would go much better, and I'm pretty confident I'll be happy to support again. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:50, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry you had a bit of a rough time. I actually started writing my rationale as a weak support, then a neutral, but I eventually landed in the oppose section. I don't think that now is the right time, but I certainly think the right time will come. As I said at the RfA, don't believe for one moment that vandal fighting isn't an essential task, but not all the experience you need for adminship can be gained through the recent changes. Don't feel down about it—failing an RfA doesn't mean you're not an asset to Wikipedia, and I hope you'll take on board some of the genuine feedback you were offered and not dwell on those opposers who were talking out of their arse. Feel free to stop by my talk page or drop me an email if you need any help or you just want to talk. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:38, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I appreciate the kind words (and all the best to Boing! who has thrown his hat into the ring!) Geoff Who, me? 16:30, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

RfA (4)

I'm sorry about your RfA. It's a cruel process that can seem like a judgment of your work, but it's more a reflection of the absolutely nutso standards that the commentators demand. Please don't fall into the trap of changing your contributions to game the RfA system as most of them are actively doing. Just keep up the good work. You don't personally have any need to be admin to enjoy what you're doing. Just keep loading up those admin work queues with whatever you need done. —UncleDouggie (talk) 06:28, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks, UncleD, I appreciate your taking the time to post a note. That's good advice which I intend to follow. I've been a sysop/admin in other places at other times and I thought of the post here as no more than it was in those other places: just keeping the light bulbs screwed in and the floors, walls and windows relatively clean. I agree it's best to just do what I do around here without looking over my own shoulder to see what some future process might demand. Cheers! Geoff Who, me? 16:38, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
You keep beating me at vandalism, darn you. I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 02:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you most kindly, I dream of horses. I prefer to think of it as working together! Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 02:13, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Remove Info.

Dear ...

This is Mustafa A. Katie my user name was (mustafa1702) which is blocked on 15 February 2011, I add many information in this web site : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_microprocessors And also I add new pages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_System_Development_Kit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_SDK

What is the problem if I like to delete a page or remove a paragraph from wikipedia pages?

Thanks & Best Regards

Mustafa A. Katie www.intel-vintage.com admin@intel-vintage.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Intel-vintage (talk • contribs) 02:39, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

  • Hello, Mustafa. It appears that your original account (Mustafa1702) has been unblocked, so feel free to use it. My concern with your deleting pages and removing content from Wikipedia articles was that you did not leave edit summaries to explain what you were doing. It appeared that content was being removed for no reason. Others had the same concern at the time and we all posted notices at your talk page. As the unblocking administrator noted on your talk page, "In the future, please use edit summaries to describe your actions and intent - especially when removing material. If you start receiving notices of any kind on your talk page, please respond to them here, on the talk page of the editor who placed the notice, or on the talk page associated with the relevant article." Posting a brief explanation in the edit summary for a page when you are removing content will help those of us who watch for unusual removal of content. If you are updating, perhaps a brief note such as: "Removed outdated paragraph - replacing with updated information," or something to that effect, will go a long way. It is a sad fact that far too many of those who choose to edit Wikipedia confine their efforts to destructive and not constructive actions. You shouldn't be confused with those "vandals" when all you wish to do is to contribute positively. Happy editing and feel free to ask any question about editing here. I'll be glad to help however I am able. Geoff Who, me? 22:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

But its true

my teacher told me that the bird booby was named after a womens breast because of their shape and size and name. From, Parkour1324567890 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parkour1234567890 (talk • contribs) 01:01, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

  • Referring to this edit. Well, Parkour, may I suggest you take a look at WP:RS for an explanation of the kind of reliable sources which may be used as reference citations for facts in the articles here on Wikipedia. And you might want to take a look at the section on the bird's name in the article. Geoff Who, me? 01:08, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

ban away

User talk:24.125.63.226 vandalized Old Dominion University again. So, ban away.

  • Kat, it looks like one of the other watchers reverted those later edits to the article. And an admin has blocked the IP account. Geoff Who, me? 02:25, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Please consider striking this[1] and why

Read for yourself the contributions 216.118.143.198 and 142.68.87.199 made to the article Ball gown:

  • "Trivia: In fairy tales, particularly Disney fairy tales, princesses are often seen wearing ball gowns".[2] Please! This is no article on fairy tales or Disney, it's an article on fashion. There's no other trivia within the article!
  • They removed the entire History section from this same article.[3]
  • They removed the article from the categories fashion and history of fashion![4]
  • Edits changing one word back and forth from "elegant" to "luxurious"[5] to "beautiful"[6] while doing nothing or little else in the same edit. Doing the same with various fabrics (silk, pearls, sequins, etc etc).
  • Changing "full dress" and "court dress" back and forth.[7]
  • My edit summary indicated that I had made 3 edits in a series of 12. You didn't give me time to complete it.

If you don't realise their edits were not constructive, at least do you realise mine were not unconstructive? It would be nice if you stuck that level one notice on my personal talk page, but it's up to you. PrincessWortheverything (talk) 01:46, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

  • Done. Please accept my sincere apology. I couldn't see what you were doing through Huggle's somewhat focused lense. Geoff Who, me? 02:22, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Peace!

PrincessWortheverything (talk) has given you a dove! Doves promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day happier. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a dove, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past (this fits perfectly) or a good friend. Cheers!

Spread the peace of doves by adding {{subst:Peace dove}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

PrincessWortheverything (talk) 18:02, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

  • Why, thank you, Princess! A very nice surprise, indeed. Geoff Who, me? 18:24, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Time limits on adminship

Hi I have proposed time limits on adminship. I'd appreciate your input! --Surturz (talk) 21:09, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Posted a comment and got Lars to add his comment about the Swedish wiki - which has one year terms for admins. Geoff Who, me? 16:46, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Date of Birth - Gary Clail.

Please review Gary Clail. Many thanks! Gordo (talk) 11:04, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Gordo. Looks like you picked up (and reverted) the odd date of birth (29 October 3011) that had been in the article a while. I missed it on March 16 when I reverted the addition of the unsourced "Controversy" section. Looks like the birthdate was introduced with this edit on March 15 by another IP editor. One of the limitations of Huggle is that it doesn't always show edits by multiple editors over a period of hours or days. There's still a lot to be said for reading the articles to get their sense and to make sure other inappropriate edits haven't crept in. Geoff Who, me? 16:11, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Amsterdam/Hauge

I see you reverted the edit I did to Netherlands. The reason I labeled Amsterdam the De Jure capital and The Hauge the De Facto capital is simple. The Amsterdam is the constitutional capital, but does not house the seat of government as The Hauge does. Therefore, Amsterdam is legitamately, and FACTUALLY the De Jure capital, and The Hauge is legitamately and FACTUALLY the De Facto government. The Dutch Constitution may not say The Hauge is the capital, but that is why it is the De Facto capital, and Amsterdam the De Jure. Please see my plea through and allow the true information to be put on the article, thanks. - User:Caturday2

Well, I suggest discussing the issue on the Talkpage for the article. I saw that there is a hidden note (visible only when editing) which reads: |capital = [[Amsterdam]]<!-- Do not replace Amsterdam as capital. The Hague is ''not'' the capital of the Netherlands. If you disagree, too bad, for a change here you need to change the Dutch constitution first--> Geoff Who, me? 00:08, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Middletown High School (Ohio)

hey man what the heck, I put a link and everything...just look on the site its greg rasmussen............................................................................................................................. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angryman24 (talk • contribs) 01:52, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

My apologies. It looks like Apparition11 has updated the link and restored it along with your update for the superintendent's name. Help me out in future by adding an explanation when you edit. That will help show you intend a positive contribution which yours clearly was now I see it in hindsight. Again, please accept my apologies. (I've deleted my incorrect notice from your user page, as your edit clearly was not meant as vandalism.) Feel free to ask me any questions about editing around here - I'll be glad to help as much as I can. Geoff Who, me? 13:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Comment by 70.52.21.232

how did you know so fast about this edit?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.21.232 (talk) 00:04, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

You mean this edit to Anthony Housefather? One of the things I do around here to help out is to watch new edits to review for editing tests, noncontributory edits and outright vandalism. In your case, your edit was misplaced on the page and didn't include a verifiable reference. If Mr. Housefather is indeed deceased, that information would be a valuable addition to his article. How about updating his article with the information in the body of the article and including a verifiable source? When you do that, add a short edit summary at the bottom of the editing window to let those of us who watch that you're trying to make constructive edits. Happy editing! And if you have any questions or need some help, feel free to post a comment or request here.Geoff Who, me? 00:35, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Bacon WikiCup 2011 Award

Bacon WikiCup 2011 - Participant Medal
Due to your work in expanding bacon-related content during the Bacon WikiCup 2011, you have been awarded the Bacon WikiCup 2011 Particpant Medal. You received a final score of 8, earning yourself ninth place. Congratulations, and thank you for your great work! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 09:03, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Don't revert (Messages from Dragracefan)

I think you are attacking me and I was who created the RuPaul Drag Race page, so I can modify it as I want. Good night

STOP REVERTING!

Dragracefan, you should sign your posts using ~~~~. I disagree. Another editor (Tedley) is listed as the creator of the article on 15 November 2010. Be that as it may, no one owns Wikipedia articles. The main issue, as I see it, is your removal of content from an existing article without explanation. If you want to create another article, be my guest. If you want to request that the existing article be deleted, please request its deletion. I stand by my reverts to your edits. Geoff Who, me? 01:34, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

low-resolution for fair use

hi, just saw the notice that you put on my talk page. I have a question, or more of a comment about the situation. I've read all of the rules regarding the fair use and know that it's full of fuzzy and gray area definitions. To me, low-resolution can mean many different things, but I've been trying to keep them all less than 800x600 pixels, so they don't break past the higher resolution limit on the image source page. To me, it would be better to have clear limits on these things (which I know is pointless to ask for, since there will never be) just because both the triscuit box and the cinnamon toast crunch box have been reduced to different sizing and quality settings by two different editors. It would be best to either have a rule for the longest side (like 400 or 500 pixels) and go by that. It's just very frustrating for me to do these pictures with an emphasis on clarity and quality, only to have them changed randomly to somebody else's definition. Considering that I have been a big contributor to this area, it would be good to have a community-set standard that I can abide by so my uploads won't be need to be changed after the fact.Evan-Amos (talk) 18:07, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree. I tend to shoot for just under 100 px (which is why I reduced the Tricuit photo to 73 px), but I see that the Cinnamon Toast Crunch photo was reduced to 35 px by the other editor. In both cases, the photos are a noticeable improvement over those previously attached to the articles. I agree it's a grey area, but the basic idea is to have a photo that is clear enough to illustrate the subject without being of such resolution as to allow easy copying for nefarious purposes. ("Pssst. Wanna buy some Triskuits? Real cheap, today only!") I don't know if the fair user article makes it any clearer. I don't know what can be done about the greyness. Do you want to try floating a proposal at the Village Pump? There's one on images going on there now. Geoff Who, me? 19:29, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Pisgah, Alabama

Hi -

Just noticed that you reverted some vandalism on Pisgah, Alabama the other day. I wanted to make sure you were aware that there was prior vandalism on that page that remained unreverted (example). It's always a good idea to check when reverting vandalism that you're reverting to a clean copy of the article. Thanks for your work! —Tim Pierce (talk) 18:16, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. It's hard to see vandalism a few edits back by a different editor when using Huggle for reversions. When I spot it, I drop out and manually fix the prior edits. But I don't always see them. Good thing there are many pairs of eyes! Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 19:53, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cinnamon Toast Crunch.JPG

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cinnamon Toast Crunch.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 05:55, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

On the ball, as always, Skier. Thanks, I've tagged the photo with a G7 tag as another editor has uploaded a much better photo for the article and my small effort pales in comparison. Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 17:49, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Hitler's Toothbrush Moustache

I understand that you may see it as trivial, but it is undoubtedly a part of Hitler's legacy; even more so than the line "Holocaust denial, along with the display of Nazi symbols such as swastikas, is prohibited in Germany and Austria" as this deals with nazism and not Hitler specifically. The toothbrush moustache article s rife with references to Hitler, but no mention at all is made on his page. I do not believe that you are giving me the benefit of good faith. Le Douche? But of course! (talk) 00:35, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Oh I assumed you were adding the reference in good faith as I think I mentioned in my edit summary. Perhaps to discuss it on the article's Talkpage? I agree that it was a distinct feature of his appearance, but perhaps it is your placement in the article (right after the Shirer remark) that seemed inappropriate and trivial when I looked at it. I really have no horse in this race so I'm not going to lose any sleep over whether the moustache re-appears. It does seem to me that the Hitler article can use a lot of work to edit and organize it to be more encyclopedic. Perhaps there is room for the moustache in there, somewhere. Geoff Who, me? 18:18, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Your rejection of my edit of the articles dealing with Vera Alexandrovna Tiscenko Calder

I logged on to your Wikipedia articles on Vera Alexandrovna Tiscenko Calder who was in point of fact my mother. There were a number of appalling factual errors which I attempted to remedy but some three hours later I received a message from you stating that my contribution had not been accepted for reasons known only to yourself. Can you please explain to me how I should go about correcting the errors in your Wikipedia information. I am the only son of Vera Suhrawardy and Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy (NB my mother never, ever appropriated the name Calder since by the time her first husband Eugene Tiscenko had changed his name by deed poll to Calder my mother had already married my father).

I look forward to your reply,

Yours sincerely

Robert Ashby —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.192.242.91 (talk) 03:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Robert. What I saw when I looked at the article was a series of edits by an unknown user accessing via IP address 90.192.242.64 which were changing dates, names and other information in the article without explanation. I assumed, perhaps wrongly, that the edits were inaccurate and not beneficial as there were no references being added to support the changes. Using the edit summary to make a brief mention of why changes are being made goes a long way toward avoiding reversions like those I made, as one hallmark of those not intending to contribute constructively is the lack of edit summaries to explain their changes. In any event, no one "owns" articles on Wikipedia and everyone is free to edit them. I do suggest giving an edit summary when you edit articles. Also, if you want to revert my reversion of your edits to that article, just go to your last revision, select "Edit," and then "Save." All of your edits will reappear. Do add an edit summary, if you choose this course. Also, you might read WP:OR and WP:VER on sourcing/references for Wp articles. Generally, using one's own, personal knowledge as a reference is frowned upon, as there is a preference for citations to independently verifiable references to support the facts in the articles. Welcome, and happy editing! Geoff Who, me? 17:56, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Large pie.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Large pie.jpg, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

Article is not specific to this brand of pie and other, free use pictures of Chicken and Mushroom pies are available.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Oddbodz (talk) 19:56, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

It's not a problem as another editor has found and placed a free image illustrating the article. I see the file has been deleted already, so let's let it lie. Geoff Who, me? 17:39, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Wheat Thins (Cinnamon).jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wheat Thins (Cinnamon).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:58, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Another editor created and uploaded a much better photo to illustrate the article so I have tagged my photo with a G7 tag. "Delete away, Mr. McManus". Geoff Who, me? 17:44, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Barry Southgate

Just as well he blanked it; page stank of copypaste so severely I could actually smell it. HalfShadow 23:40, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Warning to user Chelseabot

Hi Geoff,

I just wanted to give you a heads up that I was just correcting a URL on Eric Schmidt's page in his wealth section. The first edit was to update his wealth and link to an updated page, and the second edit was to correct the formatting in the title of the link in the reference section. Not sure how this could have caused problems.

-Chelsea —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chelseabot (talk • contribs) 17:08, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Chelsea, I took a closer look at the article and your edits. I reverted my revert as it was clear on review your edits were constructive. I've also removed the warning I issued in error on your talk page. Please accept my apologies. Geoff Who, me? 17:18, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Response from IP User

My2i.com is a imedia. People can touch people instantly to exchange information timely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.21.228.146 (talk) 08:33, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

IP user subsequently warned and blocked by others for adding links to multiple pages. Geoff Who, me? 15:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey Geoff

How is citing the fact that the 72 T-birds were a clone to the Mark lll vandalism? take a look at the two cars and tell us this wasnt the case. since you screwed up and removed this comment, ill have my freind put it back as I dont have an account here. 99.128.16.62 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:51, 18 May 2011 (UTC).

How about citing a reliable source for your edit? Great if what you added is in fact the case, as supported by such sources. And, while you're at it, why not create an account? It's free and we'd love to have a new editor willing to contribute. (And by the way, it sure helps if you add an edit summary when you're editing pages, whether or not you choose to open an account.) Geoff Who, me? 00:56, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to the Bacon Challenge 2012

Hello! You have been invited to take part in the Bacon Challenge 2012. In case you don't know or need a refresher, the Bacon Challenge is an annual celebration of bacon on Wikipedia in which editors come together to help create, expand, and improve Wikipedia's coverage of bacon. The event lasts all the way through National Pig Day 2012, giving participants plenty of time to work at their pleasure. In addition to the Bacon Challenge is the Bacon WikiCup 2012, a side event to the Challenge in which all bacon-related contributions done by those participating in the Challenge are submitted and scored by the scorekeeper (me) based on the scoring chart. At the end of the Challenge, the user with the most points in the Bacon WikiCup will win a shiny trophy for their userpage. In addition, the users who score the highest in specific categories (not yet finalized, but the categories include most image uploads, most article creations, most DYK submissions, and more) will win barnstars. Finally, all participants will receive a medal. While the awards are nice, in the end, the important thing is to have fun and enjoy what we're all here for, which is improving Wikipedia.

If you decide to participate, great! You may add your name to the participants list at the main page of the Bacon Challenge 2012, and pick up the userbox for your userpage if you desire. Signing up for the Challenge will also automatically enter you into the Bacon WikiCup. If you don't wish to participate, that's fine too - maybe next year! In the meantime, if you know anyone who might also be interested in participating, feel free to invite them! The Challenge is open to anyone and accepts participants at any time, so feel free to let anyone who might be interested know.

Note that I, the scorekeeper of the Bacon WikiCup, will be on vacation starting on the 18th of June all the way up until the 5th of July. I will have limited access to the internet, so I may or may not be able to score users' contributions during this time. Sorry for any delay in scoring (but since the Challenge lasts for more than half a year, there's no rush, right? (= ).

I'm looking forward to another fun, successful year. Thanks! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 22:46, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

IP editor and Wladimir Klitschko vs. David Haye

Hi Glane23. You gave a spam warning to an IP regarding this edit, but they didn't add any external links, they only removed text. The link they seemed to have added was already there. Can you go back and strike the template? Christopher Connor (talk) 23:18, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the catch, Christopher. Reverted my template on the IP user's Talk page and noted my error in the edit summary. Geoff Who, me? 23:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Entenmann's cupcakes.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Entenmann's cupcakes.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:33, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, bot. The file has been re-linked to the article and the template removed from the file's page. (Couldn't tell when or why it had been delinked, so I just re-linked it.) Geoff Who, me? 19:21, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Scotland article

I changed "James" to "James IV of Scotland" in order to clarify the person who signed the Treaty of Perpetual Peace with Britain's Henry VII. You reverted it back to "James" calling my change an editing error. Please change the information back to James IV of Scotland. Simply stating, "In 1502 James signed the Treaty of Perpetual Peace with Henry VII of England," is insuffcient as there has been more than one James hailing from Scotland. Laurie Ann — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.107.53.153 (talk) 23:15, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Laurie Ann. I saw the "http:" in the text and primarily reverted for that reason. A way to refer to James IV is to use the form [[James IV of Scotland|James]]. That will read as "James," but will be a wiki-link to James IV of Scotland. Why don't you try it yourself? Cheers! Geoff Who, me? 23:23, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit to reese peanut butter cups by IP user 76.70.114.130

Hi Geoff,

While I have in the past made questionable edits to wikipedia entries, never have I edited this particular page, nor do I know "jared". I think I have been warned in error. Still, thanks for your diligence.

Ron — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.70.114.130 (talk) 17:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah, you mean this edit back on April 27, 2011. What most likely happened is that the IP address you accessed Wikipedia from, 76.70.114.130 on July 31, had been previously assigned to someone else. This is likely because most Internet Providers use dynamic address assignment, which allows IP addresses to be reused. When I warned the other user in April about an unconstructive edit, the warning posted to the talk page for that address. Thus, you saw the message when you accessed WP yesterday. You can avoid irrelevant messages like this one by creating an account. It's free and pretty much painless. Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 00:20, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Green Label.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Green Label.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 21:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, Kelly. I commented at the deletion discussion page. Geoff Who, me? 22:22, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

A strange warning

Hello, I'm not sure what to make of this. I am a Wiki reader, but have never been a registered, nor active member for editing or adding information. I've ever only been a passive person, using this site as a quick reference.

Yet, just now, when I searched for a physics reference chart, for a student, I received an orange warning that an edit that I made, on a wiki page, about a song I have never heard, by a band I've never heard of, was being disputed and canceled.. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:71.37.222.250&redirect=no

I HAVE NEVER EDITED, DISPUTED, NOR SIGNED UP AS A WIKI USER! Why am I getting this message?

You are referring to a note I posted to 71.37.222.250 on 26 December 2008 regarding an edit to Welcome Home (Coheed and Cambria song). You saw the note because you accessed Wikipedia using the same IP address. As the talk page notes: "This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's numerical IP address. Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address." Since the shoe doesn't fit, you need not wear it. In order to avoid such irrelevant messages in future, consider creating an account. It's free and hides your IP address so it no longer matters that you happen to be assigned an address someone else has used. Why not try it? Happy researching! Last, you'll want to sign your posts to Talk pages by ending with four tildes (~~~~), which will automagically sign your post with your IP address, or login name if you're a registered user, as well as the time and date of your post. Like this: Geoff Who, me? 21:06, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

I appreciate the eyes on my userpage :-) (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:43, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! Geoff Who, me? 17:57, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

IP Comment

You're no fun — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.182.240 (talk) 21:08, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Apparently referring to this edit to V, the 2009 TV series, which I reversed. Geoff Who, me? 21:49, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Hello Geoff! I hope you accept this brownie as an amicable greeting from a fellow Wikipedian, SwisterTwister talk 00:46, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
How nice. Thank you. Geoff Who, me? 00:47, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

IP User comment from 75.246.86.244

i am very very sorry its just that i dont get the answer

Apparently referring to my revert of this edit after ClueBot had just reverted a similar edit by same IP user. I stand by my revert. Geoff Who, me? 00:31, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

St.Maximilian Kolbe School, West Chester, PA

Greetings and good work with Huggle! Just dropping by to leave you a note that although you reverted an author's page blank here, the page can be marked as an author deletion request. Didn't know if you knew or not, as it is a bit difficult to see this type of thing in Huggle. Keep up the good work. Regards, Tyrol5 [Talk] 01:44, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, Tyrol5. I do try to see author page blanking and to mark for deletion as such, but as you mentioned, it's not always easy to see that in the Huggle interface. I often check the regular enWiki view in my browser when I am doubtful. Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 15:41, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

CH-53 Article

I tried my hand at editing in the CH-53 article, wanted to add an accident that ocurred in 1983 that was mentioned in the notable accidents. It was clearly a notable accident because it resulted in the landmark Supreme Court decision regarding contractor immunity. I was unable, however, to format my submission properly due to my inexperience. I don't think my inexperience ought to rob the world of the knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.48.161.46 (talk) 20:25, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

You mean this edit to Sikorsky CH-53 Sea Stallion. I couldn't tell what you were trying to do since you didn't include an edit summary, so it just looked like you were inserting random text. What were you trying to add? Maybe I can help. (P.S. Sign your posts on Talk pages with four tildes (~~~~), without the parentheses, after your comment. The system will convert those four tildes to your userid (or IP address) and also add the date and time, all automatically. Cheers! Geoff Who, me? 20:52, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Glane23, thanks for dealing with the IP vandal (who was leaving pleasant messages on my talk page) so quickly. Its appreciated. :-) Kind Regard -- Marek.69 talk 17:19, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Young Guns

The edit I made to the Young Guns page was made because the character that was referenced in the first paragraph was named "Dick", yet in description of characters above, Charlie Sheen's character's name says "Richard". Should it have read "Richard (Dick)"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Padrejay (talk • contribs) 17:32, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

The edit I made to the Young Guns page was made because the character that was referenced in the first paragraph was named "Dick", yet in description of characters above, Charlie Sheen's character's name says "Richard". Should it have read "Richard (Dick)"?Padrejay (talk) 17:33, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

  • You mean this edit by the IP user? At the time, the edit was made without an edit summary, so I couldn't tell if it was being made in good faith or was something unconstructive, so in an abundance of caution I reverted the edit to the prior version. I see that the IMDB page for the movie lists the Charlie Sheen character as "Richard 'Dick' Brewer," so perhaps your proposed revision mentioned above is closer to the correct name of the character. Feel free to change the article and, may I suggest, leave an edit summary so everyone else can see that you've thought about the change and have a good reason. Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 22:29, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
You can revert faster than I can. I'm very impressed. Lucasoutloud (talk) 00:23, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
  • Thank you most kindly. The way I look at it, we're all together just trying to keep the encyclopedia clear of extraneous/malicious scribblings. You get what I miss and vice-versa. Cheers, mate, and thanks again! Geoff Who, me? 22:18, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello

(Sizzlepop (talk)) Sizzlepop Dear person I do not know, I will make this quite civil in regards to you giving me warning of vandalism and please accept my most sincere apologies for I indeed thought what I wrote to be true. I would also remind you that you stopping me from posting on this public information site is I believe against my constitutional rights of both "Freedom of press" and "Freedom of speech" if you do not believe so I suggest you wikipedia it (Sizzlepop (talk) 20:49, 15 September 2011 (UTC)).Sizzlepop

Message

Thank you for the welcoming message. I've been on Wikipedia since 2004, much earlier than you (not counting the username I used before the current one...). And anyway it seems it was in fact your own edit which wasn't constructive as you reverted it yourself. Uffish (talk) 21:55, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

  • Please accept my sincere apologies. I reverted my own revert of your edit to John von Neumann and I thought I had also reverted my notice on your talk page at the same time. I have now done so. It was an error on my part. Geoff Who, me? 00:09, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Your revert

Please be more careful when reverting people in Huggle. My edit to the template sandbox was intentional and it's a sandbox designed for testing funky edits and use cases. Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 21:13, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, Steven. Itchy trigger finger got the best of me. I was confused as your edit didn't have an edit summary to guide me. I see you've beaten me to reverting my revert. I'll leave you to it, then. Thanks for the advice. Geoff Who, me? 21:16, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
No problem, and thanks for the quick response. Cheers, Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 21:37, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Care for a second round?

I just wondered if you had given any thoughts to a second bid for adminship? I have been watching your anti-vandalism work for the last few days and then did an in-depth search through your past history. I think that it's a shame you don't have the tools, considering your strong and consistently accurate vandal-whacking. You don't need to answer right away. Give it some thought, I would be happy to nominate you if you choose to. Trusilver 22:46, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Trusilver. I will give it some thought. I learned a lot from my self-nom effort, responding as I was to some Signpost announcements about the need for more admins. If I did it again per your nom, I'd articulate better that my main interest is keeping the walls and floors around here free of extraneous stuff. I've ended up doing more vandal patrolling than anything over the years, though I like creating the (very) occasional article, uploading photo files to illustrate articles that need them and making small improvements where I see the need. I've been a sysop elsewhere and elsewhen, so it's not something I see as some kind of crown, but really as an appointment as janitor. I like leaving the place clean without a trace of my own effort. Besides, what I really have to think about is whether I'd be a part of any club that would accept me as a member, to paraphrase Mr. Marx. I'll get back to you when I've had a think. Geoff Who, me? 00:04, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Good answer. It doesn't take more than a quick glance at my userpage to understand I have little tolerance for admins that think adminship makes them special. The best administrators are the ones that understand that there are no perks to being given the mop, only extra responsibility. Trusilver 00:14, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Trusilver, I've thunk my thoughts about your kind offer. I went back and forth for the past week and finally decided to give it a pass. Many of the suggestions from participants in my self-nom, no-consensus RFA involved my heavy use of automated tools to revert vandalism, my lack of interaction with others, etc. The best advice I received, and which I ultimately followed, was not to change my ways just to increase my chances at a second round. I like doing what I do: trying to keep the wall scribbling down to a dull roar and mopping up the various unsightly fluids. And the occasional (non-automated) editing I do by way of gnome-like efforts to improve things. And the few new articles that I've created ever so infrequently. I had read some old posts by Mr. Wales about adminship not being a "big deal" and I answered the call for more help in that spirit. RFA makes it seem like a "big deal." I guess what finally helped me make up my mind was the current Signpost article on social ties' influence on RFA voting. It resonated with some of the comments posted in my RFA. I'm just not social enough, it seems. (It really just means I've chosen to be social elsewhere — offline actually). I think I'll just keep on doing what I do as best I can without the extra tools. Thank you for the unexpected vote of confidence. See you around and cheers! Geoff Who, me? 02:02, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Integrity
The most important quality of any administrator candidate is integrity, even if the best way of expressing that integrity is by acknowledging that the mop isn't a good fit for you. Compromising your integrity to get (or keep) the mop is a sign that you should never have it to begin with. Your answer is well thought out and shows that I made the right choice in offering, even if the answer was no. Trusilver 23:54, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Jarrah White: Prod is not AfD

Hi. I see you reverted a couple of removals of a {{prod}} template from Jarrah White with the comment "unexplained removal of AFD template", then eventually reported the removals at AIV as vandalism. I have no idea why the article wasn't just tagged for speedy deletion as {{db-nn}} in the first place, as it seems to meet the "speedy delete as no notability has been reliably asserted" criteria quite well. However a prod template (proposed deletion) may be contested by any editor at any time, just by removing it; removing a prod template isn't vandalism (and in fact replacing it might be construed as such: as the {{prod}} template itself says, "If this template is removed, it should not be replaced".) A prod template is not "an AfD template", removal of which may count as vandalism. I've now put the Jarrah White article into the full AfD process here. You might like to take another look at the (admittedly Byzantine) deletion policy. Cheers, Tonywalton Talk 01:06, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, Tony. I got my templates mixed up and, as always, in hindsight it's very clear I should have stopped at one time and just moved on. That's what I try to do when I'm seeing repeat restorations of something I've reverted as potentially unconstructive, because it gives different eyes a chance to consider and evaluate the circumstances. I broke my own rule, there. Thanks for cleaning up my spillover. And, so, onward... Geoff Who, me? 18:23, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
No problem. The deletion process is a bit like a maze of twisty passages sometimes! Looks like Jarrah White is on course for deletion anyway. Cheers, Tonywalton Talk 19:28, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Ah, yes. Been lost there many times! Thanks again! Geoff Who, me? 20:34, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

duplication deduplication in microsoft windows versions

duplication is the problem. deduplication is the feature — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.76.122.183 (talk) 10:31, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

You mean this edit to History of Microsoft Windows. How I wish you'd included an edit summary when you made your edit! It sure looked like changing 'duplication' to 'deduplication' was unconstructive. Care to change it back—preferably with a citation that "deduplication" (or "de-duplication"; I've seen it written elsewhere both ways) is one of the features? I'd do it myself, but I don't know enough about the product mentioned to intelligently edit the article. Geoff Who, me? 02:14, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
You keep stealing my reverts! :O Keep up the good work, man. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 22:50, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar! Way I look at it, you'll catch what I miss as we're all in this together to keep the wall-scribblers scrubbed out. Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 22:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

The Recent Changes Barnstar

The Recent Changes Barnstar
Puffin Let's talk! 16:56, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, Puffin. Geoff Who, me? 17:03, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

October 10

Thanks for your message. May I ask, why was my edit considered unconstructive? 86.176.28.80 (talk) 18:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

You mean this edit to October 10? Well, ask yourself this: how is it constructive to have an article about October 10 include the statement, "Today is October 10" when the article consists of events which occurred on that date historically? Geoff Who, me? 18:54, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Surely the edit could be reverted once the day has ended? 86.176.28.80 (talk) 19:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
It's unencyclopdic. What purpose does that bring to the article, and do you really think someone needs Wikipedia to tell them it's October 10th? Trusilver 19:37, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Maybe not, but Wikipedia does have a habit of stating the obvious. 86.176.28.80 (talk) 19:39, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

double talk

I am confused by your revert of my modest edit here. I added an 'other use' for "double talk", and changed the template for "doublespeak" to 'distinguish', as that seemed more appropriate. I often don't log in for such minor (uncontroversial) edits. 75.150.168.6 (talk) 00:54, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

You know, you're right. When I looked at the article and its history again, my revert did not make sense. I have restored your addition of the dab link to Gibberish. Please accept my apologies. (I also removed the warning issued in error from the IP user page.) Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 01:19, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Apology accepted. 75.150.168.6 (talk) 01:23, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

revert of redirect

Hi, I don't know why you reverted my merge of Pyrogenic into Pus. This was proposed over a year ago (discussion here for what I thought was legitimate reasons, and there was a consensus that never was put into motion. Richard☺Decal (talk) 18:17, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I also noticed you deleted the information I merged from Pyrogenic infection into Pyrogenic, which I also did because there was good reason (and consensus) for the merger. You didn't revert the merger on the end of pyrogenic infection, though, so all the information that came from there is now present nowhere... Richard☺Decal (talk) 18:19, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

the merger discussion for this can be seen here Richard☺Decal (talk) 18:23, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


I see you fixed it, thanks! Richard☺Decal (talk) 18:27, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, please accept my apologies: I couldn't distinguish what you were doing and so acted in haste. I also pulled my erroneous warning from your talk page. I haven't tried to restore Pyogenic as it is tagged with a 'major edit' tag and I didn't want to disturb. Geoff Who, me? 18:34, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
No worries :-) I was in the middle of merging 2 articles into a third and I can see how that would look weird. Richard☺Decal (talk) 19:14, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Page blanking

This blanking of the Battle Ax page by the page's only contributor could have been seen as a WP:CSD#G7 speedy deletion candidate. The author, having been informed of the deletion discussion about the page, may have simply decided his autobiography wasn't worth keeping. Why did you revert, rather than just tagging for {{db-author}}?

Hi, WikiDan61. Going by the language of the deletion tag, that the page not be blanked while the discussion regarding deletion proceeds, and lacking an edit summary to help indicate the editor's intention, I opted to return the page to status quo. In addition, a limitation of Huggle is that it does not indicate, in most cases, that an editor blanking a page is the page's original creator, particularly where there are a number of edits between the original creation and an edit being examined. Had the editor indicated an intention to delete the article they created, I probably would have just tagged it. Hope this helps explain my thought process. Cheers, mate! Geoff Who, me? 14:58, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia article

Sorry for that. But it's because that info was a fake. I can't prove it to you because all the reliable sources are in japanese, which is my primary language. That info was invented by someone and put into Wikipedia. Sorry to disturb.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.2.13.222 (talk) 20:34, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. You mean this edit to Himitsu Sentai Gorenger. All you need to do is to include an edit summary explaining what you are doing. In this case, something like "removing invented information" or "removing incorrect facts added with no reliable sources." That would help me know that your edit is intended to improve the encyclopedia. Try again - just add an edit summary! And welcome! Geoff Who, me? 22:46, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit to Talk:Crusades

Can you please put back my edit because it is part of a school project to see if a student can edit wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by European History (talk • contribs) 23:27, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

You mean this edit? How is that constructive? Feel free to edit in a way that improves the encyclopedia. For example Wikipedia:How to edit a page has pointers. And you can experiment to your heart's content in the sandbox, which is designed for testing and practicing. Cheers! Geoff Who, me? 23:33, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello, Glane23. You have new messages at MichaelQSchmidt's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

RE: A strange warning

Thanks for the reply and info Geoff. Perhaps there should be a time limit to parse such things, due to the heavy use of DHCP nowadays? *shrugs*

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thanks for the quick revert on my Talk page! Tgeairn (talk) 00:19, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
You're most welcome! Geoff Who, me? 00:21, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Good Humor
Thanks for the witty joke about snow. Warden (talk) 00:36, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
How could I resist? Thank you , Colonel. Geoff Who, me? 00:41, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks

Many thanks for tidying up the referencing presentation in the article on Dundee Cake. I agree that the article still needs quite a lot of work, and have contacted Wikipedia: WikiProject Food and Drink about this article. Again, thank you for your help, ACEOREVIVED (talk) 11:52, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome! Geoff Who, me? 23:42, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Your warning

You undid the deletion that I asked and said that it was vandalism.

Why?

The article is not wikipedia worthy and I asked for his examination. --ChronicalUsual (talk) 23:28, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

First, there was no edit summary to help me understand what you were trying to do with your edit. Second, if in your opinion an article should be deleted, feel free to nominate it for deletion. I suggest reviewing the deletion policy page for deletion criteria. That page also explains how to tag an article for deletion. Geoff Who, me? 23:35, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
I have tried the tag "Proposed deletion/dated concern = Does not meet relevance and importance criteria of wikipage." It is right this time?--ChronicalUsual (talk) 23:45, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
Looks OK to me. Now, someone may edit the page and/or remove the proposed deletion tag you added. If that happens, and you still remain convinced the article should be deleted, you can try nominating the article for deletion, which will trigger a discussion leading to a decision to delete or keep the article. Geoff Who, me? 01:11, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, Geoff. Some things never get old, do they?. Just curious...was it the uber exclamation points or the expletive that pushed you to act? :^D Tiderolls 08:18, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

It was just too many exclamation points: that's my story and I'm stickin' to it. Cheers, mate. Geoff Who, me? 21:20, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:X Factor Finalists 2010.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:X Factor Finalists 2010.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:58, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Not a problem, bot, Another editor decided to use a different album cover for the article so I have tagged this image for deletion (author requested). Geoff Who, me? 18:39, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Bacon Challenge 2012 Update

Hey! It's been a good few months since the Bacon Challenge 2012 kicked off in June, and I'm pleased to say that decent progress has been made. While we were a bit slow to start, bacon-related contributions have been picking up again, and scores have been rising in the Bacon WikiCup. Here's a quick rundown of the overall positions as they stand:

Currently, only a handful of participants have reported contributions: to those who haven't, remember, there is still plenty of time left to contribute and rise up in through the positions, as the Challenge and WikiCup run up until March. Just like last year, all participants will receive a shiny medal which they can place on their userpages, or use as a self-esteem booster if need be (just joking...sort of). If you need ideas for what to work on, a list is available here.

One last thing! Per request, we are bringing back territory representation into the WikiCup! Editors can now represent nations, states, or provinces, just to add a bit of fun and Olympic-flair to the event. Simply reply to this message with the territory you wish to represent, if you choose to do so.

Thanks for reading! Good luck! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Puffy tacos

Hey Geoff. You apparently restored some content to Taco in this edit back in August. Someone has commented here that the wording is confusing. I agree, and I've checked the ref and could fix it, but I think that the section may be going into too much detail and it would be better just removed. I'd be grateful for your input at the talk page. Rivertorch (talk) 07:05, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

The taco article is subject to constant revision (if not vandalism) and it's often impossible to keep track of the changes within changes. It looks like a reference was deleted at some point and changes in the text led to the difficulties pointed out by the editor who posted to the talk page. I took a stab at copyediting the puffy taco paragraph and added a citation for the Lopez family history. By all means have a go at making it better! Geoff Who, me? 17:10, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Cîroc vodka.jpg

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Cîroc vodka.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 04:47, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Dude. But the new photo (File:C%C3%AErocVodkas.jpg) which an editor used to replace this file is itself tagged for deletion as it lacks source and copyright info as well as a fair use tag. So I restored this single bottle photo to the Ciroc article in place of that other one. All should be well, now. Geoff Who, me? 21:11, 16 January 2012 (UTC)


On the warning you gave me

Hi, I think you mistook me for someone else. I was reverting a vandalizer, and I was acting in good faith, but you warned me nonetheless on my talk page. I don't know what I did wrong, but I'm sorry if I made a mistake. I did not do it on purpose. Sorry. Agent 78787 (talk) 02:00, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi Agent78787. What I saw was this edit which also resulted in removing what appeared to be much of the article, that is, the paragraph beginning with "Homeostatic regulation extends far beyond the control of temperature" and continuing through all the category links at the end. I can see on looking at the edit again that you must not have intended that result, as you appear to have focused correcting on an anonymous editor's apparent vandalism to paragraphs above the one I mentioned. Fortunately for everyone, Vsmith seems to have fixed everything back up with this edit. Please don't take it personally. We're all just trying to make the encyclopedia better. Thanks for helping. And happy editing. Geoff Who, me? 20:25, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Comment from Charger334

those posts i made were NOT vandalism. I ask you kindly to stop to doing it. Charger334 (talk) 02:01, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

I beg to differ. At best, your edits so far have not been very constructive. But, everyone starts somewhere. Tell you what - I'll refrain from reverting your edits for a day or two and let the rest of the community weigh in as they see fit. Good luck! Geoff Who, me? 02:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Glane23/Archive_2&oldid=1147978627"