User talk:Bobo192: Difference between revisions

Hi, I am a new user and I see a page where you recently made some changes which appears vandalized.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_history_of_New_Jersey

If you scroll down to the "New Sweden" entry, some childish person has inserted some anti-wiki rubbish. Why didn't I fix it? Well, the vandalism seems to have survived a few reversions including your own, and I am a total newb here. I hoped if I brought it to someone who is knowledgeable, they could fix it better than I. I so far confine myself to fixing typos.

Thank you kindly for your time,

~ Ron —Preceding unsigned comment added by SilverbackRon (talk • contribs) 06:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert on my userspace! :) Sometimes I wish changes to one's userpage popped up a banner, too... Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 18:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, this is the first edition of the WP F1 newsletter. If you want to keep getting it, please talk back on my talk page.

Enjoy!LB22 (talk) 11:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a feeling I know who it is. I'm not exactly the most popular kid at my school, if you catch my drift. RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 19:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yup. I'm just glad I'm fast. LOL RC-0722 ^communicator/_kills 19:54, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be rude, but please don't remove comments that aren't attacks from my talk page. Thanks, Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 01:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. Cowardly Lion (talk) 02:38, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I notice you do some good vandal-watching but it is important to warn users after they vandalize pages, as typically we can only go to AIV after they've been handed first, second, third, and fourth-level warnings. (Twinkle is a great way to easily warn users). Thanks! xenocidic (talk) 21:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You just grey listed me! :0 74.133.9.95 (talk) 01:29, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh don't worry about it. It happens! 74.133.9.95 (talk) 01:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the revision history of Monarch butterfly. You reverted one vandal, but the version you reverted to was also vandalized. Please try to make sure you don't do this again. An IP seems to have picked up on it and completed the reversion. Thanks. Richard001 (talk) 07:41, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please note the talk page you moved from talk space to mainspace at 51st Marine Expeditionary Unit was a false copy of 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit created by the community banned user Mmbabies because he seems to be in love with the number 51 and he uses talkspace to get around RC patrollers and keep his nonsense on longer. No harm, no foul, but created false material is part of his modus and I'm sure it was inadvertent on your part. Make sure to note this next time a situation like this pops up. Thank you. Nate • (chatter) 05:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :). CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 00:49, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agian, Thanks :). CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 01:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am just wondering why the article on Chef At Home was deleted? Mr. C.C. (talk) 06:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was asking as you were the one who deleted the article. Chef at Home is a cooking show on Food Network Canada.

The way the article sounds in my head is promotional. So, I will have to work that out. But yeah, you answered my question sufficiently. Mr. C.C. (talk) 17:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted what appeared to be a pretty random message left on this talk page a minute ago. If you can understand it, please feel free to go ahead and put it back, but it seemed extremely random to me.   jj137 (talk) 03:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. He just left a similar message on my talk page.   jj137 (talk) 03:44, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you reverted a few vandalism from Special:Contributions/12.226.91.61 if you want, for future vandalism reverts, you can give the user Vandalism warnings to help get him or her blocked quicker. If you have any other questions, let me know! Ctjf83Talk 04:14, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reverting vandalism in my talk page. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add my thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page! TheProf | Talk 19:46, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments on my talk page, but its actually User:Chandlerjoeyross who produced those charts. Regards, WWGB (talk) 03:57, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please look at this article? The same IP address has made a lot of edits and I'm having a hard time sorting out what is legit and what isn't. Thanks for your help! Tnxman307 (talk) 17:44, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, a lot of the information seemed like a personal opinion or just nonsense. I just didn't want to do a mass revert and accidentally remove good info. Thanks for checking into that. Tnxman307 (talk) 18:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all the reverts on my user page and talk page i really appreciate it.

Staffwaterboy ^Talk♂ 04:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto for mine. Trekphiler (talk) 01:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask why you reverted the changes I made to the Boalt Hall page? As far as I am concerned (and I am an alumnus from this school and I am financially supporting it), the official name of the school is now Berkeley Law. Boalt Hall is to be used only among students/alumni/faculty. Outside, the short name is Berkeley Law. The name of the school for Wikipedia should therefore be Berkeley Law http://www.law.berkeley.edu/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.203.176.227 (talk) 15:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem Bobo... can you please make sure the changes are taken in consideration? I must say I am not an Wiki expert and it seems the Boalt Hall pages still does not direct to the Berkeley Law page... thanks 194.203.176.227 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 16:10, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. As a recent editor of the Jeff Probst article, I'd like to invite you to share your opinion in the Talk:Jeff Probst#Born 1961 or 1962 discussion I have initiated. -- Tcncv (talk) 02:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I sincerely apologize. I must be more careful. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:23, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note that we have the TOTD department set up around the "yearless year". That means the same pages are used year after year. Sometime after the first of the year, the entire yearless year is copied to archive pages to preserve a historical record of the tips displayed over the past year. 2007 has been copied/archived, which means you can change the yearless year pages any way you want (replace tips with new ones, change their order, etc.) - but not those that have already passed (unless you copy/archive them first - they need to be copied to 2008's archive before replacing them with 2009's tips). The links to the archives are included at the bottom of the main TOTD page. The Transhumanist    01:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does that make sense?  :) The Transhumanist    01:09, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 17:13, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. If you'd like a reference, the 1920 Wisden had the following in the Notes by the Editor: "I have no wish to pat myself on the back or exult unduly over the abandonment of the two-day scheme in county cricket. I felt sure the experiment--hastily determined on--would not answer, the objections to it being so obvious. It was doomed before the season had run half its course, and in August the Advisory Committee decided unanimously to go back to three-day matches in 1920." See [1] JH (talk page) 17:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that you removed all the hidden endorsements from the campaign articles so I decided to put them all back. I am not trying to derail your work it is just my opinion that the lists look more encyclopedic when they are concealed and not out in the open. Perhaps you have a good rationale for your changes, and I would like to discuss this but I don't know where the proper forum for that would be.--William Saturn (talk) 04:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am sure this was discussed in the past but it is now probably deep in the talk page archives of some article. According to [2] & [3] there seems to be a long standing consensus and favorablity toward the hidden endorsement lists.--William Saturn (talk) 21:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, when reverting vandalism could you mark edit as non-minor? This helps, because some users configure watchlists to filter minor edits. Nevertheless, you are doing a good job here - thanks. --Kubanczyk (talk) 11:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did a revert after you but I think we were both trying to revert the same edits. Not sure which version is better. [4] --Faradayplank (talk) 02:01, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not wish to insult anyone with the "animals" link (which you recently deleted) on The Celtic Song. The purpose of Wikipedia is to provide information. This is valid information, just like the other links in the middle of the songs: Scottish Cup, Celtic Park etc.

Please do not deny others what could be considered useful information, no matter how unpleasant. 70.90.198.172 (talk) 02:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. No reply necessary, just to let you know that your rollback on Einstein (US-CERT program)‎ was reverted because the anonymous user was entirely correct. —SusanLesch (talk) 05:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, the page is fine (and I hope remember too to check how far back I am rolling). It just happened that what that user added is probably the only information the public will have about Einstein 2. I'm happy to find out it was published. Thanks for your note. —SusanLesch (talk) 18:38, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. : - ) --MZMcBride (talk) 03:30, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]