User talk:Fribbler/Archives/2008/July

Thanks

Noob kept spamming my page, thanks for reverting it

No problem Halosean! Fribbler (talk) 01:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

How do I download it, won't let me

Tagging speedy for House Night

Is tagging the article using {{db-bio}} proper? I think its not a bio. Regards, --Efe (talk) 11:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I guess I interpreted "House Night" to be a group of people, as well as being an event. Probably not {{db-bio}} though. Cheers! Fribbler (talk) 12:03, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, it has already been deleted. Cheers. --Efe (talk) 12:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Adoption

Hey, I just reviewed your contributions and you have definitely been doing a great job. I was also happy to see the perfect edit summary usage. Moving on, would you mind doing this assignment? Read over it, and then simply answer the questions on my talk page. Thanks, « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 23:40, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I'll give that a going-through. Thanks. Fribbler (talk) 23:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks – I definitely see several correct reverts. I think you're ready to make a request for rollback. However, please read (if you haven't already) Wikipedia:Rollback feature before requesting permission. Rollback is similar to Twinkle rollback, but much faster. Tell me what you think. Best, « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 23:49, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Excellent, all correct. Moving on, how much do you know about Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism? Regardless, I'll start by explaining the whole process to you. Its a page "intended to get administrator attention for obvious and persistent vandals and spammers." This page provides quite a bit og detail about what AIV is, and when and how to report. I suggest you read through it. After you do, would you mind completing this assignment? Thanks, « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 02:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

There is no need to do it all at once. Take your time. You are quite proficient, but I would like to see some AIV reports. Tell me if you are willing to do it. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 00:07, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

You have rollback now, no need to use twinkle for obvious vandalism. ;) « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 00:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) I know, but I can't let go of the easy "warn user" tab. Otherwise I have to remember the page they vandalised. :-) Fribbler (talk) 00:17, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Yep, one of the advantages :) « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 20:09, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Jumping the gun

Hi Fribbler. Hope it wasn't too bold of me to close that thread at RD talk without checking with you first as the only other supporter. It was a lost case by then anyway . . . but I should've left a note here in case - sorry. Btw, I see that you started 4 months ago! Seems like you've been here for ages. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 00:37, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I was keeping an eye on the discussion and it was a lost cause indeed. I would have closed it myself as it got WP:SNOWed in. Yeah, only a few months here, but I jumped in with both feet! :-) Cheers! Fribbler (talk) 15:31, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Name of school in Reims, France, 1945

Thank you, Fribbler, for helping on this recent Language reference desk query. Your input and others' tripped my period-language sensor, i.e. I suspect the institution may have undergone some change of nature since May 1945 even while its name remained intact. Since I lack the time to delve into this further, I decided not to translate the name but will settle for a minimal description of the school. -- with appreciation, Deborahjay (talk) 11:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Vandalism

Congratulations! Yeah, you're going to have to get used to things like this :-/. Don't take anything seriously. Best, « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 23:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Ha ha, it doesn't bother me. I felt excluded in not getting vandalised for reverting vandalism ;-) Fribbler (talk) 23:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Reviewing your contributions, things like this really show me that you read the policies and understand them. I also see several correctly tagged speedies/AFD's. One question, can you explain why you reverted this as vandalism? I don't consider that vandalism, although if the edit is incorrect, or false information, I suggest you use the "good faith" button instead. But other than that, I see several correct reverts. Regarding your speedy deletion tag on Cengage Learning, which was correct based on the article's status when you tagged it, but a quick glance at the history shows it's gone through some major changes. Other than that, all looks good. Unbelievable work at the reference desks by the way! Keep up the good work! Best, « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 23:26, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

No problem. The Cengage Learning CSD was a mistake. I didn't read the history. Red alerts went off in my head regarding a company article that seemed like an advertisement. I didn't do my research, though. As regards this [1] edit, I must contend that I could not assume good faith here; Chesterfield is not in Nepal. As much as changing Paris, France, to Paris, the Moon (I am biased in that I know UK geography rather well) it was in my mind, AGF'in'able (surely not a word :-) ) Fribbler (talk) 23:42, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Whoops, regarding [this, I didn't even read the surrounding text. You are correct there. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 23:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it was a sneaky attempt at vandalism: the worst kind! By the way, have you any more assignments for me? I enjoy completing them. Fribbler (talk) 23:53, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

For that matter, I do. :D « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 23:57, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) I'm on it!...But I might finish it tomorrow as it is after one in the morning here in Ireland. Fribbler (talk) 00:02, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, take your time. It's still 8 P.M. over here. « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 00:09, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Pretty good. Actually, no. Excellent. :) (Yes it was a long assignment) One comment: On question 12, 'crats can also change usernames. Your answer was correct, but missed one thing. Keep up the good work! Best, « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie 22:44, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Requested deletion of Oink (Water Buffalo)

I want to know why you didn't delete it, it is clearly being vandalised. I created the page in the first place and now want it deleting because you and I are unable to stop the person from vandalising it over and over again - I can't see why this is a problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Webbo2005 (talk • contribs) 18:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Replied at the users talk page. Fribbler (talk) 19:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks but you didn't do a very good job in reviewing the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by Webbo2005 (talk • contribs) 09:05, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused. I did not "review" the article. I edited it twice: once to remove an incorrectly applied speedy deletion-tag, and once more to restore another users removal of correctly sourced information. Fribbler (talk) 11:22, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, lets get this straight. I requested a speedy deletion on the grounds of vandalism - the note at the top asks Administrators (i.e. you) to check the article - but you didn't - so how can you say it didn't meet the criteria? You then put it back and it was vandalised again by "Diggly", almost immediately. Today, someone else has come along and requested it to be deleted (albeit on different grounds). Sorry but I just can't get my head around the fact you say it doesn't meet the criteria when you state you haven't even read the article :S Webbo2005 (talk) 11:29, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Right. (I see you meant "review" as in read the article, which I did. Also I'm not an Administrator) Let me explain, you applied a speedy deletion tag under criteria G7 (you can read the criteria here). Since others had contributed substantially to the article at the time of the request, the request could not be fulfilled. Secondly, you cannot request that an article be deleted because of vandalism (otherwise the "George W. Bush" article and many others could never exist). Another user has since submitted the article to Articles for Deletion citing notability concerns i.e. that the articles subject does not meet wikipedia's Notability criteria. Fribbler (talk) 11:48, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

"This page may meet Wikipedia’s criteria for speedy deletion as pure vandalism. This includes blatant and obvious misinformation, and redirects created during cleanup of page move vandalism."

Does it not meet that criteria? I'm still confused. I CREATED THE ARTICLE. When you say "since others had constributed substantially" - WHERE, WHO? The vandal? You didn't "review" it properly did you? Please read it again, comparing the two edits side by side. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Webbo2005 (talk • contribs) 11:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Pure vandalism, is as it's name suggests "pure". That is, a new article with no content other than "x is an alien." or "y is gay". As for substantial contributions, at the time the speedy was requested 7 different users and IP address had edited the article. Fribbler (talk) 12:02, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

"7 different users and IP address had edited the article" - of which 3 were vandals, 2 were myself, 1 was Green Tentacle who basically re-worded the page and added an info box and Mauler90 who undid some of the vandalism. As I said before, I don't think you did a good job reviewing this one. I wasn't referring to the pure vandalism aspect of the deletion request, I was referring to "This includes blatant and obvious misinformation" - misinformation being the key. I don't want to have to keep undoing changes made by "Diggly" - which is why I want the article to be deleted. The guy isn't giving up, he obviously has some sort of issue and I don't know him, I don't know if his information is correct - the land registry says not, I just don't want him to keep vandalising the page. I created the page in the first place so why can't I delete it? It's insane! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Webbo2005 (talk • contribs) 12:09, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Green Tentacles additions were enough to mean "substantial contributions". See WP:OWN, although you created the article, you cannot do with it as you see fit. If you disagree with my take on events (as you appear to) you could ask here or one of the users here. As there's not much more I feel I can explain as regards policy. Fribbler (talk) 12:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough - but being involved in the article, I just don't want to be done for libel. If it goes that far then at least I can blame the policy; which I believe can easily be taken out of context; "Pure vandalism" for example - what the hell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Webbo2005 (talk • contribs) 12:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about that. Every change made to an article is attributed to the editor who made that change in the page's history. Good luck.Fribbler (talk) 12:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

No need to worry now, it has been deleted now on the grounds of Vandalism. My faith in Wikipedia has been restored! Webbo2005 (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Invitation

I saw that you added a reference to one of the articles (Lough Allen) that I worked on for the Unreferenced Article Cleanup WikiProject so please accept this invitation.

Please accept this invite to join the Unreferenced Article Cleanup WikiProject, a WikiProject dedicated to decreasing the number of unreferenced articles on Wikipedia. As of December, 2008 there were over 154,000 unreferenced articles on Wikipedia, we need your help! Simply click here and sign your username to accept!

Sure. I often go ref-hunting. So why not formalise it! Fribbler (talk) 13:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for joining, this project needs all the help it can get. --Captain-tucker (talk) 16:05, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Bord na gCon

On 20 July, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bord na gCon, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 17:12, 20 July 2008 (UTC)