User talk:Ayudante

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!)

Here are a few links you might find helpful:

You can sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing ~~~~; our software automatically converts it to your username and the date.

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

We're so glad you're here! TheThingy ^Talk 00:21, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dog Gone / All You Can't Eat[edit]

Sorry about that. I hit rollback on Vandalproof and it warned you instead of the IP vandal. --Rrburke^(talk) 03:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem, mistakes happen! Ayudante 03:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal warnings[edit]

Hi, thanks for joining in the work of reverting vandalism and warning the vandals. I noted that you added {{uw-vand2}} to an anon IP user's talk page. I've changed this to {{subst:uw-vand2|Darren Lockyer}}, while I was adding a further warning about another page. The "subst:" replaces the template with fixed text when the page is saved, and the second part after the | inserts a reference to the vandalised page. Hope this helps! Again, welcome and thanks. Drop me a note anytime if you're looking for help. - Fayenatic london (talk) 07:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for explaining that! Ayudante 22:01, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

that is not vandalism[edit]

that is a weird archive I made of a page. I deleted it after realizing there is no pointuser:cowbellcity45

You did not provide the article's name that you are referring to. I have no clue what you are talking about. Ayudante 22:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New York City[edit]

I can understand your assumption that my revert of New York City was vandalism in that half the content of the page vanished. However, my revert was of an edit by Anime Junkie whereby that user had performed a copy/paste and duplicated the page, artificially doubling the size of the article. The lack of a comment on my revert is a valid call though, I had just performed a quick revert with popups and didn't think twice about the auto-commenting feature. Please feel free to check this out, and afterwards, with your permission, I'll remove the vandalism warning on my talk page. Thanks. LordCo 04:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. I meant the 'be careful' notice. I know it's not a vandal warning. LordCo 04:40, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took care of the issue. Thanks for bringing that to my attention! Ayudante 04:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the subject of playing nicely[edit]

you really should give people more that 30 secs after uploading a page to check for errors and correct them. Especially when they can't save the corrected version because in the mean time you've tagged it for "speedy deletion"

I have no idea who this is. Please sign your posts with a ~~~~ so that we no who you are. Second, you left no message as to what article it is that I tagged for deletion. Finally, please don't write in such an attacking manner. Ayudante 21:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dua Khalil Article[edit]

EXPLAIN TO ME HOW EDITING the Dua Khalil Article with FACTS is Vandalism. Are you trying to cover something up here? I need an explanation. In no way are my edits vandalism so stop erasing them.

You are adding facts that do not even pertain to the article, thus that is vandalism. Please sign your posts with ~~~~ so I know who you are. Ayudante 22:27, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could I Trouble You...[edit]

...to have a look at some edits? I reverted what I suspected was vandalism on Anna Anderson last night. An anonymous user, User:209.136.70.93 made what I believe to be POV edits to the article. He re-reverted, and while I'd normally have no problem reverting him again and putting a notice on his talk page, something tells me that this'll just end up as a silly edit war. Could you possibly have a peek at the page and give me your opinion of the edits this user has made? Also, please understand that I have no personal interest in the article outside of the possibility that it's being vandalized.

Thank you. LordCo 00:55, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am leaving this message on your talk page, as well as mine because I think it is easier that way! (You might think I am weird) I would assume that the edits you reverted probably are false. However, I know so little about the topic I would just wait until someone that knows a little more about the topic can come along and tell whether they are vandal edits or not. Ayudante 01:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lol. That was another one of the reasons I was reluctant to re-revert. In any case, thank you for looking and for your opinion, I really appreciate it. LordCo 01:43, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem!

??[edit]

You can't assume that everyone on this IP is a puppeteer. Let's say someone messes up, then they will be accused for being Jessica. That's not fair. (Morrie)

I am not assuming anything, however, you cannot remove tags that clearly state DO NOT DELETE! Ayudante 04:55, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is different[edit]

Way different. How do you know where the admins are and other users? How do you get to people's talk pages without going to page history? How do you know how much contributins you or someone else has made? Do you think this is different? Why am I asking so many questions?

Archival of Talk:Global warming[edit]

While archival of the page is overdue. Its not really smart to be archiving sections/discussions that were active as of today. --Kim D. Petersen 15:25, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've archived as many threads as possible now that haven't been active for a 5-7 days. --Kim D. Petersen 16:24, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]