User talk:Royboycrashfan/Archive 1

Welcome to the Wikipedia

Welcome, Royboycrashfan/Archive 1!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

• First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
• When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
• Learn about some of the Wikipedia landmarks by trying our Wikipedia scavenger hunt!
• If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
• Wikipedia has a vibrant community of editors. The village pump is a great place to see the goings on.
• Remember to use a neutral point of view!
• Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

• Wikipedia:Utilities
• Wikipedia:Cite your sources
• Wikipedia:Verifiability
• Wikipedia:Wikiquette
• Wikipedia:Civility
• Wikipedia:Brilliant prose
• Wikipedia:Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkSoul 04:07, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on Nobel Prize

However, when one reverts a form of vandalism on articles, it is often practice to go to the talk page of the offender and to add the line, {{subst:test}} ~~~~ or {{subst:test1}}. This adds a warning to the offender's talk page that reads as follows:

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks..

See Wikipedia:Vandalism for more information on this. As you will read, for repeat offenders there is also a test2, 3, and 4. Thanks again! Cowman^Talk 14:31, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Pic of Lindsay Lohan

Just out of curiosity, where did you get the impression that the pub shot (which you can find, BTW, at Lindsay Lohan Music) was not of Lindsay? RadioKirk 19:45, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Last night, when I was reverting vandalism, I noticed the picture depicted this guy whose name I don't know instead of Lindsay. I'm clueless as to how that happened, but it seems to have been reverted. Royboycrashfan 20:56, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Ah, I see, somebody was playing around with the image itself. Someone else reverted it and replaced it. RadioKirk 21:16, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Beat ya! :"D

Keep up the good work! Your warning regime is similar to mine, coo. If you want to be more efficient, you could try my monobook.js on for size. Adds tabs to your browser for easier vandal warning. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 04:03, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

King Cobra article

Hi there! I noticed you reverted some edits by user:172.185.85.222 on the King Cobra article. I must say that some of those edits the user made appears to be rather valid. So I was wondering what your reasoning behind them was? Thanks :-) Akamad 05:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Stop reverting the king cobra page.

The page as edited by 172.185.85.222 is highly correct, and has expanded the article in many ways, including having added some excellent medical information which I have reviewed.

He has added correct grammar, made the article read more smoothly, and removed incorrect capitalized instances of king cobra.

Whatever your problem with his version is, please fix it, but do leave all that new information there.

Thank you. (unsigned comment)

Sorry, I don't know what I was thinking. I guess I got carried away. - Royboycrashfan 05:32, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks (1)

I would like to thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user page - Nick125 07:44, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem. :-) Royboycrashfan 07:44, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Andy Warhol

I'm new to WIkipedia, and I keep trying to change the Andy Warhol page...I don't have a specific source, however, it's pretty common knowledge that "Warhol" was not his real name...it was indeed Warhola (unsigned comment)

Excessive Reverting

I noticed you have been reverting many cases of vandalism, and for that I applaud you, however in some cases you have been reverting perfectly valid information. When changes done by another user are not blatant vandalism, it is best to do a bit of research on questionable changes before automatically assuming they are incorrect. For example, in the Andy Warhol page it took me a minute of searching to find out that the changes about his original name were indeed correct. So, while I'm sure that all your reverts are in good faith, I ask that you please try not to get carried away and instead try to assume that questionable edits are valid first, and don't revert them until the information is proven false. (But once again, if it's blatant vandalism such as blanking and inserting obscene language, go right ahead)

Also, another way to see if a questionable edit done by someone is vandalism is to check his or her user history. In many cases, the contributions history of vandals has other vandalization in it that may reassert the possibility of their edits being unconstructive. Thanks. Cowman^Talk 03:45, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

The Boondock Saints

I was just wondering why you removed the word "him" from the sentence "When the man exits the bathroom, the saints make Rocco kill him himself.", which is what actually happens in the movie. thanks, Alexforcefive 04:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, brainfart. When I read the sentence, I thought "Why does it say 'him' twice?". It wasn't vandalism, just confusion. Royboycrashfan 04:22, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

ah, I thought maybe that's what happened. Sorry for labelling it vandalism, but I've reverted the article three times now in four days. I'm a little jumpy! ;P

68.112.201.90

Hello--why are you vandalizing my user page?? I hardly see how a link to fool and tool is anything that you should be deleting!!68.112.201.90 03:46, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

What? I never deleted anything. All I did was add <br> tags. Royboycrashfan 03:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Well--the history seems to indicate something different--perhaps I am wrong--I am a newbie. However, please refrain from adding tags to my user page unless you can show the policy that allows you to vandalize my work. I like it the way it is! Braaad 03:50, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry if I seem a bit paranoid but I have been the victim of servere harassment of late and I will not allow anyone to change my user page without justification. Braaad 03:56, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I added the <br> tags because the troll picture was in the way of the template. That's all. I wasn't vandalizing in any way. Royboycrashfan 03:57, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Again--my apologies--however, please refrain from ANY addition to my user page. I don't believe that your additions are REQUIRED by any policy. 68.112.201.90 03:59, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

66.214.87.127

Just so you know, it's wiped 3 warnings from its talk page already and been listed at WP:VIP. Though maybe having yet another person tell it to stop may do some good. The Literate Engineer 04:38, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

152.163.100.204

The anon just erased an entire article[1], not once but twice [2]. Please block him as per your warning:

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Royboycrashfan 23:14, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Found here: User_talk:152.163.100.204#December_2005 Travb 23:20, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have the privilege to block users. Royboycrashfan 23:22, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Taken care of. I contacted admin here. Travb 23:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

LOL opps you posted this warning just today, for the same incident. I didn't realize until just now. My mistake! Travb 23:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism

Thank you very much for removing the vandalism from my user page. I would haven't have seen it for the next five days, as I haven't been feeling well. Thanks again. --Kilo-Lima 14:33, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

65.26.150.243

This site is interesting. Everyone polices everyone. So you can't remove a warning from your own page ever. Is it possible to get it taken down eventually or maybe appeal the warning?--65.26.150.243 02:15, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Removing warning messages is highly discouraged because from what I know, it can mess things up. Royboycrashfan 02:19, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, how do I appeal the warning message then? Is there some hirer authority I can write to? --65.26.150.243 02:22, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

That I am not sure about. You could ask an administrator. Royboycrashfan 02:23, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I will ask the guy who warned me in the first place. --65.26.150.243 02:25, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

My supposed vandalism

I think I might have screwed something up when I attempted to revert Black (people)'s vandalism resulting in that blanking, your vigilance is appreciated though.

Thanks for removing that warning! maxcap 22:48, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

You should also remember to sign your comments on talk pages (this appears on the edit page, should you forget). ;) Royboycrashfan 03:54, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks (2)

Thanks for reverting vandalism and adding the vandal counter to my page. Cobra 06:09, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Template subst.

Hi RBcf! Thanks for the note. Cheers -- Szvest 05:23, 30 December 2005 (UTC) ^{Wiki me up&#153;}

Same here! I have to confess that I don't always keep up on the latest; thanks for the tip! Ohnoitsjamie 02:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Australian Creeps

Thanks for giving him the big number! Have a less stressed new year ok? vcxlor 06:56, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Talk Page

Thanks for reverting my talk page. I was going to block him but someone beat me to it. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 07:58, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks (3)

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page, much appreciated :D - JVG 02:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks (4)

Thanks for reverting the "nerdlinger" vandal. Dismas|^(talk) 11:13, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

User 24.64.223.203

You recently gave this user his fifth or sixth "Last warning" to stop vandalism. Since you did this, he has vandalized the Batman page. Please block him. Simnel 11:50, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not an admin. Could you ask someone with SysOp powers or put a notice about him on WP:AIV or WP:VIP? Royboycrashfan 21:24, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Seige of the North

Roy, you may have found my edit "unhelpful" but it's the direct quote from Mike DiMartino in the latter half of the Animation Insider interview he gave, not some trumped-up paraphrase that masquerades as a direct quote. I go now to revert your reversion in the interests of exactness. (I'll include a link to said interview.)--172.165.158.67 06:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Okay, but if you wish to make such edits in the future, I would suggest citing sources to make them more verifiable. Royboycrashfan 03:30, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

hello

there is a lot wrong with that section and i will explain it very shortly. killing children is not 'self defense' in any NPOV world view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.185.250.195 (talk • contribs)

There's no problem. A lot of pages have such sections, and nobody has complained about them. Royboycrashfan 10:32, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

69.105.39.132

I was getting to the you are blocked message! :-D [3] KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 00:34, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Now there's more emphasis. :-D Royboycrashfan 00:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Page vandalising

Wow, I'd lost count! You're right! -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 07:43, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/G-Men(Slang)

Could you please revisit and reconsider based on my comment on the AFD discussion page? - Mgm|^(talk) 11:46, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Review afd

I nominated Wikipedia Review for afd; and you removed the entry from the Feb 3 deletion log. Just wondering why... 'tis a valid afd. --EngineerScotty 05:59, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

First, you listed the old AfD discussion. Then, you wrote the text under the Jerry Jewell passage. This time, it's okay. Royboycrashfan 06:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't know how either of those happened, I just used the afd3 template. I'll try again--my apologies. --EngineerScotty 06:06, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Fictional high schools AFD

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fictional high schools, I was about to revert my comment but I hit an edit conflict with you. You're right that Luann was most likely the intended reference. With retrospect it was an unnecessary edit on my part. My apologies. --Muchness 06:09, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of UML tools

Those links can be deleted. Please reconsider your vote for an article with the external links removed. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:46, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cornell Hangovers

I'd added comments explaining more about the Hangovers' notability, and also the motives of the nominator; I was hoping you'd be willing to reconsider your vote to delete. Cheers, JDoorjam Talk 05:23, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your vote on AfD Joi Gordon

[4] I've presented some evidence about her notoriety under WP:Bio guidelines. Would you be kind enough to review the evidence and consider changing your vote? ---J.Smith 05:35, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Instat messaging

That removal was a mistake I reverted the wrong page my mistake :( THANKS Betacommand 04:16, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

WP:AFD

Hi there,

This concerns Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Daisey, where you recently voiced an opinion. User:Calton has raised some significant objections, and I would like to ask if you wouldn't mind considering the ensuing discussion and changing or confirming your choice with respect to the article Mike Daisey. Sincerely ENCEPHALON 07:06, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Reconsider AfD on Imao Blog Article?

Can I get you to reconsider your vote on the AfD on Imao blog? Per WP:WEB, there are more factors to notability than Alexa rank. The article has been edited to include verifiable evidence of notabliity, since your vote. Thanks FlyingSpaceMonkey 17:58, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm afraid not. Looks like a red link. Royal Blue 00:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Woody Guthrie

Just so you're not confused by what I did, I reverted all the way back to #40200281 b/c I believe that the "Alex Guthrie" stuff was vandalism, too. Good luck with 206.131.56.156; I have to handle some stuff here at the office, so he's all yours (don't forget to use WP:AIV if he gets out of hand). --M@rēino 19:23, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I just became aware of that. Royal Blue ^T/_C 19:24, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Lululemon AfD

You recently voted in the AfD for Lulu Lemon. I'd appreciate it if you would reconsider your "delete" for advertising vote. I've added some recent information to the article and removed more of the "advertising". Would you revisit the article as well as the comments that I made a number of entries below your vote. Thanks so much for your consideration. —ERcheck @ 23:41, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Glyconutrient

You recently redirected Glyconutrient after its AfD was closed. This is just a courtesy to point out to you that I feel the AfD was closed inappropriately, for a number of reasons:

a) It was closed early, after less than 24 hours, although no one had expressed a single opinion in favor of "speedy" anything.

b) There was no clear consensus to redirect. There were various suggestions.

I've re-opened the AfD for these reasons, and because I did that, I also reverted your redirect. -ikkyu2 (talk) 01:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

dear royboycrashfan

I would like to know who vandalized Stone Cold (novel). Please tell me at jakeyfry@aol.com This is really important, the IP of the ban was my schools IP, and everyone is blaming me because i have a wiki account.

From fryjak. Ps, sorry if this is wrong place.