Apphistorian
Vandals attack! edit
<<Hey Montana, Who took all the Appaloosa photos? The history won't show who removed them. Kind of a strange thing to happen, although I was kind of glad to see the one gone, since it's a bad picture.>>
That was called VANDALISM, the bane of wikipedia, the reason for watchlists and what makes editors grumpy. I reverted the article. It should be OK now. The person who did it was what we in wikiland call an "anonymous IP" --an unregistered user who dove in, wrecked the article and ran. Learning how to revert edits is easy and a handy tool for you!
Stuff like that, just fix immediately and don't fret talking about it...!
Go ahead and remove the really ugly one if you want, I was tempted, but there are so few images period that I didn't feel that I wanted to be too hasty...
<<Did someone go crazy with the Nez Perce stuff? I couldn't find the changes if any were made.?? I checked the changes against the last "good" version you or I had, and basically someone was just upset that we said that Chief Joseph "surrendered." They put in a long rant about it, which I basically cut down and rephrased so that we took out the word "surrender." Montanabw 03:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
FYI, for future reference: Wikipedia:Vandalism and Help:Reverting
As far as photos go, if the Wikipedia administrators removed images due to copyright problems, they leave a message behind with one of those <!--message--> tags. What happened to the Appy article today wasn't an Admin, it was a vandal.
The vandalism, while annoying, could be much worse...check out the edit history of Cowboy =:-O
- Ah the $64 question: How to stop vandals? Well, Horse finally got protected and for a while Pony was, might still be. I requested protection for equestrianism and cowboy and never got it. The admins just hate to lock down articles, I swear that the phase of the moon is as much a predictor as anything. They will protect stuff being vandalized multiple times per DAY, and articles with less traffic but daily vandalism can get it...basically one admin explained it to me as a look at the past 50 edits or so, if we are spending more time reverting vandals than editing, they might protect. Look at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, you'll get a feeling for the whole world of wikipedia vandalism. My advice is to just get real handy and reverting and using the undo command, and from there don't worry about it until there is a problem hitting the article every day...most of this stuff is just kids who are amazed that they too can edit wikipedia. sigh. Montanabw 01:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
More projects for you? edit
If you are interested, the articles Arappaloosa and Colorado Ranger need serious help. Being breeds related to the Appy, thought you might like knowing they are out there. Montanabw 23:07, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Help me! edit
 | This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
Please help me with... How does one get correct information on a page that does not allow the heading to be edited, and has misinformation throughout the rest of the article? American Cream Draft is the American Draft Cream page and it has a lot of incorrect information on it.
Apphistorian (talk) 00:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC) App Historian Apphistorian (talk) 00:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
- Since American Cream Draft(I fixed the link, the whole URL is unnecessary) is a featured article, we want to know about any errors. Please detail those errors on the article talk page, Talk:American Cream Draft. Articles summarize what independent reliable sources state about a topic. If those sources are not being summarized accurately, please describe how. If there are sources missing, please describe them. If the sources are being summarized accurately but you disagree with what they say, there is not much we can do other than add any additional sources, giving due weight. 331dot (talk) 00:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
added my concerns to the American draft cream talk in the sources and gurus. This really needs to be corrected as the public lie hurts other breeds that were developed. Apphistorian (talk) 17:45, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Obversa (talk) 15:54, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
- Condoning copyright infringement and theft just hurts the entire concept of Wikipedia. The fact someone has been allowed to wholescale steal other's works multiple times, as Observa has, and continue to post is just disgusting. For wikipedia to roadblock people who don't want their stuff stolen is aiding criminal actions. This isn't about 1st amendment rights, it's about condoning theft. Apphistorian (talk) 01:58, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
October 2023 edit
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Star Mississippi 17:36, 5 October 2023 (UTC)- It really makes the point that wikipedia would not survive without stealing the work of actual researchers. How about blocking the people with multiple copyright thefts? Oh wait, then wikipedia would be empty. Apphistorian (talk) 03:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Blocked for sockpuppetry edit
Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice:
{{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.
- Yawn. No one cares. You let a copyright thief steal me work, and instead of banning them you are mad at me for defending my copyrighted work. No wonder no one takes Wikipedia seriously. I have 2 other accounts already, so good luck finding them. Hint: This one wasn't used for years. And if I find anymore of my stuff on here I'll report it Apphistorian (talk) 03:28, 7 November 2023 (UTC)