User talk:Michaelas10/vandalism

I've made over 1000 reverts in my time as a vandal-reverter, and I'm sure quite a few of these were made by a mistake. After all, I'm only a human. If you've noted I reverted a good-faith edit of yours by a misunderstanding, feel free to notice me about it here.

Musan

Musan is a city near the border of china on tumen river. the city is also noted in the movie "the children of the secret state"- they said that it's like ghost town. 84.94.62.150 19:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for correcting the information, but as I said on your talk page, before making an important edits please add an edit summary to it or discuss it on the article's discussion page. Michaelas10 (Talk) 19:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Metallica Edit

Hey Michael just wondering why you reverted my edit to the Metallica page? It was only a short edit, which has been reported several times over the years most notably to my knowledge by Kerrang in a 2000 article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.210.190.242 (talk • contribs)

"After allegedly kicking James' dog" did sound a lot like vandalism. When making factural changes to the article, especially such as the one described above, always try to reference you edits. To avoid further confusion, please consider creating an account. Michaelas10 (Talk) 15:14, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Reference

From my transcript:

"VADER: No. I am your father."

Furthermore, I've that movie several times so I know he never said that. 24.158.198.170 17:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Can you provide a link to the transcript? If you will, I am willing to add it. Michaelas10 (Talk) 17:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

No, i believe its an R&B song — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.77.96 (talk • contribs)

• You can't label a song R&B because you think so. Please provide references for it before making such changes. Michaelas10 (Talk) 13:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

vandalism???

hi on the slayer page i gave dave lombardo and tom arayas country of birth. why would you call this vandalism?Ukbn2 19:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd rather keep the "hispanic ancestry" label for them, which has a corresponding reference tag, instead of saying they "immigrated" to the US. You've also added "respectively" at the end of the sentence. Michaelas10 (Talk) 19:30, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Blech

Vandalism nothing. I remove blatant copyvios and people revert me... and again... I'm not going to hit the reversions rule on that page but I wont be responsible if about.com sends a DMCA notice to Florida. 68.39.174.238 12:21, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Answered. Michaelas10 (Talk)

Deleted?

no, I didn't delete it. I moved it to "fourth wall breaks", because whoever wrote the article called breaking the fourth wall a "technichal goof". ):( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.217.120.229 (talk • contribs)

Answered. Michaelas10 (Talk) 13:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

y?

y did u tell me to stop vandalising the sandbox? ??? 74.37.205.135 20:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

• The sandbox is used primarly for tests, not for profanity and images of horse feces. Any such attemps to vandalise the sandbox will be removed very quickly. Michaelas10 (Talk) 20:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Your reversion on the Misc desk and warning

Hi Michaelas10: I'm not sure that your reversion and warning of User_talk:71.97.27.89 was warranted; is there a particular reason why you thought this user's contributions justified that action? Anchoress 21:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

• I strongly believe that this was a bad-faith edit. I don't see how asking the community why they didn't do their homework was related to the reference desk, nor how it could help it. Wikipedia is not a social networking website. Michaelas10 (Talk) 21:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, I agree that Wikipedia isn't a social networking site, but I don't see how the edits have anything to do with that. I guess you must spend time on the Ref desks if you reverted there, so you probably know the issues about when and how we answer homework questions has been a hot topic of discussion lately. Several editors have asked about it. How I read the edits was that the questioner either saw the caveat at the top of the page about homework, or saw one of our discussions about homework, and was wondering why that was, and how we knew not to answer a question because it was homework. It didn't sound like a discussion question at all. Another possible reason why this editor asked the question is that for about half a day yesterday her/his first edit (an obviously good-faith question) had been mistakenly deleted. The questioner might have gone looking for it, failed to find it, thought it had been deleted because it was a homework question and wondered how we knew it was homework. Anchoress 21:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Stars! article

Hi there. I can sort of understand you reverting my changes when I was removing stuff, though I think you shouldn't as I was simply trying to make the article comply with the guidelines. I really don't understand why you reverted the infobox addition though. Anyway, I don't have time to mess around with this right now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.248.95 (talk • contribs)

• I don't see how removing large portions of information helped to make the article comply with the guidelines, you might have just tagged it with {{cleanup}}. You could also explain the removal through your edit summary, the lack of valid explanation made me consider your edits as vandalim and revert them entirely. Michaelas10 (Talk) 21:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Korn article

It wasn't vandalism.I was fixing it.Someone changed the names of the members , so I was putting it back. Also, the band is listed as Nu metal,Alternative metal,Industrial metal,Rapcore. First, Industrial metal is a subgenre of alternative metal, so we should decide whether it should be one or the other. But Korn takes influence from other types of metal , so that's why i put altenative. Also, I don't know why they should be considered rapcore. I have yet to find a song that has rapping. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.172.98.73 (talk • contribs)

As I already said in your talk page, you did not provide an edit summary, and I could not determine whether the edit was vandalism or a constructive contribution. Please also understand that changing the genre of a band per personal analysis is original research, and it is preferable that such changes will be discussed in the talk page of the article. As for the change in the band's members, that wasn't made in the same edit I reverted. Michaelas10 (Talk) 14:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

???

hey, why'dya revert the edit i made on darna mana hai? out of the plot summaries of the six stories, five outlined the basic story and left a little suspense, but the one i edited gave the whole plot away, so i thought i'd get it to look more like the others. u think it's vandalism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.95.163.106 (talk • contribs)

Please note that Wikipedia is not censored, and there is no need to hide any information or plot from the readers. Besides, this is why the {{spoiler}} tag exists for. Michaelas10 (Talk) 16:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Robert Benoist

Your changes to the Robert benoist biography after I edited the entry have reintroduced the errors I was trying to fix. I have been researching the subject for 18 years, am about to publish a book on the subject and am a professional motor racing reporter. If you reject the changes I made you are getting it wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.232.52.169 (talk • contribs)

As the warning I gave you said, you did not provide an edit summary, and I could not find if the content removal you made was vandalism, or a clean up. You may now feel free to make the changes you made again if you would like to, but this time provide an edit summary and notice other editors through the article's discussion page. Michaelas10 (Talk) 19:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Removal of Soccerdad1955 from AIV list

Hi there. You removed that user from the AIV list, saying that they had not received a final warning. It was my understanding from the vandalism templates page that the blatantvandal template had the same effect as a test4, and is considered a final warning (ie "blocked from editing without further warning" is quoted in the official template). Please explain how this is not a final warning, and why another admin placed an indef ban on the user for their blatant vandalism rather than looking the other way as you did. :)

Chrisch 14:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Different users may have different view on issues, and it came to my attention that his edits aren't entirely balant vandalism looking at his contributions. Regardless, it might have been my mistake and he is now idenfblocked. Michaelas10^{Respect my authoritah} 14:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism Warn

Hi, I received your warn to my userpage. I appreciate you finding that, but you'll notice that I was actually reverting vandalism (two previous spam edits) and actually accidentally reverted back to a version that wasn't clean. Given that, I'm not sure a vandalism warning was really the way I'd have gone there. I appreciate your hard work - but please be careful about templating the regulars... it can occassionally backfire. Thanks for catching my mistake! Philippe 20:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Note

Note that Boris Allen has been banned for supporting vandals etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.74.1.47 (talk • contribs)

That still doesn't permit you to blank his userpage. Michaelas¹⁰ 11:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)