Jump to content

User talk:Amcrius: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
SineBot (talk | contribs)
m Signing comment by 98.69.162.127 - ""
Line 120: Line 120:
ChaseAm, you can shorten your edit summaries. Like with this [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=United_States_Armed_Forces&curid=32212&diff=549735653&oldid=549735413], you said "Doesn't appear to be a valid change (it appears dubious and vandalous); if it is, an edit summary or reference should be provided, or it should..." You could just say rvv(?), no RS, unexplained. Or any combo of those terms. See [[WP:G|Glossary]] and [[WP:ES]] (especially the link in the SA section) for more hints. Also, your AfD on Stephen Liddle has sparked a lively discussion. I've enjoyed it and learned a few things. Keep up the good work. – [[User:Srich32977|S. Rich]] ([[User talk:Srich32977|talk]]) 00:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
ChaseAm, you can shorten your edit summaries. Like with this [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=United_States_Armed_Forces&curid=32212&diff=549735653&oldid=549735413], you said "Doesn't appear to be a valid change (it appears dubious and vandalous); if it is, an edit summary or reference should be provided, or it should..." You could just say rvv(?), no RS, unexplained. Or any combo of those terms. See [[WP:G|Glossary]] and [[WP:ES]] (especially the link in the SA section) for more hints. Also, your AfD on Stephen Liddle has sparked a lively discussion. I've enjoyed it and learned a few things. Keep up the good work. – [[User:Srich32977|S. Rich]] ([[User talk:Srich32977|talk]]) 00:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
:{{aye}} Oh, excellent - a wonderful surprise! Thank you, I'm guessing you see that I rather enjoy and appreciate suggestions! Okay, I will definitely take that into account when reverting. However, I've been "on the fence", so to speak, about edit summaries. For the new people, I'd like the person who was reverted to be able to clearly see as to why they were reverted. Though, I also think if they're editing should they not have knowledge of these codes/shortenings, or look into them if not? I especially try not to bite newcomers (or anybody, really). Hmm, I suppose if that's reallly a concern I could just post a personal message on their page if it hasn't already been done, seeing as that's more of a function of messages rather than edit summaries. What would you think as for that? Also, for the AfD on Stephen Liddle has certainly taught me many things as well. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! [[User:ChaseAm|ChaseAm]] ([[User talk:ChaseAm#top|talk]]) 00:33, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
:{{aye}} Oh, excellent - a wonderful surprise! Thank you, I'm guessing you see that I rather enjoy and appreciate suggestions! Okay, I will definitely take that into account when reverting. However, I've been "on the fence", so to speak, about edit summaries. For the new people, I'd like the person who was reverted to be able to clearly see as to why they were reverted. Though, I also think if they're editing should they not have knowledge of these codes/shortenings, or look into them if not? I especially try not to bite newcomers (or anybody, really). Hmm, I suppose if that's reallly a concern I could just post a personal message on their page if it hasn't already been done, seeing as that's more of a function of messages rather than edit summaries. What would you think as for that? Also, for the AfD on Stephen Liddle has certainly taught me many things as well. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! [[User:ChaseAm|ChaseAm]] ([[User talk:ChaseAm#top|talk]]) 00:33, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Ok chase. Thank you very much. I know Euronymous and Dead are best firneds, so I shall put in personal life. Thank you.
Ok chase. Thank you very much. I know Euronymous and Dead are best firneds, so I shall put in personal life. Thank you. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/98.69.162.127|98.69.162.127]] ([[User talk:98.69.162.127|talk]]) 23:58, 29 April 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== Hi Dear Friend ==
== Hi Dear Friend ==

Revision as of 00:00, 30 April 2013


Welcome

GB fan 00:37, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome

I am glad you understand. If you have any questions that I can answer let me know. Again welcome and keep up the good work. GB fan 00:40, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ChaseAm, you are invited to the Teahouse

Teahouse logo

Hi ChaseAm! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Writ Keeper (I'm a Teahouse host)

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:16, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Photographer's Barnstar
I've no idea how or why you decided to update the images on the ClueBot false positive page, but the new pictures are a great improvement. Thank you! Yunshui  06:52, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Hello. Overall I still agree with what I said when I first saw your request at WP:RFP/C, you are doing a very good job. For the most part your edits and warning are appropriate. There are some that warnings that probably weren't appropriate.

You gave 130.185.155.130 an only warning for [this edit. While the edit was inappropriate, it probably didn't rise to the level of an only warning. Also you reported them to WP:AIV for vandalism after a final warning. The only problem is that the final warning was in January. After a few days most warnings of IPs can be disregarded because there is a strong possibility that it was a different person.

Here, you reverted an IP on their talkpage. The comments they made were inappropriate ad should have been removed then warned for it, but you should not have readded the information they removed. Users, even IPs, can remove most items from their talk page. The list of things that can not be removed is very short. Prior to this you were correct when you restored content to an IPs talk page that they removed.

Nothing technically wrong with this, but after you moved Wikipedia:Hope Castle to Hope Castle you could have requested the redirect be deleted as it was not needed. (I have deleted the redirect)

When you edited Brooke Candy you added {{citation needed}} tags to a couple of unsourced statements. While that is correct in most instances, when we are talking about living people and have something that could be considered negative, the first step should be to remove the the information until a reliable source is found.

You use edits summaries which is very important for others to be able to see what you have done. There are a few things you can improve on, but that is the same for all of us. Overall you are progressing very nicely. Keep up the good work. GB fan 01:13, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, certainly! Thank you so much for the suggestions; it's nice to have some outside ideas on where to work on and place focus. Once again, thanks a bunch! ChaseAm (talk) 19:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions

ChaseAm, you can shorten your edit summaries. Like with this [1], you said "Doesn't appear to be a valid change (it appears dubious and vandalous); if it is, an edit summary or reference should be provided, or it should..." You could just say rvv(?), no RS, unexplained. Or any combo of those terms. See Glossary and WP:ES (especially the link in the SA section) for more hints. Also, your AfD on Stephen Liddle has sparked a lively discussion. I've enjoyed it and learned a few things. Keep up the good work. – S. Rich (talk) 00:25, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Green tickY Oh, excellent - a wonderful surprise! Thank you, I'm guessing you see that I rather enjoy and appreciate suggestions! Okay, I will definitely take that into account when reverting. However, I've been "on the fence", so to speak, about edit summaries. For the new people, I'd like the person who was reverted to be able to clearly see as to why they were reverted. Though, I also think if they're editing should they not have knowledge of these codes/shortenings, or look into them if not? I especially try not to bite newcomers (or anybody, really). Hmm, I suppose if that's reallly a concern I could just post a personal message on their page if it hasn't already been done, seeing as that's more of a function of messages rather than edit summaries. What would you think as for that? Also, for the AfD on Stephen Liddle has certainly taught me many things as well. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! ChaseAm (talk) 00:33, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok chase. Thank you very much. I know Euronymous and Dead are best firneds, so I shall put in personal life. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.69.162.127 (talk) 23:58, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dear Friend

Hi. I see you reverted Euronymous. These men are best friends. I have cited source for best friend. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.69.162.127 (talk) 04:05, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! That isn't particularly something that should go in the caption, if you really would like to put that in the article, it will need to go into a section, most likely personal life. Be sure to cite that source. Thanks for your contributions ChaseAm (talk) 11:55, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]