User talk:Vrenator/2011 Archive

I was presented with a vandalism message, but I did not edit any wikipedia page. I am confused, especially as I am on a shared network, which is collectively blocked from editing wikipages —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.80.20.230 (talk) 12:07, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

The block had expired but someone has vandalised from this IP address today and it is now blocked again Vrenator (talk) 12:11, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for showing me how strong your vandalism ban is, i now trust that most content is not just people having fun and destroying the net — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chubbybig (talk • contribs) 16:46, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Show me what you have got and I show you mind. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.66.9.111 (talk) 16:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sorry for that, it was a mistake Sm3a (talk) 17:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC).Reply

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. Reyk _YO! 22:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

No Problem! Vrenator (talk) 09:05, 6 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

U're saying that i am vandalism Wikipedia, which is not true! I do tell true stories, that's not vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.83.132.56 (talk) 10:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

All your edits today have been unsubstantiated personal attacks - that is vandalism - If you continue you will be blocked from editing.Vrenator (talk) 10:10, 6 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

your right his lacrosse is a much more interesting then my patents or multimillion dollar company right? Anyway I would like to create a page ( if need be I will have one of my people do it ) that is under Nicholas James not nick james but cant seem to figure out how to do it. It appears to revert to nick instead and says that page exist but not under nicholas it dose not. What do you suggest?

Nicholas James is set as a redirect to Nick James. If there is more than one notable Nick or Nicholas James then a disambiguation page can be set up like this, Murdo MacDonald (disambiguation). I put a welcome template on your user page User talk:99.170.144.10 which gives a bit of help and guidance for new Wikipedians. I suggest to create a User first and edit using a log in rather than an IP address as you have been doing. Vrenator (talk) 12:15, 6 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

You left a message for me on 29 December 2010: "The recent edit you made to Katya Virshilas constitutes vandalism, and has been reverted. Please do not continue to vandalize pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Vrenator (talk) 19:30, 29 December 2010 (UTC)". BUT... I bought this computer with, presumably, this IP, on 31 December and it was supposed to be brand new, unused! What does this mean? Was it a used computer? From the posting, can we find out the country from which this posting was made? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.157.191.107 (talk)

The IP address is not to do with the computer you are using but the Internet connection. It is possible the IP address was assigned to someone else previously. The best way to avoid any confusion is to set up a user name and log in to Wikipedia with that. Vrenator (talk) 09:07, 7 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

We have been asked by the school to Immediately Remove the today section.. you have reverted it back to abusive information. some children changed it over Christmas period.. THIS MUST BE REMOVED ASAP..

Az —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.45.194.35 (talk) 16:24, 7 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for catching vandalism (and in record time!) on my talk page. :) Guoguo12--Talk--  21:18, 10 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome! Vrenator (talk) 21:19, 10 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Really sorry! Was just a joke between a friend and i. Peace out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.63.235 (talk) 22:01, 10 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I am currently trying to update our wikipedia page. This is my first time doing this and I do not want the whole thing to get deleted. I am working on explaining why we are one of the oldest firms in Florida. But I keep getting tagged as going to be deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.64.244.194 (talk) 20:25, 13 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've put a message on your talk page which gives advise on creating a new article. You have already put the 'Hang on' on the page to contest the speedy deletion. you need to ensure that you provide citations to show notability. If you are connected with the organisation you may have a conflict of interest. Vrenator (talk) 20:31, 13 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dear Mrs. Vrenator,

I understand your concern that my recent interventions on the "List of Beelzebub's characters" may seem overattentive to detail. However, allow me to explain:

- Since any criterion to leave out characters is essentially arbitrary, I've opted for maximal coverage. Other than characters who do not appear more than once, I've decided to include everyone, and Kido and Sadohara were missing. If you think this should be discussed further, please expose your reasons in the discussion page before reverting my recent edits.

- I decided to go into more detail on Saotome because he may represent an evolved version of Oga's powers, and because his introduction was a major plot twist.

- Kiriya's name was spelled incorrectly over most of the text.

- Sometimes, usage of the pronoun compromised understanding. In one instance, it would be impossible to say whether the text referred to Oga or Alex, for example. I took care to eliminate sources of ambiguity by using names in a more liberal way.

- Izuma's reaction to Saotome's use of demonic power was missing from his character's description. Symmetry with the other characters who responded to the pulse of energy was lacking.

Therefore, instead of reverting to 82.35.239.159, consider comparing the first version of 75.207.225.49 to the previous one by Hugosworld92. I say that because 75.207.225.49 is also I: you will find that I am almost solely responsible for the article in its current state, devoted a lot of effort to it and would like to have a word in its evolution. I believe there was significant improvement of the article relative to when Hugosworld92's version was current. The manga is very popular and the anime has just been released, so interest in the page is bound to increase in the near future. Is it not reasonable to present a neat description of characters for those interested?

If you feel that some of my edits are unnecessary, consider not jumping back to a version several steps behind, but to one that retains the most substantial changes and gets rid of the "unconstructive" edits. Or else, change the "unconstructive" parts back manually.

If you would like to make a substantial contribution to this article, why not help me with including more references? It is a tedious, cumbersome task and, although I have read the manga several times, I still cannot bring myself to do it. Finding the names in Japanese script is also in good order. 144.92.43.122 (talk) 23:09, 13 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

The main reason I reverted your entries was that it showed up as removal of content with no edit summary. I see you have now put those edits back in with a summary. I apologise if I was a bit hasty in reverting. I do not know enough about the subject nor do I have the time to provide references but I wish you success with the project.Vrenator (talk) 10:21, 14 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sir I am a student of Sathyabama Uinvesity. This page has very an very old photo the university. So i want to put some new photos the university and its new infrasturure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.250.42 (talk) 12:54, 14 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

You may have intended to put up new photos of the university but you actually put up a load of Wikipedia example files. If you want to put up photos you need to upload them first and ensure you have the rights to use them. Vrenator (talk) 12:59, 14 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I do have the rights to use the photo. Is it possible to put the photo in wikipedia after uploading it into facebook ? Actually i am very new to wikipedia. I am really sorry if i had done some thing wrong last time. I will try it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.250.42 (talk) 13:09, 14 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

See Wikipedia:Uploading images for details on uploading images to Wikipedia. You do need to be logged in with anautoconfirmed account to upload images (meaning that the account must be at least four days old, and you must have made at least ten edits). If you do not have an account, or you have not been autoconfirmed yet, please see Wikipedia:Files for upload. Vrenator (talk) 14:05, 14 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

After lots and lots of searching, I was able to find a video of him accusing pianists (most of whom are now deceased) that they used shortcuts and had sloppy playing techniques. Here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vwBkg3TbHg

As a musician, a piano teacher and performer - I feel it's pretty fraudulent to let someone like Richard Kastle have a page on Wikipedia. There have been a number of nutters on YouTube (one of whom was called MikeCaffey) who seemed to go to INCREDIBLE detail to try and promote this fraud, and to remove comments of those who disagreed (and chances are there are people doing it to his Wikipedia page), why I don't know, but I feel it's only fair not to promote someone who feels he needs to circulate untrue statements.

This video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drEFMz7HiCU was made a while back when mikecaffey was rampant on YouTube. There have been some assumptions that Richard Kastle was mikecaffey, however it's impossible to prove or know how much truth there is on the matter (if there IS any).

As someone who cares about the quality of the arts, and music in particular, I feel I have to say this, simply because the fact that a page like this is dedicated to him, to me, reeks of someone 'wanker' (not you obviously), but some nut who seems to have no agenda but to promote this nutter.

I'm not denying that this guy studied at University, or that the page contains false information, but I feel that if someone like Kastle who mocked, lied and made statements to denegrade the reputation of others... then I do not see why this guy has... no, DESERVES a page of his own.

Is it possible for the page to be deleted... or is there a process that has to take place before it is deleted? I'm sure there are many others (and there WERE many others) in the past who saw Kastles derogatory comments as sick and decietful.

Thank you for your time.

I note your comments about the article but putting them in the body of the article is not the place. Comments about the article should be on the talk page. I note you have made some comments there already. If there are factually accurate contributions you can make, put them in the article but be sure to include references. If you believe the article should be deleted there are procedures for that here Wikipedia:Deletion process. The criteria for having an article is notability - not likability so providing there are references to demonstrate notability then the article should remain. Your comment in the article saying it should be deleted is vandalism and this is why it was reverted. Vrenator (talk) 08:47, 16 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

NO. What Kastle says is vandalism against the reputation of GOOD pianists... What I said had to be said. I shall definitely look at the process of getting an article deleted.

Thanks for the warning. Shame you didn't bother to check what my edit was, else you'd have noticed I was reverting a vandalism edit by a IP that just has the intention of vandalising wrestling pages. 86.186.84.220 (talk) 17:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

As a rollback user and a recent changes patroller, shouldn't you be taking more care in your use of the tools? 86.186.84.220 (talk) 17:06, 18 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wasi'chu Jaque Hammer (talk) 15:10, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Vrenator,

I am wondering why you removed the addition of Kashoo Online Accounting? This is a fairly new company but has recently been purchased by FBC. Kashoo is the #1 search term on Google for 'Online Accounting Software' and has numerous non-trivial articles written about it. Does this company need a Wiki article before it can be included?

Thanks for taking the time.

Best regards,

Christopher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tekgrunt (talk • contribs) 19:07, 31 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

The criteria for inclusion is that the company must have an article. To have an article notability must be demonstrated by including external references. All the other items listed have Wikipedia articles. Vrenator (talk) 09:50, 1 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

what is the problem? why did you revert my improvements? By the way, can you help me reshaping the box covering the picture? Answer here, please.Ta Prof A.C. 93.43.194.78 (talk) 14:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I inadvertently reverted your changes and then immediately put them back. I've changed some of the formatting so that it doesn't go over the picture but I'm not sure exactly how you would like it set out. The best way is to find an article that is set out how you want it and copy the formatting or look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia. Vrenator (talk) 15:27, 2 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

You seem to have saved the picture, but destroyed the box. Isn't it possible to save both? Maybe pushing the picture over? Reply here please, A.C. 93.43.194.78 (talk) 15:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC) Do you really want boxes? Check out Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia to see different formats available or look at a similar page. Vrenator (talk) 15:29, 2 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dear Madam. I appreciated your attention.

 I tried again and, I don't know how or why, this time it worked.

The article is a very tangled issue and the boxex are necessary, as they contain detailed information, which may not interest the general public. I am not familiar with the procedures, so it was very fatiguing. If you want to complete the job , you might provide a redirect for each synonim of rapini. It is impossible for me, because just to obtain ONE simple correction, I had to fight a whole day with ignorant editors. Some are not native English speakers and, probably, have also problems in comprehension. A youtube COMMERCIAL video has been removed, if you can restore, it would be fine! Thanks for your help. Byddwch wych! Prof. A.C.93.43.210.190 (talk) 13:04, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dear Madam, The article RAPINI has beeen vandalize by Bkonrad.Could you restore it?93.43.209.146 (talk) 08:21, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I understand your frustration but the article wasn't vandalised by Bkonrad, he reverted back to a previous version in good faith as unfortunately the style and formatting of your changes left the article confusing and unreadable. It is unhelpful to verbally attack editors such as Bkonrad who are trying to keep Wikipedia a useful encyclopaedia. It may be helpful for you to set up a user account and a sub page to try out your editing on Rapini before putting the changes into the live article. you will find that if you log in and edit under a username your edits are less likely to be automatically reverted as vandalism. Unfortunately I don't have the time or skills to spend time helping edit the article but maybe another editor may be able to help - try putting {{helpme}} on your talk page. Vrenator (talk) 09:11, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dear Madam, I apply to your English fair-play. I haven't verbally attacked anyone!, on the contrary I have been very mild. 'Incompetence and arrogance ' is the LEAST one can say. I realize that an editor may be incompetent. The point is that if you don't like the format of an article, [because of your incompetence], you have the authority to change it, to your shame!. But you have NO RIGHT whatsoever to DESTROY one week of painstaking research, because you are too lazy or too ignorant to read and comprehend it. I am a retired Professor, and ,look, I grow rapini in my kitchen garden.I was intrigued by the extreme difficulty of the issue , that few people in the world can clarify.I hope you grant that is simply outrageous that anyone Jack-in-the-office may take the liberty of liquidating so many efforts without a warning, as you kindly did, or without discussion. If I decide to verbally attack your colleague, I hope you forgive me. With my best wishes. P.S. The Cambridge dictionary translates cimedirape 'turnip tops'.I guess it is wrong.Do you have rapini in Wales? A.C.93.43.208.140 (talk) 12:32, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Firstly, I did not destroy or revert your work, another editor reverted it and I believe he was right to do so. I have no wish to engage in any further discussion about the article. I find your tone to be abusive and insulting both here and on Bkonrad's talkpage. I have done nothing but try to help you to edit the article in a constructive way. Vrenator (talk) 16:30, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

i saw your page and got inspired. by the way i am active contributor on wiki with little contribution till. And am not aware much with styling and formatting documents.so, i am looking for someone who guide me little in some leisure time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manjeetkumar53 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 28 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the message. I'm not really that experienced an editor. To format my pages I've basically copied from other pages. Feel free to copy the formatting - just copy and paste from edit. If you need more help try Wikipedia:Questions. Vrenator (talk) 19:55, 28 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

The article disscusion is closed it is to be kept, therefore banner is removed noob error

The Afd has not been closed. The only indication of its closure is by you as an anonymous IP editor without even signing your comment.Vrenator (talk) 13:34, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

sorry i was testing out what i can do. Malwood (talk) 16:14, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

As a former employee of the Thomas J. Pappas schools my edits were simply correct incorrect information someone else posted.

70.190.161.185 (talk) 16:49, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Changing the English word "clientele" to the French word "clientèle" is not correcting spelling, it is translating to a foreign language. I reversed that one. Happy editing! Chris the speller (talk) 02:20, 16 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for helping fix spelling on an article. However, the correct edit should have been a vandalism revert. Please take care when making edits like this that you see what you are changing. Stifle (talk) 10:50, 17 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Good work, Vrenator - I got that nasty addition suppressed by WP. --Wikiain (talk) 23:25, 17 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please be careful to check the page history; you placed this speedy tag in error (the author hadn't blanked the page). Thanks, EyeSerene^talk 13:41, 18 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

The CSD template states "the author of the only substantial content has requested deletion in good faith, either explicitly or by blanking the page." The author requested the page be deleted on his talk page and asked for help in doing so. I did look at the history hence trying to help the user. Vrenator (talk) 15:17, 18 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Ah, I see. If something similar comes up again it might be helpful to note why you've tagged the page in your edit summary. No worries though, and thanks very much for the explanation :) EyeSerene^talk 15:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I was just curious as to why my page [Savannah Bogat] was deleted. In your explanation for the deletion, it stated "does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject". However, I do not agree with that. There are pages that others have made that only say one useless sentence about the person, while my page provides adequate information regarding Savannah Bogat. I always thought of Wikipedia as a viable source for information on a variety of people, and for my page not to be approved, is upsetting. I hope you will find the time to review my page for Savannah Bogat and reconsider your deletion. Thank you. Savbogat (talk) 15:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

I did not delete the page, that was done by an administrator, User:Lifebaka. I nominated it for deletion as there were no external references which indicated the notability of the subject. See Wikipedia:Notability for guidelines on what is considered notable. Your username also suggests that this is an autobiographical article- Please also see Wikipedia:Autobiography Vrenator (talk) 09:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

800 people use this ip it is a school —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.183.35.243 (talk) 15:32, 5 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi --- thanks for warning 75.147.73.202‎ . As they had just received a final warning recently, they were ripe for a report for a block (which I have taken care of), rather than dialing back to a first level warning -- don't be hesitant in the future to seek a block for similar vandals. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 15:02, 7 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

YOU DELETED MY THING ABOUT THE BILLIONAIRES WHY? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seannybhoy1888 (talk • contribs) 15:39, 7 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Your comments were unenclyclopaedic and did not include any references to back them up.Vrenator (talk) 15:41, 7 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

i was cleaning up the page by deleting the sections that i deemed not necessary? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.13.38 (talk) 15:44, 18 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Replacing content with "crap" is not cleaning up. Vrenator (talk) 15:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Admittedly that was, but afterwards i was deleting sections that were not necessary. The article is headed with the need for a clean-up, and the sections i deleted are definitely worthy of part of this clean-up. I am going to delete them again as they are simply not necessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.13.38 (talk) 15:48, 18 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Just letting you know that I have deleted Jordan lederman as G10 (blatant attack}, and not A7 (non notable) as you had tagged it. G10 gives a red alert for admins to delete the page very speedily. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:48, 28 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

It is true why cant I add it in? -- Regarding edit on Gaby Logan

You cannot add uncited information. Vrenator (talk) 15:40, 28 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Just made a revert to Mythology using Huggle but didn't revert back far enough, causing you to accidentally leave me this! If you could remove it I'd be grateful!! Cheers. Mato (talk) 14:31, 6 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Seems you bit me to it. Thanks. Mato (talk) 14:31, 6 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sorry for misuse of wikipedia but my intention was not to create spam links. The company we've named in Turkey is HighFive and I could not enter our company bio in english. I am a new user and did not know that this would violate wikipedia rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SCO7550 (talk • contribs) 14:01, 10 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

No problem. Vrenator (talk) 14:32, 10 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Just to let you know I'm opposing the speedy deletion on the grounds listed at the article's discussion page. Mouse Nightshirt | talk 13:03, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've passed this on to Djc wi who posted the original template. I merely replaced it when removed. Vrenator (talk) 13:11, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Many thanks. Mouse Nightshirt | talk 13:27, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for watching over Da Vinci's painting...I put the method of inversion in a separate article - The Dual Mirror Language of Leonardo Da Vinci, and I have deciphered the same code many times from its source - Ancient Egypt... Da Vinci did it freehand, which is amazing...the people in the pyramids had a preset alphabet of images, like putting cut out clothes on a Barbie Doll. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rikfriday (talk • contribs) 00:08, 12 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

I was trying to explain what happened, it wasnt vandalism because it REALLY happened as the references prove. please undo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.141.39 (talk) 09:15, 25 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Some of your addition may have been sourced but the addition of "training-ground for future snobs because it costs £155.50 per year to join." is unsourced and just insulting. Please ensure all your additions are properly sourced and encylopaedic. 09:20, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello Vrenator. I am just letting you know that I deleted Soundvision ireland, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 10:18, 25 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Vrenator,

Thanks for the message. I did not mean to delete the page of Joey Ellis. It's because I intend to redirect Joey Ellis to Joey Foster Ellis, as the person himself wants to do this. He is my friend....A great guy.

Please change it back...Thanks.

Let me know if you have any other questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellen.clementia (talk • contribs) 14:41, 13 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm a new user and I need advice — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.8.91.111 (talk) 15:48, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

sorry for vandalizing the pages — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.239.188.137 (talk) 09:09, 16 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

for the help on my talk page. Bentogoa (talk) 13:01, 17 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

hello vrenator. i noticed that Qweasd321 had been messing with the plot section of the article i mentioned. is there any way we can stop him? i hate it when he is trying to spread confusing information to other people...

sincerely, an avid reader of wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.101.39.4 (talk) 07:21, 22 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

The user has been warned. If they keep putting on unconstructive edits they will be blocked. Vrenator (talk) 07:50, 22 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks guys for these reverts and these --Redrose64 (talk) 22:09, 28 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

i've been warned for no reason. i didn't edit these pages

i've been warned for no reason. i didn't edit these pages.is it a bug?please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.108.192.13 (talk) 21:45, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

The edits were made from the same IP address as you are using. If you get a username you can avoid confusion with other editors. Vrenator (talk) 11:14, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

  Hi! Doesn't this seem like biting a newcomer? [1]. Tagging a page within minutes of creation for speedy deletion (in this case 4 minutes) may discourage the editor. Just something to look out for next time.   Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 15:30, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I understand what you are saying but I really don't think this is a good example of biting a newcomer - it is not even in English! Vrenator (talk) 15:45, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Even so, some people would define it as biting a newcomer. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 16:27, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I recently edited the Fedde le Grand article to correct his birth name from Fedde le Grand (which is his stage name) to Ferry de Groot (which I believe to be his true birth name). This change appears to have been reversed by you on the grounds of suspected vandalism. May I ask on which basis you decided that my modification is (a) in error and (b) vandalism?

You changed it with no edit summary and no source was given for the revision.Vrenator (talk) 15:37, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Why did that person keep changing the page back? I meant User:Zbankozbankovych. --Onewhohelps (talk) 15:34, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

If I need help, may I ask you? --Onewhohelps (talk) 15:52, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

You can ask - I'm not always on Wikipedia and I'm not an administrator but if I can I'll try to point you in the right direction.Vrenator (talk) 15:55, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

He is creating a nuisance on his talk page now. --Onewhohelps (talk) 16:07, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Can you stop him editing his talk page. He keeps asking for unblock and being told no. -Onewhohelps (talk) 16:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

While it turned out to be the correct reason, nominating Frigate Ecojet for deletion under Very short article lacking context within 1 minute of creation is not Assuming good faith. It is explicitly stated that you wait a reasonable amount of time in the footnotes for this criteria see Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#cite_note-Hasty-2. While I appreciate you are eager to work on New Page patrol it should be done without Biting the newbies. May I suggest that you start from the bottom of the log, which is just as helpful as it clears the backlog of unreviewed articles. --Mrmatiko (talk) 15:41, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Duly Noted - I was probably too hasty on this one.Vrenator (talk) 15:46, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I did not see an edit summary or reference for the current birth name on file, so I'm not sure why the omission of these (to the best of my knowledge) optional attributes gets my well-intended correction reverted for suspected vandalism. Wouldn't it make sense to at least verify the correction, instead of just dismissing it based on the crude assumption that the lack of a summary or reference implies malicious intent? Absence of proof is no proof of absence.

FWIW: my source is the article below combined with the knowledge that "Fedde le Grand" is not a Dutch birth name and "Groot" is Dutch for big/great/grand.

http://www.reviped.com/interviews/international-interviews/item/1960-interview-–-fedde-le-grand-still-going-strong

Can you explain why this is getting reverted?

anyway of saving this page? --Ujaj35 (talk) 14:52, 15 August 2011 (UTC) nvm --Ujaj35 (talk) 15:16, 15 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I forgot to log out from this wikipedia and then my little brother use my account for his joy. I'm sorry about that vandalism. I'm a wikipedian user for approximately 4 years, so I think I'm a experienced user. If you check my other edits, you will not find any kind of harmful contribute. I know you are doing your job. It's not a problem, good job. Best regards :)--Sabri76'^message 16:07, 15 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Thanks for editing the Mahoonagh article back to its original form. I'm glad somebody shows interest in our small parish! However, I must correct you on the issue of Clooncooravane North and South. I'm a local historian and etymology enthusiast and my recent research has indeed uncovered an approximate translation of this region of the townland. Clooncooravane is indeed a very large region of the townland, hence its separation into two distinct areas and my insistence that it was a big caravan. The translation comes from a British mistranslation from the original Irish, into English and then back into the original Irish. It was thought that travelling circuses (or "clown caravans") would rest here during the long transit to Kerry, where circuses were very popular. I hope this recently discovered meaning can be re-added to the article as soon as possible.

Thanks,

Jonny Collum — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.87.189.16 (talk) 16:23, 19 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Anyone can remove a PROD tag for any reason, so please don't revert removals--especially when they come with detailed explanations. Thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:56, 19 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I was browsing the news online and my curiosity was sparked about how many people knew about IBM's role in the Holocaust. I decided to check wikipedia and was dismayed to find that somebody saw it fit to put there that IBM "talked" about providing supplies to "accommodate" the prisoners. In reality the supplies that were provided were used to track all prisoners and log their names in a punchcard system. Since these punchcard systems were relatively complex machines, IBM employees at to visit the concentration camps all the time in order to fix them, If you think that this is not worth mentioning, especially given the fact that IBM also provided the weapons that were used against the Nazi party, then I am really not sure what to say to you.

If you are adding controversial information to an article you need to provide sources to back it up. Vrenator (talk) 15:39, 25 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for reverting the vandalism to the article on Gear trains. Prof McCarthy (talk) 06:07, 20 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome. Vrenator (talk) 08:41, 20 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Excuse me, but why am I being issued a "level 1 warning re: vandalism" for flagging a broken link that redirected to a persistent Javascript pop-up? That obviously wasn't a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. I see you removed the link after reverting my edits, so I assume you confirmed that it led to a bad page and would love to know why you felt there was something wrong about the way I dealt with the problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.246.14.5 (talk) 16:58, 21 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

As you noted I removed my changes and the warning immediately after realising that I had made a mistake. Mistakes do happen. Vrenator (talk) 10:01, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I perfectly understand the removal of my editing, but I had no time find out how would be appropriate to add a box with a warning on that page. Could you do that? The informartion on that page must be verifyed since the Heading and many explanations are not correct. Thank you ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcusmansur (talk • contribs) 17:25, 21 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

I suggest you put your comments on the article's talk page rather than the article itself. You could also consider editing or re-writing the article. If the title itself is wrong could request the page be moved. See Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia. Vrenator (talk) 08:06, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Why reporting such an important news about the personal life of a politician is considerede vandalism?

It this about censorship. The news is fresh and completely verifiable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.79.214.46 (talk) 09:55, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

It's about putting controversial uncited information on a biographical article. If it is verifiable then put in your sources. Vrenator (talk) 09:57, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have replied to your comment at AIV on this. See this edit. Feel welcome to contact me on my talk page if necessary. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:10, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

...and now I've replied to you at User talk:JamesBWatson#Thanks too. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:36, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Just letting you know I reverted your reversion of the edit on Zak Spears. As the article is about a porn actor, the content that was added isn't necessarily out of place. --Deadly∀ssassin 10:38, 27 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

No Problem - although it does leave a couple of dodgy links and refs.Vrenator (talk) 14:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I wanted to let you know that I have challenged your WP:CSD A7 on Huaian Foreign Language School. Criteria A7 does not apply to schools. I have tagged the article with some maintenance tags, and have no objection if you would like to pursue an alternative deletion process. Monty₈₄₅ 14:09, 27 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK thanks for letting me know.Vrenator (talk) 14:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

My you were quick! how do you spot the vandalism so fast? thanks. Robotics1 (talk) 20:49, 27 September 2011 (UTC) Thanks :) Vrenator (talk) 12:37, 28 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

No problem! And sorry for the mess i created by mistake. :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 12:42, 28 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for spotting and reverting the problems we are suddenly having with Grafted on this article. I doubt if we have heard the last of this editor on this page. He/she simply removed the whole section on virgin birth before I or some other editor reverted back. I don't understand how he/she has a user name without a user page. There is an editor called Graftedln73 who has the correct bio - but I can't see if it is the same editor. Myrvin (talk) 13:44, 28 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

Do you mind explaining why you reverted my Men's Rights edit? I re-wrote the Introduction to better explain what Men's Rights was about. TickTock2 (talk) 14:17, 28 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Having reviewed it I can see I was wrong in reverting. I have put it back as it was. Vrenator (talk) 14:20, 28 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! TickTock2 (talk) 14:25, 28 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

if you know the letters you can read that she is an Armenian.. 46.241.145.123 (talk) 14:19, 29 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Your edits are not constructive. You do not provide sources and pictures are being removed. Vrenator (talk) 14:23, 29 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sorry for the images but you seems dont know that the language of source is not a enough reason to remove as you are doing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.241.145.123 (talk) 14:27, 29 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

You're blind if you dont see the sources I provide [2]! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.241.145.123 (talk) 14:29, 29 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hey there. I agree with your CSD nomination. I was going to propose it myself. However, I don't believe it's a hoax, but just a duplication of solar system, as the three were accepted into the solar system as dwarfs a while ago. Such is my understanding based on Google News. cheers, ScottyBerg (talk) 15:51, 30 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Vrenator!

I have put together a survey for female editors of Wikipedia (and related projects) in order to explore, in greater detail, women's experiences and roles within the Wikimedia movement. It'd be wonderful if you could participate!

It's an independent survey, done by me, as a fellow volunteer Wikimedian. It is not being done on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation. I hope you'll participate!

Just click this link to participate in this survey, via Google!

Any questions or concerns, feel free to email me or stop by my user talk page. Also, feel free to share this any other female Wikimedians you may know. It is in English, but any language Wikimedia participants are encouraged to participate. I appreciate your contributions - to the survey and to Wikipedia! Thank you! SarahStierch (talk) 03:30, 1 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

the changes to floater were a legitimate addition of a description of a floater in media, family guy, and as a fairly accurate description this is an worthwhile addition — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.144.160 (talk) 09:06, 2 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello.

OK - first thanks for volunteering to keep wikipedia sane and I totally respect your opinion to mark my page for deletion. But before you do, I hope you take some time out to hear out my case because I think you may have missed something.

Notability: This page is the de-facto listing of Open Source ERP softwares and very important for any Open Source project like us.

Why we qualify?

• The project is a fully functional software used by many clients across the world. (https://erpnext.com#!demo)
• Its been Open Source since 2009 (http://code.google.com/p/wnframework/)
• Being actively developed (https://github.com/webnotes)
• Mentioned in some of the leading blogs (see references in the main article)
• Active community (http://groups.google.com/group/wnframework)

Fairness: Please have a look at some other ERP pages and see if they also fit the same critiria you are using to mark this.

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fedena
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebERP
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tryton
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LedgerSMB

Please compare:

• Please see what community they have
• Please find out how active is their development
• Do they have a working demo? If yes, is it just scaffolding or something real

Neutrality: Since I am the creator of this project, I may be biased, but if you look at the page, I have tried to keep opinions out of it and have also listed some of the weaknesses of the project. Like lack of automated testing. For your info - I have seen other projects and 90% don't even have any test case.

I will ask some other members of our project community to update this page. But I would request you to look at my case with fairness.

Thanks, Rushabh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rushabhmehta1 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 4 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Update

Hello. I just thought a bit more and have an idea. Since you are a frequent moderator at List of ERP software packages, why not allow all open source projects to be listed and only those with "significant coverage" to be allowed a page?

We can also separate "new" open source projects from the mature ones, so visitors can decide for them selves. This way, all projects get a fair listing and we also keep wikipedia's sanity.

If you say yes, I can do the change. I the page is too important and needs a restructure.

(The reality is that the "significant coverage" is a self fulfilling concept. List of ERP software packages is the #1 search result and all listed projects will get more and more coverage.)

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rushabhmehta1 (talk • contribs) 16:37, 4 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Firstly I didn't nominate the page for deletion although I did tag the page as I felt it did not demonstrate notability, parts are written like an Advert and the creator has a Conflict of Interest. It is not my decision as to whether it gets deleted. I am just a Wikipedia editor not an Administrator. I do regularly look at various pages such as List of ERP software packages to remove "Red Links" as the main criteria for inclusion is that there is a WIkipedia page and to have a Wikipedia page the item must demonstrate notability. If you feel the criteria for inclustion should be changed it should be discussed on the Project's Talk page. You will probably find that on most of these pages there has already been a fair amount of discussion on what should or should not be included. Vrenator (talk) 08:39, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have challenged you WP:CSD A7 on Arturo Alvarado. In my opinion the claim about being nominated for a music awards is sufficient to pass the low standards of criteria A7. The article still has issues, and probably does not pass the notability guidelines, so I have no objection if you would like to pursue an alternative deletion process. Monty₈₄₅ 16:29, 7 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

What should we do with Youcef Nadarkhani article? By media reports he was sentenced to death because of Christianity, and by official reports he's rapist. There's kind of dispute because some may claim it's anti-Iranian sentiment by Western propaganda and official sources are more relevant, and others may claim it's Iranian propaganda so Western sources are more relevant. Before I've edited text there was a clear violation of NPOV: sources and categories were one-sided. In my opinion, we should include both of it. --109.60.1.39 (talk) 14:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

To Remove the categories you have and put him in the category of Iranian Rapists is unjustified. The Rape allegations were only added later and were not in the original accusations as per references. Your changes seem very biased. You should open a discussion on the article talk page rather than keep changing it.Vrenator (talk) 14:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK, I included both categories and added official reposes. It would be nutty from us to defend rapists or persecution of Christians, so it's better to keep both. --109.60.1.39 (talk) 14:55, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

He has been accused of Rape. It is an allegation - Who made you judge and jury to convict him? Where is your evidence? I will not get into this further on my talk page - please open a discussion on the articles talk page so that other editors can comment. Vrenator (talk) 14:59, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Citation from official PressTV: "Western media have manipulated the case of Nadar-Khani, a convicted rapist and extortionist in Gilan Province, to wage an anti-Iran publicity campaign by falsely claiming that his criminal conviction his conversion to Christianity and acting as a priest." Where's official source that he's "Christian", "convert" or "sentenced to death"? He's not sentenced to death, so we should exclude that also, or leave both. --109.60.1.39 (talk) 15:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I mean, it's on you, because you surely have far more authority then I do. :) --109.60.1.39 (talk) 15:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Youcef_Nadarkhani#Edit_war_and_page_protection --BoogaLouie (talk) 20:44, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Just to let you know, I've had to decline your speedy deletion nomination of Trade Printing under importance not asserted because a business model isn't one of the categories given under that criteria as being eligible for speedy deletion. Obviously you can still Propose it for deletion or take it to AfD. --Mrmatiko (talk) 14:42, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK thanks for letting me know. My concern is not the concept of the page but that it appears to have been created for the sole purpose of putting in Spam links. The creator had their article "Zoo Printing " deleted and then created this adding spam links. If it's going to remain it needs to made encyclopaedic and not just a place to put spam. Vrenator (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

This article is not intended to add spam links. After the Zoo Printing article was deleted, I attempted to create a page that was more informative and did not come across as advertising in any way. The link to the Zoo Printing website was relevant, as the site offers clear information on the home page to define what trade printing is. My goal is to further educate people about the purpose and definition of trade printing. It's unclear to me how this demonstrates spam or advertising, especially as the link has since been removed. It's also unclear how this article is anything other than encyclopedic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Estduran (talk • contribs) 15:39, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For dealing with too much Vandalism and tagging Goran Zdrale for SD faster then me. ;) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 14:54, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks:) Vrenator (talk) 14:55, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I agree that you are very good at anti-vandalism, but tagging a page as empty one minute after the creation of a page isn't a good idea:

"Consensus has developed that in most cases articles should not be tagged for deletion under this criterion moments after creation as the creator may be actively working on the content; though there is no set time requirement, a ten-minute delay before tagging under this criterion is suggested as good practice. Please do not mark the page as patrolled prior to that suitable delay passing, so that the wait does not result in the article escaping review at a later time." taken from WP:CSD#cite_note-Hasty-2

--Mrmatiko (talk) 15:06, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the message. I do understand what you are saying but in this case it is clearly an autobiographical article for someone with no Google results other than Facebook , Twitter etc. Vrenator (talk) 15:14, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Then the best thing to do in that case is importance not asserted (A7) and state that you've already carried out a search in the edit summary. --Mrmatiko (talk) 15:22, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Vrenator, thank you for patrolling new pages. I'm just letting you know that I have deleted Daniel Bader as a G3 blatant hoax, and not as A7 (non notable person) as you had tagged it. Please be sure to read pages fully before tagging them, and for further advice do check out WP:NPP . Thanks.--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:13, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I GIVE UP! There's such a fine line between a hoax and a non-notable person - this was an example - at least it got tagged and deleted. I try to keep an eye on edits to remove vandalism and rubbish and yes mistakes happen - no-one is perfect! As you will see when I make mistakes I apologise, but to keep getting "reprimanded" for being too quick and not reading the page is unfair and not the case. I do read them and sometimes judge it slightly wrong but if you look at my edits most of the time I'm right. I think I'll give it a break now as I feel completely fed up with it all....Vrenator (talk) 15:47, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

You are a good new page patroller, please don't take our comments the wrong way. One of the reasons that people who watch Category:Candidates for speedy deletion are commenting on your nominations is because we are trying to avoid putting new editors off. Obviously this has had an unintended consequence of irritating someone who is an excellent contributor. Most of the nominations you have made are perfectly valid. Your talk page would fill up very quickly if we congratulated you on every valid nomination, which clearly results in a negative seeming talk page, and for that I'm sorry. --Mrmatiko (talk) 16:05, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

		Cookies!
		Mrmatiko has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. These are for all the valid nominations that you have made, and hopefully will continue to make. To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

--Mrmatiko (talk) 16:05, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, I see from my watchlist that you reverted this edit at Paganism which very clearly needed doing. However the IP editor clearly wasn't being a vandal - if you read the edit they made, it's clear they were being misguided but very honest in what they believed to be improving the article. I've left a note on their talk page encouraging them to look at WP:V and register an account, as I think it's possible they might become a constructive editor with some guidance. I really restrict a vandalism warning for edits such as "Brad Smith is a pagan and smells of poo"... Best wishes, Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 21:09, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Just wanted to say thank you for the help with the nasty comments someone made on my user talk page. It was kind of disheartening that my first messages from another user were so mean & unconstructive & it made me feel a bit better to know that someone else noticed & cared :-) Thanks, MsBatfish (talk) 09:50, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome. Vrenator (talk) 09:52, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Oh and thanks for the cookies!! :-D MsBatfish (talk) 09:54, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hey Vrenator,

I am completely new to WikiPedia, the reason I created a Wiki Account was to create my very own Wiki Page, Oliver Crow. I don't really know how WikiPedia works behind the scenes yet, and that's why I am guessing that I am getting my page deleted. I'm not even sure that I am posting this in the right place, or if you will see this. I really want to get involved in Wiki, but it seems that I have already gotten myself into trouble.

Is there anyway that you can assist me in learning the Wiki ways?

Thanks, -Oliver

(RandomCheesecake)

The "Welcome" message on your talkpage gives a few links and guidelines on how to edit Wikipedia. With regards to the article you created Oliver Crow please see Wikipedia:Autobiography. Vrenator (talk) 11:23, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

So basically I can't make my own WikiPedia page without getting in trouble or being deleted by someone like you. Correct? Randomcheesecake —Preceding undated comment added 17:16, 17 October 2011 (UTC).Reply

Anyone can edit Wikipedia but you just need to ensure that any changes you make are properly sourced and constructive. If you create a new page make sure it follows the guidelines. Happy editing Vrenator (talk) 17:35, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

I see my edits on the Datanomic page have been reverted. I was trying to address the concerns that this page appeared to be written as an advertisement, remove extraneous (and some obsolete) external links and to also correct errors and add correct factual information. The page has now been reverted to a condition that is inaccurate and full of marketing speak and few facts.

Regards, Dataguru

Hi Vrenator,

I'm just letting you know, that I have reverted your warning on User:Bongwarrior's talk page, as it actually was your edit, that just so happened to contain the vandalism, and Bongwarrior had just reverted it. Please make sure you carefully take a look at an edit, before you revert it, and warn a user, next time. Thank you, and Happy Editing! -- MelbourneStar☆ ^{(talk to me)} 09:06, 18 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I was actually trying to revert the same thing as Bong Warrior at the same time - Igloo must have missed this and reverted the wrong edit. Vrenator (talk) 09:09, 18 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Well that's fine, but just make sure you look back incase - 'cause trust me, in the small 10 months I've been here, I've had my run-ins with editors on simmilar issues. Thanks for explaining your reason :D -- MelbourneStar☆ ^{(talk to me)} 09:12, 18 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia sais my article will be deleted if I won't provide it with a reliable source within 10 days.

Therefore, I have 3 questions :

(Q1) Do the links in the section "External Links" count as reliable sources ? (actually THESE were my sources for the article)

(Q2) Does this link count as a reliable source ?

[3] (probably from the German author)

Note that this page (as of now) exists in 3 different languages : German, English and Greek.

I wrote the english and Greek versions of this page. The German one ALREADY existed when I wrote mine.

(Q3) Why the existence of the German one, does not (necessarily) mean I can write my article ?

(My article was based ALSO in the German one. I'm a bit confused, because it looks as wikipedia doesn't seem to consider itself a "reliable source" - I don't mean to offend anyone here)

Thank you for your time, Sincerely, ak8978

The PROD (Proposed deletion) has already been removed so the article won't be deleted as it stands. Vrenator (talk) 13:15, 18 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello Vrenator. I am just letting you know that I deleted Sana Ditta, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 15:41, 18 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

  Hello Vrenator. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know however, regarding GamesPunch, that tagging articles for speedy deletion moments after creation as lacking context (CSD A1), content (CSD A3) and articles created through the Article Wizard, is too fast. It's best to wait at least 10 - 15 minutes for more content to be added, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), pure vandalism (G3), and copyright violations (G12) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:11, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I feel my edit was constrctive. I do not think you need 5 different defintions by different writers and authors, who each have a particular narrative. I think the guardian definiotion is the oldest one and most wildley accepted. I wanted to write about how the support for media freedom changes ie the policies of the Establishment are non constant they do change.Also wanted to explain the cycle the military is called in often as a helper of last resort but then fails on the political front --Multanguy47 (talk) 14:48, 19 October 2011 (UTC) please do not undo my changeReply

I'm not sure what page you're talking about here - I did revert one of your edits but that was undone straight away. Another user has reverted other edits maybe you need to speak to them? Vrenator ^talk 14:59, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I did not realise you had undone it, I was just wondered why I got a warning --Multanguy47 (talk) 15:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

hi their is currently an edit war going on the Establishment page, I was wondering if you could arbitrate to stop it getting out of hand --Multan47 (talk) 22:56, 21 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. You recently edited World Marketplace. You might like to know that I've started an AfD discussion about the article here. andy (talk) 12:37, 28 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Vrenator,

I've removed the PROD template you replaced on this page - the article creator is within his rights to remove it, even if he did so without leaving any reasoning. From your note on his talkpage, I deduce that you read it as a AfD template instead of a PROD - you'll be pleased to know that it has now been AfD'd for precisely the same reasons (I see you've already been notified, above). Sorry for the delayed notification, real life got in the way a bit. Cheers, Yunshui 雲水 12:46, 28 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for letting me know - yes I had thought it was a PROD but I did think that the edit summary saying it was removing vandalism suggested that the user is not being honest. It appears to be a Spam only / COI account. He is also trying to drum up support for his vandalism accusations against User:Andyjsmith from other Admins - but I'm sure you've looked at his other edits already. Vrenator ^talk 12:50, 28 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I see your point. I know of the issues with this user (I think I may have speedied a couple of his articles myself, from memory) - not sure if it's deliberate vandalism or just a chronic COMPETENCE issue. Yunshui 雲水 12:58, 28 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Vrenator-

I'm new, I've read though the documentation and I apologise for conflicting with them. I've removed all information from the page and just left the right side bar on this page. I will go through the notes you provided more closely and meet with the standards.

- Mark — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark198912 (talk • contribs) 14:02, 28 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I suggest that you just remove all the content on the page and replace it with {{db-author}}. This will just get the page deleted. You can re-create the page when you are ready, but please ensure you provide proof of notability - see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) Vrenator ^talk 14:11, 28 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've done that "{{db-author}}" and saved the page with just that.

Thanks for the link!

- Mark — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark198912 (talk • contribs) 14:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I noticed the edit warring done by an IP and the resulting lock-down of the article and thought you should know that the IP 146.232.75.208 has added original research[4] to the Tatars article before and this was titled "Original research" on the talk page. Just thought you should know. Cheers. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:01, 2 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

What I was trying to do WAS constructive... however I was not able to do it. I am now going to dit back the changes i've made as what I was trying did not work. What does not help is you posting that rubbish on my talk page literally the minute i edited it. This also gives users no time to roll back. I am an experienced editor and have made many edits helping to improve wikipeia. So I do not appreciate someone writing on my talk page the moment I do something which pupose was constructive. Mythical Curse (talk) 16:16, 3 November 2011 (UTC).Reply

I apologise - I made a mistake and have removed it. The message on your talk page is not "rubbish" but a standard message to discourage unconstructive edits as you will know if you are an experienced editor Vrenator ^talk 16:20, 3 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

You have accused me of 'vandalism'. Go look in a dictionary, I made a correction. It's spelt colour not color. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgmellor (talk • contribs) 14:50, 4 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

While I would completely agree with you being an English person that the spelling of the word should be "Colour" rather than "Color" there is a clear section on the article's Talk Page Talk:Color discussion the spelling. By changing the article and inserting your comments your edits will be considered vandalism and will be reverted. Vrenator ^talk 14:55, 4 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

He was already warned not to do that. If he persists, his stay at wikipedia is liable to be a short one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I realise that but just trying to get him to understand why it is considered vandalism - Some of us Brits are very sensitive to "Americanisation" of the English Language. Vrenator ^talk 15:20, 4 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm aware of that. The reason I brought this up here as that he was already told once not to change it, and now he's been told twice. If he has to be told a third time, he'll get reported for it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:28, 4 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I totally agree - I'm not disputing that at all, after all I did revert some of his edits. Vrenator ^talk 15:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes. Had it started as "colour", changing it to "color" would have triggered the same admonition. Thanks for your help. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:36, 4 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

see: WP:ENGVAR for the rules. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:38, 4 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

He dood it, and he got a whippin'. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:18, 4 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Well - he was warned - if you can't serve the time -don't do the crime!Vrenator ^talk 11:08, 5 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sorry about the Sunn O))) post. Very juvenile, I know. I did it to make my best friend laugh, which I realise is not in the interests of the wikipedia community nor its mission to share the world's knowledge. However, he has been having a rough time recently and I know appreciated it. I shall leave you and the encyclopedia to it, and revert to being a watcher/user/plagiarist of wikipedia, rather than a vandal.

Kind regards

EC — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericconway (talk • contribs) 15:14, 4 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Good evening! It is our final day of high school at Northcote College, and we would like to edit the page as a joke. My previous edits have been reverted, is there some way the edits can stay up for 24 hours or so before being reverted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ncote2011 (talk • contribs) 10:28, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia and any edits which are not constructive will be considered as vandalism and will be reverted - even if you intend to revert them later. If you continually make such changes you may be blocked from editing. It is not possible to make exceptions for your final day of high school this could lead to all sorts of "Joke" edits being permitted. Vrenator ^talk 11:43, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

The only correction I made to the George Carlin page was to put the album Am and FM before Class Clown, as it was chronologically released that way, and misrepresented on the page. It was very constructive and not vandalism so that viewers may know the true order of his album releases. So I am protesting the warning I have been given. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.20.143.92 (talk) 13:45, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I reverted the edit in error and then immediately changed it back as you can see. The warning automatically appeared on your page which I tried to remove but another editor beat me to it which caused an edit conflict so I was unable to remove it myself. Apologies for the confusion. Vrenator ^talk 13:48, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

sowwwwyyyyy — Preceding unsigned comment added by IAMTHE1antrueGOD (talk • contribs) 16:18, 7 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Requesting you to delete that page Tom Gale (Designer), as I had shifter the articles to Tom Gale page, as it was left blank after an earlier deletion. ThanksStyle3000 (talk) 10:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have placed a template on the page that the author has requested deletion - It should be deleted shortly by an admin.Vrenator ^talk 10:16, 9 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for defending this article from attack by a vandal. This artist is close to my heart. I grew up at Langley Marish and my parents are buried close to Nash's grave. LynwoodF (talk) 10:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

No problem. Vrenator ^talk 10:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi,Vrenator.Recently IP 205.118.178.118 is costantly Section-Blanking Doritos,check the contribs.What to do with this IP?That's me! ^{Have doubt?} Track me! 15:53, 10 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

The IP has had final warning both on this and another similar IP - If they vandalise again they will be reported and blocked.Vrenator ^talk 16:05, 10 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

	Purple Barnstar
	Hope you will be not dis-encouraged by the personal attacks by 142.227.180.140. Happy editing! :) ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 16:40, 10 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks VJ - all in a days work - took a while to get him blocked though.Vrenator ^talk 16:41, 10 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Did you read what I posted on Mikaey's talk page? The Arte Libertino Magazine page is a massive copyvio/fraud. Speedy's the right path for it, but I'll take it to AfD, which will only result in the same thing. MikeWazowski (talk) 16:35, 11 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

yes I did and I also read your talk pages where you were requested to lay off NPP for a bit. Continuing to replace the templates looks to me like edit-warring. Maybe AFD is the right way to go. Vrenator ^talk 16:40, 11 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

i now have put a referral lnk as wells as referral list of at least one source,,,please check it out and tell me if i'm right ,,it will surely help me learn about wikipedia... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anshulkumardhiman (talk • contribs) 16:38, 11 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Why did you give me a warning and revert me? That section had absolutely nothing to do with the nebula, and is only concerned with the Exploration of Mars, a totally different topic. I moved it from one article to another. 70.24.248.23 (talk) 14:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sorry - I made a mistake, I have reverted it back and removed the warning.Vrenator ^talk 14:44, 14 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your prompt attention. 70.24.248.23 (talk) 14:45, 14 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

How did this qualify for a {{db-author}}?--v/r - TP 17:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Oooops sorry - got it wrong! Vrenator ^talk 09:19, 16 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

hello, i saw that you rightly reverted some vandalism happening on the Swagbucks article. I forsee this page being continually vandelised by the same people - or others - is there a way to block revisions unless they are approved by an editor? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.189.47.98 (talk) 19:47, 16 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

The vandalism yesterday came from one IP address which has now been blocked from editing. If there is more vandalism on the page you can request the page be protected but I don't think it's necessary at the moment. Keep an eye on it if it becomes an issue either put in a page protection request or let me know and I'll do it for you. Vrenator ^talk 09:09, 17 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

ok great, thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.189.47.98 (talk) 17:40, 17 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi!

i only added the links to the www.skatteverket.se website for verification purposes, so that the information posted could be verified. They are not advertisements of any services, rather they are the only verfication of the source that exists.

The previous information posted on taxation in Sweden was not correct (obviously erroneous), and also, it too uses direct linking to the skatteverket.se website. I chose to do the same, but simply added links to the correct parts of the website.

Please advise on how to 'suggest' the changes if i cannot enact them myself. My apologies for any inconvenience. I am new at this.

I also wanted to add a link to the Nordic councils information on taxes in the Nordic countries, Nordisk eTax, however, that is also run by the Nordic Tax Agencies. Will that also be a 'conflict'?

Best regards Bjorn — Preceding unsigned comment added by SKV International1 (talk • contribs) 10:30, 18 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have put back your changes as on reflection they are not promotional. Please see the note on your talk page as it is not permitted to edit on behalf of a group, company or website. There is information there as to what you should do. Vrenator ^talk 10:42, 18 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK! Have added a COI notice on my user page as well. Will use the talk page from now on. Thank you for your time and your assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SKV International1 (talk • contribs) 10:49, 18 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Have also applied for a name change. Thank you for your assistance! SKV International1 (talk) 11:27, 18 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

No problem. Vrenator ^talk 12:08, 18 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, the user 182.177.106.200 has made repeated vandilism on the nawaz sharif page (blanking)...can the user be from editing ? --Multan47 (talk) 15:09, 19 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

The user has been warned each time I have reverted the blanking of content. Once he has been warned for times if he does not heed the warnings he will be reported to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and may be blocked. Vrenator ^talk 08:29, 20 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Any reason why you think they're socks? Alexandria (chew out) 16:39, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Blocked User:Eco Pickled Surafce created a page for User:Valgro arvind advertising Eco Pickled Surafce] which was deleted by THawarth. I can't see it now but the company was started by a person called Valgro Arvind. I deleted the same material from the talk page of User:Valgro arvind.Vrenator ^talk 16:48, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

could you possibly add that to the SPI page? Thanks :). Alexandria (chew out) 20:18, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I removed the contents of the user page for Kadesu. This is actually MY profile from a few years ago that I no longer. I can't remember the login I used for it. I want it removed. How can I do this without getting warnings? It's not vandalism because I own it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.174.218 (talk) 22:39, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

When you change it make sure you say why you are removing content in the edit summary then it shouldn't get deleted again. Vrenator ^talk 09:04, 22 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your message. HABANA was an empty page and there was only a redirect to HAVANA. Since I wanted a new page by the name HABANA, I removed the redirect. How is HAVANA linked to HABANA, both are different, right? HABANA is a local festival and I have added reference material too. Could you let me know how it constructs a publicity. There is no form of commercial activity here or gain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ppradeepkumarp (talk • contribs) 10:16, 22 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've put it back to the version you created and nominated the page for deletion so that an Admin can decide. Vrenator ^talk 10:26, 22 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I am a newbie here and was trying to add some constructive information about Adam Henley. I am his mother. Please can you let me know why you thought it was vandalism. Am I doing something wrong? Any help or advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks, sianh10 Sianh10 (talk) 12:45, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Any changes that you make or additional information that you put in must give reliable sources to substantiate the changes. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability for more information.Vrenator ^talk 13:53, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

	Thank You
	Thank you for correcting the vandalism on the Hod Stuart page. I tried to undo it myself, but I did not see that you had already reverted it. I deeply apologize. Johnny 42 (talk) 14:38, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

No problem! I came close to warning you for vandalism until I realised what you were trying to do. I've requested page protection as it seems to be getting hit a lot. Vrenator ^talk 14:40, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure what you're talking about.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.4.250.222 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

This edit [5] is vandalism.Vrenator ^talk 09:01, 25 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello there,

Given the information for this page came from the Spanish Wiki, is it ok for me to use the same reference as them for the same info, or do you need separate sourcing?

Cheers, Hugh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frankpembleton (talk • contribs) 17:47, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've added a couple of references and have removed the deletion tag. Please continue to expand the article using the Spanish sources if necessary. Vrenator ^talk 09:29, 25 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Just a note, you did not transclude this article in the Articles for deletion log page when you nominated it for deletion, as required in step 3 of the subsection "How to nominate a single page for deletion” on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion page. Another user has performed this step for you to complete the process. In the future, please follow all of the required steps when nominating an article for deletion. Thank you. Northamerica1000^(talk) 07:45, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

For reverting the IP that vandalized my talk page. –Chase (talk / contribs) 19:33, 28 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome!Vrenator ^talk 13:37, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dear Vrenator,

Could you help me improve article which you've recently checked (UkrSib Asset Management)? You've wrote, that this article needed additional citations for verification. But there are some proof-links (Net asset value ratings of asset management companies on Investfunds.ua and on Expert RA rating agency). Unfortunately, there's no english version of web-site Investfunds.ua, because it's an Ukrainian independent source. What should I do to place a correct reliable source? Thank you in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnnaPol (talk • contribs) 11:51, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have put a template on your Talk page which gives a bit of guidance on creating your first article. Your article. I've also changed the references a bit on your article UkrSib Asset Management. You need to provide citations for all the information in the article. If they can't be done in English that's OK. Vrenator ^talk 12:01, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much! I've just added more citations to this article. Is that enough? And could I hope that article will not be removed? And if everything is ok, could I remove "improve" message by myself? AnnaPol (talk) 12:44, 30 November 2011 (UTC)AnnaPolReply

It is looking better. I see no reason for it to be deleted again but that's not to say another editor may see it differently. I've removed the Ref Improve Tag and put in a few "Citation Needed" tags where sources should be provided. Vrenator ^talk 13:35, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! You really helped me!AnnaPol (talk) 15:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome. Vrenator ^talk 15:21, 30 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello there!

Just about the page My Clubbing Holiday - what evidence needs to be provided of its importance as I have emails, screenshots and more please let me know, thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.108.178.34 (talk) 09:22, 2 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

There are no independent sources on the page - please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for guidance. Vrenator ^talk 09:26, 2 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

Today I just saw that the Wikipedia Entry about "Park Sanghyun" I made for MBLAQ got deleted. I'd like to know why. I saw that he and 2 other members still didn't got an own wiki page and wanted to do this. Did I do something wrong maybe, if so please tell me because I'm still a beginner. =)

Thank you Hyukkie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyukkie (talk • contribs) 12:46, 2 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

The page was not deleted but redirected to MBLAQ as you will see if you go to Park Sanghyun. There didn't appear to be enough notable information for a separate article on Park Sanghyun. Vrenator ^talk 12:51, 2 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dear Madam! Right now Wikipedia has half a dozen references to StarWind software titles. Created by different people and in different places. Don't you think keeping article about company created them has sense? You've marked one as "advertisement" but it only helps people to verify already existing links! What should be done / changed to keep the article safe from deletion? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.211.183.197 (talk) 16:42, 4 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

A lot of the article really needs to be rewritten to take out the promotional stuff - the whole product section looks like an advert. There is also a question of notability which is why the article got deleted last time - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/StarWind Software. It needs independent sources to establish notability (See Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)) otherwise someone is likely to nominate it for deletion again.Vrenator ^talk 09:48, 5 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

...and links from independent sources will be added. Thank you very much for cooperation! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.211.183.201 (talk) 15:18, 5 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

...does it look better? More references from independent sources to follow... ))) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.211.183.232 (talk) 15:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

It's looking a bit better - I have removed the "Advert" tag - need to get those independent sources to demonstrate notability in though as all bar one of the references are from StarWind. Vrenator ^talk 16:08, 5 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

...are on the way! Thank you very much for cooperation and contribution! )) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.211.183.244 (talk) 13:10, 6 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dear Vrenator,

I want to thank you for your comments and recommendations. This is my first article for Wikipedia, so I found them really useful. I’ve changed the article in accordance with your requirements and added external links. I hope you will help me make it better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runa zor (talk • contribs) 16:06, 7 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Unfortunately the article has been nominated for deletion. It will be up to an administrator to decide based on the consensus whether or not it meets WP:Notability. As there has been a previous failed attempt to get this article established and having read the previous AFD it doesn't look very promising.There are not enough independent sources to demonstrate notability.Vrenator ^talk 16:34, 7 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK, a lot of independent sources (inlcuding hard copy ones) has been added. Could you please check the page state to say is this enough of not. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.238.8.10 (talk) 00:37, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

It is not up to me to decide whether it is OK it will be decided at the conclusion of the AFD by an administrator based on other comments by users and the consensus. As your comments here have been made from 5 IP's and a registered user all SPA Accounts. It gives the impression that you are editing on behalf of the company which would be a Conflict of interest. If you are serious about editing Wikipedia I suggest that you edit from a registered account and that you contribute to other articles. Vrenator ^talk 09:36, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

I did not treat wiki editing as something I would perform on constant basis that's why I don't run an account. However things are changing - I'll do! Thank you very much for suggestion! :) AK47 213.238.8.5 (talk) 17:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm confused why my edits to the Sadat X page have been erased. Sadat X made those statements. They are linkable. A figure that is notable enough to have a Wikipedia making such statements is, itself, notable. What I wrote was not false, defamatory, and was not irrelevant.

I am rather inexperienced editing Wikipedia, so, I am not being sarcastic when I ask why the changes were made.

Jedsa (talk) 01:56, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

As you have not made any edits to the Sadat X page since 20th September I am assuming that you are referring to the edit made my IP User :76.193.177.51 yesterday. If that is the case then the reason the edits were reverted was that there were no sources provided for the comments. If you can provide reliable sources for the comments please include them as references when you make any changes. Vrenator ^talk 09:20, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

I was under the impression that I did provide reliable sources for the comments-each one was linked to the individual Sadat X tweet I was referring to, and I think my links were input correctly and visible? I can't imagine what would be deemed more reliable than an individual's own verified Twitter account... Jedsa (talk) 00:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

There were no citations provided - just saying that he tweeted something without providing a link to the source is not providing a reliable source Vrenator ^talk 10:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Vrenator, You said I could ask you if I ever needed help, so I was wondering if you or someone you know of could possibly help me on something: I am kind of in need of a neutral party or two at a discussion I am having over on Talk:Child destruction. An editor who comes across to me as potentially having some ownership issues (James500, he is the primary and frequent editor of the article) reverted my edits and so I left a polite comment on the talk page explaining my edits and asking what he has issue with and how can we fix it, etc, see: Talk:Child destruction#Why were my edits reverted? Basically he hates every single change I made, claims that "they make no sense" and doesn't seem to want me to have any input in the article. He has already left me 7 replies (so far) over the course of less than 2 hours (at this point I still haven't replied yet). I can just see this going in a bad direction, so I was hoping that some other editors might join the conversation to help keep it from escalating, without having to make a big deal out of it or get formal help with the situation. Right now it's seems like he's telling me I can't edit the article and he will just revert any changes I make, and while I don't have any huge personal attachment to that particular article, I don't agree with his reasoning or approach and I think it's non-constructive and unwelcoming. Should I just give up and move on? MsBatfish (talk) 10:44, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi MsBatfish, I have read the discussion and while I can see that it appears that it may come across as James500 having Ownership issues, it could also be taken that he has put a lot of work into the article and is trying to keep it accurate. I am not an expert on the subject, have not read or got access to the books referred to and don't have the time to familiarise myself with it. I think James500 makes some reasonable points as do you. I suggest that instead of making large changes to the article you make only small well referenced changes with good edit summaries. Discuss any disputed issues on the talk page as you have been doing and if you can't come to an agreement then maybe it would be time to look at Dispute Resolution. Hope this helps a little. Vrenator ^talk 11:07, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks Vrenator. A lot of my changes were really small (although they were done at the same time), things like changing grammar and making some things flow better, removing things that were said twice, filling in missing headings, or removing random ['s etc. He is claiming they are all useless, and seems unwilling to consider any of them or make any effort to work out a compromise, so I'm afraid if I so much as touch the article he will immediately revert. Shall I just try to talk to him again and hope for the best? I was kind of hoping someone other than me would at least comment there so that I don't feel so alone dealing with him and so he realizes that other people are reading it. MsBatfish (talk) 11:18, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Maybe just test the water and do a small edit to correct grammar or something with an edit summary. If he reverts for no good reason then you can take it from there and maybe put in Wikipedia:Editor assistance request. I will keep an eye on it myself as well.

It looks as if your edit has prompted him to make a lot of changes to the article himself all of a sudden as he hadn't edited it since October until today! I also note that James500 has been editing since 2008 and is a member of WikiProjectLaw Vrenator ^talk 11:47, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, he's actually now made some of the edits that I had made, so perhaps he either just didn't actually look at everything I'd done and was only claiming to hate it all after the fact in order to back up his choice to revert, or perhaps he just wanted to do any editing himself. Either way, I think I will probably just end up leaving that article alone for a bit as it's not high on my priority list and not worth the un-needed stress. Thanks for your help. MsBatfish (talk) 01:43, 9 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Beat me to that much vandalism? A star is in order Achowat (talk) 13:20, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks - much appreciated.Vrenator ^talk 13:25, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've declined your hoax and added a ref. Whether it meets any other csd criteria, or should be prodded or AfDed, I leave to you... Peridon (talk) 13:43, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Fair enough! Vrenator ^talk 13

46, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm starting to feel like the fellow who said 'Why don't you get a life?' to Victor Frankenstein... Peridon (talk) 20:03, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi Vrenator, I'm new to Wikipedia, having just published my first article (National Guard units with campaign credit for the War of 1812), and I'm still figuring out editing and how to contact editors. I believe that what you have caught as "vandalism" was my attempt to edit my own article in response to a comment from another editor. Upon looking at a recent version of my article I found, at the bottom, a comment to the effect that my External Links section didn't conform to Wiki policies. I read the links in his comment (to discussions of External Links), and concluded that, indeed, none of my links were really necessary. Many were to a website (globalsecurity.org) that charges a fee if you view the website more than 8 times a month (or something like that), which, I believe, makes it inappropriate for use an External Link. Others just didn't add all that much to my article. So, I deleted all of them. I believe that's the edit you reversed. Thank you for your vigilence and any suggestions you might want to make. Cheers, (Mmcmartin35 (talk) 17:22, 9 December 2011 (UTC))Reply

Hello again, Vrenator: Thank you for the suggestions. I will certainly endeavor to do these things using proper protocol, etc, in the future. (Mmcmartin35 (talk) 18:53, 10 December 2011 (UTC))Reply

Hi,

It appears that you have deleted a page which I had created. The page was titled 'WorldNet TPS'. I feel it was unfairly deleted.

The purpose of the page is to provide Wikipedia users with some background/history regarding WorldNet TPS. WorldNet is the second largest payment service provider in Ireland and it is important that web users who choose not to use the WorldNet website (worldnettps.com) can access information regarding the company on the most popular encyclopaedia in the world.

I would like you to review your decision to delete the WorldNet TPS page.

Kind Regards,

Mark — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkWN (talk • contribs) 12:10, 12 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

The page was nominated for deletion as explained on your talk page because but it did not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant. There were no independent sources to establish notability. Please see Wikipedia:Your first article for guidance. Vrenator ^talk 12:22, 12 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Would these documents suffice as notability?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkWN (talk • contribs) 12:40, 12 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

It's not really up to me to decide, although one of the links is a blog and another a press release so probably not. I didn't delete the article, I nominated it for deletion and an admin then reviewed it and deleted it. Check out the link I gave you above and if you think you can establish notability you can recreate the article - this time properly referenced or you can submit an Article for Creation so that it can be reviewed before being created. Please remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia not to be used for promotion. Vrenator ^talk 14:18, 12 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

By the way your note on the article's talk page suggests that you are editing on behalf of the organisation which means you may have a conflict of interestVrenator ^talk 14:21, 12 December 2011 (UTC)Reply