User talk:Majorly/Archives/5

QD[change source]

Hi, just out of curiosity, I was wondering if you could tell me how many QD tags I have made, my deleted edits? It probably won't be many, just a rough figure would be good. Kennedy ^(talk) 08:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

12 by my counting. Majorly ^talk 13:24, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, thanks for that :) Kennedy ^(talk) 13:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations: You have been given a Barnstar!

for being a good admin. Static^{-=Electrify My Thoughts=-} 00:57, Saturday September 20 2008 (UTC)

Plus how many QD tags do I have? Static^{-=Electrify My Thoughts=-} 00:57, Saturday September 20 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - about 17 that aren't in your userspace. Majorly ^talk 01:04, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. StaticFalcon^{-=Electrify My Thoughts=-} 01:06, Saturday September 20 2008 (UTC)

The color changes for my sig. 67.189.185.73 (talk) 23:41, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please avoid light colours then? Thanks. Majorly ^talk 23:44, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll remove 'em. 67.189.185.73 (talk) 23:47, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry.[change source]

I would like to apologise for yesterday on #wikipedia-simple. I feel that I have abused the community's trust in me. After all, had I not sent him the link to IRC, he would not be able to attack you and others on the channel. Although I knew that he disliked Wikipedia, I felt that, if he met the people that were behind Wikipedia, he would prehaps stop taking the mickey out of me editing Wikipedia, as he would know that all we are trying to do is do something amazing -- giving away a free encyclopaedia. I should have known that prehaps he would get offensive, and maybe I erred on giving him the link to Simple English Wikipedia's IRC channel. I'd also like to thank you for +oing. Sorry, and please forgive me. If you have any suggestions on what I should do next, please say so. Yours, Microchip • talk 12:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apology accepted. Majorly ^talk 14:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:StaticFalcon[change source]

Why the recent revert? Just curious. Sebb ^Talk 23:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was a red template. Majorly ^talk 23:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. Sebb ^Talk 23:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:RTV[change source]

I'm using RtV See en:WP:RTV Shocking Hawk 22:07, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um no your not...

Vanishing is only for users who are exercising their right to leave. The "right to vanish" is not a "right to a fresh start" under a new identity. Vanishing means that the individual, not the account, is vanishing. There is no coming back for that individual. FSM ^Noodly? 22:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yes there is. zOMG leave me alone. Shocking Hawk 22:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FSM is right. By all means, stay, but don't claim you're vanishing because you're not. Majorly ^talk 22:23, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LEAVE ME ALONE Shocking Hawk 22:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about we all edit an article? Sebb ^Talk 22:31, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK which one? Shocking Hawk 22:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sigh. any article that doesn't pertain to this drama. Sebb ^Talk 00:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Time to vandalize (JK.) Shocking Hawk 00:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. Don't even joke about it. Sebb ^Talk 00:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Y not? Gwib jokes about socking? Shocking Hawk 00:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gwib doesn't have a history of doing it. You do. Sebb ^Talk 11:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you[change source]

Thank you very much for supporting my successful RfA. I will do my best to fulfil my duties as an administrator and use the tools wisely. If you need any help, or have any feedback on my editing, please contact me on my talk page. Thank you again, - tholly ^--Talk-- 16:43, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spam[change source]

Just a note to say thanks, Majorly/Archives, for your comments and vote in my RFA which closed as successful with 17 supports and no opposes. I am quite impressed with the level of support, and I promise to do my best as an administrator. Thanks again, Kennedy ^(talk) 10:44, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Closing RfA[change source]

Sorry, didn't know I couldn't close them. /headdesk. --Gwib^-(talk)- 16:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only if it's snow cases, it's better left to a bureaucrat. Majorly ^talk 16:07, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure it has to be closed by someone who hasn't voted as well, which in this case I guess will be Eptalon since Creol voted. FSM ^Noodly? 16:19, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry[change source]

Yeah, that was a definite fail (in reference, of course, to...emulsion...). Thanks for deleting. --Isis ♠(talk) 22:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Biscuits[change source]

Looks like i cocked that one up! Woops...

Thanks,

B G^7even 15:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just restored that page. The company in question has 420 employees, and a turnover of over 160m Swiss Francs. It is very present in Switzerland; It also has a website on German language Wikipedia (de:Kambly SA)

Rollback[change source]

Thanks mate :) Giggy (talk) 22:03, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dont delete everything[change source]

Hey, that wasnt a very obvious personal attack and there was entries by other people on that page including user:Majorly you should not have deleted it. You should put it back. ~ R.T.G 22:31, 27 October 2008 (UTC) Also it is useful to have a record of the way a person behaves on talk pages. They do not delete stuff on en.wiki unless it is grossly offensive. If this person wants to return, you will want to know what they have done and they should know you have access to it. Sorry for bothering you ~ R.T.G 22:37, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is simple.wiki, not en.wiki. The page was simply trolling, by a sockpuppet. No reason for keeping it. Majorly ^talk 22:39, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. There was two other entries above him (check it). I must say, as I checked, a permanent ban for being disruptive for ten minutes is a bit harsh. All I saw was "are you a cyberman" and "Did you get a photo with Jimbo Wales". ~ R.T.G 22:43, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, the whole of the discussion was based on his first trolling comment. Someone who is disruptive in their first ten minutes might as well start a new account to be quite honest. Clearly isn't here for the right reasons. Majorly ^talk 22:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the photo is a reference, since they did take a photo together. All of it was trolling, and it was rightly deleted. Synergy 22:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Majorly, you may be right there but you indeffed it. Anyway it was just as I had read what he said and before i read what you said I checked the history and it all disappeared so it appeared to to be an older discussion. ~ R.T.G 22:51, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Desert[change source]

I just noticed the guy gave out a eight-digit phone number (missing two digits). That means nobody will be call him, since he didn't give a reasonable location, so we can't guess his area code. We barely ducked the bullet there. I didn't even know that Dan was a steward, though. alexandra (talk) 04:13, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Luckily that's the case. Stewards should only use their powers here in an emergency, never any other time. There's plenty of active admins; no need for any kind of steward intervention. Majorly ^talk 04:22, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. It was thoughtless of me not to remove the automatic summary. It's been observed that the alleged phone number is plainly invalid, but I certainly take your point. One of your RC patrollers turned up in the stewards channel claiming to have a personal information emergency, so I figured I'd take half a second and help him out. Obviously I didn't succeed in saving anybody any time, and I'm sorry to have troubled you. — Dan | talk 05:34, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, I've asked several sysadmins to hide the log entry, but all have refused on the basis that a log entry with fake information is not worth their trouble. If it's not gone by tomorrow I'll ask again. — Dan | talk 05:46, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I misspoke. It's probably not fake. The IP address traces to Austrlia. Specifically, it traces to the QLD area, which is prefix 07, and then from there you type an eight-digit number – not a three-digit area code and then a seven-digit number. All thanks to the WHOIS lookup and en:Telephone numbers in Australia. I was being enthnocentric in believing that this Cameron lived in the United States. alexandra (talk) 05:49, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thankfully, the IP traceroute is not exact. The alleged address and the IP it geolocates do not correspond to each other. There's about five different "xxxx" streets, each in a different city, and I do not know enough about Australia to know which suburb would trace closest to the one that teh IP geolocates to. alexandra (talk) 05:56, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just checked this up and the phone number/address seem to match up (and the phone number is usable). Anyone interested in more information should email me. Giggy (talk) 06:32, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's all gone now. — Dan | talk 17:48, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear. Thanks for assisting. Majorly ^talk 17:50, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Context[change source]

Hi, you deleted RTE 1 and 2 and TV3 Ireland. What do you mean it "didnt show context"? (these are three of four main national TV stations and RTE 1 has some notable history such as the longest running talk show in the world) ~ R.T.G 17:10, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"is a TV station" is not enough context? alexandra (talk) 17:10, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not if that was the only line xD ~ R.T.G 17:13, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it was. Majorly ^talk 17:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Rollback[change source]

My rollback rights? If so, that seems a little harsh for a mistake. The first time I didn't know....and people are able to make mistakes and accidents. Maybe a three strike limit something?-- ✧ Christian Man 16 18:32, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, rollback is an easy come easy go thing. I was just going to remove them, but since it was a first offence, I thought I'd give you a chance to be more careful. Next time they'll be removed. Majorly ^talk 18:35, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That still seems harsh but thanks...please think about the three strike thing.-- ✧ Christian Man 16 18:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:([change source]

Stealing sucks. Giggy (talk) 10:08, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah... should be back to more active next week. Majorly ^talk 14:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

your protection of Bop It[change source]

While I'm glad something was done, i believe and I'm guessing here, protection of pages is only useful when there are multiple vandals to the same article, in this case I think you should have only blocked the user vandalizing.-- ✧ Christian Man 16 17:22, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you with do my rollback ability, I was using to revert constant vandalism like it's for.-- ✧ Christian Man 16 17:24, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Removing an RFD tag isn't vandalism. I'm sorry. Majorly ^talk 17:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is.....and if it isn't I'm sorry but it was vandalism to me...Just please give me it back. I'm still learning.-- ✧ Christian Man 16 17:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're still learning, you shouldn't have access to the real thing. Until you've finished learning, you can use the undo feature, popups or whatever. Majorly ^talk 17:31, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was just look at Tholly's summary when he blocked the dude, it was and I quote "Vandalism: removing RfD tags non-stop, has had final warning". Now will you please give me it back since I was doing what I was supposed to with it? Iwas doing good with it, I did alot of reversion yesterday cause I had that button, please.-- ✧ Christian Man 16 17:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Majorly, I've looked through the page history, and the previous instance of ChristianMan16's misuse of the tool, and have decided to give it back to him. I think that it was the right decision to use it in this instance - I would have done after a couple of times, as the tag shouldn't have been removed, and after a couple of times (and vandalising the RfD) it obviously wasn't good faith. You say that he has been warned, but that was for the last offence - there was no warning here and it is debatable as to whether it was vandalism. I know he has used it in wrong places before, but I don't think that this is a worthy cause to remove it, sorry.

On another note, shouldn't Bop It be protect so auto confirmed users can edit it, because all the vandalism has come from this one (now blocked) user and IP addresses, and as it is up for RfD people may wish to help improve it. I will change than in a couple of minutes if you don't object or have already dome so. Thanks - tholly ^--Talk-- 17:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocked 212...[change source]

Hello,Majorly, 212... belongs to a school (NorthWest Learning Grid). It lookas like the IP is used by many users. I have therefore put a SchoolIP template on top, and I have unblocked the address (Your block for three month was too long in my opinion, also see what I have written about "Pakistani editor" on ST. In any case, just wanted to let you know. Don't be afraid to block them, in the case of the POV/nonsense edits we have seen, but keep in mind that there are many editors behind this IP. Also keep in mind that very likely they have trouble understanding English (past a certain level). --Eptalon (talk) 13:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cars 2[change source]

Majorly, would you mind restoring that article, as it has notablity just it need to be written to show so. I will do that if you do so.-- ✧ CM 16 23:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just rewrite it from scratch. Majorly ^talk 23:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know where to start from scratch could please restore it please? It won't hurt anyone.-- ✧ CM 16 23:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page was basically nonsense, so no. Majorly ^talk 01:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's all you had to say in the first place.-- ✧ CM 16 04:40, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]