Misplaced Pages

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Unsigned messages will likely be removed. For messages left here, I will usually respond here. If I leave a message on your talk page, I will watch for a response there.
Start a new talk topic.

Archives
Archive 1 (April 2007 – October 2007)
Archive 2 (October 2007 – January 2008)
Archive 3 (January 2008 – April 2008)
Archive 4 (April 2008 – September 2008)
Archive 5 (September 2008 – April 2009)
Archive 6 (April 2009 – January 2010)
Archive 7 (January 2010 – October 2010)
Archive 8 (October 2010 – May 2011)
Archive 9 (May 2011 – October 2011)
Archive 10 (October 2011 – May 2012)
Archive 11 (May 2012 – October 2012)
Archive 12 (October 2012 – present)

Thanks

Many thanks, Bongwarrior, for keeping an eye out for vandalism on my personal pages. Regards, Pinethicket (talk) 10:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

And thanks for this. It happened like 10 seconds after I pulled up my watchlist! Thanks for keeping a close eye. :) • Jesse V. 21:53, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Apology

Sorry for my edits. I was just testing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hahahahohoho22222 (talk • contribs) 09:15, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Procedure query

• Please, what is the full procedure in blocking a user whose username's appropriateness is queried in Misplaced Pages:Usernames_for_administrator_attention/Bot? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:15, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Depends on how bad the name is, and how bad the edits are (if they have edited). And always take the bot reports with a grain of salt - a lot of those tend to be false positives. Which particular user were you wondering about? --Bongwarrior (talk) 10:22, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

• User:ALongBrownTurd, listed in Misplaced Pages:Usernames for administrator attention/Bot. One edit, which was vandalism. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:26, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

I would probably {{Vaublock}} and disable their ability to create a different username. If it was just the username with no edits, I would probably softblock and let them choose a new name, but it is sometimes useful to let the report linger until they edit, in order to see what their intentions are. --Bongwarrior (talk) 10:39, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Of course, often times you can judge the user's intentions by the username alone, if it is sufficiently foul. In those cases, there's no point in waiting for additional evidence - just block them as you would a regular vandal-only account. --Bongwarrior (talk) 11:02, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

• What should I also do in leaving messages and information on one page or another? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 10:42, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

If you mean the user's talk page, there are various templated block messages specific to vandal+username, username hardblocked, and username softblocked. The templated reasons at the bottom of Special:Block will automatically appear when the blocked user tries to edit - if the user's talk page is a redlink, I will usually skip leaving a message for them there because the red "this user is blocked" banner will appear at the top of the screen. If the user's talk page has been edited, the banner doesn't show, so I'll usually leave a message there. --Bongwarrior (talk) 10:55, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

• Please, where are these templated block messages listed?Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:56, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:User block templates, and at the bottom of the pulldown menu on the block screen. --Bongwarrior (talk) 20:52, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello

I am very sorry if I have done something to annoy you regarding my reversion of User_talk:129.100.107.81 edits... I promise that I have never had any such intention. I am curious about the number of reversions claimed. When I made the apology to his talk page, I only saw one reversion. I don't see two. Was there another that was removed or something? Again, I sincerely hope I am not annoying you, you seem like a very reasonable person. --Sue Rangell 22:07, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Not at all - I had removed the first warning that you left, but not the second. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:09, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Article

I apologize for my behavior. I was wrong. You're doing what needs to be done and I respect that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coltonmc1 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

It's no problem, thank you. You may want to experiment with editing on your userpage, where we are generally far more lenient. --Bongwarrior (talk) 00:30, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

User:69.126.3.144 IPSock of VOA User:SlapBot

Thanks for blocking SlapBot (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). See WP:AIV for obvious IPSock of SlapBot, 69.126.3.144 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) here: . Shouldn't the IP be blocked as well? Thanks again, JoeSperrazza (talk) 04:59, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Probably, but I'm assuming the autoblock took care of it. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Re:Kakrowts

Just to let you know that I admire your work and am sorry that I made you feel so. Indeed I often block before the "final" warning recently. In this case, there was a level-3 warning, which is "enough" for a justified block. Anyway, let me know if you want me to do something about it (unblock or something). Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 10:42, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Hasty .. I would think so a couple of years ago. Those who came here for cheap fun leave characteristic patterns, and I started blocking them quicker, for two major reasons - (i) I did try a lot to let them go and then saw them return, quite nastily, (ii) admins are leaving, vandals are only coming back in thousands - good to know that people like you are watching, but I do know that we are too few and we fail (I daily receive signals of unnoticed vandalism, and perhaps it is healthier not to know how much of it we let through :-). Materialscientist (talk) 11:07, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Re: MOH: Warfighter Edit

Hello Bong,

I appreciate you co-editing this plot, I have been keeping a sharp eye on the article to give as simple, but yet precise of how the storyline is revealed. So far I have played the game up to the Sarajevo encounter. I was so fond of the Philippine operation, as the Filipino technical advisers have done their best of getting the Tagalog scripts right and Filipino accents well, despite the setting is the 'Chabacano' speaking province of Basilan in Mindanao.

I really wanted to hear your input bec. of there have been so many changes of the Philippine special forces utilized along with the US Navy SEAL. I did mention the Scout Rangers, but was later changed by other sources as "Filipino special forces". It just sounded like, despite being from a 3rd world developing country, that there is no recognition at all. I then did the research and found the Philippine Army Special Forces, founded by Gen. (later Pres.) Fidel V. Ramos and replaced with that name. I was thinking that maybe other 'co-editors' did not want to 'specify' the Filipino special forces group. But why was the Pakistani ISI mentioned or the Polish GROM. I read about the NAVSOG group, but reviewing the game, I know the army had the most encounters with the Abu Sayyaf especially during the missionaries taken hostage.

I hope we can work on this together to give the Filipino (our Filipinos) the recognition it deserves. Peace to you! Jay2siazon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jay2siazon (talk • contribs) 05:30, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I'm not familiar with the game or the article at all, and I certainly wouldn't consider myself a co-editor - I merely stepped in while it was in the midst of a vandalism raid and tried to make the necessary repairs. Thank you for your hard work on the article; I'll leave it to you and other editors with some knowledge of the game to decide on the best wording. Take care. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Autistic

The Sanic article had more credibility, notability and reference material than the majority of the worthless dreck in this site. And yet you delete it because it was made by 4chan.

That low-functioning autism must really take a toll on your sanity.

Have a good day.