User talk:Zsinj

Talk Page Vandalism Count

You just reverted one of my edits because of "vandalism" on Warrington. I have no idea how this might have happened. I certainly didn't mean to remove any sections and preview looked just fine. In fact, I was trying to add a Trivia section. If you look at my contributions you can see that I'm not in the habit of vandalizing pages. I apologize for my browser or myself screwing up. I'll try and add my Trivia section again and hoep that it doesn't mess up the page this time. --Millard73 20:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Archives: January 2006, February 2006, March 2006, April-June 2006

Whizkidravi - Hoopaholic400

Listen, I assure you I have no idea why he reported me, for if you look in the early history of both our user pages, you will find that he vandalised my page first, on 26 June. You see, Amit Om happens to be my friend, and we both live in Florence, SC. However this user is younger than I am, and is newer to Wikipedia and its laws, and tends to be very naughty, he may even try to change this post of mine. It is sad and baffling to see him complain of me. I had tried to scare him by warning him of administrator action, but to no avail, however I am glad your thorough investigation led to his initial vandalisation, and that you also chastised him. If you check most recent user page histories you will find that he has edited my page last, on 11 July. Therefore, action should be taken, if any, on User: Hoopaholic400 rather than I, §çђèîßéŋҜяäñĸәň 17:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not only is HoopaHolic vandalising my page, he is vandalising my talk post too! (Check page history)he is the true culprit and centre of our conflict-§çђèîßéŋҜяäñĸәň 18:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also apologise for forgetting to sign in-§çђèîßéŋҜяäñĸәň 18:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. --Zsinj^Talk 18:07, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for temblocking hoopaholic400 I also thank you for reverts to my user page from 'Hejoli's vandalisim. Hejoli is obviously one of his aliases. It is sad to see a friend, however juvinile, to do these things. But I must, as usual dismiss these actions. Thank you Zsinj in you efforts against vandalism. -§çђèîßéŋҜяäñĸәň 18:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quick work, thanks!

You got 'em before I did. Guess I made 200.45.6.131 mad - fun, huh? :-) Vsmith 19:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, very fun. Do you like it? --200.82.18.187 19:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah...and he re-incarnates so quickly :-). A range block maybe? Vsmith 19:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mistaken "Vandalism"

I didn't *intentionally* delete anything in the article. I can only assume something went wrong in the form submission. I only changed one word in the first paragraph. I re-submitted my revision; hopefully this time without omitting anything. - 208.47.211.5 21:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was most likely a bug with your internet browser. No lasting damage was done. --Zsinj^Talk 22:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

For unvandalising my talkpage. JFW | T@lk 23:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Inquiry

I appeciate your help, but I filed that a while ago. He has since kept the warning, and I'm sure that the recent message will probably inrage him further. I might expect a response from him, but hopefully he will just ignore it. I didn't realize that he name was not removed from the investigation. Thanks again for letting me know and I will go check it and remove it so that there isn't anymore confusion. Bignole 23:44, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bush

I was trying to alter the message to reflect the fact that it's permanently protected. Sorry for the confusion. Rompe 01:23, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I would, but I'm not very experienced with Wikipedia and my baptism by fire didn't go so well, so I'll leave that to you or someone else. Rompe 01:29, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AIV warning (Slavery)

...grr, you beat me to it. Happy editing to you! Te ke 02:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Falsely accused

Hi, you accused me of vandalism on the Beverly Hills High School wikipage... Specifically, the bit about "whoring" someone's self in Hollywood (I don't remember the actual quote). Anyway... it wasn't me... It was the user who added an edit right AFTER me. You can check it out in the History. Just wanted to clear my name on that issue. Thanks.

Oh crap... sorry... Boldy1 again... I didn't really look at what you wrote. I read it wrong. You never accused me. I'm an idiot. My bad...

Wjhonson

Hi Zsinj, I note that you also warned Wjhonson about violating 3RR. Since I don't want to violate 3RR myself, I wonder if you could revert his edits for me. He's not technically vandalising the article, but it's clear from this deletion review that I should have deleted the article at first because there is no verifiable information that Kitty May Ellis is notable enough to have her information in these articles. Thanks, Deathphoenix ʕ 19:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I sent another warning, we'll see if he heeds it (forgive me if I don't hold my breath). --Deathphoenix ʕ 19:08, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]