Spliffy
too add a new comment to my talk page
click here please add ~~~~ after your post so i know who its from!
 | This user avoids insults for vandalism, moving straight to actual bodily harm |
Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. KeithD (talk) 13:36, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
- Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. - ulayiti (talk) 00:53, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
Photo, Emma Watson
[Look] Why did you delet this version? I've written the copyright license and we're I got the photo from under the photo, so it was legal because the man who tooked this photo allowed everyone to use them. And this is more allowed than to use photos of Warner Brothers... unsigned comment by FallingDown
huh i didnt delete anything in fact im not een an admin, but by looking at the picture no-ones determined its copyright status so it will be deletedBenon 01:02, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Microeconomics
Hi Benon, I noticed you reverted my change to the microeconomics article. If you look at the change in question, I removed a duplication of an article elsewhere in wikipedia. The current microeconomics article is sevrely broken and is just copies of other pages , I am cleaning it up now. Please consider carefully before reverting more changes. novacatz 17:13, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
- oops sorry, was looking at the irc vandal bot and clicked the wrong one very sorry (Benon 17:15, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
- No problem - for reference - please put comments to my talk page and not my user page. Be careful with tool-assisted edits in future :) novacatz 17:20, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
PLEASE BE CAREFUL WITH YOUR SCRIPTS
Benon, I just had a quick review of some of the edits you have been doing ('reverting vandalism') I noticed that you just reverted a copyright vio notification put on by another user. A quick inspection of the site linked to does reveal that the article is a copy of what appears to be a commercial website. Can you please inspect the changes made and some background before hitting that revert button. novacatz 17:34, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
advice duly noted, thankyou (Benon 17:39, 19 December 2005 (UTC))
You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikipedia. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may come back after the block expires. Hamachi Nigiri 01:00, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
hmm and i suppose posting naughty pictures on bush dosnt make you a vandal? troll alert Benon 01:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
later turned out to be a sockpuppet(willy on wheels) Benon 01:54, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Re: "nice admin"
Thanks! It's all part of the job. :-) Hermione1980 01:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Cartoon Network
It wasn't Vandalism. My net cut out and not all the info got sent so only the first bit of the new version got thourhg. I was trying ot correct it but got edit conflicts from you reveting it,
whilst you where editing someone else blanked the page and posted ozzy osbourne on it, the revert wanst for you Benon 14:21, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks
|
Thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage! |
"rvv" on Citadel of Doom
I see now; you aren't involved in that fan project I've been cleaning up at all, you just saw my edit summary and assumed it was vandalism. I guess it's a reasonable assumption given how inadvertently stupid the edit summary was.
I'd appreciate if you would respond to this message, so I know it's cleared up, instead of deleting it. rspeer 01:52, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Okay, I got your response; our messages crossed paths. Thanks for the response. rspeer 01:53, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
just thought id post that message here too, the editor isnt at fault, because of changing the page legitly to a redirect with conseus caused hudge page size diffrence, causing the vandal bot to flag it and the baffaling edit summary made it look simlar to a sockpuppet vandal opprating at the time, i once again apologise Benon 11:48, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Whitney Houston
Please could you revert the page further back, to my last version? Both User:Calvy.r and User:80.195.187.58 are at it. --Whouk (talk) 12:32, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks. --Whouk (talk) 12:35, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
- your welcome :-)
{{benon}}
When you use your {{benon}} welcome template, please be sure to "subst" it ( {{subst:benon}} ). Otherwise, people trying to edit that section on the user's talk page find themselves editing your template. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 01:35, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
ok thanks fo the advice 01:37, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
Thomas Paine
OK, I'll bite. What evidence is there that modern historians accept that Thomas Paine wrote the Declaration of Independence? -- Mwanner | Talk 00:19, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- i simply reverted it because a alrge section of te page was balnked and i couldnt find that it a)had consues b)conformed to the npov policy (even if you feel the point of view was invalid)Benon 00:25, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- There's more to Wikipedia than NPOV-- it is also important that the content be actually true. Look at the sources provided and see if they seem credible to you. See if there are modern historians cited. This guy is using Thomas Edison to support his contention! Then there's Robert G. Ingersoll, a politician who died in 1899, Joseph Lewis, a "freethinker" who left school at the age of nine (born 1889), Andrew Joseph Galambos, a libertarian who developed a concept of absolute property ownership, and William Vander Weyde {born 1871) who admits that "several drafts of the Declaration, ..., are in the handwriting of Jefferson. -- Mwanner | Talk 00:49, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
- as i feel unable to now draw conclusion (within the rules) i will not be editing the article any furher and will leave it to another (more expreinced) editor(s)/adminsitartor(s) to make any further revisons/reverts (i dont personallyhave experince in the scope of this subject)
You reverted this page to nonsense. Please don't do that. If you want to add sourced material to the article, that would be great. James James 04:41, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
irc bot
just to let you know the irc bot computer2 has gone belly up ;-)Benon 19:13, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
oops never mindBenon 11:35, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
Two things...
First, be careful when you welcome people. You just welcomed a POV pusher over User:66.73.197.42. Note that I have nothing against welcoming IPs, but you should check their contributions first to avoid embarassment later.
Second, subst your welcome template :-P
Happy editing. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 02:46, 29 December 2005 (UTC) thankyou for the advice rune, i am now subst my template after it was pointed out to me over irc, i still welcome pov pushers and include a link on how to write to a npov, dont forget you should assume good faith ;-)Benon 05:34, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
dont think that sounded too good, i dont welcome pov pushers, what i do do is to welcome n00bs who are ignorant of the npov policy and help to point them in the right direction Benon 01:11, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
TfD nomination of Template:Benon
Template:Benon has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Benon. Thank you. xaosflux Talk/CVU 03:08, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
template has now been move to my name space i use it for vandal fighting.Benon 03:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Eenemies of Batman
OK, I have explained my thougths on the Enemies of Batman talk page. Dyslexic agnostic 21:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
- I recall a section there where you (benon) asked me if I'd like some copyedit from third, and I replied I beg you to...did somebody erased it?--T-man... ""worst vandal ever"" 23:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
- oh yeah sorry we did copy-edit it as no offnce but some of it could have sounded better even though it was correct :-) Benon 23:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
- Benon, thanks for your "interference" here, it was welcome. I have begun some copyedit of Enemies of Batman, although at times it is hard to make out what T-Man is trying to say. I will try to keep the framework of the current concept, though, and have filled in years of first appearances where missing. Dyslexic agnostic 02:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe you can also "mediate" T-Man's insane edit on Legends of the Dark Knight... Dyslexic agnostic 02:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Just trying to make wikipedia good. Thanks back at you.--Gillespee 04:09, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
Wiki Defcon
Please remember to comment and sign changes made to this template. Thanks! --Zsinj 00:12, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- i swear i did sign it, maybe i just forgot this time :-s Benon 01:02, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Vandal fighting tool
I was just wondering which vandal fighting tool you were using. SWD316 talk to me 00:14, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
your warning of User:70.174.41.72
I went ahead and blocked because the user already had a bv template on their talk page and I didn't see them making any positive contributions in the near future.--Alhutch 00:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- dont worry id have blocked em too if i was an admin ;-)Benon 00:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Keep up the good work :-) Alhutch 00:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
What is going on? Titoxd(?!? - help us) 02:22, 25 January 2006 (UTC) huh Benon 02:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC) problem fixed Benon 02:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
DA and T-man
Benon, perhaps you could explain why are are now seeking to have me banned from editing certain pages? My reply to your motion can be found here. Please tell me how I have been uncivil to T-Man since the block lifted, with a link to that uncivil edit, or how I have wikistalked, since both Batman and Enemies of Batman are on my usual edit lists without any need for me to refer to T-man's edits. Thank you. Dyslexic agnostic 02:40, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- its a pre-emptive motion, not for a pemanant but temporary injunction, its alos nothing perosnal but i motioned it for both of you, its also the arbitraters decision and not mineBenon 02:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- I appreciate it's not personal, but I also see it as a drastic request. If either of us act uncivil or inappropriately, then a block will suffice. For my part, I confirm again that I have no intent to ever be uncivil to T-man again. Dyslexic agnostic 02:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- yes you recent civility is much improved and that something to admire, however it is upp to the wiser than me arbcomBenon 02:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- I appreciate it's not personal, but I also see it as a drastic request. If either of us act uncivil or inappropriately, then a block will suffice. For my part, I confirm again that I have no intent to ever be uncivil to T-man again. Dyslexic agnostic 02:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Here is proof that I am really trying to work with T-Man... see his message to me regarding Enemies of Batman, and my reply... Dyslexic agnostic 06:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- thats fine, present it at the arbitration and the motion will probably be rejected, i didnt make the request lightly and its now out of my hands Benon 06:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Advocate
I want an advocate. A wikipedia advocate, partial on my behalf. I won't state anything. I'm serious.--T-man... ""worst vandal ever"" 03:27, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Cool... I didn't know about advocates. I told T-man to go to Wikipedia:AMA Advocates accepting inquiries to get one. I also signed up as one (I guess I can't be T-man's though...) Dyslexic agnostic 04:30, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Your warning to User:24.215.245.183
FYI, User:24.215.245.183 copied your warning from its talk page into that of User:Can't sleep, clown will eat me, signature and all. It has since been reverted. RossPatterson 03:28, 25 January 2006 (UTC) thanks for the heads up Benon 04:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
comment left on user page
Would you care to explain why you deleted my list of Granma crew and their fate? See Fidel Castro discussion page. El Jigüe 1/25/06
when using my talk page please add ~~~~ after your post, and i was reverting vandalism from another user and some linksam, sorry your edit may have got hit by collatral damage but porn link spamming on the article was presentBenon 02:11, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dyslexic Agnostic. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dyslexic Agnostic/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Dyslexic Agnostic/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Kelly Martin (talk) 02:41, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm confuded who are you implying that is stalking who? I remind you that I accused DA of wikystalking and DA admitted to be monitoring me "3rd thing on the morning" and his edits were just blind reversings (always erasing my words rather than repracing or at least askme for sourcing) and when he #wrote, the info content several big factual mistakes and ofenses on the summary. To me that's unethical. ... I acused him with several editors and nobody cared. Recently I though It was ok, so I went with a "if I can't against him I'll do the same (which apparently was ok). I have to say that I was invited by DA to edit the first article I knew he was there first beforehand. That was the limited series article, but my edits didn't erase his words and the changes I did didn't clash even with DA's interests. I was just acting a little bolder with a merge of 3 other articles he might started but were on a "stub" state and renamed a page wit a name everybody seems to like (list of maxiseries) then I had some mistakes but I got help before on good time. I never wrote about anything I didn't know about and didn't erase any dyslexic words. Then I went to a page and undid a blind reverse DA did on an editor I related to and felt that if he was goingto erase whatever I wrote, I could rewrite at least whatever he erased unfearly. Remember that by then I started dobting acting the way DA did was bad practice. Shanel and your words to him were the first I can recall telling him to stop.--T-man... ""worst vandal ever"" 04:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
- im trying to imply wiki-stalking has taken place, its up to the arbitration comitte to see whos wiki-stalking who and if in fact theres even been wiki-stalkingBenon 04:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Photo, Emma Watson
[Look] Why did you delet this version? I've written the copyright license and we're I got the photo from under the photo, so it was legal because the man who tooked this photo allowed everyone to use them. And this is more allowed than to use photos of Warner Brothers... unsigned comment by FallingDown
huh i didnt delete anything in fact im not een an admin, but by looking at the picture no-ones determined its copyright status so it will be deletedBenon 01:02, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
[Kurdish Music]
That article is copyrighted, just copied and pasted out of biased text. That article should be about music not political or geographical issues and called areas in Iran and Iraq Kurdistan. This is politcally motivated and you are aiding this. This does not benefit Wikipedia. 82.145.231.57 05:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
then please follow the correct way to deal with copyright violations including use of the {{copyvio}}tag rather than blanking a large part of an article, which could be considerd vandalsimBenon 05:13, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Kurdish Music
That article is copyrighted, just copied and pasted out of biased text. That article should be about music not political or geographical issues and called areas in Iran and Iraq Kurdistan. This is politcally motivated and you are aiding this. This does not benefit Wikipedia. 82.145.231.57 05:08, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Because of an an unfair assited pop revision this page cannot be cleaned up of politically motivated comments and copyright violations. Actually, I think it is copyvio; see [1]) 201.17.212.126 05:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I have reported you to Wikipedia. 201.17.212.126 05:27, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
No one blanked the article. They REVERTED to a cleaned up version. What does calling Iran and Iraq areas of an non-existent Kurdistan in that region have to do with musical genres or proples? This is politically motivated and wrong. I have to let you know that we are preparing legal issues because of Wikipedia's rep on the Net - people will read such articles and take them as verifiable fact. IN FACT when you google it already many articles use this article as source - WITH NO COLLOBORATING EVIDENCE. I stress this point. You are in fact MAKING something which does have credit verifable - creating misconception. People are falsely using this article as though it is fact. The article was taken from the book quoted in that article - and that book has been discredited as a political tool. Plus it's musicologoy is incorrect. Are you an expert on this region's music? Sending politcal messages under the auspices of a music article - all over the web. Wikipedia should not be used as a vehicle for such things - the apporpriate article for Kurdish sensitivities can be opened. This is not the way an objective article is written when the subject matter is about music. Where on the world map is there a Iraq Kurdistan or Iran Kudistan? An Afgahistani muslim minority majority lives in Bradford in England Essex - I don't see articles on this region of England being quoted as UK Afghanistan. This article when we compare with other articles on Wiki is not sourced at all - just copied and pasted with almost no complete reference to music.
There is a hidden agenda here and with your help Wikipedia is playing to that. And the way you have chosen to protect this page goes against all Wikipedia policy. This means I can open an article about music - stick in any facts I like derogatory to 3 or 4 nations and leave it for a while for it to be fact on the Net?
You are perpetuating false information. If you can find me one independent source to verify any of what is written there - INDEPENDENT OF THAT ARTICLE - then I will accept it. Otherwise it is just an underhanded way of propagating terroist proganda at the best - and bad information at the least. 82.145.231.77 23:43, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Family Guy
My deletion (which you reverted) was not vandalism; in fact it was removing a section containing irrelevant and trivial comparisions between "Family Guy" and "The Simpsons." 138.16.27.168 01:56, 27 January 2006 (UTC) then please use an apprpriate edit ummary to diplay why you sleted a large chunk of the article, the article come under almost contant vandalism attack and we are not physicBenon 01:57, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
NO it is YOU whom vandalized MY article. Tis true that I'm new to the site, but it's not fair to offer people the chance to add to the site then delete OR edit what is written. It's not nice. So bite me, ass holes.Insert non-formatted text hereuser:24.158.235.98 2:02 27 january 2006 (utc)
Drunk with power
Just look how much this guy moves and edits, some one should edit him right out of the site. It would seem he's drunk with power.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2:05 (talk • contribs) in fact i have no more power than you do to do anything inside wikipediaBenon 02:07, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
bite me AND stop moving folks articles— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2:11 (talk • contribs)
Succesful RfA!
|
Thank you for your support during my RfA! The community has decided to make me an administrator, and there's work to be done. I look forward to seeing you around the project in the future, and if you see me do anything dumb, let me know right away! Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 23:44, 27 January 2006 (UTC) |
Vandalism
Hi, I did not know it was vandalism to remove content. Sorry. I do believe the content in question is biased against Jehovah's Witnesses in the general tone and style. It's the same for the Awake! and Watchtower entries, and therefore I was only removing what I thought was biased. The sort of writing in there would never get into Encyclopedia Britannica, so how can it be gotten away with on here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.114.15 (talk)
response on their talk pageBenon 01:34, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Isn't this a public user editable site though, hence the whole point of it being a wiki? I simply edited the article. I did not add any pro-JW comments, nor change the sense of the article, simply removed the biased comments. I will report it as you say, but I must say you're a very unfair moderator for what is a publically-editable site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.114.15 (talk)
reply on their talk pageBenon 01:45, 28 January 2006 (UTC)