User talk:Gail/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Gail. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Gail, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Longhair\^talk 08:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I've been editing for quite some time under dynamic IPs, so I have an idea of policies. Gail Wilson (talk) 14:30, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Gail, take better care in reverting vandalism. Use the "history" tab (above) to look through recent changes. When you reverted the vandalism from 65.217.178.82 (talk · contribs) of the Carlos Santana article, you revert only one of two vandal edits from this user, leaving one of them in place.

Try to do a "Compare selected versions" and scroll back until you locate a "good" version. You can undo multiple vandal edits by putting the left radial button in the "good" one, and the right radial button in the last edit by the user (normally at the top). (You may have to copy the user name/IP because this feature blanks the "Edit summary" field.)

Help:Reverting

Wikipedia:Vandalism

Thanks. IP4240207xx (talk) 20:21, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

You're right. My apologies about missing that one. I'll try to pay more attention in the future. Gail Wilson (talk) 21:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Awarded to you for repeatedly and viscously stepping on the fingers of vandals and potential ruinous editors of wikipedia. Your help is appreciated. Kero tan-^{Have a nice day :)} 14:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm honoured :) (Although Huggle helps too...) Gail Wilson (talk) 14:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for your work against vandals. Majoreditor (talk) 15:03, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you :) Much appreciated! Gail Wilson (talk) 15:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

No problem. If you're getting vandalized, that must mean you're doing good work, so keep it up! J.delanoy ^gabs analyze 20:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, now there's two. I'm following them all over the place with Huggle. And don't worry about that warning, he accidentally reverted you after you reverted someone else. J.delanoy ^gabs analyze 20:23, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey, I was thinking about that accidental warning I hit you with, and was surprised Huggle didn't ask for confirmation first, because I've seen it do that before reverting whitelisted users. Well, it turns out you weren't whitelisted yet, so I did some poking around and figured out how to add you to Huggle's whitelist. So hopefully this won't happen again. --JaGa (talk) 20:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your anti-vandalism efforts on Ancient Egypt. I've protected the page for two days to keep new and unregistered users from vandalizing it. If your account is too new to continue editing, I apologize. I wanted to let you know why you might not be able to edit it further, and that it's really absolutely nothing against you at all; it's an unfortunate consequence of how the system works. THanks again for your help. Cheers and happy editing! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 21:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not a problem, I've been autoconfirmed today. And I agree with the page protection. Thanks for informing me anyway :) Gail Wilson (talk) 21:14, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! mature people 1, childish teenagers 0. Ironho lds 01:35, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I don't know what drives them. Don't let them dissuade you from your good work though! I'll keep the page on watch in case they return. Gail Wilson (talk) 18:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

{{elpme}} I was wondering... is there any way of shortening my username to just Gail? Thanks for any help! Gail Wilson (talk) 18:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

WP:CUN has the info you need if you want to change your username. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 19:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I hadn't thought that it might require the intervention of an admin. Thanks for the info :) Gail Wilson (talk) 19:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

In fact in needs the intervention of a bureaucrat. PeterSymonds (talk) 11:46, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Heh you're right! I'm still getting used to the technical wiki jargon. Gail Wilson (talk) 11:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, you know I've granted you rollback. And as for the diff I provided, sorry, you were right. I didn't see the "butt town" thing. Oh well, be careful anyway...! :) Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 11:45, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll do my best :) Gail Wilson (talk) 11:47, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I wish to not have messages from you show up on my screen. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.117.88.126 (talk) 19:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied at Talk:X-ray#keeping information accessible to non-physicists. Gail Wilson (talk) 19:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For continuelly beating me at vandalism. :-D Justpassin (talk) 18:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot :) You should try using Huggle too someday... it really speeds things up! Gail Wilson (talk) 18:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I seconded your request for protection. It was vandalized so quickly I reverted to a vandal version before I even had time to revert the first vandal. — Calebrw (talk) 19:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, I assumed something like that had happened (that's why I didn't send you a vandal warning). Article semi-protected now, so you may relax ;) Gail Wilson (talk) 19:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Now relaxed and moving forward with my regular duties at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools — Calebrw (talk) 19:30, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind, but I've tagged your user page for deletion after it was created by User:Reppa C as a piece of vandalism/attack on you. --Sugarbutty 12:47, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

No, on the contrary, thanks :) I hadn't even noticed it. Gail Wilson (talk) 12:50, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

No problems, glad to be of service. Bencherlite ^Talk 13:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I sometimes get overwhelmed by the constant battle against the idiots, but then I run across people like you who are on the good side, and it makes the battle so much easier! Thanks. ~Jonathan (talk) 16:40, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

DO YOUR RESEARCH MISTER! PISCO IT'S FROM PERU...TRY READING A COUPLE OF BOOKS BEFORE TEACHING THE WHOLE WORLD SOMETHING THAT IT'S WRONG. HISTORY BOOKS WILL SHOW YOU THAT PISCO IS FROM PERU SO THERE IS NO SUCH A THING AS PERUVIAN OR CHILEAN PISCO! PISCO IS PISCO AND IT'S FROM PERU. IF YOU WOULD LIKE SOME RECENT PROVE ABOUT IT READ THE BOOK NAME: MI PAIS INVENTADO BY ISABEL ALLENDE A CHILEAN WRITER THAT IN PAGE 22 OF HER OWN BOOK SHE ADMITS THAT PISCO IT'S FROM PERU AND THE CHILEANS STOLE THE NAME FROM THE PERUVIAN CITY! PLEASE READ SOME MORE ABOUT IT!

Replied at User talk:24.0.209.37. Gail (talk) 17:49, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Yay! Got the name change :) Gail (talk) 17:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about my rollback of your reversion on Timexpo Museum. You just managed to revert it before I did, and I rollbacked the last revision. No hard feelings, --Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 16:35, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, happens to us all sometime :) Gail (talk) 16:53, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gail,

I am sorry about deleting those pages, i was kinda bored,

Apologies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsenalboi20 (talk • contribs) 09:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Just a note that you're really fast at reverting vandalism :P Helenginn (talk) 11:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

You are, yeah Jmathur (talk) 17:11, 17 June 2008 (UTC) Danke shönJmathur (talk) 17:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I think Terra and Billy bob are most likely the same person, but I doubt Astro is as well. Checkuser would be useless, in this case, as they're all from the same college, so their IP addresses would pretty much be the same. It isn't a problem, though, since they didn't violate WP:SOCK (they were reverting vandalism, therefore it wasn't 3RR). I've semi-protected the page, so that should be enough. Good work with huggle, by the way, I'm seeing you all over today. ;) · AndonicO ^Engage. 12:44, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Probably a college grudgematch or something. ;) Impressive work. Don't burn out, though; I know I did... · AndonicO ^Engage. 12:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

At this rate, you'll probably pass it next month. · AndonicO ^Engage. 13:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Apologies, I'm trying to constantly revert the ridiculous vandalism, but there's so much of it that I was getting lost with what parts I was changing :P Nicpowel (talk) 13:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Its because of this........ http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=819024 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.96.131.189 (talk) 13:19, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks 81.96.131.189 for the link, but you should stop vandalizing... if you keep on going like this, you'll only get your IP blocked from editing. Gail (talk) 13:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

FYI:

An IP editor added Michele Obama (sic) to the list using the edit summary "reverting vandalism". To the best of my knowledge, Senator Barack Obama's wife isn't a porn star and doesn't belong on the list.

When another IP editor tried to correct the vandalism, you reverted to the vandalized version and gave the helpful IP editor a vandalism warning.

I just wanted to let you know why I undid your edit and deleted the vandalism warning you left for the IP editor. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 16:33, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Malik Shabazz#List of African-American porn stars. Gail (talk) 16:41, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

No problem. The first IP was sneaky with his/her edit summary and the second IP editor didn't correctly link to Obsession (porn star). Thanks. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 16:44, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert! Much appreciated, and happy editing, Leonard^Bloom (talk) 16:58, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome :) Same to you! Gail (talk) 16:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You must be doing well with Huggle, especially beating me to vandalism! I award you this barnstar for that. -- SchfiftyThree 18:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Note that this is a Huggle bug - I'm reporting it to Gurch – iridescent 21:24, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I think that was the fourth erroneous warning I received today. Gail (talk) 21:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks I kind of wrecked it and youve corrected me —Preceding unsigned comment added by Canpop (talk • contribs) 18 June 2008

Hi!

It seems as though we were both leaving a warning for this editor at the same time - you were leaving a level 1 vandalism warning and myself a level 2. Since 2 warnings are not neccessary, I removed yours because this person does not need to be welcomed to Wikipedia since he's been around for quite a while and has already received a warning so I thought a more stern warning was the more appropriate one.

Anyways, I hope I haven't offended you by this and, if you do disagree with what I did, I apologize and feel free to revert me.

Peace! SWik78 (talk • contribs) 14:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

No offence at all :) I agree with the sterner warning, it looks like a vandalism-only account. Gail (talk) 14:07, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for undoing all the vandalism on the Magibon page, I appear to have missed the previous vandalism. StaticGull Talk 15:20, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:StaticGull#Thanks! Gail (talk) 15:33, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

this page needs to be either vandalized or deleted. I chose the fun route of vandalism lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arguecat3 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

From the comments on your talk page, I'm sure that you already know that regular contributors are happy with the job that you've been doing with reverting vandalism. You did right with reverting on an article on my watchlist. I urge you to create a user page so that your name doesn't appear as a red link, even if that means that you add "This page was intentionally left blank". Even better, you could add the rollback icon in the upper right by adding the text {{Rollback}} . Regulars know that a red linked user page usually means danger, but that's not correct for you. Having rollback privileges means that the community has some level of trust in you. Happy reverting! Royal broil 15:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Royalbroil#My user page. Gail (talk) 15:52, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, you're right. It is not a red link, it is redirected. Still, a little information helps other contributors see that your not a newbie and that you're serious. Royal broil 16:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I got it from one of her blogs before. I browse them sometimes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arguecat4 (talk • contribs) 18 June 2008

No problem. As far as semi-protection goes, I really don't want to semi-protect my user page, because I don't care when people vandalize it. They just get reverted/warned/reported/blocked. On occasion, I have had my talk page semi-protected, because it's annoying to get the "you have new messages" banner just to see the tail end of someone reverting vandalism. Since edits to my userpage don't do anything like that, I doubt I'll ever get it protected. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 16:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You've beat me to the revert many-a-time, and you've personally reverted vandalism to my page. Thank you very much! Leonard^Bloom (talk) 04:16, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I've looked into it, but I prefer the lightweight Lupin and Twinkle. Keep up the good work, and enjoy it the whole time. Leonard^Bloom (talk) 16:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I hear-by award you the Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for beating me all the time while I am using Huggle :) Alexnia (talk) 17:07, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

(86.134.175.128 (talk) 17:24, 20 June 2008 (UTC)) The page NISL needs to be deleted the information is factually incorrect there is no such language such as NISL. A few of the universities in the UK and Ireland have found no such language and the comments "Unionist BSL users (mainly members of the British Deaf Association") is offensive I am surprised a highly respected organisation such as the BDA which has worked worldwide is allowed to be riddiculed in this way.

Replied at User talk:86.134.175.128. Gail (talk) 12:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

(86.134.175.128 (talk) 14:31, 21 June 2008 (UTC))Unfortunately yes if you see the NI government are currently working with numerous deaf organisations who all agree on ISL and BSL however NISL does not exist. DCAl are the department solely taskedd with languages and currently deal with all the contraversial languages already it would be a major political issue if they missed NISL if it actually existed!! Some of your references refer to NISL before the official state of NI actually existed so how can Northern Ireland Sign Language exist before Northern Ireland? I am happy to provide further info if necessary.

Sorry for the confusion on the Clive Baker page. My bad! Mspraveen (talk) 12:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

No problem :) But be careful to check the article's history before nominating it for deletion. Gail (talk) 12:18, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

While reverting some diffs on user page, I noticed that you had reverted vandalism there as well. Honestly, thank you again. Next time my page is vandalized, and you revert it a third time, I will dedicate a page to you in my user space. Leonard^Bloom (talk) 04:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

It's nothing, really, but thanks for the appreciation :) I presume that I had gone through the rest of the vandal's recent edits upon reverting his personal attack, thus discovering your other vandalized pages. Gail (talk) 16:24, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Still, my page is almost never vandalized, and the times it has, you reverted it. If it happens again, you'll get some sort of memorial page. Or maybe a barnstar. ;P Much appreciated, and happy editing, Leonard^Bloom (talk) 18:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. The you made to Tigon has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Anonymous101 (talk) 15:10, 23 June 2008 (UTC) Sorry, This was an accidental Huggle war sorry.--Anonymous101 (talk) 15:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

No problem, happens all the time :) Gail (talk) 15:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the IP edits. The regular additions of the JamesLast.de fansite has been going on for, oh, about a year now. - Dudesleeper / Talk 01:11, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! I must admit that the IP's taunt was amusing though :P Gail (talk) 08:20, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry Gail, just having some fun. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.45.213 (talk) 15:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Ummmm, yes. That's the point. I have a clear distain for the Cleveland Browns, Eva Braun, and Dan Quayle. Where is your sense of humor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.45.213 (talk) 15:36, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, its the encyclopedia that anyone can edit! At least see the humor in that. Look, I'm not saying you should keep the images up. I'm just saying you could at least be a little lighthearted in your attitude. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.45.213 (talk) 15:42, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not entirely templated. You did just ask me if I thought my actions were insulting. And how is the number of people who read this encyclopedia relevant when the edits are taken down within minutes anyway? Relax Gail, its all in good fun. You are one of the only patrols I've met that can't at least delete jokes with a smile on their face. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.45.213 (talk) 15:59, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Such a headline would be humourous because the joking intent is obvious. This is because the well known and famous have been targeted. It's for this same reason that satirical publications cannot be sued for libel. The reason why the incident you cited is unfortunate is because the vandal had the intent to intentionally mislead people. The joke would not be obvious to the any other person reading the article. And if Wikipedia's reputation were to be damaged, isn't that a con that comes with the territory of having an encyclopedia that anyone can edit? I have a great respect for what you guys do on this site, but if you can't keep it accurate and reliable, then you deserve to take a hit to your reputation even if you guys mean well.

That's fine, but you are missing my point. Wikipedia's reputation doesn't get tarnished from joke toilet edits that get reversed right away. It gets tarnished by things that go unnoticed such as the flyover incident. So I suggest you spend more time getting worked up over finding legitimate inaccuracies than scolding those who are just having a little fun. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.45.213 (talk) 16:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

You're missing the point of Wikipedia. If you want to test your editing, use the Sandbox. Q ^{T C} 16:59, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

That statement is a matter of opinion. Maybe you are the one who is wrong, considering it seems like most people don't have a problem with joking, which IS harmless whether you appreciate it or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.252.45.213 (talk) 17:18, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Most people don't have a problem with joking. Just don't vandalize wikipedia and you'll have no problems. From the Relevant policy page: The most common types of vandalism include the addition of obscenities or crude humor, page blanking, or the insertion of nonsense into articles.. Q ^{T C} 17:20, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

For the record, my replies are at User talk:71.252.45.213. Gail (talk) 18:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

You have false information. The so called "New Hospital" that you are talking about is the same hospital thats been abandoned, called overbrook. I am a historian of these places and would apreciate it if you stop spreading lies all over the internet. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.203.83 (talk) 16:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:71.251.203.83. Gail (talk) 16:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: your speedy here, it clearly says he's a professional golfer, that's an assertion of notability right there. No A7, I'm cleanin git up right now but take it to AfD if you disagree. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 13:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I answered on my page :) _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 14:21, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

again :) _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 15:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

THANK YOU GAIL 81.108.97.207 (talk) 18:45, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome :) Gail (talk) 18:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Blocked. :D Acalamari 18:49, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

May he have ample time to bring his arousal under control. 19:06, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

She denies your freedom of speech and will probaly delete this

Replied at User talk:86.45.14.19. Gail (talk) 15:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I am hugely dissapointed with you Gail. tut! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.181.170 (talk) 12:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:78.150.181.170. Gail (talk) 12:28, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		You reversions are incredibly quick! Anonymous101 (talk) 15:32, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you :) It's a nice change from the annoyed vandals' complaints I've been receiving lately ;) Gail (talk) 15:41, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Not trying to vandalise, I being the one who put the vandalism template in the page Sambalpuri Region. Next time, please be careful in shooting off messages to stop vandalism. Hope you realise. Thank You. Softdynamite (talk) 19:21, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Softdynamite. Gail (talk) 13:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for making a report about 86.29.88.233 (talk · contribs · block log) on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, it appears that the editor you reported may not have engaged in vandalism, or the user was not sufficiently or appropriately warned. Please note there is a difference between vandalism and unhelpful or misguided edits made in good faith. If they continue to vandalise after a recent final warning, please re-report it. Thank you! TigerShark (talk) 15:24, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I have now blocked them, because they had actually been warned before but had deleted the warnings. My request above still stands though, because your edits seem to indicate that you believed that your warning to them was their first. Thanks TigerShark (talk) 15:27, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Replies at User talk:TigerShark#AIV. Gail (talk) 15:49, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for your response. Not the first time that somebody has mentioned this kind of thing happening with Huggle! :) Cheers TigerShark (talk) 15:31, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Wow. Xavexgoem (talk) 20:49, 29 June 2008 (UTC) 15:32, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) By the way, I agree with giving Goldenvision9 the benefit of the doubt... I was a little reluctant to report him/her, but needed some way of making him/her stop removing sourced content without explaining his/her rationale. I think 3 hours is reasonable. Gail (talk) 21:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing you saw the reason why I changed that article but I just wanted to make sure send me a message if you saw my reason.

Falcons745 (talk) 16:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Falcons745. Gail (talk) 23:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

The point of that edit was to get the two articles split not redirected. His crimes are still alleged and he is innocent until proven guilty and that article said he did do his alleged crimes but didn't say they were alleged. He also has a trial upcoming and I felt it innappropriate that his article say he was the bishop while he is still awaiting trial.

Falcons745 (talk) 19:41, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Falcons745. Gail (talk) 23:51, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

To end edit warring in this article I am calling all editors of this article for vote on talk page--Rjecina (talk) 22:19, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm a little mystified. I made a comment in a discussion on Lech Kaczynski the other day. (I'm not a member.) Now that comment takes me to User Page where, I find, you have deleted an edit I made to a page on Trick Daddy. I've never heard of Trick Daddy. And I looked at the edit you deleted, which just seems to be a bit of mischief. I never made that remark. I do use several different computers; maybe I can figure out which one that came from. 72.83.107.139 (talk) 16:13, 21 July 2008 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza

Actually, I find yet another edit I didn't make, this time after the Lech Kaczynski one. And it's got to do with a basketball player I've never heard of. 140.147.160.34 (talk) 14:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza

Hi there. My ip address must have changed recently because I just got a "new" message from you. This ip address has not previously belonged to me (and my ISP serving me this new ip address has signed me out of my account) and I have never even heard of the page Hot 100 number-one hits of 1984 (United States) (also I am not American). My established user account is JayKeaton which I will sign back into after I send this message. 219.90.249.41 (talk) 21:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey! I did not say that Blake Lewis is a bisexual or gay! I just thought that it would be more reliable if we include the issues/controversies about him. Are you watching the Season 6 of the American Idol? Everybody is questioning about his sexuality and he already denied the issues about that on a radio interview in Los Angeles, CA. If you want me to have some reliable source about that, go on YouTube, search on Google or Yahoo! and you'll find out that when he was on the Idol, many have claimed that he was gay. But he is denying it... he said that the issues were not true. 121.1.61.198 (talk) 11:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

SO YOU GET ALL YOUR INFORMATION FROM THE LOS ANGELES TIMES? QUE INCREDULO! WIKIPEDIA SHOULD BE A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE GET THE RIGHT INFORMATION AND FACTS! WOULD YOU LIKE TO READ A LITTLE MORE ABOUT PISCO BESIDES THE LOS ANGELES TIMES? PERHAPS SOME REAL DOCUMENTATION THAT YOU WILL BE ABLE TO OBTAIN ABOUT PISCO...DID I MENTION SOME FACTS LIKE THE CHILEAN GOVERNMENT RECENTLY CHANGE THE NAME OF AN "X" CITY TO PISCO? PERHAPS YOU NEED TO WATCH ALSO SOME YOUTUBE VIDEOS WHERE CHILEANS ADMIT THAT THEY STOLE PISCO FROM US!.

WHEN I LOOK UP "CHAMPAGNE" IN WIKIPEDIA I GET THE REAL INFORMATION...CHAMPAGNE ONLY COMES FROM THE CHAMPAGNE REGION OF FRANCE AND THE REST IT'S JUST SPARKLING WINE WELL MISTER IT'S THE SAME WITH PISCO, THE ONLY AND ORIGINAL PISCO COMES FROM THE PISCO REGION IN PERU AND THE REST IT'S JUST ANYTHING BUT!

MAYBE YOU WOULD LIKE TO READ THE BOOK FROM CHILEAN WRITER ISABEL ALLENDE "MI PAIS INVENTADO" WHERE IN PAGE 22 SHE ADMITS THAT PISCO IT'S PERUVIAN AND SHE EVEN SAYS: IF ANYONE CAN CALL CHAMPAGNE TO ANY SPARKLING WINE WHY CAN'T WE CALL PISCO TO OUR DRINK?...UHMMM I HOPE YOU FEEL REALLY STRONGLY ABOUT SOMETHING THAT MAKES YOU PROUD AND PEOPLE JUST START MANIPULATING THE STORY BEHIND IT. HAVE A NICE DAY AND IF YOU EVER GO TO SOUTH AMERICA DON'T FORGET TO VISIT MY BEAUTIFUL COUNTRY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.209.37 (talk) 1 August 2008

Hey Gail, and thanks for finding and reverting the vandalism to my talk page. --Tkynerd (talk) 17:51, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem, happy to be of service :) Gail (talk) 18:00, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I see you're on a reverting spree there! You beat me to 3 pages, starting from your talk page. Maybe I can catch up while you read this. --Joshua Issac (talk) 01:33, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Nice diversion tactic, never thought of that! ;) Gail (talk) 01:35, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

The IP's are annoying! Thanks for helping me revert their edits. Vernon (Versus22) (talk) 01:45, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem, we're in this together after all :) I've requested for semi-protection of Dissidia: Final Fantasy, as it appears to be receiving a lot of vandalism today. Gail (talk) 01:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I just can't believe how much vandalism there is on Wikipedia. Hard work! :( Vernon (Versus22) (talk) 02:09, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For reverting vandalism --Joshua Issac (talk) 02:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm honoured :) Gail (talk) 13:44, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

As per your message, I'd just like to state that geese are indeed monogomous animals, hence why I added that point onto the page. I understand if you believe more information was needed to make it a worthy paragraph, but I can assure you it was factual at least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.79.157.248 (talk) 02:48, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

User correct, replied at User talk:81.79.157.248, fact reinstated in article. Gail (talk) 23:12, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gail, thanks for sorting out the mess/vandalism on my user and talk pages today. Cheers. Marek.69 ^talk 23:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! :) Gail (talk) 10:00, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

for going back 30+ revisons here. I was about to do the exact same thing but you beat me to it. (It looks odd thanking someone for reverting 37 revisions but there was a lot of vandalism that was never removed).--Faradayplank (talk) 10:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

It helps if you search for gaps in the page's edit history. If a page was not edited for a couple of months (such as June to October), then it's more likely that the old version is clean. Just my two cents ;) Gail (talk) 11:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, the joys of new page patrol. Thanks for the cleanup. --fvw * 12:29, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem, thanks to you too for patrolling :) Gail (talk) 12:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

You have no idea what it is like to be a Philadelphia Eagles fan. It's not deconstructive or whatever you called it; it's an expression of pain and suffering that we endure on a once-weekly basis. And a true statement, LJ Smith can't play..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.116.28.173 (talk) 00:40, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

How about finding a reliable source (such as a news article) which mirrors your views? That way, it would be acceptable to include some criticism in the article. Gail (talk) 00:44, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gail, Many, many thanks for your vandalism patrols on this page today! It took me months to write, and it is pretty scary how people seem to attack the front page article so much. Your help is much appreciated!-- Myosotis Scorpioides 00:56, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, and congratulations on getting an article you wrote to the front page! Gail (talk) 00:58, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello. Thanks for reverting the vandlaism on my page. I filed a report on WP:AIV. Thanks again. America69 (talk) 21:22, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Wow, an admin got there fast, the IP has been blocked for a week. Thanks again!! America69 (talk) 21:23, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Yup, I was just about to copy the diff to tell you that. You're welcome! Gail (talk) 21:25, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

My edits to the deathcore and carnifex pages were completely accurate. I don't understand why you would mark those edits as vadalism. Is it not a fact that Carnifex are part of the homosexual genre? And is it not a fact that Deathcore is for fags who need a more watered down version of death metal? Idk, Gail, it seems like you should have left those up there. I don't know if you really know what you're doing...66.139.121.174 (talk) 12:15, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi. What was wrong with my edit exactly? I felt my contributions helped balance the tone of the article, which at present has far too positive overtones. I accept that the insertion of the word "mediocre" is perhaps a blatant expression of opinion, but it is a toned down opinion (given that i think they are shit! Seriously have you ever heard any of their music?) needed to counter other bias contained within. 194.189.32.65 (talk) 12:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah ok, no worries. Someone's bound to have criticised them somewhere! To tell you the truth, I'm glad to have met someone who hasn't heard of them. You're not missing out put it that way! 194.189.32.65 (talk) 12:41, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I am so sorry gail i just let my friend go on my laptop for around half an hour i did not know he was wiki editing I wont let this happen again —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paisleyd (talk • contribs) 18:37, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

sorry about my editing on the dr who page on wikipedia.

the episode is actually called 'the eleventh doctor' and not 'the 11 doctors'.

i found out on www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.208.245.50 (talk) 19:01, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:90.208.245.50. Gail (talk) 19:20, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I absolutely did not make an unconstructive edit. The claim added was not from a MEDC country so was not eligible as clearly stated. Secondly claims over 122 are also not allowed. So it broke 2 rules. In future, please take more than 1 minute to decide that people are being unconstructive on pages where you perhaps have less knowledge than they do. 84.13.31.46 (talk) 22:52, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:84.13.31.46. Gail (talk) 22:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

i really think there are serious problems with the sources for the graphic, including reliability at best, but lack of (sources) too Presidetn of the unites states of america (talk) 15:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I have replied on my talkpage but this is what I put. Yes sorry I will revert it. I was going too fast and I havent ever used huggle before so its just getting into it. But thanks for pointing it out to me. Corruptcopper (talk) 20:14, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I have revered my edit and also left an appology on the talkpage urgeing them to create an account so they have there own unique identity when they edit. Corruptcopper (talk) 20:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I got a message about an edit I didnt do. How come someone else got my IP? Please reply here (in your talk page). Thanks--117.196.161.33 (talk) 20:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The most probable explanation is that your ISP allocates IP addresses dynamically. This means that your IP may change whenever you reconnect, with your previous IP being available for allocation to any other subscriber of your ISP. Since the message was posted more than six months ago, I would not worry about it. Gail (talk) 16:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		I watch the talk pages of everyone I warn. You've filled up my watchlist. What else is there to say? J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 20:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm honoured :) You're one of the editors I encounter most frequently on Huggle. Gail (talk) 20:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem, that happens. I checked to make sure other sources also said the same. Thanks! Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 02:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

What did I do ? I removed an illegal image ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom.magnussen (talk • contribs) 11:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

The images are still viewable in these countries and from what ive read it is illegal to publish these images anywhere in the world as the artist has in a way banned /copyrighted them . Do you speak danish ? I am happy to find this info for you . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom.magnussen (talk • contribs) 11:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Again you have made a mistake ,yes Danish and Islamic law do not apply in the US , but the US has there own laws about racisim which make this image illegal too in the US . Please think about what you are saying !--Tom.magnussen (talk) 12:15, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reading . Ill keep tryin . --Tom.magnussen (talk) 12:22, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

To be noted here is that Vijayakanth is a day time drunkard for which he was chucked out of DMK and Jayalalitha too speaks a lot about it.

Please refer http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=vijayakanth+drunkard which will give lots of information —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.5.39 (talk) 12:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I saw your battle with vandalism over at United States v. Microsoft, and just wanted wanted to say: good job! -- NathanoNL [ usr | msg | log ] 13:49, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks :) I've requested for the page to be semi-protected, but there appears to be a backlog on WP:RFPP, so I'll just keep it on watch for now. Gail (talk) 13:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

why will i be blocked for editing the sandpit as someone else told me to?144.82.240.178 (talk) 14:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sandbox, not Sandpit. لenna vecia 14:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Precisely. Thanks Jennavecia! Gail (talk) 14:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

What about the merging the article "hardest language" within the article "language learning aptitude"? Is that acceptable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.104.70.109 (talk) 16:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:85.104.70.109. Gail (talk) 17:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I know I'm a little late with this, but I just wanted to say thank you for reverting my user page after it was vandalised yesterday. Very much appreciated! ZX81 ^talk 00:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, it's my pleasure :) Gail (talk) 17:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I reported this person on AIV. Thanks for reverting on Tom Arnold- I reached my 3RR limit. tedder (talk) 19:40, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Tedder. Gail (talk) 19:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

If you aren't watching my page, I replied there. (I don't mind continuing the discussion at either place) tedder (talk) 20:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting a particularly nasty bit of vandalism from my talk page. mandarax • xɐɹɐpuɐɯ 20:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome :) The vandal has now been blocked for a week. Gail (talk) 21:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Done Thanks for the heads-up. I've removed the remaining warning from Obymunch (talk · contribs) (will add courteous remark when I figure out an elegant way to say it without implying "It's all Gail's fault!" :) Cheers. Proofreader77 (talk) 01:52, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Gail, as i stated to John the reasons for the edit are in the discussion page. The content removed is speculative and by a fan of a rival club with no other intent other than malicious. Please try to grant me the benefit of the doubt as you have done the person who psosted the malicious content. I also propose the page is semi-protected such is it's liability to be vandilised. Thanks81.102.233.188 (talk) 20:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry but the content removed has no other source than that of a known sectarian bigot who's motives were malicious and assertions speculative. I will be changing it back. I will also be posting a thread on several fans websites asking them to do similar should it be re-posted. I can give you numerous sounces to back my argument up and that of the general concensus if only you could point me in the direction of where to put it. Again i don't ecpect you to have a detailed knowledge of the sectarian problems of the west of Scotland but be aware they are deep and drive idiots to go to great lengths to score pathetic black propoganda poiunts against one another, which you are aiding at the moment. Please inform yourself of this if you want to gain a rounded picture of whatis actually happening here. Thanks81.102.233.188 (talk) 21:11, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

My claims can be backed up by editor "Henke67" should you wish top liase with him on this matter. Thanks81.102.233.188 (talk) 21:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Gail, i appreciate that and don't expect you to take my word as gospel. However as someone who lived in Scotland for 30 years and with a depth of knowledge about the dynamics of Scottish football i can't express how frustrating it is to have this obvious malicious content onthe page. It's clearly wrong not to mention against general concensus. I have left, on numerous ocassions, muy reasoning on the discussion page but even that is now being removed by over-zealous editors. I will endevour to supply numerous sources to back my claims up but am still lost as top how to apply these so as to satisfy you and other editors. In the meantime, if you can please concult editor "Henke67" he, i'm sure, will at least give you some reasurance as to my motives and the general concensus. Thanks 21:35, 21 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.233.188 (talk)

Gail, the content removed on the discussion page is not regarding Celtic F.C. As with the content on the mainpage it is malicious and designed to taint the name of the club. It is by a fan of a rival club who, like the his brethren who actually set up a website in order to take his bigotry to new depths by using a child abuse case as a weapon in a futile and rather pathetic slanging match, is using it for malicious purposes. If we are to be to the letter of the law on this then i suggest you recommend that a new page is set up with regard to Celtic boys club as it is a seperate entity to Celtci F.C. again i can provide numerous sources on this from historical and nespaper sources. I don't expect you to have a detailed knowledge though i suspect you are now starting to grasp the depth of this rather distastful part of Scottish society. Thanks again. 21:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.233.188 (talk)

I take that on board, Gail. However i strongly feel that it's very presence on there is giving a victory to those who are seking to maliciously vandalise the page. No it's not on the main page but it is unfounded malicious content designed to sully the name of the club despite the fact the subject is about an entity with no ties to Celtic F.C. If it were on a page designated to the relevant body involved then i would have no argument but it's not and therefore i feel i am vindicated in removing. As and aside, i'd like to apologise for causing any added work load and/or stress over the matter but i feel to leave such utter non factial bile on there is giving a small victory to the empty headed, amoral people behind it. Agian i thank you for your understanding. 22:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.233.188 (talk)

Gail, that's absolute bullshit. I've tried to considerate to your position but have not had that reciprocated. I now feel i have no other option than to carry out my intention to post this as a topic on numerous fans sites which, no doubt, willlead to a sharp increase in your work load. I must add that hen people come one wiki and edit to remove obvious malicious content that they know to be so but are met wioth such blind belligerance from people like yourself it really does tarnish the spirit that wiki operates with. In future, if you don't have the time to research what you edit then just quit. The enterprise is not worth carrying on with if it has such obvious undermining flaws in it's application. For the last time, Thanks.22:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.233.188 (talk)

Well i hope that you also include this talk page as to give a real impression of reasonable behaviour. You have been given ample respect on this matter yet have continued to repost malicious, unfounded and speculative material which i will now be informing Celtic football club that you are now hosting; i'm sure this kind of defamation will prove interesting to their P.R. department. I will also be making this a topic on fans websites so as they can have the opportunity of of making their feeling known. Lastly, i have, on numerous occasions, asked you to make clear to me where i put my sources and accreditation which you have failed to do; perhaps it's time to get off you conceited high horse and look at how you deal with similar issues in future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.233.188 (talk) 22:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Replies at User talk:81.102.233.188. Gail (talk) 23:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

hi, just came on to wiki now and got this message - "Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Prestonpans has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Gail (talk) 22:23, 16 January 2009 (UTC)"

I have never even heard of the article or the place before, much less edited it lol i have singed in with my account now so you can check or whatever it is you wikipolice types do. Cheers ("we have nothing to fear, but fear itself" (talk) 13:27, 15 February 2009 (UTC))

> further to your message- I know about dynamic IP's, and if your simply spamming the person who vandalised the page (or everyone with their IP) in hope that they wont do it again, then good luck to you. It seems pretty futile to me. Anyhow ill take it as an apology. Peace —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maccie06 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

right then, I guess I will have to. Keep up the good work, clearly im the only person on here who finds it irritating.

Replies at User talk:Maccie06#Palm wine. Gail (talk) 14:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I notised that you seam to have revereed my edit for some reason... I was wondering why... I am sorry that I don't know how to send a message.

In the EDIT I changed "martial" to "marital" it is a very simple typing error... just letting you know. BTW I see it in other places as well so I may change them, but I don't want all my work reverted :(

Sinserely,

David

Replied at User talk:68.173.196.35. Gail (talk) 14:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

forgot to log in, but made a valid edit concern a page that is blatently biased, I was making it unbiased, and fixing a link, while you undid my revision. Becareful with your reverts as I imagine this probably isnt the first time you sent an unnnessecary warning to someone who could have been a newbie learning the ropes...shame on you. Too many complaints can result in loosing roll back rights remember70.49.153.50 (talk) 02:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:70.49.153.50. Gail (talk) 14:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

There must be some mistake, the toddy article was a in a jumble, the table and the text was in the same paragraph. I inserted the blank line in order to bring the text at the bottom of the table. I will check why palm wine has been edited, I did not intend and I did not edit palm wine Yogesh Khandke (talk) 12:11, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes toddy and palm wine are the same article. Yes palm wine was edited by me. You possible did a revert. See the Names table. Please put it in order or revert the edit you have done to my edit it will put things in their place. Please be careful before reverting edits which clear mess. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 12:15, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes I did not log in because I am trying out different editing formats. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 12:16, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I did not log in because I overlooked it. You seem to be misusing your rollback rights. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 12:19, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing the mess, you seem to have a hang of the wikipedia syntax. Sorry if I sounded a little loud. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 14:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Replies at User talk:Yogesh Khandke#Palm wine. Gail (talk) 14:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Gail., Two complaints about your huggle usage in one day is not acceptable. In each case the editors were working on the articles Lz white, and palm oil and were in the process of adding and deleting text and usig multiple edits. People can make a formatting errors very easily. When I use huggle I dont immediately revert anything on site, but i take the time to see where they are going and see if its blatent vandalism. Targetting only IP addresses to fight vandalism also deters users learning the ropes especially when a warning templete is placed as their first form of commmunication and their edits are legit. This will deter them from using wikipedia. You were lucky in both cases that the users were not newbies but forgot to log in, nether the less the easily could have been. Grammer aside if it doesnt look right fix it, dont revert it, Theres more to editing on wikipedia than just reverting pages (if people undid all my grammer mistakes id have no edits). Im sure you know rollbacking is not a right but a privilege, please use it as such.Ottawa4ever (talk) 13:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

(agreed with the palm oil edits) However Im a bit confused with what you write, Im not sure I understand fully , you say you rollbacked their edits because you didnt agree with their tone of the article, but then say you used a loop hole that their was a grammatical mistake and which allowed you to use the roll back function to remove it this that way (70.49.153.50's edits to Liz White (politician)) Its fishy the way yo explain this edit. Im not going to make a complaint about this as you seem to be aware that you cant use this feature this way. But I find your explaination of the use of huggle and the roll back feature a bit `eye brow raising`. Ottawa4ever (talk) 16:27, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Well the solution would have been not to use your roll back feature or automatic scripts. If you disagree with an common edit you revert manually (click on a previous page edit it) and if controversal make a note on the pages talk page, If its vandalism use your roll back feature then slap a tag on their page (though people seem to be complaining of this too, (Im not touching that one even though its falling under biting newcomers). You can throw wiki policies around if you like to make your case, but here you flagged it as vandalism used your roll back feature and slapped a warning on the users talk page, when it was an edit you disagreed with in principal and wasnt vandalism. I dont necesarily buy the fact of this story of yours (I think your trying to cover yourself and not take responsiblility for a mistake). Fighting vandilism isnt just about reverting, its also about helping other new users grow as editors, making suggestions on edits and proposals for pages. You can easily create vandals by biting newcomers and slapping warnings left and right on edits you disagree with so please be careful in the future Ottawa4ever (talk) 14:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. Like I said before, I fail to see how your explanation justifies your usage of rollbacking that edit (Maybe Im stuburn, but Ill admit that). If you revisted the page in question about Liz white you would see the editor had and was in the process of perfecting the edit (The last edit was an attempt to fix the citation before you reverted, In fact your reversion was undone afterwards (if you had a problem with pov then why didnt you say anything on the page later or even now still?) however I will note this , grammer mistakes are still intact. I read the liz white page now and no where to me does the edit in fact make it more biased, it is merely updated to reflect the results of the last canadian election held in november or so (how this makes the edit unproductive I question?). Everything in that article is in fact a fact (minus the grammer which can easily be fixed). In fact , the edit did have an edit summary which mentioned paticular issues that the article was suffering from (PoV) it also mentiones you could revert the edit and mentiones reasons against this, which to me suggests an opening of dialogue for the article not of an warning to the user). If we reverted everything with a spelling mistake and warned every user of this especially IPs (potential new comers) we will turn people off wikipedia and create vandals. I am not convinced of your reasoning (Your edit history suggests you merely glanced the edit at the time and reverted, other people are experienced in huggle too, (Can anyone determine POV in 10 seconds?), I stand by what I said before I think you made a mistake, but Ill let your future edits speak for yourself.Ottawa4ever (talk) 17:34, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

which is why you would involve yourself in a POV revert in the first place (Or is it grammatical or vandalism)? You know my position. In the future be careful, Happy editing Ottawa4ever (talk) 19:16, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Replies at User talk:Ottawa4ever#Reply. Gail (talk) 19:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem, keep up the good work catching those vandals! --J.Mundo (talk) 16:29, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

H2onE2 (talk · contribs) put that on the talk pages of editors who had voted to delete his article -- see WP:Articles for deletion/Glacial respiration. dougweller (talk) 16:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Replies at User talk:Dougweller#H2onE2. Gail (talk) 19:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Gail, Thanks for reverting the vandalism. However, the vandal needs a warning, too. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 16:52, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Stan

This IP has been very disruptive today. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 17:05, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Stan

Left a message with trusilver about 216.185.29.68 very disruptive IP on 2/23/2009. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 17:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Stan

Replies at User talk:7&6=thirteen#Warning vandals. Gail (talk) 19:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

hows u Gail?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.9.35.164 (talk) 23 February 2009

Gail, 198.237.133.10 very disruptive. I Undid the Thurgood Marshall talk page edits, but there is lots more vandalism. Can you help> 7&6=thirteen (talk) 19:42, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Stan

You are correct about today's edits. The Thurgood Marshall edits were after the "final warning" issued on the Tuskegee Airmen edits. Dealing with IP addresses is tricky, I know. I think that one of those 'invitations to register so that they can avoid the hassle (if they weren't the offending party)' might be good. What do you think? I saw one of those a couple of days ago, but I can't remember where. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Stan

I never had any aspiration for administration. Although it seems that I'm being "pulled back in", which was a line from The Godfather or a sequel I think. However I have encountered some very adept and persistent vandals that "undo" couldn't. So I can see the value. How does one apply for rollback privileges? 7&6=thirteen (talk) 20:34, 23 February 2009 (UTC) Stan

Replies at User talk:7&6=thirteen#198.237.133.10. Gail (talk) 19:21, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

... for recognizing that my redirecting a non-notable song title by Weird Al Yankovic to the album that contains the song is in good faith, as my contribution history demonstrates. In this case, the redirection is superior to an AfD, which would have happened if the redirect is not sustained. Thanks again. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 18:43, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Reply at User talk:147.70.242.54#Virus Alert. Gail (talk) 19:22, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

It looks like you've been on Wikipedia for a year today. Happy Wiki-birthday! I hope you have a great future here. – Quadell ^(talk) 18:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Gail, I was just about to add the 1991–1994 NCAA Women of the Year, but I decided to check the edit history, see that they have been added before, but you removed them. I realize this is ancient history; the edit is here, but do you recall why?

I'd like to put them back in, based on this ref, but if I'm missing why they shouldn't be in here, I'd like to know why.--SPhilbrick T 18:29, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

I noticed you haven't edited in months, so I went ahead and made the change, if you feel it isn't warranted, please weight in at the Talk Page--SPhilbrick T 18:46, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for responding, I was pretty sure I was on solid ground, but I didn't want to revert your edit without letting you know - it now makes sense.--SPhilbrick T 19:55, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your courtesy, thanks! I sincerely hope to encounter more editors having your attitude.Gail (talk) 03:00, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Welcome

Reverting Vandalism

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

And another...

Re: revert

Good news

Ancient Egypt

Apprentice of the Universe revert

Shortening username

Rollback

creepy messages

And yet another

Wrestlemania 24

User page vandalism

You're a great person

Pisco Sour

Reversion on Timexpo Museum

Hi

You're really fast.

Launceston College.

Zezi Ifore page

List of African-American porn stars

Thanks!

Wow, you're fast.

June 2008

James Knowles

Warning for Toyyy&nbsp;(talk&nbsp;· contribs)

Thanks!

Magibon page

User page

Magibon DOB

Re: reversion

Here's another I guess...

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

NISL

Clive Baker

Making a habit of this.

James Last

Toilet Man

Essex County Hospital Center

Frank Conallin

81.108.97.207

86.45.14.19

Cheeky Watson

Barnstar!

Caught the Wrong Person, Mate!

AIV

RickK #1254247

re: the article you reverted then unreverted

re:John Tomkins‎ vs The Bishop

Magnum Crimen

my alleged "edit"

my alleged "edit"

Blake Lewis

Pisco

Thank you!

Reverting spree!

Thank you

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar

Geese are indeed monogomous

Thank you

Thank you

thanks

you have no idea

Sunderland Echo

Vandal on my page

Deathcore?

Pigeon Detectives

My Numskull friend

Apolisge

Living Supercentenarians

terrorism

RE:Request

IP

Long overdue shiny

Khaaaaaan!

What is Vandalism&nbsp;?

Vijayakanth Drunkard

Good job

why will i be blocked

Warning for Toyyy (talk · contribs)

What is Vandalism ?