User talk:Xompanthy

Please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page. Please use headlines when starting new talk topics. Thank you.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

PC

Darn it. My PC broke... every single time when I start it (the black window) shows the path to my System files and asks me to repair it (asking for the 'r' button)... and what's worse, this is not the first time (ages ago it happened three times in a row). But back that it came out that the problem was hard-ware related...I had to by new Electric Charges (is that what it's called in English?) and a new Fan...I really do not understand! --PaxEquilibrium 11:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duron, 750 Mhz, 256+128 Mbs RAM, WindowsXP.

BTW this admin thing is really getting annoying. Methodius is the nth person who just asked me for assistence confusing me for an admin!!!

I know it might seem nice, but it's really becoming annoying. I'm doin' this. --PaxEquilibrium 15:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Xompanthy! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Ale_Jrb^talk 22:39, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. And sure, if ya want to :). Ale_Jrb^talk 23:06, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try now. Ale_Jrb^talk 23:06, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe my post should not have been reverted

--71.185.139.224 14:06, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted that edit by accident, I didn't see it was project page. BUT! Saying things like "xyz is retarded" anywhere on wikipedia is not acceptable, even on Wikipedia project pages. Take a look at WP:CIVIL. Try to constructively elaborate your opinions in the future. Thank you. -- xompanthy 14:10, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

I solved the problem.

The whole Hard Drive needed formatting. I didn't format it for 6 years... ever.

I have Linux installed all the time, so I just handled the whole process through him. ;) I've deleted the whole damned thing, and now it's as if my computer never worked better.

BTW, if you're in for more laughs, see User:CroDome's talk page and his contributions... but be careful, I've heard occasions of death from too much laughter. ;0) --PaxEquilibrium 19:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW did you hear that Racan died? --PaxEquilibrium

Over down in Serbia the fools of its political leaders have only made compromise about a government now - and look when was the election - on 21 January (more than 3 months passed)!

Vojislav Kostunica will remain Premier. Ha well, I really hoped that he'd go... but I guess we're gonna have to wait 4 more years... --PaxEquilibrium 21:13, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think who will succeed Ivo Sanader? --PaxEquilibrium 21:33, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've become very fond of Linux after this. ;)

What do you think 'bout it? --PaxEquilibrium 17:18, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see CroDome didn't make ya laugh very much... --PaxEquilibrium 20:28, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion

You Edited The Fire Bellied Newt page and removed a legitamate post. :(

Ha... seems I did. You have my apologies. I read "heads" as "hands", so it seemed as "they prefer to sit with their hands raised in the air", and that looked like vandalism. My bad. Reinstate that edit if you haven't done so already. -- xompanthy 02:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leningrad (song)

Hey there. With few exceptions, song lyrics are not allowed on Wikipedia as they violate WP:COPYVIO, so I removed them from this article. Cheers. JuJube 11:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My deepest apologies then. Damn, even a 99% efficiency at reverting vandalism gets you if you revert a 100 edits a day. Ah well... I only have the best intentions. Cheers. -- xompanthy 11:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Don't worry about it ^_^ JuJube 11:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Outlaws

Hi! I reverted your removal on Ante Gotovina, as I added a source. However, I added to be accurate that this is in all of the Balkans, not specially this region. Tazmaniacs 13:51, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you sourced that statement, then my deletion did a lot of good. I'm more than happy you found a book to support that claim. In the future, you should add citations as soon as possible so situations like this can be avoided.

All in all, I find the article on Ante Gotovina remarkably well written. -- Xompanthy 16:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So do I! (I wasn't the one to write that sentence, but I did read that book and remember fairly well that discussions of outlaw tradition in the Balkans take up the half of this 90 pages book, a very short & interesting reading!) Cheers! Tazmaniacs 16:19, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey what's up

How're you? Long time no hear... ;) --PaxEquilibrium 20:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wb. :) --PaxEquilibrium 21:47, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Crosfields

Hi. I would just like to show my thanks and appreciation for reverting the vandalism on the page Crosfields School which I created. THe reason is I showed the page on May 9th to my class on a projecter and the vandalism you reverted slagged off that very teacher in the class.

If you hadn't reverted that so soon or not at all, everybody including the teacher who was slandered would have seen that horrible vandalism on the projecter screen and I would have been in serious trouble and would have had a lot of explaining to do. I tried to trace the IP but was unsuccessful. Please could you give me instructions as how to trace that IP-Adress so I can track whoever did it because it would have had to be one of the people in my year who did that and I need to have a serious talk.

Thank you,

Monbro 20:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments like that make feel all warm and fuzzy for reverting vandalism :). Though it's no problem, really. So far, I've reverted hundreds of vandalism edits. As for your IP tracing, I doubt you'll be able to find out who did it. Using WHOIS on the IP gets us the information that the user is using Energis UK (now Cable & Wireless) as an ISP. Geolocating the IP tells us London, though that you probably knew already. Reverse DNS returns "user-5447afce.wfd87b.dsl.pol.co.uk". It won't help you much though. Your best bet is asking his ISP who was using that IP at that particular time, but I strongly doubt they would just give you the information.

Aside from that, there isn't anything else you could do to find out more.

Cheers. -- Xompanthy 12:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Croatia

Please add Croatia to your watchlist (see this). I'd like to keep our stable compromise.

Cheers. --PaxEquilibrium 20:20, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Santa Claus

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. You removed texts from Santa Claus. It is considered vandalism. If you continue removing texts in such manner, you will be blocked. Frtg66678 (talk) 16:36, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding me? I removed unsourced text from the article, text that never should have been there in the first place. Since you're quite new here, please take a look at WP:ATT,WP:SOURCE, and WP:NOR. Also, WP:CIVIL would do you a lot of good too.

And by the look of all the warnings for vandalism on your talk page, you are hardly the person to call _me_ a vandal. I will kindly ignore you. -- Xompanthy (talk) 16:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing of text is vandalism. If it is unsourced, then add some tags, but don't remove. Continuos violation of wikipedia policy can result in ban. So be careful in editing. Frtg66678 (talk) 16:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, I seriously can't believe you. I understand you're new here, but at least READ THE DAMN RULES before quoting them. I removed unsourced text, and this is not only perfectly valid, but the right thing to do. The FACT tag should be used less and less, and best, not at all. Even Jimmy Wales said so. The FACT tag is a mere excuse for not finding the appropriate source.

And by your logic, I can go to the Sun article and add "the sun is a glowing ball of confetti" and no one can remove it, only add the FACT tag? Are you kidding me, seriously? And for the love of God, stop being uncivil, stop threatening to "ban" me, and listen to the various warnings on your talk page. Threatening people for absolutely no reason can (and probably will) get YOU banned.

The next time you threaten me and act uncivil in any way, I will report you. -- Xompanthy (talk) 17:05, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Even Jimmy Wales said so" do you have any proof? Cautioning someone and telling someone to follow rules is not threatening. On which basis you are accusing me that I have threatened you any way. It is true that continuous violation of rule can result in block. Frtg66678 (talk) 17:14, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In general, I find the "fact" tagging to be overdone in Wikipedia. A better option is to nuke the unsourced material. Sometimes "fact" is warranted, I don't mean that it is always a bad idea. But it is overdone.I very often see completely preposterous claims tagged with "fact", usually because an editor is being excessively cautious. Be bold.
— Jimbo Wales

Source [1]

"It is true that continuous violation of rule can result in block." Yes, it is true. I'm just not the one breaking the rules. -- Xompanthy (talk) 17:22, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The name Santa Claus is derived from Sinterklaas, the Dutch name for the character based on St. Nicholas. He is also known there by the name of Sint Nicolaas which explains the use of the two fairly dissimilar names Santa Claus and Saint Nicholas or St. Nick. may be it is unsourced. But removing it simply it not good. Read the policy of good faith, then edit wikipedia. This information can be useful to many. Frtg66678 (talk) 17:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I would like to point you to WP:ATT,WP:SOURCE, and WP:NOR. Here is a direct quote from the very first paragraph of Wikipedia:Attribution: The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is whether material is attributable to a reliable published source, not whether we think it is true: Wikipedia is not the place to publish your opinions, experiences, or arguments.

WP:ATT is policy. It is one of the rules that guideline this place. Just because you think that some text should be put into the article is not a valid reason to add it. You need a source for it, otherwise it will be removed. -- Xompanthy (talk) 17:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has a rule ignore all rules. First read it very carefully. It is necessary in case of useful information. Frtg66678 (talk) 17:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]