User talk:Nevermorestr

Welcome!

Hello, Nevermorestr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Jedi6 -(need help?) 22:50, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stotts City, Missouri

Removed the vandalism from the article "Stotts City, Missouri" by user 71.243.19.131 "Stott city is known around Missouri for having a high number of its population turning into prostitutes." It is a bogus statement. I lived near Stotts City (in Mount Vernon about 12 miles away) and have relatives and friends that live there. I know from personal experience that the statement I deleted is false. Nevermorestr 21:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, thanks for that! Generally when I'm correcting punctuation I try to look at the context to make sure that the overall text makes sense. Looks like I missed that one. --Ghewgill 21:32, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors.

I have reported the anon user who keeps vandalizing the article. Don't risk your own editing abilities by continuing to revert him. =Axlq 23:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The user has been blocked for violating WP:3RR. I have also requested that Moral Majority be semi-protected to prevent further vandalism from anonymous users. =Axlq 23:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your good work in reverting vandalism related to Jerry Falwell's passing. Reversions of simple vandalism are exempt from WP:3RR and you have now been unblocked. --BigDT 00:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about blocking you. I did not check your good-faith reverts, but I have blocked the IP you were reverting. bibliomaniac 1 5 00:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Y	Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 24.255.143.112 lifted or expired. Request handled by: —Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that there is some more standing vandalism on the "Baptish Faith and Message" article by the same spammer that I engaged on the "Moral Majority" article. I was going to revert it back but unfortunately I'm still blocked as of 4:35, 17 May 2007. I don't mind waiting out the block but I would appreciate if the revert was made. Thank you. Nevermorestr 03:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal Proof

I've applied for Vandal Proof because I really would like to make a contribution to Wikipedia if only to keep it non partial, and being a forum administrator...I loathe spam.

Your VandalProof Application

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Nevermorestr. As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank again for your interest in VandalProof. Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 03:23, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your VandalProof Application

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Nevermorestr. As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that you have only been actively editing for less than three weeks.

Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank again for your interest in VandalProof. Daniel 12:21, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Troy High School (California)

You may want to be careful about biting newcomers. That Troy High School (California) edit was legitimate. You should type in the name in Google News and you'll see that the IP's edit was correct. Azia Kim was indeed an imposter posing as a Stanford University student. OCNative 03:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry that you feel that I was too harsh. I did check with Google, including the top search item which is the school's website. Unfortunately it was down (as it still was five mins. ago) and I did not find any other reference to the incident. I used the uw-vandal1 template which includes the warning "have been reverted as they could be seen to be defamatory or potentially libellous", so I don't believe I was "biting". Mistakes happen occasionally, please look at my previous edits. Nevermorestr 04:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I said try "Google News" not just Google. But searching for "Azia Kim" "Troy High", which definitely turns up hits on both Google and Google News. Try http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=&ie=UTF-8&q=%22Azia+Kim%22+%22Troy+High%22 or http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=azia+kim+troy+high. Also, I put the uw-vandal1 template in the box below and does not include the "defamatory or potentially libellous" line. OCNative 11:22, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. At least one of your recent edits was not constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

I know you said "Google News", and I replied that I had used Google. I also typed up above that I had used the vandal1, of which I was mistaken. I did use what I thought was the proper tag for the circumstance. Thanks for posting the whole vandal1 template onto my talk page, instead of a link. Now who is biting who? Feel free to "constructively" criticize my edits previous to Troy High School (California). I'm sure there are some more exceptions that you could point out. Nevermorestr 18:51, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kubuntu LTS

I noticed that you removed text noting that the 8.04 release of Kubuntu was not an LTS, stating that it was in fact an LTS release. There is no mention of this on the Kubuntu website, nor the developer mailing list. Also, you did not update the end of support date to match what would be expected of an LTS version. inclusivedisjunction (talk) 02:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Canonical: 
 http://blog.canonical.com/?p=15

 HardyReleaseSchedule (scroll down to April 2008, far right hand column):
 https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardyReleaseSchedule

 Linux Today:
 http://www.linuxtoday.com/infrastructure/2008050100426OSDBHL

 If you want the LTS support date updated, feel empowered to do it yourself. Done.
 Nevermorestr (talk) 03:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The first and second sources refer to Ubuntu, not Kubuntu. There was never any issue in Ubuntu being an LTS release. And a third-party site calling it an LTS release does not make it so: the length of support of release is determined by Canonical. If you want to play the game of "does Kubuntu have 'LTS' next to it", take a gander at the main download server for the Kubuntu ISO, vs the Ubuntu one. Or how about how they are labeled in Canonical's store? Surely, they would have modified their CD cases so that it said "LTS" on them, like the Ubuntu ones do? inclusivedisjunction (talk) 07:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:12, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]