User talk:Touisiau

An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 18:23, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Regarding this. If you're going to be so brash as to accuse me of not reading the link in question, I'll lay this out for you. Read carefully:

As of March 17, this link shows four reported vulnerabilities for Vista: "Microsoft Windows ReadDirectoryChangesW Information Disclosure Vulnerability", reported Feb 2007, which is a real vulnerability. It's mentioned in the Secunia list. There's the "Windows Vista Voice Recognition Command Execution Vulnerability", which is a crock if ever there was one: It's not on by default, requires a very precise set of environmental factors to be in place, and is not even a problem unique to Vista. Securityfocus talks about it here. There's "Microsoft Windows Csrss HardError Messages Multiple Vulnerabilities", which is mentioned in the Secunia list. Finally, there is "Microsoft Windows Graphics Rendering Engine WMF SetAbortProc Code Execution Vulnerability" which is from December 2005, almost a full year before Vista's release.

So there we go. Secunia and Securityfocus show the same information, and as such, the links are redundant to eachother. One link to Secunia, in the External links section, will suffice. That said, we almost never include such links in Wikipedia articles on operating systems... there's a long-standing consensus on this issue, and it'd be good for you to respect that. If you have an issue with this, discuss the issue on the talk page, but do not continue with this little misadventure of yours unless you can gain consensus from other editors. Please review Wikipedia:Consensus and Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which explains what is expected of you at this point. If you continue to make these edits without making any effort to discuss your changes , you might find yourself on the wrong end of a block. -/- Warren 13:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SecurityFocus, involving Symantec , Common_Vulnerabilities_and_Exposures and Bugtraq, is a reference. Wether you like or not. Secunia and SF are updated each day, and do not always include the same vulnerabilities, as is the case today, and you acknoledged it. It is very important for users to know all current vulnerabilities affecting their system.

Your own opinion about SF is not a reference enough to hide some vulnerabilities from wikipedia readers, which could have some deep consequences. Touisiau

An Automated Message from HagermanBot

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! HagermanBot 10:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 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. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. -/- Warren 11:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is only a NPOV tag, and there is an NPOV discussion going on.Touisiau

Blocked

You have been blocked for violating the three-revert rule at Windows Vista. Please be more careful to discuss your changes or concerns rather than engaging in an edit war. The duration of the block is 8 hours. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

this is a NPOV tag so I appeal immediately of this decision.Touisiau

If you will agree to stop reverting the article, I will unblock you (on the condition that any further reverts within the period the block will normally last will lead to a reset of the block, and that one will not be lifted.) Please note, however, that inserting or removing an NPOV tag is subject to the three-revert rule. From WP:AN3:

Note that the test applied to determine simple vandalism is usually quite strict; adding or removing {{POV}} or {{fact}} tags is not simple vandalism.

Would this be agreeable to you? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, as a side note, if you wish to appeal a block you should place {{unblock|your reason here}} on your userpage, to ask another administrator to review. However, I have this page on watch and will receive messages left. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:06, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keystream

Hi Touisiau. Thanks for your nice addition to the new keystream article. --David Göthberg 10:19, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

February 2008

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to Linux. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. There a lot of examples of applications that haven't been ported to Linux. I'd hardly call Cubase and Microsoft Office "the most famous" examples. Please leave it as it was. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 14:34, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cubase and MS Office are original research ? I like your choice of words and templates :)

I couldn't find an appropriate template, but the point was there is no need to add examples of "famous" applications. Fame and things like that are personal opinions - I don't think Cubase is famous, while I will admit that most people know what Office is.

Also, please do not re-iterate something that has been mentioned in the same sentance. I've just reverted your last two edits because the edits were unnecessary. ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 16:29, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You completely misunderstood my point. Please see the Linux discussion page where I explain my point with further details.

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) 16:22, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]