User talk:Xompanthy

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

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]

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]

--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]

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]

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]

• 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]

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]

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

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

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]

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]

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.

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]

I would also like to give you some friendly advice. Read all those policy pages I have linked several times now. You seem fond of quoting the rules. You should at least read them then. -- Xompanthy (talk) 17:45, 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]

Again, you should read the rules before quoting them. Here's a quote from that page: "Ignore all rules" does not mean that every action is justifiable. It is neither a trump card nor a carte blanche. A rule-ignorer must justify how their actions improve the encyclopedia if challenged.

Please read that page in it's entirety before trying to say any more. -- Xompanthy (talk) 17:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have given an invalid link.Frtg66678 (talk) 17:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed now. -- Xompanthy (talk) 17:55, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've indefinitely blocked Frtg66678 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) and left a lump of coal in his stocking. I thought giving him a warning would make him stop, but he just kept on with the Wikilawyering, harassment, and disruptive editing. I'm sorry I let him go on that long.

Happy holidays! --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 17:59, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, good. I was getting tired. You made the right decision, he was a blatant vandal. That coal picture made chuckle though :). Happy holidays to you to man! -- Xompanthy (talk) 18:04, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays and welcome back! :) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 08:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article The Elder Scrolls Construction Set, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 23:29, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why the hell am I getting this message? I have nothing to do with the article. I have never even seen it. Someone messed this bot up... -- Xompanthy (talk) 01:00, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correction, it seems I did make a grand total of 4 edits to that article about 9 months ago. But again, I couldn't care less about the prod and I don't see why the bot thinks I should. My edits were neither big nor important, they were very minor and basic fly-by edits, and I do those all the time. -- Xompanthy (talk) 01:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken, I'll stop counting edits past a set time ago. BJ^Talk 03:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is my school's computer, and I just recieved a messege that some one else here editted the page Andrew. Here's the change this guy made- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Andrew&oldid=189433961 Wow. Here's proof that a college education doesn't a smart person make. I'd just like to apologize for this BS, that took time from somebody's life to fix. And thanks for keeping Wikipedia clean. Maybe someday our instructors will realize how well-kept it is, and actually let us use it as a resource.

Keep up the good work- Brian from San Jac —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.102.16.11 (talk) 18:43, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um... thanks, I guess... although I haven't a clue what you're talking about... -- Xompanthy (talk) 19:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. :-) --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please put that article on your watchlist? I'm growing continuously tired as my old compromise is being jeopardized, and millions of slaughtered, croaticized and catholicized Serbs have the tenacity to reemerge (yes, I know, it was a year ago!). Thanks, --PaxEquilibrium (talk) 22:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:MKrleza.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. dave pape (talk) 19:05, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The requested source information has been added. -- Xompanthy (talk) 23:11, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but there still needs to be some evidence to support the PD claim - specifically regarding the copyright status in the source country on 1 Jan 1996. Assuming it's a Croatian photo, then commons:Template:PD-Croatia indicates it's PD only if the photographer died before 1949. If the photographer is hr:Milan Pavić, his work is still copyrighted in Croatia and in the United States. --dave pape (talk) 01:13, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems likely I screwed up. I was given this photo and told it was in the public domain in Croatia. I wasn't told who the author was, although I assumed it was Pavić and didn't ask (something I regret in retrospect). So it could be one of two things: a) it wasn't Pavić's and I need to find who's is it b) it is Pavić's and we should either remove the image or get permission for its use. Option B seems likely, but I'll try to look into it. For now, the image should probably be removed. I'll upload it again if and when I work out the copyright details. -- Xompanthy (talk) 19:37, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree about that remooval of the Origin of the Name section on Zagreb article; from same occasion, is there some suggest, I would be happy to re-write myself that section and provding citations; Any suggestions ? NIR-Warrior (talk) 23:15, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will work on it in some minutes while Im fixing spells and fixing broken and inexistant links NIR-Warrior (talk) 23:27, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help us by correcting wrong spelling and bad grammar on the article, the article need to be a featured one from Wikipedia. NIR-Warrior (talk) 23:41, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just sent you an email, but in case it does not get through to you, I thought I should write to you here, as well. I am hoping you can help me with the Friedrich Kellner article, to translate it into Croatian. I have a condensed version of the article that I can send to you (about 1500 words). Thank you, Scott --Rskellner (talk) 02:12, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just wanted to say thanks for your contribution to the epub article.

Perhaps it's not important, but I want to clarify why I had originally written the things you corrected. In terms of the font MIME type, I simply choose a "suitable", though perhaps not standard, MIME type because there is no standard that I was aware of. However, I believe your correction to be something much closer to a possible future standard than what I had written. Also, about the Unicode being optional or mandatory, I had based my original writing on section 1.3.6: Relationship to Unicode :

Publications may use the entire Unicode character set, using UTF-8 or UTF-16 encodings, as defined by Unicode...

However, you're correct about section 1.4.1.2.

Anyway, I'm glad someone took the time to check what I wrote, because I'm certainly no expert nor infallible. =) Thanks! Quillaja (talk) 02:37, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have no clue what that page is about and have never edited it myself. Perhaps my ISP rotates IPs? Most anything I'm likely to edit aside from basic grammar on any page would be gardening stuff. 76.167.254.144 (talk) 12:36, 6 March 2010 (UTC) forgot to sign[reply]

Hello, Xompanthy. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

UOJComm (talk) 05:22, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seasons Greetings,

This is in reference to a relatively new umbrella article on en-wikipedia named Ceremonial pole. Ceremonial pole is a human tradition since ancient times; either existed in past at some point of time, or still exists in some cultures across global continents from north to south & from east to west. Ceremonial poles are used to symbolize a variety of concepts in several different world cultures.

Through article Ceremonial pole we intend to take encyclopedic note of cultural aspects and festive celebrations around Ceremonial pole as an umbrella article and want to have historical, mythological, anthropological aspects, reverence or worships wherever concerned as a small part.

While Ceremonial poles have a long past and strong presence but usually less discussed subject. Even before we seek translation of this article in global languages, we need to have more encyclopedic information/input about Ceremonial poles from all global cultures and languages. And we seek your assistance in the same.

Since other contributors to the article are insisting for reliable sources and Standard native english; If your contributions get deleted (for some reason like linguistics or may be your information is reliable but unfortunately dosent match expectations of other editors) , please do list the same on Talk:Ceremonial pole page so that other wikipedians may help improve by interlanguage collaborations, and/or some other language wikipedias may be interested in giving more importance to reliablity of information over other factors on their respective wikipedia.

This particular request is being made to you since your user name is listed in Wikipedia:Translators available list.

Thanking you with warm regards Mahitgar (talk) 05:27, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Xompanthy. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The file File:RandomSS.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Orphaned file with no clear usability on project

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jon Kolbert (talk) 13:49, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]