Difference between revisions of "User talk:WikiSysop"

From DOSBoxWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Questionable deletion)
 
(Re: new section)
 
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
Can you explain why you censored [http://www.dosbox.com/wiki/index.php?title=TOOLS:ScummVM&diff=next&oldid=3635 this section]? You didn't even include any edit summary. -[[User:Lwc|Lwc]] 18:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 
Can you explain why you censored [http://www.dosbox.com/wiki/index.php?title=TOOLS:ScummVM&diff=next&oldid=3635 this section]? You didn't even include any edit summary. -[[User:Lwc|Lwc]] 18:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 +
:ah yes.
 +
:The scummvm people used that piece of information as proof that we prefer scummvm over dosbox for games that scummvm supports.
 +
:Which is not true.
 +
:Especially the last part of that section is totally not true. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:WikiSysop|WikiSysop]] ([[User talk:WikiSysop|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/WikiSysop|contribs]]) 08:49, 18 October 2010</span></small>
 +
::If they "use" unofficial wiki information, it's their problem. But who said the last part is totally not true? It sounds true enough for me.  -[[User:Lwc|Lwc]] 23:50, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 +
 +
== SPAM ==
 +
 +
Would you explain why you didn't delete pages like [http://www.dosbox.com/wiki/index.php?title=Cpu%2Fcore%2FIntro&action=historysubmit&diff=2253&oldid=2249]? Protecting and blanking is of course enough but since the wiki has such a strength "captcha" now it might be worth to delete such pages... [[User:Mabdul|Mabdul]] 11:28, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 +
 +
Hi again,
 +
 +
I'm following the [[Special:RecentChanges]] feed and recognized that there is very much spam in "user space" since a few weks. mostly with ~200 new pages a day. I believe the captcha has to be changed (again) or a rangeblock to be created. Regards, [[User:Mabdul|Mabdul]] 11:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 +
 +
== Re ==
 +
 +
Thanks for informing me about this. I can understand your concern about that line. However, my change from version 0.72 to 0.74 in that page should be considered proper. DOSBox 0.72 is not even downloadable from that page any more. --[[User:Wengier|Wengier]] ([[User talk:Wengier|talk]]) 18:58, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:58, 28 October 2014

Questionable deletion

Can you explain why you censored this section? You didn't even include any edit summary. -Lwc 18:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

ah yes.
The scummvm people used that piece of information as proof that we prefer scummvm over dosbox for games that scummvm supports.
Which is not true.
Especially the last part of that section is totally not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiSysop (talkcontribs) 08:49, 18 October 2010
If they "use" unofficial wiki information, it's their problem. But who said the last part is totally not true? It sounds true enough for me. -Lwc 23:50, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

SPAM

Would you explain why you didn't delete pages like [1]? Protecting and blanking is of course enough but since the wiki has such a strength "captcha" now it might be worth to delete such pages... Mabdul 11:28, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi again,

I'm following the Special:RecentChanges feed and recognized that there is very much spam in "user space" since a few weks. mostly with ~200 new pages a day. I believe the captcha has to be changed (again) or a rangeblock to be created. Regards, Mabdul 11:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Re

Thanks for informing me about this. I can understand your concern about that line. However, my change from version 0.72 to 0.74 in that page should be considered proper. DOSBox 0.72 is not even downloadable from that page any more. --Wengier (talk) 18:58, 28 October 2014 (UTC)