WARNING: Vandalism and blanking GETS REVERTED ON SIGHT.

Did I screw up something? Want to yell at me? This is the place!

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on Hello Fascination. You beat me to it! Ahaha. talkingbirds 21:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! ConCompS (talk) 22:42, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Hindi has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Wikiscient 23:14, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, just started with Huggle...! :S Wikiscient 23:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's alright per WP:AGF. :) ConCompS (talk) 23:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re. yr barnstar :

Aw, shucks, ConCompS!

Thanks! --Wikiscient 21:41, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

-- Tinu Cherian - 05:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Ken Crandall has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Tiderolls 04:16, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

False alarm. ConCompS (talk) 04:17, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry...I was attempting the same revert you made. If this warning causes you any trouble, let me know. I'll own up to my mistake. Regards Tiderolls 04:19, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ttonyb (talk) 01:56, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! ConCompS (Talk to me) 02:03, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been granted with the rollback permission on the basis of your recent effort on dealing with vandalism. The rollback is a revert tool which can lessen the strains that normal javascripts such as twinkle put on the Wikipedia servers. You will find that you will revert faster through the rollback than through the normal reversion tools such as javascripts and the undo feature, because the rollback feature does not require fetching the data from the page history and then sending article data back to the Wikipedia server as the javascript requires, therefore you could save time especially when reverting very large articles such as the George W. Bush page. To use it, simply click the link which should look like [rollback] (which should appear unbolded if you have twinkle installed) on the latest diff page. The rollback link will also appear on the history page beside the edit summary of the last edit. For more information, you may refer to this page, alternatively, you may also find this tutorial on rollback helpful.NW (Talk) 19:49, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

my writing on chavs was not vandalism and is not even bias. you are just preejudiceagainst me as you keep saying i vandalise pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.23.1.128 (talk) 23:52, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, but show me the proof. ConCompS (Talk to me) 23:54, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mpdelbuono (talk) 23:55, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of C. R. formula at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! (Note: I always leave approvals to others.) Art LaPella (talk) 01:47, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the nomination. Wouldn't it be better if the hook states that the formula was to solve the disagreement between the Congress and the League on formation of Pakistan carved out of British India? That might make it more interesting as it would point out to the importance of the article with both these parties (India and Pakistan) being nuclear - rather than seem like some kind of political talks between Gandhi and Jinnah. I will leave it with you to decide. Cheers Wiki San Roze ^†αLҝ 07:25, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On December 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article C. R. formula, which you recently nominated. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 03:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fast catch on that IP vandal who dinged my user page. Thank you. Geoff ^{Who, me?} 00:49, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. ConCompS (Talk to me) 00:50, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate, only doing what I thought best. :) --Coffee // have a cup // ark // 01:06, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well regardless of the Spelling issue, (an actual translation would be Mslm as Arabic is spelt with no vowels, and Moslem better represents the way the word is spoken and is more historically correct) can we agree that the line in regard to Afghanistan is in the wrong tense? It refers to 2009 in the future tense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.249.174.195 (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2010 (UTC) :Seek consensus on the talk page of the article. ConCompS (Talk to me) 03:18, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strike that. Wrong spelling dude. ConCompS (Talk to me) 04:17, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{adminhelp}} Title says it all. Considerable work has been done on the article.

Oh, and when using < nowiki> for the template, it would also be complimentary if you can also strike the text out as well.

Thanks, ConCompS talk review 04:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I believe in this case there is no problem with you closing the AFD yourself. Cheers. Beach drifter (talk) 04:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True, but I dunno what to remove/add when closing. That's my problem. ConCompS talk review 04:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

insturstions though I agree, looks like it might be simpler to have someone do it for you. Beach drifter (talk) 04:39, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Closed. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick reminder that the Second Great Wikipedia Dramaout has begun. Please log any work you do at Wikipedia:The Great Wikipedia Dramaout/2nd/Log. Good luck! --Jayron32 01:59, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but the information I got about the Angry Beavers was from Micah Wright's website who was a writer on the show and I don't understand why you deleted it? Cassandra Thularin 19:18, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to re-add it back. ConCompS talk review 23:40, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On January 29, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bob Matthewson, which you nominated. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 18:00, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

iBen^talk/_contribsIf you reply here, please place a talkback notification on my page. 21:27, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm here to solicit your thoughts at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Bureaucrat Unchecking. The poll, which you participated in, found consensus to give bureaucrats the technical ability to remove admin and bureaucrat flags, where this is currently done by the stewards. Your thoughts are particularly interesting because you expressed reservation about allowing -crat as well as -admin. I wondered if you'd thought any more on the matter. Cheers, Happy‑melon 20:21, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I recently reviewed the article to which you lent your voice to Everybody Votes Channel. Unfortunately I had to rate 'Technical Quality' as low. The white noise in the background was a bit distracting. Not to worry though! The solution to this problem is to invest in a higher quality microphone (That is, if you want to get into voiceover work:). Unfortunately I had to rate Clarity as low. Enunciation was not all there and the volume went up and down as well as you kind of sounded bored. One thing that you may want to do is just do a section at a time, and then paste all the sections together, that way you don't get out of breath or bored reading the article! I rated Accuracy as High. You really stuck to the article and made sure that every word was used! Have a great day.--Fumitol (talk) 03:22, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are quite welcome and a stalwart first try!--Fumitol (talk) 06:30, 3 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Coming soon to a Wiki near you...The Third Great Wikipedia Dramaout will be July 5-9. Please join us for serious content creation! Signup is here. You have received this message because you participated in The Second Great Wikipedia Dramaout.

I see you have signed up for the last dramaout. Consider notifying 3 good editors of this to encourage more participation. Perhaps saying

I am participating in this. Please consider doing the same! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:The_Great_Wikipedia_Dramaout/3rd#Participating_Wikipedians 15:13, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

...for this. I greatly appreciate it. MJ94 (talk) 20:48, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're perfectly welcome. ConCompS talk 20:49, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my talk page. Nice work --Piast93 (talk) 20:54, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem either. Thanks for reverting mine too! ConCompS talk 20:55, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello my name is well also Connor you have reverted one of my edits and I respect it I live in Ottawa Canada This is not vandilisem I just don't know how to make a fresh page so hi there plz talk back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.188.93.186 (talk) 00:07, 6 November 2014 (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) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jamesjpk. I wanted to let you know that the Wikiproject Spoken Wikipedia, has been tagged with a semi-active tag. I am messaging you about this because you are listed under the wiki-project's list of active participants. Please contribute to the WikiProject if you want to keep it alive! I hope that it becomes active again! Jamesjpk (talk) 22:25, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ConCompS! I am Galendalia (talk · contribs) and I am reviving the WikiProject for Spoken Wikipedia. I noticed that you signed up at some point to be a participant and as I am reviving this project, one of my tasks is to get the participant list in order. Would you please go to the Participants List and add your name and language(s) you speak? If you are already there and do not want to be, please remove yourself. If you want to remain, please put remain next to your name. If I do not see anything, I will move you to the inactive participant list. I am putting a timeline of 7 days on this action to help keep things moving along. It would also be great if you would be willing to join the task force for Pronunciation that would be awesome, as there are troublesome words we run into. Thank you for considering joining us. If you decide to leave, I will be sad to see you leave as so many people have done a great job on the recordings and any work you have done makes a significant difference. Galendalia CVU Member \ Chat Me Up 05:09, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:AMD Radeon wordmark 2016.svg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 04:17, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]