User talk:Frigotoni
Welcome to Meta!
Hello Frigotoni, and welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!
Jafeluv 13:48, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
RE:
Ah mi ero dimenticato, la risposta dovrebbe essere "sì, se vedi un Vito per più di 30 secondi su freenode vuol dire che sono io"! --Vituzzu 14:30, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
- Uhm sì, però non ti mettere per ora a far carriera ;p --Vituzzu 22:31, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Vandalismi su en.wikiveristy
Beh certo, la cronologia va tenuta sempre d'occhio, il fatto è che l'IP in questione continuava a vandalizzare a raffica la stessa voce, tanto che a un certo punto ho dovuto ripristinare direttamente la versione della pagina a come era prima dei suoi numerosi vandalismi, in tutta questa confusione mi sono dimenticato però di rollbackare un vandalismo. Grazie per avere rimediato, ottimo lavoro! ;) --Reder 15:09, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Re:
Uhm diciamo di no, anche se alle volte un blocchetto non fa lo stesso male. --Vituzzu 17:52, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
- Eppure ero convinto di averti risposto, bofh, sono neutrale, però diciamo che un po' meno fretta...--Vituzzu 18:40, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- Scusa ma non so se hai visto che casino...ad ogni modo semplicemente il bollino iniziamo a levartelo localmente ;)
- --Vituzzu 22:40, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Reply
I have replied on my talk page. Regards --Mohamed Aden Ighe 16:01, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
Hi! I just want to thank you and give you this barnstar for your help with the translation of the 2011 fundraiser! The fundraiser was the best we ever had, both in terms of the amount we collected and in terms of number of translations. We couldn't have done either one without the help we got from you and other translators. If you are interested, we made a report, which has some statistics about the translations.
And: I have one more request, and that is that you take this survey. You may have got an e-mail about it, and if you did, please ignore this. But if you didn't it would be great if you would take this survey too, so we can learn to improve the translation experience.
Again, thanks for your help with translations – you're awesome! Jon Harald Søby (WMF) 13:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Synchbot request
Hello Frigotoni. Your request for global CSS and JavaScript on every wiki has been fulfilled (see the archived request & bot log). —Pathoschild 03:10, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Settings changes
Hello Frigotoni. I'm waiting your temp password to perform your request. Please send me a mail here. Regards, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 08:27, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
:re@mk
New version of Amsterdam was OK. We recently have major edits to the inexperienced editors of Macedonian schools. They write a lot, but do not have enough clue. greeting--Raso mk (talk) 17:43, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Warning
I don't know how to put this without sounding rude. But when did protecting a Wikipedia become wrong? In the past, people have vandalized its contents randomly, because it is open, as if waiting only to be vandalized. It is open to be used by everyone. But requiring autoconfirmed users will prevent indiscriminate vandalizing. I do not see how I can be condemned for exercising an elementary protection, which does not prevent registered users from editing. The thing is, this is one line of defense, a way for the Wikipedia's administrators to prevent indiscrimnate abuse. I do not see why this would be attacked as "misusing." You should see how articles are being defaced without any defense. Katimawan2005 (talk) 09:36, 14 June 2012 (UTC) I realize that you're speaking as a Wikimedia/Wikipedia authority. Please realize, though, that this is merely being done to defend the encyclopedia against indiscriminate vandalism and attack, which were really flagrant in the past, and that may be the reason why it has ceased to be such an easy target. We can accede by leaving ordinary articles bare, while protecting templates, the destruction of which can cause far-reaching damage. Btw, I'm translating most templates now. If they were not in the beginning, this is being done from time to time as part of a continuing process, as you will find out. By I think efforts to maintain and preserve the encyclopedia against destruction should not be greeted with a negative, suspicious attitude, as if it were a grave offense, since it is well-meant. Katimawan2005 (talk) 10:39, 14 June 2012 (UTC) I've read the material you mentioned, and I see your point. Let me say this in my defense, though. I am serious about performing my work, and have tried to do it within limits of time and resources. I contribute and edit articles and do my best to maintain order in our Wikipedia. I'll try not to take it personally, since this is how I get it, as criticism of/ rejection of my work. In any case, thanks for the feedback. I'll try to work in the light of the "open" atmosphere you mentioned. At the same time, I believe I also should be credited with performing my work as well as I can, and, (after having taken cognizance of the principles of "openness"), also would claim respect of my sense of discretion in ambiguous cases where no right is clearly violated. IMHO, administrators, who have are charged with the responsibility of looking after specific Wikipedias all these years, should at least be entitled to that. Katimawan2005 (talk) 12:13, 14 June 2012 (UTC)