User talk:Dijum

Welcome, but please don't vandalize Wikiversity
Welcome to Wikiversity; however, your edit seems to be vandalism. Please don't damage Wikiversity resources. Thanks. --Abd 20:12, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to vandalize it. By removing those two tags it prevented two pornographic images appearing when I viewed that page --Dijum 17:58, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

After a bit of research, there was an edit between my edit and yours reverting vandalism on the progress template page. --Dijum 18:12, 26 April 2011 (UTC)


 * (edit conflict with above). Yeah, your edits might have seemed to remove the images, but didn't. I wrote the following before seeing the above edit:


 * Thanks, Dijum. But you misread the page. What you removed were templates, Template:ready and Template:hot. No pornographic content was visible on the page. I reverted your change, this is the current link. No harm done.


 * Now, I did see some porn vandalism at about this time, with two images being shown. It was to Template:Progress box. That was the source of the images you saw, I'm sure. That vandalism was removed and even revision-deleted (I'd not have recommended that, because it reduces transparency, but maybe there was some special reason. The images themselves would not have been a reason. These are images that are hosted on Commons.)


 * In any case, I apologize for using the word "vandalism." I should have said "inadvertently damage," because I did not have any opinion that your motive was to vandalize. Thanks for trying to help clean up Wikiversity. --Abd 18:26, 26 April 2011 (UTC)


 * That was one strange deletion. The identity of the (steward, probably) who oversighted the revision is not shown. One of the options for revision deletion is to not show any log entry. That's commonly avoided, because it reduces transparency, and, while abuse is very rare, it can happen. I think the reason for revision deletion was that a URL was given with the edit, as I recall seeing, and that may even have linked to a truly harmful web site. However, I'm not sure why the identity of the removing steward was concealed. --Abd 18:44, 26 April 2011 (UTC)