User talk:Tommy2010

• Note: To send me a message, please click 'new section' or '+' at the top right of the page.
• Note: If I have messaged you, and I have not replied, leave a {{talkback}} template here.

HI Tommy

Thanks for the message, I will be taking guidance and make Wikipedia more informative and affective and above all netral from you on time to time. In many topics I see comments which are seems to be either sided and or sometime they are not well supported by documentation. My view would be to be neutral always along with share my best knowledge. Further sometimes it happens that numerous articles and facts (which are sometimes historical) are found in libraries. I have a suggestion that if someone come accros such article and wants to share he should email scan copy it to Wikipedia and also let them know from where he got this.

Regards,

Tatom

Thank you

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. Girlwithgreeneyes (talk) 19:13, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

your welcome  – Tommy [message] 19:13, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 June 2010

• Sister projects: Picture of the Year results declared on Wikimedia Commons

• News and notes: Collaboration with the British Museum and in Serbia, Interaction with researchers, and more

• In the news: Wikipedia better than Britannica, Pending changes as a victory of tradition, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject U2

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 19:48, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I would like to nominate you for adminship

I've been keeping an eye on you for the past while, and I've noticed that you want to be an admin someday. Your contributions and your fields of work suggest to me that you are ready. What do you say? Should I nominate you at Requests for Adminship now? The Utahraptor ^Talk 01:37, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually this is the 2nd time someone's asked me... I have to decline for now, but I appreciate the offer. :)  – Tommy [message] 01:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem, I can respect your decision. The Utahraptor ^Talk 01:51, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

But I will open one eventually.  – Tommy [message] 02:02, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Please take a look at these

Hello Tommy2010. Would you please take a look at the edits from the IP that we have been dealing with here [1] and [2]. Sadly, these look like trolling to me - especially in light of your efforts in several places and Rodhullandemu's posts on Audrey Hepburn's talk page. In the normal course of things I would add "unsourced" warnings on the IP's talk page. On this occasion I will defer to your attempt to AGF. If you feel that there is something positive that can be done please feel free to try. If, on the other hand these continue in the next 24 hours (it is 21:30 MDT 6-22-10 where I am) I feel that it would be remiss of me to not begin to add the necessary warnings to the IP's talk page. Thanks again for your efforts I just hope that we are not feeding a troll. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 03:33, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I've seen enough to know what trolling is and isn't. That isn't trolling. Maybe the second link, maybe. But we could just assume it's a new user.  – Tommy [message] 03:35, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

So the question is do you feel the need to talk to the IP about these new edits. By the way I have seen multiple forms of trolling and this one is following the path of others that I have had to deal with. MarnetteD | Talk 03:38, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I have spoken to the IP in question. I'm really done talking about this.  – Tommy [message] 03:39, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

At least remove the single-out in Kang, it is supposed to be neutral point of view after all. kang also is a meme now as well, so no reason to delete that edit. I was a bit rash with the "pretentious stuck up" bit I'll admit... Sorry to get you involved and waste your time. 208.125.58.214 (talk) 15:45, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Census

This is the website I got the estimates from http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2010/06/calera_fastest_growing_alabama.html http://www.census.gov/popest/estimates.htmlGGMcDaddy (talk) 16:13, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok thank you. I'll reference it shortly into the article.  – Tommy [message] 16:13, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for making my message to the new user more friendly! Active Banana (talk) 17:10, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Um

Is there some reason why you would remove warning templates from an IP talk page and apologize for it? It's one thing to try and explain something to someone, it's quite another to apologize for personal attack warnings such as one on the very talk page you deleted it from: "The content is acceptable and you're a prick." It's one thing to be friendly, it's quite another to dismiss fairly issued warnings. That's not really appropriate. Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:27, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll be honest, I didn't see that particular comment, but I was aware of some of the comments he said and as a result I did tell the IP to remain calm and not use "idiot". I removed them because the IP was trying to help (sure he used personal attacks) but he didn't like the way editors were templating him and disregarding his comments on his own talk page.  – Tommy [message] 20:32, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

My impression is that the IP editor is likely in junior high school, from the tone of the comments and posts. He started adding a song that wasn't truly about the subject and then jumped over to insert that a comedy film with Owen Wilson and Vincent Vaughn had a rape in it. His comments on his talk page were rude and included personal attacks. Thanks for responding. Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:39, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Yea I've seen wedding crashers (just recently too).. the scene he was referring to could arguably been a rape. Was it necessarily a better version? Well, no. Vandalism? definitely not. He was just IAR. I won't speculate about the age. We have many good young (really young) editors and older editors alike  – Tommy [message] 20:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

User page

Thanks for catching the vandalism to my user page. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:49, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome  – Tommy [message] 01:58, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

You missed

A user who stopped editing for 4 years and returned violating WP:BLP rules. Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 06:35, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't miss that. Yes they were BLP vio's but even so, being blocked after sending a message like this to an admin... I don't understand. It wasn't rude, just a newbie. I really don't think he falls under the VOA/troll category, yet at least. Maybe I don't have the experience to judge that yet, it just seems quick in my opinion.  – Tommy [message] 12:51, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Ask it to MaterialScientist, not to me. Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 15:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Will do.  – Tommy [message] 15:56, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

check your facts

tommy it was not an opinion it was a fact it was voted best shop this year. it has the most acidemically succesful and school Spirit filled sttudents

(talk page stalker) well than, . Pilif12p :  Yo  15:03, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

RE:

Ok, well can you explain to me how you belive this is clear cut vandalisum? http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:188.92.236.42&diff=prev&oldid=370101763 I'm actuly interested to knw and I'm not trying to be samrt here, My wikipedia moto is that I like to learn new things and learn from my mistakes. James'ööders 16:26, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

As said in the warning and one of the reasons why Huggle is awesome is because it provides the previous diff before the reversion. unconstructive: can't remove content without a reason.  – Tommy [message] 16:28, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I'd also like to mention that "clearcut" vandalism is fairly rare to be honest in my opinion. There are many unconstructive edits, but there are many reasons behind why.  – Tommy [message] 16:41, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'm just going to leave it at that then. Who knows mayby I overlooked things with you, If this is the case, I do Appolagise to you, I know your in good Faith as I can see your commitment to Wikipedia. At the end of the day, I like to work with fellow RC patrollers. Cheers :D James'ööders 16:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. You'll pick it up I know it. There are whole sites dedicated to destroying Wikipedia as well as some now banned users who continue to attempt to run amok here, which have obviously failed. You'll quickly pick it up. In the mean time, you should help us coordinate anti vandalism in WP:IRC. :)  – Tommy [message] 16:59, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

No Problems, Thanks and I Appreciate your help :D James'ööders 17:20, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

June 2010

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		This is the final barnstar you will receive regarding your constructive edits. If you revert vandalism on Wikipedia again, I may have nothing to revert until you log off. dffgd 16:53, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

LOL! Well I'm off! haha. Dude The "June2010" section popped up in IRC and the first thing that came to my mind was like WTF?! That's great, thank you!!  – Tommy [message] 16:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

What is IRC? I ran across WP:IRC a while ago, but I don't really understand it and I'd like an explanation from a user, not an article. dffgd 17:52, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Just to say munch!

Dffgd has eaten your {{cookie}}! The cookie made them happy and they'd like to give you a great big hug for donating it. Spread the WikiLove by giving out more {{cookie}}s, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Thanks again!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat a cookie with {{subst:munch}}!

:) dffgd 20:36, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		here's another Dincher (talk) 16:57, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Wow, thank you!  – Tommy [message] 16:59, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your feedback on my adminship nomination. You're right, only Jimbo can ban somebody. I worded it wrong. I guess it's because the nomination caught me off guard, and I was a little nervous. Anyways, thanks again. The Utahraptor ^Talk 18:01, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Cha be careful with that kinda stuff and carefully think out what you really mean.  – Tommy [message] 18:05, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Will do. I responded to your question, by the way. The Utahraptor ^Talk 18:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

No rush amigo  – Tommy [message] 18:30, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

WP:DUCK

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for block evasion of Tommy 72 (talk · contribs) per WP:DUCK. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Heh, sorry for the scare, but I couldn't resist. You said that an account Bobby998, having made two good edits, should be blocked automatically for block evasion since there was a VOA Billy999 three months earlier. That would be an overzealous application of WP:DUCK, <firstname><number> is a freakishly common user name and does not conclusively show a relation between two accounts. And even if there were no doubt that they are the same person it would also be a purely punitive block if Bobby998 started out with good edits. With three months time since the block and only five vandalistic edits in the old account, I would always accept this as a clean start or second chance and see how it plays out. You are technically correct that active blocks mustn't be evaded, but context matters. Blocks and reverts are cheap, constructive editors invaluable.
Cheers, Amalthea 20:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

oooo.... well said. wow. thank you.  – Tommy [message] 20:36, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Support scare. dffgd 20:43, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Support ban ... kidding.

Although Amalthea, 72 and 2010 are pretty far apart, but i get your point.  – Tommy [message] 20:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah well, had to balance name, number, and being blocked only a couple months before you started editing. Tommy1234 (talk · contribs) and Tommy213 (talk · contribs) were both blocked ages ago. :) Amalthea 21:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Interesting: Satan666 (talk · contribs) is blocked, but neither Satan665 (talk · contribs) or Satan667 (talk · contribs) exist... yet. ;) – B.hotep •talk• 21:25, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

well 666 is the evil number or whatever they believe.  – Tommy [message] 21:33, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: nothing really