Jump to content

User talk:Tofutwitch11/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Tofutwitch11

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Zinnober9 (talk | contribs) at 00:47, 6 December 2023 (Fixed Lint errors on this page (obsolete tags)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

CSD on Paul Kalkbrenner 2010 - A Live Documentary

I removed this CSD tag because the article is about a film, not a person/group/organization. If you feel it is not notable, you may use PROD or AfD. jsfouche ☽☾Talk 00:23, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is about a person...Tofutwitch11-Chat -How'd I do? 00:23, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gylne tider

I agree that the article is missing references, i am adding them now, but i woundered - can i use IMDB as a reference for television shows? — Kagee 00:24, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While it is not 100% recommended, you can. I see IMDB as a reliable source, but other do not. Tofutwitch11-Chat -How'd I do? 00:25, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Speedy Deletion of User:Yipyaps

You are allowed to CSD tag a userpage if it does not conform to the policies or guidelines. The CSD I tagged was G11. "G" means general and can go on any namespace. Porchcrop PC 14:40, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot call a userpage non-encyclopedic, as you tagged it, it doesn't really make sense. It is not an article. Tofutwitch11-Chat -How'd I do? 01:47, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know it is not an article, but it has advertisements, which is inappropriate. Porchcrop PC 01:56, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, while I don't agree with you, I'm not going to break 3RR. Tofutwitch11-Chat -How'd I do? 01:58, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Folks. I see a disagreement on G11 tagging, so I hope you don't mind my offering my take on it (I'll copy this to both User talk pages). I didn't see the User page in question, so I don't know which of you was right in this specific case. But in general, a User page that consists only of blatant advertising can indeed be deleted via G11 - blatant advertising is not allowed in any Wikipedia space. But if it is only partly promotional, the promotional part should be removed and the rest kept. As an aside, "non-encyclopedic" is not a valid reason for deleting anything - see here. And one final note - if a CSD tag is removed by anyone other than the author of the page, it must not be put back, even if you think it was removed erroneously - you should then take it to PROD or AfD. Best regards -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:20, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it was deleted per G11, but I think G1 would be more suitable. The page was really nonsense, not understandable, and ridiculous. AKA, nonsense. As a mentioned, I'm not going to war to get my way, but it got deleted none the less. Tofutwitch11-Chat -How'd I do? 14:15, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Kalkbrenner 2010: A Live Documentary

Paul Kalkbrenner 2010: A Live Documentary is neither about a person nor a company. It is clearly about a film (movie) or video.--Kudpung (talk) 02:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see you put it up for deletion. Tofutwitch11-Chat -How'd I do? 14:13, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Continental Airlines

You reverted some guy's change about currency coupons being bought at the airport due to a lack of references...except his update (which perhaps needed to be edited) explicitly said the source (continental.com's virtual expert, in the upper right corner). I confirmed that the information is accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Touchdown Turnaround (talk • contribs) 15:28, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual Expert's do not account as sources, there needs to be a solid source. Tofutwitch11-Chat -How'd I do? 20:11, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Says who? It's an official information source on the company web site and they describe it as a way to learn about "Continental policies and procedures." Touchdown Turnaround (talk) 13:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is no way to explicitly site the source, no link. You actually have to talk to the Virtual Expert. Tofutwitch11-Chat -How'd I do? 19:58, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. Having to type something instead of just clicking something completely invalidates it. I hope you consider this waste of time a contribution to WP. 00:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Touchdown Turnaround (talk • contribs)
Having a virtual expert as a source makes no sense -- how do I know what to say to get the answer? It doesn't automatically tell me that? Does it? Thanks. Remember to sign your posts please. Tofutwitch11-Chat -How'd I do? 02:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Charleston

The same person may be using other identities and a registered account too. User:Mydogtryed for example. HkCaGu (talk) 02:23, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He is edit warring, we are reverting vandalism. He did it again. Tofutwitch11-Chat -How'd I do? 02:24, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
User:24.42.148.237 was blocked this morning :09:52, 7 December 2010 KrakatoaKatie (talk | contribs) blocked 24.42.148.237 (talk) (anon. only, account creation blocked) with an expiry time of 31 hours ‎ (Disruptive editing)(all times my time zone).
If you are reasonably sure, and matched where the IP users geolocate to , don't hesitate to slap the warning banners on all parties concerned (master account, sock puppets, etc). When you are almost sure,; take the matter to WP:SPI, following all the instructions very carefully. Sockpuppetry is one of the least tolerated od all Wiki 'crimes' because they often use them to boost !votes and sway opinion on various discussions, and to commit WP:COPYVIO. Keep up the good work and happy editing! --Kudpung (talk) 03:07, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

Thank you!

Hi - thanks very much for the message and for the barnstar! If the guy returns or you suspect he's wearing socks, you know what to do. Thanks again for your work and for the recognition - it's very much appreciated! :-) KrakatoaKatie 04:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again - welcome to our regularly scheduled Friday night insipid wackiness here on the old 'pedia. I used to have things to do and places to go and people to see on Friday nights. Now? Nope, I'm here fixing 'poop' and deleting 'KEVINJONESIsAMoToRJunKerOMGLULZ!!!!' pages. If they ask you to be an admin, take some advice - run! Run like the wind! :-P
Seriously, though, you're quite welcome. That's what I'm here to do. Take care and let me know if you need some poop cleaned up or something. :-) - KrakatoaKatie 00:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I deleted them under WP:CSD#G3 as a hoax. There are several Google references to 'International Wrestling Entertainment' but none of them are to the same thing - it's a company that's going to be formed in 2008 (!), it's part of WWE, some of the hits are in Italian and French, so who knows if or what the thing is. But I'll eat the sock I'm knitting now if they're going to have an event in San Antonio in two weeks, shown on pay-per-view, to be followed by two more a week later. Unfortunately, the Google bot managed to get two of the pages before they were deleted. It's too new to see them in Google's cache, so we'll cross our fingers that they'll go away. - KrakatoaKatie 01:28, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bangor Maine Airport Destinations Served

You had edited out that Reagan was an airport served from Bangor claiming it was no longer available to be booked. It actually is currently flying, but it only operates on Saturdays. The Outbound flight opperates as US Airways 3953: http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AWI3953 and the return is 3956: http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AWI3956. I didn't add these links to the post cause they change frequently but I did claim it was "seasonal" which it is. Sorry for not making that clear.

Your right, I didn't catch that (usually I look on Saturdays if I can't find a flight on the others). Thanks for adding that back in. Tofutwitch11-Chat -How'd I do? 01:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Best That Never Was

Hello, Tofutwitch11. I removed your csd tag from The Best That Never Was for two reasons:

  • The article is about a film, so A7 does not apply; and
  • The subject of the film already has a page, Marcus Dupree

I have, however, PROD'd the page, because I don't think it's a notable film. Jimmy Pitt talk 16:24, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, my mistake, can it be found on IMDB? Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 16:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Air Navigation

Hey man... the article Air navigation is seriously flawed, poorly written, and needs a complete rewrite. Should the page be taken "off line" until the new version is ready, or should I work on it in a sandbox or userpage and add the changes when complete?Captjosh (talk) 01:45, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would be best to work on it where it currently is, Air navigation, so other users may see the changes. Temporarily deleting it would not be Ideal, thanks for your work! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 01:49, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Wasn't sure since it needs a full re-write! I appreciate the help!Captjosh (talk) 02:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You can certainly fully re-write it, just doing it on the page it is on now. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 02:14, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Pontificalibus's talk page.
Message added 12:35, 14 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Delta hubs

Are Amsterdam, Paris, and Cinncinatti still DL hubs? They seemed to be removed from the infobox. Thanks! Snoozlepet (talk) 14:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ya they are, I'm not sure why they were removed, there has been a lot of garbage going on at the airline airports page, if you look you would notice that I remove a lot of the unsourced junk people add...we have to keep it clean :P Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 19:58, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I added this reference which proves it, it can no longer be reverted. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 20:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TB

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Captjosh's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Waterfox's talk page.
Message added 01:56, 16 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

DIDWW

Hi. Good work again at NPP! Stay on the ball with this one and the articles concerned - it may come back under a sock or with a slightly different name to avoid salting. --Kudpung (talk) 04:13, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 23:24, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

Adopted

Hi, I saw that you adopted User:Captjosh — that's great, and I'm sure he'll appreciate it. However, please read the adopter criteria; you'll see that adopters may not be current adoptees. So, your choice is to either ask User:Captjosh to find another adopter, or to graduate from adoption. Your choice. — Waterfox ~talk~ 19:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I will graduate...I think he needs my help :PTofutwitch11 (TALK) 19:52, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed... I need all the help I can get!! ;-) Thanks Tofutwitch... Captjosh (talk) 15:04, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No Problem, once Waterfox reads the message we'll be all set. Keep up the good work! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 16:48, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Great, thanks again! I'll be spending more time with edits due to the slower-than-usual Holiday week. Captjosh (talk) 17:14, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Very Good! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 17:21, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

Eagles 24/7 (C) has given you a Christmas tree! Christmas trees promote WikiLove and are a great way to spread holiday cheer. Merry Christmas!

Spread the WikiLove by adding {{subst:User:The Utahraptor/Christmas tree}} to any editor's talk page with a friendly message.

I received four of these things on my talk page, and I'm Jewish! Hope you had a great holiday, and I'm sorry no one wished you a Merry Christmas. Eagles 24/7 (C) 03:31, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that really made me smile. Enjoy your holiday season. I didn't know anyone actually looked at my user page :P Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 04:07, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you just happened to pop up on my watchlist. Eagles 24/7 (C) 04:09, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

User:Tofutwitch11/Temp

Hello! Your Happy New Year template has a static signature, so the timestamp will always be "18:37, 28 December 2010 (UTC)" every time you substitute it. You should change the signature to "~~<includeonly>~</includeonly>~". Also, if you want to share your template to others, in the template you can then write something like "Use {{subst:User:Tofutwitch11/Temp}} to share this template to other users!" Best regards, HeyMid (contribs) 21:30, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, You can use it, Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 21:33, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. HeyMid (contribs) 21:35, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-admin closures

Please stop closing AFDs. NW (Talk) 02:50, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask why? You cannot simply reverse my closures without reason. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 02:51, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) The essay you linked to in your closure explains it: "Contrary to popular belief, especially among newer editors, discussions are not a vote. Administrators use rough consensus to determine the outcome. The process of rough consensus requires administrators to occasionally ignore opinions (sometimes called "!votes") because they are against policy, made in bad faith, etc." Your closures indicate to me that you are not analyzing discussions with sufficient rigor. I'll ignore the AFD on the article I nominated, but closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arnold Díaz as a clear keep, as a non-admin, is most definitely incorrect. Please leave AFDs be until you pass RFA; there isn't any great backlog for closure.

Also, as an administrator, I can indeed reverse a non-admin closure without discussion. NW (Talk) 02:56, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I did not realize you were an administrator (it appears you have put the tools to rest for a bit). WP:NAC is just an essay though, thus I cannot violate it. I am curios as to how you would have closed it. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 03:00, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would have relisted it, and in fact, will do so now. That definitely needs more discussion either way, though it is likely to be kept.

Perhaps violate was not the best word. It certainly offers good advice though, and unless there is overriding reason not to, you should follow it. NW (Talk) 03:19, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but, perhaps, next time this comes up (with anyone) could you be a little more specific than Please Stop closing AFD's. It is not descriptive, and as I, will wonder why you have done that. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 03:21, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your follow up question

...has been answered.  -- Lear's Fool 01:44, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Very Well. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 02:03, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

For your work at Meta. Collect (talk) 15:25, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 15:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editor Review

It's a bit short, but I've finally done it - sorry it took so long -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:07, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've left you a thank you message on your TP, keep up the good work! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 16:08, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adopt

Hi, can you adopt me? Seaofangela 17:54, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, let me put the thingy on your user page. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 17:55, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy, happy

Happy New Year, and all the best to you and yours! (from warm Cuba) Bzuk (talk) 08:25, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]












Thanks, you to! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 15:44, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hartford Meetup?

I remember once upon a time there was a meeting for Hartford area Wikipedians but I couldn't make it that day. I love to write but I also really enjoy taking pictures, so I've uploaded photos in the past for entries for the National Register of Historic Places. Do you think there will be another meeting? Chrissypan (talk) 16:43, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's really hard to tell, maybe not anytime in the near future, but I'm sure there will be another one, eventually. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 17:28, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Mr. Stradivarius's talk page.
Message added 05:49, 2 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

Graduation

The Exemplary Adoptee Barnstar
It's nice to see that you're now adopting other users! Feel free to still ask questions to me. Cheers, Waterfox ~talk~ 19:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 19:56, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

Can you please add the three 's to the beginning of your sig? They seem to have been omitted accidentally, considering the placement of the set that is there. Having the bold time stamp can be distracting on discussion pages. Sorry to bother, Lara 03:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of good suggestions there Lara. Tofu, could you oblige? Oh, and BTW, a belated Happy New Year to you  :) --Kudpung (talk) 05:28, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I kind-of liked it, but if it is a distraction, I can do it :P Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 14:29, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I hope. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 14:30, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! :) Lara 05:11, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Buffalo Niagara International Airport

Can you watch this page for me. A IP is getting very confused about Shuttle America's upcoming service to EWR. They keep listing the flight as "Continental Express" but Shuttle America operate flights only for United Express and Delta Connection not for CO. UA's website reflects this as "OPERATED BY SHUTTLE AMERICA DBA UNITED EXPRESS". Thanks! Snoozlepet (talk) 16:55, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep I'll keep an eye on it, and see what happens, how is it listed on Newarks page? Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 19:27, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Newark's page is listed as "United Express operated by Shuttle America" as also for all of the other UA Express flights flying out of CO hubs. However, I put it on a line of its own since those flights will depart out of CO gates and not UA's. All of those flights should have a line of their own unless it is listed by terminal/concourse and CO and UA should be in the same place. Snoozlepet (talk) 19:50, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 January 2011

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at The Utahraptor's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Inside view

Hello again. If you've decided to restore your inside view, I think you should also restore the original endorsements; any user is allowed to remove themself from the list if they have changed their mind. HeyMid (contribs) 15:46, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was only you and me, put yours back. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 15:46, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I forgot that. I feel hesitant to restore my original statement, as it was not so neutral, I guess. If anything, I may make another statement which may be considered more neutral. HeyMid (contribs) 15:49, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, what do you prefer? HeyMid (contribs) 15:54, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You can re-add yours if you wish, don't forgot to re-support mine if you want. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 16:00, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done, I've done both. HeyMid (contribs) 16:34, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Direct flights

See: WP:AIRPORTS

Go to "Page content". You will see that you can list direct flights along with non-stop flights, as long as the stop is not at a hub airport and it is the same plane and flight number.

Thenoflyzone (talk) 22:08, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your copy edit of Soul

Hello, as you requested I've taken a look at your copy edit of the article soul. Did you want me to point out individual concerns, or just give a quick evaluation of your copy edit? The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs 22:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Both I guess Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 22:36, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. For the most part, your copy edit was good. I did see a few errors here and there, but that is expected. Nobody's perfect, after all. The main concern was with grammar. There were several grammar mistakes I was able to locate, which are below:
  • "Many philosophical and spiritual systems teach that humans are souls; some attribute souls to all living things and even to inanimate objects (such as rivers); this belief is commonly called animism." - This sentence is awkward, as it is too long. It should say "Many philosophical and spiritual systems teach that humans are souls. Some attribute souls to all living things and even to inanimate objects (such as rivers); this belief is commonly called animism."
  • "...and soul sometimes functions as a synonym for spirit, mind or self,..." - A comma should be added after "mind."
  • "...it has been speculated that the early Germanic peoples believed that the spirits of deceased rested at the bottom of the sea or similar." - The phrase "or similar" should be omitted.
  • "The word is in any case clearly an adaptation by early missionaries to the Germanic peoples..." - The sentence should start with "in any case" and a comma should be added after case.
  • The life and death section is too short, and should be merged with the section above it.
  • "Francis M. Cornford quotes Pindar in saying that the soul sleeps while the limbs are active, but when one is sleeping, the soul is active and reveals in many a dream "an award of joy or sorrow drawing near".[8]
  • Erwin Rohde writes that the early pre-Pythagorean belief was that the soul had no life when it departed from the body, and retired into Hades with no hope of returning to a body.[9]" - These two paragraphs should be merged.
  • "...considered the soul as the essence of a person, being, that which decides how we behave." - Both the word being and the commas in this sentence should be omitted.
  • "By an imperfect analogy, an artifact, such as a knife or axe, (which has a clear purpose), if had a soul, that soul would be the act of cutting, because 'cutting' is, in essence, what it is to be a knife." - Another rather awkward sentence. It should read "If an artifact such as a knife or axe had a soul, that soul would be the act of cutting, because 'cutting' in, in essence, what it is to be a knife."
  • "Unlike Plato and the medieval religious tradition, Aristotle did not consider the soul to be a separate, immortal occupant of the body, just as the act of cutting does not occur without a knife or axe, the soul ceases to exist at the death of the body." - This is what's called a run-on sentence. It should read "Unlike Plato and the medieval religious tradition, Aristotle did not consider the soul to be a separate, immortal occupant of the body, just as the act of cutting does not occur without a knife or axe. The soul ceases to exist at the death of the body."
  • "A good example is someone who falls asleep, as opposed to someone who falls dead, the former (not the latter) actuality can wake up, (the first actuality), and go about their life, (the second actuality)." - Another run-on sentence. It should read "A good example is someone who falls asleep, as opposed to someone who falls dead; the former can wake up and go about their life, while the other cannot."
  • "Aristotle identified three hierarchical levels of living things: plants, animals, and people, for which, he identified..." - The comma after "which" should be removed.
  • "For Aristotle, there would be only one identifiable kind of soul per species, a form which is transmitted from parent to offspring, who will in turn, given normal circumstances of development, grow up to instantiate that generic form, to some degree of perfection." - Another awkward sentence. It should read "For Aristotle, there would be only one identifiable kind of soul per species, a form which is transmitted from parent to offspring. In turn, given normal circumstances of development, the offspring will grow up to instantiate that generic form to some degree of perfection."
  • "Aristotle divided the intellectual faculty into two principal parts, the "deliberative" or "calculative" and the "scientific" or "theoretical."" - The comma after parts should be replaced with a colon.
  • "...to yield a tripartite division of the intellectual soul as technical, prudential and theoretical." - A comma should be added after prudential.
  • "Nous is intuitive knowledge of first principles, which are indemonstrable; Sophia is the combination of such "understanding" and science." - The semicolon should be replaced with a comma and the word "while" should be added after the comma.
  • "Following Aristotle, the Persian Muslim philosopher-physician, Avicenna and Arab philosopher Ibn al-Nafis, further elaborated..." - The commas should be removed.
  • "...but as a primary given, a substance." - The phrase "a substance" should be omitted, and the sentence should end at "given."
  • "Avicenna generally supported Aristotle's idea of the soul originating from the heart, whereas Ibn al-Nafis on the other hand rejected this idea and instead argued that the soul "is related to the entirety and not to one or a few organs"." - "On the other hand" should be removed.
  • "...the soul was definitely not corporeal." - "Definitely" should be removed.
  • "Therefore, the soul had an operation separate from the body and therefore could subsist without the body." - The second "therefore" is unnecessary.
  • "In his discussions of rational psychology Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) identified the soul as the "I" in the strictest sense and that the existence of inner experience can neither be proved, or disproved." - A comma should be added after "psychology" and the comma after "proved" should be removed.
  • "Hillman's archetypal psychology is in many ways an attempt to tend to the oft-neglected soul..." - The phrase "in many ways" is irrelevant.
  • "The philosophy of mind and the philosophy of [Ryan Morrissey] also contribute to a contemporary understanding of the mind." - The brackets around Ryan Morrissey are unnecessary.
  • "Notably philosophers such as Thomas Nagel and David Chalmers have argued..." - The word "notably" should be removed, and the sentence should start at "philosophers."
  • "On the whole, brain-mind identity theory does poorly in accounting for mental phenomena of qualia and intentionality." - This should be removed, as it appears to be an opinion.
  • "...no existence previous to their life here on earth..." - The word "here" should be removed.
  • "in the same way that the "you" of this moment is continuous with the "you" of a moment before, despite the fact that you are constantly changing." - Pronouns such as "you" should be avoided in an encyclopedia, except in quotes.
  • "...but Buddhist monks should avoid cutting or burning trees, because some sentient beings rely on them." - The word "should" should be omitted.
  • "Some buddhists said about plants or divisible consciousnesses." - I can make no sense of this sentence. The word Buddhists should be capitalized.
  • "Others point to research done at the University of Virginia as proving that at least some people are reborn." - The phrase "at least" should be removed.

I'm running out of time, so I'll have to continue the review later. Please accept my apologies. The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs 22:59, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks, I did not realize in how much scrutiny copy editing took. I will keep those in mind, I'm new at this. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 23:13, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A copy editor must keep a sharp eye out for mistakes in the article. It's even good to go over the article a second time to make sure you didn't make any mistakes yourself. But like I said, new copy editors are bound to make mistakes. Even experienced copy editors make mistakes from time to time. Let's continue:
  • "In biblical times..." - Biblical should be capitalized.
  • "Though Jewish theology does not agree on the nature an afterlife..." - The word "an" should be replaced with the word "of."
  • "...is a matter of wide diversity in official church teaching, theological speculation and popular practice." - A comma should be placed after "speculation."
  • "...by Jesus Christ when he comes back to earth.The souls of those..." - A space should be added between the period and "The."
  • "When we die, most religions believe that the soul will be accounted for in some fashion." - The word "we" should be replaced with the word "one" and an "s" should be added at the end of "die."
  • "...that the soul at the point of death, immediately becomes..." - A comma should be added after soul.
  • "Some identify this belief as being the same as soul sleep as it does not account for what happens to the soul during the intervening time, however, it has been pointed out that all groups believe God exists outside of time." - This is another run-on sentence. It should read "Some identify this belief as being the same as soul sleep, as it does not account for what happens to the soul during the intervening time. However, it has been pointed out that all groups believe in the existence of God outside of time."
  • "They believe that we are mortal and when we die our breath leaves our body, our bodies return to the soil." - A comma should be added after mortal and die. The comma should be replaced with the word "and."
  • "A living person or breathing creature." - This is a fragment sentence. It should either be merged with a nearby sentence or removed entirely.
  • "Some Christians espouse a trichotomic view of humans, which characterizes humans as consisting of a body (soma) , soul (psyche), and spirit (pneuma),[58] however the majority of modern Bible scholars point out how spirit and soul are used interchangeably in many biblical passages, and so hold to dichotomy: the view that each of us is body and soul." - Another run-on sentence. It should read "Some Christians espouse a trichotomic view of humans, which characterizes humans as consisting of a body (soma), soul (psyche), and spirit (pneuma). However, the majority of modern Bible scholars point out how spirit and soul are used interchangeably in many Biblical passages, and so hold to dichotomy, which is the view that each of us is body and soul."
  • "...the major theories put forward include soul creationism, traducianism and pre-existence." - A comma should be added after "traducianism."
  • "This practice can lead to Self Realization, and ultimately, God Realization. Results cannot come without true effort." - These two sentences don't have a neutral tone. They should either be rephrased or removed.
  • "...such as desires, thinking, understanding, reasoning and self-image..." - A comma should be added after reasoning.
  • "The qualities which are common to both Brahmnan and jivatman are:..." - The colon should be removed.
  • "Since the quality of Atman is primarily consciousness - all sentient and insentient beings are pervaded by Atman — including plants, animals, humans and gods." - This sentence should read "Since the quality of Atman is primarily consciousness, all sentient and insentient beings are pervaded by Atman, including plants, animals, humans, and gods."
  • "For example animals and humans share in common, desire to live, fear of death, desire to procreate and to protect their families and territory and the need for sleep." - This sentence should read "For example, animals and humans share the desire to live, the fear of death, the desire to procreate and to protect their families and territory, and the need for sleep."
  • "When the Atman becomes embodied it is called birth, when the Atman leaves a body it is called death." - The comma should be replaced with a semicolon.
  • "Allah narrated in Quran 'And they ask you...'" - A comma should be added after Quran.
  • "Further in The Quranthe definition of 'Amar' is 'And the AMAR of your Creator is such that when Allah Want something to happen, he says 'Let it be' then it is done'." - This sentence should read "In The Quranthe, the definition of Amar is such that "when Allah wants something to happen, he says, 'Let it be,' then it is done."
  • "In the dream, too, all sorts of things happen to a man, he talks, eats and drinks but no evidence of it is noticed by those around him." - This sentence should read "In the dream state, many things happen to a man. He talks, eats, and drinks, but no evidence of it is noticed by those around him."
  • "In Jainism soul exists too, having a separate existence from the body that houses it." - This sentence should read "In Jainism, a soul is considered to have a separate existence from the body that houses it."
  • "Every living being from a plant or a bacterium to human, has a soul." - A comma should be added after being.
  • "...that consists of: matter, time, space, medium of motion and medium of rest." - The colon should be removed, and a comma should be added after motion.
  • "Hence the soul according to Jainism is indestructible and permanent from the point of view of substance." - A comma should be added after Hence, soul, and Jainism.
  • "Typically both Heaven and hell are said to be eternal..." - A comma should be added after Typically.
  • "...who ordered an inscribed stele, that was to be erected upon his death." - The comma should be removed.
  • "Operations of this type (along with teleportation), raise philosophical questions..." - The comma should be removed.
  • "Some people, who do not necessarily favor organized religion, simply label themselves..." - The commas should be removed.
  • "He posits that the mind is in fact not like a computer..." - Commas should be added after is and fact.
I must apologize if I went a little overboard with the review. I'm not trying to say that you are a poor copy editor. This copy edit was probably better than my first copy edit. I'm sure all copy editors overlook things like this. You make a fine copy editor. Keep it up! The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs 14:35, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

re: coaching

Hi - thanks for the message. If it's okay with you, I prefer the back-and-forth method of talk page communication instead of talkback, but we won't be using our talk pages often after this anyway. More about that in a minute. I've reviewed your contributions, your edit history, and your ER. I really like WP:NAAC - I'm one of those who edited anonymously for several weeks before I took the plunge and registered, and I'll never forget the first time I uploaded an image. What a set-up _that_ was - this licensing tag and that information template and don't forget to jump through those hoops or we're going to delete, delete, delete it! (It eventually was deleted, I think. I was scared to look for weeks. :-P)

Anyhoo... I think you should be ready, or almost ready, to stand for RfA around the time we'll be finished with the process, and I'd be happy to coach you. Understand, though, that 'admin coaching' is a misnomer, because this isn't a 'do this and that, and you'll pass' thing. By now you've probably discovered that the RfA crowd is interested in judgment, temperament, and experience. If you don't have them, I can't teach you - you wouldn't pass RfA if Jimbo himself coached you, and you would never understand why. Comes back to WP:CLUE, I guess. Some have it, some don't. We have it. :-)

When you finish reading this, create a new page in your user space called 'coaching' or 'lessons' or 'coaching lessons' or some other title that suits your fancy. (I don't like creating pages in other people's user space, unless I'm userfying something.) You don't have to add anything there yet unless you really want to do so. I'll add the intro and the first little set of questions/assignments shortly afterward. That page, and possibly a subpage or two, is where we'll do most of our communication on-wiki, and we'll do a _lot_ of communicating. We'll use email too, if you want - email me this weekend and I'll give you my regular address.

Okay, then - I think that's it for now. See you soon! :-) KrakatoaKatie 05:31, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I don't really mind the talk page thing, anyhow, you can find the page for the coaching User:Tofutwitch11/Coaching here. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 20:11, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Something a bit stronger

File:Verre de whisky.jpg

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{subst:User:HJ Mitchell/WikiScotch}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

--Happy Wikipedia Day! ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:54, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 01:55, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fitlads

Re:[edit] Speedy deletion nomination of Fitlads I have started a page on this website www.fitlads.net simply because one doesn't already exist. My input is completely neutral and verifiable information and should not be deleted! Truthwarrior2011 (talk) 02:00, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you have no sources, and I'm not sure how important notable that website actually is, as why I marked it. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 02:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(NPP stalker) Fitlads is a classic example of CSD A7. --Kudpung (talk) 02:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tis exaclty how I tagged it. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 02:45, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yep! --Kudpung (talk) 03:45, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"(NPP stalker) Fitlads is a classic example of CSD A7. --Kudpung (talk) 02:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)" well if you are going to speak in code this kind of weakens the point made about my not providing sources. If Wikipedia is meant to be a database of knowledge then you're certainly not helping to add to this. It seems that a few on here have elected themselves as moderators of information which completetly betrays the original ethos of Wikipedia. My repect for Wikipedia is being tested already. It will do no service to this website to over-moderate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthwarrior2011 (talk • contribs)

i have decided not to contribute to this site any more. it seems to be mpderated by a few people for no other reason than to have some kind of power trip. i will not use or recommend this site as an information course in future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthwarrior2011 (talk • contribs) 05:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Editor review

Hello! Wikipedia:Editor review states "Sections with at least one review will be archived at Wikipedia:Editor review/Archive (2010) or Wikipedia:Editor review/Archive (2011) thirty days after they have been created." This means that, because your editor review sub-page was created on 12 November 2010, your editor review is archived. HeyMid (contribs) 10:50, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I just reverted it because you did not close the discussion, just close the discussion and you can remove it from my talk page. Thanks. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 13:30, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy 10th Anniversary of Wikipedia!

File:Verre de whisky.jpg
Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia!

HeyBzuk (contribs) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{subst:User:HJ Mitchell/WikiScotch}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Bzuk (talk) 16:09, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 16:54, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Truthwarrior2011's talk page.
Message added 13:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

FYI Kudpung (talk) 13:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Perseus, Son of Zeus's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Perseus, Son of Zeus 18:30, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GOCE drive news

Guild of Copy Editors January 2011 backlog elimination drive

Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors January 2011 Backlog elimination drive! The drive is halfway over, so here are some mid-drive stats.

Participation
GOCE January 2011 backlog elimination drive progress graphs

So far, 43 people have signed up for this drive. Of these, 25 have participated. If you signed up for the drive but haven't participated yet, it's not too late! Try to copy edit at least a few articles. Remember, if you have rollover words from the last drive, you will lose them if you do not participate in this drive. If you haven't signed up for the drive yet, you can sign up now.

Progress report

We have eliminated two months from the backlog – January and February 2009. One of our goals is to eliminate as many months as possible from the 2009 backlog. Please help us reduce the size of this part of the backlog if you haven't already. Another goal is to reduce the entire backlog by 10%, or by 515 articles. Currently, we have eliminated 375 articles from the queue, so if each participant copy edits four more articles, we will reach that goal.

Thank you for participating in the January 2011 drive. We anticipate it will be another big success!

Your drive coordinators –S Masters (talk), Diannaa (Talk), The UtahraptorTalk to me, and Tea with toast (Talk)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 21:05, 16 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Example: Cooper Middle School (California)

Hi Tofu. You may not be aware of this, and unless you have come across a lot of school articles of this kind, there's no reason why you should already know that schools are a special case on Wikipedia. All high schools, whether referenced or not, are considered de facto notable. However, because they are frequently created by children, they are often in a mess and certainly need tagging for other reasons. Primary (elementary) schools and middle schools, unless there is a very rare, special reason (and usually there isn't) are not notable, and we generally merge the basic details of the article to the page about its school district (in the USA), or to the education section of the page about its location (other areas). We then blank the page and turn it into a redirect, additionally placing a {{R from school}} template on it. That's it - nice and uncontroversial. Do also consider placing this special welcome template: {{First school article}} on their talk page, subst it, then modify the 'and needs some very rapid attention' text in a second edit to 'and has been merged to its school district as per our normal procedure for elementary and middle schools.' Links to the guidelines are already in the template. You probably know already that all schools are exempted from CSD A7, but any other db may apply. Nevertheless, we still try to encourage the creators to stick with Wikipedia however young they are, because making a Wikipedia article may sometimes become a special class project with our help. Do take a moment to find out much more about the special case of schools at WP:WPSCH and if you like the project, please don't hesitate to join it - I would very much like to have you on board, perhaps even as a coordinator, and we need all the help we can get. There are probably in excess of 100,000 school articles out there and far too many of them are still in a sorry state. Kindest regards, Kudpung (talk) 03:54, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the message, sorry it took me so long to respond. I would love to join, but unfortunately I have enough work to do at WP:AVIATION. More work than you could imagine. If i finish my WP to do list, maybe. Ohh, and FYI, I !voted in the AFD. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 22:47, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RfA stuff

Me again! While I'm here, I thought I'd just mention that your increased interest in RfA stuff has not gone unnoticed :) If you have time, you may find this of interest - or even inspirational; it also includes a list of similar pages. You are also welcome to leave comments on its talk page. --Kudpung (talk) 04:06, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look when I can catch my breath here :). Your comments are always welcome. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 22:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tofutwitch11/Newbies aren't always clueless

Hello! Why do you contest my speedy deletion nomination of that page? HeyMid (contribs) 17:22, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do like having the redirect there, and keeping it under my list of sub pages. I may post draft updates to the page there, or use it for another mean regarding the essay, it is in my userspace, and is not doing any harm (or at least I don't think so). Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 18:08, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 January 2011

BLP references

Hi Tom, it's great that you're looking out for unreferenced BLPs, but don't be too trigger-happy. The Martin Krnáč and Stef Wijlaars stubs did have sources, it is just that the creator had put them into "External links" rather than citing them properly. You don't need to BLPPROD in a case like that – simply fix the error and/or let the creator know what to do in future. Cheers - Pointillist (talk) 13:09, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry -- I didn't notice that, I was short on time and didn't notice the external links. Thanks. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 20:06, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
All the best - Pointillist (talk) 21:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

re: revision 409061168 on Delta Air Lines

In your edit, to Delta Air Lines you removed several citations and I reverted the edit to put them back. Whether or not the list should be collapsed is a valid discussion point, but I don't see a valid reason for the citation removal - that's contrary to a central tenet of Wikipedia. Please help me understand your thoughts on that. Thanks. Ch Th Jo (talk) 23:01, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ya, no problem, it is simple for you to add the citations back -- I just reverted it for the collapsible list, it was more work to re-un collapse the list again (which would give me a ref error) than to have you re-add the citations in. Feel free to re-add the ref's, I was just trying to fix the Hubs list. Happy Editing. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 23:03, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"it is simple for you to add the citations back" That's not exactly very respectful. Citations that are correct and properly added should not be removed, expecting another editor to add them back. I'm going to revert the edits because that's easiest for me. You've also removed citations for three items that have nothing to do with the hubs list.Ch Th Jo (talk) 23:09, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I removed the citations for the other three items were because they caused a reference error. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 23:17, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I re-uncollapsed the template, but kept your reffs. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 23:24, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Ch Th Jo (talk) 23:45, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Airline articles - Infobox list collapsed vs. uncollapsed

I have read all the archived and current discussion pages for the Infobox:Airline template and don't see anywhere that it was settled on using uncollapsed bullet lists. Is that just your preference or was it decided somewhere else by consensus that I haven't read?

Per WP:IBT (Manual of Style for Infoboxes), infoboxes are intended to be concise. A list of 10 items that take up more than 20 lines (as the hubs do in the Delta Air Lines example) is not concise or reader friendly, in my opinion. Here's a couple of totally ridiculous examples: RyanAir , EasyJet. Take a look at WP:IBT and consider some of what it says, particularly: "The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. Of necessity, some infoboxes contain more than just a few fields; however, wherever possible, present information in short form, and exclude any unnecessary content." I argue that a collapsible list is in line with that guideline, whereas a uncollapsed list over 20 lines long is not. You seem to have a different view, so please share your thoughts. Thanks. Ch Th Jo (talk) 00:01, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edited to fix a typo Ch Th Jo (talk) 00:04, 21 January 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Hi, yes I have read the guidelines (over and over :P), I agree that RyanAir is a bit over the top, however, I believe Delta will do just fine with it's list -- I have a simple fix, (which is is use on Some articles). Sorry for any confusion. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 00:37, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I assume then that the format you have insisted on applying is your personal preference and not the result of a consensus decision? Having read the guidelines, why do you feel that the Delta infobox is "just fine"? I am open to your opinion, but I can't support it unless you can justify it based on something more than you just like it a certain way. The guidelines favor brevity and its my opinion that a list twenty lines long is not brief. Please help me understand how your point of view is supported by the guidelines. Thanks for keeping up the conversation on this topic - sorry my response took a couple of days.Ch Th Jo (talk) 22:39, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delta does not have a lot of hubs. I have just made the text smaller; fitting into a smaller space. I don't see any real need to collapse the text, as pages like Southwest Airlines and RyanAir have even longer lists. I don't think having them not collapsed ever caused a problem; I think it would be better for the encyclopedia if the list was viewable; and I don't see what good collapsing it does. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 22:52, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage

Love your userpage! The image is amazing. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 05:10, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha ha, Thanks. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 13:55, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The Excellent User Page Award
For having a nice userpage, I award you this barnstar. The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs 02:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs 02:41, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

:-) Thanks Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 02:43, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 01:28, 25 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]
I'll reply in detail when I get a spare minute or two, thanks. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 01:35, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 January 2011

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Airplaneman's talk page.
Message added 02:02, 25 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Decades in numismatics

I removed the speedy-deletion tags you placed on the articles on numismatic decades (1910s in numismatics, 1920s in numismatics…) The articles are of limited value and may not be worth keeping, but they do state clearly what they're about: "events in coins and paper money" (numismatics) during the decades that they cover. Therefore, I don't think the "no context" deletion tag is appropriate. If you think the articles should be deleted, I think WP:Proposed deletion is the way to go. A. Parrot (talk) 02:52, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged others for A1 and were deleted by an administrator -- they do not give enough information to stay around, just some information and then blank sections. The articles were also created by a blocked sock puppet. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 02:53, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And...if you are going to remove the tags, can you please try to fill the information in :); blank articles look really bad. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 02:56, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose {{db-g5}} would be the correct tag, then. A. Parrot (talk) 02:57, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Would you like the honor of replacing them? Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 02:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 11:50, 26 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Keepscases's talk page.
Message added 01:10, 27 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

FYI Kudpung (talk) 01:10, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, saw. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 01:34, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your WikiHero award

Dear Tofutwitch11.

Congratulations! As for being a great and helpful contributor to this project, you have been identified as a WikiHero. Thanks alot for all your good and helpful work to this project.

Your username has appeared on this list

Good luck and happy editing.

Lord Porchcrop POWER 01:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For a userbox, feel free to add {{User:Porchcrop/Identified WikiHero}}. Lord Porchcrop POWER 01:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 01:46, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Warring

You posted edit warring reports at WP:AIV. For future reference, please note that Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring exists specifically for edit warring reports. --Slon02 (talk) 21:28, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I requested page protection -- forgot I have to go there for violation of 3RR. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 21:29, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

Here, have some TL;DR

Hi Tofutwitch11. Rather than keep filling Keepscases' talk page, I just thought I would mention this to you directly. I've found WP:NOTNOTHERE to be a valuable piece of advice. It may seem weird that Keepscases mostly just vets RfA candidates and doesn't do a whole lot of editing elsewhere, but I just attribute that to the fact that that's where he thinks he can best improve things: by preventing bad (in his opinion) admins from getting the bit. You or I may disagree that it's helpful, but I do think he's doing what he is in order to improve Wikipedia. I might feel differently if he were (for example) asking a whole bunch of questions from each candidate, but one question per candidate, eh, that's easy enough to deal with. Anyway, as I said over there, I hope you don't consider me or anyone else disagreeing to be an enemy; I respect you as an editor even if we may disagree. 28bytes (talk) 02:24, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks -- I guess I'll just drop it and move on. I don't think I'll get answer from him, and it would probably be better off if I let it go. Sorry to cause all that hubub at Keepscases talk page. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 02:31, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. My guess is he's probably been through the arguing about his questions a few times before and wasn't feeling up for another round. 28bytes (talk) 02:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think the whole issue has been turned into a 'Bite newbie Tofutwitch' and among the people who are tearing him apart are ones who may been guilty of some of greater indiscretions. Tofu was expressing a legitimate concern that has been voiced by many members of this community, and if his phrasing was misplaced, the accumulation of lectures is OTT. He's got the message, let's hope that he does not retire in a huff - I know I would have done at his age (whatever that may be, but I'm sure he's younger than me ;) Kudpung (talk) 04:21, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Tofu, I hope you do not feel bitten by my comments. If so, I apologize. Kudpung, if I have committed any "indiscretions", please let me know what they are so that I may make amends. 28bytes (talk) 05:04, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
28bytes -- I wasn't really bitten or offended, more so confused as to why you and snottwog didn't portray any concerns about Keepscases work on WP. I don't give a rats ass that he asks q's on RFA's -- more so about what the q's are. I'm also a bit concerned as to why his editing is focused around RFA, but maybe that's just me. Kudpung -- yes I am indeed younger than you, and wouldn't throw my keybourd at the wall and scramble my password like some would, frankly it's not worth it. I try to portay maturity that far surpasses my age on wiki, wether I succeed or not I really don't know. I'm not really young -- but I will leave my age for you to guess, my actions on wiki should give you an idea :). Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 13:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No idea at all! I've been lucky in many respects that all my professional life was concerned with working with large numbers of people of all ages from 8 to 88, and I get great satisfaction from working with friendly people, even if they don't share my opinions! Kudpung (talk) 15:32, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is that a good thing if you can't guess my age, ha ha. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 15:37, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The hat on my talk page

Would you mind signing it? As it is, because it's my talk page, it looks like the comment is mine, and I would rather have comments attributed to their rightful owners. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:43, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, sorry -- forgot to because I got the temp error and was sidetracked, sorry. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 19:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, thanks. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:58, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

Test Alt

Test Tofutwitch11Alt (Talk) 12:27, 9 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tofutwitch12 (talk • contribs) Tofutwitch11Alt (Talk) 12:29, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Use

What do you think I should do besides new page patrolling and using the undo button to revert vandalism? WayneSlam 23:48, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are many things you can do besides NPP Wayne. One very useful things you could do is help clear out some of Wikipedia's never ending/always growing backlog's. Some of them, like articles lacking sources have over 250,000 articles needing attention. In total, there are over 780,000 articles with referencing problems. That's about 1/3 of Wikipedia's articles. I do have one question for you Wayne. Do you like NPP, and these other Wiki tasks, or would you rather be huggling and reverting vandalism? Thanks, -- Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 01:46, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would want to rather be Huggling and reverting vandalism, Tofutwitch, but since I don't have rollback, I can't do that. Huggle does require rollback unlike it's earliest days. WayneSlam 01:49, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, well, there are a few things we have to do before we can actually give you rollback and let you use Huggle again. First look over the link(s) I showed you, and I will go more in depth about what will be required of you before we can let you use Huggle again. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 01:54, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And..I would like you to create the page User:Wayne Slam/Vandalism in your userspace. You can leave it blank if you'd like -- I'll explain more in a bit. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 01:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I will create it. If there's uncategorized articles in that backlog, I'll go there too. Here it is. WayneSlam 01:58, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll add to it in a few minutes. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 02:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mind if I add to it? As his mentor, I feel I should have a part in this. The UtahraptorTalk/Contribs 17:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GO head, of course! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 18:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brassiere =

Did you even read the "vandalism" that you undid on page "Brassiere"?

I did Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 21:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brasserie

Look, I am a newbie to wikipedia. I am a real person, I am trying to help and improve it. I know what I am doing (at least in regards to this topic), I've had it up to here with the quality of the brassiere measurement article. What can I do to please you and convince you of that? Iknowbrasizes (talk) 22:17, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot simply re-write an article to what you believe or what you are an expert on. We don't hold experts any higher than any other editor on Wikipedia. Before making huge changes as you did -- you should put something on the talk page first, and provide reliable sources. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 22:19, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So I am supposed to put the changes on the talk page and wait until kingdom comes?? some of the comments there are from 2006. The only thing I deleted was incorrect stuff such as the cupsize conversions to Italian and European. I changed some things around (like the bandsize conversion chart and the cupsize conversion chart) to make it more readable, but I put everything else back as it was. Iknowbrasizes (talk) 22:31, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How can you say they are incorrect? What makes them incorrect and your information correct? Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 00:37, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you

Panyd has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{subst:Kittynap}}

Thank you for your well-wishes. They were very much appreciated and made me feel a lot better during my time off. For your kindness I present you with a kitten of your own! PanydThe muffin is not subtle 23:03, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 23:37, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

YGM

Hello, Tofutwitch11. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Read, will reply later on. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 12:27, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mizabot?

{{helpme}} Anyone know why the bot hasn't 'chived my page yet? Maybe I messed up the code, an help is appreciated. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 02:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried - just wait for the bot to kick in and see if it works. Good luck! --Addihockey10 e-mail 03:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(e/c) I changed the order of the parameters so that it's similar to the ones here. Otherwise the config looks fine. See if it works tomorrow. Cheers - [[CharlieEchoTango]] 03:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Still not working; anyone have any ideas? Talk page stalkers, anyone? Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 12:24, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's going through a new cycle - just wait and see. Note it's still on the A's. --Addihockey10 e-mail 13:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Although I am not a very prolific vandal-fighter....

...can I add to User:Wayne Slam/Vandalism? --Perseus8235 18:15, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check with Wayne. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 19:53, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Finished

The list is finished. WayneSlam 16:06, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You got them right; but you defeated the purpose. You were not supposed to look and see if they were reverted or not, you will never learn that way. I'll add some more later today. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 16:50, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, should I just take a good guess? WayneSlam 23:05, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Wayne, the purpose of these exercises are to make you think. It's a open book test. Look at WP:VANDTYPES and WP:VAND#NOT and see if the diff mentioned fits one of those categories. →♠Gƒoley↔Four♣← 23:44, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But don't look at the edit history! →♠Gƒoley↔Four♣← 23:45, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wayne, if you don't guess, the whole exercise is pointless. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 23:53, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I can't look at the diffs. What if I get it wrong? WayneSlam 00:05, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wayne; you can look at the diffs. You just can't look at the edit history to see if it was reverted. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 00:37, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We should still work on this even if I have rollback if you want. WayneSlam 23:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but you don't have rollback yet :)Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 23:40, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

Keepscapes

You should leave him alone. Most of the active 'crats have more experience of RfA than you and I put together and they know exactly what to do with an oppose like that. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:05, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I probably should, and try to, but his beviour frustates me to no extent...Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 15:07, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly why you should ignore him. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Could you review in my editor review? Thanks. -Porchcrop (talk|contributions) 08:44, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At the end of the week. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 13:50, 27 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

Other accounts

Hi. What's the relationship between you and User:Laptopmaker and User:Loosemarkers? --jpgordon::==( o ) 17:16, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No relationship, but, I am away from home (and I always log out when not using WP) which leaves the IP open to anyone who uses my computer (cousins, other family), and others who use the same Internet connection. My account is not compromised (I never use remember me away from home). I don't know who made the accounts, but if they are under my IP, it was probably someone using my connection, and they should remain blocked. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 17:49, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what's strange is the three of you are using the same IP and computer and have been all day. TNXMan 18:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You and Laptop maker evidently share an interest in airports as well. You and Loosemarkers evidently share a fascination with inane RfA questions. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:31, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)It shows on the same IP because I am away from home and using a different IP, and will be until the end of the week. I have no other IP to edit from. As to LaptopMakers interest in airports -- the history looks similar to my field of "study" if you will; and the fact that LaptopMaker used this IP adress (from what I'm told) would only make sense to be some family mocking my Wikipedia editing. As of now, the autoblock put on Loosemarkers is affecting me and I can only edit my talk page. If someone could block the IP untill the end of the month, that will solve the issue of others using the same IP and getting confused with me. (But I would need IP-Block Exempt to edit). I assure you I'm not a sock, just caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 19:50, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In regards to Loosemarkers and the RFA questions I'm not exactly sure what happened. My WP browsing history is always available by simply viewing the FireFox history, and a simple code copy/paste and some re-wording strikes as me. The coincadental thing is that this all happened when the computer I am using is shared by other people who don't care about Wikipedia as I do, and love to mock me about it. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 19:54, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's not just one IP, it's multiple IPs, . I'm assuming good faith here, but when I see things like
  1. this edit from you at 22:26 on 12/19, followed by the creation of the vandal account User:Certainlyserpent at 22:35 on the same IP;
  2. this edit from you on 2/23 followed quite soon by the creation of the vandal account User:Loosemarkers on the same IP
  3. repeated use of the same IP on the same day by Tofutwitch11, Loosemarkers, and Laptopmaker
I have to be highly skeptical -- especially since the IPs geolocate in hundreds of miles apart. I'm blocking this account for two weeks and hope that when you return, there's never a reason to look at this account again. --jpgordon::==( o ) 00:09, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You have been blocked from editing for a period of one week for abusing multiple accounts. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. jpgordon::==( o ) 00:09, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi; I'm not going to request to be unblocked because I don't have the energy and am trying to enjoy a stress free vacation. I have never heard of the CertainlySerpent account and It was not I who created or used it. I live with four other family members who all use the same IP address as I. It is very likely that one of them created the account and did the damage. I often warn them not to do things like this because it will fall back on me, but I think the warnings make them want to do it more. I can't control how other family members use my IP address, I can ask them, but can't make them do anything. In regards to what has happened today; there has been many people with access to this IP address (more than at home), so these silly actions that they do come back on me. They don't realize the on wiki consequences I face when these things happen. While I would love to be unblocked and not have this hang over my shoulder forever, I don't think there is anything I can further do to convince you of anything. It's too bad I seemed to be in the wrong place, at the wrong time. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 01:10, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This may seem stupid, this has been staring me in the face, but can someone please fix the ref tags on this page Thanks, Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 11:28, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:53, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 12:42, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So the bot doesn't archive this while I am still blocked. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 01:21, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome back

I am glad to see you are back from your break. Hope to see you around. Alpha Quadrant talk 03:40, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Southwest Airlines @ BWI/Welcome Back!

Hey. Can you keep the BWI Airport article on your watchlist for a while? Southwest was added to the hub parameter of the infobox,,,i removed it but it was added back again and i removed it again as I stated Southwest DOES NOT use hubs, they use focus cities. And also, welcome back from your break....glad you're back! Snoozlepet (talk) 23:21, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note! I've added it to my watchlist and will keep up on it for mistakes like that (they happen all to often). Thanks -- Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 23:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 March 2011

Ethiopian Airlines to Milan-Malpensa

Can you keep an eye on this for a while? IPs are continuing to list MXP as a future destination for this airline eventhough Ethiopian has made no announcement of this of any kind and Milan is not listed on as a destination on their website nor route map does not show flights to Milan. Thanks! Snoozlepet (talk) 04:03, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 20:45, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you, I was afraid to do even more damage. Flamarande (talk) 13:27, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No Problem, thanks for asking! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 13:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ERA

Hi there,

Just wanted you to know that ERA Alaska is 3 airlines operating under one corporate operation. You can verify this by looking at www.flyera.com - all the flights operate under the original ERA code (7H) and liveries. The Jim & his brother ran Hagelands (green and yellow planes) which was merged into Frontier Flying Service (ran by Bob Hajdukovich's family) who then took over Era Aviation (strictly Dash 8s). Alaska Airlines partially orchestrated this deal. Each airline still maintains their own respective FAA operating certificates, for now, which is why their names are still shown on the website, on the Medallion Foundation website, and on each plane. Era Alaska/Aviation/frontier/hagelands is all one in the same on the corporate spectrum. Regarding my addition of Bob Hajdukovich, your comment about Era Aviation would be correct if the page was named "Hageland Aviation Services". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.237.6.53 (talk) 07:57, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an article about the merger. http://www.adn.com/2009/02/17/693165/rivals-to-acquire-era-aviation.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.237.6.53 (talk) 08:02, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks for the message. All Era Alaska flights are operated under one operating certificate that was granted on or around January 2010. According to FlightAware, (here) there are 5 IFR Era Alaska flights in the air -- all old Hageland routs, operated with Era call-sign and registration. Nor are there any Frontier Flying Service flights showing up. Depending on the time you look, there may be more or less. Many of the other flights are VFR and will not show up; but Hageland and Frontier Flying Service would show in the IFR if there were any. The link you provided is over two years old, and extremely outdated. This Flight is operated with a Beechcraft 1900C, and aircraft only used by Hageland. As you can see, it is operating under Era's callsign (ERR) and reg. Things have changed, as as of now, it is all Era Alaska. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 19:01, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also, this flight, a Dehaviland Dash 8, previously owned by Era Aviation is now operating under Era Alaska's Callsign and reg. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 19:02, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 03:15, 21 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

BDL Htfd/Sprfld

Quick note: Retired from PD at same. Historical document states named by War Dept.as BRADLEY FIELD January 1942, gave caretaker status to state in 1946, turned over to state on Oct 15, 1948. New terminal finished Sept,1952, named for Francis S. Murphy, Aero Commissioner, and DESIGNATED LOCATION AS HARTFORD-SPRINGFIELD "for its ideal location between both", and the fact that it is "open when nearby hubs are closed due to [fog and other] bad weather". The ramp side of the building is lettered: HARTFORD BRADLEY FIELD SPRINGFIELD WINDSOR LOCKS CONNECTICUT 72.221.93.102 (talk) 15:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)srkelly@cox.net[reply]

NPP

Hi Tofu. We need your input on something. As you probably know there are current problems with New Page Patrolling. Take a look at the talk pages and archives of this user and this user. I think you might like to handle this yourself in your usual diplomatic way - they are working entirely in good faith but they do need suggesting they take a moment to revise WP:NPP, WP:CSD, and perhaps also this essay. We need all the NPPers we can get but we need them to slow down a bit, address the new page issues, strive for more accuracy, and perhaps aim for a slightly more formal approach when addressing new editors. We don't want to scare either the NPPers or the new editors off. --Kudpung (talk) 04:57, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note, I'll take a look. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 19:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Don't take too long over this - every day is a potential 200 pages more that slip through the net. Let me know if you prefer me to handle it, but I think your skills are perfectly suited. Some of the improvements we have to make is insisting that Wikipedia is not MySpace, some of the contributors are illustrious professors or chiefs of industry, who might not be as tolerant of pre-teen talk as for example people like me who have worked with young people all their life. --Kudpung (talk) 03:14, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll gladly talk to them about it, but I'm confused as to what exactly you want me to get across? Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 15:11, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It might have resolved itself in the meantime, but if you have a look at the talk pages, there are far too many messages about wrong tagging and there are what I consider rather familiar tones they use when explaining things to new editors. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but even if I didn't take exception to it, I would personally get the idea that Wikipedia is not being run by very experienced people. Take a look and let me know what you think. I know you're busy on other stuff, but we're trying to build up a strong army of new page patrollers. --Kudpung (talk) 16:18, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your absolutely correct. I am watching both of their talk pages and waiting until I see another NPP error pop up, or until I catch an error with their NPP'ing. It may seem a little BITEy if I just jump on them about it. If they fumble up again I'll pop my nose in there. Thanks -- Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 20:49, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent. Now to let you in on more, a couple of experienced editors have been looking into these problems now for several months. See this list that we have made yesterday and if anything comes to mind or if you have any ideas, let me know - it's backroom work like this that makes good potential admins ;) Kudpung (talk) 04:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I love it! Let me keep looking through that list! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 18:53, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We did another bot run last night to go back further and expând the data. Same page. Take a look. Kudpung (talk) 14:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nice! I'm in the list now :) Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 15:38, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Kudpung's talk page.
Message added 18:19, 25 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Sorry for the delay - had to go to a funeral 400 miles away. Kudpung (talk) 18:19, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gracias, No hay disculpa necesario. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 18:58, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WT:RFA

"now we have to act on it": my perspective is that recently people have been trying to find a step or two to take that isn't too small (otherwise, people will decide it did no good at all) and isn't too big (otherwise, when something goes wrong, as always happens, people will blame the big step and revert it). I think that people have suggested some solid, medium-sized steps on that page. - Dank (push to talk) 22:16, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We haven't really done anything to fixchange RFA. We can't agree what is wrong -- if anything at all, but them we complain about it left and right. People have suggested many things, but it gets blown off because we can't get enough people to agree for it to be implemented. We are our worst enemy's. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 22:47, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I always watchlist when I leave a msg, no need for talkback. Well it's true we've been talking for years and there haven't been any big process changes to RFA, but my wild guess is, that's about to change. We're not seeing the level of shouting and pushback we've always gotten before, and on top of that, the changes we're suggesting are largely in line with what the larger community wants anyway. - Dank (push to talk) 23:02, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I leave TB because many people don't, I won't for you anymore. I can only hope it's about to change, I think you have a good idea there and I hope we go somewhere with it. Thanks Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 23:04, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Tofutwitch11. You have new messages at Reaper Eternal's talk page.
Message added 03:18, 27 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

FYI --Kudpung (talk) 03:19, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You, Kind Sir. Certainly not needed, but appreciated. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 11:36, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's needed because it is also part of a campaign to clean up RfA. You may find this interesting and perhaps you might like to consider joining the task force. The project is running following a thread I started at Jimbo's tp. --Kudpung (talk) 15:58, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hi Tofutwitch11, Thank you for renaming my files. Sorry I misspelled the word, and created an extra work. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:11, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No Problem, happy to help where I can. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 15:12, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DCA Question

I was wondering where you got all of those new Washington National flights from BDL with Chautauqua and Pinnacle for Delta. You put no source, and on the Washington National (KDCA) Wikipedia page, there is nothing there saying those new flights to BDL. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pilotboy5 (talk • contribs) 03:02, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have to use Airline Booking engines (i.e. Delta.com, UsAirways.com etc) and Airlines timetables which are impossible to link to and reference. Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 15:53, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki-Birthday Honours

The WikiJaguar Award for Excellence
For your recent assistance responding to the request I left on someone else's talk page, I award you the WikiJaguar Award for Excellence in talk page stalking efforts. For the first (and possibly only) act of the 2011 HJ's Birthday Honours List, I award you this for services to talk-page stalking. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:34, 28 March 2011 (UTC) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:34, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No Problem, Thank You! I hope to see you have many future Wiki-Birthdays! Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 22:39, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

Shiny Things, Inc.

The Barnstar of Good Humor
Good catch, and the edit summary has me laughing out loud. N419BH 22:45, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sense of humor is always good, right ;). Thanks -- Tofutwitch11 (TALK) 22:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Tofutwitch11/Archive_2&oldid=1188531208"