User talk:ItsZippy/Archive 9

This is an archive of past discussions with User:ItsZippy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

→

Regarding Tomtomn00

Thank you for taking the time to provide Tomtomn00 with much-needed feedback. I, too, have left messages on his talk page several times regarding his inappropriate tagging of articles, but it doesn't seem to be having any effect. For several weeks I was reviewing his contributions on an almost daily basis in order to correct the inappropriate tags. Although the daily archiving of his talk page makes following threads nearly impossible, it looks like a number of editors are having an issue with his behavior. I see that he has been listed on AN/I at least once and wonder if it might not be appropriate to do so again. But I thought I would leave you a note to get your perspective first. Thanks again. JimVC3 (talk) 23:10, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I feel as though I need to try harder to control my editing. I have emailed ItsZippy with what I'm going to do to control my editing. I will limit myself to around 50 edits a day, then a few extra Rollbacks or User Talk pages. ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 07:28, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I will start this on Monday. ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 11:28, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jim, thanks for your message. I am aware that Tomtomn00 has had some problems with certain areas of Wikipedia - I am mentoring him because it was suggested at ANI that he find someone to mentor him. I try to regularly discuss any issues with him and have brought up problems when they occur. Tomtomn00 has said that he will take steps to improve his efforts on Wikipedia, which is great, and seems to be taking my advice on board. Of course, if problems persist, I will continue to raise them with Tomtomn00 and then at the appropriate avenue if necessary, but I would like to give him a little time to improve first. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:08, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

My concern is that the time he's been given hasn't changed things a great deal (I note that a couple of editors have had issues just in the last 24 hours), but I'm willing to give him a little more time as well. I'll also keep an eye on things and will raise the issue at the appropriate avenue myself as needed. I see he's commented here on my original note, so to be fair, I'm going to leave a message on his talk page as well. Thanks for the work you've done with him so far. JimVC3 (talk) 22:42, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, JimVC. The post you left on his talk page looks good, thank you for doing that. Tomtomn00's CSD have been ok of late and I have been encouraging him to read the relevant guidelines and to work slower, which I am hoping should help. For the sake of transparency, we have had a few off-wiki conversations through e-mail, simply because Tomtomn00 has wished not to discuss some things on-wiki; I have said similar things to him there and have encouraged him to use on-wiki communication as much as possible. If you keep your eye on him too, that would be great - he seems to be a good faith editor who just needs guidance. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:49, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I applaud your generous offer of mentorship, ItsZippy. If it were up to me, these cases would be solved by the banhammer and the banhammer alone. I don't have much hope here, as I've yet to recall one similar case that has been successful even with multiple mentors, but as you are rather clueful of a teacher, be not discouraged. Although sometimes, tough love is the best solution. Good luck. /ƒETCH COMMS / 23:41, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

(I'm trying for a warning-less month. Only notes I want to get.) ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 08:57, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Warningless schmorningless. Warnings aren't your concern. Acting cluefully and maturely is. Anyone can act like a twelve-year-old and not get warnings. Not everyone can act professionally, though. /ƒETCH COMMS / 14:59, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Viz characters

I sent them to AFD because I had redirected them and the redirect was undone. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:31, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that's fine - I wasn't suggesting that you'd done anything wrong. I simply believe that they should be redirected (and an AfD will give weight to the decision, if that is the outcome). ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:36, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Another Random Thing

I've just noticed, I've created around 33 articles. (See my Userpage.) Would you say that's good for me? ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 18:56, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

You have created some decent articles, yes. Remember, though, that it is much better to create a few high quality articles than many shorter ones. You're doing a good job, but try to spend a little more time on each article to make it better. Also, I'm convinced that Guild of Church Musicians and People's Theater are notable - what reliable third-party sources do you have for them? ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:05, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I've put a new source on each of them. (GoCM - Christian Today & People's Theater - BBC) ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 20:19, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

The one on Guild of Church Musicians might just be enough, but it might be worth finding another. The one you added to People's Theater is not really enough - local news coverage does not really qualify as enough to provide notability; has the group been mentioned in any national publications? I get the feeling that the second article might not be notable enough; unless you can find a good source for that, it might be deleted. Have you read the guideline on Notbility, and specifically the general notability guideline? They might be worth a look if you haven't. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:41, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I guess. ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 12:57, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

A big NPT update

Hey! Big update on what the developers have been working on, and what is coming up:

coding

Fixes for the "moved pages do not show up in Special:NewPages" and "pages created from redirects do not show up in Special:NewPages" bugs have been completed and signed off on. Unfortunately we won't be able to integrate them into the existing version, but they will be worked into the Page Triage interface.
Coding has been completed on three elements; the API for displaying metadata about the article in the "list view", the ability to keep the "patrol" button visible if you edit an article before patrolling it, and the automatic removal of deleted pages from the queue. All three are awaiting testing but otherwise complete.

All other elements are either undergoing research, or about to have development started. I appreciate this sounds like we've not got through much work, and truthfully we're a bit disappointed with it as well; we thought we'd be going at a faster pace :(. Unfortunately there seems to be some 24-72 hour bug sweeping the San Francisco office at the moment, and at one time or another we've had several devs out of it. It's kind of messed with workflow.

Stuff to look at

We've got a pair of new mockups to comment on that deal with the filtering mechanism; this is a slightly updated mockup of the list view, and this is what the filtering tab is going to look like. All thoughts, comments and suggestions welcome on the NPT talkpage :). I'd also like to thank the people who came to our last two office hours sessions; the logs will be shortly available here.

I've also just heard that the first functional prototype for enwiki will be deployed mid-April! Really, really stoked to see this happening :). We're finding out if we can stick something up a bit sooner on prototype.wiki or something.

I appreciate there may be questions or suggestions where I've said "I'll find out and get back to you" and then, uh. not ;p. I sincerely apologise for that: things have been a bit hectic at this end over the last few weeks. But if you've got anything I've missed, drop me a line and I'll deal with it! Further questions or issues to the usual address. Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 17:07, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Your Request for Adminship

You're doing well! :-) You're currently at 100% success rate. ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 19:41, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your support. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:13, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

:D ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 20:48, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

That was a cracking response! Pedro : Chat 21:43, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Heh, thank you. It took a while. :-P ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:46, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Almost there man, 2 1/2 days left and you're doing great. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:43, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

A random thing

What userpage looks the best. My current one or User:Tomtomn00/New_Design_Userpage? ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 21:43, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

(TPS) - Can I perhaps point out that it really doesn't matter what it looks like, as long as it meets the guidelines at WP:UP, and that user pages aren't really the reason we are here ;-) Pedro : Chat 21:52, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

What Pedro said - it would be a much better use of your time to work on encyclopedic content. Both of those suggestions look fine; go with your favourite. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:56, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I will go with the second one I think when it is completed. I say it looks more formal and professional. The old one is me just messing about with div and span tags. ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 22:00, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

Hi. When you recently edited Argument from morality, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Moral objectivity, Naturalism and Moral order (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:11, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello ItsZippy. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang ^{DR goes to Wikimania!} 12:07, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

The Tea Leaf - Issue Two

Hi! Welcome to the second edition of The Tea Leaf, the official newsletter of the Teahouse!

Teahouse celebrates one month of being open! This first month has drawn a lot of community interest to the Teahouse. Hosts & community members have been working with the project team to improve the project in many ways including creating scripts to make inviting easier, exploring mediation processes for troubling guests, and best practices regarding mentoring for new editors who visit the Teahouse.

First month metrics report an average of 30 new editors visiting the Teahouse each week. Approximately 30 new editors participate in the Teahouse each week, by way of asking questions and making guest profiles. An average of six new questions and four new profiles are made each day. We'd love to hear your ideas about how we can spread the word about the Teahouse to more new editors.
Teahouse has many regulars. Like any great teahouse, our Teahouse has a 61% return rate of guests, who come back to ask additional questions and to also help answer others' questions. Return guests cite the speedy response rate of hosts and the friendly, easy to understand responses by the hosts and other participants as the main reasons for coming back for another cup o' tea!
Early metrics on retention. It's still too early to draw conclusions about the Teahouse's impact on new editor retention, but, early data shows that 38% of new editors who participate at the Teahouse are still actively editing Wikipedia 2-4 weeks later, this is compared with 7% from a control group of uninvited new editors who showed similar first day editing activity. Additional metrics can be found on the Teahouse metrics page.
Nine new hosts welcomed to the Teahouse. Nine new hosts have been welcomed to the Teahouse during month one: Chicocvenancio, Cullen328, Hallows AG, Jeffwang, Mono, Tony1, Worm That Turned, Writ Keeper, and Nathan2055. Welcome to the Teahouse gang, folks!
Say hello to the new guests at the Teahouse. Take the time to welcome and get to know the latest guests at the Teahouse. Drop off some wikilove to these editors today, as being welcomed by experienced editors is a really nice way to make new editors feel welcome.

You are receiving The Tea Leaf after expressing interest or participating in the Teahouse! To remove yourself from receiving future newsletters, please remove your username here. -- Sarah (talk) 21:38, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Happy Easter

Happy Easter :D ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 19:04, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Happy Easter to you too. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:58, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

AN

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —Tom Morris (talk) 18:50, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

WikiThanks

You are among the top 5% of most active Wikipedians this past month! 67.80.64.128 (talk) 23:05, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Beat the 'crat congrats

Well, with less than half an hour to go, and at a healthy 86% I think it's safe to congratulate you on a succesful RFA. Do take care with the speedies; it was the area I first started on when I got to the tools and you wouldn't believce the number I declined! Keep up all that other good stuff you do and if you've got any questions on anything new button related ........ ask someone else (only joking - feel free to ask me!). Nicely done. Pedro : Chat 14:57, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your support and nomination Pedro, I will of course very slowly with CSDs - that was a valid concern at my RfA. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 15:53, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations

You have passed RFA and are now an administrator. Congratulations. Please do be careful with speedy deletions however, as that was a concern expressed by several users. Best of luck. MBisanz ^talk 15:50, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations! Welcome to the cabal. If you have any questions or hesitate, feel free to ask any of us (if you use IRC then you can get access to the #wikipedia-en-admins IRC channel too). :) The Helpful One 15:52, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations! ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 15:53, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the support, everyone. As I said above, I will leave CSDs for a bit and then go slowly. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 15:54, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Congrats! Now you can be in two cabals. ;) — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 16:03, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Let me add my congrats! Don't forget us in DR! Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:11, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I'd never forget you at DR! If anything, the philosophy articles I've been writing has been a great distraction than adminship will be. I've been meaning to get involved again for some time. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 16:13, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

You did it! You held up well, I bet it was a long week. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:21, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Congrats! Well done! Way to get started on the CSD backlog too.--v/r - T P 18:05, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Good on you. Glad that you passed :-) Steven Zhang ^{DR goes to Wikimania!} 18:32, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations! Keep being awesome on the philosophy articles, newly mopped one. —Tom Morris (talk) 18:59, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Congrats from me too! -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:33, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Good attitude. Pedro : Chat 21:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Weeks go by so quickly, I didn't even get to review your contributions and vote! I'm glad to see we've got another member of the mop and bucket team, and what I've seen looks good to me. No one else seems to have given you the traditional crappy t-shirt, so here you go! Worm^TT · (talk) 13:41, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, congratulations! I knew I would eventually see you join the admin corps. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:42, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Declined speedy

In this edit to Andrea Mizzi, you declined a WP:CSD#A7 speedy deletion on the basis that significance & context are asserted. I'll agree that sufficient context is present to identify the subject, but not that significance is credibly asserted. Mizzi is claimed to be a professional footballer, with a birth date that makes him 10 years old. I'm pretty sure they haven't started paying 10 year old kids to play football in Italy. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:40, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorta agree, but I think ItsZippy is just trying to be cautious. On the other hand, qualifies as a hoax so I zapped it as G3.--v/r - T P 18:04, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Heh. Welcome to adminship - damned if you do, damned if you don't. You're right to be cautious. Pedro : Chat 18:27, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I added that CSD tag. Just saying. ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 20:01, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I am, indeed, being cautious. Thanks for the note though, and thanks TP for deleting it. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:12, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Hopefully this is the last thing. You added a note here: User_talk:Tomtomn00#Andrea Mizzi. That should be all from me about this. ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 20:19, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, apologies for that. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:20, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

This seems a bit random, but what would you say about my CSD log, User:Tomtomn00/CSD log? ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 20:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

It is very impressive. The fact that only 1 has not been actioned shows you seem to know what you're doing. Keep up the good work there. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:31, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Adam Cappa

I've found absolutely no evidence that he exist. Aside, the creator has created hoaxes on musicians like this before, not to mention uploaded forgeries.W23fffd (talk) 21:23, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

These sources suggest that he exist - [1], [2], [3] - though he may not be notable. Feel free to nominate for AfD. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:28, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Congrates!

Congratulations for becoming an admin. I wish you a happy adminship

Just a tip: Please don't be too serious like this cat and don't bite newcomers, so be little polite. Because I know that it is painful, especially when an admin bites (I was also bitten by an admin because of copyright issues. But it was on the 1st day of wiki, so I was as dumb as this cat and have improved, probably! )

Again all the best for adminship Yash t 101 01:32, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Glad to see that you passed --Guerillero | My Talk 04:32, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Best of luck with your adminship. Congratulations. Mr little irish 10:43, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Recent Protection on Sleeping with Sirens

Sleeping with Sirens - It does not need move protection, as there has been no move vandalism. Just pointing that out. ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 10:31, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing that. I did not choose to move protect, but I think that was the default after the previous temporary move protection last October, which I failed to notice. I'll remove the move protection. Still getting the hang of things. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 11:21, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Remember to select the option to show more protection options, and allow all users to move the page. ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 12:02, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually, Tomtomn00, both protections (with and without the move=autoconfirmed) are identical because Special:MovePage is restricted to autoconfirmed users anyway. As an aside, move protection is also always made to be at least as restrictive as edit protection. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:41, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 11

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Divine command theory (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Robert Adams

Kantian ethics (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Christian Wolff

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

X Japan

Perhaps you can help or advise. It appears that we may have a genre warring sock puppet at the X Japan article (i.e. someone who creates a new account whenever their talk page receives a user-warning message). In your opinion, is the article a worthy candidate for temporary semi-protection? -- WikHead (talk) 19:57, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, WikHead. I have fully protected the page for 3 days to allow a discussion and consensus. I would suggest that someone posts this dispute at the dispute resolution noticeboard to achieve resolution. I'll post a longer comment on the article's talk page in a moment. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:13, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your speedy response and good logic approach to the situation at hand. Sorry I missed your recent RfA, but if your handling of this thread represents "the way you roll", I'd have surely offered you my full support. I'll post any additional comments on the article's talk page. Thanks again, congrats, good luck, and happy editing! -- WikHead (talk) 20:44, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks you for your kind words. I hope you can resolve this issues quickly and painlessly; I'll continue to watch the article and will try to help out if I can. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Your Autopatrolled Closure

Users can be granted it with less than 50 articles created, but 50 is a general number. :) ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 17:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes thank you, I know that. I declined the request earlier because, as well as having fewer than 50 article creations, the user did not seem to be creating articles so fast that the autopatrolled right would be helpful for new page patrollers. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:30, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay then. ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 17:39, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

On Photographs

First, thank you for your answer to my tea house question about photographs. The photograph that I wish to upload to and insert into the Wikipedia article I am developing is a personal photograph. It is not copyrighted. By what means to I inform Wikipedia of this - to avoid it's being rejected?Jmolf (talk) 17:28, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jmolf, that's great to hear. When you upload the image with the wizard, you can select the copyright status, which will let people know that it's properly licensed. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:30, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, ItsZippy. You have new messages at Tomtomn00's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sorry. Its been an hour. ~ ⇒TomTom N00 @ 19:40, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Using this one now. Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 20:00, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

There is a persistent vandalism on athletic pages. Please have a look before giving your statement and delete. It's necessary to block these unconstructive users. IP is only for vandalize these pages! Thank you.Montell 74 (talk) 20:41, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, Montell. I am hesitant to label these edits as vandalism, as it is not obvious that they are intended to damage Wikipedia - they may be good faith edits from someone who thinks they are improving the article. Having said that, it is possible that this is 'sneaky' vandalism, which is always difficult to spot because it is characterised by not looking like vandalism. I am not incredibly acquainted with athletics, so I am in an even more difficult position to make the call. Do you think you could find an administrator who is better informed about athletics - they would probably be in the best position. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:51, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for answer. So let me say that these edits are vandalism! Day by day unknown IP-Users change results/times of any athletic events years ago. Systematically.Montell 74 (talk) 20:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

The edits may well be vandalism, I'm just not comfortable making the block myself. As I said, do you think you could contact another administrator? If they choose to block, I have no problems at all. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:59, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh. They will be blocked. Sure and by other administrators. But not if they don't know about it because you delete my notice. That's what i ask for.Montell 74 (talk) 21:04, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

It's fine if they are blocked. As I said, I do not feel comfortable making the block myself, so please ask another administrator. I'm not going to change this position; I'd rather be overcautious. Perhaps there's an admin in the Athletics WikiProject who could help. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:10, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Soviet Union protection

Seeing that you have protected Soviet Union following Ocnerosti's complaint at the AI board, I hope you will take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Chaosname and my evidence at User:Zloyvolsheb/Evidence. Cheers. Zloyvolsheb (talk) 05:14, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Zloyvolsheb, thanks for the message. I am going out later today, so won't have time to look at the SPI this weekend. I'll take a look on Monday, when I am back. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 09:39, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation Page

Hi Zippy,

After my short absence I thought I'd get started with some of the easier chores I had set aside for myself: ontogeny and phylogeny. However, 'easy' is not the right word. Is it true that disambiguation pages require the creation of a new page like phylogeney_(biology) or something and then copy/pasting everything from the phylogeny page there, thus opening up the phylogeny page for the disambiguation? Or is there some other rule?

--Fan Singh Long (talk) 08:33, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Note: In this case the biology page is called phylogenetics, so I might just use the phylogeny without problems. I just want to discuss it before I do something stupid.

See Wikipedia:Disambiguation for some guidance. Josh Parris 00:47, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Congrats on the admin-ship btw.

--Fan Singh Long (talk) 08:34, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

HighBeam

Hey! If you want you can request free WP:HighBeam access. Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 22:23, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Moving forward with DRP

Hi ItsZippy. When you have the time and when you return from vacation, send me an e-mail and maybe we can discuss about dispute resolution. Welcome back to dispute resolution, it's always nice to have you. :) Best regards, Whenaxis (contribs) ^{DR goes to Wikimania!} 01:22, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

IP Warning 76.etc on AIV

Today *is* April 16. That's not recent enough? MSJapan (talk) 19:12, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the message. I guess you are talking about this report, yes? The reason I did not block the user at this time is because the IP address is registered to a company with a proxy server. This means that many different people may use the IP address. Although the last warning was today, that was the only recent warning the IP has received. There is a strong possibility that the people who vandalised for each edit were different. Therefore, the final level 4 warning that was given was inappropriate, because no prior warnings had been recently given. Although the report would have been correct if there had been recent warnings before the last one (if the user had been given at least one more warning today), I would have blocked the user. As there was only one warning today, I did not feel that a block was warranted. If the user continues to vandalise Wikipedia, you may warn the user again, and then report them the next time, but to make sure that it is only for recent vandalism. I hope that makes sense (and sorry for typing such a long reply). Let me know if you have any other problems. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:24, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

No, it really doesn't make sense, because you're ascribing intent to a user. There is just as much probability that it is static, which means the same user has been warned multiple times; one really doesn't know. IPs and users are different, and are treated differently. If the IP vandalises, it is blocked. Anyone wishing to edit constructively can register an account. I fail to see where there is any uncertainty whatsoever, and I would very much like to see you go to ANI with this, as I see a serious admin COMPETENCY issue here. MSJapan (talk) 19:34, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Regardless of whether this was the same user or a different user, the IP only had one warning today - I personally did not feel that this was sufficient to warrant a block, especially as other editors may wish to constructively edit through that IP. If vandalism continues and it becomes evident that a block is required to prevent disruption, then I would support a block. Having said all of that, should another administrator disagree and think that a block is appropriate, then I would have no problem with them blocking the user. On that note, if you wish to discuss this with another administrator, you are more than welcome to do so. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:43, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. MSJapan (talk) 20:13, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi ItsZippy,
I took a look at this, since MSJ took you up on your offer and mentioned it at ANI. I've blocked the IP for 3 months. While what you're saying would make perfect sense if there was a mix of good and bad edits from this IP, the {{anonblock}} and {{schoolblock}} templates exist just for this particular case; it may or may not be the same person, but (a) they (all?) know they're vandalizing, and (b) reverting and warning is a time sink for IP addresses like this, since there have been zero productive edits in years. To clarify, you've done absolutely nothing wrong (admins are not forced to make blocks they don't agree with, and you didn't remove the report from AIV), I've just been vandal blocking for a long time, so I took your comment above as an invitation to use my judgement. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:14, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
(e/c) agree with Floquenbeam. Since vandalism edits from that IP as far apart as a year (in October 2010 and October 2011) were to the exact same page and showing the exact same vandalism pattern, and since there is absolutely no sign of any constructive editing in between, I find it rather unlikely that this is anything but a single individual on a long-term stable IP. If it was a proxy computer used by many editors, you'd get some more variety, wouldn't you? Btw, the same pattern of vandalism was previously seen on a neighbouring IP, 72.26.36.22 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), so this is a problem user going back several years. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:17, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks you both for the the good advice - I'll bear what you've said in mind when dealing with that kind of IP report in future. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:18, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, ItsZippy. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Wikipedia e-mail.
Message added 20:46, 16 April 2012 (UTC). 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.

Bad AIV report

Hi... I was looking through wp:aiv this afternoon and found where I had reported User:Alfonsoribeiro [4]. You, correctly, stated that his edits were not vandalism (generally.. though the one that I reverted with Huggle was removal of other's comments from the article's talk page [5]). I have absolutely no problem with your comment, I'm really just curious about how Huggle could have reported the user when he had no warnings at all. I know that use of an automated tool is not an excuse for mis-identifying vandals, but I was wondering if there's anything that you, as an admin, could see in the editor's history that I can't. I haven't changed huggle's prefs at all. Just a hiccup? If you can tell anything, I'd appreciate it! :) Wikipelli ^Talk 21:40, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Wikipelli, thanks for your message. That's interesting - I can't see why Huggle would have reported the user. As far as I'm aware, Huggle will report a user when you choose to warn a user and there's already a level 4 warning on the user's talk page. I've had a look; the user has no talk page, nor has one ever existed. I'm assuming that it was this revert which triggered the report (which was, as you say, vandalism). I guess Huggle got it wrong (unless there's something I've missed too). I'm not too worried about it - I'm sure you were acting in good faith (your great record in anti-vandalism makes it impossible to believe otherwise). ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:48, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Noticed this thread, and just want to note that I re-deleted the material from the talk page. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:56, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually, you're probably right Floquenbeam - thanks for noticing that. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:58, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks... Just as a side note, I went back in the huggle transcript for today and I saw the message, "User has already been reported" a couple of times before it put mine in there. Might just have been a glitch. If you happen to notice any other bad reports from me in AIV, let me know. I've used Huggle for a couple of years and really don't follow up on the reports. Just happened to look today. Wikipelli ^Talk 22:08, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Did someone else report the user at UAA previously? If so, this sounds like a glitch with Huggle that I've experienced. See the bottom of this diff for an explanation of it. Calabe 1992 23:19, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Bingo, answered my own question. Someone had already reported the user at UAA. When Wikipelli reverted him, it detected that and auto-generated a report at AIV. I've complained before about this, but it still isn't fixed, apparently. Calabe 1992 23:21, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Good catch, that would explain it. Removed from list here. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:24, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

What I've done to prevent this is disable the auto-report function of Huggle, and instead make it ask me whether or not to report. It can be found at System>Options>Reporting, and selecting "Prompt for report." Calabe 1992 23:28, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Awesome catch! Thanks! I'll look into changing the options. Wikipelli ^Talk 00:59, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Tomtomn00

No disrespect to you as a mentor; I barely know you, but it isn't working with him. I'm not going to block him because it would look like a grudge on my part, but please do something to rein him in or he's going to be at AN with a ban request in the immediate future. MBisanz ^talk 02:40, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Is this in response to this conversation? I've not had a chance to take a look; I'll try to read it & reply tomorrow. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:50, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that and thought it was meaningless, as I was away and there were two editors having a long conversation, mostly not about me, on my talk page. -- Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 18:55, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I was referring to the four current threads on his talk page and the two beginning at User_talk:Tomtomn00/Archives/15#Andrei_Sannikov. All started in the last four days expressing concerns about Tom's editing. While Fetchcomms was uncivil in his characterization, Tom still is causing problems in a wide variety of areas that are negatively impacting other editors (including new editors) and not realizing the serious nature of those problems or showing signs of reducing his rate of errors in editing. MBisanz ^talk 22:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the clarification. I am aware that Tomtomn00's edits have caused problems for other editors in the past. Maybe it's naivety, but I am hopeful that Tom will become a decent editor in the future. To that end, I will continue to support him and push him in the right direction when he goes wrong. It may be that he ends up banned for long-term disruption; if that is the case, I will not argue against it as that may end up being the best result. Nevertheless, I will personally endeavour to work with him unless and until that does happen, and I am happy for people to raise concerns on my talk page and on his. Tom has generally responded reasonable well to criticisms (not perfectly, but not terribly either) and has worked well in some areas (his CSD log is pretty good). It might be that he ends up being more harm than good; if that is what the community thinks further down the line, it will end in a ban - that will be ok with me if that is what happens. However, I am not resigned to that and hope that he can improve (as he has been doing). ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:23, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

I am going to try and avoid a ban. I think I should work on patrolling new pages (NPP), because many things there often need to be deleted. Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 18:44, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

As I mentioned in my post above, your CSD log is pretty good - NPP might be a good thing to do. Please do remember to continue going slow, as you've been doing. Avoiding a ban sounds like a good idea; the way to do that is to go slowly, think about things before you do them, read over things you write before posting them and, when unsure, not doing something. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:48, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay. It seems as you just deleted something I CSD'd. Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Congrats on becoming an Admin! I don't think we've come into contact before, but I've seen you around a lot. Keep up the great work! Dan653 (talk) 01:29, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thanks for letting me be the lucky thirteenth to vandalize your user page! —Bzweebl— ^talk 03:26, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

My article (Lorenzo Bartolucci)

Hi,

My name is Lorenzo Bartolucci, and I just wanted to ask, why my article was deleted, I followed the steps that Wikipedia requested, and a moment later my article was deleted.

Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bose-co-op (talk • contribs) 20:36, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. I first deleted your article because it contained nothing aside from the title of the article and had not been expanded for a few hours. It was then deleted another two times by two other administrators because the article made no credible claim of significance at all. Unless this 16 year-old is particularly significant, he does not deserve an article on Wikipedia and, unless you can demonstrate that he is notable, I suggest you do not recreate the article. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 15:04, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Kantian ethics GA

I'm happy to inform you that I've just reviewed Kantian ethics for Good Article status and it has passed. Give yourself a pat on the back for your hard work.

If you plan to continue working on it to FA (etc.), I'm happy to help dig out sources, although ethics isn't necessarily my area of expertise.

Also, congratulations on your recent success at RfA and the subsequent enmopment. Wield it well. —Tom Morris (talk) 09:15, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Re your latest trophy

Contributed most of this for example. 202.75.56.237 (talk) 09:59, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

adopt me

please please adopt me--keegan1999 (talk) 16:13, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

what about some other time when every thaings ok--keegan1999 (talk) 16:26, 20 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keegan1999 (talk • contribs)

i can wait if someone adopt me i will let you knew--keegan1999 (talk) 16:32, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Schriver

I think you meant 'Relisting comment'. Dru of Id (talk) 22:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh yes - whoops. Thanks for the note. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 16:24, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi

Can you delete W_Boston_Hotel_and_Residences as G11, the user is removing the CSD template as an IP (I requested a SPI). --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Where's the source that you reckon this is copied from? Have you got a link? I've had a look at the sources in the references section and can't see a blatant copyvio. Pedro : Chat 19:17, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

As an advertisment. It has links to booking websites, and also removed addresses, telephone numbers and more. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:21, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Brain fail. I was thinking G12. However, no this is not a G11, the criteria for which is "blatant". The lede for example contains a neutral description of a 300 foot tower designed by notable architects - and did so when you nominated it [6]. AFD if you like but this is not a speedy in any way shape or form. Please ease up - I defended you last time when you were blocked but I'm increasingly concerned about your editing. Pedro : Chat 19:37, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Pedro's right - that article should not have been tagged for speedy deletion. In addition, your response to the incident (which Pedro has flagged up on your talk page) is really not good, nor was your handling of this. As your mentor, I have tried to support you as much as possible, but I have not and will not defend you when you act inappropriately. Aside from the issues with the technicalities of Wikipedia (anti-vandalism issues, incorrect CSDs, etc), your conduct with other users really needs to improve. If someone makes a valid complaint, listen to them, acknowledge your mistake, apologise and work to improve the problem. If you don't, you may find yourself facing community opinion about your competency soon. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:51, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

I fully support everything ItsZippy has said above. I'm sorry if I came off overly harsh on your talk, but I'm honestly seeing problems in your edits that are now actually becoming disruptive. As I said - please calm down and really, I mean really, think before you hit that save page button. We don't want to see you driven of the project but at present your values around your editing experience seem all wrong. Best. Pedro : Chat 21:08, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Wow, IPs can't try to help out new users without being accused of socking these days? This REALLY makes me want to keep editing Wikipedia. And all I got is a half-apology-complaint on my talk page for trying to help a new user. Someone please tell me why editor retention is a big deal these days.... Oh wait. 99.122.233.9 (talk) 21:52, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page, requested CSD of SPI case. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 22:01, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe a copyvio lesson is needed, too? Compare [7]/[8], [9]/[10]/[11]. 99.122.233.9 (talk) 22:24, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Not quite sure what you're saying. I consider Tom a "new user". So, we appear to have an unregistered, but very experienced user, who's apparently eager to hound a new, but registered, user, off Wikipedia. Because he wrongly tagged something of yours? Or for some other reason?

Either way, yes, there's a lesson on copyright upcoming. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:39, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Huh, a user "active here since September 2011" isn't exactly "new" to me, but that's beside the point.... I'm confuzzled as to what you're not quite sure of, as the plagiarism seems to be mutually understood by both of us. Anyway, were you here to make accusations about an IP or to steer this "new user" (as you call him) away from being hostile to IPs? Because surely you can't be doing both, seeing as that would be hypocritical and all. 99.122.233.9 (talk) 00:57, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey!

What would you say about my quite-old DYK Nomination? Also, I saw you twice on Recent Changes. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 18:27, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

That looks quite good. I won't review it myself, but it should pass (and, if not, someone will give you good advice). ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:32, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Hopefully it will be my first DYK. I've now made 46 articles and 17 redirects. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 18:38, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Yep, it got the

. :) --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:59, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

It's now in Prep Area 1. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 15:50, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Stats

Seems as I can use Adminstats. Great quick edits reference. :) - User:Tomtomn00/Adminstats. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:54, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 27

Hi. When you recently edited Religious language, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Naturalism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:36, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you very much for promoting me to rollbacker.I promise to work hard. :) Srikar Kashyap (talk) 16:19, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem; thanks for all your good work in reverting vandalism. If you have any questions or concerns, do not hesitate to let me know. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 16:20, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Sure...this is silly..but can you tell me how to add the icons on the right corner of the page like this. Thanks in advance Srikar Kashyap (talk) 16:31, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Yep, they're just templates that people put at the top of their user pages. The rollback template is {{Rollback topicon}}; just put that at the top of your user page. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 16:36, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!..:) Srikar Kashyap (talk) 16:39, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK

I got my first DYK! See User:Tomtomn00/DYK! :D --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 17:55, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Got another, see Template:Did you know/Queue/6! --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 18:01, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Well done, they look good. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:26, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Also, File:Megitza_at_Copernicus_Theater.jpg was listed for deletion, which is meant to be in one of my DYK articles. I got permission from Megitza herself via. email and sent it to the permissions-commons email! :D --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 17:36, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Gudence

Hi Mate

Do you think this will be ok for and article

Middleton ranger’s football club is a charitable football club based in the village of Middleton st George, north east England. The club is ran as a charity and nobody assonated with the club takes a wage. The club provides football coaching to children of all ages and abilities as well has having an adult’s team as well. The club was the first junior football club in the Darlington area and one of the first clubs in Teesside to reach the mark of charter standard. All the junior teams play their football in the Teesside junior football alliance which is officially classed as the largest junior football league in Europe. The clubs president is the former Southampton, Middlesbrough, Barnsley, Bristol city and Darlington professional footballer Neil Maddison.

The teams As well as the adults team the club caters for children aged from 3-15. The staff Chairman - Les Hughes Vice Chairman - Andy Musgrave President – Neil Maddison

Achievements The club has achieved massive success and has listed the following achievements. Middleton Rangers U9 - Barnard Castle Tournament Winners 2004/5 Middleton Rangers U14 - TJFA Division 5 League Champions 2005/6 Middleton Rangers U12 - TJFA Division 5 League Champions 2005/6 Middleton Rangers U12 'A' - Fair Play Cup Winners Great Yarmouth 2007 Middleton Rangers U13 - 21st Allstars Tournament Winners 2007 Middleton Rangers U10 'B' - Bishop Auckland Tournament Winners 2007 Middleton Rangers U11 - TJFA Division 6 League Champions 2007/8 Middleton Rangers U14 - TJFA Division 4 League Champions 2007/8 Middleton Rangers U10 'B' - Russell Foster Division 3 Runners-up 2007/8 Middleton Rangers U10 'B' - Farringdon Cup Runners-up 2007/8 Middleton Rangers U13 'A' - Sporting Team Winners Cleethorpes 2008 Middleton Rangers U10 'B'- Amsterdam Cup Winners 2008 Middleton Rangers U10 'B'- 21st Allstars Tournament Winners 2008 Middleton Rangers U10 'B'- Mount Pleasant Rangers Tournament Runners-Up 2008 Middleton Rangers U12 Girls - Tees Valley Division 2 Runners Up 2009 Middleton Rangers U12 - TJFA Division 5 League Champions 2008/9 Middleton Rangers U11 'B' - Russell Foster Division 1 Second Runners up 08 - 09 Middleton Rangers U12 - South Park Tournament Winners 2009 Middleton Rangers U12 - Darlington 21st Allstars Tournament Runners up 2009 Middleton Rangers U12 - Hessle Sporting Club, Hull Tournament Runners Up 2009 Middleton Rangers U12 - Power League Futebol De Salao 5 a side Champions 2009 Middleton Rangers U11 - TJFA Division 5 Runners up 2009 - 2010 Middleton Rangers U12 'A' - TJFA Division 5 2nd Runners Up 2009 - 2010 Middleton Rangers U10 Girls - Tees Valley Divisional Cup Runners Up 2010 Middleton Rangers U10 Girls - Wiggington Tournament Runners Up 2010 Middleton Rangers U10 Girls - Teesside Chorus Cup Tournament Runners Up 2010 Middleton Rangers U13 - Darlington 21st Allstars Tournament Winners 2010 Middleton Rangers U13 - Mount Pleasant Tournament Runners Up 2010 Middleton Rangers U12 'A' - Settle Tournament Runners Up 2010 Middleton Rangers U10 - Settle Tournament Runners Up 2010 Middleton Rangers U13 - Middleton Rangers Tournament Runners Up 2010 Middleton Rangers U15 - Middleton Rangers Tournament Runners Up 2010 Middleton Rangers U8 - Middleton Rangers Tournament 2010 Kajima Fair Play Cup Middleton Rangers U10 Girls - Bishop Auckland St Mary's Tournament Winners 2010 Middleton Rangers U10 Girls - League Cup Runners Up 2011 Middleton Rangers U10 Girls - TATA Steel McKinlay Cup Winners 2011 Middleton Rangers U12 - TJFA Challenge Cup Finalists 2011 Middleton Rangers U14 - Mount Pleasant Tournament Runners Up 2011 Middleton Rangers U13 'A' - Mount Pleasant Tournament Runners Up 2011 Middleton Rangers U9 - Spraire Lads Tournament Winners 2011 Middleton Rangers U13 'A' - Settle United Tournament Winners 2011 Middleton Rangers U14 - Settle United Tournament Runners Up 2011 Middleton Rangers U13 'B' - Spraire Lads Tournament Runners Up 2011 Middleton Rangers U13 'A' - Greatham FC Tournament Runners Up 2011 Middleton Rangers U10 Knights - Middleton Rangers Tournament Winners 2011 Middleton Rangers U14 - Middleton Rangers Tournament Winners 2011 Middleton Rangers U15 - TJFA Division 4 Champions 2011 - 2012

Victims of robbery The club were victims of robbery as burglars broke into the equipment shed and took everything leaving the club with one ball for the many teams it caters for. The event was well documented by the local press and the good will and generosity of the local people came together to provide the club with money to by the new equipment.

References http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/local/darlington/8394430.Thieves_steal_200_footballs_from_club/?ref=rss http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/tees/hi/things_to_do/newsid_9140000/9140701.stm http://www.freewebs.com/middletonrangers/ http://www.middletonrangers.com/index.htm

Happynight — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happynight (talk • contribs) 19:44, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, Happynight. I'm afraid any article on Middleton Rangers will not be appropriate for Wikipedia; the team is just not notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia. While it's good that's you've provided sources, they are all either unreliable, associated with the club, or the coverage is not significant enough (local news stories do not really satisfy notability). The Football WikiProject suggests that a club must have played in a national cup or league to be notable - that guideline can be found here. I see you're interested in football - it might be a good idea to get involved with that WikiProject and see how you can help improve the articles we already have about football. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:53, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Even though it is not notable, I wrote a random copy of it with (broken, failture) wiki formatting. See User:Tomtomn00/Middleton Rangers. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 20:00, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Can you delete the username of the last revision (IP), it's me.Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 20:00, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

O well i wont be writeing any more on wiki then, good site though — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happynight (talk • contribs) 19:59, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure? There's plenty of football related content on Wikipedia that you could help improve. If you need help finding something to do here, I'm happy to assist you. If you really want to leave, then good luck to you, and thank you for responding so well to my comments. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:07, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

John Marquez move

In your declining of an RFPP, you claimed John Marquez hadn't been moved. It appeared in my watchlist as being moved, it also does in the edit history. There's also an ANI about it p b p 20:54, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Purplebackpack, thanks for the note. I had a look at the move log for the page, which says that the page has never been moved. The move log for the alternative name has only one entry, which is not really a move war. Is there anything here I have missed? Also, could you give me a link to the ANI discussion? If something arises from that which requires move protection, I'd have no problem. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

ANI discussion is here. Try adding the page to your watchlist, then scrolling down to see it mention there in terms of moves and deletions (it shows up like that in my watchlist) p b p 23:19, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Nope, I still don't see evidence of a move war - I'm not sure where you're getting this from. As far as I can see, according to the logs of the two pages, it was moved from John Márquez to John Marquez, and then back today. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:20, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Afd - Amdukias

hey, while i have your attention, could you nuke this? this guy has been spamming various articles for ages now, and this addition is... not productive. thanks! Kaini (talk) 21:39, 30 April 2012 (UTC)