User talk:Toddst1/Archive 2

This page, Toddst1/Archive 2 contains archived talk page discussions for Toddst1 (talk).
Please do not edit this page.

• Current time: October 31, 2024, 22:10 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of San Diego CityBeat

Hi, Toddst1, Curious why CityBeat is slatted for removal when other publications are accepted. What do I need to do to qualify this as a post and not an ad? CityBeat can be linked to Southland Publishing and California Alternative Newsweeklies who are already on wiki. how did they make the cut? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unionpilot (talk • contribs) 12:16, 3 January 2008

thanks, Toddst1. I appreciate your direction. Good morning! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unionpilot (talk • contribs) 12:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Early tags

You usually add those tags few minutes after creation of the article? Squash Racket (talk) 16:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol from the bottom of the list. Toddst1 (talk) 16:54, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

It's not a big issue, but the kind of tags you placed there are not mentioned on that page. 'New pages patrol' is mainly against vandalism and copyright issues, right?

A quote: "Tagging anything other than attack pages or complete nonsense a minute after creation is not constructive and only serves to annoy the page author." Squash Racket (talk) 17:32, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

That quote from Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol#Patrolling_new_pages is preceded by a suggestion that tagging be done from the bottom of the list (see above). No intent to annoy. Toddst1 (talk) 17:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Citations for my new article

Dear Toddst1, I put a number of citations on the article I wrote for Harold Scott, Director, from newspaper references to websites. My question: how do I get the site off "This article needs additional citations for verification."- so that it doesn't head for elimination? Thanks Weimar03 (talk) 20:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Weimar03Weimar03 (talk) 20:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I think you nailed it. Nice work. I took care of the tags. Toddst1 (talk) 20:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Dear Toddst1 Thanks for the advice, I have used wikipedia for a long time but am new to editing and could do with all the help i can get! Jimjom (talk) 20:39, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Harold Scott, Director

Thanks, Toddst1! Weimar03 (talk) 22:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Weimar03Weimar03 (talk) 22:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Dante (Harry August Jansen)

I noted your deletion template on Dante (Harry August Jansen). Although the article is a mess, the magician was certainly notable enough. I did a quick edit, but have limited information at hand. Google shows plenty, however. I am removing your template. If you still think the article should be deleted, please nominate it for deletion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion) so that others can vote on the matter. Best wishes. WBardwin (talk) 05:05, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Commercial Paper Article

Hi Todd, I received your note regarding the name of the website that was put into the external link. I have removed it and re-added it. take a look and let me know if you have any issues with it. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.236.89 (talk) 23:13, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Troubles of the world

I've declined the speedy tag you placed on Troubles of the world. The reason is:

about the album, not the band

I did put it up for PROD, though - I don't think this article belongs on Wikipedia For your information, עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Roger Liddle

Just to give you a heads-up, but Roger Liddle is a real public figure in the UK and his edits need to be handled sensitively. Sam Blacketer (talk) 23:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Is this the correct channel in this amateur stew for my gripe?

Clearly, (given my fundamental disdain of this mass misinformation machine) I would not haphazardly, nor would I arbitrarily 'post' anything here. My reason (previously unstated, given how bluntly obvious it was) for posting the quote and reference of the Icelandic fermented shark and the subsequent mention of the rectum, was that the omission of the shark from the statement needed to be corrected. It was no problem to interpret my intent, as evidenced by a response and a profession that the author of the response would amend the section. So, in closing, all of wikipedia could serve well from this example. Think. For a second consider the context and the parameters of the rhetoric before imposing your foolishness on me. Sincerely, 72.228.113.62 never to be annoyed again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.228.113.62 (talk) 04:35, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Zpryme Research & Consulting Removal

Hello I'm a PhD student and I thought it was very helpful the article I created on January 7, 2008 regarding a very critical segment of business now; emerging markets. Zpryme was instrumental in items of research that are critical to my current studies and now the article i created to help others has been removed. Further, it was removed (still do not know why as I thought it was articulated well) and I do not have the code available. Would you have access to this? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Econ123 (talk • contribs) 06:53, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Ashley Nebelsieck

Aren't authors from major publishing houses (Random House) "notable?" The criteria on your "notable" page says they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Westrope11 (talk • contribs) 21:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but her only book appears to be published by Three Leaves rather than Random house. Toddst1 (talk) 22:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Three Leaves is an imprint of Doubleday which is a division of Random House. Here is the link to the entry in the Random House catalog:

{http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/display.pperl?isbn=9780767928496}

I probably should have put this on the page, come to think about it. sorry. I thought the isbn number would reveal all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Westrope11 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Can I put the page back up now?--Westrope11 (talk) 17:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I would think it would be OK. Be sure to assert notability in the article - any outside book reviews from a reliable source would be good. You might want to also put a note in the talk page about the random house connection. BTW, you might want to use these templates when you mention the book. It automatically formats them and decodes the isbn and stuff. Good luck!! Toddst1 (talk) 18:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Roller Skating Ninjas

Why are you deleting my Roller Skating Ninjas listings? You said it was 'unverifiable' ... so i verified it. I even verified it with a link to a wikipedia entry on Godfrey Ho! If you don't trust your own site as verifiable then what is the dispute over in the first place?! I think its silly and its mean. I spent a lot of time creating that entry and then you just delete it arbitrarily. I even pointed out on the 'talk' page that 'shat' has its own entry in wikipedia. How can wikipedia defend deleting my Roller Skating Ninja's page(verfieid internally and externally) while maintaining the enclyclopedic value of the word "shat"? I think you abuse your editting power. It takes a perpetually growing collective of writers and researchers to create an informational posting, but it takes only one of you to delete all their work. That's not fair and it's not right. I would like you to re-post my entry. Briansantamaria (talk) 05:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion tag on Haling Manor High School

1. Awesome work on New Page Patrol; so important. thanks.
2. I removed this tag because High Schools, unlike middle and elementary (primary) schools, by their mere existence are regarded as notable by general consensus. See the proposed guideline WP:SCL. A7 doesn't really apply to schools anyway: "If controversial, as with schools, list the article at Articles for deletion instead." Keep up the good work!--CastAStone/^/(talk) 23:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

1. Thanks!
2. Cool. There really didn't seem to be much there, but all is good. Thanks for the info. I'll keep it in mind. I think that's the first time I ever tagged a high school, now that I think about it. Cheers Toddst1 (talk) 23:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Rob Johnson (American football)

Your removal of unsourced information was technically right. However, a huge chunk of the article was a hoax, and that's what i was trying to undo, rather than add back in unsourced stuff. Wizardman 00:45, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

You might want to take a second look here.

Ah, User:East718 didn't actually create an attack page. He was adding a blocked notice, which does create a page, but not an attack page per se. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 00:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Right - I realize. Twinkle automatically notifies the creater of the page that a CSD tag has been placed on it. I think having such a user page perpetuates the attack. User should blocked, User pages belonging to that account deleted and salted. Toddst1 (talk) 01:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I see your point all right. I don't think I have had a vandal user create a user account in my honour - for lack of a better term - but I am not sure if there is anyway around the necessity of adding a block notice somewhere. (I have had one or two attack articles created in mainspace, but no user accounts.) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 01:14, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Millions of Us LLC

Hello, I created this article and provided 5 third-party references in an explicit effort to document "notability." The Economist and The Wall Street seem pretty authoritative to me. I have removed the deletion tag as I believe it is premature based on solely your evaluation, but left the notability tag to see what others will say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.128.229.70 (talk • contribs) 20:34, 9 January 2008

That's why I used {{prod}} instead of csd. I'll add {{nofootnotes}} so we can tie the notes to the facts. Toddst1 (talk) 20:37, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I have added painstakingly detailed references to satisfy the notability requirement. I have cited inclusions in such authoritative outlets as The Wall Street Journal and The Economist, specifically linking to the article text. I have made a thorough, good-faith effort to demonstrate notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Algajola (talk • contribs) 22:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Stop the Flares

Hello there. I plan on recreating the page once I have more info such as accomplishments, impacts, etc. Is there anymore info I need so it doesn't get deleted? Thanks Kageskull (talk) 20:40, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

As long as you review WP:Notability, you should have what you need. Let me know if you need help. Toddst1 (talk) 20:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Sweet, that answers a lot. Thanks! Kageskull (talk) 20:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

controversy regarding Rote Prayers in the Prayer article

The stuff you keep removing is verifiable. Please stop removing it as it is not vandalism. Bytebear (talk) 01:27, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

It sure might be verifiable, but what I saw didn't support the way it was worded. Either way, I don't feel strongly enough to push the point. Toddst1 (talk) 01:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Velocity Sports Performance

I declined the speedy delete because the article currently asserts a claim of notability. The article is currently unsourced, but this is not a basis for WP:CSD. Suggest WP:AfD to test the validity of the claim. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 04:07, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

This is about Dr Parivesh Mishra, a prominent social worker, writer and politicial of the Chhattisgarh State.

I am new to the contributing part of the wikipedea. As for entries under Parivesh Mishra, all are done by me so far. I see the point when you said it is shaping up to be very personal. Give me time, a day or two, I will try myself to prune it of unnecessary portions. At the same time, will provide citations wherever I can. ≈≈≈≈Pariveshm (talk) 19:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

College of American Pathologists

The language that was mistakenly addedd which sounded like an advertisement has been delted from this non-commercial medical association site. Can it be re-reviewed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mebjones (talk • contribs) 14:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, we've got bigger problems there. User: Mrand identified this as a copyright violation. Toddst1 (talk) 17:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't really calling it a copyright violation, but rather, was trying to point out that the article was full of their marketing language copied verbatim from their info sheet. Marketing droids design those info sheets to be copied, so they love it when someone does just that. My point was that the article contains a lot of marketing language and contains some irrelevant information that someone who wrote the article from scratch wouldn't use.—Mrand ^T-C 15:02, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

There is no material on the College of American Pathologists page that is a copyright infringement. This has been verified by the CAP, who has contacted Wikipedia directly. JTH2008 (talk) 18:23, 14 January 2008 (UTC) JTH2008

If that was the case, there should be a {{PermissionOTRS}} on the article. Toddst1 (talk) 18:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Option

See response on my page, there may be a way to solve this. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding William Avery Rockefeller on the John D. Rockefeller Page

Hi... the text was sourced from the wikipedia page on William Avery Rockefeller. you can find it here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Avery_Rockefeller This was my first edit here... didn't know how to cite a reference. Moreover, it has been documented to that effect at a lot of reputed pages. 203.197.77.37 (talk) 17:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

See response at User talk:PraveenKurupToddst1 (talk) 17:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Am struggling with the wiki tags! This book is the source http://www.amazon.com/Titan-Life-John-Rockefeller-Sr/dp/0679438084 It has been listed in the "Bibliography" on the "John D. Rockefeller" page.--PraveenKurup (talk) 17:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's what you would add (you can cut and paste the text below verbatim - and add the page number), right after the statement you would cite:

<ref>
{{cite book
  | last = Chernow 
  | first = Ron
  | authorlink = Ron Chernow
  | coauthors = 
  | title = Titan: The Life of John D. Rockefeller, Sr.
  | publisher = Random House
  | date = May 5, 1998
  | location = 
  | pages = **REPLACE THIS WITH THE PAGE OF YOUR CITATION**
  | url = 
  | doi = 
  | id = 
  | isbn = 978-0679438083}}</ref>

Note that you do not want to link to the Amazon page - that is considered WP:SPAM. I hope this helps! Toddst1 (talk) 18:10, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!! Will put in a verbatim quote with page numbers tomm... don't have the book now. Thanks again! You were really helpful! --PraveenKurup (talk) 18:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Dubya

I'm not sure you were right to label this a vandalism revert. --John (talk) 21:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

You are correct. I will apologize. Stand by Toddst1 (talk) 21:32, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Nicely done. Thanks. --John (talk) 21:36, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I had already realized my error and was about to revert it when I got your message. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Toddst1 (talk) 21:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

User: Duergarthedwarf

Hi, Could you please explain why you are labeling Duergarthedwarf's removal of templates without explanation as vandalism, but not labeling the addition of those templates (in alphabetic order by one editor) as vandalism? He is new and some of the templates are likely right, but those templates are appearing at least as arbitrarily as their removal. Thanks, Hobit (talk) 22:53, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I hadn't addressed User: Gavin.collins's edits as many tags seemed appropriate. For example Choldrith is unreferenced and had a notability tag on it. However User: Duergarthedwarf removing the notability tag without addressing the problem seems like vandalism to me - especially since he/she is a brand-new user. If you want to follow User: Gavin.collins's edits, it might be a good investment of time as well. Toddst1 (talk) 22:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, please note that I had explained why his/her edits were vandalism on his/her talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 23:26, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• Yep, and I'll reply here (and there). I think at least one of the templates he's adding (weasel) is so far out as to be blatant vandalism. Plus he seems to be working his way through monsters in alphabetic order hitting them ALL no matter their actual notability. I've removed a few of the clearly bogus ones, but don't really feel like walking them all. Given he's only on "D" it might be a lot of work. And as you note, some of the tags are valid on some of the articles. But still, indiscriminate tagging (and clearly bogus tags) on this scale feel a lot like vandalism.... Hobit (talk) 01:23, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

• I don't mean to butt in on your conversation here, and while I agree that Duergarthedwarf is a vandal, it does seem to me that indiscriminately tagging 50 or 100 articles a day with the same templates also borders on vandalism. If these tags were being carefully added after thorough readings of the articles, that would be one thing, but a quick glance at the editing history for User: Gavin.collins makes it clear that he's just adding tags indiscriminately. And the "weasel words" tag in particular is unjustified many times.

At the same time, I'll grant that a lot of the tags seem accurate. But adding massive amounts of tags indiscriminately isn't helpful, and whenever a user removes one or two tags they disagree with, they're confronted on their talk page with instructions from User: Gavin.collins to not remove tags that he's added. Rray (talk) 15:35, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

You're not butting in at all. I had seen the discussion on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Dungeons_&_Dragons#More_tagging and thought about posting something there. Since I'm not a member of the project, I thought better of it. I would say that both of those editors could probably improve their behavior a bit. User: Duergarthedwarf was a very active brand new user (Sockpuppet?) and wouldn't engage in conversation as he/she was removing templates. Wikipedia is built on consensus and anyone who can't be bothered to engage in a conversation about potentially objectionable edits is probably not acting constructively.

I'm not a D&D person so I'll leave it to the project folks to take it from here and decide what templates are appropriate. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 16:14, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Admin

Hi. I just wondered if you've considered becoming an admin. You seem experienced enough, so I'd be happy to nominate you if you're interested. Regards. Epbr123 (talk) 14:41, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow. Thank you. I appreciate the offer - it is definitely quite a compliment. I suppose it's considered canvassing if I asked a couple of admins if they would support it. Let me think about it and do some reading on the process/obligations. Toddst1 (talk) 16:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I was just thinking of nominating you as well, having seen the prodigious amount of edits you've put in at AIV (191, according to the counter!), the amount of time you've been here, and the balance of your edits with respect to content, vandalism reversion, talk page, and project space. Kakofonous (talk) 01:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Nabil Abou-Harb

Sorry, like I said - I'm new to this whole thing. I've added a lot of references and cleaned up the language a little. Could you tell me what else I need to change to get back on track? Thanks. Donstorm (talk) 13:40, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I would start with the Biography section and make sure you have citations for the statements there. There are a lot of statements that seem like WP:Original Research Toddst1 (talk) 11:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

How's it looking? I've just cleaned up the bio and the Arab in America blurbs as well as added a couple more references. Can I take off those flags yet? Donstorm (talk) 10:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Big improvement. Still a few unsourced claims and WP:Peacock words/phrases but I took the tags off. Keep up the good work. Toddst1 (talk) 15:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll try to find a way to show that "up-and-coming" claim instead of just saying so. Why did some guy just put the flags back on by claiming he is reverting vandalism? Donstorm (talk) 10:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't know. Better yet, just call him a film maker and don't predict the future. It gets to sound like an advertisement very quickly if you do. Toddst1 (talk) 15:37, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

All right. Fixed. Thanks for all your help! Donstorm (talk) 10:39, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments regarding new FGL topic.

Todd, I just received a note that you have tagged my FGL topic for rapid deletion for copyright issues.

As the original author and owner of all of the material in question, a fact which is easily verified (www.5g.com, www.open5g.com, www.zude.com, www.angieandsteve.com), there is no issue of copyright. Accordingly, any material that I place in Wikipedia that I wrote and own is obviously placed there with my full authorization.

I am hopeful that Wikipedia cna evolve to be an important informational source for many of the technical projects that I am involved with, and look forward to any assistance, direction, or guidance that may be available.

Thanks,

Steve Repetti Chairman/CTO Fifth Generation Systems co-author FGL programming language —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srepetti (talk • contribs) 01:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

If you are the website/copyright owner all you need to do to give the copyright permission for this article is to send an email to permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org (replace "at" with @ and "dot" with .) stating that you are the copyright owner and that you agree to license the material under the terms of the GFDL. There is even a boilerplate you can use here. Then someone will come along and tag the talk page of the article, remove the copyright violation tag and restore the article for all to read. Toddst1 (talk) 01:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't tell me to chill, I'll chill you

If you acctully read what they had posted you would understand why I handed out warnings and speed tags.Harebag (talk) 02:44, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I read all of them before I made my two comments here and here on your talk page. Perhaps while you're waiting for your block to be lifted, you'll review WP:Civil and Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol#Being_nice. Toddst1 (talk) 19:37, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Expand

Hello! Regarding one of your edits (a while ago) to Abdikarim Egeh Gulaid when you added {{expand}}, {{unreferenced}} and {{wikify}} tags on the article. All of the tags are 'correct', but there is no need of the expand template when a stub-tag is already there. Just a friendly notice! - Milk's Favorite Cookie 02:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Look again - it wasn't marked a stub when I added them. You may argue that I should have tagged it as a stub though. Toddst1 (talk) 06:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

peer review

I was wondering if you could take some time out of your schedule to head over to the Heroes (TV series) talkpage and give us an honest peer review. The page has gone through some major changes in the last few months, and it would be fantastic if a prominent editor/contributor like yourself, could head over and give us at the Heroes Wikiproject some sound opinion and ideas on improvements for the page. We have all worked very hard at improving the page, and we need great outside, reliable and trustworthy users to come over and help us improve. I you are interested in joining the peer review discussion with other prominent users/contributors, much like yourself, please follow the link. Thank you very much for your help and your continued effort to improve Wikipedia and its quality! Wikipedia:Peer review/Heroes (TV series)/archive2--Chrisisinchrist (talk) 06:02, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Gladly. Thank you for the honor of such a request. See Wikipedia:Peer review/Heroes (TV series)/archive2/archive2 Toddst1 (talk) 18:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

removing {{reflist}} templates

You appear to be going through articles and removing {{reflist}} tags and inserting comments suggesting using <references/> but breaking the references in the process. Assuming good faith here, can you explain? Toddst1 (talk) 13:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

• Hello. When you have both the {{reflist}} tag and the <references/> tag what ends up happening is you get a double listing of the references happening. So I had to eliminate the one in order to avoid duplicate listings of references.Nhl4hamilton (talk) 13:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
  • No problemo. Nhl4hamilton (talk) 10:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Digital rights management edits

These edits were discussed in some detail on the relevant talk page. A cursory look at the 'citations' reveals them to be neutral on the issue of whether DRM is restricted to media only, or whether software is included.

The discussion on the talk page is listed under "Edits of MasterHomer / iamacreditcard", and was removed then because it was included as a deliberate attempt to increase credibility of a statement made elsewhere from Wikipedia as a deliberate act of intellectual fraud.

Consequently I believed it was both reasonable and indeed nessisary to remove the post. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unedit (talk • contribs) 22:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Please use an edit summary. Toddst1 (talk) 22:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Ifeanyi Chijindu.jpg

Hi, I removed the db-norat tag because the image hasn't been uploaded for more than 5 days. norat is for images that are older than 5 days old. Corvus cornix_talk 22:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok - thanks. I didn't know that. Toddst1 (talk) 22:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I didn't either till I read what the template was saying.  :) Corvus cornix_talk 23:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey Todd...I'm new to Wikipedia, so I'm still learning the ropes and etiquette here...I used some other articles as models while writing Ifeanyi Chijindu's, so maybe I'm missed something? I've seen untagged articles that have the person's business all over it and there's hardly any sources. I don't know why my article got tagged for "advertisement" when I didn't include her company's website in her external links or in the thumb picture to the right. According to Wikipedia's style definition, it says in RE: to tagging articles for blatant advertising that "Note that simply having a company or product as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion." Also, I don't know why it's been tagged for "dispute" when there's lots of sources, online and printed. I'd really appreciate if you could help clarify these things for me since I want to do a good job on the article. Thanks! Just The Facts Plz (talk) 23:28, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Ifeanyi Chijindu

Could you please explain in the article's Talk page what you're disputing? Sticking on a disputed tag without an explanation doesn't help to make the article better. Corvus cornix_talk 23:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I agree...knowing what to change exactly would be a great help! --Just The Facts Plz (talk) 23:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Addressed on Talk: Ifeanyi Chijindu. Summary: my bad. Sorry. Toddst1 (talk) 02:12, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Funyuns banner removal

Thank you for writing to me. I would like to remind you that it was several months ago now that I removed the banner. Before doing so, I did remove some really trivial stuff and incorporated some other sentences from the trivia section into the main article. I believe that what was left was, at the time, a section on Funyuns in popular culture only. Of course, it has been edited again since that and some real trivia crept in again. (I've just removed some sentences that I think shouldn't have been there.) I am just as keen as you are on making this a real encyclopedia that contains reliable, meaningful information, I may slip along the way but my intentions are good, as you are aware. I don't just want this to be a load of nonsense like "Zach's dog is called Funyuns" that no sensible person would want to read either.Simon Peter Hughes (talk) 02:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Simon Peter Hughes

I think I should add "Trivia/In popular culture" sections to my Peeves list. Cheers! Toddst1 (talk) 04:37, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Prem C. Pandey

Clearly you're one of the tiny number of people who has attempted to make sense of the article Prem C. Pandey. I'm another. Somewhere almost hidden by the godawful mess of that article I see somebody who for some time was the head of an institute that, rightly, has its own article, but who's otherwise not obviously remarkable. Even the references that I laboriously corrected earlier do no more on average than quote Pandey, underlining the fact that yes, he headed that institute. Can you think of any compelling reason why it shouldn't be sent to AfD? (Please reply either here on on the article's talk page. Thanks.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Since I wrote the above, an IP has degraded the article still further. I'm sick of even attempting to make head or tail of the claims within it (and I'm sure you are too). I've warned the IP, who may of course have some trouble understanding English. -- Hoary (talk) 08:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I just reverted the IP's edits. There are multiple socks at work here, I fear. All those IP addresses editing the article are mobile devices in India. Toddst1 (talk) 12:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

My own impression too was that there was just one author. (If there are two or more there's no sign of disagreement among them.) That being so, and as he shows (they show) no interest in our attempts at improving the article, my own idea was to let them go ahead and degrade it as much as they wish, pending AfD. I'm not eager to start the AfD very soon, though, as I'd have to babysit it and I have other things to attend to for the next few days. Next week perhaps. -- Hoary (talk) 13:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. Toddst1 (talk) 14:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm starting to think that one "contributor" to this article is insane. -- Hoary (talk) 14:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Hope it's not me 8-). This is indeed a very strange edit pattern. Toddst1 (talk) 16:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

It's definitely not you, no.

We've disagreed a bit about what to do. Nothing necessarily harmful about that. I notice that before changing your mind you briefly said that something was up to me as I'm an admin. I appreciate your good intentions, and this may have just been idle modesty or something, and maybe one reason you deleted it was that you decided it was factually wrong; but I'll take it seriously all the same. No, being an admin has nothing to do with this. If you and I disagree, the better position should prevail; it's not a matter of a pecking order. All being an admin means is that if we all agree that something is to be deleted, I have an extra link on my screen that lets me delete it. It truly is no big deal. -- Hoary (talk) 06:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Just left you a note on your talk. I actually moved the message there since it seemed to be more about you and me than that editor. It seems we're working in the same direction and I have enjoyed working with you. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 06:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Nice

I watch “James Bonard Fowler”, and I note that you have made some solid, well-structured contributions! —SlamDiego_←T 23:43, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! That article in particular will be an interesting one to watch and update this year with the coming trial. BTW, thanks for fixing the NPOV stuff there. It's easy to let that stuff creep in on a subject like this if you're not careful. Mea culpa. I had recently created the Jimmie Lee Jackson article. It would be really good to get a public domain picture of either of them for their articles. Toddst1 (talk) 18:21, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Hiii

Thank you for your interesting comment to my page. In future, do NOT revert previous warnings that I have received and served, that is history and should not get in the way of my future wikiediting. Many thanks HaereMai (talk) 07:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Please do not blank pages per Wikipedia:No blank pages Toddst1 (talk) 16:06, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:No blank pages states that you should not blank articles not user pages. HaereMai (talk) 00:42, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you should re-read. It doesn't say that. Toddst1 (talk) 03:09, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

"They also mislead readers into thinking an article exists, disappointing them when they find a blank page." ARTICLE. Why would someone be disappointed to find a black user page? WAKE UPHaereMai (talk) 03:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Stop - Be civil. Look at what I said. The article makes no mention of user pages. I mean that about stop. Toddst1 (talk) 01:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

This is not your issue

Everyone is ganging up on my roommate. He added a source just as Dorftrottel and Jeanenawhitney requested. Please unblock him! -UWMSports (talk) 18:41, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

It's clear it's not yours. Please don't Canvass. Toddst1 (talk) 18:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

He's been blocked, so its kinda 20-0 without him being allowed to post on your talk pages. I'm closer to the source than you guys. And don't tell me about being civil. I'm being quite civil. I want things to be fair -UWMSports (talk) 18:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

And rightly blocked. I will tell you about WP:Civil when appropriate and calling someone's action on wikipedia "horse shit" as you did in this edit is not civil. You really should review Wikipedia:Canvassing and STOP. Toddst1 (talk) 19:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

janette barradas

---

janette barradas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.50.22.156 (talk) 19:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Minor characters in 24

Toddst1, can you please explain why you reverted without explanation the significant cleaning up I've been doing on Minor characters in 24? Those character sections are greatly laden with WP:OR, WP:PLOT, and WP:TRIVIA; I posted about this on Talk:Minor characters in 24, so discussion is probably more appropriate there, and I'm cross-posting this there. --Lquilter (talk) 20:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I've already un-reverted my change. It was a bad revert on my part as I noted in the edit summary. Sorry for any inconvenience. Toddst1 (talk) 20:51, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for clarifying. --Lquilter (talk) 20:52, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Argos

You might have noticed this already, but your first revert on Argos was actually fine. Your second revert actually reinserted the vandalism. Natalie (talk) 17:42, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Whoops. 8-) Not my intent. Toddst1 (talk) 17:44, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I figured so. These things happen. Natalie (talk) 23:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

The Golden Pitcher on WNYO (FM)

You identified the following addition as vandalism

- The sports department has had an annual flag football, softball, and sometimes basketball with its on-campus television rival, WTOP-10 since the 1970s. WNYO's dominance over WTOP has been unheralded over recent years. WTOP sports directors and their members have been known to sore losers as they frequently cry foul for any reason whatsoever. It is clear they are frustrated by the slaughter house happenings. The winner gets to keep the golden pitcher, which is really nothing more than a plastic pitcher from one of the local bars. In fact, it's in worse shape than the Liberty Bell.

This is not vandalism. If you feel that this is not a reliable source, not verifiable, original research or something of that sort, that would be a much better edit summary. I'm going to research this issue a bit more. Thanks, and have a great day.Wjhonson (talk) 23:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

You are correct - it was an edit war between Dorftrottel and FancyMustard. That is different from vandalism. I do think FancyMustard was way out of line though (and got much worse). I came across this doing Recent changes patrol. I noticed that Dorftrottel had reverted that edit (or one almost identical) twice and politely asked FancyMustard not to restore, citing "WP:POV WP:OR DO NOT REINSTATE". My €0.02 worth. Toddst1 (talk) 23:19, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Todd. I got side-tracked but hope to plow through the edits. It seems like possibly they've found consensus. I was pulled over from a post on RS or OR I believe, can't quite remember. Thanks for your response! Wjhonson (talk) 04:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

administrative education

I was looking at SSP cases. What do you propose for User:Anonymous IP? The user is blocked. The user has no edits. Having an account and then editing only from an IP is permitted, I believe. These questions are only asked for my own education, not to harass you. Archtransit (talk) 00:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, no worries on the question - It's actually a pretty good one. I think if you read the editor's comments on his/her own talk page at User talk:76.182.32.227 you'll see what I was trying to do. I use TW to report sockpuppets and in the course of reporting User: 76.182.32.227, TW wanted to know what the other account was. I typed "Anonymous IP‎" (meaning an unknown anon IP) which, apparently through the workings of TW, and the sockpuppet report, it posted something on the Talk page and User page of User: Anonymous IP - best I can figure - it's kind of obscure. What's clear is User: 76.182.32.227 is a block evading sock using multiple IPs which is what I was trying to report. Toddst1 (talk) 00:37, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

It still doesn't make sense to me. User:76.182.32.227 doesn't have a productive attitude. How that ties in with User:Anonymous IP is unclear to me. Is it just that Anonymous IP is a nefarious sounding name? Archtransit (talk) 00:55, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there is a user named "Anonymous IP". I think it is an artifact of me filing a sockpuppet report using TW against an unknown sock. If there is such a user, it is a coincidence. Toddst1 (talk) 00:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok if you want to know

If you want to see why I put those nonprinting notices on Way of St. James, look at just a few of the links we removed over the last few months alone: [1].--Filll (talk) 01:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I understood after I looked a bit deeper. It was clearly a bad revert on my part, hence my note to you. 01:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

If we let people just post whatever they wanted on the page, clearly the page would be destroyed in a few months. I finally decided to try the notices and see if that helps.--Filll (talk) 01:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

User talk:68.161.54.236

apparently you didn't blink fast enough for twinkle :P--Pewwer42  Talk  04:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

yup, my mouse finger is getting kind of slow. I noticed it and reverted. Cheers.. Toddst1 (talk) 04:53, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm kidding, although I do need a new mouse, the left button isn't picking up all the clicks.--Pewwer42  Talk  04:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Max and Ruby

I just updated my Max and Ruby update with references. I am hoping that I did this correctly this time. Please let me know if I am I still doing it incorrectly. Thanks! Blm0303 (talk) 15:43, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Got your note. I am confused. I thought I did use the ref tags. I guess I didn't do it right, but I don't see with the link you gave me how to just use ref tags on a webpage. Or just do ref website /ref? Sorry to be such a pain in your neck. Blm0303 (talk) 16:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

You're not being a pain in my neck. 8-) I would recommend using something like this:

{{cite web
  | last = 
  | first = 
  | authorlink = 
  | coauthors = 
  | title = 
  | work = 
  | publisher = 
  | date = 
  | url = 
  | format = 
  | doi = 
  | accessdate = }} 

and fill in at least the publisher, title and URL. Let me know if you need further help.Toddst1 (talk) 17:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

St. Barnabas Church peer review

Hello...i would love to peer review your article...i will start this weekend--ChrisisinChrist ^{comments and complaints here!} 20:19, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Usernames

Hi there; I notice that you welcomed User:Deltalkshow, and then warned him about his creation of an article entitled Del Talk Show. Perhaps you are not aware that Wiki username policy prohibits the use of the names of commercial or media enterprises as usernames. Could I encorage you to become familiar with this policy, as it is incongruous for an editor to comment in this way immediately before a username block is applied, as I have just done. Happy wikying. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:29, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I was aware of the policy as you can see by this edit. My welcome was genuine, as I understand even folks with WP:COI are allowed to edit from a NPOV, assuming a name change. You may notice that I frequently welcome vandals. I've never seen a non-admin suggest a username change. I'll be glad to suggest username changes in the future. You'll notice that I've reported over 100 usernames to Wikipedia:Usernames_for_administrator_attention over the past few months. Toddst1 (talk) 21:38, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

My friend, I had no wish to criticise or to give offence, and I apologise if I have done so. As you suggest, WP:AGF clearly recommends the welcome of editors who unwittingly submit unsuitable names. My point was really more that you commented on the unsuitability of the article he had created, with essentially the same title as his username, without additional comment. Non-admins have a perfect right to suggest to editors that their name may be unsuitable. Use {{usernameconcern}}. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 21:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

No offence taken. My writing sometimes seems terse - not intended. I didn't know about the template - I'll use it! In fact, I was just thinking about creating such a template. Glad it already exists. Cheers! - Toddst1 (talk) 22:41, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Beerex redirect proposed for deletion

Hi Toddst1, I note you have proposed Beerex for deletion. This is a commonly used term for Beer Exhibition or Beer festival and this redirect page was created to take users straight to the appropriate page; I believe the Beerex redirect to be very useful. Oddly, when checking the page, I can't find the dated prod notice. I look forward to hearing from you Weydonian (talk) 23:35, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi. If you look at the date of my note on your talk page, I left it on January 8 for an article you created called Beerex. The article was deleted on January 13. You've recreated a redirect named Beerex on February 6. The redirect looks solid to me. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 00:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion! Weydonian (talk) 20:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Belair Mansion peer review

Hi Toddst1 -- I am concerned that by my providing a narrow comment or two within the peer review for Belair Mansion, that I may be interrupting whatever would be the normal process for a qualified peer reviewer to take on the article. I don't feel qualified or able to take on a complete peer review, as I am going through peer review for an article of my own, for the first time, just now, for the article List of National Historic Landmarks in New York. I did ask on your behalf for others in WP:NRHP to consider joining the peer review at talk page of WP:NRHP, but that is not a regular process there and I am not surprised that so far there are no takers.

Please do follow the regular process at Wikipedia:Peer review to ask volunteer peer reviewers to consider reviewing your article, and please do explain that one person (me) has provided only a very limited comment and is not qualified/able to perform a proper peer review.

Good luck! doncram (talk) 15:15, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Your comments are more than welcome. I'm looking for all feedback to try to improve this article. I've sent off for the source documents as you suggested. Your comments about the stable are very relevant. Since they're listed separately at NRHP, I created the separate articles for them. It may make sense to merge them. We'll see. Toddst1 (talk) 16:08, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

OC Systems

Boy you sure got rid of OC Systems fast. You didn't even leave me time to respond on the talk page. The patent Aprobe technology is signifcant contribution. Cole is a leader in the Open Source community. Could you give me further imput on why you so speedily got rid of this article? Amyyaley (talk) 22:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

The article had been around for weeks if I remember correctly and had no assertion of WP:Notability. That would not be fast. If you think that the article did not merit deletion, you can appeal at Wikipedia:Undeletion_policy#Deletion_review. FWIW, I tagged it, nominating it for speedy deletion, and an administrator evaluated the my nomination then deleted it. Toddst1 (talk) 22:15, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

That article was posted yesterday about this time. Another version was posted Monday and was nominated because of blanant advertising. I took out anything that could be taken for advertising and that was the article posted yesterday. So I am unclear as to what you have been seeing for weeks??? Amyyaley (talk) 22:20, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, like I said, I wasn't sure that I remembered correctly. However, I see the deletion review restored the article to your userspace. Looking at the article, it's clear that it doesn't assert the company's notability. Having a patent doesn't make a company WP:Notable, nor does participating in an open source project. See Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for more info. In terms of timing, if an article doesn't its subject's assert notability, it's likely to be deleted within an hour of creation. Sorry I didn't remember the article's edit history when I replied above, but either way, it wasn't too speedy.

Looking at your edit pattern, you're probably going to have some questions about WP:COI, so I thought I'd highlight that policy for you. Not trying to give you a hard time, but Wikipedia has lots of things that foul up newbies. Happy editing. Toddst1 (talk) 23:17, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I see where I got confused - I was thinking of the other article that you edited for OC Systems, PowerAda. That's the one that has been around since 2006 and hasn't established WP:N. As I mentioned on your talk page, I nominated that for WP:AFD. Toddst1 (talk) 16:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

VRoooom Technology‎

hi, thanks for the note however im not advertising....im simply creating a "bio" or history of a company in my community . you should search " microsoft" or "wikipedia" " home depot" thank you for your concern. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert.moore.j (talk • contribs) 21:47, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for OC Systems

An editor has asked for a deletion review of OC Systems. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Amyyaley (talk) 22:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

See Dave Mock

Clearly an autobiography. Please take the appropriate action. Thanks! -UWMSports (talk) 23:53, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion regarding Dave Mock. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Toddst1 (talk) 18:11, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a joke, it's an inside job, face it.

There was nothing wrong with what I linked, look at the other links in the page concerned. The page I linked, showed an alternative, non-comercial example from the 'norm', or is that the issue? The external links on that page are, essentially, spam, by the above definition, in your template, cut and paste. Jeez, so much for free speech and difference of opinion. P.S. I appreciate wikipedia spam policy, but this doesn't even come close to violating it. All I did was find a decent site, and after, previously exaiming wikipedia (and seeing that articles of a similar nature were included, and reading them), felt that (it-wikipedia), was lacking in reasonably suitiable examples, or that the page, in general, lacked in alternative viewpoints. My aplogises for participating in the wikipedia experience. The mass media is correct, wikipedia is dominated by a miniority, what a joke. WATCH HOW FAST THIS POST IS DELETED, that in itself is proof. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amisomeone (talk • contribs) 18:07, 23 February 2008

No, but systematically going through articles about food and adding links to a single site as example recipies is considered spam. See WP:Spam for more info. Toddst1 (talk) 18:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

flaggin wterm article

you flaged the wterm article with expand and refimprove, templates. Its a very small program, there isn't much else to say. and as for references, the one direct source is good for the article size. Please read the article first before flagging it. Thanks ZyMOS (talk) 10:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

AGF - I had read the article. I figured you planning on improving it it. It sounds like you aren't. Toddst1 (talk) 21:46, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

So now u add a notibilibly thing on it. Its not the top terminal emulater, but its still prpular. It is listed on the list of x windows terminal emulators on the wiki page, and has a package for installation in every linux distribution. You have now added more warnings on the page, than the etire articles content. An example. eterm is one of the most popular terminal emulators. wterms article has more content, and eterm's page does not have propers notations.

Since i was there, i added notation ZyMOS (talk) 05:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

If you do not know about the subject, you should not mark notability. It is a good article, with good style. It is notable. I think i have addresses all warnings and have given evidence or precidence to the contrary of all. I would apreciate you removing the warnings and being more conservative with warnings in the future. ZyMOS (talk) 05:35, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Again, AGF. What makes you think I don't know the subject? Since "ls" is a clean article (although it seems WP:NOT would apply), I'll remove the tags. Toddst1 (talk) 18:38, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Ill put more sources but its really not nessesary, the source is first hand (assuming the homepage is writen buy the authors ) in any academimic paper this would be acceptable. and again i cite eterm, a sidgle source, prefectly acceptable. I assumed u don't know teh subject because a simple google search would show the notability. Its not the most popular, but its a well known program. But ill add the extra sources. I just wan't to note that if you sit back and think about it, all the the flags were unnessesary. I think any thrid party would agree ZyMOS (talk) 23:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

PS in the future could you link to what AGF means. for i did not know.

Please see Yahoo! Fantasy Sports

User keeps deleting prod request. Take a look at the article, just a long list of meaningless facts and links. -UWMSports (talk) 18:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

{{prod}} tags can be removed by anyone at any time. If you think the article should be deleted, nominate it for articles for deletion. Follow the link for info on how. Toddst1 (talk) 18:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Cruise West

Could you please provide me with (or instruct me how to obtain) the data for the now-deleted article titled Cruise West so that I may revise it to meet your standards of notability. Khaufle (talk) 22:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, how do I get the cruise line's vessel pages back? I find it very concerning that they were deleted when there are hundreds of others with equally limited articles linked on List of cruise ships. Khaufle (talk) 22:29, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

They aren't my standards - they're Wikipedia's. See Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted? To see the text that was deleted, contact one of the Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles and one of them will restore the article to your userspace. I don't have access to it. You should review the WP:AFD discussion for the article (it was discussed in an open forum) before you recreate the article. Toddst1 (talk) 13:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I see that you are one of the qualified administrators who can copy it back to my userspace. Would you be so kind? Unfortunately I don't log in very frequently and completely missed the discussion. Had I been aware I would have offered changes at that time and hopefully could have avoided the deletion. I'd rather not spend the time recreating the wheel when I could be using that time to better enhance the article that was already written. Khaufle (talk) 16:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I am not an administrator. See Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles Toddst1 (talk) 20:48, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I wonder what list of users I was looking at? OK, I'll approach one of them. Thanks. Khaufle (talk) 02:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Joshua Barney entry

Sorry it took so long to get back to you on your request. I updated the content a little, and added a reference to where I got the information. My previous edit was more to synchronize the Joshua Barney entry with the Battle of Bladensburg entry, as well as adding that Marines participated, which I found on the historical marker and other online research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WhiteKMJK (talk • contribs) 17:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

winmagic inc. and other pages

Hi Todd. First, sorry about the "WinMagic Inc." article - you can delete that for now, perhaps I will try to make another 'more complying' article later. Also, if I'm editing this usertalk page wrongly, I'm sorry about that too :P

Anyway, I'm mostly working on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_disk_encryption_software

We noticed our company (winmagic inc) was not listed there, so I'm starting to add our product and filling in all the charts on the page. Is that a COI? Also, should I make a page linking to our product and our company, like some other companies have on the above page? Is that a COI? Please advise.

Thank you very much for your time.

Baonh (talk) 19:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)bao

Check out WP:COI. It's OK to edit, but be extra careful to maintain WP:NPOV which you didn't. Toddst1 (talk) 23:56, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

civility

ok, i understand the edit wasn't civil and i apologise. But with the "metal up your ass" i don't see what the problem is. It's just a joke and i doubt anyone can take it seriously...thanks Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 22:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion / AfD

I quite agree. However, it is clear from the previous editor that they would have otherwise gone to speedy deletion, had an appropriate tag been available. The article is more than suitable for speedy deletion. PS. Please consider archiving this page Jammy Simpson | Talk | 23:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it should be deleted, but heck, if I threw a speedy tag on every article I thought didn't deserve a discussion... well.. I'd have done a lot of them. 8-) Toddst1 (talk) 23:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow

Kinda harsh on Riverpeopleinvasion, aren't we? Just cuz you don't like the thought of metal up your ass doesn't mean you have to freak out. Most people don't even notice stuff like that. elisa^talk. 13:31, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

No I don't think my comment was harsh at all. Nobody freaked out.

Do you and Riverpeopleinvasion always declare well-earned warnings to each other as "harsh" as he did with this warning you recieved (that appears to have not been taken to heart). Perhaps taking the message seriously would be a better course of action. Toddst1 (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Ha. You're awesome. I love how you dug through my archives to find 'incriminating' evidence. And, if you would have dug a little deeper, those talk edits were because an edit war was occuring and I was trying to resolve the problem (in fact, it's still in progress now). So unless you can come up with a good reason as to why you harrass random people, I suggest you leave me alone. Regards, elisa^talk. 20:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

You have made two false accusations here: 1) that I freaked out, 2) that I harass people. Please stop. Instead, please take responsibility for your actions. Toddst1 (talk) 23:05, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

You apparently dislike people calling you out. elisa^talk. 13:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA nom page created

Kakofonous (talk) 02:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

You forgot to accept! --Kakofonous (talk) 05:43, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Shall I transclude or do you want to? --Kakofonous (talk) 05:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind...wrote this while you were doing it. Kakofonous (talk) 05:52, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Long Xuyen

Because this is an editor from Vietnam, and presumably they know who is notable and who isn't (and those redlinks, consequently, would lead to articles). If you want to know who the people are, just ask the editor. WP editing shouldn't be a combat. Badagnani (talk) 02:04, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Not meant to be combative, rather, dealing with vandalism. Specifically, this edit was flagged by Lupin's anti-vandal tool which brought me to the article. After reverting the vandalism, I thought would clean the article up. I'm surprised you're seeing it differently - especially since I said what I was doing, following which policies, in my edit summary. Toddst1 (talk) 02:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, that edit is disturbing. Probably the editor is about 14 years old. However, there may be good mixed with the bad. Badagnani (talk) 03:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. 8-) Cheers! Toddst1 (talk) 03:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

welcome to NRHP; colonial site write-ups needed :)

Hi, welcome to WP:NRHP from a fellow member. I know I have seen your name before, probably on NRHP articles already. If you are interested in colonial NRHPs, perhaps you'd be interested to browse the work-in-progress List of National Historic Landmarks in South Carolina, which has many new stub articles that have good sources linked, but little development. Or if u have a different geographic interest, i would be happy to know. I happen to focus on the National Historic Landmarks, which is kind of an honor roll of the NRHPs; we are getting within striking range of having an informative article for every one of the 2430 or so NHLs. South Carolina happens to be in progress right now; status of all NHLs by state is reported in a table on the WP:NRHP main page. Cheers, doncram (talk) 20:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome. You came across my name when you gave me really valuable input on Belair Mansion. I hope I've effectively implemented your suggestions. I'm still hoping to get that to GA, and know I have more work to do, so I think I'm going to remain focused on that for now, but want to be a part of the project. Toddst1 (talk) 21:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Spell checkers

Hi - just been reviewing some of your contributions for your RFA nomination. I've got no problem supporting, but this edit caught my attention. The spell checker is not a standard tool in Wikipedia, but seems to be an optional add-on in anti-vandal tool. See WP:SPELL. It seems reasonable that a new editor wouldn't have that installed. Hope you don't mind me bringing your attention to this. It's not enough for me to worry about, so I'll cast my vote help to establish consensus at your RFA now. Good luck! —  Tivedshambo  _(t|c) 11:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow. I had no idea it wasn't standard. Thanks for pointing it out. Mea culpa. Toddst1 (talk) 13:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I've amended my edit to User talk: Yung_chuck. Toddst1 (talk) 13:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I've always edited on Wikipedia using Firefox. That explains why I thought it was built in. Toddst1 (talk) 15:40, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Vrag naj vzame

Hi! I removed your proposed deletion of this article. I agree that the article isn't very good, but it was created yesterday and will be improved. There is no problem with verifiability nor does it violate WP:CRYSTAL. I'm not sure how familiar you are with the Eurovision, but it is the most watched television broadcast in Europe and, to the best of my knowledge, the most watched annual transmission in the world. The entries to it definitely satisfy notability and there are articles on all the other entries. As the entries are selected in March, these articles are still stubs but will most certainly be expanded fairly soon as the Eurovision has a whole "army" of extremely devouted fans. :) Cheers! JdeJ (talk) 22:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Plaxall - Wikipedia page

I have reviewed the information in my talk page and as a content owner am permitted to post the information in the article plaxall.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cschiffner (talk • contribs) 21:14, 10 March 2008

As I stated on your talk page, you need to give wikipedia explicit permission. See the instructions on your talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 21:16, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I have given wikipedia explicit pemission which is found at http://www.plaxall.com/about.php You can see it at the bottom of the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cschiffner (talk • contribs) 21:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

You're not listening. That permission is not enough. Follow the instructions on your talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 21:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I have now added the GFDL statement to the page in question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cschiffner (talk • contribs) 21:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Is there anything else i need to do to satisfy your requirements?--Cschiffner (talk) 21:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to address these concerns. Before I answer, I have to say, they're not my requirements.

To be honest, I don't know. You have a GFDL disclaimer on your site now but there's also a copyright notice. Someone more knowledgable than me will have to answer your question. I don't get stumped too often. You get points in my book! Let me see if I can dig up an answer your question. Toddst1 (talk) 21:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

It looks like you have another problem. Another editor has tagged it for speedy deletion under Wikipedia:CSD#G11 - meaning that they think it's just advertising. Toddst1 (talk) 21:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The "spam like" material is removed. As far as the GFDL statement, it releases the information in question while the remainder of the site/page remains under the ownership of Plaxall. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cschiffner (talk • contribs) 21:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Re

This user is nothing but a vandalism only account. He repeatedly blanked his talkpage and erasing warning messages. So I have gave some mammoth warnings. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 17:37, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Google Books

I am not aware of any general policy of not linking to Google books, and the thousands of links to it imply that there isn't one, but WP:LINKS (not WP:Links ) is pretty clear about not linking to copyrighted works, period. I see no problem with linking to public domain works at that site, but that's just my opinion. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

From WP:LINKS: "Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website has licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to material that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement". I don't think Google's fair use claim constitutes "licensing" (although I'm not disputing their fair use claim, only quoting WP policies). If you find out anything conclusive either way, please give me an update. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

David Maupin

Hi Toddst1, The article that I just wrote about David Maupin was listed as an autobiography, which is incorrect. I work at a major contemporary gallery in New York and am creating pages for the owners of the gallery that is taken from major media sources. Can you please help me remove the error messages that I'm receiving on this article? Thanks so much, Bettina Prentice —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lehmannmaupin (talk • contribs) 18:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Changed. Please review WP:COI before proceeding. Also, please address this username concern. Toddst1 (talk) 18:06, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Bobby_horocofsky

Oh, I missed <the offensive phrase>. Good catch! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 21:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Easy to miss at the bottom. It started innocently enough. Toddst1 (talk) 21:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the weird vandalism on my user page. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 22:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

He/she got me too. Toddst1 (talk) 23:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Anglicanism

I notice that you've created / worked on two Episcopal church articles. Well, do I have a project for you; one that needs people who write articles about Episcopal churches. No need to be an Episcopalian or even to like them :-) Would you like to join the WikiProject focusing on Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion: WikiProject Anglicanism. Our goal is to improve and expand Anglican-related articles. If you are interested, read over the project page and consider signing up. Cheers!

I'll check it out. Toddst1 (talk) 23:56, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Addict Clothing/MC Wrec

Hi,

Regarding MC Wrec; I don't even know the guy, other than he is todo with Addict Clothing's music - the link I added there was to give notability for my Addict article, as I was told by the guidlines that if you have links pointing to your article it looks better and I found that there was something about Addict Beats Collective there when looking for link from my article.

Why has he been deleted? I hope it's not because of me, as that page is nothing to do with me.

With regards to Addict Clothing, I write articles for them, for free, because I love the company and what they do and what they are and think what they do deserves to be heard.

Many thanks,

Mischa.wgreen (talk) 12:41, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

RfA - Discospinster

Thank you so much for your support in my RfA, which was successful with a final count of 70/1/1! ... discospinster _talk 23:30, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Your RfA

Hello Toddst1, I'm pleased to tell you that your RfA has been passed as successful and your are now an administrator. Congratulations, and good luck with the mop. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:18, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 09:20, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Hoped to be first with my congrats, but DHMO beat me to it. Can you keep me a spare desk in admin school - hopefully I'll need it soon ;-)  —  Tivedshambo  _(t/c) 09:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Well done! Rudget. 11:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations. Remember to keep writing! Relata refero (talk) 15:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I know you will do a great jobThright (talk) 17:55, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Uber congrats! Tiptoety ^talk 18:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

The admins' T-shirt.

Congratulations on your successful RfA! Do everything you're supposed to and nothing you're not! :) Make sure to check out the new admin school. Good luck and feel free to ask me if you have any questions. GlassCobra 18:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations - oh, and remember, despite what everyone says, it's not actually possible to delete the Main Page. Honestly. Seriously...go ahead. Try it... ;-) _GB^T/C 22:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Congrats!!!Kukini ^{háblame aquí} 22:57, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome

Wow you did very well! Wikipedia has every reason to believe you will make a brilliant admin! Thanks for taking the time to thank an old "commentor"! Have fun with the tools! --Camaeron (talk) 17:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Non nobis solum ; p

Bob Griese editing

Hi Todd

I see that you have edited my contributions to the page on Bob Griese. While I understand why my contributions were not acceptable-- I was in the process of entering citations, but they were not in yet-- you seem to have deleted the entire 2nd half of the article. This deletes Bob's pro football career entirely. It also deleted the one footnote I managed to put in before I saw what you had done.

I wonder if it would be better to either restore the article I wrote, so that I can place appropriate footnotes, or at least restore the work that others had done on that section of the article, as it just doesn't make sense to end the Bob Griese article in 1967, when most people know him because of his pro football career.

Thank you for your hard work trying to keep wikipedia as an authority of reliable information

Elton1111 (talk) 17:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)elton1111 march 14, 2008 (happy pi day)

User talk:Palmer-Ridge

Should User talk:Palmer-Ridge be deleted? User seems to not exist and is only being made as an article. -WarthogDemon 19:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think so. The user has made edits, and while strange, User talk:Palmer-Ridge doesn't seem to be hurting anything. Perhaps the editor has parked the text there to reuse. I may be wrong though. Toddst1 (talk) 19:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

your RfA

your welcome, but I must say, if it closed with 42 supports, it must be a sign. 101010 --Pewwer42  Talk  17:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Spam disguised as user pages

Perhaps you missed the template I add to the talk pages:

{{subst:spam-warn-userpage|User:XXX|header=1}} ~~~~

That ought to be sufficient, in my opinion. --Calton | Talk 22:35, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Samuel

Do you now see why I put a speedy delete tag on the article, because it was nonsense and a hoax. Someone in the AFD even commented that it shouldn't of gone through AFD. D.M.N. (talk) 13:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

As I said, I saw it might have been a hoax when I declined speedy, but a hoax is not a reason for speedy deletion. See Wikipedia:Patent_nonsense and Wikipedia:Don't_create_hoaxes#Dealing_with_hoaxes. Many folks don't like that, but that's the way things are set up. Toddst1 (talk) 14:58, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

iNorden.org

Hi Toddst1, You recently deleted INorden.org on the grounds that the text was copied from this page: http://inorden.org/?page_id=31&language=en. The only propblem is: I wrote that page, too, (as iNorden.org editor) and have given myself permission to re-use it here. As I'm new to Wikipedia (as a contributor, that is), I'm not familiar with proccedings needed in order to re-publish deleted pages, but I expect there's a backup of sorts somewhere. Hope you may be of some assistance, as you deleted the page. Thanks a million for your kind help. Jarle Petterson (talk) 05:58, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Block

Hi! I noted you have just blocked the IP address User:169.244.35.11. In view of some overlapping vandalism from a new 'user account on the John Dalton article could you please take a look at User:Balla207 to see if it could be the same user. If possible could the User:Balla207 account be blocked as a vandalism only account? Also in view of the persistent vandalism history from the User:169.244.35.11 account and the 16 vandalism warnings, of which 3 are final warnings, that have been posted on the users talk page, so far, this year, would not a 12 month Anon Account / School block be more appropriate than a 48 hour one? Richard Harvey (talk) 18:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

hang on tag

Thankyou for the info. Besides that, where may I find this article's AfD?Dædαlus T@lk\^{→quick link} 21:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

re: User talk:Wikimania08

Since an attorney was invoked at User talk:Wikimania08, that looked too clearly like a legal threat, so I blocked. I could also have blocked as a sockpuppet, so it was almost a case of which reason yielded the longer block.

By contrast, with the comments left apparently by the same person at User talk:Eeihq, I gave the benefit of the doubt that, even though it's a threat, it's not a legal threat. —C.Fred (talk) 23:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

So Very Sorry <(**,)>

Hey, sorry about that personal attack earlier, I was just in a very bad mood. Everybody gets mad sometimes, and I'm just sorry that I vented my anger towards you. Good Luck with being an admin tho! Once again, I'm very sorry I acted that way.

Tool-apc (talk) 23:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

So Very Sorry <(**,)>

Hey, sorry about that personal attack earlier, I was just in a very bad mood. Everybody gets mad sometimes, and I'm just sorry that I vented my anger towards you. Good Luck with being an admin tho! Once again, I'm very sorry I acted that way.

Tool-apc (talk) 23:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of articel Kristoffer ericson

Hi,

Looks like you misread the debate, if you read it more carefully you would see that the consensus was "Yes to keep" and not yes to delete. Please revert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.209.186.97 (talk) 09:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

You are correct. I have restored the article and removed the db tag. Sorry for the mistake. Toddst1 (talk) 16:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of article Daniel Boey

Hello,

Why did you delete this article? I just spent three days dealing with three different admins and was approved by Discospinster to have this article online. I am sorry for my tone but I can't keep dealing with all these admins different opinions. No article will ever satisfy everyone and it's not fair to have me keep defending my post just because someone decides they don't like it, or has no meaning to them etc. An Admins decision should be respected by all other admins otherwise what is the use? Can you please repost the article?

Thanks Succisa75 (talk) 16:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:CSD#A7 Toddst1 (talk) 17:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I have read that and the A7 ruling does not apply. If you read the article and followed up on the links you would see that this person is a prominent and influential figure in the fashion industry through out South East Asia. No other admin that has contacted me about this article has ever brought that into question.

If Motorola has assigned this person as one of its ambassadors for its Project Red Campaign to fight Aids in its South East Asia I think that would support the argument this person as being important or significant. Succisa75 (talk) 17:36, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you should stop re-creating the article that causes you to be in contact with so many administrators. It's been deleted seven times. Toddst1 (talk) 18:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

It's been deleted seven times because admins like yourself don't take the time to read the history of the article, nor try to contact the writer to try and rectify the problem in a supportive way before deleting. Also every deletion thus far was always overturned because any valid issue an admin had with it I rectified it, in a timely manner, or they corrected their mistake. It's obvious you have no valid issue. Also it shows the lack of respect on your part for the other admins decisions in allowing it to stay active. I will be contacting the Admin notice board to have this handled further. Succisa75 (talk) 20:43, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

No. That's not the reason it's being deleted. It's exactly what I and the others have been telling you. Good luck with ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 00:53, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Who are you and what are you doing?

I'm new to Wikipedia. As best as I can understand from the reams of instructions and rules I've been scrolling through, you have something to do with deleting an article I was working on.

1. I did not intend to post my article yet. I must have pushed the wrong button. I wanted to save it and work on it somemore, adding references and such.

2. There is no copyright violation. I am the original author of the text as it appears on my website and in the revised version I was working for Wikipeida on before you deleted it.

3. I am happy to give Wiki editors the right to edit my posting. I do NOT want to put an announcement on my website to the effect that anyone anywhere can use and edit the text there. Are you telling me I can't use my own writing, which I retain all rights for, when I write for Wikipedia? That's quite a muzzle.

4. Why can't you send a notice that I could respond to instead of, within less than 24 hours, deleting an article I was working on?

5. Who are you and what's your expertise in copyright law anyways?

Thank you.

Will Roscoe, Ph.D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Willrsf (talk • contribs) 17:02, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Carnegie Mellon University Rowing Club

Toddst1, I saw that the article regarding the Carnegie Mellon University Rowing Club was deleted upon the criteria that it was not encyclopedic. The club has a rich history, and significance in Pittsburgh, and as the publicity chair representing the organization, I have been requested by university officials to create a wikipedia article lending to the history of the organization. I also understand that Wikipedia encourages that we, the users, should not write about subjects in which we have personal interest/affiliation with, however, I feel that someone from this small organization would be the only person qualified to write a credible article about the organization. Can you restore this article and provide me with some suggestions on how to make it more Wikipedia appropriate. I will do my best! --Nicksmarto (talk) 04:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

yılmaz bektaş

hi, can i learn why our "yılmaz bektaş" article is deleted, bec i didnt get it why delete, the arctile is from yilmaz bektas himself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ybektas (talk • contribs) 13:50, 19 March 2008

See User talk: Ybektas#Speedy deletion of Yılmaz bektaş Toddst1 (talk) 13:58, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Snoopdobi

Thank you for your report - just a quick point, though, that new cases go at the top of the list on WP:SSP, not at the bottom. I've moved it for you, and dealt with the case (pretty open and shut). The case won't, therefore, appear in the list at all in a few minutes, as it will have been archived. Thanks. _GB^T/C 14:01, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I must have edited a section by accident instead of the whole doc. I put it at the top of the list but thought he header comments were missing. Cheers! Toddst1 (talk) 15:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Solid Look article.

Raffaellogalli (talk) 17:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC) Hi, I am trying to satisfy the wikipedia requirement and I believe that the previous attempt was not fitting 100% but I do not see any reason for deleteing the article this time. Can you please explain. Thanks.

Wikipedia:CSD#A7 Toddst1 (talk) 18:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

--Raffaellogalli (talk) 00:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)I understand your point, but you should consider that I have created the article with information regarding the utility and the advantage of the subject and it was deleted because consider blatant advertising. After that I recreated the article without the information and you declared as an article that doesn't indicate why its subject is important or significant. So can you please advise on what should I do? Thanks.

Macalla Software

This article has just been deleted when I thought I had put a "Hang On" message on it. I removed some text and left it quite simple with statement of fact. I also asked somebody somewhere in Wikipedia why even if after I removed the text it might still be deleted as other company profiles (and I named a few) were live. I couldn't see the difference between mine and the other companies that I mentioned.

Whilst I completely understand that advertising is not good for this site, I still think that a company name with a statement of what that company does is a definition, not advertising. My article was deleted and it was simply a definition.

Please explain. Thanks Aislingfoley (talk) 17:45, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

A different administrator deleted it because An article about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. I just left you a note trying to help you understand some of the Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Toddst1 (talk) 18:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

A question as to why you are deleting my edits

I'm new to Wikipedia. As best as I can understand from the reams of instructions and rules I've been scrolling through, you have something to do with deleting an article I was working on.

I'm not sure why you felt it necessary to delete the content I uploaded to the Y&R page.

I am simply updating information about the company so that it is factual. There is no self promotion involved.

As on of the largest advertising companies in the world, it is important that any information in the public domain be as accurate as possible.

I am greatly disappointed that you felt it okay to delete this content without even the thought of contacting me to ask any questions you may have had.

I have re-uploaded the content and would appreciate it if you would not delete.

Any questions please contact me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcaplan243 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Please read User_talk:Mcaplan243#March_2008_2 and take it seriously. Toddst1 (talk) 18:49, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

1998 South Carolina Gamecocks football team

You recently tagged 1998 South Carolina Gamecocks football team for speedy deletion as an attack page. I fail to see the attack. Please explain. Toddst1 (talk) 01:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• Look at the author's contrib history and it will quickly become apparent. Plus, this EXACT article was speedy deleted the first time it was posted as an obvious attack piece used to disparage its subject, the author has added nothing of substance to merit keeping it the second time around. It's not even an article, it's a table that sums up a football season. Please talk to User:Pegasus if you need further info on the subject. Thanks. ViperNerd (talk) 01:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Unless you can explain how this is an attack page, I will decline the speedy deletion a third and final time. If you continue to add the template without explaining how this is an attack page you will be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 01:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I just explained it. This is not even an ARTICLE. It is a table of results for one single season of South Carolina football, one of the worst in its history. Do you think the author just picked this season out of a hat to write about? Please think about why this article is being posted. Wikipedia is not simply a repository of information. If this author can write an actual ARTICLE about this subject, let him do that and then post it. He shouldn't be allowed to simply post a stub and then promise to finish it up at some future date. ViperNerd (talk) 01:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've already mentioned this page to the admin who originally speedy deleted it. You can take it up with him. I can't help you if you want to be stubborn and insist you can't see the obvious. ViperNerd (talk) 01:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Ellen's Stardust Diner

Good evening. I have a question as to why the article I wrote about Ellen's Stardust Diner was deleted. Mind you, I don't take any offense to the article being deleted, but I assure you the article included actual information from the restaurant's website. Is there any particular reason why the article was deleted? And can you please tell me what kind of information I would need(if any)to avoid deletion in the future provided the article be written again? Mr. Brain (talk) 04:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

It was deleted under Wikipedia:CSD#A7, "An article about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant." If you go to that page's deletion log, you'll see it's been deleted 4 times. Toddst1 (talk) 16:18, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

user:ClockGameJohn

How could making a test page result in being blocked? Don't Feed the Zords (talk) 12:41, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Replied on User_talk:Don't_Feed_the_Zords#user:ClockGameJohn. Toddst1 (talk) 16:20, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Article Ponty Mython the quest for a better ending

Toddst1, I saw that Ponty Mython the quest for a better ending was deleted on the basis that it was not significant or didn’t have any references. What happened was, I was typing it and saved it and went to bed. i was going to put all the references on it in the morning. I have several references that I would like to put on it. could you please either post it on my user page or undelete it so I can put the references in? thanks. Spy boy360 (talk) 20:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

See User:Spy boy360/sandbox. Please don't move back to userspace unless it is ready. Toddst1 (talk) 01:16, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Martin Lindstrom

Dear Toddst1, I must start by saying I am having problems finding out how to chat with you and please may I request your assistance, could you please explain why you deleted Martin Lindstrom, please find below the text which you deleted, I would be more than pleased to learn from you how to fix the below text, All the very best,

Martin Lindström

Martin Lindström (born March 7, 1970) is a Danish brand futurist, researcher and writer. Martin was born in Århus, Denmark; his professional life began at 12 years of age.

These remarkable beginnings heralded ongoing startling achievements. Still in his thirties, Martin is one of the world’s most respected author and branding gurus, an honor bestowed by the Chartered Institute of Marketing.

Throughout 20 years of book writing, marketing experience, Martin has conceived a revolutionary set of principles that achieve positive business results from transformational marketing strategies. His unique vision is scientific and process-based, all supported by global studies conducted by a team of more than 600 researchers. Reference site www.MartinLindstrom.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterhenery (talk • contribs) 01:56, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

DELETION OF PAGE Swami Jyotirmayananda

I still cannot edit a new article for Swami Jyotirmayananda because it is now "protected", and previously deleted by you. I did create a page (showing up as a Project) but I cannot create it as an article. Please view the Swami Jyotirmayanmanda "Project" page, as I want to use that content to be published as an Article. What do I need to do to make that happen? Gbito (talk) 03:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 March 21 Toddst1 (talk) 10:44, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Martin Lindström

Dear Toodst1, could you please explain why you have deleted Martin Lindstrom, I have the copy below, and if it is advertising as you state, could you please show me why and I will correct it, All the very best,

Martin Lindström

Martin Lindström (born March 7, 1970) is a Danish brand futurist, researcher and writer. Martin was born in Århus, Denmark; his professional life began at 12 years of age.

These remarkable beginnings heralded ongoing startling achievements. Still in his thirties, Martin is one of the world’s most respected author and branding gurus, an honor bestowed by the Chartered Institute of Marketing.

Throughout 20 years of book writing, marketing experience, Martin has conceived a revolutionary set of principles that achieve positive business results from transformational marketing strategies. His unique vision is scientific and process-based, all supported by global studies conducted by a team of more than 600 researchers. Reference site www.MartinLindstrom.com

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterhenery (talk • contribs) 01:39, 21 March 2008 (and unfortunately left on User:Toddst1/awards, moved to here and formatted) by Toddst1)

Dear Mr. Lindstrom,

In response to your comments left onUser:Toddst1/awards, moved to User talk:Toddst1: Your autobiography, Martin Lindstrom, has been deleted 4 times by 4 different administrators in violation of Wikipedia:CSD#G11 as "Blatant advertising. Pages which exclusively promote some entity and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic." Please consider the following Wikipedia policies:

• WP:Advert
• WP:Autobiography
• WP:Notability
• WP:Reliable

before you consider recreating the article and ensure any future contributions comply with these policies. Otherwise, they will continue to be considered disruptive and will be quickly deleted and may lead to you being blocked. I hope this helps. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 11:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Alien Abduction Lamp

Hi Toddst1

I can understand that you flagged my article since it was about something that I myself created. I have to argue that I attempted to keep the article as objective and as little as possible about myself.

The reason that you gave for deleting it - that this is "blatant advertising" does not seem right to me. The mere fact that there is no product to advertise for should talk strongly enough against that. I mentioned in the article that it is becoming a product, but that sentence alone could be removed if that is what you reacted against?

I feel that the Alien Abduction Lamp has as much a place in Wikipedia as the Lava Lamp. It may not be a product yet, but it has become quite an interenet phenomenon. A quick google search will tell you that it har earned some reputation.

Is there any way that I can recover the text that I entered? I did not expect it to be deleted, so I did not save a copy, and there were formulations in the entry that I would have liked to keep.

Lasse Kleinsan (talk) 11:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)kleinsan

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Kleinsan (talk • contribs) 11:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC) 

Kurt St. Thomas

Sorry for sticking my nose in but i seen that the user you reported claims they own the photo but you may already know but the photo is from Kurts myspace. here is the link to the page, hope this helps and again sorry for butting in.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=1726537 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thuringowacityrep (talk • contribs) 11:55, 21 March 2008

No problem. I didn't report him/her- I removed him/her from AIV after discussion. He/she may need to go back though. Toddst1 (talk) 11:57, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

• No probs...Thanks Thuringowacityrep (talk) 12:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Usa-grant-inc

Was blocking email and account creation really necessary? When we block at UAA where usernames are promoting a company we just disable autoblocks. Rudget. 12:29, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I think I've fixed it. I didn't mean to second guess you - it was collision, and apparently an uninformed one. Toddst1 (talk) 13:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Rudget. 13:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Bad report

Hello. Would you explain to me what makes this a bad report, so I do not make the same mistake again. I take it the user was told twice, and continued. Please advise. NonvocalScream (talk) 19:05, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I hope you took no offense. The user was clearly vandalizing, but here's why I declined to block the user: You had left a level 2 warning for the user after his vandalous edits to Wirral Grammar School for Boys. After he/she recieved the warning, I saw no further edits from the user. I generally don't block someone who hasn't had a level 3 or higher. Obviously another admin saw the situation differently and blocked the user. That being said, thanks for your vigilance in fighting vandals. We need all the help we can get. Toddst1 (talk) 20:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh no, I don't get offended. I just don't want to make many mistakes. Thank you for getting back with me. In the future I'll pay better attention and try to monitor the editors after a graduation of warnings. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 20:26, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Nuclear Gravitation

Hey. I saw you PROD'd this article. The author removed the prod tag, so I nominated it for AfD. You can view it here. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 19:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Zeleno zvono

You speedily deleted this article after an editor nominated this claiming that it was spam in Czech. The article was actually written in Serbian, so I don't think we can take the nominator's translation at face value if he didn't even know what language he was translating from. Could you please restore it to allow it to go for proper translation before we judge it? Phil Bridger (talk) 18:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Restored and {{db-spam}} removed, so it will stay restored. Toddst1 (talk) 16:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Catalin Dragomir

I found it quite appalling that you deleted my article about Catalin Dragomir. I was a piece of research that took hour and effort to compile, yet your vile assumption is that we advertise. We asked permission to write about this architect. Can you please restore this article ASAP. Mihai Sima —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cattouk (talk • contribs) 21:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Please review WP:Advert. I see nothing encyclopedic about that article. It has been deleted 4 times - each time for valid reasons. Please do not recreate it without addressing these problems. Toddst1 (talk) 21:36, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. It was deleted each time for copyright violations, which is wrong, as long as we have permission in writing from Catalin. This time it was deleted for "blatant advertising" reason which I personally find ridiculous. What give you the right to be a judge and jury at the same time about its encyclopaedic merits? We find this particular architect quite interesting to be in your sorry encyclopaedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cattouk (talk • contribs) 21:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

In my talk, you refer to me as Mr. Dragomar, which is not my name. Mihai Sima is my name and I wrote an article about "MR Dragomir". Also you gave me a warning for my article. I think this is a flagrant violation of our freedom of speech. I find your tactics and position as judge and jury as being not only disruptive but also extremly fascist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cattouk (talk • contribs) 05:06, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

On 12:14, 10 April 2007 you, Cattouk(talk • contribs), signed Talk:Catalin Dragomir as:

Yours sincerely,

Catalin Dragomir


METHAMORPHIC

www.catalindragomir.com

so it seemed appropriate to refer to you as "Mr. Dragomir". Now you claim to be Mihai Sima "his PR agents". I'm not sure which it is, and it doesn't really matter to me. I am sure of Wikipedia policies on WP:Advert, WP:Neutral point of view and WP:Copyright (among others) which you do need to follow, as I have politely and clearly indicated on your talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 15:57, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Re You Do (Family Guy)

This originally consisted only of the lyrics to the song, but the author ripped them out after I tagged it. Sorry to have wasted your time. Fritzpoll (talk) 13:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

That's what it looked like. Good call and keep up the great work. Toddst1 (talk) 15:23, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of article Grid5000

Tichadok (talk) 23:29, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, the Grid5000 article that you just deleted looks very similar to these articles :

• GARUDA (Indian)
• D-Grid (German)
• VECC (Calcutta, India)

From the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grid_computing#National_Grid_Projects

So I was wondering why you deleted it.

Thanks

Tichadok (talk) 13:13, 22 March 2008 (UTC) Hi Todd, if you want to be consistent, I think you either have to delete the three articles above or undelete the Grid5000 article. Thanks

Thank you for your suggestion regarding GARUDA . When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Same goes for D-Grid and VECC. Feel free to take them to AfD.Toddst1 (talk) 15:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Tichadok (talk) 14:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Could you please undelete the Grid5000 article, if the GARUDA exists for India, then the Grid5000 has to exist for France. The Grid5000 article is written as the same manner as the GARUDA article, that's why I see no reason why you deleted it. Thanks

Copied by User:Fritzpoll from main User page to here... just trying to help!

Yes, I see you reposted the same reason for deleting, but did you actually take a look at it? The original article that was deleted was a cut/paste from the Swami's own website, so I now understand why that was deleted. The new content I last posted is completely and utterly different! I spent over five hours creating the new content and digging up references and links. I can name many other articles with much lesser content, references, etc. that have been deemed "OK" to keep in Wikipedia. So now I am now at a complete loss as to what would make you happy in getting this article in. I've read the pages that I was told would help me, followed the instructions as best I could, and you simply re-enter the same information you did last time for deleting the page. Can you please spend a moment looking over the content and compare it to the original that was submitted? If it is truly not satisfactory, rather than pasting the same reason again (which is obviously not helping me understand) can you help me a bit by being more specific as to what I need to change to make the article OK? I am not trying to flame you in any way, I am just not understanding your criteria and asking for your help. Thanks in advance for helping me understand. Gbito (talk) 01:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Frankly, I'm kind of lost here: What I deleted was a misplaced article called Article:Swami Jyotirmayananda not Swami Jyotirmayananda. . Swami Jyotirmayananda was deleted by someone else and salted, and is both in deletion review now and it also appears to also have been restored. In case the subtlety isn't clear - the one I deleted is mis-titled and appeared to be an attempt to get around the salting without going through deletion review. Toddst1 (talk) 18:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Rolling Stone

I don't see how a single article in the Rolling Stone instantly makes someone notable for their own article, but I suppose I'll have to take it up with WP:AfD. Sillygostly (talk) 03:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

To put things into perspective, an Australian teenager named Corey Worthington became instantly famous for throwing a house party (where around 500 people attended) which required police intervention in order to end the party. Over the following weeks, Corey received a ridiculous amount of coverage across every conceivable medium (i.e. TV, newspapers, websites, YouTube parody videos etc.). While there have been efforts in order to create an article on the teenager (and I understand it has since been deleted) as the event in question was historically insignificant (and the subject of the article has failed to make any substantial contributions/achievements in order to justify his own article). I believe the Jonah article is similar in that the article is historically insignificant, and the individual in question is not noteworthy enough to justify his own article (being documented in a tabloid magazine for having large genitals and playing an extra in a small number of television shows doesn't grant notability). I suppose merging his article with a Wikipedia article which documents other people with large genitals would be acceptable, however a completely separate article on an (arguably) unknown individual is excessive IMO. Sillygostly (talk) 03:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Larry Dablemont

I see you've had some issues with this hoax before. We could use your wisdom on the deletion page: [2]. I just eliminated a ton of wikilinks from the hoaxer. This should be salted, don't you think? Qworty (talk) 03:55, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Catalin Dragomir

I found it quite appalling that you deleted my article about Catalin Dragomir. I was a piece of research that took hour and effort to compile, yet your vile assumption is that we advertise. We asked permission to write about this architect. Can you please restore this article ASAP. Mihai Sima —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cattouk (talk • contribs) 21:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Please review WP:Advert. I see nothing encyclopedic about that article. It has been deleted 4 times - each time for valid reasons. Please do not recreate it without addressing these problems. Toddst1 (talk) 21:36, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. It was deleted each time for copyright violations, which is wrong, as long as we have permission in writing from Catalin. This time it was deleted for "blatant advertising" reason which I personally find ridiculous. What give you the right to be a judge and jury at the same time about its encyclopaedic merits? We find this particular architect quite interesting to be in your sorry encyclopaedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cattouk (talk • contribs) 21:46, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

In my talk, you refer to me as Mr. Dragomar, which is not my name. Mihai Sima is my name and I wrote an article about "MR Dragomir". Also you gave me a warning for my article. I think this is a flagrant violation of our freedom of speech. I find your tactics and position as judge and jury as being not only disruptive but also extremly fascist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cattouk (talk • contribs) 05:06, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

On 12:14, 10 April 2007 you, Cattouk(talk • contribs), signed Talk:Catalin Dragomir as:

Yours sincerely,

Catalin Dragomir


METHAMORPHIC

www.catalindragomir.com

so it seemed appropriate to refer to you as "Mr. Dragomir". Now you claim to be Mihai Sima "his PR agents". I'm not sure which it is, and it doesn't really matter to me. I am sure of Wikipedia policies on WP:Advert, WP:Neutral point of view and WP:Copyright (among others) which you do need to follow, as I have politely and clearly indicated on your talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 15:57, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Zeleno zvono

You speedily deleted this article after an editor nominated this claiming that it was spam in Czech. The article was actually written in Serbian, so I don't think we can take the nominator's translation at face value if he didn't even know what language he was translating from. Could you please restore it to allow it to go for proper translation before we judge it? Phil Bridger (talk) 18:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Restored and {{db-spam}} removed, so it will stay restored. Toddst1 (talk) 16:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing it did turn out to be spam? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:09, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

It appears at least User: Kubek15 and user: David Eppstein thought so.Toddst1 (talk) 16:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

upv

Aw, six reverts to the same page within a half hour is nothing. ;-) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 16:59, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Yilmaz Bektas

Hi,

i need to learn something that about cant add and article about Yilmaz Bektas. i copied your latest answer to me for remembering. As i understand u said that we cant add an article about someone unless he's not notable, but i can see other results when searching "yilmaz bektas", from pages "ruffa gutierrez" etc. Yilmaz Bektas is a famous business man in Turkey, he got profile from Imdb and many many results from google and images... Why u think that not notable and we cant add an designed his profile article to wikipedia, i need learn that.

Thanks and regards

You said:

You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved, as you did at Yılmaz bektaş. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.

Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it might be listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Verifiability.

If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles.) Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 13:39, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.247.188.72 (talk • contribs) 13:54, 25 March 2008

See WP:COI and WP:BIO Toddst1 (talk) 15:29, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Socialroster

I am incredibly frustrated. You deleted my article that met all of Wikipedia's policies and was contributed to by another user with sources and verification. The reason for deletion was that another user felt it wasn't notable???? Isn't that the purpose of wikipedia that information can be available that USERS think are notable not a consolidation of power? Just deleting a site like that where where was no previous listing for the keyword is downright irresponsible and detrimental to the community. Thanks for ruining the freedoms of a good thing.

Btomasette _talk —Preceding comment was added at 22:13, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you SO much!

Thanks for giving that young man a bit of a timeout. I was worried I'd get sucked into a 3RR myself in trying to revert him. Hopefully, he'll get the message. Tried to help him, but he just went on his merry way. Much obliged.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

PMDrive1061 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thank you SO much!

Thanks for giving that young man a bit of a timeout. I was worried I'd get sucked into a 3RR myself in trying to revert him. Hopefully, he'll get the message. Tried to help him, but he just went on his merry way. Much obliged.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:Godspy on my talk page

Thanks for letting me know. J Milburn (talk) 23:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Tyson (Percy Jackson)

I was getting ready to redirect to Percy Jackson & The Olympians. It really is not an attack page. It's about a fictional character who happens to be-- a Cyclops. <<LOL>> Cheers, Dlohcierekim 02:45, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Would it be OK for me to unprotect, redirect to the main article and then reportect? Cheers, Dlohcierekim 03:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Of course. Thanks for asking. It's been deleted like 8 times, so I put a protect on it. Toddst1 (talk) 03:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I Like to ask before I undo. Dlohcierekim 12:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

RyRy5

Hi. I noted the odd removal of one of your blocks by RyRy5. On March 24 I had a concern with RyRy5 on an AfD page as I noted here. Although it was a disturbing mistake, I accepted the user's explanation that it was a good faith mistake and withdrew the uw-v1 I had issued. Since then I have encountered other concerns about questionable actions/ideas from this user here, here and here. Since RyRy5 is aggressively promoting a user adoption program, I am concerned that this pattern may end up being transferred to other users. Just thought I should let you know. --- Taroaldo (talk) 06:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, that was an honest mistake. I'm sorry and go ahea and revert it.--RyRy5 talk 06:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I just read the notice above. I was a little too enthusiastic back then. And I felt so sorry of what I did I wanted to apologize. I don't think that was wrong. Also, the adoption Program wasn't really my idea. Two other users (that I know of) have an adoption Program too. I'm also not trying to start another adopt-a-user program. I is only for my adoptees to learn better while giving out tests. I also let admins grade the tests after I do.--RyRy5 talk 06:36, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

IP Block of 76.10.176.221

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I think you used the wrong template for this user block here. I'm guessing you wanted to let them know they were blocked for 1 week, instead of telling them they vandalized the '1 week' article? Anyway, thanks for the assist. Tnxman307 (talk) 16:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I clearly need more coffee this morning. 8-) Thanks. Toddst1 (talk) 16:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

User talk:AGK#User talk:Animal00

Hello, Toddst1. You have new messages at AGK's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Regards, Anthøny 18:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Lucky Busker

Hi, I see that you have deleted the page I created for Lucky Busker. I read an article in Billboard magazine how so many artists were not using Wikipedia to it's full potential, so having discovered this artist on MySpace I thought I would get in there early. Lucky Busker is signed to a major label, RCA Sony BMG and the entry was no different from that of any of RCA's other artists entries. I would appreciate if you could reconsider this deletion. Many Thanks. --Maddogjb (talk) 12:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

March 2008

Just a note, it's not our normal procedure to warn users twice for the same edit, especially with a {{uw-vandal4}}template. Be sure you use all the templates, from 1 through to 4, in order, before reporting. Cheers Steve Crossin (talk to me) 12:14, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Toddst1 (talk) 12:47, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

UPV

No problem babe... that was some seriously intense vandalism too. Make my computer choke up for a second or two. Queerbubbles | Leave me Some Love 14:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

I can has mop?

Hi Toddst1/Archive 2! Thank you for your support in my RfA (87/3/3). I truely appreciate the many votes of confidence, and I will exert myself to live up to those expectations. Thanks again! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 17:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

get less strict

dude , that was a self bio ands the signefics was for my casemanger to read it and see my intire story and aslo freinds if i ever got any ,just cuz its not a clad heart movie star dont mean its not worthy of being here that was how i was going to interduce my self to everyone was that wiki page i rember when you could post anything on wiki but i guess not now —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glyth (talk • contribs) 08:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Try myspace. Toddst1 (talk) 16:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

IP Block of 209.174.67.204

I reported this address, you deleted my request [3] with no explanation or action. What's up? I'm sure you are aware that a lot of necessary but tedious grunt work goes into stopping this kind of vandal, one who continues on even after a "final" warning. I'd appreciate either some help or at least an explanation of why not. ~ Alcmaeonid (talk) 01:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Two reasons I declined the block and deleted the report:

1. Insufficient recent activity to justify a block - The IP editor hasn't had any warnings today or even this week - we have no way of knowing they even saw the one that was issued last - which was 10 days ago. It's a middle school IP, so it's probably not the same person.
2. I didn't see any blatant vandalism. Now I can't say this edit was solid, but I can't say it damaged the article. It seemed messed up already.

I guess it warranted a warning but the editor seems to have stopped on their own. Remember, blocks aren't for punishment, they're to protect Wikipedia. Your efforts on vandal patrol are really important, and please don't let this diminish your efforts. I hope this answers your question. Toddst1 (talk) 01:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well I can't say as I agree. 15 warnings & 2 blocks in one month alone would seem to constitute a pattern of persistent vandalism in my book. And the edit in question converted a fact into fiction. Is there such a thing as a "post-final" warning? Anyway, I'd appreciate it if in the future when you delete a request, kindly leave a reason why. Thanks. ~ Alcmaeonid (talk) 01:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

If you look at the AIV history, you can see that I had previously labeled your report as "Insufficient recent activity to justify a block." You're free to disagree with my judgement, and I'll take it as a compliment that you think I'm being too soft on editors. Admins often get criticized for being too hard. Either way, no ill feelings meant towards you. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 03:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Zachary Jaydon

Thank you for helping me out. I am not sure what I need to say regarding the AfD, or where. I would like to have a chance to defend my article, and finish citing my magazine sources before it is assumed to be a bad article. I'd also like to add that I satisfied every request of all the admins involved in the first AfD by citing independent, verifiable sources regarding Mr. Jaydon. I had been working on the article with a couple of admins; one in particular, whom said she was happy with number of sources that I used, and even helped source the article, and help me to clean it up to meet Wiki standards. If you could give me any advice, I would be grateful. I am not the most experienced in some parts of Wiki formatting, but I am trying hard to learn, and feel like I can contribute well written, unbiased articles to this site. Thank you for your time. Skyler Morgan (talk) 01:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll add my voice -- thanks for helping out this editor. Taking the time to read into the article's history when you found it tagged for deletion was above and beyond the call of duty, and taking it to AfD was ... well, in my family we call that "gentlemanly", but you may not read the same qualities into that word as we do, so let me just say "praiseworthy", on the level of helping a little old lady to cross the street when nobody's looking. On behalf of this editor, I thank you. Thanks also for kindly informing me about the AfD; I believe I've already committed myself to neutrality, so will not comment, but I am grateful for the notification. If I can ever be of service to you, let me know. Accounting4Taste:talk 02:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll accept the complement. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 03:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

please block

If you can, please block User:Joe_Law. All he makes are bogus articles. Thanks. Me what do u want? _{Your Hancock Please}

Re: Al Viro

Your reason for deletion seems nonsensical. How is it possible that "the most prolific recent contributor to the Linux kernel" doesn't indicate the person's significance, so little so that the entry merits deletion? This wiki is running on a kernel that this guy is fairly prominently responsible for. The fact that he's difficult to learn about doesn't make him insignificant. In fact, how is it possible that the archives of your talk pages merit more bytes on this server than a few words on Al Viro? Context, man, context. Please undelete the article and stub it if you must, but it should be available for future clarification and development. Niels Olson (talk) 19:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

If he were the most prolific recent contributor to Slurpee he wouldn't be WP:Notable either if that was his only claim to notability. That being said, I've restored the article to your userspace. See User:Niels Olson/Al Viro. Toddst1 (talk) 19:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Not vandalism

I was just looking for Harshing My Mellow (disambiguation). It was speedied using a rationale of vandalism? Please restore it and the other articles that redirect to it. At least let it go through an AFD. Its deletion harshes my mellow. --evrik ^(talk) 20:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

After looking at the history again, I've restored the article and reverted it back to the last good edit, yours. Sorry to HYM. 8-). Toddst1 (talk) 20:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• Thank you. --evrik ^(talk) 20:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

See discussion below. Toddst1 (talk) 22:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Abuse report 194.83.177.252

I was trying to post an abuse report, following guidelines on [4], apparently it didn't work like I thought. It's an anonymous address from a university with repeated vandalism, so it should be banned for anonymous use and an abuse report should be sent to the relevant address. Thanks in advance, and sorry for the trouble. --AkselGerner (talk) 22:07, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I guess I figured out how to do it, it's not easy to do the right thing sometimes :p. BTW Is it ok to remove the warnings over this from my talk page, once it's resolved?--AkselGerner (talk) 22:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Harshing My Mellow (disambiguation)

Hi, you seem an active editor, indeed I see you are an admin ... can you explain what is going on at HMM? Why would you be trying to save a dab page with only one entry? It seems madness to me but ... :) Abtract (talk) 22:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It appears to be a poorly formed dab page with two entries, per my read. Toddst1 (talk) 22:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

But one "entry" is a see also ... this is a one entry dab page and shouldn't exist ... at the most it deserves a hatnote on the target article. Abtract (talk) 22:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Good point. Upon further ivestigation, It seems like Harshing My Mellow (album) and Harshing My Mellow (disambiguation) are both redirects. Seems neither should exist. Toddst1 (talk) 22:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well spotted ... I didn't get that far. Abtract (talk) 23:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• Harshing My Mellow (disambiguation) exists because of wikt:harshing my mellow. I was going to make a soft redirect, but then found other things under the same title, so it became a disambig. Sometimes redirects are used as placeholders when an article does not exist (yet). If you're going to nominate the redirects for deletion, please take it here: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion first. --evrik ^(talk) 23:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

That's why I thought it was vandalism at first. It seems really screwy. Let Afd run its course. Toddst1 (talk) 23:24, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

please block

If you can, please block User:Joe_law. All he makes are bogus articles. Thanks. Me what do u want? _{Your Hancock Please} —Preceding comment was added at 23:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for asking again, but you said last warning to User:Protos44. I just nominated one of his articles for speedy deletion. And I just warned User:Bob McGregor for the last time. P. S. Sorry for writing this section twice. Me what do u want? _{Your Hancock Please} —Preceding comment was added at 01:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion?

Hello. You just deleted my page under Christopher R Snyder while I was still working on it. Can you please give me some time to update it before you delete it?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skiwee10 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

That looks an awful lot like a vanity autobiography to me. I can't imagine it passing WP:Bio. I'm not inclined to restore it. 00:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Reincarnation of User:Sixtynine69x69

You have blocked him right? And I suppose it is you who also you are also the one who deleted his page. You said that he vandalised. What kind of vandalism is this exactly? I am asking this because there seems to be a reincarnation of him at tl.wp. with the same user page as User_talk:Sixtynine69x69. -- Felipe Aira 04:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Firestorm (robot)‎

You closed this dicussion using the wrong template. Just wanted to let you know, and I corrected your mistake. Happy editing, Dusti^{talk to me} 18:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Duh.. Toddst1 (talk) 13:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Eric William Wright

Thank you for moving this page. The speedy deletion tag appeared as soon as i had saved the page, so something strange happened there. Gaia Octavia Agrippa 22:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:April 2008

I know I shouldn't, but his edit didn't leave me any choice. Did well in blocking him and be sure it won't happen to me as well:). Ciao --62.1.235.229 (talk) 23:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

NATO article vandalism

Sorry about that (NATO) but I felt insulted. :) 84.208.79.120 (talk) 23:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: John O'Keefe

What made youthink you could remove a bio I placed on Wiki? Who are you to determine who is and is not "important enough?" John is a very important voice in the emerging conversation and have help many people find their voice - your removing him simply shows your bias to people of faith you disagree with - explain it to me - I find your actions personal. [morewormwood] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morewormfood (talk • contribs) 17:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Tracy Price-Thompson article

You deleted that article even though it had the {{hangon}} template in it!

Like I said in the contesting talk comment, if articles on books themselves are not eligible for speedy deletion, how the heck is an article about the author of four books eligible? --❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 18:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review, of course - you should have just clicked on the ISBN number links of the books in the article and seen how many libraries have them. --❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 18:57, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for Tracy Price-Thompson

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Tracy Price-Thompson. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

I have restored the article because it was deleted within one minute of the {{hangon}} tag being placed on it. I've given the user some time to prove their statement, but appropriately warned that failure to add the required sources could result in a re-deletion. Cheers! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 19:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Duet Total Compatibility System

I just thought I'd mention that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duet Total Compatibility System seems to be snowballing! -- JediLofty ^{User ¦ Talk} 08:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad there seems to be consensus. I'll err on the side of caution and seek consensus for issues I'm not sure of like this. I'll see if I have time to close the speedy this afternoon. Toddst1 (talk) 17:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

why do you keep deleting them/?

User:LisoOR

Could you please re-examine this user's behavior since you last blocked them? After his block expired, LisoOR (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) commenced to upload a photo of Keeley Hazell's breast and tried replacing her infobox photo with the breast photo. He reverted himself because he couldn't get it to work. --Laser brain (talk) 17:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Ravedactyl: Project Evolution

Hi. Does Ravedactyl: Project Evolution not qualify for deletion? Like Codename: Justice, it is a non-noteworthy short film by a non-noteworthy person that appears to be have been written in the same blatant advertisement style as Codename: Justice, but another admin removed that tag I placed on it because, according to them, it was "not G4". What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nightscream (talk • contribs) 21:02, 5 April 2008

My opinion only: I think it does not qualify for speedy deletion because it asserts notability, having won the film festival. However, I believe it would/should be deleted through AfD. Your mileage may vary. Toddst1 (talk) 00:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually not at all

I dont get it. What is with guys power deleting n Wikipedia? There are corporations all over wikipedia that have the exact same messaging. No consistency at all. What is the satisfaction with removing some corporations and not others. What company do you work for? Why are you weighing in on my request to personally speak with the person who deleted the submission? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesoweng (talk • contribs) 02:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Jamesoweng (talk) 02:33, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Curious, does one earn some sort of credentials or points for being the first to delete something?

Just curious to the motivation of deleting corporations written in an encyclopedia style being deleted within 60 seconds of being submitted. No one wants to answer my question. Or give me a way of getting a private company entered in properly. I have already read the wikipedia articles. Why is microsoft or amazon or expedia okay when lesser or unknown companies are not?

Jamesoweng (talk) 03:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Your questions (the legitimate ones about why your articles have been deleted) have been answered numerous times. As I said before, please read the answers. Additional information about creating articles on companies can be found at WP:Corp.

Regarding the quick deletion of articles. If an article has been speedily deleted once, recreating the article will likely lead to very speedy deletion. Mind you, the only article that you wrote that I deleted was there several months before another editor nominated it for speedy deletion. It should have been deleted long before that.

Toddst1 (talk) 19:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of article Grid5000

Hello, the Grid5000 article that you just deleted looks very similar to these articles :

• GARUDA (Indian)
• D-Grid (German)
• VECC (Calcutta, India)

From the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grid_computing#National_Grid_Projects

So I was wondering why you deleted it.

Thanks

Tichadok (talk) 13:13, 22 March 2008 (UTC) Hi Todd, if you want to be consistent, I think you either have to delete the three articles above or undelete the Grid5000 article. Thanks

Thank you for your suggestion regarding GARUDA . When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Same goes for D-Grid and VECC. Feel free to take them to AfD.Toddst1 (talk) 15:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Tichadok (talk) 14:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Could you please undelete the Grid5000 article, if the GARUDA exists for India, then the Grid5000 has to exist for France. The Grid5000 article is written as the same manner as the GARUDA article, that's why I see no reason why you deleted it. Thanks Tichadok (talk) 23:29, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

See WP:OSE. Toddst1 (talk) 12:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

George Sowden

Hi, you seem very determined to keep the an article about George Sowden off wikipedia. While I appreciate that the first time it was written, it was possibly not "encyclopedic" in style, the second attempt was a good stub. If you feel that there is no place for George Sowden on Wikipedia, may I ask why you don't remove all the other founding members of the Memphis Group also? It seems to be a very random choice of yours. We have dozens of newspaper and magazine references, as well as awards, recognitions and Museum Exhibits of George Sowden's work to add, and, given a little time, will be happy to add them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drkolos (talk • contribs) 09:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

You could also just do a google search for George Sowden and see four pages worth of independent listings on third party, design, related websites and publications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drkolos (talk • contribs) 09:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

1. No, you are wrong. I do not "seem very determined to keep the an article about George Sowden off wikipedia". I deleted it (once) after it was nominated for speedy deletion by another editor.
2. You are free to nominate all the other founding members of the Memphis Group for speedy deletion if you think their articles fail minimum criteria.
3. Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).

Toddst1 (talk) 14:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Fooshy Deletion

Hi, you have marked Fooshy for deletion and warned me that I may be banned from editing again for self promotion. As my area of work is Website Development and Content Management, I feel I am in a good position to edit these pages and as such created the Fooshy page.

Although I do have a link to Fooshy, the article was not in any way self promoting - I used terms of the nature "Fooshy Claim" when describing features and I included a link to an external review by a leading authority on Content Management.

Can you tell me why there is still a problem with this article?

Thanks

Bigrbuk (talk) 08:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Responded on User_talk:Bigrbuk#Responding_to_your_question_hereToddst1 (talk) 16:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

According to WP:Corp - "An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." As mentioned above - does the review provided by a leading source in Content Management, not count as reliable and independent. It seems it is simply easier to delete an article that has already been deleted before, rather than give it a proper and fair evaluation.

Bigrbuk (talk) 08:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you understand the difference between WP:Notability and WP:Advert? 13:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and I fail to see the difference between the Fooshy entry and that of many other CMS's already within Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigrbuk (talk • contribs) 13:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I haven't surveyed the other CMs on Wikipedia, but this article appeared to be WP:Advert. WP:OSE won't fix that. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 13:40, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

warning

Hey. Just letting you know that I had spoken to an admin about the deletion of the vote, as well as the comments before doing so. I feel like I posted a legitimate explanation on the page. It wasn't a vandalism act. Please assume good faith. I suppose next time, I will have the admin do it for me. Skyler Morgan (talk) 00:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Whomever who you talked to gave you bad advice: Removing others' comments is not OK. In fact, you shouldn't remove your comments if you wish to retract them on a page like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zachary Jaydon (2nd nomination). The custom is to strike through your comments Toddst1 (talk) 12:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for that. Do you by chance know how long an AfD takes to be completed? The one on my article has been going on a week, so I just wondered. Thank you. I am just trying to get an idea. I appreciate the advice, and the information. Skyler Morgan (talk) 16:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It varies. If comments are still being made, things can be extended as in this case. Usually about 5 days unless consensus is reached sooner. Toddst1 (talk) 16:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Mariani Packing Company

Hi. Please don't take this the wrong way but, I think you may have gone a bit quick on deleting the page that the above talk page related to. I was in the middle of replacing the holdon tag that another user had removed "illegally" and trying to explain to the creator of the article why they needed to make changes for it to not be deleted. I'm asking that you undelete the article and allow it to go to AfD or undelete the article and PROD it instead. For information I have no connection to the article, its creator, or the user that removed the holdon tag. Thank you. Jasynnash2 (talk) 16:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it was too quick, but I've restored it per your request. Feel free to remove the speedy tag and take it from here. Toddst1 (talk) 16:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• • The whole thing is beginning to look bad actually. I was trying to do a favour because of that user removing the holdon tag but, now the creator of the article is getting vandalism notices about it. Seems really weird. Either way thanks for not taking offense and stuff I guess I'll just wait and see what happens with the weirdness. Jasynnash2 (talk) 16:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It appears Mariani Packing Company is a client of TMD Creative. Advert, username vio, etc. Toddst1 (talk) 16:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh. Pfft.

Sorry! 21655 ^{ωhατ δo γoυ ωαητ?} 16:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

My bad and not the only one today. Perhaps it's time for me to hang up the mop for the day. Toddst1 (talk) 18:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: User:User: 24.128.42.57

The IP had made several unconstructive contributions before actually being warned. The edit that you're referring to, removing vandalism, is some kind of joke with User:Johnny 5 names, who is indefinitely blocked. The IP and Johnny appeared to be waging some kind of "mafia" war over several articles, see [5]. I thought it best to put an end to their games. GlassCobra 16:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Not a problem. GlassCobra 16:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: This

I only learned a few months ago. :( - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 11:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Cathy Wilkes

Hi there, could you please explain me why you deleted this page? You put r1 code next to it but I checked links twice and all of them were fine. Copyright has not been infringed as my colegue who wrote MKG text is ok with me using it on Wikipedia on her behalf. Ups, right, you could not have known about it, but now when you know can you bring it back? What shall I do? Will you leave it as eg. a stab if I add a citation mark? There is no Cathy Wilkes Article on Wikipedia and it should be as she is a great artist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmvf (talk • contribs) 13:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC) thanks

The article was a blatant copyright infringement of http://www.mk-g.org/index.php?id=383. You copied the entire second paragraph (most of the article) verbatim. Since your colleague has not released copyright to Wikipedia, it must be removed quickly.

If you want use the material, you'll still have to deal with WP:Advert, but here is how you can grant wikipedia the copyright. :We need to verify that you are the real copyright holder and understand the legal implications of putting your copyrighted work on Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation has established specific licensing guidelines that we need to follow.

Follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requesting_copyright_permission#For_text. It has all the info you need. Be sure you understand the rights to the text that you will be giving up. Then, you'll be granted what's called "an OTRS ticket" that shows Wikipedia has been granted the rights to the text and then you can post the material verbatim.

We don't accept copyrighted work outside of that process in order to protect the holders of copyright, both from others posting their words on Wikipedia, and from unknowingly signing away their rights.

I hope you understand that refusing all copyrighted work until we have real evidence that it's been released into the GDFL is the best way to make sure we aren't violating anyone's rights.

I encourage you to review WP:COI, WP:Advert, WP:Bio and WP:Reliable before proceeding.

I hope this helps. Toddst1 (talk) 13:58, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I will do.It helps very much. Sorry if I am messing about - I am beginner here :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dmvf (talk • contribs) 14:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Deleted article about David Ellsworth

Hello. I'd like to know why exactly the mentioned article (Dr David Ellsworth) have been deleted. Ellsworth is the author of the book "Smith County Justice", which have recently being published on wikileaks. I also linked to the wikileaks article. I also told on Ellsworth' page, why the mentioned book is so important. It emphazises the corruptive judicial system in east texas in the late 70ies. Yes, the book and the author are not well known today, which is because the book have been supressed by texas state authorties (censored!). While many persons may not like what Ellsworth wrote about the texas justice system, it is a fact that these things really happened. So, could you please provide some further detail why you deleted the page? Scip (talk) 19:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I didn't think it asserted his notability per WP:Bio at all which is the reason it was deleted. (having written a book that people didn't like isn't notable) Beyond that, without citations seemed like a hoax. I've restored the article to your user space. You can find it at User:Scip/Dr David Ellsworth. If you can get some WP:Reliable references in it, it should pass WP:BIO. I recommend getting some references in there before you move it back to the mainspace, as it's likely to be re-deleted by someone else otherwise. Let me know if you need help with the move. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 19:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind response, Toddst1, and for restoring the article to my userspace. I'll rework it (it were not ready anyways) and add sources, if I can find some. One question remains: what if I cannot find reliable sources? Most of the informations I got so far came from the subject (Ellsworth) itself, which seems to violate the mentioned wikipedia policies. Shall I abandon the article in this case then? Scip (talk) 20:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

If you can't find sources, then the person truly is not WP:Notable and the article would be considered original research. You would then add the {{db-author}} tag to the article to have it deleted. Give it a shot and see what you can come up with. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 20:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahm - one (hopefully) last question: I took a look into the article of Wolfgang_Hohlbein my favourite author, who is well-known. However, there are no sources referenced in the article. Even the book list doesn't contain ISBN numbers. Ok, I am sure he is of course a notable person just because almost everyone (at least in EU) knows him, but it there seems to be no evidence for this on the article. I'm a little bit confused... Scip (talk) 22:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. You are right - that article is missing WP:Reliable sources and I've tagged it as such. However, having won awards, the article asserts notability so is not subject to speedy deletion for WP:Notability. It's kind of a technical distinction, I know, but that's how it works. I guess I could have just said WP:OSE. Hope this helps and don't hesitate to ask me or others further questions. You can always put the question on your talk page and add "{{helpme}}" right before your question if I'm not around. Good luck and happy editing. Toddst1 (talk) 23:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello Todd, so I now invested a lot of time trying to find sources either about the book or the author. I could not find anything about the latter, but something about the book. It is even mentioned in a wikipedia article (Kim Wozencraft) as well as the author. I am also in contact with a person at the University of Texas at Tyler Library (via mail). She told me the book were not supressed, in fact it is even available in the library. So you are very right, if I had not checked it I would have been sure the book were supressed, which seems not to be the case. However, I am not sure if I have enough sources (I think I don't), perhaps you can take a look at what I got so far. Currently I am trying to get some kind of access to the tyler library, they do indeed have informations both about the book and ellsworth, but on microfilm, which I cannot access from here (I'm located in germany, a trip to texas just for a wikipedia article would really exceed my limits).Scip (talk) 20:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, a couple of comments: I think you should focus on why the person or the book is WP:Notable. As you find that, you'll want to cite your source - preferably with a footnote or three. The book listed on Amazon will be considered a spam link.

Just for example, take a look at a similar article about a journalist that I wrote, Carol Leonnig. I think you'll get the idea. You want to find things like awards or where his work was cited. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 20:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes the page about Carol Leonnig indeed shows how to do it. However, meanwhile I got word that the author I'm trying to get informations about did use a false identity, and - once this fact were revealed - leaved the region. This might be the cause why I seem to be unable to find any references about him but the fact that he just wrote this (and another) book. So I think I'll abandon the idea to write an article about him, it would not be reliable. Thanks again for your efforts to assist me, I learned a lot! Scip (talk) 21:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

TomGreen 2

Unfortunately, your decision is a bad day for common sense. By reversing his block you have given him the green light to do as he wishes. Furthermore, you have also now made a personal attack against me. I was trying to help clear up what I saw - when I checked his edit history this afternoon - to be a long-standing problem which nobody appears to be willing to address. It seems whenever one tries to stand up to the bullies, one comes away with a bloody nose for one's troubles. Well, on your heads be it. It's unsurprising that Wikipedia is seen as such an unreliable source in the press when people such as this are given carte blanche to do what they want (I am a journalist so ought to know). I would request a third opinion, but see little point in it, and I feel I have no choice other than to leave Wikipedia. I cannot be involved with a project that appears to condone this behaviour. Congratulations must go to both yourself and Mr Green for this. Don't bother posting a reply on my talk page, because I won't be here to read it. Goodnight. 86.147.218.231 (talk) 22:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.Toddst1 (talk) 23:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Paul20070 Toddst1 (talk) 16:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Edits by 86.147.218.231

Hi Todd. I am the user who reported TomGreen to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism yesterday afternoon, and in light of events that seem to have happened after that, I thought I should come here and explain my position. I realise I was a bit over-enthusiastic in reporting him for something quite small really, and you were right to unblock him. I'm pleased to say I'm not responsible for what happened later in the evening. That appears to be down to whoever inherited my IP address (I logged off after posting my report and my IP address changes every time I do that). I'm glad you've removed that attack piece from the talk page. It appears to be attacking all of us (TomGreen, yourself and me - me because I'm not a journalist and my name isn't Derek). I'd like to request the page be deleted and salted if that's possible. I'm also going to get myself a user ID so this sort of thing doesn't happen again. Thanks 86.147.219.12 (talk) 11:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for contacting me. I really bear you no malice. Unfortunately, IP talk pages cannot be salted. They would prevent future communication. As far as deleting them to hide history: I would feel better about that if the request came from that IP. I believe you when you say you are the same person, but I don't know that. As an admin, we have to be very careful.

You seem to be a very knowledgeable person about Wikipedia, and I'm sure you could contribute quite a bit. I thoroughly encourage you log in with a named account, but I hope you actively try to steer clear of the kind of conflict you found yesterday.

Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 13:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Paul20070 Toddst1 (talk) 16:37, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Detective work

Your post encouraged me to do a bit of detective work and has helped me to uncover some rather interesting facts. Seems I might have inadvertantly been harbouring a drawful of socks. Hopefully my reply will help to clear matters up and sort things out. Thanks Paul20070 (talk) 14:56, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Given the extent of the problem, I've decided to retire. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I shudder to think what may have happened had you not. Cheers Paul20070 (talk) 16:10, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

suggested deletion of Daniel Durnford Kemp page

This page is in no way defamatory as it has been written by the very person in question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkemp24 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Reply on User talk:Dkemp24Toddst1 (talk) 18:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

user:Lukeatomic

You've recently blocked him for 3RR, if I revert his edits now then I will be in violation of 3RR, if you take a look at his edits, they are clearly in violation of several policies that I pointed out, so could you revert his last two edits (if you agree with me about them being blatantly unconstructive of course) since I don't want to risk getting blocked too, thanks. The Dominator (talk) 23:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Which article? The editor has gone through quite a few. Toddst1 (talk) 00:12, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The last two edits, on Bringing Up Buster but that one has already been reverted by a different user, so the only remaining one is Pilot (Arrested Development episode). The Dominator (talk) 00:15, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, these persistent trivia adders are sometimes difficult, because all you can really do is point out the policies that they are violating and hope they'll discuss. Question; is there a warning template I can add to a user's talk page in situations of addition of trivia? The Dominator (talk) 00:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

{{uw-trivia}} or {{uw-3rr}} will work, but note they have to be {{subst}}ed, so it would look like {{subst:uw-3rr}} as you type it. Check out Wikipedia:TUSER for the complete list and guidance on where/when to use what. cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 00:29, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I am familiar with warning templates and have been using them regularly for months, but for some reason I've never seen {{uw-trivia}}, I've never really browsed through the single level ones before. Thanks. The Dominator (talk) 00:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

You should check out WP:TW. It helps with warnings and AIV reports. Toddst1 (talk)

Yeah I've got Twinkle, it's great, I'm still trying to learn to master it, well thanks for your help, happy editing! The Dominator (talk) 01:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! You made my day...

Sick and tired of telling these guys to stop their vandalism on wikipedia, and thanks for putting the block on this guy User talk:137.132.3.7.

Dave1185 (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

and you made mine. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 00:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Ruby James Deletion

Hi, I am really new to this and I am trying to navigate my way around. The article that I posted was deleted for blatant advertising. I am really not trying to advertise here, but wanted to post more or less a bio of the performer. People kept asking why she wasn't listed here and so I thought I would do that. If I have done it in an improper format, please let me know. I would be happy to redo the article. I copied and pasted the bio because it had a lot of information in it. I had planned on editing it and then was blocked and by the time I was unblocked and got through that process the page was deleted.

Here are the facts:

Performer with 2 E.P.'s "Loaded and Sweet as Sin" First Full-Length Album: Desert Rose Placements: Nu-Line Cinema "The Women"

Let me know if this is acceptable. Aquila Red (talk) 00:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

RFA

Thanks for the note, but the odds are slim that I'd get overwhelming support, both because of the enemies I've made who'd come out of the woodwork (User:Everyking has even posted on WR that I ought to be banned) and the schoolmarmish types who dislike my blunt approach. But thanks for the vote of confidence. --Calton | Talk 02:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

For a taste of the wackiness that wold result from my apply for adminship, check out the shenanigans here, where a few admins get a bug up their butts about my horrible and disruptive tagging of spammer talk pages. User:Doug User:Ryan Postlethwaite‎, and User:John Reaves seem particularly, well, obsessed -- check out the last one's comments in particular. --Calton | Talk 12:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Univ of Maryland IP troublemakers

Hi Todd- I see you blocked 136.160.138.51 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) - they seem to have moved to 136.160.150.110 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), now short-term blocked after doing more of the same. Just thought you might want to keep an eye on it. Thanks. Tvoz |talk 04:15, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

God, I hate vandals. -- 136.160.160.102 (talk) 23:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Reported at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#University_System_of_Maryland_IP_vandals Toddst1 (talk) 23:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

137.132.3.7 block

Please double-check your 1 month block on Singapore University's external Internet router. In my opinion, its seems a bit excessive to issue such a block for a single vandalism edit and call it a BLP violation. At the very least, change your block reason to schoolblock before I have to deal with dozens of irate and confused emails on unblock-en-l. Thanks. --  Netsnipe  ►  16:54, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Adjusted to 2 weeks for schoolblock. This is the third block for that IP and the previous one was for 1 weeks. That really doesn't seem excessive to me, but if you feel strongly about it, I will not be offended if you feel you need to adjust it further. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 17:01, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't the length or the actual blocking that I found excessive. I meant to say calling a one-off bit of vandalism and then citing WP:BLP as overkill, not to mention potentially confusing to the thousand other students likely to be behind that router. = ) --  Netsnipe  ►  17:11, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Sdrtirs

User:Sdrtirs left 12 messages on my talk page with 12 separate headings, and I replied. User:Sdrtirs has continued leaving messages on my talk page, after I have already acknowledged receiving his deltion notices. If my actions are legitimately considered vandalism, while User:Sdrtirs's are not, then Wikipedia holds deletionists and bots to a far lower level of conduct than contributors. Dekkappai (talk) 18:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Note: He has since given me a warning to stop uploading these images, which were uploaded LAST YEAR-- back when Fair Use was considered Fair Use here, if you recall. I have long since ceased uploading images of living persons. Hence, I consider this "Warning" to be in intentional provocation. Dekkappai (talk) 18:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

<sarcasm> Annoy a deletionist with a bot? Heaven forbid! </sarcasm> ;) But seriously... Several of these images-- though I've long since given up defending images of living people-- have extenuating explanations, such as retired and jealously guarding privacy, etc. Also some of these images were to film posters, which to my knowledge are still allowed under Fair Use. Is mass-tagging these for speedy deletion really appropriate? Dekkappai (talk) 19:12, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

"Posters, programs, billboards, ads. For critical commentary." This means film posters are only Fair use for discussion of the poster itself, not the film? Then 99.9999999% of the film posters on Wikipedia do not belong here. And neither do I, I'm beginning to suspect. Dekkappai (talk) 19:19, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to be a pain in the posterior, Todd, but I think this edit says a lot... Cheers. Dekkappai (talk) 19:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Attacks

I have been editing the Chicago Cubs page for a while now, and a few days back, this guy User:Tool2Die4 comes around and starts screwing stuff up. He posted an insult on my page shortly after I tried to make nice with him. Dont believe me? go check it out. I then requested an admin's help in looking at this situation wherein I admitted that I made an angry response to his initial attack. I had tried to get him to work with me (see his talk page) and he ignored this and posted (see my talk page) a message saying "What do you expect from a car salesman who went to the college of dreams" which is a direct and unprovoked attack on both my livelyhood and my background. I tried to be the good guy, this guy is a troublemaker and I wont get involved in an edit war with him, which I think is his intention. I do not know if you are aware of the admin intervention I requested about an hour ago? Thanks.Wjmummert (talk) 20:29, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

This is pretty laughable. The situation was discussed at large on the Cubs talk page, and you chose not to participate. Keep peacock words and POV out of articles. And you've been called out on your talk page in the past for adding original research to articles. It really isn't that hard of a concept to grasp. Tool2Die4 (talk) 20:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

You two can solve your content dispute - I'm not getting ivolved in that. That personal attack that I mentioned to you is all I saw. I don't know where User talk:Tool2Die4 attacked you and haven't been able to find it. If what you say is true, we have at least two wrongs. I can't stand up for either of them and will warn and/or block as appropriate. I think this is too complicated for AIV. It's been there at least once today and got kicked out.Toddst1 (talk) 21:49, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Nomination for Speedy Deletion

I nominated that user talk page for speedy deletion because the user appears to be inactive, and the page has no substantial edits. Please assume good faith, I believe I followed policy.

Thanks.

Ragnaranchorage (talk) 22:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, I see the attempts to archive now. Sorry, I was referring to posting history. Looked like the user hadn't posted in a long time, and that talk page was dormant for a year until today.

Ragnaranchorage (talk) 22:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Reply

I don't understand how I have been involved. I never use IP addresses. Can you clarify? Thanks.--RyRy5 ^{Got something to say?} 00:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Wait! Never mind. I understand. I thought I vandalized a page. Sure I'll have a look.--RyRy5 ^{Got something to say?} 00:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Coming Clean

Hello User:Toddst1. I am the vandal that has been trying to inject some humor into talk pages. Obviously, I've taken my antics a bit far. Please excuse my actions and try to forgive me. I started out yesterday in a quest to see what the particular responses were from admins in the face of varying degrees of vandalism and disruptive edits.

I began as the bellicose editor User talk:136.160.138.51 and tried to be as harsh and uncooperative as I could. I found that admins quickly came down on me harsh with the schoolblock template as a result of my personal attacks.

The next identity I "claimed" was that of User talk:136.160.150.110 as more of a neutral vandal. I was surprised to find the response from admins to be much softer and more tolerant.

The third time, I was User talk:136.160.154.150: the friendly vandal. I left messages that espoused "have a nice day". Still disruptive, of course, but not the seething personal attacks I started with. I found the admin response to be even softer. In fact, a few complimented me on my knowledge of Wikipedia and invited me to sign up.

The fourth facade I assumed was that of User talk:136.160.160.102: the "ignorant-yet-well-intentioned" editor. With your response to this one, however, I realized you had had enough. I tried leaving a "trail" to see if the admins could follow, yet I don't believe you were able to link them all (The 'Weir-beast', the Bitter Sweet Symphony comments). Anyways, as I said, they were an experiment in admin response and I feel regret that they have been taken as seriously and badly as they have. This has all been my fault. Please forgive my actions. I promise to continue being a constructive editor on Wikipedia. Thank you for your time. --136.160.144.22 (talk) 00:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it'd probably be better if I morphed into who I really am... -- 136.160.144.22 (talk) 00:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

... which is me. -- VegitaU (talk) 00:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I've had such a hankering to see what being blocked is like, I couldn't resist it any more. Please feel free to block me for violations of WP:SOCK. But there's no reason to rangeblock all the IP addresses. -- VegitaU (talk) 00:56, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the fourth facade: I did connect the dots. It was fairly simple, because I have User:RyRy5's page watchlisted, and seeing different IPs replacing the page with the lyrics to Bittersweet Symphony (which as far as I'm concerned is the greatest song of all-time) kinda gave it away. Enigma ^message Review 05:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with the 15 minute block. I found that to be punitive and in violation of WP:POINT. Instead of a short block you should've given a full 24 hour block for vandalising Wikipedia. Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 09:32, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I meant no sarcasm in my response to your block, but I have never considered being an admin, though I agree with your block of me. Please forgive my causing you any grief. Believe me, I have regretted my actions since yesterday. I can only ask that you forgive me once more and try to believe that I shall not be reverting to my childish behavior any more. Thanks. -- VegitaU (talk) 14:48, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Abuse report

Thanks, I'll check it out. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 00:50, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

The 10 People Who Suck

I beg your pardon? Please don't accuse me of vandalizing Wikipedia when I've done no such thing. I only pop into Wikipedia now and then to look things up and if I see a mistake I correct it. I most certainly didn't make a page called "The 10 People Who Suck." 82.31.37.95 (talk) 10:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Replied on User talk:82.31.37.95. Toddst1 (talk) 16:05, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

final warning

Please, tell me how that is uncivil? Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 12:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Ask your Mom or your teacher. Toddst1 (talk) 13:39, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

How rude. Avoiding my question are we? Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 22:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Second pair of eyes requested

Hi. I don't think we have met. I wanted to get a quick neutral admin review of my block of User:SamuelM555. I received a complaint that this user was adding ethnic/racial categories to articles on living people without any verifiable sources to back them up, and edit-warring when other editors removed them. I warned the user, and then blocked for two weeks when they continued. The length of block reflects the fact that this is now the user's third block. Please, if you have time, take a quick look and tell me what you think. Thanks in advance, --John (talk) 15:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I appreciate it. I would rather err on the side of leniency when making such blocks, but I endorse the suggestion that a future block if required would be indefinite. Let me know if I can ever do anything in return for you, and thank you again. --John (talk) 15:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

That user

I'll say it's support. We both got more than enough cr*p off him that day. Pretty soft outcome at AN/I, but there you goes. Best wishes. Ref ^(chew)(do) 15:53, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for removing the vandalism from my user page. It is much appreciated! Alanraywiki (talk) 22:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

TomGreen

I notice you've unblocked TomGreen because of this edit, which was actually a response to this edit. This user has a long history of disruptive edits, which he hides amongst constructive edits. Whenever anyone has tried to take him to task in the past, he has accused them of harrassment (see this for example). If he's not to be blocked, I would like to request that someone keep an eye on him. Thanks 86.147.218.231 (talk) 17:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know about what you said above, but I don't see any blatantly disruptive behavior after this final warning that you issued. This un-cited fact added to an article about a future album is the only thing that could come close. I feel I made a mistake by blocking him. I have unblocked him and apologized. Both were in order. Toddst1 (talk) 18:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I may owe you an apology myself, as I got the impression you'd unblocked him because of the comment he'd posted on my talk page. As I say, I apologise for getting the wrong impression. The thing that concerns me is that he will be making more disruptive edits, and some of these edits slip beneath the radar, and damage the integrity of this encyclopedia. His disruption can be traced back to at least February 2007, and I feel that he should be monitored in some way to prevent him from doing this. 86.147.218.231 (talk) 18:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I realise I sometimes go to the limit of what is permitted, but I am not actually trying to be disruptive at all. Many of my edits are attempts at combating what I see as people having biased personal interests in articles. Thanks for being reasonable. Tom Green (talk) 18:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

In fact, this is sometimes not the case. For examples of this user's disruptive edits, see [6] [7] [8] [9] [10])[11] [12] [13] [14]. 86.147.218.231 (talk) 18:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Suggestion: Perhaps both of you should chill out a bit. My opinion only. Toddst1 (talk) 18:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

That's a good suggestion. He seems to be behaving himself at the moment. I'm happy as long as he continues to do so. 86.147.218.231 (talk) 19:02, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Note to future readers: The ip here turned out to be a sock of User talk:Paul20070 who retired after I requested a checkuser Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Paul20070. The sock was confirmed along with many others. Toddst1 (talk) 16:14, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I found the socks after discovering the checkuser report. I later discovered they were the work of two (now former) friends who I had allowed to use my computer. I thought it best all round if I retired. I've now salted my password so am unable to log in to leave this message. Paul20070 81.152.149.124 (talk) 18:26, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Please undo deletion of the article Kosmopolis

Hi. I have been hired by the Center of Contemporary Culture of Barcelona in order to upload to Wikipedia all the information related to Kosmopolis. International Literature Fest. I have a permission letter (in Spanish) I will be very happy to provide if requested. I was in the midst of editing the article and you abruptly deleted it without previous notice. ? Olga Sala (talk) 16:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Baloney. You had plenty of notice and acknowledged it by adding a {{hangon}} tag to the article after it was tagged as a blatant copyright violation. It would have also been deleted as an WP:Advert. Please stop using Wikipedia for your commercial gain. See the warning on your talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 16:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

No commercial gain here (we are talking about a book festival!!). There are many literary festivals in Wikipedia already. This is a major event in Spain organized by the Center of Contemporary Culture of Barcelona (CCCB), which finds it extremely important to make all the info. related to Kosmopolis available to anyone interested. I will be very glad to provide any info or copyright permission if requested. Also, I will be very glad if you can help me and will follow your proper instructions happily. It has taken me a while to write the article and edit it afterwards, right now I feel quite frustrated. Please help. Thanks in advance. Olga Sala (talk) 17:17, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

replying on User talk:Olga Sala Toddst1 (talk) 17:29, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello Todd. Please tell us what to do and we will gladly follow your instructions. There are plenty of literary festivals in Wikipedia and we never thought it would be a problem. All the material and images provided come from the CCCB itself (so no copyright violation occurs) and in the following days we will send the text and images copyright permissions to Wikipedia. Besides that, the CCCB wanted to make a big contribution to Wikipedia introducing short bios of all the major writers and cultural actors that up to date have participated in the festival. Some writers have an entry already, some doesn't (in the deleted article they were linked already). Having said that, I would like to remark that Kosmopolis is a literary festival organized by a public institution. The entrance fee is absolutely symbolic and if some advertising goals are in play here are those in favor of culture and free knowledge. Please help us.Olga Sala (talk) 20:54, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a recipe for you. I think the answer is review WP:Advert and WP:Notable to start. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 22:52, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Suparna Bhattacharya

Hi. I established the page on Suparna Bhattacharya, a person who I consider to be an important Linux kernel developer, and a female at that, which I thought makes her unusual. She is certainly outstanding in the field of Linux kernel developers. Unfortunately, both for her and me, you thought otherwise, and deleted her page in Wikipedia.

I did not see that there was an impending deletion, nor the discussion on the deletion. My 'bad'. Is there a way that I can look at the discussion, and perhaps repechage the decision? Can you tell me how I can ensure that I always see discussions about deletions of pages I established?

I only discovered the deletion when I mentioned Suparna Bhattacharya to my son who is studying computer programming at the Australian National University, said something of her achievements, and went to look her up here.

With thanks, - Peter Ellis - Talk 10:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

It was speedily deleted on March 17 after nomination by User: Croquemitaine42 under A7: An article about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant. I see that User: Croquemitaine42 didn't leave the courtesy note on your talk page which is both unfortunate and a pet peeve of mine. In reviewing the article, I feel that the speedy deletion was a good one, that the article didn't assert notability. Yes she published a few articles, and yes she had jobs.

As a courtesy, I have restored the article to User:Peter_Ellis/Suparna Bhattacharya to allow you the opportunity to establish her WP:Notability under WP:Bio. Then we can move it back to article-space after that has been established. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 15:24, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for putting it back into my space, which I note that Google had detected before I saw the mention here. :-) The subject is, I believe, an important and notable person and I will endeavour to bring out those matters further. - Peter Ellis - Talk 23:55, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

User: Paul20070

Hello Todd. I am User:Paul20070 and would like to disappear. But unfortunately, I made the mistake of salting my password before deciding I wanted to make this request, so it is now impossible for me to request this in the preferred way. I am a little vexed by recent events. I would have preferred not to go, but felt I had no choice when I discovered the true extent of what was going on. I'd be grateful for some advice, but would prefer you didn't remove the requests yourself since you appear to be the main interested party in this matter. Thanks 81.152.223.85 (talk) 08:48, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

You have the right to disappear and I will facilitate that. That means deleting your user page and subpage - not your user talk. That may be needed for further administrative work. Toddst1 (talk) 12:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

It would be good if you could do that. I've also left notes for Jimbo Wales and Alison requesting their help and advice on this matter, and posted a request at the asministrators' noticeboard and at the the checkuser debate, so I hope this doesn't prevent you from being able to act. Thanks. Paul20070 81.152.149.124 (talk) 18:35, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Hyowon

Hyowon is my friend here at Shepard's Ranch and I told him that I would clean his page up a little.I didn't delete any words except the ones that didn't make sense.Jacob Green696 (talk) 14:59, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

"Metal"

Hey what if I change the Greeting to something else that has to do with Metal?I'm only asking you because you seem to have the most problems with it.Jacob Green696 (talk) 16:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

It's not my call at this point; it's on ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 16:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Alrighty then I'll just convince all of them.Jacob Green696 (talk) 16:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for advice

Hi! Thanks for the advice regarding editing pages User_talk:Hazmog. I'm very new to this and I'm not trying to advertise anything - just want to contribute, but its hard knowing where to draw the line! Anyway looks like i need to research editing more thoroughly. —Preceding comment was added at 11:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Attila the Goth

I just noticed this. Thank you. For all the vandalism I couldn't seem to do anything about, thank you. I'd love to know the names of the nitwits doing it, & what they'll have to face for getting the school locked out.... Trekphiler (talk) 14:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Glad its appreciated. Some folks are more reluctant to make calls like that, but I think this case warranted it. I doubt the school will be able track them down. Toddst1 (talk) 16:22, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Ping-Pong

E-mail you have! Hope it clarifies things for you. Best. Pedro :  Chat  14:05, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

All is well. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 16:20, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I fail to understand

I was merely bringing the case to the communities attention. Goodandhonestwhig (talk) 12:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

thank you

Thanks for your help. Jackmantas (talk) 13:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm in the process of merging the pages. StraightBanging (talk) 14:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Justice Kennedy

I'm not sure where to put this. But I made some changes to the abortion and "gay rights" sections of the Kennedy entry that further explained the dynamic post-Casey. They were "reverted" quickly after. I'm unsure why. The edits I made were to further elucidate the impact of the differences between O'Connor and Kennedy on the meaning of the Casey plurality (which was incorrectly called a "majority" opinion on the site before my edit). Furthermore, it seems important to note on the gay rights section that the boy scouts opinion was a unanimous opinion and that the decision did not rest on any "gay rights" arguments but rather on the rights of a private organization to define its membership. The article before my edits did not make that clear. And since the section discussed more than "gay rights" cases, it seemed the title of the section was misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.34.234.180 (talk) 15:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Replied User_talk:208.34.234.180#Anthony Kennedy (my bad) Toddst1 (talk) 15:56, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for responding and reinstating the edits. I will try to remember to log in before making changes so as not to arouse suspicion. Good day.

Thanks for Deletion

Thanks for deleting that Azeem ahmed article I tagged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimpsonsFan08 (talk • contribs) 16:56, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

David L Cook

I see that you have placed a warning on the users talk page in reference to the slanderous edit. However, I also see thatyou said in your edit summary that the remark was not aimed at Cook personally? The edit clearly says "Cook" claims to be a humanitarian. How can that not be aimed at Cook? We need to blank this from the eidt history so that no one else can see such rumor. This could end up hurting the subject of this article. Canyouhearmenow 17:20, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification! Now, can we delete the edit from the history so that it cannot be read by the genral public? Canyouhearmenow 17:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! They have removed the edits from the history. This is the second time I have had to do this. I am wondering if I should ask for a page protection on this article. It seems that with the Christian articles, everyone wants to take pop shots at these people. Sometimes I can catch them and sometimes it kind of sneaks by. Do you think I should ask that this page be protected from unregistered users? Until they give up at least.. Canyouhearmenow 17:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Chamber Page

I am not sure why the chamber page(s) I created are considered advertising. I think they relate perfectly with the economic information associated with cites. 17:34, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It's pretty clear you are trying to promote that organization. While all of the info may be true, it's certainly not encyclopedic. Those articles also fail WP:Corp. Toddst1 (talk) 18:04, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Gimme a break! I just re-read the article. The Chamber of Commerce is a client of yours and you're citing material on YOUR website! Toddst1 (talk) 18:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I still disagree. Our company has hundreds of clients and I haven't tried to advertise them. My opinion still is that information about chambers of commerce is as valid as much of the information I see on Wikipedia about businesses, organizations, cites, etc. Despite your perception, my only goal was to add valid and useful information from the Economic section of the Parma, Ohio page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Insivia (talk • contribs) 12:56, 16 April 2008

user:nouse4aname

Hi there; I accept that you have been here longer than I have. But are you sure that this user justifies a block? I was just following through on his WP:AIV report, and it seemed to me that he was reverting vandalism by user:booowooo. I could be wrong. He has posted a very aggrieved {{unblock}} message on his talk page. Could I ask you to re-check, just to reassure me? --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 19:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

post on my talk page

Were you talking to me? Just wondering... J.delanoy^gabs_adds 00:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Help plz

Hi Todd,

You have recently deleted

21:08, 19 March 2008 Toddst1 (Talk | contribs) deleted "IP Triple Play" ‎ (A7 (group): Group/band/club/company/etc; doesn't indicate importance/significance)

It's a fact that "IP Triple Play" the trade name IPTP Networks is a quite big network organization that have a hundreds of peering partners, it forms 1% of AMS-IX. Also the company is the member of three largest internet exchanges AMS-IX, LINX, DE-CIX in the World List_of_Internet_Exchange_Points_by_size.

References:

[15] [16]

[17] [18]

I hope it's sufficient to restore page and I will take care to update it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RusMaxwell (talk • contribs) 22:32, 16 April 2008

RE: AdminToolbox

Glad you found it useful! How exactly did you configure Lupin to monitor AIV? whoops misread the message, but it would be great if the coding for that code be cracked.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 01:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

FYI: Avengah

User talk:JackLumber#FYI: 90.205.80.229 / 90.208.215.240 / Avengah

FWIW: When I posted my original message to JackLumber, I didn't know that Avengah would be unblocked; I just thought that Jack (who had dealt with Avengah both qua 90.205.80.229 and qua 90.208.215.240) should be informed. —SlamDiego_←T 13:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Questionable warning

Your warning [19] ] to a new editor seems excessive for a new editor who has created one bio article. Edison (talk) 19:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It was a bad BLP, that the subject objected to. That usually gets a 4im, but I gave a uw-3. Toddst1 (talk) 19:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I strongly object to your characterization of the talk page for the article as an "attack page" in your deletion of it. It should have been deleted as the talk page of a deleted article, since there weas no "attack" in it. It only contained quite proper comments I had made relative to sourcing. Please be careful when selecting a reason for deletion, so as not to cast other good-faith editors in a bad light. G10 was not the right label in this case for the talk page deletion. Edison (talk) 20:01, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Give me a couple of minutes to take a look at what I did. I will be back. Toddst1 (talk) 20:04, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. I wonder how you know that "Gavinwims" who blanked it is in fact the subject of the article, and where did he describe it as an attack page? I note that you deleted the main article as an A7 rather than an attack page. I myself often cannot decide whether to deleted the usual junk attack bio as nonsense or non-notable initially and a reference to the 1911 Britannica was definitely hoaxish. Regards. Edison (talk) 20:08, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

You are correct. I should have deleted that talk page as an orphaned talk page of deleted page. I suspect I was thinking that I didn't use the right deletion tag on the main article and somehow managed to put it on that one. It was clearly an error.

I deleted the main page as an unreferenced BLP that someone seeming to be the person objected to. I'll restore the article now, as it is clear there was at least one error on my part. My apologies. I have noted this in the talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 20:12, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I agree the article deserves deletion and should stay deleted at this point. I did not speedy it when it was created because it made a couple of claims of notability, which the I could not find refs to substantiate the claim to notability. There is no reason to leave an undocumented bio article up when no refs can be found, especially whe a new user claiming to be the subject says it is nonsense. Edison (talk) 23:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Admin

Well, I had an RFA at the end of February; at that time I had just over 5000 edits. I failed mainly on the grounds of too little experience outside of vandal-fighting. Around two weeks later someone asked me if they could nominate me for adminship. I asked a few experienced editors what they thougt about my chances of succeeding, and they all said it was way to early. Pedro said I should wait at least 8-10 weeks, which would be around 2 weeks from now. (May 1-May 15) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 01:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate that. Just a quick question: Several people have already said they would like to co-nominate me if/when I go up for RFA again. Would it be considered canvassing if I notified them/you when I go up for RFA since they asked me? Or do you think I would keep getting people saying "Too many co-noms" á la Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Pedro 2? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 01:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Your call. At this point, you have more experience with RFA than me. Mine was pretty bland. Toddst1 (talk) 15:26, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

How do I put the "information box" on my wiki page?

Toddst1, I am new to wikipedia and have no experience whatsoever. Ive noticed on many articles that on the right side is a large box with an icon, and information about companies. For example, how many employees work for the company, whether it is public or private, when it was founded, etc. How do I create a box like that? (Dkozick (talk) 13:50, 15 April 2008 (UTC))

replied on User talk:Dkozick Toddst1 (talk) 15:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Hellekant

Use of the term "neo-nazi", NPOV violations in this, BLP1E, etc. Sceptre ^(talk) 15:56, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead. Sceptre ^(talk) 16:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Björn Söderberg‎ might be a better venue. Sceptre ^(talk) 16:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

uploading picture

How do i upload a logo that has been officially service marked? What if I dont have the copyright information? help!! i dont want to get booted (Dkozick (talk) 21:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC))

Check out WP:Fair Use. Be sure to follow it carefully. Toddst1 (talk) 15:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Blocking

Can you get unblocked if you get blocked? Mr. Green^chat 15:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, for the right reasons. Let's work on not getting blocked in the first place. Toddst1 (talk) 15:48, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Well I haven't been blocked I was just wondering.Does the person who blocked someone have to unblock him to? Mr. Green^chat 16:09, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Final warning

I'm sorry? That was not a personal attack on anyone. It was simply a joke referring to the population as "retards". It's not meant to mean anything jees can't i make jokes around here? Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 15:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

replied on User talk:Riverpeopleinvasion Toddst1 (talk) 16:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Heyy I don't think should count as a personal attack.He did not say anyone in particular.He just said that most people wouldn't know what Q3 means and that people who think that everyone does is retarded.He meant everyone who is like that user, not just that particular user. Mr. Green^chat 16:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

speedy deletion of Moses Schneider

hello, i don´t wanna disturb or something else. I was just a bit surprised about the tempo of deletion. Although i´m using computers daily, i´m a very slow writer on keyboard. For me it´s not exactly clear, why you deleted my entry, because bands he produced, already appear in (the american) wikipedia like beatsteaks and botanica. the beatsteaks are very succesful in europe (golden records some counties) and the become known in u.s. more and more. the Hansa Tonstudio is a legend of studio, where david bowie, iggi pop, u2 and more recorded their records. the transporterraum berlin is a kind of ancestor of transporterraum new york, where his friend gordon raphael produced the strokes. you might read the complete story in the following link: http://www.avalondesign.com/strokes-news.html and look for "The Transporterraum Setup".

I forgot to say that M.S. was nominated for some (german) awards.

I´m looking forward to get an answer. thanks. ah, yes I´m a wikipedia- beginner.

Bwikib (talk) 22:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC) Bwikib

  thanks for the response, yes it would be great to have the possiilty to improve the article in my privat sandbox.
  cheers. Bwikib  (Bwikib (talk) 23:09, 16 April 2008 (UTC))

I found this at Bwikib/sandbox and moved it to User:Bwikib/Sandbox - I hope that was the right thing to do. Please shout if it's not. --AndrewHowse (talk) 14:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

How do I request a block and lock?

This is concerning the Sviatoslav Richter page. User Steiner_redlich is deleting relevant, cited material. All attempts by myself and other administrators to move the discussion to the articles talk page have failed. Also, when he was previously blocked, the edits continued anonymously. According to his talk page, Steiner_redlich is an admitted sockpuppet of francorussie.THD3 (talk) 00:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Urbanisasi berlebih

Hi. :) I see that you've tagged this article for WP:CSD#A2. I can't find any sign that it exists in another wikimedia project in another language. A google search for "Urbanisasi berlebih" didn't turn up a wikimedia project that I saw, and a search for a sentence from the article only produced this wikipedia page. Would you mind pointing out its source so I can process the speedy? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:57, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

While I'm at it, I just thought I'd point out the template {{UE}}, in case you're unfamiliar with it. :) I presume you might be, given the custom notice you left this user. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 19:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Pope benidect the 16

Hello, just so you know, I replaced the g1 tag on this article because it seems to fail the g1 criteria and replaced with {{db-reason|duplicate article}}. There doesn't seem to be a specific speedy for this (but it seems like there should be):) Cheers!--Sallicio^{$\color {Red}\oplus$} 20:10, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

The Innocent Mage

I deleted the copy righted material yesterday on April 16, 2008 right after I put it their. I was wondering why you deleted it all together? Kc007 (talk) 20:35, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Kc007

Replied on User talk:Kc007 (my mistake)Toddst1 (talk) 20:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

The Innocent Mage

Its okay. Thanks for replying. Kc007 (talk) 20:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Kc007

Re: Mike Sherman

Just for the record, I didn't make any more than 3 reverts. Though the IP's contributions show four edits, another user reverted one of them. The IP refused to explain why they were removing the content, despite the warnings given. BlueAg09 (Talk) 22:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Winkymania

This user made this edit. This is obvious advertising and his Userpage is the same and could be seen as a personal attack. He hasn't had any useful contributors and has vandalised. Just thought i would let you know. Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 00:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. What happened to him? Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 00:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

AIV reports

Pardon the interruption, but since you're active there at the time I'm writing this, I have a question (or series of questions) regarding an AIV report I submitted almost an hour before I'm typing this note. It's a re-report of a vandal IP I reported earlier in the day (the earlier report was cleared due to staleness), with some additional examples. Since the creation of the second (current) report the IP address has been used for nine or ten additional vandal edits, while my report languishes, being skipped repeatedly by admins addressing reports submitted after mine. Is there something amiss with the report? It certainly seems that I've given the same or greater level of detail as several of the reports added and closed since my addition. Minimally, I'd like some feedback on this, though what I'd really like is for some action to be taken on the vandal - it's pretty clear this address is being used by a chronic vandal of TV network pages (the edits done a couple of days ago that prompted the warning on his user page are identical to edits made by serveral blocked IPs and at least one vandalism-only account). Majorclanger (talk) 00:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Good report - replied User talk:Majorclanger#AIV ReportToddst1 (talk) 00:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Majorclanger (talk) 00:39, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning

Thanks for the friendly 3RR warning. I thought reversions of spam were excepted from the 3RR? Thanks for the clarification. Kindest regards, AlphaEta 02:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

correct. Response on [[User Talk:AlphaEta Toddst1 (talk) 03:01, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I'll keep it in mind. Have you ever danced with the Devil by the pale moonlight? (talk) 03:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Self-Harm

Hi there, Regarding this I'm of a similar mind to yourself. I've raised a chkuser but it's almost 2am here now. I don't have access to the IRC channels would you mind pushing it a wee bit please? I'm not sure this is something we can ignore personally. Leave me a message. Cheers ^Khukri 23:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and appreciated. ^Khukri 23:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I haven't been confirmed but I can try to get on IRC. I will notify of my progress. Best, Malinaccier (talk) 00:07, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to gain access to the administrator channel, but I'm in the regular channel. I'll try to bring the situation to light. Malinaccier (talk) 00:13, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey bud, sorry I was not online at the moment. Me like Malinaccier, have no idea how to access the admin IRC channel (never found a use for it). Is there something I can do to help (eg. contact police...?) Tiptoety ^talk 00:16, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

If we knew the IP we would know what police to call. I think the first step is to get an Checkuser quickly and maybe contact someone from the foundation. Not sure how to proceed with either. Toddst1 (talk) 00:18, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Strike that, I thought it was an IP editing, guess we will have to wait to here back from the CU. Tiptoety ^talk 00:18, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[20] We all had the same idea at once. :) I have never really had a need for it until now. Tiptoety ^talk 02:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh no - I unabashedly followed the directions on your talk page. I had your idea after you did. Toddst1 (talk) 03:02, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

		Thank you
		I would just like to say thank you for your efforts regarding the potential suicide thread on ANI last night. This may have been a poor taste message or hoax, but if it wasn't hopefully...... we may have made a real difference. So thank you and if ever there is anything I can do to help you in the future, please don't hesitate to ask. Khukri 07:58, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Quick Ban!

Thanks, Todd, for the quick IP ban on the Taft High School guy. I've been working my butt off on the California Schools and this guy comes in and messes up half the page. Thanks for getting him before he struck again. Manway (talk) 03:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Reply

I was talking about the source in question, not the user - that is the difference between the two comments. The other user, however, is attacking me personally. --07fan (talk) 04:29, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

That user's comment appeared to be in response to your racially motivated edit. Toddst1 (talk) 04:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

How is that "racially motivated"? Pan-Arabism is a political ideology (ie Saddam was a pan-Arabist), not a race. Many Arabs criticize Pan-Arabism as well. --07fan (talk) 04:39, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Your comment was interpreted by me as accusing Arabs across the region of historical revisionism. While your statement may have another interpretation, it certainly appears to more than one editor that you are making a statement about arabs, not arabs that follow a specific ideology. Toddst1 (talk) 04:48, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect, your interpretation is wrong and probably the result of your unfamiliarity with what Pan-Arabisim is. I never said "Arabs", I said "Pan-Arabist", and that does not justify the personal attack by the other user basically calling me a racist. Even if the warning you gave me was justified, which is not, shouldn't you at least warn the other user as well? --07fan (talk) 04:54, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Warning already retracted on User talk:07fan. It's clear that it was possible to interpret User:07fan's edit as anti-arab, but there is another way to interpret it, likely the way it was intended. Toddst1 (talk) 04:56, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Blindmansbuff

Hi, can you block this account. This is very likely sock of User:Hkelkar. I have reported it in Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Hkelkar_strikes_back. Hkelkar socks are identified by similar tendentious editing and are generally blocked without any formal procedure like checkuser etc. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 05:54, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well he/she doesn't seem to be active and I'm not sure how to identify a Hkelkar sock. Let me look some. Toddst1 (talk)

Hkelkar socks have pro-Hindutva POV-pushing, pro-Jews POV-pushing, anti-Muslim and anti-Christian POV-pushing, pro-India POV-pushing and anti-Pakistan and anti-Bangladesh POV-pushing. You can see the contributions of User:Hkelkar and his socks to familiarize yourself with his editing pattern. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 06:07, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

NOPV: if someone already made wrong artical, and its orchestrated by some govermant to do so, is erasing suchpropaganda a vandal act, or defendingthe truth. Vandalism is for instance to deny the right of name and indentity such some people reffering to themselvs as greeks are doing right now. They do taht to MAcedonians, but also to Kalash people. It seems that they have the right to erasye history and write what tehy consider and want to be truth. So stoping such propaganda is act of good will and not vandalism.

If thats not true, than wikipedia at whole is not encyclopedia but is a politicaly biased bunch of articles

KolevTome (talk) 10:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC) KolevTome

About a "vandalism" warning I got from you

I wanted to report that it is false but it said "If you didn't edit this page, you don't need to report it." With all due respect, the hell I don't. Because I have 2 vandalism warnings now and it says I have only a final one left. So I'm just going to post my report here. I don't know if I'm making a mistake by doing so, but I don't know where else to write it:

Only my brother also uses this IP because we share the same modem but different computers we use. 1. He doesn't even use english wikipedia, let alone editing a page. 2. I myself did not edit those 2 pages. 3. When I want to edit, I log into my user account, don't do it anonymously.

So this was probably a mistake by your bot. Nobody uses my computer. And I want my 2 warning rights back. Not that I think I'll vandalize in the future, but because I'd like to keep all 3 of them in case I make a mistake while editing.

Thank you for your understanding, in advance.

Mike Cr. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.62.138.72 (talk • contribs) 10:54, 20 April 2008

wikipedia-en-admins

Please also register your nickname before adding a request (type in /msg nickserv register password, replacing password with one of your choice). Then leave a note on my talk page, please. Cbrown1023 talk 16:11, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Aggrivated

This user is requesting an autoblock removal from a block you made, but the account has no edits and looks suspiciously like a sleeper account to me. Mind taking a look when you get the chance? Thanks. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Block of User:Carl.bunderson

Hello, you blocked this user for 3RR today. Now, it seems he was actually right in his conviction that his opponent was a banned sock (User:Beh-nam). Would you mind unblocking? Defending the Afghanistan articles from socks has been a huge problem, and we don't want to lose our last remaining legitimate editors in that field. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:54, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the heads up. Toddst1 (talk) 20:57, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the reconsideration, Todd. In the future, do you think there's a better way for me to deal with the vandals and socks than my admittedly ruthlesss reversion of their edits? It's just that I hate the thought of becoming the type of user who goes and tattles on others at the admin noticeboards. Thanks again, and have a good day. Carl.bunderson (talk) 00:15, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

My recommendation is to stop editing at 3. If it's vandalism, warn with each revert. Someone else will revert after your third, then file an AIV report. Toddst1 (talk) 17:38, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I will warn with each revert, I assume the tpv is the best one to use. I kind of don't believe that someone will revert after my third though; it took rather awhile for admins to respond to the situation well. Not to be offensive, but I feel like you guys don't always look at the context as fully as you could before doling out blocks. It seems obvious to me that the anon, and then the other user you blocked were in the wrong, and the only person that responded consistently on the noticeboard was not an admin, and sided with the anon. It's just frustrating that I go through so much trying to fend them off, and the admins don't seem to notice for quite awhile. I have nearly 8k edits, have been here for awhile, and have a barnstar for reverting spam; my other block was also on a 3rr violation, but I should have contested that as well; the other editor was in clear violation of "links to be avoided". Shouldn't admins notice these things, and give well-established editors the benefit of the doubt (as well as going through the whole context rather than blocking all involved)?

So how do I avoid this? Will my going to AIV before the anons/socks do actually help in these cases? I'm sorry if I'm being a pain, but I really do wonder about these things, and I really do appreciate you unblocking me. Carl.bunderson (talk) 19:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Block of Flukes1

I was wondering if I may extend his block to indefinite; his vandalism of J.delanoy's userpage, along with statements such as this, lead me to believe it's just a SPA vandalism account. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 01:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Not at all a problem. I appears to have already been done. Toddst1 (talk) 17:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

FOAD

Could I ask you to please reverse your deletion of the FOAD article. It was a valid and IMHO useful soft redirect to Wiktionary. It was deleted a week ago as a G6 Housekeeping deletion, but no actual work has been done there in the week since. I have asked the original G6 tagger for an explanation of the need for the G6 deletion, but they have been inactive in the last several days. In the absence of any progress towards whatever housekeeping was intended, I would request that it be restored. If the tagger returns with a valid explanation for needing a housekeeping deletion, then I can re-delete it myself for them. But until that point, I think the project is better served by the restoration of the soft redirect. - 14:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

done. Toddst1 (talk) 17:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Hyowon1

Why did you give Hyowon1 an additional warning about chatting?He's already gotten one and he stopped ater that. Mr. Green^chat 18:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Because he/she didn't stop. The edits speak for themselves. Toddst1 (talk) 18:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Did you read my response to his last comment on my page?He has stopped since then. Mr. Green^chat 18:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

spam blocking

Hi Todd, You've recently removed all of the edits I have made about Santa Barbara Business College. It was not my intention to create spam. How would I edit the page to provide users with more information, without it coming across as spam?

And also, what is the 'stub' level, and how would I raise the level of a page?

206.169.19.202 (talk) 19:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)mr

Syken

This was the thing to do, sadly, more so with the unsourced, negative content now gone from the article. Gwen Gale (talk) 21:33, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The user had 8 warnings on that article. I don't see it as silly.Toddst1 (talk) 21:36, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Silly? I don't understand... Gwen Gale (talk) 21:38, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I should read more carefully. Yes , this was unfortunate. They had exactly the content they wanted on the page. Toddst1 (talk) 21:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Can you chime in with your opinion on this discussion? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 04:34, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Honduran72

Why did you remove the report from AIV without so much as a comment?Kww (talk) 01:22, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Especially fun since once he stopped editing under his account, he hopped over to 69.118.13.10 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)Kww (talk) 02:20, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Bad edit on my part. The Honduran72 edit was stale - about an hour and not vandalous and my intent was to remove that one only. I apparently clipped 193.180.104.200 as well. Sorry. Toddst1 (talk) 14:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it was Honduran72 that I was complaining about ... a blatant vandal that has been attacking a group of articles about the Honduras since December, 2007. That's why I posted links to the ANI discussion. Finally got him blocked last night, along with a sockpuppet account this morning, but it would have gone much faster if you had acted on the report instead of deleting it. Reports of vandalism from named accounts never go stale. You may choose to take a different action if it is obvious that the account has renounced his vandalistic path, but being an hour old doesn't make any difference at all.Kww (talk) 15:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Inactive?

What makes this one "inactive"? The last incident was today. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 17:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

That user, RolandR, kept removing my comments from talk pages. When I politely asked him to stop doing it, he removed that comment as well. Seemed strange. Thanks for your note. Amoruso (talk) 01:42, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again. Your advice is sound. Amoruso (talk) 02:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Personal info and reverting one's own talk page

Thanks for your offer of help. However, my identity has been posted by abusive vandals so often on Wikipedia that removing references seems to be a losing battle. See the edits made by Runtshit (some of them to pages hidden by adnmins or removed through oversight). Some of these edits were abuse posted on Tanya Reinhart the day after she died; it was the content of these that Amoruso was posting again on Steven Plaut. Indeed, he seems to have posted it on the Reinhart article again, for the third time this morning. I'll leave it for now, in the hope that another editor with a sense of decency will remove it. The same gleefully abusive comments were also posted on the articles about Shimon Tzabar and Baruch Kimmerling after they died. I realise that you cannot libel the dead, but this relentless vicious smearing really angers me.

Please tell me where you think I "appear to be in violation of 3RR". RolandR (talk) 02:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

What on earth is the Infield Fly Rule? I'm a sport-hating Brit, and don't even understand LBW. RolandR (talk) 02:17, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

nosing in

Excuse me for nosing it, but RolandR's talkpage is on my watchlist. Roland gets nothing short of persecuted on Wikipedia for standing his ground in difficult places where the truth can be very quickly bullied away. I'm sure your diplomatic note to both he and Amoruso would have been a difficult for him to read. It's important for editors to see Admins as neutral and impartial when times are tough. Why effectively take sides by calling them both competent editors? This 'levelling effect' often lessens the validity of one editor by seeming to justify the other. Wikibreaks are sometimes sound advice (though 'Wikipedia', imo, could perhaps better appreciate how it benefits on some occasions from people not taking that luxury), but I've had experience of both editors here, and I found the 'double praise' insensitive to Roland in particular. Admins should always keep out of personal judgements! I'm sensitive to admins at the moment - they often only seem to slip up when they let their guard down and start thinking in personal terms: the advice to let go should surely suffice. --Matt Lewis (talk) 02:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Possible sockpuppet

I have reasons to believe that user On the edge of my mind is a sockpuppet of user 74.130.43.138. Not too long after you blocked 74.130.43.138 (about two mintues after), the other account was formed and was personally attacking me. I noticed the similarities between these two accounts. I figured you are the person who I let know about this since you were the one placed the block on 74.130.43.138. Thanks KeltieMartinFan (talk) 04:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice

Thanks for responding to my request at WP:ANI about blocking User:Spadge47.This is the first time i requested a block against a user. Next time i'll report vandalism at WP:AIV....Thanks for the advice again...Gprince007 (talk) 11:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem. Thanks for the heads-up on that. Toddst1 (talk) 11:37, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the block, but more help needed

Almost immediately after you blocked User_talk:86.129.31.62, a new editor User_talk:Argus-Bot immediate showed up and started making the same changes [21] AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 15:45, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for posting the warning. I'm weary of continually reverting these edits even though they are vandalism, I don't want to run a fowl with the 3RR. AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 15:48, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I've never posted to AN/I before, I'm concerned I may not have done it properly. AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 17:45, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

3RR

Thanks for the heads up. Have put the page up for protection from non-registered users and alerted the wikiproject:football community. Will pay closer attention to the 3rr rule in future.Londo06 18:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism?

I Dont understand? i was trying to make a page and oh no it gets deleted straight away. Whats with that. why cant i make a page about myself? whats so bad about that. it says you should not make thm about real people but there are millions about real people. i would just like to hav one about me and my cousin. thought it would be a nice idea. dont undestand why you wont let me? Can you find it in your heart to let me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josephhhhhhhhhh (talk • contribs) 20:43, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

thank spam

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 194 supporting, 9 opposing, and 4 neutral. Your kindness and constructive criticism is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers, Anthony and Acalamari for their nominations. Thank you again, VanTucky

Glad to be of help. Now get that mop out! (kidding). Toddst1 (talk) 23:18, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:ANI

Thanks for the notice. I didn't really understand the whole problem. I mean, I understand some like me closing Afd's, but I can do that now. You close one that should be an obvious WP:SNOW keep (I'm not touching any ones that have been decided to be deleted, merged, ect.). You then rm the template off the article, then you add a different template to the talk page.

Anyway, I also stopped adopting since users have told me I should be the adoptee.

Comments?--RyRy5 (talk) 00:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Just for context, I'm sure you know I spoke up in opposition to the discussion. Standatoms1985 didn't say you violated any specific policy other than appearing to him to be a bit of an annoyance. (my words not his). I used to see your reports on AIV pretty frequently, but haven't come across too many lately, so I really don't know much about what you've been up to. I just didn't think the conversation on ANI was appropriate and certainly not without you knowing about it.

If I were you, I'd just focus on making constructive (not over-enthusiastic) contributions. Use TW with care and be sure not to bite newcomers and you should be fine. Your heart seems to be in the right direction. Try working on a few articles from scratch and bringing them along to at least start-class if not B or beyond. It puts all the vandal work in context.

Good luck and let me know if I can be of assistance. Toddst1 (talk) 00:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I can't use TW (I use IE and it doesn't work there). The reason why I don't report on the WP:AIV is becuase I don't see many users that need to be blocked since most of them are on their first warning. I've been busy creating and editing articles. I'm currently put Jackie Robinson for WP:GAN but nothing has happened for two weeks.

I'm having some problems here at wikipedia of my editing. It probably started with the deletion of my adoption program. I then stopped adopting and became an adoptee myself, just today. I just don't like it much when many people are talking negative about me when I've matured here almost. Some have stopped though which is good. I read up on wikipedia policies the past week but would like to come clean, but I can't really do that now. Comments?--RyRy5 (talk) 00:38, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Not meaning to be rude here by not replying. I'm not sure I have a whole lot of value to add. Let me think about this...

I had a run in with a guy that was pretty critical (and downright rude) to me. He was a retired academic (now banned for personal, sexist, ageist attacks and sockpuppet abuse) and was infuriated when I tagged an article about a aircraft parts manaufacturer that he wrote for speedy deletion. What I did is side-step the drama and started writing an in-depth article about something really obscure, in this case, Belair Mansion. I spent a lot of time pulling the article together and ended up contributing to at least a dozen or so articles related to it in the proceess. By doing this, I had some [good credentials] behind me for vandal patrol and eventually, my RFA (but that wasn't my goal - I just wanted to put that episode behind me).

I hope this is remotely helpful. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 15:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Reply?

Please reply at the section on your talk page "Re:ANI". Thanks.--RyRy5 (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

not meaning to be rude.. see above. Toddst1 (talk) 15:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Gabriella Miller

You deleted Gabriella Miller for being an advertisement. I saw the article before it was deleted and tried to find additional references for it, but I didn't have much luck.

After I left a note about Wikipedia's notability criteria to Iprcom (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), the author of the Gabriella Miller article, he or she replied:

Please find link below which shows coverage in some of the UKs leading newspapers and magazines about gabriella miller

http://www.gabriellamilleroriginals.com/content/default/press.asp

That page is a collection of clippings showing the designer's products pictured in editorial photographs in various magazines that don't seem to be indexed by Google. For purposes of verifiability, I would have preferred links to the magazine sites, but I am inclined to think that the collection of clippings is a strong argument in favor of notability.

If the collection of clippings seems to indicate notability to you, please consider restoring the article, adding the press clippings page as an external link or reference, and trimming the article so that it doesn't read like an advertisement. --Eastmain (talk) 03:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't have time to do all that today, but I have gladly restored it to User:Eastmain/Gabriella Miller if you want to have a crack at it. I'll try to take a look later this week. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 15:43, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

IP User: 64.80.225.13 and WP:AGF

I am more than familiar with the meaning of good faith. I originally removed |this edit and assumed good faith. Until I researched the user's talk page and saw this edit that was also made today. The user has recieved two "final warnings" in the past two months, one as recently as a week ago. Looking at the "contributions" that come from this IP, I see very little evidence of "good faith" with this IP. Not to mention there's no additional warning that can be posted to a talk page after the final warning. It's not only AIV, but I'd argue it's most certainly WP:ABUSE on top of that. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 23:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

• You are incorrect: this edit was not made today at all - rather it was made 5 days ago.
• Your statement is not true with shared IPs - especially schools. They are typically not blocked unless they edit past final warnings given the same day. With schools, you can assume that edits made 5 days apart are probably not the same person.
• The edit made today is not vandalism.
• The editor made no edits past that edit, so clearly no block would have been necessary, even if that was interpreted as vandalism.

Toddst1 (talk) 23:21, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

More on this at Wikipedia:Abuse reports/64.80.225.13 Toddst1 (talk) 15:55, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, sir.

Hi,

You have recently deleted my page Freakytorrent. I really don't get wy? It was marked with Advertising but i just wanted to add an article about my site so i don't get what i did wrong. Could you please explain wy because i really wanted the page and i would like to have a page about my site on wikipedia. Regards, Fyver Fyver (talk) 16:19, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Please see the notes I left on your talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 16:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I have read the notice But do i really need to wait for someone to write an article over my site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fyver (talk • contribs) 17:08, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Bro, I do not like you, you deleted scoutmatt. Jack Tokarz is an important, historical figure and should be allowed to have a page. He was the 3rd president of the Bora Bora golf club and has many friends. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.55.4.185 (talk) 19:51, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Oakhill College

Many thanks for your assistance and advice. Thanks alot. Five Years 06:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Jugs for Juke

Hi Todd,

I'm new to submitting a new article to Wikipedia and my recent page was speed deleted with the reference of A7 as the reason for deletion. I read up on it but I'm unsure as to how I can make Breast Cancer Awareness seem more important . Can you please advise?

Thanks so much

(Shazzy McShazzalot (talk) 07:11, 28 April 2008 (UTC))Sharon

Max Lazer Band

I see you deleted my article on the Max Lazer Band .The reason given is that they were not important. I also notice that you are Canadian. The Max Lazer Band was an LA based glam punk group. I wouldn't imagine they were known in Canada; although they did play London. I shall not revert the deletion but I will enlist the aid of American editors; especially those familiar with the California punk scene. No hard feelings but I am sorry to see my article gone. jeanne (talk) 07:49, 28 April 2008 (UTC)Max Lazer was brilliant.

Todd, I just found a live link to Max Lazer.It's cdbabycom/cd/godfatherspunk.Type in Max Lazer and see for yourself how much stuff comes up on him.jeanne (talk) 12:24, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk page warning

I just wanted to let you know that your personal attack warning on my talk page was the most polite warning I've ever received. Thanks for keeping it bare bones and to the point; I appreciate that. Viriditas (talk) 09:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject North Carolina Newsletters

A newsletter has been planned for WikiProject North Carolina, a WikiProject where you are a member. As a member, you will automatically receive the newsletter on this talk page unless you choose to opt-out. If you wish to opt-out of the newsletter, then please leave a message on the project's talk page. If you would like to help write the newsletter, then please add your name at Wikipedia:WikiProject North Carolina/Newsroom. Thank you. Diligent Terrier Bot (talk) 17:36, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

This message was delivered by Diligent Terrier Bot (talk · contribs), a bot operated by Diligent Terrier (talk · contribs).

I'm still laughing

Obviously you can't review the unblock request of a user you just blocked, but "I AM A FRIEND OF JIMBO WALES AND HE GIVED ME PERMISSION TO VANDALIZE". Hahahaha. Enigma ^message 19:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

love it. I protected the page. Toddst1 (talk) 19:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Deleting Reach Out To Asia page

Hello,

Reach Out To Asia is a charity that is working towards narrowing the gap between those with and those without access to education. Could you explain, without citing Wikipedia pre-fabricated request for deletion examples, why Reach Out To Asia isn't important, but say Save the Children have a page?

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DQ2005 (talk • contribs) 10:05, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Max Lazer Band

Todd, I've added a bit more info and a live link.Is it ok now?jeanne (talk) 11:57, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Deleted article

I note you have recently deleted From Buddha to Bono quoting "Blatant advertising" as per log entry below. Why didn't you contact me first about this? Surely it is better to address content issues rather than just deleting an article created in good faith? Peter Campbell 10:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Peter,

I'm sorry that User: Qworty didn't notify you that he/she tagged your article for speedy deletion as spam. I'll leave him/her a note about that. I was the admin who came along and cleared out the backlog of spam pages tagged for speedy deletion. When we do that, we usually just verify that the article meets the criteria and don't check to see if the creator has been notified. Frankly it would take forever to clear the backlog if we did. We generally have to rely on the courtesy of the nominators.

I see you're in the process of re-creating the article, so I guess that my restoring it to your userspace wouldn't help much. Toddst1 (talk) 14:50, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Toddst1. I was able to salvage the article content from Google's cache so there is no need to restore it to my userspace. I will recreate it when I have pruned out content some may regard as advertising. Peter Campbell 01:34, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

AIV blocks?

Question about IP blocks. I don't like to be block happy, but I'm confused and hoping you might be able to help me. I reported an IP address who had been blocked fifteen days ago and has a history of vandalism. So far, they vandalized twice today.

You mentioned they aren't yet worthy of a block but to keep an eye on them. So my question is this: in the past with their history they received a temp. block with two reports in the same month and not even on the same day...so what is the rule on when to request a block? I don't want to clog up the AIV page.

DizFreak ^{talk Contributions} 17:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, there isn't really a rule but there's a custom of assuming (under AGF) that an IP editor - especially school IPs like this one - is not the same editor from day-to-day, unless you see the user going to the same articles or there is widespread vandalism. So in most cases, we usually look at it to see if there was a final given today that they edited past. In this case, it doesn't appear that the vandalism has persisted since your warning - which is good. Blocks are preventative - not punitive. Since the editor stopped vandalizing (at least for today), no block was necessary.

That being said, if there is a culture of vandalism at a school, then longer blocks are in order and the more blocks a school has had, the longer any block is likely to be. It's pretty fuzzy but that's the gist of it. Frankly, it can be frustrating, but that's how things tend to work.

Please keep up the great work on Vandal Patrol, and I hope this helps. Toddst1 (talk) 17:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. It makes sense what you are saying. I appreciate the help and will keep it in mind. DizFreak ^{talk Contributions} 17:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding deleted comment and warning...

I don't understand how it could have been construed as unimportant. It wasn't irrelevant, it was interesting... and it pertained to the article. Maybe you should reconsider. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottoid (talk • contribs) 06:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

You have a point. I will revise the message to be more specific. Toddst1 (talk) 15:29, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

ANI report

Just to notify you about a recent ANI post which has been created regarding your recent edits. Rudget (Help?) 16:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

User: Robdurbar 81

I feel that User:Nightmare 81 could possibly be a sockpuppet of User: Wonderfool. He baltantly listed it as the first username on his vandalism spree. I need a name000 (talk) 00:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

NineSigma

I've reformatted the NineSigma page several times, the last was just a bare bones explanation of what the company does. This is no different than their competitors page Innocentive, or any other brand page i.e. kraft, starbucks, etc. Thus, I'm completely in the dark as to how the page is 'blatant advertising' when it isn't actually selling anything.

Could you please advise how I could make an acceptable page about this company that won't be deleted, because I've tried everything! Ninesigma (talk) 14:27, 2 May 2008 (UTC)Ninesigma

User:Bloopenguins

I'm not so much into teaching; too much typing. Reminds me of helping new players at Project Rockstar. Not that I don't enjoy it, but making what your saying 'unmistakable' can be tiring... HalfShadow (talk) 04:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Not trying to make anyone look/feel bad. I just felt especially charitable. I'm back to normal now. 8-) Toddst1 (talk) 07:05, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Dawn Yang

It doesn't seem like warnings are going to work on Dawn Yang, we've had multiple unrepentant reversions. I've reverted to my limit and even though it's a WP:BLP concern, I don't think anything I do right now will help until the admins take action. Just letting you know. Thanks! Redrocket (talk) 09:08, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I blocked the main offender for repeat BLP violations and the page is protected so new editors can't continue the spree. Toddst1 (talk) 15:59, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Another Deleted Article?

Dear Toddst1, please show the courtesy to alert users that you intend to obliterate articles, which will give them a chance to modify content to suit Wikipedia standards or your personal preferences... I worked hard on a page that you deleted. Now, I have to start from scratch.Peterlitwin (talk) 13:55, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I intend to "obliterate" all attack pages you create as well as any further vandalism you may perpetrate. You have been alerted. Happy now? Toddst1 (talk) 16:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: shiny object

Thanks for the barnstar! must getz shiny objectz.... Thingg^⊕⊗ 16:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all the valid AIV reports! Sorry your RFA wasn't successful. Keep up the great work. Toddst1 (talk) 16:47, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

"blocked for a period of 2 fortnights"

Great way to put it! I wonder if the blockee will know what that means.

Best wishes, Wanderer57 (talk) 16:49, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Gotta make it interesting. Let them do the math. I guess I was feeling creative today. I blocked an IP vandal for 13 fortnights as well. Toddst1 (talk) 16:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I just saw 12 fortnights. Love it! Given how many warnings were given (including from me, maybe 13 fortnights would have been more poetic.OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 17:24, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

"Four score and seven days" has a classic ring. Wanderer57 (talk) 04:41, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

You know there were one or two IP's that probably could use a block for 4 score and 7 years. 8-) Toddst1 (talk) 05:37, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleted North Queensland Soaring Centre

The North QLD Soaring Centre article was about a non-profit club of gliding enthusiasts amd therefore should not have been deleted as blatant advertising. How do I recover this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.185.58.145 (talk • contribs) 21:48, 2 May 2008

I reviewed the deleted article and I think it meets the criteria for speedy deletion. Toddst1 (talk) 05:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Max Lazer Band

I have added more information.Would you please put the article back.Thank you.jeanne (talk) 06:37, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

replied on User talk:Jeanne boleyn Toddst1 (talk) 07:00, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

rtgs's personal page

You have deleted my page, telling me that I am vandalizing and that you have rights to delete MY PAGE. But did you exercised your rights in a right way???

As I am new here, and IF you are real administrator (not Greek propagandist) please revert my page BACK and mark with bold everything you think is not appropriate, so i will delete that AND explain to you why I think it is appropriate. Then, if you agree I will put it back.

Just to stress - that I HAVE NOT CHANGED any article, only talk pages, where I express MY OPINION on what has happen to MY COUNTRY. If I do not persuade people, I will not change anything in the article, as you have deleted MY PAGE, thus eliminating MY RIGHT on free speech. Shame on you.Rtgs (talk) 09:28, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

re:ANI Discussion

Thanks for the heads up. I'll comment once I read through the whole thing thrice. RC-0722 ^247.5/1 20:17, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Tube Bar prank calls‎ etc.

Thanks a lot. This has been going on for such a long time. Regards, High on a tree (talk) 15:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Bruce333367

Hi, Todd. You may wish to consider locking down the talk page on this guy. I was just on my way to report more nonsense on that page when you lowered the boom on him. Thanks for all you do!  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 20:07, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Ryoka7

Hello Todd, thought I alert you to this guy Special:Contributions/Ryoka7, who keeps on blanking his talk page thinking that we are stupid when we don't get to see his list of previous history of multiple vandalism entries and getting multiple warnings from loads of people. I get really sick of having to monitor this kind of people all the time and I shall leave him to you now for whatever further intentions you might have in mind. PS: I'm all for BANNING him, seems that this account was created for nothing but vandalism and vandalism only. --Dave1185 (talk) 22:03, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

It's allowed to blank your talk page. It's discouraged, but not vandalism. Toddst1 (talk) 22:05, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I know that but his recent streak of vandalism after coming out from a BAN is a good enough proof that he is nothing but a trouble-maker, and maybe even hell bent on vandalising more articles to come. Oh and by the way, User:Jsmith86 and me are now monitoring his every move now... (and to quote Capt Bart Mancuso of "Hunt for Red October") if he so much as twitches again, we will blow him right to Mars. --Dave1185 (talk) 22:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Please read my response

>>Toddst1, I get that this is Wikipedia, the problem is the exception to whether or not all people's perspectives count applies only to Macedonians when it comes to Balkan issues. The problem is when a peoples self-determinate to a name, a symbol, or etc other people should not influence or force their decision upon them because that nullifies self-determination Mactruth (talk) 00:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for being rude

Mr. Green^{Hit Me Up}Contribs(I wouldn't look at these if I were you) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend and remember :"All men are created equal, but ambition, or lack of it, soon separates them." Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I was being pretty immature recently and I awant to make it up to you. Mr. Green^{Hit Me Up}Contribs(I wouldn't look at these if I were you) 17:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps we can learn to work with each other instead of fighting.Is there any articles that you think need editing? Mr. Green^{Hit Me Up}Userboxes 16:35, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually,if you would like to,could you maybe help me with my current project:SRCA.You don't have to if you don't want to. Mr. Green^{Hit Me Up}Userboxes 18:09, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

I very much appreciate your support. 99.99% chance that these threats are kids, but the one time it's not I don't want to pass it off. Again, thank you. Cheers, Bstone (talk) 13:27, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that very few wikipedia administrators have training in assessing threats like that. We have no business making calls like that. I feel the same way about suicide notes that we sometimes find here. Toddst1 (talk) 21:11, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, Wikipedia admins cannot assess such threats. Law enforcement can. I wonder if you might take a visit to WP:TOV and see about supporting it to become a guideline? Bstone (talk) 23:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

email blocking

Hi. You might want to consider not using email blocking so often; it's really only designed to be used for very abusive editors who actually abuse email. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 14:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Good point. Thanks for the guidance. Toddst1 (talk) 21:09, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

User:ArglebargleIV

(Response) I would like a semi-protection on User:ArglebargleIV very much, thank you. I don't mind too much what people do to my talk page, but the user page stuff is annoying. Thanks again. -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 21:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Fairlight

I would like you to review the comment section that you left on my talk page and witness for yourself the type of editor that lodged the complaint regarding the Fairlight article. The fact is that two editors (myself and one other) independently added that story to the article (I was not aware of the first addition when I made mine). Both times the content was removed by an anon claiming that the source was not reliable. I will not judge whether it is or not. But if you consider the anon editor's remarks, both in his edit summaries and on my talk page, I think it's pretty clear that he has his own motivation for prompting such immediate action on his part and yours. I also don't see why such a harsh warning was given by you on my talk page. I have not shown any sort of bad faith on my part (how could I when there was zero prior discussion about the issue?) and I don't think you have acted in a manner that is either fair or responsible. Ham Pastrami (talk) 00:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Defamation is defamation. Your assessment of responsibility is unfortunate. Toddst1 (talk) 01:44, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Indef block of IP?

Did you really put an indefinite block on 216.51.167.250 (talk · contribs)? Granted I have only been an admin for a few months, but I thought a year was the max for IPs. --Kralizec! (talk) 18:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Grin. Yep. I did. Guilty as charged. I had a brain fart when I read the AIV report as vandalism only. See [22] I fixed it within a matter of seconds (note the timestamps). Good catch though. Toddst1 (talk) 18:43, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

User:SamuelM555 blocked again

Hi. Sorry to bother you but I thought I would invite you to review my 1 month block of this user with whom you've interacted in the past. Too harsh? Too lenient? See what you think; I was tempted to make it an indef this time and maybe should have. What do you think? --John (talk) 20:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi John. I fully support this block. I probably tend to block on the longer side of the bell curve, but your block seems totally reasonable to me. Full support. Shout if it's being discussed elsewhere. Toddst1 (talk) 21:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. If another block becomes necessary I do think it should be an indefinite one. --John (talk) 21:23, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Friendly notice of ANI discussion

FYI. Bstone (talk) 22:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

John Baselmans

Toddst1

Please can you tell me what went wrong? So far I know I did not change anything and I saw I'm now complete deleted from wikipedia? Please advice me, Sincerely (Baselmans (talk) 20:30, 9 May 2008 (UTC))

replying on User talk:Baselmans.Toddst1 (talk) 20:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem toddst1. Have a great weekend and mistakes can happen.(Baselmans (talk) 20:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC))

Blocking that Dragon Tales IP vandal...

Thank you very much! I was frustrated last night b/c the admin claimed the user wasn't properly warned--if you've been blocked for something once, shouldn't that constitute fair warning NOT to do the EXACT SAME THING AGAIN??--and then another admin marked it "stale", which was only rubbing salt in the wound. So, sorry about the 'tude. :) Thanks again! Gladys J Cortez 01:14, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Same article vandalism means previous warnings count. Glad to be of service. Toddst1 (talk) 01:16, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

More trouble at Video CD, CD Video, etc

You protected these pages a while back as a result of repeated vandalism from anon ip's. Since semi protection, socks are now editing with newly created names. I've posted to AN/I about it, Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User_talk:Harry_the_Hamster_-_sock_of_User_talk:Argus-Bot.2C_User_talk:86.129.31.62.2C_User_talk:86.145.219.221.2C_User_talk:86.162.213.186] AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 13:27, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Samanthabox0817

I've listed this User at WP:COIN. They've created a large number of articles all related to the same photography agency, with no sourcing. Corvus cornix_talk 22:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Mark Hanau AFD

I see you did some careful editing at Mark Hanau, as did I several days ago, but Aimulti has responded with reverts of everything, including putting the actress back on as his daughter. Many of his sources are circular (referring back to WP) or original research. Exactly why AB is strongly discouraged. Sigh, Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 22:47, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

My daughter, Sasha (Starlight) Hanau is sending me documents showing that I am her father. I hope they arrive in time but if not I will remove the claim until they do. I will post the ALRA company info later tonight. Companies House is closed for downloads at the moment. (business hours in the UK). I provided a link on the deletion page ( to the ALRA page of Companies House) but downloads cost $1.00 or (one Pound) . I will pay for it and post a link to he documents. Aimulti (talk) 23:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Please review WP:Reliable. Toddst1 (talk) 23:11, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Dear Todd, Can you list the links you have a problem with on the discussion page and I will respond or edit them. I am NOT trying to do anything but provide a true and honest article. Aimulti (talk) 23:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

See the article. I've tagged them. You know, the edits you reverted without explanation?Toddst1 (talk) 23:25, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

With regard to ALRA. Kent Library lists the three directors (managers to use their term) but Sorrel Carson is called Mr. Sorrel Carson. On that basis Sorrel Carson (female) was not involved. The other article (obituary in the Stage) only mentions Sorrel. As Stage is a theatre magazine it has little interest in business people of the Chairman of a company. Mark was hardy about to ask for a retraction of his mothers obituary. EVERY PROSPECTUS, (scan provided) ADVERTISEMENT, & COMPANY DOCUMENT lists the directors correctly (as required by law) with Mark Hanau as Chairman.Aimulti (talk) 23:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Toddst1 has referred you to WP:Reliable. You are trying to use original research and primary documents. The WP standard, as I have told you, is that if a subject has no articles about it/him/her in peer-reviewed publications or in the mainstream press, it does not belong in Wikipedia. Prospectuses, company documents, and advertisements are great sources for lawyers and private eyes, but they do not generally meet WP standards. Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 23:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Newsletter

I'd just like to know so I can fix the problem - how does the newsletter mess up your archiving? - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 22:08, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at the history of this page. I had to manually archive it earlier today. I think it's because it doesn't end with a timestamp but I'm not sure. Toddst1 (talk) 22:49, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, maybe I'll try ending the rest with a timestamp. Are you sure you want to opt-out, then? - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 22:54, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Keep me on for now and you can use my talk page as a testbed. I archive pretty quickly (lots of complaints to archive, I guess). If it works, I'll stay. Toddst1 (talk) 22:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Aimulti on my page

I think the canvassing was reasonably legitimate, but it did emphasize how personal the issue and "his" page has become for this user. I contributed to the debate that the page should be kept, but that this user should not edit it any more. I think that would be to his benefit as much as to anyone else's. --Simon Speed (talk) 16:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

callupsie

Hello Todd, I have updated information about Callupsie. It is an indie rock band that features and collaborators that are already noted on wikipedia. The band has been featured in major music publications such as SPIN magazine. Collaborators include members of Black Flag and The Descendants. Callupsie is recognized for being the band who started the new wave of indie rock in the popular Tulsa music community, which is already drawing comparisons to the Omaha and Austin underground music scenes.

Hopefully those notes will be legitimate remedies for the wiki page.

thank you

callupsie27 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Callupsie27 (talk • contribs) 18:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Toddst1 (talk) 23:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Attack on aimulti

Dear Todd,

I have looked at your history and you seem to be a real Wikipedia editor. The person who is accused of being a sockpuppet of mine is known to me but other than that we have no connection by blood, business or anything else.

The attack on every contribution I have made (107) pages covering a wide range of topics has been organised by a group called "Dissident Action Group Exposed". Over the years they have distributed smear letters over the internet saying I am a child molester, blow up churches and other such nonsense. Do a yahoo search if you doubt my word.

Also look at the edit history of the two people I named. They both joined within one day of each other (only about 10 days ago) and have made hundreds of contributions since then. ALL ATTACKS ON AIMULTI.

You seem a fair person so all I ask is you check out what I have said above and then act as you see fit.

Wikipedia is not the place to act out personal vendettas. I hope you agree.Aimulti (talk) 21:10, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Smile

I stumbled upon your Userpage via an XFD recently, and couldn't resist...

Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

(Or, for humour's sake, retrieved from the discussion on Template:Smile...)

User:Mizu onna sango15 has given you the finger! Giving the finger promotes WikiHate and hopefully this one has made your day worse. Spread the WikiHate by giving the finger to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!

:P Regards, --Mizu onna sango15/水女珊瑚15 00:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC).

Curved Air

Could you explain (in the article's talk pages) what in the article as it now stands involves a COI, or otherwise please remove your tag ? RGCorris (talk) 13:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. Toddst1 (talk) 00:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

How many does it take?

How many times does a user have to be warned about blatant vandalism before it is considered sufficient? Niteshift36 (talk) 16:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

If it's an IP, it typically has to be clear that they have seen the warning - either edit past final on the same day, same article on different days, or similar vandalism. Otherwise it is somewhat unfair. If I made policy, it wouldn't be that way, but that's the custom. Toddst1 (talk) 16:11, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I reported a registered user who has been warned twice (I just made it a third). His contributions have ALL been reverted as vandalism and he did an article that was speedy deleted because is was pure nonsense about a classmate of his. Yet you removed him from the vandalism list without explaination. Could you clue me in? Niteshift36 (talk) 16:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure. Before I do, I should say that we very much appreciate your efforts in fighting vandalism here.

I assume you're talking about MileyCyrusFanNumero1 (talk · contribs). Two reasons this user won't be blocked today: User is not currently active and has not edited past a final warning. Last edit was several hours ago - before you added the u3 warning to the talk page. Blocks are preventative - not punative. While this user's contributions aren't entirely constructive, they're not blatant vandalism. More info at Wikipedia:Blocking policy.

Hope this helps. Toddst1 (talk) 16:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

It does, but it doesn't. Who can give a final warning? When can a final warning be given. Second, if you actually read the past edits, you will see they really are blatant vandalism. This whole thing with Mark Deboy goes back to <defamatory edit deleted> Every attempt to add Mark Deboy is related to that. I guess it has to be more blatant than that. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:32, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry - my bad. You are correct that there was blatant vandalism - actually defamation which is especially problematic.

Here's how it works: Anyone can issue warnings at any of the 4 levels for violations of policy. Usually we start with level1 and go up to level 4 in order. Sometimes when it's pretty blatant we may skip a level. There are a couple of situations where we go directly to level 4im warnings - and this would be one of them - defamation of a living person under WP:BLP). Another area that we go straight to 4im often is personal attack on another editor. We typically don't block an editor unless they edit past a warning that says something about being blocked, like in this case.

I believe you are correct that this editor seems to be editing in bad faith, but following the custom here, he/she shouldn't be blocked unless he repeats it, now that a 4im has been issued. I've added them and their target articles to my watch list and I suspect you have too.

On a related note, I took a quick look at your editing history and you seem to be a pretty solid vandal fighter. May I suggest you take a look at WP:TW? It's a tool that might make your work here a bit easier. Let me know if you need help setting it up. Keep up the great work and let me know if I can be of assistance.

Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 16:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. You are correct, I do watch articles for vandalism. Just FYI, I happen to be an alumni of Riverdale (a long time ago), so that's when I noticed this guy. His remark refers to an incident where 3 starters for the soccer team were arrested for the crime alluded to in the deleted remarks, although I don't remember DeBoy being one of them. Niteshift36 (talk) 17:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Question

Is one allowed to remove warnings from their talk page? Such as vandalism warnings... I can't see any policy on it. Many thanks in advance. Rapido (talk) 16:46, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. That's why I reverted that edit on your talk page that had been re-added. Toddst1 (talk) 16:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Aha, many thanks... you learn a new thing every day! Rapido (talk) 17:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou Todd

I do appreciate it when other editors make me aware that people have been talkling badly of me behind my back, I'm sure you know the word we attribute to this in the real world, and quite frankly I hate these type of people. I would rather people tell me to my face what problems they have with me. So again thankyou I will be checking who exactly has been doing this although I already have my suspicions. Cheers TeePee-20.7 (talk) 17:20, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Dave Trumfio

Hi!

Myself and a few other editors have been helping the said user on IRC for the past hour or two, and while the article was a WP:COI, I believe that the editor was turning around, and was going to be a successful editor. Newbies make mistakes, and while the user in question has made a few mistakes, I feel strongly that this account was a vandalism only account. I would appreciate it if you could reconsider this block. Regards, Stwalkerster [ talk ] 22:21, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I trust you mean that this user was NOT a voa. Unblocked per your endorsement. Toddst1 (talk) 22:27, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I did mean that - oops. Thanks Stwalkerster [ talk ] 22:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Aimulti (talk · contribs)

Regarding User:Aimulti, I'm not sure it's really a case of sockpuppetry or ban evasion as much as it is a guy who doesn't seem to understand Wikipedia very well. The IP edits strongly suggest he was having great difficulty with posting. I haven't looked too deeply into this, so maybe I'm way off, but I don't think this guy deserves an indef block. The block for personal attacks seems totally right, but he's a frustrated newbie who's facing a situation where an article about himself is being discussed for deletion. Being a little understanding of his mindset will go a long way towards helping the situation. -- Ned Scott 03:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll reply on his talk. Toddst1 (talk) 04:57, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I respectfully but strongly disagree that Aimulti is simply a newbie who deserves understanding. I have given my reasons on the discussion page for the Mark Hanau AfD. "Elephant in the Room". Keepcalmandcarryon (talk) 14:39, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Protect then?

The anonymous vandal is still active at talk:aspartame. If blocking isn't appropriate, would you mind reinstating last week's page protection? Thanks. Deli nk (talk) 17:46, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for 1 month. Toddst1 (talk) 17:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 17:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Could you please protect my talk page for a little while too? Deli nk (talk) 18:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protected for 24 hrs. Toddst1 (talk) 18:03, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again! Deli nk (talk) 18:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

db warnings

Thanks for the reminder. I usually need to use the template text to get the syntax right on talk page warnings and the pages were disappearing faster than I could cut-n-paste as it seems that you and other admin are on top of the db queues right now. If you notice, in the case of some users, I am adding the templates to their talk pages as recommended. ju66l3r (talk) 21:46, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Smile!

Hello Toddst1, ShakespearesZombie has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

RE: May 21

As I love reading messages that piss me off on really bad days, I feel like that is nothing for you to notice or bother with, it is not vandelism and what I said was nessearily true according to public opinions. YaBoiKrakerz

OK, fine, don't reply, it doesn't matter to me if you can't guard your quote or the fact that you're not allowed to remove comments no matter what they are, looks like you were the one breaking the rules. YaBoiKrakerz

why do people want to delete pages that have been up for over a year

Hi Todd, Just on regards to the Article Nelson Chan, additional revisions were made to it, but it was just deleted, and asked for consideration of deletion.I'm not pointing any fingures, yet on the other hand, the page has been up since 2007, and things just needed to be updated.

can we just allow the updates to take place?

furthermore, can you help with the pages of Mihcael Kuss, and Chirs Potter, they are both great meteorologist, and well deserve a page on Wikipedia.

I'm still pretty new to all of this, and I just read and learned about my own Talk page, so accept my apologies for putting too much info into somethings.

Thanks :)

1. Oingoboing69 :) 17:03 MAY 21 2008

hi Todd, sorry I didn't mean to paste an entire section into your talk page, where as I should have just forwarded

Talk:Nelson Chan

so all the ref. are there to comply against the AfD template, can we reverted to Revision as of 20:24, 21 May 2008, plus the new referance?

Thanks --Oingoboing69 (talk) 19:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

P.S. how do I make those Cookie peace offering thingies? Oingoboing69 (talk) 19:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

well there are a fare amount of Directors in the same context. Justin Stephenson,Oli Goldsmith. Nelson Chan also directed and produced Tales of the Baroness, which all serve everything pretty ligitamately.

Like Bdiu2008 said, this page has been up for awhile now, let's just update some of it and let it stand. Thanks.--Oingoboing69 (talk) 23:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not that I wish these Articles to be taken away, ( I'm speaking about Justin Stephenson,Oli Goldsmith. Nelson Chan), It's just seems odd that it was always focused and revolved around one particular Article. I just want to these HArd working Artists to be reckonized.

Thanks..(I'll put it infront of my sig this time.)--Oingoboing69 (talk) 23:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Toddst1. thanks for looking over and clearifiying the situation. I've explained my next set of action on User talk:Oingoboing69. Please feel free to share your input on the situation. Thank you.(sorry about the copy and pasteing, but just wated everybody to be on the same page)--Oingoboing69 (talk) 22:14, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Monitoring

I just wanna know if you're monitoring my edits, I don't care if you are or not, I just think I should know. YaBoiKrakerz 21:11, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

John Baselmans

On 20 March i did place the CSD A7 tag on the article John Baselmans because the article did ( and still does) not mention why the suject is notable or important. You did remove the article following the placement of the tag, but i'm wondering why the article the article now seems to be restored without a explanation ? I can guess this message has something to do with it, but that does not explain why my action was reverted. By the way, I would have liked to add this message as User:81.70.9.250 (as which user I did place the tag) but your talk page does not allow anonymous users to place messages? Kind regards, FruitcakeNL (talk) 15:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the semi-protected talk page - rash of vandalism yesterday. It should expire shortly.

Baselman's stamps appear to at least assert notability - which is all you need to do to avoid speedy. My speedy deletion was an error on my part. If you feel he is not notable, please take it to WP:AfD. Best regards. Toddst1 (talk) 15:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

But in which way does the article assert notability? It's not really my opinion that mr. Baselmans would be not notable enough, i just can not read anywhere in the article why he would be important or notable enough to be mentioned on Wikipedia. Why would the CSD A7 tag be inappropiate in this case? Kind regards, FruitcakeNL (talk) 15:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The article states his work was used on stamps from a sovereign government and lists numerous exhibitions which assert notability; it fails C7. For more info, see Wikipedia:CREATIVE. Again, if you feel differently, I strongly encourage you to take it to WP:AfD.Toddst1 (talk) 15:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I do feel Wikipedia:CREATIVE surely does not apply to mr. Baselmans, and that solely the design (or use of his work in) of stamps is not enough to be mentioned on Wikipedia (that would be thousands of more or less impotant illustrators and artists from all over the world, and i'm sure that not any of them is mentioned on Wikipedia because of that). In my opinion, it's more what makes him important as a artist what would assert notability, as is mentioned in Wikipedia:CREATIVE (wide recognition as a artist, uniqe style, influence, etc.) Sorry for my stubbornness, but i just don't understand why it would be neccesary to start a AfD discussion if C7 could apply to this article (and i don't understand why it does not)? FruitcakeNL (talk) 16:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

TruePlanning Software Model

Todd - We've been quite compliant with Wikipedia's rules and have removed any perceived bias. This is not corporate spam. This is a cost model detail. Yet the same warnings keep coming, most of which do not make any sense. How is what we're contributing any different than say Microsoft Excel? We've cited references, etc. I don't understand why the same warnings keep coming back up when we've taken care of them with numerous edits. Thank you. Chrispfister (talk) 16:27, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

You are more generous than I ... `cause I would have tagged it for an A11 CSD. --Kralizec! (talk) 18:32, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it's pretty squishy. You've convinced me - I sent it to AfD. Thanks for the help. Toddst1 (talk) 19:15, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Re:

So the editor can continue to disrupt British Raj as long as he has support from Admins I guess? Where is the neutrality here? All I am asking is for him to bring up WP:RS? Anyone can continue disruption as long as their viewpoint is implicitly favored by people in wikipedia even though it may not be based on WP:RS? If one is not willing to stick to and enforce WP:RS all we are doing here is reporting bias in wikipedia articles. Desione (talk) 19:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Discussion moved to User talk:Desione Toddst1 (talk) 19:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Hanau

How do you get keep out of 7 delete suggestions (not votes) and 5 keeps, one of which was the subject and another was a sock of the subject? Toddst1 (talk) 23:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I counted 6 and 6 if we discount the possible sockpuppet, 7-6 if we don't. I think the reluctance of other admins to close it speaks to the closeness of the discussion, which should default to keep. Perhaps "no consensus: default to keep" would have been better, but the end effect would have been the same. But don't forget that it is not just the numbers on each side that matter, it's their arguments based on policy. Many !voters of "delete" suggested that the article could be recreated better. If so, then it can just be made better and there is no reason to get rid of the history. --Selket ^Talk 23:24, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

One Biscayne Plaza page

How does linking to another page that simply attaching the website blatant advertising ON wikipedia? Yes, the page for Terra should be filled out more, but I was starting w/ the link. Is that wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkitect75 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Spam Toddst1 (talk) 23:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

SEER-SEM

I've deprodded SEER-SEM; although it's a rather sorry article, that "widely used within defense, military / aerospace, government" does appear at first glance to check out (a quick google-skim throws up enough respectable names - notably NASA - that it at least warrants an AFD so the specialists can comment on it). — iridescent 23:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Welcome back. Toddst1 (talk) 23:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I was just thinking, it's like a return to the old days for me to be posting notices on your talkpage. I feel like Master Po. — iridescent 23:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I've learned a lot from you over the past year. I even have a userpage now. 8-) Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 23:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Have you discovered the cunning "policy prevents you permanently protecting your userpage, but doesn't stop you protecting subpages, so make your userpage a one-line transclusion of a subpage" trick? Works a treat at keeping the vandals away. (incidentally, I never entirely went away...) — iridescent 00:23, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of the policy at all, but I did structure my userpage similarly (out of geekiness) and semi-protected it, which does 90% of the job. Where does it say you can't permanently protect your userpage? Toddst1 (talk) 20:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It's implies at WP:SEMI, in that it only permits userpages to be indefinitely semi protected. I can't imagine anyone challenging you were you to full-protect, though. — iridescent 20:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks.  :)

You're right. I just lost my temper when I saw the horrible things that idiot wrote. Thanks for setting me straight and thanks for the compliment. I used to do a lot of NPP as an admin, but it was looney-tunes like that which finally drove me off. Glad to be back as an observer.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:09, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Reverting all edits by vandal?

Thank you for blocking User:Tuds75. However, many of his recent vandalisms are still present. On many of the pages, he's made multiple edits, and as I am not an administrator, I can't quickly and easily revert all of his changes. Would it be possible for you to do this, or point me to where I should request his edits be reverted? Also, it appears he (or someone vandalizing in an extremely similar pattern) is doing further vandalism as 71.63.251.34, which should also likely be blocked and reverted. — λ 00:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Why was the page Jewnikah speedily deleted? I did not mean it as an attack page. How was it one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comradesandalio (talk • contribs) 04:02, 22 May 2008

Help please, Todd. Bloo caught another vandal...

Here is the info and the time. This took place on the CSI: Miami page, David Caruso's name was replaced with an unrelated person. If you are able to send a report to the right place in enough time - I would appreciate it. As I explained last time I tried to help by reporting a vandal, I'm an avid Wiki user and reader, and fix things by the people trying to make this "Wanker-Pedia" quickly....but I do not have enough time to learn the procedures to police the place. So I ask for your kind help. I posted the standard "warning" in the IP users talk page. I personally think everyone should have to register in order to edit anything, but I'm not in charge.

Thanks for your kind help in the past. And if you cannot get to this I understand. Cheers, Bloo. Bloo (talk) 06:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Medialink Worldwide

Hi,

I noticed that this page was deleted and feel as if it was done so unfairly. Meant to provide information about the company, the page was speedily deleted because it was marked so by an individual who's account has been flagged for his frequent deletion.

I was currently in the process of adding information about the company of Medialink when I was initially marked for deletion. As I was making changes, and even referred to the webpage for Public Relations Society of America which was similar in language to Medialink page, the Medialink page was still deleted.

The page contained outside references about this company, pointed out elements related to its development and gave examples of what this company does - much like larger companies GM, Fisher-Price, etc. As more information was being added, the page was simply deleted.

I would like to discuss this issue further with you and work to address the removal of this page in a timely manner. Thank you for your time!

Thanks, --Eklein428 (talk) 18:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you the Online Media Relations Project Manager at Medialink? Toddst1 (talk) 18:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion...Yes....I noticed that Medialink on Wikipedia does not represent Medialink Worldwide. I would like advice to make Medialink Worldwide apart of the Wikipedia network as part of an Encyclopedia Entry, not a promotional effort. This is being done on my own accord and is not, in any way, meant to promote the company as a whole. How can I achieve such a post.--Eklein428 (talk) 18:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)--Eklein428 (talk) 18:44, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved as you did at Medialink Worldwide. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.

Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it might be speedily deleted as Medialink Worldwide was or listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Verifiability.

If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles.) Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 19:02, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

In effect, there is nothing I can do to add information about the company even though a completely unrelated organization currently has a two sentence wikipedia post? You have been so helpful thus far and I appreciate all your help but anything else you can do to lead me in the right direction in this situation would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you so much for any additional insight.

--Eklein428 (talk) 19:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

You are not prohibited from creating such an article, but it is discouraged. WP:Corp, WP:COI and WP:Advert are things you should be familiar with if you proceed. Toddst1 (talk) 19:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your help Todd. Sorry for the confusion. I will read through the following and make sure that I adhere by the wiki guidelines. Many thanks again!--Eklein428 (talk) 19:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Reasons for deletion?

Hi - I rewrote EasyLearning and Serebra Connect to take into account your comments and you deleted them as "vandalism". I am new to this but this seems excessively heavy-handed. Please explain your thinking as I significantly changed the pages according to your comments.

Also, you have marked EasyLearning for deletion. Would you mind explaining how this program, as a unique and worthwhile one as far as I can tell, is to be deleted when on the E-learning page are listed many commercial companies under "Proprietary"? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.158.140 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 22 May 2008

Removal of templates without comment is usually viewed as vandalism, especially, speedy deletion templates for articles you created yourself. As far as the AfD nomination, see WP:Corp. I suspect WP:COI applies as well. Toddst1 (talk) 21:11, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Semi protection requested Isis Gee‎

Todd you apparently blocked IP user 79.233.126.164. This user was disrupting the article at Isis Gee‎, where I am trying to doa 3O dispute resolution between two other editors. Can I get the page sei protected for 72 hours or until Tuesday if possible, since I'm travelling over the holiday weekend. I think that we are getting somewhere, but the IP is non cummunicative and blatent. Thanks! --Kevin Murray (talk) 22:08, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Dale Fuller

Hi. I removed two of these tags, as the text I saw was not blatant advertising by any means and contained a significant notability claim (being CEO of a major company) which makes it unsuitable for speedying. You could try AfD, but I suspect that it'll only be binned if it's untrue that he was the CEO. --Dweller (talk) 22:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Now I'm puzzled. You're a) clearly very experienced and b) an admin. So I must've got something wrong, somewhere. I'm tired. <scratches head> Off to bed for me. Let me know what I've misunderstood! --Dweller (talk) 22:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

That's why I didn't delete it myself. Short-term interim CEO of a public company may be "a person who is part of the enduring historical record". Toddst1 (talk) 22:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Morning! I agree. May be. AfD? --Dweller (talk) 09:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

You deserve this even more than me...

		The Real Life Barnstar
		For you great work in possibly saving a life today. Tiptoety talk 23:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the shiny, and thanks for contacting the police. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 23:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

And thanks from myself as well. Appreciated. Pedro :  Chat  23:05, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Toddst1

I've made changes in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RusMaxwell/IP_Triple_Play , could you place it back if it is all right? TNX —Preceding unsigned comment added by RusMaxwell (talk • contribs) 00:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I still don't think that is anywhere near establishing WP:Notability with WP:Reliable sources. Toddst1 (talk) 10:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Years in Ireland

Could you pl explain why you have intervened here? The editor involved deleted 20 articles which is rather more worthy of your attention I would have thought. Are you an Admin? - if so you should declare that when leaving messages on my page. Sarah777 (talk) 01:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Anyone can leave valid warnings on your talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 01:05, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not talking about valid warnings. I'm talking about your partisan intervention. Sarah777 (talk) 01:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no interest in that article. Please mind your manners. Toddst1 (talk) 02:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Judith Ann Hawkins

Regarding above, I expect you are doing a particular 'job' in tagging this article for speedy deletion, please can you note it takes more than five minutes to create substance in an article please give it time. It is unfair to delete the article so soon after creating it. Dmcm2008 (talk) 10:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

To be clear, that article was tagged for CSD 42 minutes after creation - not 5. That should be plenty of time to get more than 1 line of text and 2 external links. It hasn't been deleted yet. Toddst1 (talk) 10:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for you rather precise response, I was at work on a break sorry if I was not able to establish an article in that time. Dmcm2008 (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The Used

Hey, this page was protected a while ago until we reached a consensus over the genres. This has since been reached, and i've put the article up for unprotection here. Although i haven't had a reply so could you unprotect it? Thanks. Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 10:51, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

You seem surprised :P Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 17:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Same vandal, different day.

66.113.50.120 (talk · contribs) 18:51, 22 May 2008 66.113.50.120 (Talk) (6,203 bytes) (→Trivia) (undo) 66.113.50.120 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) I hope I did at least part of that right. Person now defacing the page on Conrad, Montana - which I had only checked to see what else this person had been up, too. I did NOT fix it so it can be seen. It only requires an "undo".

If you will direct me to the proper place to report minor vandalism such as this, I will go there. Cheers, Bloo

Bloo (talk) 14:33, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thank you for the barnstar. Happy Editing Mate. Rgoodermote  15:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

SEPAD

Hi I would like to know why everytime I publish info about SEPAD, the cuban learning platform the article is deleted. I followed some style of other learning platforms like Moddle with articles published on wikipedia. Our intent with the article is to show how elaerning in 3rd world is posible and not to advertise the product. I appreciate if you can send me an email to yfimia at (g) (m) (a) (i) (l) thanks!! --Yfimia (talk) 16:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

See WP:Advert. Toddst1 (talk) 18:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

New users

Do you know how to find new users? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacob696 (talk • contribs) 17:34, 23 May 2008

Yep. Why do you ask? Toddst1 (talk) 18:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Because I wanted to greet new users and point them in the right direction,like the Adoption Center or the Help Desk or the Userpage Help Desk.I'll be back on tommarow Mr. Green^{Hit Me Up}Userboxes 18:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Great reason. Can you see this link? I don't know if it's restricted to admins or not. Toddst1 (talk) 18:33, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I can see it, and I'm not an admin. Enigma ^message 18:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Mr, Green, as you're doing that, how about becoming familiar with Wikipedia:Username policy and patrolling the new names? You'll find a lot of obvious trolls there and it could be an area where you could add a lot of value as not many people do that work. When you find one that doesn't meet the policy, you could do one of two things:

• Add this text to the user talk page:

{{usernameconcern| REPLACE WITH YOUR WORDS}} ~~~~

• If it's really blatant, or they're not responsive/cooperative, report them at Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention for an admin to dispatch.

Just don't be over-enthusiastic or otherwise impolite with the message (I don't think that would be a problem). Sound good? Toddst1 (talk) 18:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Also WP:Friendly would be a good tool to pick up to help with the greeting and adding welcome templates. Toddst1 (talk) 18:55, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Thats sounds great and I will proboly do that.I also want to join the welcoming commitee.I can't use Friendly because I have IE, but I will do my best. Thanks Toddst. Mr. Green^{Hit Me Up}Userboxes 16:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Nelson Chan and User:Oingoboing69

Can you perhaps help out on communication with Oingoboing69 (talk · contribs)? I gave them a heads up today about canvassing, and that seems to have convinced them that we are have some kind of dispute. Please see User_talk:Delicious_carbuncle#Nelson_Chan. I suspect there are language and possibly other issues. Every attempt I make to clarify what the issues are only seems to make things worse. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Happy holiday + advice request

Dear Todd. First let me wish you a happy holiday and say I have no hard feelings. I believe you acted in good faith although I feel you may have attributed errors (due to inexperience on my part) to willful wrong doing, in error. I have learned a great deal from you which will make me a better editor in future (if I decide to continue editing).

I have one question you may be able to answer. While working for photographer, John Vickers, he taught me a photographic technique he developed and called Educated Bleachouts.

The technique created astounding copper plate engraving or scraper board like images from regular continuous tone photographs. One example was a cat. Every single hair could be counted in the final EB print. He provided these EB's mainly for newsprint advertising (pre coated stock) as they reproduced well. He told me I was the only assistant he had taught the technique. No article or book on it exists.

I am getting old and would hate to see this outstanding technique be lost for all time. How could I create a Wikipedia article on it as no references exist? Is there anyway experts in photography can review an article and confirm that it is plausible and correct? It need not be attributed to any person but just be a how to article. Does Wikipedia have any way to preserve knowledge that is not already published? Possibly not....but that would be sad as this is the perfect forum in which to do so if the right safeguards existed.

Any ideas? Warmest regards,Aimulti (talk) 03:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

No refs = No article as WP:OR. Toddst1 (talk) 17:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

my RfA - Ta!

Gwen gleans, wending keen by the wikirindle.

Thanks for your strong support and wonderful words in my RfA, which went through 93/12/5. I'll be steadfast in this trust the en.Wikipedia community has given me. Cheers! Gwen Gale (talk) 01:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm positive the tools are in good hands. Good work on the Mark Hanau issue already! Toddst1 (talk) 13:53, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Possible Sockpuppet

Hey Todd, I think there may be some sockpuppets in wikipedia. (Concerning to Blackbelt accounts)--Gregsynth (talk) 18:39, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Videomaker Magazine

Hi, I wanted to take a crack at writing an acceptable stub for Videomaker Magazine. Could you restore the deleted text to my sandbox so I can work on it? Thanks. Philly jawn (talk) 04:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. Toddst1 (talk) 17:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I have placed a stub article at User:Philly_jawn/sandbox. Could you please restore the article? You may take what i have written and paste it in. Many thanks. Philly jawn (talk) 18:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I took a look at what you have and I'm sure it would be speedily deleted if you moved it to mainspace. It needs some more work. I've added a few tags to help you get it in shape. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 20:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Spb Software House

Please undelete this article. --SergPodtynnyi (talk) 16:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Why? Toddst1 (talk) 17:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

James Simpson (government official)

Hi there do you think that this article is an attack page on James Simpson seen as there is no relevent links to prove that this person exists or even that this person is who the article says they are. ILoveFran (talk) 20:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I doubt it. It does have problems though. Toddst1 (talk) 20:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into it anyway ILoveFran (talk) 20:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The Sussex Centre for the Individual and Society (SCIS)

This is a fully sourced article about an institution that has received a lot of media interest and is thus clearly notable. What is the exact (detailed) problem here? Put another way, if this is not in full conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, what changes can be made to make it so. I think this is an important and notable topic and needs to be made in a format that it acceptable to all and of encyclopaedic value. Precisely how, for example, is the article in any way defamatory.

One of Wikipedias greatest weaknesses is the speed in which some material is deleted and the reluctance for certain admins to engage in intelligible conversation about the same. [SCIS Info] —Preceding unsigned comment added by SCISInfo (talk • contribs) 00:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, see WP:Coatrack. Toddst1 (talk) 00:48, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, read what I have actually written and respond with intelligible conversation about the same. Also note "What to do about coatracks". This is clearly an important topic, and with the greatest respect, I think you may have got it wrong. (SCISinfo) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SCISInfo (talk • contribs) 00:54, 30 May 2008

Take it to Wikipedia:Deletion review. Toddst1 (talk) 02:23, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Request for return of deleted article

Hello, Could you please return my deleted article to me. I had been communicating with another administrator user, jonny-mt, who already returned the article to me prior to your deletion and was providing some helpful guidelines for revising the article. I have made the revisions and would like the original article back to make these edits rather than start over. I would really appreciate your help with this. Sincerely, Curt Q12345q --Q12345q (talk) 02:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure. I should have noticed that it was in your user space before I deleted it. You'll find it back at User:Q12345q/Saloon Doors Emporium. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 02:58, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review for Sussex Centre for the Individual and Society (SCIS)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Sussex Centre for the Individual and Society (SCIS). Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 13:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Todd, thanks for keeping me informed re the above article. I would liked to have contributed to the deletion review, but was too late and clearly not required. Thanks also for supporting my CSD and introducing me to WP:Coatrack ;) Best wishes, Poltair (talk) 22:32, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Can't find submited article

Hi, Last night I revised my article that was deleted by you and clicked "save page" once done editing it. However, this morning when I put the title of the article "Saloon Doors Emporium" in Wikipedia's search window, the article did not come up. Is there something more I need to do? I did not receive notice that it was deleted again either. Thanks Again for Your Help, Curt --Q12345q (talk) 14:47, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

It's not searchable since it's in your user space. You have to remember where we left it. You can see the link above in my message to you. User:Q12345q/Saloon Doors Emporium Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 14:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

How to re-submit article

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. I also found the article in my user space as you identified but can't seem to figure out how to re-submit it to Wikipedia. I clicked on "save page" and it is only located in my user space. What now? Sincerely, --Q12345q (talk) 16:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

First, the article isn't ready yet. It still fails WP:Corp and needs reliable third party references, establishing WP:notability and would be speedily deleted again. If you don't meet those criteria before you move it back, I would be surprised if you get a third chance.

Second, there are two ways:

• An administrator can move the article to Saloon Doors Emporium
• You could cut and paste it into Saloon Doors Emporium

Either works. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 00:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Problem with Twinkle?

I think this edit may have been an error :-) Best, Gwernol 00:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Uh, yeah. That's quite a hiccup in TW. Thanks for catching it. Toddst1 (talk) 00:21, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Indeed :-) Gwernol 00:23, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Anoshirawan

Mind explaining an indefinite block on this user beyond a generic template? -- Ned Scott 06:52, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Kafziel filled me in a little bit more on it. Sorry to question your block, but all I had to go on was their recent contribs, so it didn't add up right away for me. From what Kafziel told me, this editor has been very disruptive, and I guess the indef block makes sense in light of that. However, might I suggest trying a topical ban instead? -- Ned Scott 07:14, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ned, Sorry I was away for most of the evening yesterday. I could support a topical ban. It appears that quite a discussion has taken place since then though, including protecting his/her talk page. Do you still think we should reduce it? If you do, please just go ahead and change it with my support. Toddst1 (talk) 14:03, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Videomaker Magazine

Hi, I wanted to take a crack at writing an acceptable stub for Videomaker Magazine. Could you restore the deleted text to my sandbox so I can work on it? Thanks. Philly jawn (talk) 04:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Done. Toddst1 (talk) 17:55, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I have placed a stub article at User:Philly_jawn/sandbox. Could you please restore the article? You may take what i have written and paste it in. Many thanks. Philly jawn (talk) 18:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I took a look at what you have and I'm sure it would be speedily deleted if you moved it to mainspace. It needs some more work. I've added a few tags to help you get it in shape. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 20:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

• I've updated it. I think it's enought to be published as a stub, and I think the references and g-hits establish norietey. Philly jawn (talk) 19:20, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks much improved. I removed a link to amazon (you don't want spamlinks in your article). What I would do if I were you is :

• Follow this link to Videomaker Magazine and create the page by:

• opening User:Philly_jawn/sandbox for editing in another window or tab,
• copying all the text from User:Philly_jawn/sandbox in the edit window (ctrl-c or edit->copy)
• pasting all the text in the newly opened Videomaker Magazine article (ctrl-v or edit->paste).

• Save [[Videomaker Magazine,
• Create Talk: Videomaker Magazine and say that you have rewritten the article and think it should be ok now.

Hope this helps. Toddst1 (talk) 19:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

• It does, thanks! Philly jawn (talk) 19:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Ogle family

I was surprised that you reverted my cosmetic change to this article. Don't you agree that to have minor headings in a heavier bolder format than the main subheadings creates an inbalance in the presentation of the article?Ordyg (talk) 12:30, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Just following WP:MOS. Doing so allows linking to individual people (from other articles) who don't have their own articles. Toddst1 (talk) 18:22, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Well yes, that is my point really - that big chunky characters in the centre of the piece do nothing whatever for the style. It has nothing to do with your content; merely with presentation. The present teatment looks clumsy and is clearly not in accordance with MOS. It is hardly a big issue and that is why I was surprised at your reaction Ordyg (talk) 07:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I think you're right that it's not a big deal but wrong about WP:MOS. I think what is there now is in compliance with WP:MOS, speicifically, Wikipedia:MOSHEAD#Section_headings. I can't understand why you think using italics for section headings is within WP:MOS. Using italics in to delineate sections about individuals, as you did is disjoint from both Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(text_formatting)#Main_uses and Wikipedia:MOSHEAD#Section_headings. Toddst1 (talk) 15:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I quite accept your point about italics, but with respect you have totally ignored the point that I am actually making. Please have a look at my new effort and see whether you can accept that presentationally it looks much neaterOrdyg (talk) 11:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I usually try to avoid discussions about my opinion vs. your opinon, but it appears you want an answer: My opinion is that it doesn't look better with bullets or italics. Perhaps if you kept the discussion on the same line as the bullet and the person's name it might look better, but as it is now, I don't think it does.

My further opinion is that my opinion shouldn't carry much weight on stylistic issues. 8-) That's why we have MOS. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 16:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Nickymark21 (talk · contribs) vandal

Hi, Todd. Another admin clobbered his IP with a short block and I'm of the opinion that the main account is deserving of a permanent block. Just my $.02. Thanks.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

what's the ip? Toddst1 (talk) 15:50, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

98.217.7.158 (talk · contribs). --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:57, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

looks like Spellcast (talk · contribs) beat me to it. Toddst1 (talk) 17:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Blocked User

The editor User talk:BanditoLoco who you just indef blocked is asking to be unblocked I suspect it is this other blocked editor notice the same mistake with the unblock template using the round bracket and not the curly ones thanks. BigDunc^Talk 19:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

James Woodward disambiguation

Greetings. You removed my addition to the James Woodward disambiguation page, but I don't really understand why you did so. Would you be willing to explain this to me? Victor Gijsbers (talk) 21:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

See my edit summary and the note on Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Disambiguation_pages about blue links (vs redlinks). Toddst1 (talk) 21:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

I tell you, doing NPP used to get me in trouble with users with attitudes, which is why I quit for a long time and gave back the admin tools while I was at it. Lots of new templates since then and I thank you for bringing them to my attention. This is such a useful resource that it just burns me to see idiots abuse it. The nice part is, we win in the end. Thanks for the compliment. Much obliged.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The Real Life Barnstar

Thanks! I just did what needed to be done. :) – ClockworkSoul 21:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

User talk:142.25.110.50

You last blocked for 1 month, so this time I put 3 months... Is that reasonable? xenocidic (talk) 19:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I would think so. Frankly, it would have to be pretty egregious for me to question another admin's blocking period. I might have gone for 6 mos, but I tend to be a bit heavy handed for repeat vandals. Toddst1 (talk) 20:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Chadwell O'Connor entry

Hi,

Thanks for your edits on the page I created for Chadwell O'Connnor. This was my first wikipedia entry so it was a little rough. I have added in-line citations for most of the content although there are still a couple of sections where I'm still looking for references. I'd like your assessment that it is now well-enough documented to remove the caution label at the top of the article.

Regards, Jim Jlg1953 (talk) 22:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Replied on User talk:Jlg1953. Toddst1 (talk) 23:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your swift response to the vandalism by the editor with the handle Dogface1234. I was afraid he would be something of a nuisance. Be well Ecoleetage (talk) 23:33, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

That one was pretty obvious. Thanks for reporting it. Toddst1 (talk) 23:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks from me as well, for your participation in my recent RFA. i've left some thank spam for you below! if you enjoy reading overly detailed analyses of RFAs, feel free to check out mine here (comments welcome). cheers, xenocidic (talk) 23:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

templated rfa thank-spam

Thank you for your support

So...how do I use these things? ;>

I would like to thank the community for placing their trust in me during my recent request for adminship, which passed 72 13 2 . Rest assured, I have read each comment thoroughly and will be addressing the various concerns raised as I step cautiously into my new role as janitor. In particular, I would like to thank Balloonman for putting so much time into reviewing my contributions and writing such a thoughtful nomination statement after knowing me for only a brief period of time (and for convincing me that I was ready to take up the mop now, rather than go through admin coaching).

To my fellow admins - please let me know right away if I ever take any mis-steps with my new tools. Should I make a mistake, and you reverse the action, I will not consider it to be wheel-warring (but please tell me so I can understand what I did wrong).

To everyone - please feel free to slap me around a bit if I ever lose sight of the core philosophy of Wikipedia as I understand it - the advancement of knowledge through the processes of mutual understanding and respect. As always, feel free to drop by my talk page if I can be of any assistance. =)

Sincerely,

~xenocidic, 01:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Why deleted?

umm you just deleted my information on North Allegheny. 1. You did not go to the school and have no idea what your talking about. 2. I was quoting myself, because I am the webmaster, so I was providing information about myself. 3. You just made the North Allegheny page less informative -- oh well, I could care less. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ironj221 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I am creating a post about a notable person and you deleted it, despite its explanation of context. Why? RealEstateGuru (talk) 00:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

See WP:Bio Toddst1 (talk) 00:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

"A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. "

There are at least 12 regional and local (and 1 national) articles written about Mr. Nelson's contribution to real estate brokerage. He is doing now what Charles Schwab did to stock brokering. RealEstateGuru (talk) 00:39, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Interesting omission in the (now deleted) article. Toddst1 (talk) 00:42, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I did not intend that comment as an "attack". If links/scans of the articles in question are added to TCN's page, will that keep it from being "swiftly deleted?". RealEstateGuru (talk) 00:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Here's how it works: If the article asserts WP:Notability then it won't be speedily deleted. It may however be deleted after discussion if it doesn't demonstrate WP:Notability. You demonstrate notability by adding WP:Reliable sources to ensure verifiability. Sorry for the gobbldygook but to keep wikipedia from being filled with high school students' rumors and such we have to have rules. Hope this helps. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 00:57, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I will gather my sources together and try again soon, when time permits. I appreciate your dedication to this great site and I share your distaste for high school students' rumors. RealEstateGuru (talk) 01:03, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Bruce C. Kone

What do you know about the facts of Bruce Kones termination. The only vandalism occurring is you deleting the truth about the matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Micah2020 (talk • contribs) 01:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Never pretended to know anything about the matter. I do know about WP:V as you should too. Toddst1 (talk) 01:09, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Do I really need to add the numerous amounts of articles railing Bruce Kone, for allowing a Republican connected student into the medical school? Or giving equal pay to women in the Medical department. Or firing old sexist, bigot men? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Micah2020 (talk • contribs) 01:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes. See WP:Reliable as well. Toddst1 (talk) 01:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

VegitaU is posing as an admin

I noticed that you blocked this user briefly a few weeks ago. He recently reverted my comments on Talk:September 11, 2001 attacks and threatened to block me on my talk page. He is not an admin and I assume not authorized to make such threats. Kauffner (talk) 08:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how VegitaU is posing as an admin at all. He issued two warnings which at the surface may appear legitimate. Discuss the warnings with VegitaU. Toddst1 (talk) 14:36, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

So if you don't agree with a comment on a talk page, the proper response is to delete it and then put an unsigned warning with a templete stating that the user will be blocked if he continues to post? I guess you learn something new everyday. I'll have to try it myself sometime. Yes, I have already warned VegitaU to stop vandalizing the page. Kauffner (talk) 14:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

No, not at all. However, where arbitration has decided that "disruptive information or comments related to the promotion of conspiracy theories to the September 11, 2001 attacks" should not be promoted here, you will be blocked if you try such. I'll be glad to help there if necessary. Toddst1 (talk) 15:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

There is nothing in the decision about conspiracy theories. You're quoting from a templete that VegitaU wrote. He wasn't even an arbitrator. Here is the relevant part of the decision:

Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict (defined as articles which relate to the events of September 11, broadly interpreted) if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. Kauffner (talk) 17:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

The entire arbitration is about conspiracy theories. Perhaps you should read it. Toddst1 (talk) 21:51, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

That's not the same as banning them, is it? VegitaU is making up rules as he goes along and you seem to think I should follow them. He also claimed he removed my comment because it continued a closed discussion--another bogus rule. A rule banning conspiracy theories would make no sense anyway. Everyone would start accusing each other of promoting conspiracy theories. I write what the best of my knowledge is the truth. I can't help it if you think its a conspiracy theory. Kauffner (talk) 03:56, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

FYI ANI

There's an ANI thread about you here. Regards, SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 20:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Huh?

I saw you warned Angelo De La Paz (talk · contribs) that he was close to violating 3RR on Matilda Mecini... but the WP:3RR policy clearly states that reverting the "addition of libelous, biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced controversial material which breaches Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living persons" does not count towards 3RR. PageantUpdater talk • contribs 08:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

What I saw was removal of peacock terms, saying she looked like Marilyn Monroe. I tend to agree with the Angelo's actions, so I didn't block him/her as I did the person he/she was reverting. Am I missing something? Not trying to be confrontational, honest question. Toddst1 (talk) 08:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

You didn't block him, but you did warn him he was potentially violating the rule [23]. Cheers. PageantUpdater talk • contribs 08:47, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I guess this does fall under that exception for biased. I shall remove my warning. Thanks for pointing it out. Toddst1 (talk) 08:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Article PikKirby deleted?

PikKirby (talk) 10:49, 8 June 2008 (UTC) I know the uprising level of useless articles about just themselves or just useless in total, but PikKirby, an group name for my claymation group my school last year was really important to people in my school and to all my freinds. I wish that I can keep this article so that my freinds, family and others can see what we did during that time at school. Thanks :)

(new at wikipedia.. ) --PikKirby (talk) 10:49, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

MainBody

I listed it, it would appear twinkle messed up. It appears not to be there anymore. I am relisting it. Thanks for the note!  Asenine  13:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

White men marches on

Why have you deleted this article? I know it's a racist song but it quite famous song sang for white supramecist groups. I think that the song is enough important to be on wikipedia. Thanks, Gabriel Vidal Álvarez (talk) 15:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

You mean White man marches on. You are correct - that was a bad nomination for speedy deletion. I should have declined it as it asserted notability. I have restored the article. It may be deleted in the future for other reasons. Toddst1 (talk) 17:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tanthalas39 2

You made added a comment to your opposition stance in this RfA. The syntax you used messed up the numbering/tallying scheme. I fixed the typo, but it is unclear to me whether you were striking out your opposition, or clarifying it. If my edit is wrong, please make the appropriate fix. Cheers, Kingturtle (talk) 18:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. The fix is fine. I may change my position, but I wanted to get that diff out there either way because I don't want it to seem like I have a vendetta or anything. I wasn't even wikistalking him when I found that edit - I came across that edit from ANI. I'm still thinking about whether to change my endorsement. Toddst1 (talk) 18:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

User:Teenvideogamenerd

[24]

Wasn't actually vandalism, but spamvertisement. A block might be in order, but it shouldn't say he was vandalizing, because I don't think he was. In any case, I've temporarily salted the page.

Cheers - Revolving Bugbear 19:33, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

You are correct - I have changed the block and and notification message. Thanks for pointing that out. Toddst1 (talk) 19:34, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Deleted because article is perceived to be advertisement, copyright infringement or both?

I'd like to know why the article I created this morning is being sent for "speedy deletion?"

The firm I'm writing about (Kiesel Boucher Larson) just last summer settled one of the larger Clergy Abuse cases in the country ($660 million alone from LA County) totaling over $1 billion.

They're also getting involved with Ed McMahon and his foreclosure situation, along with a number of high profile cases. I see that other prominent attorneys are listed on Wikipedia. Do I need to create individual Wikipedia pages for each attorney, in order to comply with this site's rules?

I'm just wondering. Also, I am self-employed and writing about the firm as Paul Kiesel is a friend of mine and I thought his acheivements and his firm's were worth noting, particularly surrounding cases with mass appeal.

I can clean up the biographical information. I used most of that from their website.

Please let me know.

Ben Lingle kbl8648 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kbl8648 (talk • contribs) 21:37, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Both copyvio and advertising. No, you don't need (and probably shouldn't) create individual pages for each attorney. You should, however, read the following before proceeding:

• Copyright Policy
• Advertising Policy

and since you're likely to run in to these too:

• Wikipedia's concept of notability
• Company notability
• Personal notability

Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 21:42, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Toddst1. You have new messages at ChaoticReality's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

LOL

haha! this just really struck me!

Oh, man. This is the only way to describe my reaction. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 01:55, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Vegaswikian1

Thanks for the heads up. It is me. I decided that I did not want to use my admin account while on open networks. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:56, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

User 38.116.202.170

Hi, Can you block the above again for continued vandalism to the "German Battleship Bismarck" page even after a recent barring you imposed? Thanks, bigpad (talk) 08:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Jack Graham Page

Hi Todd. I'd like to ask that you remove the 3 week extension of the block on the Jack Graham (pastor) page. The user who asked for this block has been a disruptive editor, challenging and deleting anything on the Prestonwood Baptist Church or Jack Graham (Pastor) page that has the smallest negative impact on the church or it's pastor, no matter how true, sourced, and notable. Essentially, I believe that he and a couple of other editors (I suspect sock puppeting, but don't have any real evidence) are using Wiki as a PR machine for their church and it's pastor. The page was suspended from editing on it a few weeks ago with unsourced and untrue information on it that this user placed there. I saw what was happening (I wasn't involved at that time) and decided to just let it stay for a couple of weeks and then to see if I could reason with this guy on the discussion board. I suspect that he asked for the extension to keep his false information on the page, and any true, notable, and source information off the page which may not be positive. He's starting to learn how to use wiki admins to get what he wants. Will you please reverse your extension? If things get to heated and vandalism starts, etc. you can always protect the page then. However, for now, now one is making threats of vandalism or destruction on that page and I think that continuing to keep the block is just telling new editors to "go away" rather than giving them a chance to learn and contribute.

I'd also like to ask that, if you should decide to keep the block, that you first correct the information that is there. Specifically, I'm referring to this:

"Dr. Graham also falls in line with the 90% of Southern Baptist pastors who do not consider themselves Five-Point Calvinists. [6] On the subject of five-point Calvinism, he was quoted in The Baptist Standard in 2003 saying "he would not want to see Southern Baptists embrace an elitist doctrine or to minimize the importance of evangelism, which are common criticisms of five-point Calvinism."[7]"

The sourced article doesn't say that 90% of Southern Baptist pastors do not consider themselves Five-Point Calvinist, and the article says "which are common criticisms of five-point Calvinism" Dr. Graham did not say that part, and this makes it look like he did. It says that they polled a small group of SBC pastors and that 90% of them were not 5-Point Calvinist. Can you change the paragraph to this:

Dr. Graham is critical of Five-Point Calvinism. In 2003, Dr. Graham told The Baptist Standard that he would not want to see Southern Baptists embrace "an elitist doctrine" or to minimize the importance of evangelism. Romans9:11 (talk) 14:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

You mean I protected the m:The Wrong Version? Toddst1 (talk) 20:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

As I asked you yesterday, Todd, it is pretty obvious that there will be another edit war on this page if it is unlocked so I would still ask that the lock continue for the time you set forth yesterday. As you can see in the log of this page in question there were several editors trying to make this page a Calvinist debate for some reason even though this covers about .05% of Pastor Graham's preachings and he doesn't even mention this issue on the beliefs page on his ministry website. The only source for this statement was a quote 5 years ago that puts him in agreement with 90% of Southern Baptist Pastors according to a survey produced so either both sources need to be there or none as far as i'm concerned. No one is trying to make this a "PR page" or remove "negative" information but I do wish for this and every other article to be correct and not misleading.Johnb316 (talk) 20:35, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

That was my point. It's always the wrong version and folks are waiting to fix it. Toddst1 (talk) 20:50, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes I hear ya...thanks ToddJohnb316 (talk) 20:56, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

So are you just going to blow off any request to correct poorly sourced material on locked pages because there is always another party who disagrees? I mean, The Wrong Version was funny, and I can see how it's a constant problem, but there's still poorly sourced information on a Bio page that your lock is keeping on this. Remember, I BLEW OFF the first lock leaving this information on this, but Johnb316 is just using you guys to keep his info in place. If you'll review the history you'll see that Johnb316 is one the disruptive people that caused the lock in the first place. You'll also notice that he has not contributions to Wiki - just reverts and complaints. Again, you can always lock the page if a edit war starts, but as you've said before, there's no crystal ball. There will always be some chance that an edit war will happen on any page. If the likelihood of an edit war was good reason to lock a page, pages such as the Abortion page would always be locked. If you feel that vandalism is an imminent threat to the page, then semi-protect the page. I noticed that you did not lock the Prestonwood Baptist page, where vandalism and edit warring did happen - it was semi-protected. Anyway, I'm respectfully asking once again for your assistance in this matter.Romans9:11 (talk) 13:12, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey.

You sure have made/worked on a lot of pages.76.189.13.127 (talk) 20:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Delection of StylePointer.com and the Hong Kong comment

I am new to wikipedia so I am confused about some of your comments. It will be great if you give more clarification.

1. I found the wiki page of my some of my competitors (e.g. theFind.com). What is the difference between theFind.com and StylePointer.com pages then? Is it because that you believe theFind.com page is created by non-theFind.com staff? please clarify.

1. On Dicover Shopping article, I truely think that my addition is not promotional but it adds value to the quality of the article and is relevant. Why did you delete it then?

1. in Hong Kong page, a lot of comments written there were not sourced and are kind of subjective. For example, under the culture section, it says that "A number of Hong Kong filmmakers have also achieved widespread fame in Hollywood, such as John Woo, Wong Kar-wai and Tsui Hark". What is the difference between this and my addition? Btw, Andy Lau, Tony Leung and Alan Tam are really the most popular stars and singers there.

Please kindly give me some hints.

Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vivianwonglee (talk • contribs) 21:36, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Warning regarding user

Toddst, with all due respect, I highly disagree with your accusation that my comments regarding the user you referred to were without basis. I think that if you'll review his actions you'll find that he is very disruptive, and only causes problems, instead of contributing anything to Wiki (he's made no contributions). However, out of respect of your position, and to not appear as a troublemaker myself, I'll refrain from calling him disruptive. I will, however, use proper wiki channels to report disruptive behavior.Romans9:11 (talk) 21:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Media Vision Usa

Hi, my article has been deleted by you and I am considering re-writing the article, but i need your help. It was about the company called Media Vision usa and it was not for advertising at all. I don't know which part seemed like advertising, so I talked to Andrew who tagged my article for speedy deletion, and he said I might need to work on it again not to sound like advertising. I'm thinking to start writing from very basic information about that company and I'll add more contents on. is that cool? I am very new to wikipedia, so please let me know what I should do for rewriting my article. I'll upload my old article in my User:Fresh01a/Sandbox for your information. Thanks, Fresh01a (talk) 17:59, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

need help

Hi Toddst1 - I need your help with a situation; wasn't sure if it is purely vandalism so I am coming to you instead of WP:AIV. This User:59.91.210.225 removed information, stating it was "irrelevant" - I gave reasons as to why the removal was unjustified - [25]. This individual has responded with personal attacks (in Hindi, btw) and vandalism - [26], [27], [28]. What shall I do? Vishnava _talk 00:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Another attack - [29]. I've warned the user several times. Vishnava _talk 00:05, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I can't follow this. Perhaps take it to WP:ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 17:39, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

That's alrite - he's gone and its cooled off anyway. Vishnava _talk 17:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Tek Panel page

Please explain why a generic description of Tek Panel is construed as advertising yet their can be extensive Wiki pages for other computer manufacturers (Dell, HP, IBM, Gateway, etc.)? Tek Panel is a signficant topic because a) it is actually built in the United States, and it is a large format integrated computer. I understand and respect your job and duty to Wikipedia, but its my opinion in the quest to be fair and impartial your decision to delete the topic of Tek Panel is actually unfair in lieu of other manufacturer's having entries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chitownram (talk • contribs) 16:58, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The fifth time it was deleted (the most recent) was for WP:CSD#A7. Take the hint. Toddst1 (talk) 17:01, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Moving my ANI broke links

Well that broke the links that I made to the ANI and his stalking and harassment of me is a seperate issue that I want addressed by the Admins. --8bitJake (talk) 17:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

What links? Canvassing links? Toddst1 (talk) 17:44, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't appreciate you removing my discussion of Nwwaew. His actions and complaints against me are still on the page. I don't see why his complaints are left there while you are blanking out what I said. --8bitJake (talk) 22:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

That was a flawed decision from years ago since it included false accusations. I never used a sock puppet that decision included charges against other people. --8bitJake (talk) 22:48, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

User talk:69.182.25.76

IP addresses are not "accounts" so they cannot be "vandalism-only accounts." Unless you have evidence that an IP is being used by the same person over an extended period of time or there is repeated abuse over a long period of time, IPs should generally not be blocked for more than a couple days as they will likely change owner, and only very rarely should they be blocked indefinitely. Mr.Z-man 18:55, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

You are correct and I most certainly knew that. I obviously forgot somewhere in making the block that I was blocking an IP. I have corrected my error. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Toddst1 (talk) 21:11, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Inappropriate action

I haven't looked in detail at your block of 8bitJake, but it is highly inappropriate for you to "review" and decline an unblock request stemming from your own block. The entire point of the {{unblock}} template is to allow a blocked user to request that a third party, uninvolved administrator examine the reason for blocking. This block may be, and probably is, kosher. But you should never, ever, ever decline an unblock request related to your own blocks. FCYTravis (talk) 01:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

You know, I wondered about that before I took the action. I checked WP:Unblock and while it didn't say it was ok, it didn't say it wasn't and led me to believe it wouldn't be a problem. It seemed to be focused on preventing wheel-wars. Sorry for the transgression - not my intent. That does make sense though. I'm going to edit WP:Unblock and add something about that. Thank you for bringing it to my attention! Toddst1 (talk) 13:00, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to be dropping eaves here, but I noticed this discussion and also took a look for any mention of this policy/guideline regarding {{unblock}}. The only thing I could find was a section from WP:APPEAL which said "When a block is appealed, other editors - most of whom probably have no involvement in the matter - will review your editing history, which has been logged, as well as the reason for the block and the history leading up to it. Requests for unblocking are listed at Category:Requests for unblock." So it would definitely behoove us to add something to the blocking policy page to codify this presently unwritten rule. In the interest of disclosure, I've currently declined one block that I've placed here, though I doubt anyone would take issue with that as the unblock request was done in poor faith. I'll let other admins review my blocks in the future. xenocidic (talk) 13:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment, xeno. I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one in this boat. I've started a discussion on the policy talk page Wikipedia_talk:Blocking_policy#Unblocking and would appreciate some discussion there. It's a policy so it needs discussion. Toddst1 (talk) 13:21, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm gunna keep an eye on that, but being a FNG I have nothing much to add at this time. =] xenocidic (talk) 15:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I figure it's the FNG's that need that information. It's clear I fall in to that category - at least in this case. Toddst1 (talk) 15:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Hey Todd, would you please grant me permission to use the rollback feature? I'd like to experiment with a few more features on wikipedia including huggle. Thanks. Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 02:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

replied on User_talk:Riverpeopleinvasion#You_have_been_granted_Rollback Toddst1 (talk) 13:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey thanks man and yes i can, i'll get to using it right away :) Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 21:34, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

haha yeah i love them. I put it in thanks :) Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 23:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

wow you can read my mind! I was just thinking that i know i've got a fairly large list was gonna find out how. Thanks lol :P Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 00:25, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok i archived it myself, i thought id see if i could figure it out myself without copying anyone lol. I did it in a relatively simple way, the archive is at User_talk:Riverpeopleinvasion/Archive_1. Could you protect the page so only i can edit it? Or the closest thing to that i don't really want people editing it. thanks Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 01:00, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah thats fair enough i'm not that bothered i just wondered cause yours was. Every page i edit is automatically on my watchlist so i keep an eye on everything Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 01:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Block issue

Hi Toddst1 - obviously you know better about blocking policy, but isn't this one month block a bit excessive for an anon IP that has been blocked for 45 mins and 48 hours in just the past 4 days? Isn't a 1 week block more reasonable? Vishnava _talk 15:28, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll change it to 1 week per your request. Vandalism from a school IP at the end of the school year immediately on release of a block indicates to me that the problem is fairly likely to continue until school lets out for the summer. Note the user was vandalizing the same article that they were last blocked for. Toddst1 (talk) 15:30, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh it wasn't a request, just a question/opinion :) Regards, Vishnava _talk 15:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure when school lets out in New York, but let's keep an eye on that article and IP. Toddst1 (talk) 15:36, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Templating the regulars

Hey, just a friendly note. You can take it or leave it. I reccomend leaving a personalized note on the page of AIV reporters who make bad reports. I know AIV is often fast paced, and it is alot easier to template an editor but it can often be extremly discouraging, especially to new editors and semi-experienced editors who are not completley familiar with our AIV policies. I have seen sevaerl editors leave because there AIV concerns were not addressed and when they expressed concern over this, they were templated or played off. Again, you can take it or leave it but I highly reccomend a personalized note in this case. For example this. Thanks and happy editing/administrative tasks. Chrislk02 ^{Chris Kreider} 15:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Good point. In doing the personalized note, I discovered quite a bit more going on there. Toddst1 (talk) 16:42, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

RE:Criminal Investigation Department

I have my suspicions of who the IP is a sockpuppet of, whoever it is constantly hounds my edits thats why I warn and revert him. He cyber stalks me. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 17:00, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I realise your only doing your job advising me of these things, and I bear no grudge against you. I just wanted to make that clear, and I will try to Assume Good Faith. Police,Mad,Jack (talk · contribs)☺ 17:06, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Blog Like It's The End Of The World

Hullo - I'm curious as to why this was so speedily deleted. I'm also a little concerned at the shortness of the time lapse between the notification and the actual deletion. In fact, I had created the article about half an hour ago, and when I went to update it with some more information, it was not only nominated for speedy deletion, but already gone. While I recognize that Wikipedia needs a mechanism to quickly remove useless articles, half an hour seems a bit too quick. I was going to put a {{hangon}} tag in, but that's kind of hard to do when the article is already gone. I'd appreciate the opportunity to discuss this.    ¥    Jacky Tar  20:05, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Further to my previous - I'm afraid I don't really see how the article constituted advertising. As far as I can see, a link to a blog, when the blog is the information source, or in this case, coordinating point, seems a valid reference. If it was the Frappr! map reference, I don't believe that also constituted advertising, as it was in place as an external reference, specifically to those individuals participating in this year's BLITEOTW. Or is it that I posted a link to this article on another blog? Would that be grounds to delete the article? I look forward to hearing from you.    ¥    Jacky Tar  20:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

It was a toss-up between deleting it for notability or advertising. Take your pick. You're welcome to take the article to WP:Deletion Review if you disagree. In re-reading it, I probably should have used notability but the end-result is the same. Toddst1 (talk) 20:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, i'm Avatarfreak. And i have a question

All my stuff got deleted i think because i made a new user name by accident. Do you know if there is anyway to get it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avatarfreak (talk • contribs) 02:46, 14 June 2008

Great Iowa Flood of 2008

There is a problem in editing this article, which I originated. My last edit, which involves the Wapsipinicon River is recorded in the edit, but does not show up. Similarly, the reflist|2 bit also fails to work. It is so much work nowadays to find an Admin to deal with such things. --Ace Telephone (talk) 04:41, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

ANI abuot Jake-no longer there

I was going to contribute to the discussion, but the section on the ANI page for it is no longer there. But you can red my talk page what he called me on it, what I wrote on his and the DLC talk page, you can see the kind of grandstanding he does. He doesn't listen to anyone and unabashedly tailors things to fit his opinions, dispite something being out of context or contrary to what he wants to think.Tallicfan20 (talk) 04:56, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. It got archived last night before discussion was complete. I've relisted it. Toddst1 (talk) 14:45, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

I didn't continue to edit Kinklesville

I didn't continue to edit Kinklesville, i only did it once! There must be a mistake!

Remember you can't spell aircraft without RAF (talk) 20:03, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

why can't I edit that Template

I put a picture in the public domain, is there anything wrong?203.73.158.177 (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Mos#Images_as_text Toddst1 (talk) 03:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I got your point, I won't put any image at the title place203.73.158.177 (talk) 04:10, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Comet protection

You added the template but didn't really protected the page. Please do that! Thanks! --Damiens.rf 15:38, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Just the opposite. I semi-ed the page. Toddst1 (talk) 16:09, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Personal info ANI

Todd, could you please review this? I'm concerned that some evidence for an ongoing RfC is now redlinked. Gnixon (talk) 17:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk page restoration

Actually you need to delete every edit after the first one that reveals personal info, since each subsequent version saves the entire page as it stands at the time. Guettarda (talk) 18:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Guettarda (talk) 19:04, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

thanks for quick block

Hehe, I was going to make a note on his talk page about the notice I put up at ANI, but you were faster than me :) --Enric Naval (talk) 21:06, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Moulton

Why'd you delete his talk archives too? -- Ned Scott 03:15, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

ah wait, never mind, I see your comments on AN/I. Though I would think the talk page archives would be harmless, considering they're just a copy of what's in the current talk page's history. *shrug* Cheers. -- Ned Scott 03:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

It's all good. You keep me honest, Ned. Toddst1 (talk) 04:16, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry guys, I missed the ANI comment and can't find it now. Why were they deleted? The logs seem to say "Temporary userpage deletion" but I'm not sure if this applies here, especially given that people are still appraising all the stuff. Thoughts? - Alison ^❤ 21:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

ANI report here. Basically user is repeatedly adding personal info to userspace pages and user talk. I finally had to protect the talk page to keep him from reposting links to off-wiki sites with the info. Toddst1 (talk) 02:15, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Block

Hi there. You had helped me out last time I needed a block on User 208.217.164.134, for their numerous vandalising edits. The block you put on them was a 48 hours one which has now ended, and they have chosen to take this time to AGAIN make the same edit by deleting the same sourced factual information. I was wondering if you'd be able to help me out with this user, instead of me reporting them yet again. Thanks for your help -Fall Of Darkness (talk) 21:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry - I've been away and just came across this. The user is not currently active so we shouldn't block. Toddst1 (talk) 02:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The user edited the Brimstone article at 20:15, 17 June 2008. They made the same edit that they have made the past 6 times they touched the article. User is deleting the same referenced fact from the article each time. Despite many warnings, User continues to vandalise said pages- even disregarding the seriousness of your 48hr block. They apparently will not learn. -Fall Of Darkness (talk) 02:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

about the user you just blocked

I noticed that there were no warnings adjacent to the indefinate block on your edit, ({{test 5}}). What was the reason for an indefinate block?

Who? Toddst1 (talk) 03:26, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Moulton

Please read the Permprot box you added to User talk:Moulton. It is not appropriate for a talk page that is uneditable by nonadmins. WAS 4.250 (talk) 09:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I changed it to a non-template message. Thanks. Toddst1 (talk) 21:10, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk page notice

Why did you erase so much of my talk page when you tried to post about the article deletion nomination about United States Air Force tanker contract controversy? Anyway, the subject encompasses much more than the Airbus aircraft, which is why it merits its own article. The Druyun scandal portion is one of the biggest US military procurement scandals in history, and that happened before Airbus was in the picture. Cla68 (talk) 23:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Whoa. Sorry about that. I saw that WP:TW had a hiccup in creating the AFD page. It apparently ate a bunch of your talk page in the process. Not my intent. If you look at the history of United States Air Force tanker contract controversy, you'll see it was all the same TW edit. I actually proposed a merge/delete, rather than just a delete. Again, my apologies. Toddst1 (talk) 00:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Cla68 (talk) 02:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of United States Air Force tanker contract controversy

An article that you have been involved in editing, United States Air Force tanker contract controversy, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States Air Force tanker contract controversy. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?

You did not create the discussion page, so I created it for you. You may wish to withdraw your nomination, since several editors feel the topic is notable. Please post your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States Air Force tanker contract controversy -- Eastmain (talk) 23:47, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Uninvolved admin

I wanted to ask for your input as an uninvolved admin. User:72.211.223.181 who seems to be the subject of the article Joel Widzer‎ is attempting to insert, what I see as unsourced PR type language and remove a COI tag. He is now claiming that I have "nazi type" behavior. I feel that more eyes are needed. --Daniel J. Leivick (talk) 01:16, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Article speedily deleted as promotion and recreation of deleted material, user blocked for 3RR. Glad to be of assistance. Toddst1 (talk) 01:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

The McLean Group

The website was copy written by me. It was not an exact replica although I might have used some of the discriptions I used there on this posting. Could you please help me to get my posting back.

Thanks,

Eric 202-210-7883

egins@mcleanllc.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.62.129.204 (talk) 17:00, 26 June 2008 (UTC) Why did you erase my posting? This posting was inline with what other companies and individuals posted and was written to inform and not advertise. I do appreciate your efforts to keep wiki clean so I need to ask for your help in getting my posting back up. I welcome your suggestions on the ways that I might change my posting so that it may be reposted I would appreciate your help. I thank you for your consideration and look forward to your prompt response.

Sincerely,

Eric 202-210-7883

Ginser (talk) 08:05, 23 June 2008 (UTC) (Ginser (talk) 12:09, 23 June 2008 (UTC))

It was a copy of the company website, which was copywritten. Toddst1 (talk) 01:08, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Joel Widzer

Could you explain why the Joel Widzer page was delted. it says self adversting, however the page has been edited throughly thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reagan0005 (talk • contribs) 01:36, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

See above? Toddst1 (talk) 01:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

how is this resloved. A reading of the page gives a sense of factual background and notoriety certainly not advertising. In additions, the page has been revised and revised by a number of editors. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reagan0005 (talk • contribs) 01:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

It's deleted. WP:Deletion review if you feel strongly otherwise. It's been deleted before, and you know that. Are you acting in concert with Koninginwijfje‎ (talk · contribs)? Toddst1 (talk) 01:45, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Is there an easier way to communicate with you? The page was revised and was in good standing until someone wrote about a unverifiable event today, which kingturtle handled. Then it got caught up in this mess. How can I work with you to have a good page for Wikipedia? Your page says to Assume good faith so I’m hoping you’re here to work with us. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reagan0005 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I am requesting that you restore Joel Widzer. It is an article that I've been editing and monitoring. The article definitely needs a lot of fine tuning. Your objection is that it is blatant advertising, but it is very easy to simply remove the sections in question. Also, you refer to it as a recreation of deleted material Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joel Widzer - but the AfD you refer to lists only KEEPS and no DELETES. Kingturtle (talk) 03:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

restore Joel Widzer

can we work on restroing the Joel Widzer page? thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reagan0005 (talk • contribs) 04:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I have done so. Please do me a favor and close the deletion review. Toddst1 (talk) 04:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Will do. I also reverted the article to a NPOV edit I did a month ago. Kingturtle (talk) 04:59, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

ok how do I close the deltion review (I am trying to learn and really trying to do the right thing) Also how can we make this a better artilce? thank you reagan (talk) 05:08, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for restoring the Joel Widzer Article. Do you have any suggestions for improving it and avoiding this problem in the future? Thanks for your help.reagan (talk) 17:27, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Try using only third-party reliable sources - I don't recommend using bio pieces attached to columns he has written as he has written the bio as well. I'd remove the expert advice section completely. Toddst1 (talk) 17:29, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

ok-thanks, i think the expert section was to show the depth of his work. Is there another way to write this sections. thank youreagan (talk) 17:32, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Maybe, I dunno. It's like saying he has a job. I'm not convinced the guy is truly notable. Toddst1 (talk) 17:33, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

If you look at the body of traveling writing you can see that he made the switch in consumers’ minds of thinking about travel for $5 a day to thinking how they could get good value at a reasonable price. But that aside, he has been mentioned in a lot of publications and written about in other books, as well as interviews and done a lot of TV work.reagan (talk) 17:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Harding

Thanks for protecting. That joke from the Colbert Report is like 10 days old by now. Apparently some of the inter-nuts are just now hearing about it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:51, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I hadn't figured out where it was mentioned, but have seen enough of these to recognize that it had been mentioned somewhere. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 22:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I didn't see that one show early last week, or whenever it was, but I gather that Stephen Colbert, trying to be a modern-day Soupy Sales, advised his audience to try something, to see what would happen - namely, to substitute "Gangsta" for "Gamaliel" in the article, referencing the alleged "Negro" blood in Harding's ancestry. It was funny once. 10 days later, it's getting old. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Induced Birth Infant Liability Act

Hey Toddst1, I was writing an article about Illinois' Induced Birth Infant Liability Act. The article didn't have too much content yet and I should have found more media sources for it so understandably it was proposed for deletion as Nonnotable and given 5 days to be improved. Then at some point that tag was changed (decidedly without merit in my opinion) to CSD#G10: Attack page and naturally you deleted it. Any idea who changed that tag? And do you mind if I give the article another go, at this point excluding the names of any of the legislators? - Schrandit (talk) 06:18, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to have another go at the article. I don't know much about the subject but it appeared to be an article that was somewhere between a WP:Coatrack and an attack. Please keep WP:NPOV in mind if/when you have another go at it. For an article like that, I'd recommend writing in your personal sandbox and copying it it to mainspace when it's good and ready. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 21:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, will do. - Schrandit (talk) 23:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Bill Blankenship

An article that you have been involved in editing, Bill Blankenship, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Blankenship. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice?

LFA061807 page

Hi Toddst1, I am a representative of Legend Financial Advisors, Inc. We have made several attempts to launch a Wiki site for our President Louis P. Stanasolovich. Each has been unsuccessful due to "copyright infringement", and/or "promoting". With regard to the accusation of promotional use, we have honestly attempted to keep a neutral-point-of-view (NPOV), but our article has been continuously deleted. With regard to the copyright violation all the information that is found to be offensive by the CorenSearchBot is all from our website www.legend-financial.com so I believe that it should be okay to use that (correct me if I am wrong). Can you please give us specific advice as to how to create this article in the proper way? Thank you! -Legend

LFA061807 (talk) 18:04, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Jack Graham (pastor) page

Toddst1,

I doubt you remember this but about 3 weeks ago you locked the page for Jack Graham (pastor) due to edit warring on the related page for his church and also for edit warring on the actual page. Anyways, the edit warring of course came back as soon as the lock was lifted and I was just wondering if you would please take a look at the discussion if you have a few minutes and either chime in with an opinion or consider locking the page for an extended period of time. One admin was gracious enough to lock the page for 3 days just a few minutes ago but i'm concerned this is not enough. Johnb316 (talk) 16:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Newbie question about adding citations

Hi there. I added some clarifications to Jonny Gomes page about his Charity work before I registered so they appeared just with my IP address. then I signed up and tried to add the citations (two websites) under my PTownFan ID. I see that you reverted them to my first edit so the citations don't appear. when i originally viewed the page, someone had added "citations needed" about these two aspects of the post so I provided two websites using the "ref" button on the toolbar. Is there a more appropriate way to do it?

thanks for any advice.

PTownFan —Preceding unsigned comment added by PTownFan (talk • contribs) 00:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Block review

Can you take a look at WP:AN/I#Crown Prosecution Service - Second pair of eyes, please.? There are three votes against the indef block, mine included.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:20, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I also oppose any kind of block for this new editor. Please unblock and gently explain that edit warring as he did isn't good. Explain about using discussion pages to resolve disputes. --Jenny 21:26, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

why is my page getting deleted —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrPlayGamez (talk • contribs) 07:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Jon Porter

Toddst1,can you remove the semi-protection for Jon Porter? There are a number of false facts posted in the stance and issues section and I think you can agree that it's mostly negative stuff. To be fair and balance we should put the good things with the bad things...please unprotect the Jon Porter page. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OfficeMax12345 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Joel Widzer

Hi Toddst1 I made a major reedit to the Joel Widzer page. Can you review it and help with any needed changes. I think that it adheres to the proper policy but certainly would Appreciate your input Thanks reagan (talk) 20:04, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

HelpAroundTheHouse

Hi Toddst1. I only just noticed that you'd placed a note on a page that I created some months ago. It relates to the topic, HelpAroundTheHouse, which you marked for removal because it did not satisfy the noteworthiness criteria. I am now able to provide some quality references that attest to the article's noteworthiness. The main one is from an Australian prime-time television report that was done about our website (along with another loosely related service). In addition, the site's creator was also recently interviewed in a radio program. Please note that these reports were entirely non-commercial in nature; in both cases the reporters judged that their audience would be interested in the subject. Would these be enough to meet the criteria? Regards Hcaandersen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hcaandersen (talk • contribs) 06:26, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Jemele Hill

Why would you ever delete the column on Jemele Hill? She writes a frequented column on ESPN.com every week, and espeicially lately, has come under fairly heavy scrutiny for controversial comments she made. I've been trying to find her wikipedia article for almost a year now to see if I could conviently learn more about her, but you deleted it. She is a national journalist whose work is syndicated on the largest sports journalism website in world history every week. Why would you ever have deleted her? It wasn't even my article but I want an article about a fairly significant member of the world of sports journalism and a quite relevant television personality but now I can't read one because you deleted an entire article rather than whatever on it was offensive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TulsaUKBC (talk • contribs) 13:23, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

E.B. Hughes

Give me a chance! I'm still doing it... PC78 (talk) 18:36, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

No worries. It's there now. Regards. PC78 (talk) 18:39, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Moulton's talk page

Hi Toddst1. Just a quick note; as it's been well over a month now since this page was fully protected, I'd like to unprotect it now as Moulton would like to discuss his indef block further. He's indicated this via email and I don't think there will be any further private information issues. This is something I tend to do as a matter of course in contentious cases; I've just extended the same to banned editor, User:David Lauder. Over to you :) - Alison ^❤ 20:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Done. Toddst1 (talk) 22:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that :) Appreciate it ... - Alison ^❤ 00:46, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

For deleting that article called "Kiwi's, it was nonsense. ~~Sealim~~ (talk) 17:06, 23 July 2008 (UTC) Reply at my talk page please. :) I replied at my talk page. ~~Sealim~~ (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 17:11, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey

Sorry, that page was just a joke for my roommate. Is it possible to get a copy though to show him, I think he would find it funny. No worries for deleting it though, I was only planning to keep it up long enough for him to see it. --Lives.in.snow (talk) 18:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)(talk)

Our lovely jihadist

I'm good with that. Just so long as that idiotic screed of his is gone. No shortage of internet weirdos, no?  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:22, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

eh

[30] I used to think that too, but it's actually not true, believe it or not. It's just reviewed unblock templates that aren't allowed to be blanked. –xeno (talk) 00:26, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I've undone my changes there. I'm still learning here after how many edits? 8-) Toddst1 (talk) 00:32, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

eh, us FNG's , always mucking something up =) –xeno (talk) 00:35, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm still at it. 8-) Toddst1 (talk) 17:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey

That's cool. It's just that i am a loyal member at Moviemistakes and was just trying to help the site out. I joined it back in 2005, and i thought putting links would help.

Ssiscool (talk) 20:22, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Troyrodriguez361

Hi, I think this guy has about exhausted our patience. He's created a sock (User:Troymgarza) to get around your block, which I've blocked, so I am inclined to block the main account indef as well, for failing to gain any clue despite repeated attempts to show him the way. Any thoughts? Kevin (talk) 21:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

?????

I just received a warning for inappropriately editing some random member of the Nevada state senate's page from you and I did no such thing. Not only that I'm not even signed into wikipedia for editing so... yeah. please don't kick me off wikipedia or something —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.142.168.130 (talk) 21:50, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Self-relocation

The article now is a bit tattered and unkempt. As a new article, more will be added in the next few days. Patience please. Thanks for your help. William R. Buckley (talk) 04:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Oops

I blocked User talk:Richit right after you gave him/her a "final" warning. Feel free to reverse my block - it's for 72 hours, probably needed anyways, but I'll defer to you on this one. Tan ǀ 39 21:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

No - you're fine. I had already changed my note and put in an edit summary saying I support your block. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 21:59, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Deptford Mall

The information removed from the Deptford Mall page is considered confidential, and not general public knowledge. The lease plan is not for public consumption, and is as of this date, inaccurate.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tower936 (talk • contribs) 23:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello Toddst1, Thank you very much for coming to my defense in regard to the Deptford Mall page. Since Tower936 is alleging that this information is confidential and not available to the general public, I want to take the time to explain exactly how people find the leasing plan for the mall's website.

Go to http://www.deptfordmall.com

In the top right corner, click "leasing"

Scroll halfway down the page and click "To view this Center's Lease Plans and Market Profile Click Here"

In the middle of the page, click "Leasing Information"

Click "Lease Plan 1"

The leasing plan for the 1st floor of the mall will load, which clearly shows Gilly Hicks in the Sears hallway.

If Tower936 (talk personally feels that this information should not be available to the general public, perhaps he should contact his employer. I am copying this message to the Deptford Mall talk page as well, just so everyone is clear on the issue. Thank you again for your assistance, you're a great editor. PanzaM22 (talk) 19:12, 26 July 2008 (UTC) Mike

Unprotect Jon Porter

Toddst1, I know the Jon Porter site has recently been trashed by a person with his/her own agenda, but protecting it prevents people like me from editing. I mean you have to look at his opponent, Dina Titus, and his page and see a stark difference in point of view. He has all the negative stances and issues attached, while Dina Titus looks like a saint. All I'm saying is to let both sides of the argument appear. Like in the energy and oil section, it says that he has a 0% rating from the Energy Independence Foundation, but it doesn't tell you that he helped create the third largest solar power plant in the U.S. which is located in Boulder City in his district. Protecting this page prevents the candidate himself from responding to the allegations and prevents editor like me to do my due diligence and try to make this election fair. You have already blocked the person who was creating the mischief, so block them again if they continue.(PackerFan123 (talk) 15:50, 26 July 2008 (UTC)).

Forget it. You were already declined at Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection#Jon_Porter_.28edit.7Ctalk.7Chistory.7Clinks.7Cwatch.7Clogs.29. Quit forum shopping. Toddst1 (talk) 19:21, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Yea I know I got declined by them...but you're the one who has the power to recommend unprotect...when looking at both the Dina Titus's and Jon Porter's page..don't you even see a little bit of bias in favor of Titus? All I want to do is put some facts about Porter..that's it. I lived in his district and from what I've seen he's done a lot of good for us. (PackerFan123 (talk) 21:53, 26 July 2008 (UTC)).

It might be. However, you're clearly a WP:SPA and since Porter's staff has been problematic, I see no reason to unprotect until after the election. I'll let more seasoned editors (not subject to the semi-protection) straighten the article out. It's protected from WP:SPA's like you and OfficeMax (talk · contribs) and his WP:Sockpuppets (assuming you're not yet another one). Toddst1 (talk) 04:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

RFA thankspam

Thanks for your support in my RFA, which passed with 140 supporting, 11 opposing, and 4 neutral. I will do my best to live up to the trust that you have given to me. If I can ever assist you with anything, just ask.

Cheers!

J.delanoy^gabs_adds 20:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Patrick Walls

I am extremely annoyed at you deleting the article I created about Laser prototypes, you gave me no reason as to why my article was deleted other than it's about a company, which is not allowed, I followed the instructions to contest and explained why the company was of great importance and should be allowed to be included in wikipedia on the talk page,(Founded first rapid prototyping company in the UK and Ireland, the most well know company in the rapid prototyping industry in the UK and Ireland as they were the pioneers for many of the prototyping processes which are now common place in Industry, their contribution in this field of Engineering, is undoubtedly huge.) but to no heed because my page was deleted there after. I believe you are a wikipedia bully, whom may need to consider, that they may not be an expert in all subjects and should apply haste in denouncing an article! Disappointed and very annoyed wikipedia member! 28th Jul 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.120.107.243 (talk) 08:24, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Look, I had nothing to do with the deletion of Patrick Walls - it was deleted on 15 December 2007 - a long time ago. Second, the creator of that article was notified here. Third, it was a solid deletion - for the right reasons. Fourth, it wasn't your page - it was Wikipedia's. Have a nice day. Toddst1 (talk) 13:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

SUPERAnti Spyware

The page about SUPERAnti spyware was very good, tell me what do I have to add more since it's the third time I make this page and it still gets removed! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emperordarius (talk • contribs) 14:44, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Mechele Linehan

Hey Todd, thanks for your message. I am new to wiki (which I'm sure it obvious to you). I just noticed there had been a link to the freemechele blog and it was taken down. I was actually going to just edit it right now to say "to learn more about" rather than the whole bit about purchasing products, as that is not what the site is really about. It is a site with which I am affiliated, so I guess it's still a no-go? Sorry if these are dumb questions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lookingforjustice (talk • contribs) 18:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

answering on User talk:LookingforjusticeToddst1 (talk) 18:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

Just figuring this all out. Will go to the right places to learn more and talk about it. Will sign this!

Lookingforjustice (talk) 18:08, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Starstylers

Just FYI, this user, who you blocked indefinitely for a personal attack, is requesting unblocking. IMO, I think that while a block was certainly appropriate here, it might be a bit harsh to make it permanent. I think Starstylers was steamed up about a lot of warning templates from Dave1185, and lost his/her cool in a bad way. Anything I'm missing here? Mangojuice^talk 15:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I've unblocked. Toddst1 (talk) 15:57, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

• Please read again the comments left behind by a few other concerned editors on his talk page. Thank you. --Dave1185 (talk) 18:13, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Ok, got your answer. I will not put it back again.  :) Thanks for being so kind and welcoming.

Lookingforjustice (talk) 18:12, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for moving the Rowan Hood article. I didn't know how to move it. It was my first day that I had an account on Wikipedia and it was nice to have someone help me out. Thanks a bunch! Petlover26 (talk) 16:06, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

You're more than welcome. It's a pleasure to help new users that want to contribute constructively. Most of this administrator's time is taken up dealing with vandals and their effects. Toddst1 (talk) 16:08, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for blocking that IP. I don't see how that other administrator didn't see what he was doing was vandalism, considoring he was undoing redirections left and right. Thanks again. ----eric (mailbox) 17:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC) --eric (mailbox) 17:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Removal of {{unreferenced}} template was what did it for me. Toddst1 (talk) 17:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, I noticied that too but I was busy looking at that stuff he put back up. Anywho, thanks again. Happy editing. ----eric (mailbox) 17:47, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your help in WP:AfD and blockin' dem vandals for me, I award you this barnstar. Thanks for your help sir. Happy editing! ----eric (mailbox) 18:57, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Question about length of a block

[31] Alison made a 3 month hard block. Just curious why it was shortened. User seems to have quite an extensive history of abuse. Thanks, Enigma ^message 00:50, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

She made the 3 month block, ~2 months ago. I protected the talk page after I removed the personal attack on the talk page, semi-protected the page and wanted to be sure the block aligned with the page protection. Upon examination, I should have used the checkuser flag. Sorry. Toddst1 (talk) 01:07, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess East wanted to make a note of it. Thanks, Enigma ^message 02:34, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I was just thinking now that perhaps a longer block is warranted due to the personal attacks posted on its talk. Enigma ^message 02:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Please block

You gave him that warning, and the same guy is back again, trolling your talk. [32] Enigma ^message 06:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I am behaving and apologising as we speak

Thank-you for unblocking me. I am in the process of apologising to the latest group of offended and I am behaving within the constraints of wiki-laws. If I may add two cents- you were right in detecting an element of immaturity and rigidity among some of the complainants- though I admit I was wrong to continue provoking.Starstylers (talk) 09:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I am behaving and apologising as we speak

Thank-you for unblocking me. I am in the process of apologising to the latest group of offended and I am behaving within the constraints of wiki-laws. If I may add two cents- you were right in detecting an element of immaturity and rigidity among some of the complainants- though I admit I was wrong to continue provoking.Starstylers (talk) 09:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Puppeteering Question

My user page says that: "It is suspected that this user has used one or more accounts abusively."

I have never used another account besides this one and I have not abused my account as far as I know. Is there a way I can have that removed? Sydney180 (talk) 13:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Martella Wines

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Martella Wines, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Merzbow (talk) 22:20, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Toms_Hardware

Hello Toddst1 - I received a message on my talk page indicating that I vandalized Toms_Hardware. This is simply not true. The original page, before I touched it, contained a very large section dedicated to pointing out every bad thing about Toms_Hardware and offered no positive counter points. It appeared as though it were a negative attack on the site.

I removed that portion and replaced it with a staff role of the editorial team. If you read the original section, I don't believe I vandalized anything. The original section did not provide any positive value.

Other media outlets have gone through rough times too, but their pages remain neutral.

I reverted to the staff role after an anonymous user kept removing it, insisting that the staff role was unnecessary. This person also indicated that he would remove staffs and other sections (like forums) from other peer sites and even indicated that he did in this talk page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:66.171.233.231

According to the Wikipedia history on that IP, it has been static for the last three days. If this user was indeed truthful and honorable in their intent, they would have done the same things to other pages of similarity. This was not the case.

Please assist.

Thank you. Bom tuannguyen (talk) 07:57, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello, the same user removed the edits again, the 3rd time over. I believe this violates a rule? The user does not have a login and continues to use this IP: 210.124.181.153

Please assist.Bom tuannguyen (talk) 08:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Force.com

Thanks Todd - you're right on both counts but there's only so much of my weekend I'm prepared to donate to Wikipedia... next time I'll use an underconstruction template.

samj (talk) 06:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Mizbiplob

User:Mizbiplob fired an email to me through wikimail, probably because I kept desperately trying to correct his English when he was posting asking for an unblock. He's active on his talk page again, but as there's no block template on there I doubt it will get seen. You were the last blocking admin; so I thought I'd drop this note. --Blowdart | ^talk 21:28, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I've restored his/her talk page and reformed the unblock request into something that might get noticed. I don't think it warrants an unblock though. Toddst1 (talk) 21:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

No I doubt it, but it'll save me from emails *grin* I don't think he/she was malicious, just crippled with a very poor grasp of English and no idea of what's notable. --Blowdart | ^talk 21:36, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Advice on Salient Media

I've read the blatant advertising section. Salient Media doesn't promote the company. It's written in a neutral tone. It doesn't attempt to sell anything. All information is factual. How can I change the post so that it is not deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SalientMadsky (talk • contribs) 21:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Copyright Infringment?

I jsut read another post that said Salient Media was in copyright infringement. I am from Salient Media. I wrote that at the bottom of the post and sent an email to permissions-en@wikimedia.com from my Salient Media email address. I'm really confused why this keeps getting taken down. Why is it so difficult to post text that I wrote and own?

Erik —Preceding unsigned comment added by SalientMadsky (talk • contribs) 21:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks--SalientMadsky (talk) 22:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: a block

As a courtesy, I thought I'd inform you that I extended the block on a user you blocked (See here). Just thought I'd tell you :-) Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 23:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Good call. I didn't block for the sockpuppetry. Toddst1 (talk) 13:26, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

BAyyub

Hello Todd -- You deleted the page Center for Technology and Systems Management due to copyright violation. I noted in the discussion for this page that I hold the copyright in the source link. I slightly updated the language. I am the copyright holder. Is there a procedure to nonexclusively transfer the rights to Wikipedia?

Thank you for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BAyyub (talk • contribs) 00:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Copyright infringement for Lung Cancer Alliance

Toddst1: I recently created a page under the heading Lung Cancer Alliance, which you removed for copyright infringement. I work for Lung Cancer Alliance, maintain their web 2.0 outreach and have total permission to use and distribute copyrighted material created by LCA. In additon, the site was flagged for being non-encylopledic because it only promoted a group, company, etc. I have researched other organizations such as American Cancer Society and American Lung Association that have very similar sites (discussion of the mission of the organization, support and advocacy programs, external links, etc). I am new to wikipedia and do not understand why our site was flagged and removed so quickly. If you could provide me with more information, it would be greatly appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LCAlliance (talk • contribs) 16:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

An IP editor that you blocked has evaded his block by posting at WP:AN3

Hello Toddst1. See this 3RR report. Your existing block is here. It will not expire until 21:28 UTC on 5 August. Sometimes an existing block may be doubled due to evasion. I'll leave any action up to you. EdJohnston (talk) 16:40, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PIAS Entertainment Group

You deleted several comments at this AfD. I assume this was inadvertent. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 17:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - not sure how that happened. When I saw the page, I was editing as the third commentor. Never even saw those other comments. Toddst1 (talk) 18:11, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Self-published

The following discussion has been moved to Talk:Jeff_V._Merkey#Relocation_of_discussion:_Self-published_sources. Please continue it there Toddst1 (talk) 23:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I am not certain I understand. What is "a self published source" if its a news site? LWN.NET has been around a long time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.2.248.210 (talk) 22:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

If you had used a citation template, you might have filled in the author's name (instead of making up your own format) and have typed in that Markey is the author. Toddst1 (talk) 22:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

merkey is not the author of LWN.net, jonathan cohen is and posted an article. whether its quotes from merkey are not, its not self published. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.2.248.210 (talk) 22:19, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Read the article and see the author's name Toddst1 (talk) 22:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I did, its linked under a category titled "articles" and is a reprint of Merkey's press release. Jonathan turned it into an aricle. It is therefore not self-published. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.2.248.210 (talk) 22:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

It is an email that he (you?) wrote about himself. Toddst1 (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Spuh, StreaksOnChina

I don't know if you were responding to my ANI report without understanding my point, or acting independently. If you look at my ANI report, I'm convinced that StreaksOnChina is actually the same editor, just trying to keep the topic of Raven's weight alive and being talked about.

Hi Kevin, Without starting a checkuser, or a sockpuppet report I can't do much more than what I've done. We should keep an eye on these guys though. Toddst1 (talk) 00:54, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I am making this comment because I have been specifically mentioned in this heading. I would like to repeat that I am not the same person as Spuh. I beseech you to avoid leveling this kind of accusation without making any efforts at some kind of due process. It is true that I created this account for the express purpose of commenting on the heated debate between Spuh and another user, but I am a very separate person from her (she has pointed out that she's female on her talk page--guess we all dropped the ball on that one). I feel compelled to mention that it's rather distressing to have a user jump to such a serious conclusion. Thank you, Toddst1, for handling this as appropriately as you have. I assure you that I am making no effort to vandalize anything, and am merely arguing a position. I have no comment on Raven-Symone's weight problems, although I would like to make it publicly clear that I do not support unsourced insults on ANY wikis. StreaksOnTheChina (talk) 06:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

A 1st barnstar thanks

Why thank you very kindly for the lovely Copyeditor's Barnstar you've presented me with this evening.  I've never had a barnstar before :)  I was a actually bit hesitant to check your message at first, as I assumed it was probably one of the Wiki-editors trying to ride my block for crinkling their favourite page.  How wrong I was ;)  Thanks once again Toddst1, and do have yourself a mighty large day! -- WikHead (talk) 03:13, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

StreaksOnTheChina

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Spuh‎ revealed the relationship. I'm interested to see the response, because it will go a long way towards telling me the amount of good faith to extend.
Kww (talk) 15:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I've blocked both accounts. Toddst1 (talk) 15:43, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit Waring on Scrubs (TV series)... again.

User talk:C0l3kunzl3r is doing it again. Since you blocked him last time, I thought you should know. Qb | ^{your 2 cents} 16:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

MafiaExpert

"I actually started to unblock you but in doing so, I decided not to based on your "I don't agree" comment above" Comes across as kind of mean. Did you need to tell him this? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

The point wasn't to be mean, but rather to point out that the editor's unblock message was a half-hearted attempt at saying "I did something wrong". Toddst1 (talk) 21:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I know that's what you meant. But you could have said "I've decided not to unblock because you don't convince me that you realise that your behavior was also disruptive" and missed out the You could have been unblocked had you kept your mouth shut but you blew it sentiment. Anyway it's done now, and can't be undone. Just something to think about for the future. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:19, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Apollo

Thank you for laundering the socks. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:05, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Here you go! :)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For being a terrific administrator and keeping a cool head, when that editing got hot(exaggerated of course, but!) I still award you this barnstar! You deserve it. Happy editing. Ciao! eric (mailbox) 06:08, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

If at all, please don't stay away for too long okay? ;) Ncmvocalist (talk) 06:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, don't let reality take you away from us! :-D --eric (mailbox) 06:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Abd / IP

Don't take a break because of Abd's attitude. The guy just loves to involve himself all over AN / AN/I just like Beam, albeit with a "nicer" approach. The moralising and pontificating by such non-admins because nauseating after a while; you were spot on with that IP. Note Abd only recently backed down on his talk page by admitting the glaringly obvious - the IP almost certainly ain't a lawyer. In his desire to be seen to "do the right thing", Abd has enabled a troll IP address. You were absolutely in the right; ignore the totally undeserved criticism. Minkythecat (talk) 07:47, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Maybe it would help the situation more if these kinds of messages were sent privately (e-mail). There's going to be a lot of people who are going to disagree with what you've just said, and I think we just want this situation to calm down and not keep going. -- Ned Scott 08:02, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

209.86.226.18

I am requesting that you unblock this user, since he/she has not in fact made any legal threat, and WP:NLT was the basis of your block. Give'em enough rope and they will hang themselves. For all we know, the user , who claims to be an attorney, just wished to chat with Godwin. Preemptive blocking based on suspicion of a thought crime is just too much. Thanks. Edison (talk) 03:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I've made over 2,000 blocks an a couple of them have been bad. This was not one of them. However, I had unblocked several minutes ago in good faith. Again, I feel it was a solid block. Toddst1 (talk) 03:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your valient efforts to enforce policies. Now the question is what 209.86.226.18 will do with the length of rope provided: Make a noose? Certainly bears watching. Edison (talk) 03:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to provide some after-the-fact support for the position that this was an overly-eager block. Based upon the feedback you've received, will you be re-considering the approach if something similar happens? I'd also like to ask that you think about the effect of the language that you've used. Above, for example, what is the utility of calling the user a "troll?" If you're wrong and they are a good faith user, you've insulted them. In the event that they do intend disruption, what is aided by using a pejorative? - brenneman 03:37, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Toddst1 is one of the better admins around here - particularly when there were other neutral admins of the opinion that the block was well-founded, I'm not surprised why he's frustrated. I don't think there's a need to answer those questions; as long as he gets the message from my edits. ;) Ncmvocalist (talk) 03:46, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I support Todd's decision, per block reason, the block should stay. --eric (mailbox) 06:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Please read before you post. The block was already undone.I agree that Todd is a fine administrator. Edison (talk) 05:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Regrets

Dear Todd, I noticed you took a break. Too much Wikidrama. I sincerely hope the conflict we had did not contribute to your decision. I would seriously regret that. Maybe look at it this way. I made a mistake, you made a mistake, because some irritating editor was creating havoc on Wikipedia. I tried to do something about it and got carried away, you tried to do something about it and got carried away - and we got pitched against each other. Is that what we want? Let the bad guys win in the end? I am sorry for my remarks, maybe my ego was offended too much as well. Kind regards and hope to see you again somewhere overhere. - Mafia Expert (talk) 11:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

You're fine. Thanks for the note. I wasn't being sarcastic when I said I look forward to working constructively with you. Toddst1 (talk) 18:29, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Unprotection of Abd's talk page

The page is semiprotected because it was a target for persistent trolling and harrassment by a banned user—a protection reason fully within policy.

As well, the protection policy only bars permanent semiprotection. In this case, the page is temporarily semiprotected. (Even then, WP:IAR can always be considered.) If the trolling doesn't resume after protection expires, it won't be restored.

Beyond the semiprotection policy, is there a specific reason why Abd's talk page needs to be unprotected? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

It seems asymmetric since he's editing IP talk pages. Heck, most admins don't protect theirs for that reason and when they do, like User:NawlinWiki‎ who's getting a heck of a lot of trolling from Grawp, it's for short periods and in extreme cases only. Toddst1 (talk) 18:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

There was (and still is, I gather) an ongoing problem with banned User:Fredrick day and an ongoing army of socks and proxy IPs. A shorter semiprotection (3 days) was applied to Abd's talk page back in March, followed by a longer period (1 month) in April. In both cases, the harassing socks returned shortly after the protection expired. The latest semiprotection (3 months) expires in nine days or so; I don't plan to renew it unless the problems continue.

Incidentally, I strongly recommend just ignoring Abd-related issues as much as possible. Just say to yourself, tl;dr, and move on. It's what most of the rest of us have learned to do. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:39, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

as an "uninvolved" admin, I agree with Todd here. Unless he has an "anon talk" page setup, it shouldn't be semi'd, especially while he's leaving messages for IP users. –xeno (talk) 18:39, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

We have been at...

Smells like socks to me but why? odd, SatuSuro 03:41, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Huh? Toddst1 (talk) 03:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Snowy river - it doesnt make sense that two new red lnk users are following on the same text so seamlessly to me - but hey I have been wrong in the past - you have no email enabled - i prefer not to sound out such ideas on open wiki space but i have no alternative - cheers SatuSuro 03:47, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, yeah, especially the similarity of names. No blocks were issued, and the editing is pretty clearly in good faith, so no biggy on the dual accounts IMHO. I suspect someone just lost their password or something. Then again, what do I know. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 03:51, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Heheh nor do i and i cannot remember why i had it on my oversized watchlist - cheers - agree with your leave alone point- but might keep on watch just in case - cheers SatuSuro 03:58, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I tried

I went to Arthur Smart (talk · contribs) page and offered a truce. I apologized for my part in the exchange and tried to bury the hatchet. Instead, he deleted that and replaced it with this: "This editor is taking a long wikibreak to avoid wasting any more time in ArchConservativePseudopediaville" then altered the "userbox of the month" to read: "Note: This userbox does not apply to anyone in particular, and most especially not to any heavy-handed administrators with hair-trigger 4im guns." I give up trying. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

It was very nice. I thought about leaving a note on your page after I saw that.Toddst1 (talk) 14:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

trepak page

Silentnomad (talk) 15:14, 8 August 2008 (UTC) Hi Todd,

You deleted an edit I made to the Trepak page, saying that the "In popular culture" section cited obscure performances that were unreferenced. I had in fact properly linked to the So You Think You Can Dance (Season 4) page which also notes the Trepak performance. How should I construct the edit so that it is not deleted by a new edits patroller? Thanks...

User Corfiot

Hi Toddst1. Thank you for your attention to this and I left a reply on ANI for you. I would like to clarify that Gwen's comments on ANI include: "Corfiot is writing with a casual Greek idiom that I find very hard to understand, hence while I do think his comments are meant to stifle discussion, I can't tell how truly threatening they are." I suggest we consult with user:Future Perfect at Sunrise or user:Yannismarou for a better translation because these were threats and attempted intimidation, legal or otherwise. Thanks again. Dr.K. (talk) 17:41, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Regarding 2008 South Ossetia War

Hi, Im sorry if I have caused you some trouble but I was merely correcting a sentence that was removed by certain members mainly: User:Eupator and User:MarshallBagramyan whom both appear to be countrymen from Armenia. And I inserted a sentence backed up by a reliable source and they just remove it saying the source is not reliable enough. Now I ask you sir,please to take a look at this source, its from topix.com. And it shows that the Vaziani base was attacked by Russian planes from the Russian military base located in Armenia. I also discussed this source and topic with several other member and they all approve of this except these ttwo gentlemen who keep removing it. So that is what I was trying to do, counter their undoings. Could you perhaps keep an eye on this article and make sure this sentence is not removed again. I thank you. Baku87 (talk) 00:55, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Toddst1, Baku87 has now actually violated 3RR on the article. That is despite asking various users for reverting on his behalf.-- Ευπάτωρ ^Talk!! 02:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Eupator you have been conducting a misinformation campaign against me which is in violation with the rules, I did NOT ask anyone to revert anything, please the message again, I asked Toddst1 to keep an eye out for the sentence and article, which you and your fellow countrymen have been constantly removing without any backing from fellow members. By the way the fact that your countrymen MarshallBagramyan notified and asked for your reverting aid in the 2008 South Ossetia War is in violation of 3R. Another fact is that you made more reverts then you are allowed which AGAIN is in violation with ARBAA2. Baku87 (talk) 11:45, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

please explain your "vandalism" claims

in regards to your rants about vandalism can you please tell me whats so vandalistic about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.100.167 (talk) 15:02, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Volano chat was recreated again

Title should probably be salted. Enigma ^message 23:41, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Strongly recommend salting now. [33] Enigma ^message 06:02, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Good call. I'm just trying to not be overzealous here. That's why I took it to AFD. Useight took care of the salting. Toddst1 (talk) 13:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

What's your take?

I've got some concerns about how Hrafn is choosing to edit the Frank Kaufmann article. Since you commented "keep" at the AfD, I was wondering if you'd mind taking a look. I've tried to mediate between the two sides several times, and it appeared to be working, but now he's working on the article again. If you could take a look, I would appreciate it. Regards, ^S._D.Jameson 05:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

User_talk:Hrafn#Concerns_about_your_edits_to_Frank_Kaufmann Toddst1 (talk) 13:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks. I was initially quite sympathetic to his point of view, as that article at one point read like little more than a hagiography. Yet as the discussion at the AfD went along, it was Hrafn, and not those on the opposite side of the discussion that became more and more combative in tone, rarely willing to even consider compromise. Thanks for stepping in there. ^S._D.Jameson 16:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• [34][35][36] -- yes, they weren't combative towards the end at all . Complete pacifists in fact. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 17:39, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

  I'm speaking of how they dealt with my attempts to help out on the issue. You were aggressively opposed to any compromise in the beginning, even accusing me of proposing a Faustian bargain at one point. Jclemens agreed to my suggestion that he step back from the AfD almost immediately. You continued agitating. Perhaps if you had simply stepped away from it for awhile, things may have turned out a bit differently. ^S._D.Jameson 17:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

• I won't impose upon Toddst1 by continuing this on his talk & will instead reply on your own. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 18:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

  There's a reason I asked Todd to step in on this particular situation. I felt that I was at my wit's end with regards to how I should deal with your actions on the article. ^S._D.Jameson 18:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of AfDs...

I got one for you to look at. [37] Nominator is apparently withdrawing his nomination, because he changed to Keep. Enigma ^message 15:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Why don't you do a non-admin close and add the oldafd to the article talk? Toddst1 (talk) 15:20, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, I did participate in the discussion, and I'm unaccustomed to closing AfDs, but I did as you suggested. :) Enigma ^message 15:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

It's fine to close the afd you participated in if the consensus is unanimous. Good job. Toddst1 (talk) 15:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

BIASED USERS

Hi you seem to be totally blind to what your indian freinds are doing by removing the admimistered and disputed tags on indian mountians and when i try to remove them from pakistani articles the indians pounce and add the un sourced claim again could you please look into Giani g edits and look at the book with both eyes open and do not takes sides as a editor you must remain neutral you make like india but that doesnt mean you have to insert baseless claims on pakistani mountain without references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.235.17 (talk) 18:34, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Biased or not, you're violating several wikipedia policies on block evasion and edit warring. By not following thos policies, you're not going to get your position heard. Toddst1 (talk) 18:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

i have told you a million times my ip is dynamic what can i do? as for biased or not thats not how a editor like you should behave maybe wikipedia should reconsider your credentials as a account holder giani g has provided no source and keeps on targeting pakistani articles whats your take on that why dont you warn him? edit waring occurs when un sourced claim such as giani gs are taken as fact and not even read by editors like you he never provides sources only for one article he did on gasherbrumIV so please wake up thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.235.17 (talk) 18:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Andrew Young / Rielle Hunter

Hi, if you had read the talk page you would see that I did discuss the edit before making it. The source cited does not say that Young "still maintains" that he is the father, it only repeats the months old assertion of fatherhood:

"In the interview, Edwards denied knowing anything about any support being provided to Hunter or to Andrew Young, the former Edwards campaign aide who has said that he, not Edwards, is the child's father. "

Welcome to wikipedia, please read the sources you are citing and the talk page before reverting other people's edits. DiggyG (talk) 20:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC).

Your snide remark aside, Young has not changed his position, so he still maintains it. Toddst1 (talk) 21:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

My apologies for overreacting. I felt it was condescending of you to point me towards the sandbox as if I were a newbie. DiggyG (talk) 22:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and point taken. I hadn't checked your edit count, but your talk page looked like you hadn't edited much, hence the template. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 22:02, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Breuner Airfield

jeez dude, you didn't even give me a chance to address anything!^MY♥_INchile 23:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I didn't speedily delete it either. I don't see any assertion of notability. Toddst1 (talk) 23:25, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thatcher

This is checkuser Thatcher talk page.--Rjecina (talk) 23:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Account in question is banned by Luna Santini, but if you are interested we are having another today puppet account user:Retrovizor --Rjecina (talk) 23:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Volano Software Inc. spam and trolling

FYI, see this blacklisting entry:

• MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist#Spam and article-tampering by Volano Software Inc. (permanent link)

I'm not sure that this will stop our Volano Software spammer/troll, but it may slow him down some.
--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

spamming??

Thanks for your message, I apologise if you feel I have been spamming. However, I felt the links I added were hardly spam as all the articles were superyacht/luxury yacht related, and the website I was linking to contains a full, current and up to date listing of the worlds superyacht fleet, highly relevant I'd say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yachtreport (talk • contribs) 15:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Pdfreeman

Hi, just before you closed the sockpuppet case against User:Pdfreeman, I added another suspected sockpuppet to the case. This is just a note about that, because of the overlapping edits you may not have seen my addition. BTW, I note that Pdfreeman himself has not been blocked. Thanks for your quick actions in this case. --Crusio (talk) 16:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - I got it. That's actually the user that led me to this case. Toddst1 (talk) 16:58, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

American Brain Cancer Foundation

I saw that you dealt with the recent sockvandalism on this one. In light of this article's origin, and the fact that it has been speedily deleted twice already (my third speedy nom was declined), is it worth A7ing it again or just wait for the PROD notice to expire? In any event, when the page is finally deleted, it needs to be SALTED too. Thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 17:02, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I think you're right. There is no assertion at all there. I was going to let the prod go, but that article is subject to snow... Toddst1 (talk) 17:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

OK good job, thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 17:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Pbstrypsin

One of the Pdfreeman sock puppets, Pbstrypsin, still has a user page cut-and-paste copied from a genuine user, and which has that person's real-world name on it. Would it be possible to blank Pbstrypsin's user page (as you did with User:Bpaftw for the same reason) so that this innocent bystander cannot get associated with it. I know I could save you the trouble by blanking it myself but I strongly feel this isn't something that a non-administrator should do! Regards Jll (talk) 20:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

There is no need to do anything now, the user page is gone. Regards Jll (talk) 08:38, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Concerning User Name

I'm not trying to create a role account, however there is another organization with the same acronym, and we are hugely different and our organization does not go by any other name. How can I remedy this problem without scaraficing the organizations name?

thank you

NYSSA 8.13.8 —Preceding unsigned comment added by NYSSA - New York Society of Security Analyst (talk • contribs) 16:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Faethon Ghost

Thanks for issuing the short-term block, which I suspect will grow. I've seen nothing useful by that guy so far, and was fixing to take him to ANI, but you basically beat me to it. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

No prob. Toddst1 (talk) 16:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Misuse of Twinkle

Hello - I believe you have misused/abused WP:Twinkle. The edits by User:Lfapn might be undesirable from your point of view, and they might even be contrary to WP:EL, but they are certainly not vandalism. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Uh no. See Wikipedia:Vandalism#Types_of_vandalism and look at Spam. Either way you're splitting hairs. Toddst1 (talk) 17:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you overlooked the part about "after having been warned." Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Nope - I ignored it. Toddst1 (talk) 17:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

An obvious single-purpose account, that purpose being spam. Out! Out, spam spot! Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 18:46, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure did look that way (WP:Duck) - we see enough of them. The user has politely requested unblocking and I have granted it and welcomed her to Wikipedia. Toddst1 (talk) 00:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, the user ID is a combination of the user's alleged initials and the initials of the organization. I'll wait and see if the editor switches gears to editing, say, articles about cartoons or sports. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 02:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Buddies page

Thanks for the note, I actually commented on the MfD yesterday. I had forgotten all about it until it showed up on my watchlist... Stan (talk) 18:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Ref retracted comment

Hi Toddst1

Just about to post a question as to when recent is recent enough when I saw your correction. Thanks for taking the time out to let me know, much appreciated:-) Tmol42 (talk) 20:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Route 666

Thanks for taking care of Route 666 (2009 film). What do you think of Revolution: The Ron Paul Story? There are zero Google searches between Ron Paul and any individual mentioned in the article. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 00:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Virtual Knights

I find this website and its administrators very unorthodox. This article, Virtual Knights, was called "inappropriate" when in fact it does not violate any "inappropriate" terms. It is simply an article to explain about a book, written by an author, who happens to have published a real book (this statement is not deniable). Wikipedia may have the authority to delete articles such as the previous thereof, but they lack professional conduct and behave in an unsuitable manner to the general public and its users. This is not a personal attack, this is simply a fact. I forgive those you delete such articles, but the manner and attitude should change for the better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Creutlinger (talk • contribs) 00:50, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Saying that an admin has acted in a careless and offensive manner is a personal attack,and is not acceptable. This discussion is where you had opportunity to voice your objection. Kevin (talk) 00:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

May I ask, down the line, that this article be recreated from a NPOV when it does become more well-known? I will give up all attempt to recreate the article and apologize if this is a possibility. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Creutlinger (talk • contribs) 01:17, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Follow the trail

Yep. And Evildeathmath (talk · contribs) clearly has problems of his own. Why not go after him? Read the reasons for editing, and LEAVE ME ALONE. --Ragemanchoo (talk) 06:14, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Personal Attack

I messaged the person who Wiki told me deleted the arcticle to ask why it was deleted because that person Adam Cookson is real what do i need to do to prove to you that he exists and that is what he does, do you want his number?

can you email me somehow? because i really dont understand this wikipedia message thing

mrrag66@aol.com Cheers

Wikilove

ThatOneGuy1999 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hello

DougsTech (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

SoS

Sword of the Spirit. I'm not understanding why its not notable enough. I have read all the wiki stuff about notability and, this has got to be notable, I mean 25 countries and ten thousand Members. Or maybe I'm just too new to this. --JB (talk) 16:28, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. I addressed this a bit on the talk page, but here's the deal: An organization is generally considered notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. An organization can claim to have a million members, but it's only their claim. If they're not in any third-party sources, they're not WP:Notable. There's lots more info on this at Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)

You'll notice I've been trying to help with this article, cleaning it up and stuff, but I'm leaning towards nominating it for deletion because I haven't been able to find any third-party references to the organization - I've found plenty of references to the phrase, but not the organization. You really need to find some reliable sources quickly to preserve the article. Toddst1 (talk) 16:33, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

We're working on it, I'm sure we'll find reliable sources, maybe not on the internet. If we do find something that is a hard-copy, please be sure to check it.

I knew something like this would happen but I didn't know that it would come so fast and strict, I would have kept the article in my sandbox.

Until we find anything (which I hope is soon), I'm gonna put it as a stub, for reference issues so people might understand the lack of reliable sources.

And I have noticed that u improved the article, like the quotation and little kinks, thanks for that.

--JB (talk) 16:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Would you like me to move it back in to your sandbox for you so you can get it in shape? Toddst1 (talk) 16:50, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll move it if I have to Thanks.--JB (talk) 16:53, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

You said that I can't create a page that has been deleted. If I move it to somewhere else, will it be like the page was never created ?
That's what I wanna do, I want to create the article again when I get some reliable sources, can I do that without the article being formerly deleted.
Will it help if I erase everything from the page ? Guidance plz.
--JB (talk) 17:27, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I've withdrawn the AFD with a result of "Move to user space" and moved the article to User talk:Jadbaz/Sword of the Spirit. If and when you're ready, we can move it back to the article space. I think this is the best route to take and is why I suggested it above. Good luck! Toddst1 (talk) 17:35, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Can I still retrieve the discussion page ? cuz its gone with the article.
And if ur interested here's the new article page.
--JB (talk) 18:21, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

The article is here User talk:Jadbaz/Sword of the Spirit as I said above and the talk page was moved predictably to User talk:Jadbaz/Talk:Sword of the Spirit Toddst1 (talk) 18:22, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Its not a wikipedia article, its within a user that I created, so please don't change anything (well, of course encyclopedia that anyone can edit). I mean don't delete anything please. I'll take care of my own stuff. --JB (talk) 18:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

It's in the wrong place - It needs to be in your user space, not some user that doesn't exist. You should add the tags {{db-author}} to all of the articles under User:Sosuser that you created. Toddst1 (talk) 18:50, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Administrator intervention against vandalism - User:Ironfist06

It appears that the problem was that as I have a DST offset on, the contributions log was showing times using my offset, whereas the signature for the final warning was not, causing contributions before the final warning to appear afterwards. --Muna (talk) 17:50, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Words escape me (literally)

My apologies for the inappropriate choice of verbiage - I was fishing for another expression and obviously hooked the wrong one. Ecoleetage (talk) 18:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello! I have already answered your query (see above). I made an honest mistake in choosing the wrong phrase to describe the issue at hand. Thank you. Ecoleetage (talk) 19:15, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

RFC Bates Method / Natural Vision Improvement article

Dear Toddst1, If you have time and are willing to share your point of view. Can you give your comment arguments about the current discussion in the bates method article. Paragraph : The American acadamy of opthalmology link listed in the external link section ? appreciate your comment, Seeyou (talk) 21:32, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

When you read the current discussion. My creation of Bates method / Natural Vision Improvement article might be a logical improvement of the article. According to wikipedia Bates method and Natural vision improvement are equal. A merge from that point of view is quite logical regards, Seeyou (talk) 21:32, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

?

Hi Toddst1, I have been trying to create Travel Website Wiki page about Trip N Tale (www.tripntale.com). I do not understand why it keeps getting deleted. My first attempts I did not add references, but the last one I added numerous references from outside sources, etc. Please let me know what I am doing wrong.

Thanks, Brent —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bmarrelli (talk • contribs) 22:25, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

DRV

An article you deleted has come up for discussion on DRV here. I thought you should be notified, as well as perhaps be able to clarify some things there. Thanks! Shereth 22:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Speedy deletion of EPIC FAIL

Your deletion tagging script fails at notifications. I didn't create that page -- Gurch (talk) 23:06, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

May I ask

Why was an article about the host of the second largest ham radio gathering in the country not notable enough?

Just curious - The article was The Shelby Amateur Radio Club? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamradiorulz (talk • contribs) 02:49, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Mynameisstanley

Hi, User:Mynameisstanley is back after being blocked. He again is deleting dead links, adding improper deletion tags and the lot. Please have a look. I rather do not want to be involved anymore, because I am afraid I will loose my patience again. Thanks. - Mafia Expert (talk) 10:54, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Same here. I am completely fed up with this guy, which is why i am a bit hesitant to be involved myself. I am just afraid of losing my temper over his disruptive editing, and i dont want any unnecessary headaches. Please do the needful. Joyson Noel (talk) 11:20, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

why

why did you protect my usertalk page?--99.137.208.196 (talk) 15:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Mark Levin Edits

The anonymous user, 74.68.132.134 (talk · contribs), whom you had previously blocked for edit wars on the Mark Levin page, has once again resumed such edits. There is a discussion on the talk page about how to properly source these uncontested facts on the main page. He won't take part in the discussion, but simply continues his habits of reverting my edits on various pages and accusing several users of sock puppetry.

Please look into his actions, and consider warning him again for ignoring your last ban. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ynot4tony2 (talk • contribs) 12:52, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Sammich

		The Minor Barnstar
		For doing the thankless jobs. Now back to work admin slave! mboverload@ 04:31, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Give me a chance

I'm InuYoshi and I promise I won't do a edit war again, I will leave TDK as superhero and I won't revert it to action.

Please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.43.37.9 (talk) 12:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

You're an admin

What? ;-) Tan ǀ 39 16:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm also an involved editor. Toddst1 (talk) 17:00, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

User name: Master baeta

Hello Toddst1

Thanks for your concern about my username. I am unsure if this is the write place to discuss this as I am slowly but eagerly learning the wikipedia ropes.

In any case, you noted that my username sounds off-beat, but the second half of my username is an identifier. BAETA is in fact my last name. As the eldest son of three, everybody in my family (and beyond) calls me the Master, which eventually evolved into Master Baeta. Following the KISS principle, c'est aussi simple que ça! As you will notice online as well I have had this username since about 1994, so I find it hard to depart from it as it proves to be my online moniker everywhere...

Hope that helps to justify that.

Master baeta (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

User:71.201.110.92

Hello Toddst1. Nice work on fighting those vandals (27000 contribs is massive!) ...it appears that 71.201.110.92, who was editing just now, is evading the block that was set on 76.97.62.123, as both IPs are registered as Comcast (based in NJ). ~ Troy (talk) 18:51, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

They appear to have no edits in common. Why do you think they're the same? Toddst1 (talk) 18:54, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, there was still negative editing, but most importantly, the IPs are registered as the same ISP. However, I do admit that I went too far with that ...I'll see what happens with this one. Regards, ~ Troy (talk) 19:14, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I've extended your block of Cult free world (talk · contribs)

Hi Toddst1. Regarding the ANI thread here, I've extended the one-week block you issued earlier today to User:Cult free world to indefinite. The main reason I did this was the outcome of a previous ANI thread here, where he escaped an indefblock by the skin of his teeth. I feel that a return to the behaviour that almost got him indefed just a few months ago is not indicative of someone who has learned from experience, and he should not be afforded any more last chances.

I hope you don't mind me tweaking your block - I would normally discuss such a matter with you first, but I wasn't certain whether or not you were still logged in (from your contribs, the last about 45 mins ago, it looked like I had just missed you). If you feel the need to undo my admin actions in this instance, that's no problem; I won't consider it wheel-warring ;) All the best, EyeSerene^talk 19:43, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I am not in the least offended. Thanks for doing the extra due-dilligence on this. I always appreciate an extra set of eyes! Toddst1 (talk) 22:40, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, and you're welcome. I'm glad you don't feel I've overstepped the mark. I noticed you've amended the title of this thread too - I should have thought more carefully about how my original read :P EyeSerene^talk 07:32, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Skank article

Hey Toddst1, I think that maybe Skank should be restored and taken to AfD. After all, it did survive two past AfDs here and here, and it seems slightly out of process to speedy it now. I agree that it should probably be deleted, I just think it should be discussed first. It's your call though, take care. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out. I've restored it and am not going to pursue AfD as it redirects now. Toddst1 (talk) 23:33, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. The redirect was basically a placeholder, so I've restored the last full version of the article and taken it to AfD myself. --Bongwarrior (talk) 00:30, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Delete Comment

Excuse me but I do not believe I blanked out or deleted anything on the John Michell Talk page you were refering to on my Talk Page. I certainly did not mean to. But I do not think I did. I did add commentary to that talk page. Please tell me if I am wrong so that it will not happen again. 216.240.101.40 (talk) 08:08, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

User:InuYoshi

I figured I would come to you since you blocked and unblocked this user back on August 10. After you unblocked said user, it appeared that he had decided to abide by consensus and leave the page as it was. Unfortunately, it only took 2 days before he was reverting the page again. Recently, has had engaged in an edit war with multiple editors over this same edit - ignoring the previous consensus (and the current re-opening of said discussion on the talk page).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 01:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

He's asking for an unblock (I declined the first one), I would probably say to recommend the next reviewing admin decline but maybe shorten a bit. Or just leave it, he seems kindof unrepentant per the above. In either case, you might want to comment for the next reviewing admin. P.S., that IP block for 1 year seemed a little harsh dude! =) –xeno (talk) 20:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Ragemanchoo again

You blocked User:Ragemanchoo recently for incivility and refactoring comments on an ANI thread. Selected from today's edits alone, here is refactoring of other's comments [38] [39] and borderline incivility [40]. Also, this is a re-insertion of material that they had previously inserted and another editor had reverted for obvious reasons. I'm not sure your block had any effect on their behaviour. Can you take another look? Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 01:26, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Not really warranting a block (yet?), but I did comment on this. Keeping an eye.. Toddst1 (talk) 17:35, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Delicious carbuncle (talk) 02:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

User talk:InformationAdder

His last few edits appeared to remove other spammy fansites rather than add more, you might consider shortening the block, or discussing with the user why the EL's were inappropriate and seeing if they plan to contribute in other ways. –xeno (talk) 17:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

It was the "wanker" comment that motivated indef. I'll change it. Toddst1 (talk) 17:03, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Yea, I noticed that but if his edits were in good faith and not COI I can sorta see where he's coming from. –xeno (talk) 17:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Changing back to indef Toddst1 (talk) 17:09, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

/sigh... Oh well. coulda gone down differently with a discussion. –xeno (talk) 17:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Toddst1. You have new messages at Justinfr's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

help

hello i was wondering you could add a perm ip user block to the White people being its a race issue we have constent trolls and disruptive editors reeking havok on the article ,thanks in advance if you could check this out--Wikiscribe (talk) 20:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I've semi-ed it for a week. I suggest you seek a rangeblock on the ip. Toddst1 (talk) 20:15, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello Toddst1. I saw that you protected White people, however, unfortunately (as almost always happens), on the wrong version. Would you be so kind as to revert the last IP edit, whenever you have a moment? If you need additional info for verification, just ask. Thanks!--Ramdrake (talk) 20:19, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

It's only semi-protected. You and other experienced users should be able to edit it. Toddst1 (talk) 20:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Duh, thanks!--Ramdrake (talk) 20:23, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

that ip just vandalised my talk page also i think it may be some sort of sock of a user you blocked not to long ago [41]--Wikiscribe (talk) 20:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

that ip just vandalised my talk page also i think it may be some sort of sock of a user you blocked not to long ago [42]--Wikiscribe (talk) 20:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for unblocking me, if my edits are undone, I won't insist in my edits anymore. InuYoshi (talk) 20:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

You're faster than me!

Hi Todd,

You just removed the "The International Affairs Association (IAA) of the University of Pennsylvania" page that I posted about an hour ago.

I have uploaded a statement to the site www.penniaa.com/about so that you can see that everything is ok and that Wikipedia may use this source.

Please put the site back up as soon as possible. I appreciate your help and understand why the speedy vigilance is necessary (but am frustrated anyway ;-p).

Thank you, Lmarkel (talk) 18:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Part 2

Hi Todd,

I got your message but am still a bit unclear as to what I need to do. Can you please tell me if the following will be sufficient?

I will e-mail a "request" from my personal e-mail to admin@penniaa.com, then I will respond to this e-mail from admin@penniaa.com (sent to my personal e-mail) confirming the permission to use the content from www.penniaa.com/about/. Finally, I will forward this conversation from my personal e-mail to "permissions-commons AT wikimedia DOT org". Correct?

Sorry about being confused.

Thanks again, Lmarkel (talk) 19:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I think that's correct. I've never done it! Toddst1 (talk) 19:09, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Monte Cassino Vandalism

Hi, thanks for getting back to me. Kirrages isn't the person who vandalised that page (Battle of Monte Cassino). Whoever did it didn't leave any trace; that's why I felt bad about having to fix it by reverting, because it undid Kirrages changes, which were good changes. I don't know who the vandal was, he's obviously someone who hacked the page, undid the log of his own changes, etc. I would revert to Kirrages version, but then I don't want to restore the vandalism because it's very difficult to fix. Contact me if you need more details please. Thanks. Srajan01 (talk) 20:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the Zodiac update. I'm not familiar with him or his methods, but I'm guessing that it's him because of the Celtic Cross image. The only problem is that I had to revert to the 2nd to last version, and therefore undid Kirrages link edits, which were probably good. I didn't want to restore that version because I wasn't sure if the damaged template would return, so someone needs to see if they can restore the last known good version (Kirrages) without restoring the damaged template. Srajan01 (talk) 02:57, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm A Jayhawk

Hi, i saw you removed the lyrics and MP3 links from I'm a Jayhawk. I'm just curious, are these not allowed? All the other pages in the same category have direct MP3 links, such as ISU Fights and Boomer Sooner. Ryan2845 (talk) 23:40, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Lyrics are usually copywritten, but are subject to WP:NOT#Lyrics depending on context (in this case, yes). WP:NOTLINK would apply IMHO to the MP3s. Go Kansas! Toddst1 (talk) 00:00, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for the clarification. and yeah go kansas! :-) Ryan2845 (talk) 00:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Shoulda (Drew Seeley song)

On the article Shoulda (Drew Seeley song), you banned 96.249.147.90 for edit warring. Johnny0929 is now making the same edits--I think they're the same person, as they've done these same edits before and, at that point, the IP was blocked for 12 hours too. justinfr (talk) 00:08, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Cheers... justinfr (talk) 01:50, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup

Will it be offensive if you clean, or delete, some notices (i.e. blocks and warnings)? I just want to make sure it's safe and not a form of vandalism. 24.1.4.241 (talk) 14:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Kingman Research

Thanks, Toddst1--

I would be getting to that soon. This is my first time at doing this. I learn by doing that reading everything. I am in the progress in creating a guided walking tour for Historic Downtown Kingman. So the information is just the preliminaries. I have created a newspaper with Pagemaker for the tours using the same information. One the things I will be doing, is going to the houses and building owners of today and getting more information on the houses and buildings. So my research is very fluid. Thanks for the help, and it you see something that needs correcting by all means do it or let me know. I can't learn if no one shows me. Thanks RobChilcoatr (talk) 23:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

thanks Chilcoatr (talk) 00:21, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Just guide me through. Thanks RobChilcoatr (talk) 18:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

user:Sinbad Barron

On 19 August user:Balkantropolis has recieved your Balkan related edits warning. Can you please give something similar to user:Sinbad Barron because he has not learned anything from this week short block.--Rjecina (talk) 15:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

More incivility from User:Ragemanchoo

New incivil comments by Ragemanchoo (talk · contribs):

• edit summary: "...Whoever the anonymous troll(s) is who keeps trying to say they didn't really needs to google it, & then f*ck off"
• "...I really wish teeny boppers who can't spell or type would stay the fuck off the site."
• "...Also, people trying to say the Keddie murders never happened are what is known as TROLLS and need to simply fuck off."

That enough? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Sigh.. Toddst1 (talk) 16:31, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

I just removed out the "stay the fuck off the site" comment. I assume you missed it, but if you left it intentionally, feel free to revert me. Thanks for the block. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:07, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Nandesuka

[43] - WP:DTTR. Corvus cornix_talk 20:15, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair point. Toddst1 (talk) 20:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Cheers.  :) Corvus cornix_talk 20:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

BoB page again

Todd, I've noticed that you are an admin that likes to help and seems to be quick on the draw; shenanigans afoot on the Battle of Britain page and we may need an uninvolved perspective. Step in before editors violate 3R. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:41, 23 August 2008 (UTC).

Thanks Todd, you certainly lived up to your "Quickdraw McGraw" status (now that's a trivia question...), FWiW Bzuk (talk) 22:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC).

I think Fred Flintstone is more my persona 8-). I haven't run in to you in a while. Hope things have been good. Toddst1 (talk) 22:10, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Xasha (talk · contribs) talk page protection

Wait, why? He can't make two unblock requests? Seems rather premature, at best, draconian and heavy handed, at worst. Please explain. El_C 22:01, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem making 2 requests - rather, supporting the block and saying "the request was frivolous. Please stop wasting admins' time". Toddst1 (talk) 22:03, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay, you deemed it to be frivolous, that I've gathered — but what puzzles me is how do you go from one, single frivolous request to a week-long page protection that's usually reserved for abusive conduct? (abuse, as oppose to misuse) I just fail to see the need for it. El_C 22:11, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

There were two unblock requests and both were declined. How many does it take? Before you answer: check Xasha's talk page history. Toddst1 (talk) 22:14, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't know... more than two? ("further") But why can he not edit his talk page (say, another user wishes to drop him a note — they're allowed to talk because of this?). How can you justify protecting the page when he didn't direct abuse at anyone. El_C 22:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

What would you like me to do? Toddst1 (talk) 22:23, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

It's all good now. What I discuss below is more briefly outlined on Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Talk-page protection. El_C 22:44, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I see you unprotected it, thanks. Note for future reference: the unblock request field tells users they can submit (at least) one more unblock review. Now, the reviewing admin may decline it, even view it as wholly frivolous, but there's no reason for protection unless things escalate after that. Because, we don't want to have users afraid to submit a second request for fear of having their page locked for a week due to it being frivolous (again, anything after that is another matter). Hope that makes sense. El_C 22:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure. I handle at least 2 or three of these every day. After the second appeal is declined that says something to the effect of "I didn't do anything wrong" -> Decline="See the reason for blocking", I see no reason to keep fielding unblock requests. Toddst1 (talk) 22:31, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Very rarely should you need to protect the page immediately after the second unblock request. Again, our unblock instructions tell blocked users they may seek (at least one) "further" review, whether it's (deemed) good or not. After that, the blocked user may well cease completely with the unblock requests, choosing to, say, work on a draft for an article on the page, engage in discussions with others (not necessarily about the block). Not sure I can explain it any more clearly. El_C 22:44, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Scarface and Al Pacino

Scarface is not a crime thriller, its possible thrilling moments are in the end in the action scene, so if we should add Crime thriller to Al Pacino, we should also add Action Thriller to it because this movie has just one action scene and the only "thriller" moment was in the action sequence. Scarface is a crime drama.

About Al Pacino, he is not an action film actor, he is more of a crime movie actor, he's only been in around 5 action movies, the same applies for Robert de Niro, who I removed from list of action actors. InuYoshi (talk) 22:13, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

No research???

How come no research? In IMDB it is listed that Al Pacino acted only in 6 action movies. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000199/filmogenre#action Not that imdb is reliable, but he probably didn't appear in more than 5 action movies. His vast career as an actor is as a drama and action movie actor. Imdb doesn't list Scarface as thriller (well the first scarface (1932) it lists). The only site which lists Scarface as a Crime Thriller is this one and allmovie

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000134/filmogenre#action About Robert de Niro, he has more action movies than Al Pacino, however he is not an action movie actor, he is a crime/drama film actor. Dude have you ever seen one comparing Al/DeNiro with actual action movie stars such as Schwarzenneger/Stallone/Van Damme?

Those are my sources, I trust IMDB. I wanted to help when I edited those pages, if you don't like my contributions go ahead and block. What can I do? Cry and beg for you like a 4 year old child for its mom to buy a new toy. No!! Go ahead and ban me if you want, but remember, I just wanted to help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by InuYoshi (talk • contribs) 22:26, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Not my point - it got you in trouble in the past. You should think about changing the behavior. Toddst1 (talk) 22:27, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Fethullah Gulen

i am also surprised that you blocked me although i made all my edits based on the discussion on the talk page of Fethullah Gulen. other two users (User:Adoniscik, User:Nandesuka) who use the edit summaries in the place of discussion page were not. isn't what they are doing an edit war? please have a careful look at the case. all my and other editors' edits are in the history pages of Fethullah Gulen. you can review my explanation here, too. thanks... Philscirel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.224.82 (talk) 03:57, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Fallacious. The talk page falsifies your claims. --Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 16:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

i can see that your attempts to appear in the talk page after my request, etc. fortunately the whole history of the page, discussion page and your reverts without discussion are all there... -Philscirel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.224.82 (talk) 19:12, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Britain

Yes I was aware, and thanks for your concern:). Having made this mistake once before (I still believe I was justified!) I shall not be doing that again! Dapi89 (talk) 23:18, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

BTW, the user you have blocked is now using his IP address and sock puppeting, is that what it is called? Bzuk has reverted for now. Dapi89 (talk) 23:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey Todd I am just getting used to Wiki's peculiar wiki lanbguage so please excuse me. You banned me for "vandalism" I am a tech author and all I have done is minor text edits for spelling etc, I always give a change reason, I do not think I have done anything wrong.

I may have slipped but I can't see I did anything wrong unless it was a slip.

I am trying to find a place to put this but this seems nearest.

Best wishes,

Simon. trewy@live.co.uk —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonTrew (talk • contribs) 15:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Note: Please be aware that an instance of WP:SOCK has occurred in this edit which is a serious breach of protocol on Wikipedia. I have cautioned the IP to stop now. FWiW, this is another example of the WP:TEND issues that are involved. Bzuk (talk) 04:10, 24 August 2008 (UTC).

Michael Bloomberg

Erf, double tagging! I'm gonna revert to your duration ;) -- lucasbfr ^talk 12:20, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Great minds... Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 12:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Original Resourches

Hey Toddst1, do you want me to bring Brian de Palma for him to say that Scarface isn't a Crime thriller? or do you want me to bring Al Pacino and Robert de Niro for they to say that they are not action movie actors?

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by InuYoshi (talk • contribs) 12:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Neither. Just a verifiable and reliable source. Toddst1 (talk) 14:01, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

La Conner Marina speedy

You put a note on August 20 that La Conner Marina had been speedied, but the article wasn't created until August 22 (but was listed in List of marinas on 8/20), and there's no indication (that I could find) of a previous article or in the article history of any notice tags. I had left a note about copvyvios, but I don't know if the user has made any adjustments to the new articles he's created since then. Flowanda | Talk 21:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

It's been re-created. I've re-speedied it. Toddst1 (talk) 22:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Dude, unfair.

The person i wrote about is a real producer of music...If you want his email i can gladly put you in contact with him. I also have some of his work i can send you. If you didn't want it to be on wiki you should of just told me and i would of removed it. There's no need for a warning.

Thanks.

DoubleTee —Preceding unsigned comment added by DoubleTizzle (talk • contribs) 23:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

NPA:Michael Heming Toddst1 (talk) 23:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Cellulosic ethanol

Thanks, Todd, for the warning about 3RR. I feel I've done what I can to raise the issue of unwanted content being put into this and related articles, and protect the integrity of WP in this case, and am moving on to other things. Johnfos (talk) 20:20, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

User:88.108.242.182

You've just blocked this IP indefinitely. I presume this was a mistake to block indef. D.M.N. (talk) 21:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

yup. fixed. Thanks. Toddst1 (talk) 21:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

CSD A1

WP:CSD#A1 reads:

Very short articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Example: "He is a funny man with a red car. He makes people laugh." Context is different from content, treated in A3, below.

I fail to see how this could possibly apply to this revision of Integration with other techniques which you deleted under criterion A1. Could you please be a bit more careful when going through the speedy deletion requests? Thanks, Jitse Niesen (talk) 22:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

No. I take exception to your assertion of context. What context does the article state? A supposition? It's certainly not identified. WP:SNOW also applies. Toddst1 (talk) 22:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

It's not a very short article. The subject of the article is identified, albeit vaguely: it's about miscellaneous integration techniques. There is a huge difference between the example given at the CSD page and the article. I grant it that the subject is not clearly delineated and that the article should give more context, but those are not reasons to speedily delete the article, they are not even reasons to delete the article via AfD. And WP:SNOW does not apply because it's not clear at all what the result of an AfD will be: it could be merge, rename, transwiki or delete. There is a chance that the article develops into something suitable, and there is also a chance that it will have to be deleted. But it needs more thought that the CSD process provides. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 23:58, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

You and I have very differing opinions here. Toddst1 (talk) 03:54, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

That is worrying, as the criteria for speedy deletion are meant to be clear. I posted about our disagreement at WT:CSD as I'm curious what others in the community think about this. I also restored the revision you deleted for the sake of discussion under the assumption that you wouldn't disagree with this as the text of the deleted revision is in the current article at the moment. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:11, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

ty

Re ANI, thanks for letting me know. There's no use letting a minor issue get discussed ad nauseam because the person who acted isn't there to explain why. :) Whiskeydog (talk) 23:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Unblock on User talk:Ashley kennedy3

I was in the process of declining this unblock request when you granted it. I don't have a problem with that, I just wanted to let you know that her unblock request was basically copied from the "Good unblock request" examples section of WP:GAB, which I've now removed (WP:BEANS and such). Mangojuice^talk 17:24, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I think you're right, but I'm inclined to give benefit of the doubt. (I'm not a hard-ass all the time 8-) I'll reblock on second revert though. Toddst1 (talk) 17:26, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I read that, and I was like, this sounds surprisingly mature. And then I realized the wording seemed familiar.. from other unblock requests. Mangojuice^talk 17:27, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes the basic template was found in Wiki:guide to appealing...The request was however meant and not a sham...I do appreciate the vast reduction in the sentence. I will seek alternative methods to "edit wars"...Thank you...Ashley kennedy3 (talk) 17:56, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

User:FinancialAnalyst

On reviewing my actions, I did undo one edit of his in error. I removed it by mistake under the false impression that it was spamming, and I've apologized in full on his talk page. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

That's unfortunate, but I both Mango and I had warned this fella about AGF and personal attacks. I think the block was valid. Toddst1 (talk) 17:28, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I've got no problem with that; but when I mess up, I don't want it said, "Orange Mike is a rouge editor and takes no responsibility for his mistakes!" --Orange Mike | Talk 17:34, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Wasn't sure where you were going. Toddst1 (talk) 17:35, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

While I'm not going to get involved with this one (i.e., not going to unblock or decline the unblock), I don't think that the cited edit was really a blockable personal attack... Tan ǀ 39 17:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Still disagreeing on civility, aren't we? ;-) cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 17:46, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Y Combinator

I took the 3 minutes to find an article on NEWS.GOOGLE.COM from a mainstream print publication that had Y Combinator as a primary subject. Once I found it, I removed your prod. I don't think this will do well in AfD, but putting it there is your prerogative.

76.206.233.255 (talk) 20:18, 27 August 2008 (UTC) (anon)

Blocking of Aks818guy (talk · contribs)

I think you went overboard blocking Aks818guy indefinitely. The user did not receive any warnings for his edits today. He had been previously blocked for edit warring, and his edits today were good faith edits, not vandalism, no matter how ill-advised. --Michael Johnson (talk) 04:33, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Alright. I shortened it to two weeks. 3 blocks in 6 days on the same issue is highly problematic and the editor has already been warned on this issue so the block is solid. It's on you to keep an eye on him/her when the block expires. Toddst1 (talk) 04:40, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Now we're back to indef after his/her rant on her talk page - incivility and personal attack, with a off-wiki threat. Toddst1 (talk) 16:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Protection from Anon IP users Requested

Thanks for the protective block you did on the John Michell (writer) article, The anon user with two IPs disappeared. However, new anon IP users have appeared who are pushing the same agenda on both the article and discussion page. I suspect either a sock puppet or a puppet master. Can this pp-semi-vandalism|expiry=21 August 2008 be done on the discussion page also to stop an edit war? Can you restore this block please? Thanks. SageMab (talk) 22:13, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

We typically don't protect both the talk and article page. The IPs should be able to request an edit. If they're vandalizing, they should be sufficiently warned, then reported to WP:AIV. Toddst1 (talk) 22:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

This is the IP user 82.153.23.251 and as he does not have a talk page I have warned him on the article edit page and the disuccion edit history. I've worked on this article for over a year and I really do suspect either a sock or puppet master. Please protect the article page.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SageMab (talk • contribs) 22:44, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

He or she does now. Toddst1 (talk) 22:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much Toddst1. I put a vandlism warning on his new user talk page as suggested and he blanked it out on both his page and in page history. I listed facts about him on the JM article discussion page and signed his unsigned comment and he reverted the edit saying I had blanked out his paragraph which is untrue (see history). Vandalism I believe. I am only interested in a good pro and con collection of facts about this author and because of this author's subject matter have seen his article page (and my edits and anyone constructive) abused. Please keep an eye out for this as I have no interest in an edit war. Thanks again.SageMab (talk) 23:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the wise words on the talk page for this article. I agree. But, they are at it again. Please take a look at the talk page and the comments in the section after yours. I am going to post this reply to them, but it looks like a NPOV gang-up. SageMab (talk) 05:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Phiwum you will notice that that I did not reinstate the word philospher in the lead paragraph. In adding solid, verifieable facts to this article I have come across reputable references to him as a philosopher. The truth of the matter is that John Michell is well known as a philospher. It is well evident in both his books and articles. His many publishers list him as such and libraries and bookstores file him under this term. Read the article page Phiwum and Looie. Restraint in what Looie? I do hope you are not threatening another editor. I have just spent several hours adding very solid, as per Wiki standard facts, quotes and paragraphs to this article from reputable sources. I suggest you both read the comments from the administrator above which I find to be very solid advice. This admn found my restoraton of the article to be correct I believe. SageMab (talk) 05:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Please take a look at the John Michell (writer) article page again. I do believe there is there is a determined effort by editors, who do not like the subject matter this author writes about or who are unfamiliar with this author's work and who do no reading about 3rd party sources who comment on this author's work, to seriously undermine this article by removing salient information that advances the article as per BLP, cutting down or changing sentences to reflect OR, and removing quotes from verifiable sources that also contibute to the facts about this author or by distorting facts by adding half truths on the page. How can this article be protected to insure no OR and BLP? SageMab (talk) 14:53, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

As one of the editors involved (and possibly one of those that Sagemab suspects of being a puppet master, I wish he'd make an official complaint if that's what he thinks). I'd welcome your attention. I admit to having removed a review by a non-notable alternative medicine practitioner wroting in a New Age store magazine for instance, but that was clearly not a RS and didn't advance the article. I think Sagemob is a bit confused about what OR (and NPOV) means, and what is required for an encyclopedia article. I've removed quite a bit of what I see as OR written by him (eg analysis of Amazon reviewers views). Any help from an uninvolved person would be welcome. It's reached the point where another editor has suggested an RfC on him. Doug Weller (talk) 16:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

May I suggest that the two of you move this from my talk page to either Talk:John_Michell_(writer), WP:SSP or WP:ANI but not more than one of them? Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 16:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Point taken. Thanks. Doug Weller (talk) 16:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. Thanks for your patience. I would like to suggest again to DougWelle, whom I have told that I have tried to ignore contentious posts as suggested by Wiki, the the article discussion page is not a chat page or a page where you post long pages of Wiki guidelines when an abbrev. is enough. Going to an editor on this article might be more productive and would avert the appearance of an edit war. Enough already Doug. SageMab (talk) 17:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Brfc97 suspected of another block evasion.

Hello. I notice that you recently blocked Matter of Principle for being a block-evading sock of the abovementioned user. It appears that this person has returned, in the form of Grandsorbs. The strongest indication is that, prior to his block, MoP made this edit to Alan Shearer, which was then reverted. Today, a new user (Grandsorbs) (with surprisingly good use of the citation template), made this edit and this edit, which amount to the same point. I should note that this particular insertion has never been made to the article prior to this period. Also, checking out the contribs of Grandsorbs and comparing them to those of Brfc97 and those of Matter of Principle shows exactly the same articles edited by them all. Seems pretty clear case. Cheers! - Toon⁰⁵ 23:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow, taken care of! You'd think we were getting payed for this work! Cheers - Toon⁰⁵ 00:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

IP block

I don’t like to second-guess fellow admins, but did you intend to make this block indef? Cheers —Travis^talk 23:45, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

No - I'm a dope. I got the talk page right 8-). Thanks for pointing that out. Toddst1 (talk) 23:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Sara walk

Can you possibly protect this page to avoid it being recreated again? Ctjf83Talk 00:31, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Gary Aldridge speedy delete?

Hello there,

What was libellous about what I put? I hardly put anything at all. A mere stub. I have no reason to defame Gary Aldridge as I have no personal opinions about him. I know that he died under unusual circumstances but I just assumed that it was notable enough to be at WP.Yeago (talk) 03:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Infanticide and Massacre of the Innocents by Herod the Great

Thanks for your note. I did not add any commentary to that article, but in good-faith I did add links within the 'See Also' paragraph of Infanticide to the related articles on Massacre of the Innocents and Abortion. I did not notice any mention or clarification of the two links elsewhere in the article, other than the image of the Massacre of the Innocents fresco at the article's introduction. I appreciate your input. Thanks again. Dr. B. R. Lang (talk) 11:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

It was the addition of abortion - highly POV. Toddst1 (talk) 13:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Decline on User talk:GoldmanSachsAnalyst

I've reversed you and unblocked this user. The user was blocked for a username violation, and while his conduct since then hasn't been terrific, it's certainly not conduct we'd block a new contributor for, especially without warnings. Mangojuice^talk 18:12, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't feel strongly about it, but it's interesting that you reversed both me and Daniel Case (talk · contribs). Toddst1 (talk) 18:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

The difference is that in the second request, the user agreed to change his username. If the second request had been made initially, I would have granted it before Daniel Case even got there. (Username blocks are levied quickly and harshly and are intended to be undone just as readily.) Mangojuice^talk 18:17, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

With no consultation. "I have not violated the username policy, and I do not think that administrators like OrangeMike should be allowed to make additions to the policy whenever they feel like it and permanently ban users based on those made up policies." Yep, I see good things coming from this user. Tan ǀ 39 18:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

• Please, WP:AGF. FinancialAnalyst (talk) 23:08, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah Toddst1 (talk) 00:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not mad at MangoJuice. I will admit, though, that FinAn is getting on my nerves. (Thanks for the revert, Toddst1.) --Orange Mike | Talk 02:08, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Please, Wikipedia:No personal attacks. FinancialAnalyst (talk) 18:24, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't. It was a comment on your conduct and a valid one - especially after this edit. Toddst1 (talk) 22:13, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

"FinAn is getting on my nerves" was not a comment on my conduct, it was a comment about me. FinancialAnalyst (talk) 04:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it's pretty clear that you were are being a dick. My strong recommendation was that you stop (without putting it in such blunt terms). That recommendation still stands. Toddst1 (talk) 04:46, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

• I don't understand why you indefinitely blocked me for bringing an issue to the attention of an administrator and called it a personal attack, then linked to an article which includes this quote: 'Telling someone "Don't be a dick" is something of a dick-move in itself, so don't bandy the criticism about lightly. Calling someone a dick can be considered poisoning the well (a logical fallacy that is a special case of an ad hominem attack).' FinancialAnalyst (talk) 20:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Do you know what my pet peeve is, Financial? Editors that make three valid mainspace contributions out of their first sixty-five edits. Ninety-five percent of your edits is you trying to prove a point. Any further disruption and I'll block without the consensus of the already-involved admins. Tan ǀ 39 04:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

• Your numbers do not factor in that I have been blocked for a large percentage of my time here on Wikipedia and the only edits I could make during that period were on my own talk page. A number of my edits outside the mainspace were posts in reply to messages on my talk page, posts regarding an article of mine that was deleted, and messages to administrators. Also, a number of my edits were made on an article that I am trying to get returned to the mainspace. FinancialAnalyst (talk) 21:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd fully support that. Toddst1 (talk) 05:03, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I would fully oppose that. FA is a brand new user who has been blocked indefinitely twice, had his article deleted, edits from a neutral point of view, and uses sources. I would love him to spend more time editing the encyclopedia, but he's got about 5 admins breathing down his neck here. The solution is to leave him alone, not to continue to demand that he kowtow. Mangojuice^talk 14:15, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say he needs to kowtow, Mangojuice. He needs to positively contribute to the project. I also didn't ask for your endorsement; if you oppose any of my future actions, you are free to say so at the time. Tan ǀ 39 15:00, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

5 administrators breathing down his/her neck doesn't happen by accident. You have to earn it. Toddst1 (talk) 19:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Please, WP:AGF. FinancialAnalyst (talk) 21:31, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

SCO

You are correct about the spelling, and your point is well made and appreciated. However, I only added a "Z" in the spelling of a redirect for the sake American users. There is also a link established to the article from the "SCO" acronym disambiguation page. The infobox in this article also uses the "organization" spelling, and I noticed that some another contributor attempted to change the spelling in other areas of this article, but I agree with you that it should stand as it is. Thanks for your input an interest. Sincerely, Rusty Dr. B. R. Lang (talk) 11:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

User:GSK

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my userpage. I just woke up this morning and saw the edits. --The One They Call GSK // talk to me // 16:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I put something on WP:3 that may concern you. --Firefly322 (talk) 20:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Endless Ages (video game) Speedy Deletion

Hello

I have noticed that the page Endless Ages (video game) has been deleted, as it seemingly fell under the "A7" category. I have read the criteria, and I do not understand why it was speedily deleted. It clearly says that:

A7 applies only to articles about web content or articles on people and organizations themselves, not articles on their books, albums, software and so on.

Unfortunately, Endless Ages is a game, which is a software, and the line just above clearly explains that A7 does not apply to software. I also do realize that this might not be the most popular game, however, there are other games with articles on Wikipedia that could be considered of the same importance (Gekkeiju Online, Underlight, Ashen Empires, Cyber Nations, Starport: Galactic Empires, etc.). Perhaps there was an error with the fact that the official homepage was down, well it is back up now. You can visit it here. Other websites certifying the reliability of Endless Ages include: IGN, MMORPG.com, Google.

PS: There is also a section in MMOFPS that links to Endless Ages. This has been there for a long time. Thank you --Josellis (talk) 22:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

My bad. I don't play those games so I assumed it was properly tagged as web content. It wasn't clear to me that it wasn't a web based game. I've restored the article. Toddst1 (talk) 01:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Toddst1. You have new messages at Triwbe's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

User:Shkerala

Hi,

I see you have dealt with Shkerala today and given him a level 4 warning for introducing inappropriate pages. It might hence interest you that he has now created an article named Malyali and Hartal which I guess has the same content as the ones before. Regards, Gunnar Hendrich (talk) 14:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Gary Aldridge speedy delete?

Hello there,

What was libellous about what I put? I hardly put anything at all. A mere stub. I have no reason to defame Gary Aldridge as I have no personal opinions about him. I know that he died under unusual circumstances but I just assumed that it was notable enough to be at WP. Comment?Yeago (talk) 23:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:Coatrack Toddst1 (talk) 04:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

You don't seem to have thought it out very well, which perhaps explains your refusal to say much about the matter. I can understand how Coatrack might be invoked but is it because of a distortion of the facts or is it because the truth is actually quite bizaare? At any rate, your removal of my original question without response and your scant reply here tells me you aren't interested in dialogue so I won't trouble you with it.Yeago (talk) 13:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Do you even remember what you wrote in the article? Your lack of good faith is remarkable. That article could have been speedied for any number of reasons. Your question wasn't removed, it was ignored as it was petulant and was subequently archived. If you feel it was such an appropriate article, take it to WP:DRV when your latest 3RR block expires. Toddst1 (talk) 16:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I can almost remember to the T what I wrote. "Gary Aldrige is an American pastor from Alabama who died of unusual circumstances" and linked to the source on The Smoking Gun. Sure, its a very scant stub but I think you were the one assuming bad faith by accusing me of creating an attack page, and also by assuming I am being hostile by asking you (in perfectly benign language) why you think I created an attack page.Yeago (talk) 16:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Continuing harassment--on my user page by IP user

-- Hi -- thanks for blocking the first IP address. The user appears to be jumping IPs -- he's done it again. Is there a solution for this sort of thing? I'm not really familiar with policies for persistent vandals. RayAYang (talk) 04:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Robin Danar's wiki page

Hey there,

I'm a little confused by your proposed deletion of the Robin Danar wikipedia page I created. Much of the information included on the page was found in third party publications like Jive Magazine's site, PopMatters.com and KCRW's site. Robin Danar is clearly a notable subject, as he has worked with many famous artists, which were named in the Wiki page, and Wikipedia pages about other artists even mention him. And I thought the way I wrote it was very neutral and objective -- I did not assert any opinions or use any unnecessary adjectives; I just stated facts. Could you please let me know why you think this is not sufficient for this page to exist?

Thanks! DGUFO (talk) 06:31, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

See Talk:Robin Danar Toddst1 (talk) 16:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Ashley Kennedy

Very disappointed that you would revert this block so quickly. This person has a history of breaking Wiki rules and causing trouble and they are already in the process of inserting irrelevant propaganda[44] into the project. I'm new here so I might be wrong for pointing this out, but I just wanted to say that I'm very disappointed that this person is back and causing havoc. I urge you to please consider their edits to decide if they are truly a benefit to this project or not.--Einsteindonut (talk) 09:19, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

You're entitled to your opinion and I appreciate your politeness in expressing it. However, I don't see any reason to re-block this editor. If you feel strongly, consider taking this issue to WP:ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 10:55, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

VSP

The VSP article is certainly not "inappropriate". It is a legitimate company, and a legitimate article which conveyed information. It was not a complete article, but certainly not a bad one, and needed to be given a chance. I believe that the deletion of this page is not covered in the criteria for speedy deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MBMBMBMBMBMBMB (talk • contribs) 03:48, 9 September 2008 (UTC) — MBMBMBMBMBMBMB (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

collision

Thanks for the note. Off hand, I think that user has "issues." Cheers, Dlohcierekim 19:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Joker Begins = InuYoshi

Judging by the style of the edits, and the re-insertion of an image of Shakira on White people, it looks like the new user User:Joker Begins is the indef blocked user User:InuYoshi. Ed Fitzgerald ^{t / c} 15:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

CAW Local 444

Why did you delete this? It's the largest local union in Windsor, Ontario, and the home local of current CAW National President Ken Lewenza, Sr.. I think its noteworthy, or at least, deserved the benefit of discussion before deletion. 12.4.238.25 (talk) 17:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Note while I previously indicated it was a 20,000 member+ labor organization, I can only find a link verifying 5,000 members at Chrysler, plus "other" members at a number of other local employers. In any case, I believe this is a large enough membership for a labor organization to justify its notability for wikipedia purposes, notwithstanding the other reasons why this local is significant. 12.4.238.25 (talk) 17:41, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Too bad none of that was in the article. It wouldn't have been deleted. The article has to stand on its own merit (assert notability) to avoid speedy deletion. Toddst1 (talk) 18:03, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

speedy deletion question

Hi Toddst1,

I was trying to post and article on 7b only because when i did a search on it I found another band by that name and wanted to add to it. After reading the guidelines I just became more confused. The one thing that I got from it was that it needed to be verifiable. I was wondering how do you verify a band like some of the others mentioned in Wikipedia? I hope that my asking isn't out of line and apologize if it is?

Best,

7bmusic (talk) 23:53, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Use citations from reliable sources. That should satisfy notability too. Toddst1 (talk) 23:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Toddst1,

Thanks for clearing that up for me and again my apologies!

7bmusic (talk) 22:56, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Toddst1 (talk) 23:03, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Singboyb16 and buddies

Hi Todd, an editor you warned back in April is still creating fake pages -- I just added tags for csd for three of them. See User talk:Singboyb16 and User talk:Dajaine360. Flowanda | Talk 16:47, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Amigo Fura Olho=Joker Begins=InuYoshi?

It's only two edits into the editor's contribs, but I think it might be worthwhile keeping an eye on User:Amigo Fura Olho. Ed Fitzgerald ^{t / c} 21:29, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Declined speedy at Raymond poon

I'll explain why I tagged it an attack page. User:Raymond poon hasn't done anything but create a couple of nonsense articles (now speedy deleted). When I looked at the userpage it said he was a certified teacher in Manitoba. That's obviously nonsense, considering his edits (and the fact he can't properly capitalize his own name). In other words, some vandal is using his/her teacher's name as an alias. I'm pretty sure Raymond Poon (the teacher) exists in Manitoba. I'm also pretty sure he's not the one using that account.    SIS  23:28, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Could be. I can't say for sure. It doesn't say anything negative about him. Toddst1 (talk) 23:34, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm willing to bet my cat on it. And true, the page doesn't say anything negative. The account's actions are not too good, though. Not something a 'certified teacher' would associate himself with, in my opinion. I'm convinced it's fake, but okay, you're not.    SIS  23:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Benazir Bhutto

Hi. You semi-protected Benazir Bhutto. Please know that the anons who engaged in the edit warring, 203.220.10.226 (talk · contribs) and 220.253.177.132 (talk · contribs), belong to WWGB (talk · contribs). The semi-protection won't do much. Please fully protect the article.

Please either fully protect Benazir Bhutto or unprotect it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.216.123.141 (talk) 16:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

The above messages were sent to you by a banned editor and a POV pusher. See Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Klaksonn. Also, according to this, can you please remove the Shia claim from the article because it is based on POVs/errors found online by the banned editor.--Seminoletree (talk) 16:39, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Very respectable and courageous way of getting away with your POV-pushing. 63.216.123.141 (talk) 16:56, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Please take this to Talk: Benazir Bhutto. Toddst1 (talk) 17:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Todd

I'm back. Cheers. 67.180.253.2 (talk) 22:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Oops

I messed up. I thought that user had vandelized it, but it turns out not. Sorry. Also, could you please tell me on my disscussion page how to know about warned and reported people? Thanks. Marshall T. Williams (talk) 22:44, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Question

When I try to make a weblink, it displays that referance looking kind of symbol. How do I make this website name appear at the bottom of my user talk page? Look at my user page first, please, in about 2 minutes after I do something. Thanks. Marshall T. Williams (talk) 22:58, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I think what you're trying to do is:

Would someone please tell me the purpose of http://www.tripleclick.com?

More info at Help:Link. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 23:01, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Question again

I'm sorry. I didn't understand that link you gave me. Could you please answer my question on my discussion page? Thanks. And please answer my questions on my talkpage in the future. Thanks again. Marshall T. Williams (talk) 23:05, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

What?

I'm slightly confused, because I was told I edited a page recently (Scott Van Pelt) that I definitely did not edit. Is there any specific reason this could have occurred? I don't share a computer with anyone, although I do share a network... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.205.122.136 (talk) 15:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Someone with your IP address made this edit. You should sign up for an account. I'll leave instructions on your talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 15:39, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Webkin

Any chance you could slap a block on User:Webkin as well, please? It's the account of 79.76.139.7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). - Dudesleeper / Talk 15:41, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Editing Milton Keynes article from mobile blocked

Hi Todd,When I try edit the "Milton Keynes" article from my mobile device it says it is blocked by "Toddst1", then says "for the following reasons:" but there isnt a list. Is it necessary to block editing the article? I can edit it from my laptop if I click Edit from that device.. Now3d (talk) 17:59, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Milton Keynes is not protected. I suspect your phone's ip address was temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia by me. If you tell me the IP address, I can tell you what's up. I usually add something on the talk page of blocked IPs. Toddst1 (talk) 21:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

"wiki" necessary in url

Hi Toddst1, can you get the wiki dropped from URLs? would be much simpler if en.wikipedia.org was the main page. and en.wikipedia.org/Milton_Keynes as the URL of the Milton Keynes article.. atm we are wasting extra 5 bytes each time we have to link with the addition of "wiki/" :) Now3d (talk) 18:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

InuYoshi

Pretty much no doubt now that Amigo Fura Olho is idef blocked Inu Yoshi:

• film genres, and changing them
• Super Smash Bros. Brawl
• Shakira/white people

Ed Fitzgerald ^{t / c} 18:40, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

user 128.206.82.41

I think you blocked this user recently, in the mean time edits from 69.29.68.204 and 161.130.224.13 appear to be from the same person. Now the block has ended the user has added another off-topic/disruptive edit to the java talk page. I don't know what the policy is in this case (or even if this is the best place to ask). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superfly Jon (talk • contribs) 16:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Chronic fatigue syndrome

Hi, I would appreciate any guidance that you can give re the CFS and ME articles and subarticles. Within a few days, they have been completely thrashed by several users, who seem to have an agenda to root out from Wikipedia any idea that ME may actually be a physical disease, as it is classified, defined and confirmed by WHO, CDC and IACFS/ME (but of course these major bodies must all be completely mistaken...). Guido den Broeder (talk, visit) 00:31, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Hills Like White Elephants -- Ernest Hemmingway

Something happened to the text. Not exactly sure. Just giving someone a heads up that some editing might be done with it. A lot of "REDIRECTS" were suddenly added. Questionable??? Creutlinger (talk) 01:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Previoulsy deleted item

Hi, I posted the Kelley Athletic article some time ago and you tagged it for speedy deletion for no 3rd party confirmation. Would this be sufficient [45] or would more be needed.

Thanks for your help. Tmbrguy (talk) 17:03, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Maxim (talk · contribs) deleted it after Fabrictramp (talk · contribs) changed the speedy deletion request I had made based on lack of notability to a {{prod}} Proposed deletion request "to give creator time to rustle up sources for notability". The news article you mention above is definitely a start. You should be able to come up with more than that if they're really notable (IMHO). Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 14:37, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

they are not a notable company yet, but they are viable, which is why I would like to include them in wiki under the baseball glove heading as manufacturer, its actually missing a few mfg's but I wanted to start with one to get the format correct. When you have a chance I have some notes on my talk page, LMK IYHO if I have enough now. In reviewing the other mfg's listed, there seem to hang their crediability on being public companies oozing with web references and SEC filings. These closely held Co's are a lot tougher. I appreciate the help Tmbrguy (talk) 06:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Semiprotect on Kimkins

Hi. I'm wondering if you could clarify the reasons behind removal of the external links relating to Heidi Diaz and the diet, since I checked some of those, they are relevant and provide balance for the article, since in its present state it reads like a promotional. The links to the Riverside court information and KTLA provide counteraction to the super-positive nature of the article. Its not defamation, its providing an NPOV. :) Please reply here and I will chat through here. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 13:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

From my read, the IPs were primarily inserting negative or Wp:Coatrack info. This is not the place to grind an axe. It was only semi-protected, so the article could (and should) be balanced. Given the additional scrutiny, I've un-protected it. Toddst1 (talk) 14:30, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Understood, Toddst1. I have added the Riverside Court link and the References to the Woman's world back to the article, and left all of the other contentious stuff out. Its now in a section under "Controversy". Thanks for the response. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 17:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Round Table

Sorry to bother you again so soon after your block of PigeonPiece, but yesterday a brand-new SPA, Astutescholar, started deleting material critical of the ORT, deleted an entry of mine on the talk page, added a bunch of Listcruft, and added one potentially useful piece of information which so far I've been unable to verify. When these changes were reverted by Nomoskedasticity, Astutescholar then reverted at 18:32, 21:24, and 21:27 and may have created a sockpuppet, Educationatlarge, whose only contribution was to revert yet again at 16:06 today. Perhaps some sort of warning is in order? Thanks. Academic38 (talk) 21:14, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Toddst1 (talk) 14:39, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Just a quick thanks

Thanks for taking care of KillaKY6. Your efforts are greatly appreciated. :) Pip (talk) 23:09, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Glad my work is appreciated. Toddst1 (talk) 23:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Your 3RR warning to 777LOVE

Hi, Toddst1. I noticed you left a 3RR warning at User talk:777LOVE for their edits to Blood atonement. I think the edits were problematic in terms of NPOV and editorial judgment—but I didn't feel like they were getting close to 3RR or really much of an edit war at all. They did restore the edit that FyzixFighter originally reverted, but after my message on their talk page they tried a different edit, not the same. So, I leave it to your judgment, but the warning seems a bit premature to me and you might consider removing it so as not to seem too harsh to the new editor. Thanks, alanyst ^/talk/ 00:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

You are a scholar and wikipedia gentleman

WELL DONE with the Federal Realty Building. --mboverload@ 02:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 02:29, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Depaulicize (talk · contribs)

Please check the links I posted and the reports I posted at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Depaulicize and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive476#Suspected sockpuppetry by User:Depaulicize -- complex case., as well as at Wikipedia:Long term abuse#Runtshit. The editing pattern, choice of name, persistence of BLP-violating edits, attack on me on AIN and many other characteristics are identical to the behaviour of serial vandal Runtshit, and I request you to reconsider. RolandR (talk) 20:27, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow. The user may be problematic - not clear to me without wading all the way through it- but clearly way too complex for WP:AIV. Toddst1 (talk) 20:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

In that case, where do I report this? There are several admins who are well aware of the Runtshit vandal and his pattern of serial abuse; surely AIV is the best place to report this? RolandR (talk) 20:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:ANI and it looks like it's already there. Toddst1 (talk) 20:47, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Roland knows this inside-out, since he is marked victim of this brand of vandalism, and has frequently reported it, with, as far as I know, little effective response. The violence (which is, by the way, anti-semitic) persists and though we elide, delete and revert, this is an intransigently virulent pattern that we appear stuck with. It's time, after years, to try and get some top admin checkuser, or techie, to run down these patterns, and figure out what is going on, whether it is an individual or an organized group. Thanks Nishidani (talk) 20:58, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Gary Aldrige speedy delete?

Eager to get a response to User_talk:Toddst1/Archive_8#Gary_Aldridge_speedy_delete.3F. Thanks! Yeago (talk) 07:45, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

You already got it. WP:Coatrack Since it appears you don't like my answer, take it to WP:DRV. Toddst1 (talk) 15:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Coatrack on a stub? Pretty odd.Yeago (talk) 17:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV

When updating the page, you seem to have missed my request for 67.60.77.248 (talk · contribs). - Mdsummermsw (talk) 18:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

You are correct. Thanks for pointing that out. I believe I have addressed the issue. Sorry 'bout that. Toddst1 (talk) 18:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

O'Monte Jackson

Dude, I just wrote about a event that happened to O'monte Jackson. I think it deserves to be on wikipedia if he got arrested. tailpipeartist (talk) 02:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation

Your participation in mediation has been invoked here. Bogorm (talk) 08:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I see no reason to participate in this drama. Toddst1 (talk) 12:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

The reason is the presence of a template based on inconclusiveness on my user page. The further presence of the template is to be contested. Bogorm (talk) 14:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Misuse of Template:Sockpuppeteer. For the Mediation Committee, WJBscribe (talk) 18:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Thank you. Sorry you were bothered with that request. I agree it shouldn't have gone there. Toddst1 (talk) 02:14, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

151.200.32.170

Thanks for blocking that user. If I were a betting man (and I am) I would bet good money that that person was behind the death hoax, since they were sooo adamant that The Greaseman was dead, even though it was confirmed on this morning he wasn't. Again, Thanks :) - NeutralHomer • Talk 02:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

All I can say is "Get me to the perch on time!" AMF! 8-) Toddst1 (talk) 02:19, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Charles F. Mercer

Any suggestions for how to negotiate with this editor in Charles F. Mercer? thanks Tedickey (talk) 00:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

It looks like it wa handled by Tom (talk · contribs). Toddst1 (talk) 14:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Hey, thanks for blocking User:Cataniaa -- he had been vandalising the Malta Enterprise that I wrote (actually, rewrote -- it was originally Speedy Deleted as spam and I recreated it with proper referencing). Hopefully, the article will be left alone. Be well. Ecoleetage (talk) 14:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

You bet. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 14:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

User:168.9.210.12

May I please have permission to add the {{schoolblock}} template to the talk page for this user whom you have just blocked? Bwrs (talk) 15:34, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

You may (without asking), but I already took care of it. I usually put such notices up pretty quickly but - I was interrupted by a phone call relating to this mess. Toddst1 (talk) 15:42, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, what did they have to say? KnightLago (talk) 15:49, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Replied. KnightLago (talk) 16:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm a tad confused

I reported ControlFreak for repeated WP:IUP violation, and you left a 3RR block notice. Did you not think it was an IUP violation? If you don't agree it was an IUP violation, I'm on pretty thin ice. If you do agree, wouldn't it be better if the block message made it clear that adding fair-use images to discographies and BLP articles is strictly forbidden?Kww (talk) 19:45, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I didn't investigate IUP - could be. I'm not an expert on IUP. 3RR was very obvious. Toddst1 (talk) 19:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Bogorm/Inane

Hi Toddst1-
I noticed you tagged that page as a speedy delete attack page. I'm hesistant to delete something as an attack page when I don't actually know what it said! Can you give me more information? L'Aquatique[talk] 20:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the translation, but the context is User:Bogorm#Subpages. It is a collection of other editors' edits that he/she believes are "inane or derisable." At best a coatrack, at worst 2 personal attacks calling editors' actions inane. Toddst1 (talk) 20:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

[ec] Done deleted. L'Aquatique[talk] 20:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Toddst1. You have new messages at L'Aquatique's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

More bogormism, what to do?

Since his two week block expired Bogorm has picked up where we previously left, and continues to insert dubious material on the 2008 South Ossetia war page titled "Israeli involvement". He makes use of Iranian sources from a government sponsored website and continues to insert his original research with the help of sources that speak about the Jewish community in Georgia and a link describing how a Georgian minister has an Israeli passport.

We've tried to explain him the difference between a Jew and an Israeli, and how having a double passport is not proof of any "Israeli involvement" in this conflict, also notifying him that some ministers in Georgia's parliament have a Russian passport as well. This however is in vain, and he keeps inserting the section, accusing anyone who deletes it of "vandalism". Bogorm also takes it quite personal because the personal attacks seem to continue [46] wherever he can (the ANI section has nothing to do with me at all).

Anyway I've never really experienced such a persistent user before. What do I do now? Should I post the complain of his use of bad sources at the wp:npov or wp:rsn noticeboards? And what happens then? Grey Fox (talk) 21:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Another example of Bogorm's dubious editing is when he tried to insert statements of a rather unknown extreme Swedish nationalist in International reaction to the 2008 South Ossetia war and called him a "prominent Swedish writer". He even started a vote for inserting this completely inappropriate statement [47]. Närking (talk) 21:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

There is an active discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Bogorm_again. Please move this discussion there. Toddst1 (talk) 23:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Gone Daddy Gone Toddst1 (talk) 00:59, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

For your attention to Richmond, British Columbia. Truth is, though I've never been to B.C., and find it easy to sympathize with the substance of the edits in question, it was just too close to pamphleteering. Cheers, JNW (talk) 00:40, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much to both Toddst1 and JNW. I was building on several other people's edits after people learned about questionable information. What is stated on the topic now is simply factual. One reason that I did several edits in one day was that I was doing Wikipedia editing for the first time and did not catch on quickly. I think I have finally done the citations adequately. JimWright44 (talk) 01:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Perhaps you want to protect this vandals talk page [48] Ctjf83Talk 16:47, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I definitely have my admirers. Toddst1 (talk) 17:21, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

HAHA, I take it as a sign that you are a great admin, if you piss vandals off :-D Ctjf83Talk 17:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Jrseaus

Thanks for blocking that user.    SIS  00:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

You bet. Thanks for flagging him or her. Toddst1 (talk) 00:45, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Eleland (talk · contribs) indef block unresolved

I have changed the ANI thread back to unresolved, as I dont believe an indef block is the appropriate outcome. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 08:59, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. There's far more drama there than this volunteer has time for right now. Any changes to the block deemed appropriate by consensus from the discussion are OK with me. Toddst1 (talk) 18:16, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Nishidani

Just as a matter of interest, having issued this warning [49] what exactly are you thinking of blocking Nishidani for? He's being a bit dramatic, admittedly, but I don't see him actually doing anything blockable - indeed, I agree with him that he is pointing out a failure of process here. I'd respectfully suggest that backing up an inappropriate block with another one might not be a good idea. Black Kite 21:35, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

which 'inappropriate block' is this? Are you suggesting that the initial block of Eleland, after he explicitly acknowledged knowingly and willfully disrupting the project was somehow inappropriate? NoCal100 (talk) 21:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

An immediate indef block was certainly inappropriate, yes. Black Kite 22:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

there was no 'immediate indef block' - there was a one week block, accompanied with a stern warning that repeat violations will be met with stronger measures. To this Eleland responded with a tirade of bad faith accusations, verbal abuse and the aforementioned admission that he's knowingly and willfully disrupting the project, which resulted in the indef block, quite appropriately. Please follow the chain of events more closely before passing judgment on the actions of other admins. NoCal100 (talk) 22:22, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I concur with Black Kite, the Wikipedia process frequently results in double (and sometimes triple, quadruple) standards, and if editors are frustrated about this, it would be appropriate to open a discussion about how we can improve our systems, as opposed to leaving them a formal warning. PhilKnight (talk) 22:08, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

editors who can't cope with the frustration they experience without disrupting the project need a long time out. NoCal100 (talk) 22:22, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I also agree with BK, the length of your block was grossly excessive. As it happens, I favour brevity in communications, but excessive loquaciousness is hardly a blockable offence. There is certainly no way that Nishidani's pointing out of double standards merits a block, or even a warning — he is providing a very valuable service. NSH001 (talk) 22:33, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Every admin I have come across has indef blocked editors for far less disruption than Eleand's recent outbursts. I'm not sure where you are coming up with words like "grossly excessive" and "inappropriate." I guess I blocked a cabal member.

To answer Black Kite's question, ill-considered accusations of impropriety fall under WP:Civil and are blockable. I'm sure the Kite knows that.

To answer Phil's question, accusing an unbiased editor of having a double standard is significantly different from discussing imperfections in wiki justice.

Frankly, I'm baffled by the response to my actions here - especially by admins whom I have worked with and come to respect. I have yet to see any policy or guideline that shows my actions as inappropriate and I have asked for examples. Quite the contrary - take a look at this:

"Indefinite blocks are usually applied when there is significant disruption or threats of disruption, or major breaches of policy. In such cases an open-ended block may be appropriate to prevent further problems until the matter can be resolved by discussion."

Couple that with this statement:

"..Let me confess; not only did I knowingly violate Wikipedia's various "civility" and "personal attacks" and "play nice in the sandbox, kids," policies, I did it with the very deliberate intention that it cause what we euphemistically call "disruption" here. Quite simply, I was, and am, at wits end, and I have neither the patience nor the passive-aggressiveness to work through the normal WikiPolitical methods.."

"Grossly excessive" and "inappropriate" just don't seem to apply here folks.

As far as a double standard, there may be other blocks necessary to parties involved in Eleand's tirade. This volunteer can't right all wrongs on Wikipedia. If there are other issues here {{sofixit}}. Saying I have a double standard implies I've looked at two different cases and come up with different answers which I don't see here. Toddst1 (talk) 08:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

'ill-considered accusations of impropriety fall under WP:Civil and are blockable'

If that is a reference to my remarks on Eleland's page where I protested at double standards, then it is incorrect, in so far as my judgement was not 'ill-considered' but rather based on a quite precise examination of evidence, even if intolerably verbose. I tend to be verbose, when what strikes me as obvious appears not to be so in the eyes of several others. I can even understand that at first glance, you thought this a clear-cut issue. It isn't, and those who know the history of these things, rather than the shape of one diff, do right to nudge administrators towards a more comprehensive grasp of undercurrents they otherwise miss. It's an unenviable task having to cope with the tide of comment, so I don't take amiss your admonition on my page, even though I think it frivolous.Nishidani (talk) 08:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

As I said above, if there are more remedies necessary to fix all the issues around parties involved in Eleand's tirade, then let's fix them. Toddst1 (talk) 09:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Probably, as Phil has suggested, rather than take a smearer to task, which smacks of retribution and a 'cabal'(nothing to do with a cabal at all), the thing to look at eventually is whether or not, in cases like this, one should examine the cause for an outburst, or simply, as is usual, punish the person who violated, as here, WP:Civil. I've never contested, neither would Eleland, if I might speak for him, the fact that Eleland's remark warranted a severe admonition and a sanction of sorts. I am, like many, perplexed that the complaint was made by someone who violated the same rule, by making a provocative and false smear accusation, before Eleland made his outburst, indeed is morally culpable of pushing Eleland over the limit. It's a procedural thing. It has been suggested one file a report to get the double standards issue resolved. I don't do that. I dislike hassling administrators, since adults should be able to work these things out more informally. The whole issue can be resolved by warning plaintiffs their own edits prior to the reported violation will also be scrutinized. People who violate WP:Civil, or any other rule, and provoke a bitter rejoinder which also vioilates WP:Civil, are in no position to flag policy violations. The pot calling the kettle black, what's good for the goose is good for the gander is how proverbial wisdom summed it all up.

Wow. I think we're pretty close to agreement here. Toddst1 (talk) 09:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

In the cool of the day after, one can see that Todd's initial sanctions are fully understandable. The two edits he looked at constitute the kind of material that suggests the need for a very strong sanction. Once the outbursts are contextualized, however, I think most would agree that while sanctionary measures are proper, it appears the substantial outburst was provoked by a very malicious piece of defamation. The person who made that will not fall under any sanction, since none of us will report him, for a variety of technical and ethical scruples. So we have a person punished, while the plaintiff who 'won the case' appears to have both provoked the most serious outburst, violating WP:Civil, while getting off scot-free. This is not a healthy precedent to set, since it tempts people into gaming the system to get rid of people they dislike. In lieu of a rule covering such causal responsibilities, (the measure I suggested), I should think the civilized thing is to think of a discretionary gesture towards at least the principle of having not only justice done, but justice seen to be done. I.e. the 3 month block should, after some days, be reviewed downwards - a week or two. Just a suggestion in the interim: I apologize if I have, as a mere editor, been intrusive and garrulous. I hope some thought on a technical change in the rules, that warns plaintiffs to make complaints only if they are sure their own record is clean, will eventually be taken up by administrators. Regards Nishidani (talk) 09:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I essentially agree, the initial 1 week block was ok, and the desire to increase the block was also understandable. If the second block had been 2 weeks, there wouldn't have been all this drama. PhilKnight (talk) 03:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Don't blame me for this drama - blame the editor Eleland. This ridiculous argument of justifying disruption because of provcation, doesn't hold water. Shame on you for shortening the block to 1 week. Toddst1 (talk) 00:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Vitilsky's personal attacks

In reference to your note that Vitilsky (talk · contribs) would only receive one warning for personal attacks, please note the summary in the [50]. --Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 05:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunate. Toddst1 (talk) 09:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Eleland/Nishidani

You have misunderstood. No-one is saying the block was inappropriate, merely that the length was given the surrounding circumstances (and I can understand why you did it, just that it doesn't stand once investigated more fully). To be honest, I was trying to ensure you didn't do something that might end you up at RfC if you'd blocked Nishidani - indef blocking Eleland after he'd been seriously provoked, and then blocking someone with the same POV as him for complaining about it might be seen by some as suspect - even if Nishidani did do something blockable, it might be worth finding another admin to do it. Black Kite 14:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Rtvybo787

hi Toddst1 can you please help me out with this user after you blocked him he removed the comments again I think that page really needs to be protected.

Alexnia (If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page.) @ 16:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Toddst1. You have new messages at Alexnia's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Toddst1. You have new messages at Alexnia's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Todd

How did u become an administrator.--Entect (talk) 01:58, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Correspondence course. 8-) Toddst1 (talk) 04:48, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Trivia

This [51] isn't a spelling correction. Flaunting and flouting are both correctly spelt. You have, instead, changed the meaning of what you wrote; and I don't think you should do that. FWIW, "flouting your disregard" is wrong; flaunting was what you meant William M. Connolley (talk) 19:44, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Flaunting is incorrect usage. Flouting is correct as was pointed out. You seem to share the incorrect usage of the term. See dictionary definition. I have corrected what I wrote to say what I meant, and you interpreted from my incorrect usage. Toddst1 (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Pointed out? I missed that. But no: you can flout rules, but you flaunt your disregard of rules. Either way, its a grammar correction not a spelling correction William M. Connolley (talk) 19:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Pointed out here. You correctly interpreted what I meant to say. Did you read the dict def? You and I disagree (spelling/grammar), but I DGAF. Toddst1 (talk) 19:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

You've missed context. In the diff you cite, N is correcting you when you say "flaunting wiki policy". As I said, you don't flaunt policy, you flout it. In your "correction" on E's page, you've changed "flaunting your disregard of Wikipedia's rules" to "flouting"; what you're missing is the addition of "your disregard of", which makes flaunting correct in that instance William M. Connolley (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually I was correcting NoCal, not, I believe Toddst1, and this might be the cause of Toddst's misprision. Gentlemen, let us concur that Eleland was flaunting his flouting of wiki policy, this is objectively true, and grammatically indisputable. Regards Nishidani (talk) 20:08, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks you

Thank you very much for the barnstar. We can only hope. --S.dedalus (talk) 20:56, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Harassment

The editor known as Blowdart is stalking me. See his history of edits. --NOLAhistorian (talk) 01:07, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Middendorf's

Todd, I am new to this Wikipedia thing, and am trying to do a series of articles on New Orleans area restaurants. In the process of creating a page for Middendorf's restaurant, the user Blowdart, whom you have warned recently, began vandalizing my page by stating that it was not written from a neutral point of view and that it was an advertisement. I have read Wikipedia rules and from what I can tell, it is written from a neutral point of view. I included one quote from Southern Living Magazine and I could not figure out how to cite it properly, so he put the entire history and surroundings article on dock for deletion, while I was trying to figure out how to cite it. Is there a way to remove that vandalism and possibly remove the user who has gone on a rampage? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by NOLAhistorian (talk • contribs) 15:56, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I had a crack at the article. I think the tags were accurate, but I think with the changes I made can be removed. I hope this helps. Toddst1 (talk) 16:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Todd, thank you very much for cleaning up the article. Could I ask what statements remain that need to be verified with links? Thanks. --NOLAhistorian (talk) 17:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, I have a large section about Hurricane Ike's effects because it was the only storm in the restaurant's 74 year history to have flooded it. It also will probably be the reason the old restaurant building is torn down. --NOLAhistorian (talk) 17:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

IP vandalism

About this : Thank you very much ! :D Rosenknospe (talk) 22:34, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

request for feedback

Hi Todd,

I had made an appeal for a block by Futper (an admin that I feel keeps harassing me) and you declined it replying "solid block".

To be frank, I don't think you know the facts in this instance and you're seeing only one side of the story here. I realize Futper is an established admin and I'm a newb (which makes this an uphill battle) and if my points should have been made elsewhere I apologize for that (I'm still learning Wikipedia rules). However, I still think the points themselves are valid (and verifiable... if someone spends time to throughly review them. There are a group of FYROM nationalists on Wikipedia promoting misinformation and deleting pertinent facts (including possibly a certain admin). I don't mind regular contributers but when an admin appears to be one of them it creates a problem.,

(And it isn't just me saying there is currently hostile propaganda against Greeks occurring. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=hr110-356)

FYROM citizens live on formerly Greek lands. As do some Bulgarians, Turks, and Albanians. I have no issue with this and wish them the best. However, since the break up of Yugoslavia they are trying to be known as "Macedonians" (relating to ancient Macedonian Greeks) This is unacceptable to someone Greek because the denial of Greek Macedonian history is like denying Greeks were Athenians and Spartans. I sincerely feel like the target of bigotry and my ethnic identity is under attack. (like someone Jewish being Moses was Arab.. or someone Italian being told Romans were Albanians... or someone American being Washington is Mexican). These sort of things can and do lead to real wars.

What I'm looking for here is an open ear... and advice into writing a complaint in a format that Wi:AN would find acceptable. I originally tried to make an anon comment about the issue to WI:AN (without naming any names).... instead I ended up getting blocked by Futper (who appears to be a FYROM nationalist himself based on his lopsided editing patterns against Greeks). You declined to unblock me will only add to the perception that I'm trolling when my beef can be validated with a little sincere effort.... and why I've come to you.

Please... I'm asking you for your help here. I realize that it might put you at odds with another admin (who little doubt is monitoring my posts... including this one given he's patrolling even my user page). If you do help and I am not saying the truth. at worst it will mean you wasted a little time with me. If you don't help and I am saying the truth... you will done your little bit in spreading hate and propaganda.

I can only hope given these options you are willing to listen at least a little to the other side (especially given the gravity of the issues). Thanks -Crossthets (talk) 01:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what I can do here. However, this might be relevant:

In a 2007 arbitration case, administrators were given the power to impose discretionary sanctions on any user editing Balkans-related articles in a disruptive way. If editors engage in repeated inappropriate behaviour in this area, they may be placed under sanctions including blocks, a revert limitation or an article ban.

It applies to admins as well. Perhaps you need to file a WP:RFC about the situation. If I misread the situation, I apologise. At this point, I don't know what to think. Toddst1 (talk) 22:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

No need to apologize Todd. I very much appreciate your balanced down-to-earth response (and plan to read up on RFCs). I understand given the severity of the charge the onus is still on me, a newb, to prove what I say is true (which is despite that he occasional deals with extreme cases of FYROM vandalism... his lopsided editing and hostility towards the Greek POV on WIkipedia puts him in a conflict-of-interest as an admin)

I am already aware of the arbitration case via carefully examining Futper's diffs. I'd like to point out in the comments of the project page you'll find Futper (who appears to have been a key pusher for those discretionary powers and now seems to use them to the max) said the following about Greek contributers at that time...

"Greek tendentious editing can generally get away with murder" (Replace that with "Jewish" tendentious editing can generally get away with murder" to see how "neutral" he sounds)

In addition about half of the official statements in support of Futper's desire for discretionary powers (judging by the comments intended primarily to silence Greek contributers and to a lessor extent Bulgarians) come from Wikipedia contributers that seem to be FYROM-supporters (possibly nationalists). Please note though my complaint is SOLELY about Futper. Other admins appear far far more balanced in their editing towards Greeks. I am not looking for special status only not to have my edits targeted for blocking solely based on my ethnic background or because the facts are unpleasant for an admin with an anti-Greek agenda.

To understand how Futper targets me... he wasted no time threatening me yet again (for allegedly using the fricken talk page of an article as a "forum" and saying "last warning")

What would really help at this juncture is putting a visible retraction on my talk page that notes after spending time reviewing my case in detail an admin does see potential merit in my claims (to help reduce the newb-is-instantly-wrong railroading effect I am currently experiencing). When I am ready to proceed forward with WI:AN it will hopefully show other admins my issue with him aren't remotely as cut and dry as he tries to portray them.(a statement in itself)

And thanks so much for taking my time to review my concerns Todd. --Crossthets (talk) 04:03, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Taking a look into the matter here. Toddst1 (talk) 04:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Todd. While you're at it can you perhaps ask him about these offensive comments he made to me on out first encounter as well... a newb... with no prior history. (Futper was coming to the alleged aid of someone who appears to be a FYROM national)

Every sane person with normal adult intelligence can see that your allegations against (removed name) are nonsensical. If you can't see that yourself, it's probably no use me trying to explain it to you. I will simply block you if you continue with this topic, for being either a malicious troll or too clueless for rational discussion

As you can see I already asked him on his talk page... and he completely ignored the question. I'd ask again but he'll just use it as an opportunity to suggest I'm "harassing him" and threaten me again. (or get an unsuspecting admin at ANI to do it for him) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crossthets (talk • contribs) 05:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Unsurprisingly yet another threat/rant from him against me... in the middle of another admin investigating a claim of bias against him?

Admins are entrusted with additional abilities, but do not have special rights beyond those of regular editors. Like everybody else, admins are expected to behave in a civil manner, to not engage in revert wars and to not claim ownership of articles. With regard to simple misbehavior, admins are treated identically to regular users;

Admins should never use their admin abilities to intimidate others. For instance, threatening a user with an inappropriate block is just as bad behavior as actually making that block.

An admin should not block a user if they are not neutral with respect to that user, or have a conflict of interest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_Code_of_Conduct

Futper is an admin who no doubt is going to try and pull in other admins to come to his aid. If you are going to fight this fight it might very well get ugly. What it comes down to is do you believe Futper's angry dismissive newb-trolling narrative... or do you think my verifiable points are unworthy of even being visible on the talk page relating to the Macedonian Naming dispute? My fate is largely in your hands Todd. --Crossthets (talk) 07:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

The "he" I was in referencing was Futper not you Todd. You've been extremely gracious and patient with me even though I'm a newb who has put you in an awkward position with an established admin.

My primary goal was that any blocking be left to another admin (less involved with me and the articles in question) so I am free to edit without issues of conflict-of-interest arising. Your acknowledgment of the history between Futper and I and your suggestion to Futper to step away from blocking me and leave it to other admins is greatly appreciated (without even taking sides... nicely done).

I have some unfinished business with Mark (looking for the same sort of admin paper trail acknowledgment he reviewed my concerns) but you've effectively done far more than I expected so I don't think I have a need for the ANI process at the point (unless Futper wants to go down that road again). I will go back to focusing on my contributions to Wikipedia. Thx so much Todd.--Crossthets (talk) 20:24, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Completely unrelated (and very unstressful) question. I've chosen a barnstar I'd like to add to your user page (the very first I've awarded). I've figured out how to do it I think but I have no clue how to get to the page where I need to do it. (says add to User:Toddst/awards??? on your user page but I can't seem to get there) Can you provide a link to the page so I may do the dirty deed?--Crossthets (talk) 20:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

If you're so inclined, you can add it here. That page is protected. Vandals afoot you see... Toddst1 (talk) 00:43, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Civility barnstar.png

		Civility Award
		If all Wikipedians were as civil as you we'd have no need for admins! Thanks for patiently spending time helping a newb. Crossthets (talk) 01:42, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Jimmie Lee Jackson

Hi. Here, [52], you accidentally removed the vandalism which 65.66.39.1, removed. It might be a good idea for you to remove the warning you gave that ip--Jac16888 (talk) 18:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

good point Toddst1 (talk) 18:28, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

talk history

thanks. my point to that user has been made. Jw2034 (talk) 19:48, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

You got a thank you card!

A Thank You Card!

Dear Toddst1, thank you so much for your words of support, kindness, and your trust in me. My request for Adminship has been closed, and the support the community has shown will be with me forever. I have no way to properly express how grateful I am, and all I can tell you is this: I shall try not to disappoint you nor anyone else with my use of the buttons... and if I mess up, please tell me! :) If you ever need my help, either for admin-related stuff or in any other way, you are welcome to ask, and I shall do my very best. Dear Toddst1, I would like to thank you for the question you have asked, although it was very challenging, it left me with something to think about. Please take care. G.A.S 05:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Unblock

Hey thanks. Grsz^X 06:05, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

white american

if you can include w.a.s.p you can include arab american the article is called white americans and what are arabs white americans there is no precise article called "WHITE ARABS" stop being ludicris you and the other editor are making way to big of a deal, i can in right remove w.a.sp than because they are already covered under european american--Wikiscribe (talk) 17:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

people tend to fall back on a wiki policy in particlar an administrator when they really can't argue the point because they are wrong, also i am so sorry please forgive me master todd for saying you were being "LUDICRIS"i guess because this arguement falls under the wiki policy for a "LAME" argument--Wikiscribe (talk) 17:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not arguing. Suggest you do the same. Toddst1 (talk) 17:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

sorry did not mean to snap at you--Wikiscribe (talk) 19:50, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

résumés

Hi Toddst1.

You've linked to WP:RESUME on an AFD. There's a discussion about that essay going on at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia is not the place to post your résumé#Tone - you might want to join in. --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 19:16, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

suggestion?

ANI discussion archived here

complaint: The other part of this problem is an administrator Toddst1 seems to put a block or indefinite ban on the users adding the accurate 3rd party sources while "warning" the other two editors mentioned above to seem like his actions are neutral.

your response: Speaking of socks, it's pretty rare for an editor with less than a dozen edits in mainspace to make such an involved ANI report.

Your response is inadequate.

A suggested response would be:
I, Toddst1, have blocked or indefinite banned on the users adding the accurate 3rd party sources because...

a. The sources are not good sources but I didn't explain this. The reason they aren't good is ....
b. The sources are not accurate but I didn't explain this. The reason they aren't accurate is ....
c. of another reason, that reason being .....

One of the suggested responses would help your case. Your current response just confirms that you are not acting correctly (when challenged, you just call the challenger a sock).

This analysis is just from an uninvolved editor who was not read the article, just the ANI complaint. Chergles (talk) 21:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I am an editor with more than 18 months of registration and hundreds of edits. Chergles (talk) 21:49, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Your conclusion is incorrect. My actions stand on their own without further explanation. I have no need to engage on that wikidrama.

To put it in to perspective, it appears to me that this is a case of an obvious sock challenging the actions of two editors and two admins in dealing with a sockpuppeteer. Toddst1 (talk) 23:26, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

mandatory registration

I see your user box advocating mandatory registration. What is your feeling on mandatory registration with your name? Chergles (talk) 21:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't feel that using a RL name is necessary. There are plenty of circumstances where pseudonyms are useful. However, dealing with troublesome IPs could be a lot easier if mandatory registration were required. That way there would be no ambiguity whether someone editing today was the same as the person last week. Toddst1 (talk) 23:23, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Hello Toddst1. Thank you very much for your support in my recent Request for Adminship, which was successful with 111 supports, 0 opposes, and 0 neutral. I have to say I am more than a little overwhelmed by this result and I greatly appreciate your trust in me. I will do my best to use the tools wisely. Thanks again. Regards. Thingg⊕⊗ 01:28, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Round Table socks

Hello Toddst1. Recently you created WP:Suspected sock puppets/Astutescholar. I've made my own update there. Do you think that the SSP report should be announced at ANI? In a recent discussion, Jehochman argued that no additional blocks should be issued unless an SSP was filed. It's been done, so maybe those concerned should be notified. EdJohnston (talk) 03:03, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Good idea. I wanted to submit an RFCU, then update ANI, but I've gone ahead with ANI. I'll do the RFCU so as soon as I have time. Toddst1 (talk) 04:12, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Block of attack page creator

I hope you will not mind that I have gone ahead and blocked PDCII27 (talk · contribs), whom you had removed from AIV and left a final warning in lieu of a block. I think you may have inadvertently not noticed that this editor created an attack page against the same person (presumably a schoolmate) twice, six weeks apart, and also that the username is based on the name of the person who was being attacked. If you have any questions regarding this please let me know. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:30, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I fully support blocking creators of attack pages. I should have noticed that myself. Thanks. Toddst1 (talk) 15:31, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:Civility

I have nothing to fix! For the record:

• I did not offend the editor in question. I characterized "damn" the book and not the person. Thus there is no personal characterization.
• I have the right to be ironic and sarcastic. Sarcasm does not necessarily contradict civility. And I have never been uncivil towards Mervyn.
• Mervyn does not seem to understand the difference between "References" and "Further Reading". If he can't understand the obvious, this is not my problem. I do have the right to get angry, and express my annoyance to an editor, who IMO harms the article with his erratic edits. And I do have the right to believe that this editor has not been helpful to the article.

While you hastened to warn me, you found no word of condemnation for Mervyn who accused me of using "Further Reading" as a personal bookshelf. You found nothing to say to a person who insists on absurdly citing a book both in "References" and "Further Reading", a distinction a first-year university student can understand.

I thus decline your warning, and I ask you to be more careful next time. As a minimum act of recognition of your wrongdoing and of restoration of both my reputation and dignity among Wikipedians your misjudged warning harmed, I kindly ask you to remove yourself this highly offensive warning from my page, before I do it myself. Thank you.--Yannismarou (talk) 19:53, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

We disagree. Toddst1 (talk) 19:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Obviously. I regard your warning as a personal offense against me, and I'll treat it that way.--Yannismarou (talk) 20:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I recommend you treat it as a warning instead. Toddst1 (talk) 20:03, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Todd, tersely warning another admin achieves what exactly? How were you planning on following up? With a block? This warning is inane. Marskell (talk) 13:35, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

See my second comment on this subject on ANI. I was shocked to learn this behavior was coming from an administrator after the warning was issued. Admins are subject to the same rules as the rest. Toddst1 (talk) 15:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I realize that admins are subject to the same rules as the rest. Admins also need to be able to think situationally when issuing warnings, and you didn't. A brusque warning to an angry person will almost always make them angrier—that should have been abundantly obvious. And the single sentence "you have been warned" comments that followed come across as peevish lawyering.

Yanni is not new to Wikipedia and he is not stupid. Three years and seven FAs later, he deserved, at least, a conciliatory (not patronizing) invitation to dialogue. AN/I failed to produce one. But such is the nature of that swamp, I suppose. Marskell (talk) 12:23, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Great customer service!

Thank you for your message. At no time did I think you did anything wrong. I just thought that you didn't answer the question posed. My philosophy in life is to be nice and try to look at the other person's perspective. Some people in Wikipedia do that but others do not. As much as people can try to work things out and compromise with each other, that's good.

Thanks again for your message and link. Chergles (talk) 23:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Again, I am not the judge of the Oxford article. With any article, see if there is some merit to the edit. Try to separate feelings if the editor is not very nice. That's for the best of the encyclopedia. That philosophy is much better than checkuser data. Checkuser data has some significant flaws. I'm not going to discuss them because those flaws are not pertinent in this case but significant flaws do exists. Chergles (talk) 23:53, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

E-Mail

You have one. - NeutralHomer • Talk • October 16, 2008 @ 19:36

Only possible if the one you had was weak and guessable. Toddst1 (talk) 20:00, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Only if they were Polish. Can someone request a new password for someone? - NeutralHomer • Talk • October 16, 2008 @ 20:42

I don't think so. You could try WP:ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 20:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, well, the IP user requested a new one and it got switched. Didn't know an anon could do that. Do you think it is safe to switch back to my previous password? - NeutralHomer • Talk • October 16, 2008 @ 20:48

How do you know who changed your password? Toddst1 (talk) 20:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I got a email from Wikipedia saying "Someone from the IP address 98.219.177.167 requested that we send you a new login password for the English Wikipedia." Same IP I reported for vandalism. - NeutralHomer • Talk • October 16, 2008 @ 20:52

same AFD

Hey, you voted in an AFD minutes after me! I see you are against Joe the Plumber per BLP1E. Should you AFD Lenny Skutnik for the same reason? Chergles (talk) 22:14, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry - I'm not stalking you - I was following up on your AIV report. As far as Lenny Skutnik, I would say no because of the medals. Toddst1 (talk) 22:19, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Edit war

Why did not youy put this notice to the talk page of Hiberniantears?--Certh (talk) 22:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Hiberniantears got a well-deserved, but different one here. You should have issued that one. Toddst1 (talk) 22:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I think it is verty different from what you've placed in my talk page. Do you think only one user was involved in edit-warring? Why did you accuse my only in edit-warring? --Certh (talk) 22:54, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

See my comment on WP:ANI Toddst1 (talk) 22:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Can you please put the same warning to his talk page or remove it from mine? I see no reason why do you accuse only one side in edit warring.--Certh (talk) 23:00, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

The fact that other editors are reverting your edits say that you are likely the culprit, but I leave the possibility open. Toddst1 (talk) 23:06, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

So do you think it is not edit warring? I am reverting him because I think he is pursuing me. Also, will you block him if he violates 3RR or you will block me only?--Certh (talk) 23:31, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I declined to block either of you (and declined to warn Hibernatears) because Hiberniantears appeared to be reverting vandalism. As someone without deep knowledge or the time or inclination to dive deep into the subject, I decline to block. BTW, let me clarify - my comment about "a well-deserved, but different" notice was to the effect of you should have notified the editor that he or she was being discussed on ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 05:14, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Where did you find "vandalism"?--Certh (talk) 12:41, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Never said I found any. Stop trying to put words in my mouth. Toddst1 (talk) 12:43, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Continuing discussion from threat of violence

I'm sorry to bring this up when it's already been resolved, but that recent threat that was made by a vandal on the Obama article had me quite worried. Shouldn't we also tip off the media so attention can be brought to it and possibly Obama's camp can beef up security? I'm not trying to be dramatic or anything, I'm just seriously concerned. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 23:07, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

While you are free to do whatever you want outside of wikipedia, I would strongly recommend contacting the Wikimedia Foundation before you do so. See Wikimedia contact page. My opinion is the FBI and Secret Service are the best protection they could have, and they've both been notified. If you feel it necessary to contact others, then you should do what you feel is best. Good luck. Toddst1 (talk) 23:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. It's just quite a scary thing, you know. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 23:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I couldn't agree with you more. That's why I contacted the FBI. Toddst1 (talk) 23:47, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

If I'm contacting the Wikimedia foundation, should I also include the archived AN/I discussion about this or just the threat itself? --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 23:56, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I would include a link to the discussion that includes the threat. It has been archived here. Toddst1 (talk) 23:58, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks once again. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 00:00, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Copyright Issues

The message you left on User talk:Jbdave, is that a template I can save somewhere or did you just write it yourself ? I have need something like that a couple of times today on new page patrol. Cheers. Waterden (talk) 22:46, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome to plagiarize it. I keep it at User:Toddst1/boilerplate#Copyright_Issues and cut and paste stuff from that file pretty often. Suggestions welcome. Toddst1 (talk) 23:04, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Pinched and saved ! Thanks Waterden (talk) 00:07, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know!

Hi, as a new user to wikipedia, i have been experimenting, and as you are an administrator who gave me my final warning, I feel the need to make you aware of the fact that some of my other edits may be considered vandalism, so I am informing you now that i was not aware of these restrictions and possible bannings before your warning, so it would be appreciated if you could excuse these, as my recent edits have been constructive and sourced. Thanks, User:Yomammaisamartyr —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yomammaisamartyr (talk • contribs) 18:00, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

IP blocks

Here you blocked an IP for a month. IPs change, so the normal block time is generally only a couple days or so, with the exception of school blocks or IPs with long histories of vandalism. Of course, those are usually tagged as such. Regardless, is there any particular reason you blocked this IP for a month? لennavecia 15:28, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

See the edit history. Toddst1 (talk) 15:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Oops

From Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/WikiProject Ames, I went to this. I meant to go through the contibutions of User:Emir34. Apparently, I clicked on the contribs link of "Toddst1 (Talk | contribs)" by mistake and proceed with my review. My first reaction from your post on my talk page was "Isn't he blocked?" Looking into it, I saw my mistake. Sorry for the confusion and for not discussing the image matters with you first before tagging them for speedy deletion. -- Suntag ☼ 16:58, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

No worries. You're welcome to cruise my contributions any time you want. As you can tell, I don't spend much time dealing with images. I think I've fixed the problems. Toddst1 (talk) 17:09, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Good new is that I had followed up on your November 2007 PUIdisputed of Image:DeSilvaSnr.JPG and January 2008 request for speedy deletion of Image:Ifeanyi Chijindu.jpg. I also added to some of your early image summarys to make them easier to verify from the image summary themselves. I usually don't cruise contributions of active editors. Had I realized that you were an active editor (instead of thinking you were a blocked vandal), I would have posted a friendly talk page note. -- Suntag ☼ 17:15, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

“You have been blocked for a period of much longer”

Hey. I guess this is a TW bug? ;) Regards, —αἰτίας •discussion• 22:15, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

A bit of levity in some mundane vandal fighting. Toddst1 (talk) 22:16, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

NPA

Here you go. I posted a vandalism warning on his page and this is the abuse I get:[53].--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 02:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

The persecuted communists

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Todd, I mentioned the problem with FYRoM propaganda and hostility being directed at Greeks these days and I'd like to provide you a concrete example. While I am immensely familiar with the highly charged political issues... being of Greek descent puts me in a conflict-of-interest. Your superb response to me before gives me confidence your loyalties ultimately lay towards accurate articles and maintaining civility... not Wikipedia politics or stereotypes. So I've come to you for some objective advice and perhaps assistance. Some more back history first...

The innocent children of Nazis that suffered during WW2... I do not consider "victims" to the allies. Their "persecution" was due to the intolerant actions of their parents not the allies forced to defend their very existence in response. I feel exactly the same about the communists that caused so much misery for much of the 20th century. In the 1944-1950 period Greece was swept up in the early stages of the cold war and as a result experienced a civil war (Hundreds of thousands of Greeks were displaced, injured, or died during the conflict). Directly to the north of Greece were three communist satellite nations (Bulgaria, Albania, and Yugoslavia). To further leverage the situation Tito decided to rename Vardar Banovina region of Yugoslavia into the People's Republic of Macedonia (which eventually became FYRoM when Yugoslavia imploded into ethnic conflicts in the 90s).

Some communists (in Greece) were ethnic Greeks. Others were Slavic Greek citizens that had relatives in Yugoslavia/Bulgaria. Many of the Slavaphone ones went on the create the irredentist communist National Liberation Front.. a group that claiming to be "ethnic Macedonians" and wishing to "liberate" themselves. (Note - A few decades prior to that time, there had been some Bulgarian groups like IMRO and a few Bulgarian writers that lived in the region of Macedonia and talked about forming a new "Macedonian" state... but in practice their numbers were extremely small (so small that no Ottoman census ever documented existence of a Macedonian ethnic group - a point constantly obfuscated by FYRoM nationals) This is what US Secretary of State E.Stettinius wrote about alleged "ethnic Macedonians" in 1944...

The Department has noted increasing propaganda rumors and semi-official statements in favor of an autonomous Macedonia, emanating principally from Bulgaria, but also from Yugoslav Partisan and other sources, with the implication that Greek territory would be included in the projected state. This Government (of USA) considers talk of Macedonian “nation”, Macedonian “Fatherland”, or Macedonian “national consciousness” to be unjustified demagoguery representing no ethnic, nor political reality, and sees in its present revival a possible cloak for aggressive intentions against Greece. The approved policy of this Government is to oppose any revival of the Macedonian issue as related to Greece. The Greek section of Macedonia is largely inhabited by Greeks, and the Greek people are almost unanimously opposed to the creation of a Macedonian state. Allegations of serious Greek participation in any such agitation can be assumed to be false. This Government (of USA) would regard as responsible any Government or group of Governments tolerating or encouraging menacing or aggressive acts of “Macedonian forces” against Greece.

U.S. State Department Foreign Relations Vol. VIII, 868.014 / 26 Dec. 1944)

Eventually the communists (both Greek and Slavic) were defeated and expelled to communist nations. Fast forward to 2008... Wikipedia.

There is an article that a FYROM nationalist has pretty much singlehandedly written himself (named Exodus of Ethnic Macedonians... a manipulative Moses-my-people-are-suffering-but-will-one-day-return title no less) His article appears like a single sided FYRoM/communist narrative that tries to portray expelled communist FYRoM citizens that lived in Greece during the from 1945 - 1949 as "the persecuted". I tried to remove his "persecution" comments and each time PMK1 puts them back in] as if the article is his personal blog (some FYRoM nationalist even call it "Genocide" and Greeks "Nazis"). To make matters worse he came to my talk page trolling for a fight

I don't want to get into a revert war but I am I wrong to feel seriously offended here? The perps are now being labeled "the persecuted"? Perhaps I should send flowers and reparations to Nazi children for the crimes committed by the allies during WW2? As my blood is currently boiling... I'd prefer a more level headed response to him then me cursing endlessly. Can you perhaps help with the situation? --Crossthets (talk) 21:13, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response Todd. I have a small request though. We are at an impasse on his "persecution" addition (and its still there). Since I don't want to resort to another revert can you remove all instances of the word "persecution" and "persecuted" for now. This will leave the onus on him to prove on the talk page how expelled irredentist communists that murdered thousands of Greeks were "the persecuted"... not the oppressors. --Crossthets (talk) 21:47, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather let you two work this out. Toddst1 (talk) 21:48, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

While obviously I would have preferred intervention... you didn't give into temptation to become patronizing... and that continues to reaffirm my belief you are an objective level headed sort that's cautious before drawing conclusions on touchy complex ethnic issues.

Perhaps one of these days I can convince you this is a situation where being on the fence will only make the issues linger, deepen the divisions, and ultimately make resolution that much more difficult and painful. Thanks again for spending some time. --Crossthets (talk) 03:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I dont have a problem working with user:Crossthets. Just do not remove sourced material because of your personal beliefs. This an encyclopedia for all people, the sources which i have used have come from all sorts of people, especially non-Macedonians/Greeks. which can often be biased. PMK1 (talk) 03:31, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Todd, if you check the diff history for the disputed article, virtually the entire piece was written by PMK1... which makes his argument that WP is for "all people" while he reverts everyone else's edits back to his own personal article ring pretty hollow. If you look at his user page you'll also find he started a long list of articles related to FYRoM. (and in articles related to Greece... he reference Greece cities primarily by the FYRoM nationalists name for them... using the Greek name secondary if at all)

PMK1 bringing up some obscure reference to you is just obfuscating the issue at hand. His persecution reference means absolutely squat when put into the larger context all the nasty things that happened during the cold war and Greece own participation in it. (e.g. again.. sort of like Canada killing some Nazis during WW2 and then later somebody claiming Canadians were persecuting Germans.) If ethnic cleansing (as opposed to fighting communists and irredentists) was the goal... then why do Slavophone Greek citizens still exist today? Why were ethnic-Greeks also kicked out of Greece into Soviet-bloc nations? Bottom line is they were communists who murdered thousands of Greeks to spread their glorious system at the expense of the freedom of speech we now enjoy on Wikipedia.

I would also note that PMK1 views of "persecution" by Greeks.. implicitly also accuses the US government of participating in ethnic cleansing as well (since the US officially helped Greece to militarily kick out the communist "victims" and denied such a thing as "ethnic Macedonians" existed).

As Ottoman census data clearly shows... there was no such thing as "ethnic Macedonians" a hundred years ago (They primarily called themselves Bulgarians back then). However, you'd never know all this looking at the current articles related to FYRoM nationals on Wikipedia. IMO this is because of the discretionary powers promoted by a certain editor that consistently focuses on making edits against Greek ethnicity. This has allowed FYRoM nationals the opportunity to go nuts with their communist narrative of the region's history.

Homemade Image by FP: Notice the name Solun to describe Thessaloníki (the capital of Macedonia Greece). In addition, the coverage indicated on this homemade map appears wildly exaggerated and "coincidentally" resembles FYRoM irredentist United Macedonia maps (FP also admits the data wasn't collected using scientific distribution models. and one of the sources provided by FP (page 78 of pdf) seems to indicate the primary input for this map supposedly representative of Greece language demographics... was the FYRoM government. These "accidents" keep happening on Wikipedia and elsewhere (the image is of current FYRoM PM laying a wreath where Macedonia Greece is shown to be annexed to FYRoM. Now consider the response when the Absolut vodka only created a single ad depicting chunks of the US as Mexico

I know you don't want to get involved at the is time Todd so I'm not looking for a response. My hope is only to give further substance to my claims (for future reference) and to rebutt PMK1. Unless he has anything else to respond here, I'm going to go to the article talkpage to hammer this out as per your advice. --Crossthets (talk) 19:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello,Toddst1. (I'd want you to know that I'm with Crossthets in all of this). I'd like to ask you to check a "barnstar" (...) on my talk page, and if possible, check the IP. I see you're trusted by Crossthets, so I think I can trust you, too.Thank you!--Michael X the White (talk) 21:31, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

For the record Todd, another example of what seems to me as FP in a conflict of interest (this time directed at someone other than me... just to show you I'm not the only one). Maybe I'm reading the situation wrong. Its a delicate balance between having to enforce the rules against trolls... and realizing one's own POV is still a POV. You know admin rules better than I. However, when the disputed edits/images in question are the admin's own (as opposed to someone else's)... and there is a history... then I don't believe it is absurd to suggest a potential conflict of interest exists and another admin should have been left to do the blocking.

I'm just logging it here for now. I'll leave it to you want to act on it in this instance or whether you want to continue to reserve judgment. I won't be offended either way. I sincerely trust your objectivity based on what I've seem of your diff history. Even though you recently had a spat with a Greek admin... combined with your prior comments to admin FP (which "coincidentally" resulted in me not getting blocked any more and being able to get article edits in)... seems to demonstrate your loyalties are to articles not Wikipedia admin politics. That reporting professionalism is exactly why I trust you.--Crossthets (talk) 17:56, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

btw - Michael because we are both of Greek background and seem to see eye-to-eye on many of the sensitive political issues...I feel it also puts us into our own potential conflict of interest. I'd much prefer if you made your own judgments on the neutrality of Todd1 (or anyone) than rely solely on my POV. (Although on an emotional level I do appreciate the trust in judgment you've show me and thank-you for it). --Crossthets (talk) 17:56, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

This needs to go to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Please do not continue this on my talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 18:18, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wikipedia Dispute resolution question

Just a little clarification Todd. Are you saying I have to do this right now? Or am I free to wait to see if the issues improve? (as I assume FP is reading this and hopefully using it as an opportunity to be more careful in his edits) --Crossthets (talk) 19:17, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Brian Beacock

Hello, just throught I'd notify you that a page you semi-protected has been vandalised again as soon as the protection ended, diff.Mr T (Based) (talk) 13:50, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your welcome!

I finally got a welcome message! Chergles (talk) 20:15, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

It's kind of like finding the state welcome center seventy miles past the state line, isn't it :-) Tan | 39 20:19, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, I saw this as sort of like when you're at a wedding and someone walks up to you and asks you to dance. The right answer is "why, yes, I'd love to". 8-) Toddst1 (talk) 05:40, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

rollback?

My administrator friend, Cailil, whom I have had a long relationship in Wikipedia is away. I asked him for rollback ability. He is on a wikibreak. He knows that I am reliable. Can you grant it to me? I will use it well and sparingly. Thank you. Chergles (talk) 21:22, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

RE: Santino Valenti

You recently deleted a page I had created called "Santino Valenti" under the pretense that it was an attack page. I fail to see how any of its content could be construed as having malicious intent. Although I had only begun, what was there was impartial and objective, and I don't think there was anything in there that represented a value judgment or personal opinion on the subject. -CPT Spaz —Preceding unsigned comment added by CPT Spaz (talk • contribs) 01:47, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

You said the man was a criminal without providing any sources. Blatant violation of WP:BLP as an unsourced negative article about a real person. Toddst1 (talk) 01:52, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

In all fairness, it was taken down shortly after I created it. I have sources that I can list, but I hadn't gotten to the point of adding them. I'm allowed to recreate the article if I include these sources, right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by CPT Spaz (talk • contribs) 01:59, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely. I strongly encourage it. For something like that, I'd develop it here in your sandbox and then copy it in to article space when you have it in shape. Toddst1 (talk) 02:02, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

All right, thanks for the help. CPT Spaz (talk) 02:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

F+A Architects

Hello, Toddst1 ... since F+A Architects (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) has been recreated by the same editor after deletion a few hours ago, maybe you could WP:SALT it? Happy Editing! — 72.75.110.31 (talk · contribs) _{02:30, 26 October 2008 (UTC)}

Richard Adams (inventor)

Hi Todd, I have completely re-written the page and would appreciate it if you would look at it and its discussion page. Thanks, Eggzactly (talk) 22:48, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Natick Collection

The ip addresses have violated WP:MOSTM and WP:Not, specifically making edits that revolve around advertising related data, and have been warned about their behavior with the {{Uw-mos2}} warning template. It is not a three R violation because their repeated disregard of these policies and have been reported as such. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 00:34, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

That's not vandalsim, nor is any other category in Wikipedia:3rr#Exceptions. Toddst1 (talk) 00:37, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

The policies I quoted are the consensus of the Wikipedia community on the creation of articles, addition/subtraction of facts and style guidelines, thus the editor violated consensus - specifically the WP:MOSTM policy as stated. That is a an exception. --Jeremy ( Blah blah...) 00:56, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

AfD !vote snafu

Please don't change my AfD !vote to comment as you did here. Based on the edit summary, it looks like it was an accident, i.e. you intended to remove a duplicate !vote of someone else. For the record, I'm not a sock/meat puppet of Schmidt. VG ☎ 12:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Mea culpa. Very sorry about that. It was indeed an accident. Thanks for your understanding. Toddst1 (talk) 21:08, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Request to block Grn78

You might want to reinstate the editing block on User:Grn78. Immediately after you removed the block he returned to his pattern of WP:TEND and WP:DE at Diamond Way Buddhism and Ole Nydahl. Please review the edit history of these pages for details.--Editor2020 (talk) 13:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Happy Computers

I wish to thank you for your discourse at the Afd, and wish to assure you that I have the greatest respect for your work on Wikipedia. I trust that our disagreement over the of old magazine online archives of technical forums will not color our meeting together at other discussions, since I, just as do you, wish to continually improve Wikipedia. Regards, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:57, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

You bet. You're a solid contributor as well. I appreciate you recognizing my genuine error in changing VG's comment. Another editor might have taken it as a deliberate act of agression. I look forward to working with you. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 21:06, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Heck... looking at the way was set up at that time, and with how the previous contributer's sig was situated, and how my own comment nestled so tightly under his... I do fully understand it was but a simple error that could have happened to anyone. After I changed it back I made a point of doing an indent on my own comment. And in case he might have noticed the switch back and forth, I sent VG to the diff to my correction, and a link to the RSN. As I stated at the AfD, I admire the tenacity to which you stand your ground, and I will not look at that strength as anything but a fervent wish to make Wiki better. Nice crossing paths with you. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:57, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Unblock of TheRetroGuy

Not actually done by me, but due to my input [54]. I totally agree with the block, and have laid out my reasons for an early unblock. Hope you're okay with that. Pedro :  Chat  12:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• I apologize for the oversight, but I should have made this notification myself. I agree with Pedro and took the liberty of carrying out the unblock. Cheers —Travis^talk 13:04, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

• I'm completely fine with that. In fact, rather pleased. I tried to email the guy to say "stop being passive aggressive and just say you won't edit war and we'll un-block you", but email didn't appear to be enabled. Thanks for stepping in. Toddst1 (talk) 15:16, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

All good, encyclopedia not broken and hopefully one editor who will return after his wikibreak to keep on helping. Beers are on me! Pedro :  Chat  16:35, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I'm back and feeling recharged after my Wikibreak. Apologies for the hiatus the other day and no hard feelings about the block. Thanks for the welcome back note, and for protecting my talk page against the ip vandalism. I think the user concerned hasn't forgiven me for helping to uncover their sock activities. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 17:57, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

3RR is an easy one to run afoul of and usually the only one that trips up otherwise dedicated and conscientious editors. I admire your tenacity in defending the wiki. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 18:37, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

68.248.132.27 (talk · contribs)

I see you blocked this IP address before I had a chance to add the following comment:

"Good luck finding a legitimate edit from the edit history of that IP address. The only thing that IP address appears to "share" is an interest in vandalism, all of which needs to be reverted".

Is it appropriate for a malicious editor to use a "shared computer" claim to prevent more extended blocking? I don't really know how all that works, but that IP's edit history is not a pretty picture. Is a two day block sufficient?(ChocoCereal (talk) 17:11, 30 October 2008 (UTC))

To be honest, that looks like a bunch of bored kids at a church school. Repeated vandalism from a shared IP will still result in long blocks. I issued a block of 2 years to an IP earlier this morning. Toddst1 (talk) 17:15, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Well bored kids or not, it seems to waste a lot of good people's time to deal with those edits time after time. Thank you for explaining.(ChocoCereal (talk) 17:47, 30 October 2008 (UTC))

Tarpworld

Hey Toddst1 I guess I should have read the guidelines regarding usernames a little better :). Well I guess the reason I chose my username was because its the name of the company I work for its easy to remember and I see the name everyday. I would glady change if it is going to cause problems I would hate to get deleted especially since i just joined. Look forward to hearing back from you.

Tarpworldwide (talk) 20:05, 31 October 2008 (UTC)Tarpworldwide

Vandalism/3RR

Todd, can you please intervene in that matter and mediate a solution? The other editor is adding a citecheck tag inappropriately -- I confirmed the text and keeps insisting it is wrong. Thanks. Ecoleetage (talk) 20:20, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thank you very much for your help in resolving the matter of Vienna Fingers. Your patience and input was greatly appreciated. Ecoleetage (talk) 20:42, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Good work by good people deserve praise, I think. Thanks for resolving the matter so deftly. Be well and stay in touch. Ecoleetage (talk) 20:58, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

responding to your blocks of my added links to the entry on Anne Thackeray Ritchie.

I added the links to full text versions of Anne Thackeray Ritchie's work which is only available on my site, texts that are reference in the article and are out of print, hard to find. I did the scanning and editing of the text so it could be found online. My links were not intended to promote SurLaLune but to share information about a little known author. SurLaLune is a top Google search result for its more pertinent topics and considered one of the top in the world for its topic. It's primary purpose is educational and is referenced by Online Books Page and other sites for offering rare folklore and fairy tale texts that are out of copyright in the USA.

Either way, it is your choice as editor if this is considered pertinent. I considered a rare, free look at Ritchie's texts, just like a Project Gutenberg offers, to be pertinent to her entry as I have seen this standard throughout Wikipedia. I receive emails all the time from grateful people who were looking for these texts and couldn't find them anywhere else. I was trying to facilitate their searches. No offense intended.

Surlalune (talk) 21:30, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

No offense taken. Check out WP:EL. Toddst1 (talk) 21:36, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Accusation of sock puppetry

I notice that you have placed a sock puppet tag on my user page. I have worked very hard to be a balanced, fair and reasonable editor. Please take a moment to review my extensive editing history and you will see that I am no sock puppet, and I ask you to remove this false accusation.--Editor2020 (talk) 22:35, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

While the edits of you and the SPA were suspiciously identical, both of you have denied it. Not wanting to make a big deal of it, I have removed the tag. Toddst1 (talk) 15:47, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Not "suspiciously identical", just returning the page to the consensus version it had before Grn78 changed it, and changed it, and changed it, and changed it, and changed it, and changed it, and changed it, and changed it, and changed it...and was blocked from changing, and changed it from at least two different IP addresses, then unblocked and changed it, and changed it, and changed it... So I try to assist in defending the article from disruptive edits, ask for your help, since you had blocked him previously, and get accused of Sockpuppetry.--Editor2020 (talk) 16:32, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

76.110.175.48

Hi, Toddst1. I noticed that you told 76.110.175.48 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) that you were going to block him for a week, but you didn't get around to it. I've taken the liberty of extending his block for a week, as you indicated. (He clearly deserves it.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:19, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Heh. Thanks for following up. Toddst1 (talk) 15:46, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

New problems

Just a note to warn you that my friend has returned and has been adding unsourced material to pages. I've been reverting it, requesting reliable references, and may have gone over the three revert limit. I think this is a continuation of the harrassment from earlier in the week, and that it is going to continue for as long as my account remains active. I'm starting to believe I should retire as TheRetroGuy and start again under a different name. I'd really appreciate some advice on this. Cheers. TheRetroGuy (talk) 19:12, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Tell him to fuck off (politely of course). No, but point him out the rules and do it a way that is so nice it will make you want to puke... so nice it`s almost sarcastic (but be serious)... be like a care bear, or like your loving mom that is up late waiting for you to get home (anoyingly yet now that I think about it, sadly, loving)... make it so he'll have to love you otherwise he'll look like a major WP:DICK... and then, if he doesn`t listen,... since I`m not an admin and can`t block... I`ll give him the psychological warfare and question everyone of his edits. If worse comes to worse we could always consider sending him a surge spike to his IP and frying his computer or modem! --CyclePat (talk) 04:41, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I think there could also be a danger I'll start looking like a dick myself. Not what we need. Anyway, following this episode I've decided that if there's any more trouble I'll take it to ANI for them to deal with. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 12:35, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

My Page List Of Survival Horror Games

I thought it was hard to put a list into my own words.--DABANANAMUFFIN (talk) 01:23, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Tag removal?

Hi! I noticed that you added a coi tag to the article on David S. Rose. While it's true that I have intimate knowledge of the subject [grin], I figured that it would be a Good Thing to edit the article to ensure that it included accurate, referenced information. After seeing your tag, however, I've gone back and ruthlessly edited the article for NPV, removed virtually all adjectives, and cited published references for virtually every statement in the article. I'd appreciate it if you could re-check the article, verify that it is indeed both completely NPV and referenced, and then consider removing the coi tag. I'm not sure what else could be done to the article to ensure NPV, but if you see something that I don't, please let me know. Thanks! Detailhound (talk) 01:52, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

{{SharedIPEDU}}

Your input would be appreciated at Template talk:SharedIPEDU#.221_year_or_longer.22 :) Thanks! -- lucasbfr ^talk 09:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

false positive

hi, i'm an anon editor working on removing OR and badly sourced material from the IF pages. as i'm editing anonymously, i get flagged incorrectly by various vandalbots. i've already left a message on pharaoh of the wizards and eekster's talk pages, now i'm doing the same here. please dont revert those edits, thanks! 86.26.52.50 (talk)

If you're interested in more context or in participating in a wider discussion, please join us at Talk:Interactive Fiction. — Thibbs (talk) 20:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Im from Yemen and they are real, just because you have no idea what they are doesnt give you the right to take them off the website. They are real because i am holding one! :l

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which recently passed with 126 in support, 22 in opposition and 6 neutral votes. Thanks for your support in my RFA!! • If you want to reply to this message please use my talk page as watch listing about 150 pages is a bit messy • ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 22:57, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the star - as an RA, I tend to get twitchy about such things. I didn't actually call the police, though - that was Matthewedwards (talk · contribs) (hint hint). :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I should read more carefully. Toddst1 (talk) 17:46, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry i am new at anti-vandal tools Blueking12 (talk) 18:33, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

86.166.95.209

Just looked at that block that you did, I like how you blocked them until after the election. Very nice :) -¤Belinrahs ^talk/_contribs¤

Crunch gym

O.K., no problem. Bearian (talk) 22:02, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

WIlly idiot

Hi, Todd. That "oatmeal box" fool did a hell of a lot of damage which I can't undo with just a rollback key. Lots of page moves. People like that shouldn't be allowed to breed. Thanks. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:43, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Recent block

Hi. You recently blocked 74.138.164.53. They've resumed vandalising articles. See User Talk:74.138.164.53. Perhaps another block is in order?--Jeffro77 (talk) 23:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Editor Assistance Request

Dear Toddst1,

We are attempting to create a Wikipedia Page for Lou Stanasolovich who is founder, CEO and President of Legend Financial Advisors, Inc. in Pittsburgh, PA. Our company Web site is www.legend-financial.com. We are having difficulty once we have created the page, it is being deleted and we are not sure what we are doing wrong. We are putting in descriptive content that uses a neutral point of view and we believe we are complying with Wikipedia's editorial guidelines. We are primarily seeking to post factual biopgraphical information about Mr. Stanasolovich. Mr. Stanasolovich is a highly regarded and an extremely accomplished financial advisory professional who is frequently sought after by the national media and industry conferences to speak about various topics. Our goal is to create a short, factual Wiki about him as his name is often searched upon in search engines due to the media recognition he receives. We have noticed that a friend of ours in the financial advisory profession, Harold Evensky has successfully built a Wiki article and we were attempting to model Lou's after his but it still got deleted. Could you please advise us as to how we can mold the content a certain way in order to create and sustain the article? Also, is there a Wiki customer service contact person we could speak with directly by telephone if we continue to experience problems? We are excited about being part of the Wikipedia community to provide objective information about one of the most prominent figures in the financial advisory profession. Please advise.

Best Regards,

Christopher J. Kail Legend Financial Advisors, Inc. (412) 635-9210 legend@legend-financial.com --LFA061807 (talk) 14:36, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:sock/block message

Hello, Toddst1. You have new messages at Tinucherian's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-- Tinu Cherian - 05:46, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Colonel Warden

After being warned by you and others, I think he's pushing it with this comment. I gave him a notice about it, then I realized that you've warned him more sternly about personal attacks.OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 18:22, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, while not a good edit by any stretch, I don't think it warrants a block. Toddst1 (talk) 23:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't looking for a block, just making sure you saw it. Just my opinion, but sometimes blocks require a history of edits rather than just one (kind of like the straw breaking the camel's back). However, I would qualify that edit as high on the snarkiness scale. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 23:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Query on block

Hello. Just curious to know why you indefinitely blocked X123454321x (talk · contribs · block log). While the editor received a single level-one warning for a questionable edit, their other two edits looked more like un-encyclopedic additions rather than vandalism. Thanks for your time, Kralizec! (talk) 23:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Good call. I actually gave a light 24 hour block - not indef - I must have been thinking "no constructive edits" when I left the block message. Toddst1 (talk) 23:23, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Just wanted to make sure I was not missing something, so I am glad I could be of service. Thanks again, Kralizec! (talk) 23:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

69.10.216.198

Please see talk page. Dark Prime (talk) 00:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Request to review sock report

Todd, I think philscirel (talk · contribs) is back to push his line on Fethullah Gülen. I would appreciate a second pair of eyes to review my sock report. --Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 05:37, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Seems likely. RFCU? Toddst1 (talk) 05:42, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I haven't but I don't see the need; it's obvious enough now. Why would (s)he feel the need to defend philscirel if it's not him/her? --Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 05:53, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

After I noticed all 3 philscriel socks geolocate to Ohio, it was really obvious to me. Toddst1 (talk) 06:06, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, chief. I'll wait for the conclusion of the sock report before returning to work on the article. --Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 06:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Coordinated IP vandalism

Thanks for [55]. I was wondering when an admin would get around to it. . . --Flewis^(talk) 13:05, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem. That's why I have a mop. Toddst1 (talk) 13:07, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

IP

Hi, could you please look at the IPs Special:Contributions/59.164.187.149, Special:Contributions/59.164.105.254, Special:Contributions/59.164.100.127 and Special:Contributions/59.164.186.29. I believe they are the same person. Although I am agree with many of the IPs edits, I am not sure if using several IPs is allowed or not. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 20:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but...

...someone as obsessive as this doesn't deserve it. With all due respect to you, of course. I am just SICK of idiots like this hiding behind a computer and doint heir level best to destroy good work. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Bharatveer

This user has asked admin help in his talk page. Could you please have a look. Thanks. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 15:28, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

SBS

Removal of unref'ed text is not vandalism. And dont remove tags!!!!! (Archangel1 (talk) 11:14, 12 November 2008 (UTC)).

No, you are wrong. I am bored with discussing this issue. I put down my points and have to recite them over and over again and I am saying the same things. The actions carried out are within Wikipedia guidelines. You cannot block my for abiding by them. Fair enough, the blanking of text may be excessive but it prompts people into action. If you guys want to do your own thing, crack on but that why people think Wikipedia is a joke, hence the reason why ref's are so important. The idea is to bring together source knowledge into one pot. But you got to account for where you info comes from before it goes into the mix. (Archangel1 (talk) 16:17, 12 November 2008 (UTC)).

Question

Given that you have worked on the article, do you think that these additional changes [56] and discussion [57] are alright? --Firefly322 (talk) 03:38, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think the quotes are a bit excessive, but that's about it. Templatizing the refs isn't bad. You might consider using these but it's not mandatory. Toddst1 (talk) 17:51, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it should be clear if I want to spend the time doing the CITET templates, then certain editors ought to assume good faith that I am doing it to improve the encyclopedia. Since I am not an inclusionist, and think articles like this are a waste of space, but I can't spend time fighting the inclusionists, I am going to spend the time making the article at least readable! IMHO, et al. Now off to see what the latest edit to Sarah Palin's article is about. I'm sure I'll be amused. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 20:35, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

In response

Thank you so much for alerting me about the page tagging. May I ask what it should have been tagged as so I know for future reference? It seems to have been deleted per G1: Nonsense. Also, thank you so much for blocking that froggy guy. I appreciate it greatly. Have a nice day. SwirlBoy39 16:13, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

If you understand the foreign language, you can tag it with the appropriate tag if warranted. In this case {{db-bio}} seems to have been appropriate. If you don't understand the language, {{Notenglish}} is preferred. It may seem petty, but we have to be careful about these things. Toddst1 (talk) 16:16, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Nope, that's fine. Thank you. I have leared so much since I started here. Thanks! SwirlBoy39 16:21, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

RE: G. K. Butterfield

Just a reminder to be careful of WP:3RR there. Toddst1 (talk) 19:58, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. I'm very careful about 3RR. Ward3001 (talk) 23:42, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

reply

So basically, Dseer said what you wanted to say about Bharatveer, even when he was as large or perhaps even larger of an ideologue than Bharatveer (like Otolemur, Googlean, Tinu, in whose world "Hindu" = POV, much as in BV's and Jobxavier's world "Christian" = POV, and in our world POV=POV). All I am calling you out on is the fact that you used the testimony of an ideologue to back up your assertions, when you could certainly do a better job promoting your arguments through your own interpretation of his edits. Dseer's testimony is suspect at best, and self-damaging at worst. By striking my statement, I am denying arbcom the context of Dseer's statement. So in short, I will look at the statement, and see for myself what I can change to make sure your mistake does not go unseen, but at the same time, ensuring I am not attacking you.Pectore^talk 01:25, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Here you go.Pectore^talk 01:33, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I didn't think I was being attacked. Rather it seemed you read more into my statement than I meant - read: misunderstanding. I have no idea if he or she is a model editor or a complete wack job. I thought that what that person wrote expressed what I observed. Thanks for making the change. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 01:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Binayak Sen

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

just a gentle reminder that you have not replied to any of my queries related to Binayak Sen page. User:Pectore, I see that you are making comments (in many places) trying "hard" to brand me as a "Hindu POV pusher"( just like a few other editors). Please note that though i may have "personal opinions" on certain topics, I have always edited trying to keep within WP guidelines. Your opinion that I view "christian" as POV is without any actual basis.-Bharatveer (talk) 08:13, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry to say it was not self-explanatory. Are you trying to say that there were no violation of WP policies in Binayak Sen (version of SPAs for more than one month).-Bharatveer (talk) 14:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I am not tyring to say "that there were no violation of WP policies in Binayak Sen" at all. If I was trying to say that I would have said that.

I said you appeared to be involved in an edit war and that you should be careful so you would not be blocked - nothing more - nothing less. I said what I meant and I meant what I said. Toddst1 (talk) 20:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

No you said I was "disrupting" WP, which was not the case at all. I was not "edit warring" (please see talk page) where I was seeking consensus. I think you made a serious "misjudgement" on that , which led you to assume my Afd for Hindu Taliban & edits at Chandraayan (removal of political statement) as POV. Please reconsider .-Bharatveer (talk) 04:44, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A sock

You may remember Mizbiplob. He has yet another sock Enigma ^message 06:45, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Knock knock. :) Enigma ^message 07:15, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Chris Burke (actor) protection

Hi,

You semiprotected this page to prevent vandalism, but only set it for one hour. This has obviously expired, and the same user is back again. Can you re-protect? Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 10:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

TCO incivility

Does this count? Padillah (talk) 13:29, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Brian Beacock

Hi, you may or may not remember semi-protecting this article but the cunningly named Skcus_Kcocaeb_Nairb has just vandalised the page. I hazard they went to the trouble of adopting a username to get around the semi-protection.Mr T (Based) (talk) 15:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Firefly again

Please see Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Orangemarlin. It is so ridiculous as to be laughable, and he should be indefinitely blocked. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 18:13, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: Colission

Hey, accidents happen. No harm, and all's ended well!

Alex Tweddle gets snarky

Please remove these pages. They were intended to be used to raise awareness of the humanitarian subjects we cover in our documentaries. The films help charities promote their work and are non profit making. But is it makes you fell better about yourself then please reomove them Well done. (Atweddle (talk) 18:46, 22 November 2008 (UTC))

Autism Speaks

Thanks for the heads-up. I think I'm OK there: in the last 24 hours I did just this revert and this one. I will try to avoid escalating the situation into a revert war. These recent edits by 99.54.136.83 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), based on unreliable blogs that attack Autism Speaks, have scared away User:Soap, unfortunately,[58] which is too bad. Eubulides (talk) 21:29, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Fethullah Gulen

Please can you address Mastercasper (talk · contribs) (self-confirmed to 71.72.81.230 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)? Nobody seems to be handling the sock report. --Adoniscik^{(t, c)} 18:39, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Round Table AfD

A new unregistered SPA has nominated this article for deletion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Oxford_Round_Table_(2nd_nomination)

Is this a valid AfD? If so, is there a process similar to speedy delete to defend an article against a baseless AfD? As usual, the editor claims the article is "defamatory," but points out no specific content that s/he claims is defamatory. Thanks. Academic38 (talk) 06:55, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

St. John's Herb Garden

Thanks for dropping me a note saying that you wish to delete this article. I've added my two cents on the AfD discussion page about why I believe it should be kept. Best wishes, Daderot (talk) 22:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

IBeatYou

Is there any I could find people willing to help me start up this atricle. hda3ku (talk) 16:41, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Dj KO

---

I am trying to add my client's Bio to wikipedia. Once the bio was added I tried to edit so information. By the time I had more reference to add, his page was deleted. If there is any disputes with his name (which is trademarked) I can provide you with legal documents. Can you provide me with the information I need to get is page added. Thanks Kevin djko703@aol.com Djko703 (talk) 01:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

First of all, you appear to have a WP:COI. Secondly, if you want to do something like that, compose the page using preview only until it is fully referenced, or compose it in a subpage such as User:Djko703/Dj KO until it is fully referenced, then you can move it to Dj KO.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 01:47, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Your message to me.

I did not post any spam links. Did you investigate the issue before you came to this conclusion? Jonloovox (talk)

Yes, and I removed your spam link from your user page as well. Toddst1 (talk) 22:16, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Todd, I did not post any spam. Duke4.net contains content relevant to Duke Nukem 3D. It is not spam. I don't know if you're doing this because you know "Some guy" in person or through another channel of communication. But please be fair and give me your reasoning for saying Duke4.net is a spam link. Jonloovox (talk)

He is doing it because you are violating the rules (conflict of interest) and I am not. We are not friends or in any way acquainted. Some guy (talk) 22:22, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually WP:COI is not against the rules (but it is disouraged), but the edits were adding a spamlink. Toddst1 (talk) 22:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Oops. >_< Well, I had already mentioned spam and advertising to him. Some guy (talk) 22:39, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

- Thank you for helping me fight against Jonloovox's vandalism. I would like to note he has threatened me, saying on my user page "I'm reporting you for vandalism. I already know your views and motif behind removing it, but you're wrong. Next time you do this, you'll get a message from my friend who is a Wiki moderator." I am not concerned about this threat, but, as with the user's other edits, I think it is contrary to the nature of Wikipedia. Some guy (talk) 22:22, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

One year comparison Wikipedia:WikiProject Maryland

• At the end of November last year there were 1300 articles in the Md. Project
• At the end of November this year there were 4000 articles in the Md. Project
  

An increase of 2700 articles.

• At the end of November last year there were 7 featured articles in the Md. Project
• At the end of November this year there were 10 featured articles in the Md. Project
  

An increase of 3 articles.

• At the end of November last year there was 1 (one) A-class article in the Md. Project
• At the end of November this year there was 1 (one) A-class article in the Md. Project
  

An increase of 0 articles.

Just put that out there for the project's consideration.
--«Marylandstater» ^«reply» 03:02, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

David and The Giants

I've worked over the page at David and the Giants. Straightened out the content, added citations. Any possibility we could remove the flags? Doctorfun (talk) 01:57, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

A7?

You recently deleted The Scott honey brand per A7 bio, yet I didn't see it as having much context to even identify it as a real person so I nominated it for CSD per A1. Perhaps I mistagged? Master&Expert (Talk) 06:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

It appeared to be an autobiography of a block evading sockpuppet. A1 is fine, A7 also applies. See User:Hon0002. Thanks for the good work on NPP. Toddst1 (talk) 06:30, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. :) I was a bit confused if it was a bio or not, though I was unaware this editor had a prior account. :) Master&Expert (Talk) 06:32, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

• Hey Todd, I recently removed an AIV report on the grounds of an IP making only one edit since September, and not being sufficiently warned. Is it acceptable for non-admins to do this? Master&Expert (Talk) 07:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I can't say that it's inappropriate on face value. However, it's pretty thin ice. In general it's probably best to let the admins and the helperbot remove entries there, unless it's one that you added yourself. Good question. I admire your enthusiasm. Toddst1 (talk) 11:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I suspect this applies also to non-admins removing speedy deletion tags from articles for being inappropriately tagged? Oftentimes when I am patrolling new page, I will find an article that shouldn't even be deleted tagged as vandalism, or a badly-written article on a real (and possibly notable) figure is tagged as A7 - I tend to remove such tags as not complying with the criteria for speedy deletion. Master&Expert (Talk) 03:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

My feeling on that is that's ok, if it's done with a meaningful edit summary and it isn't on an article where you've been a major contributor. A note on the talk page wouldn't hurt either. I used to do it before I was an admin. Toddst1 (talk) 18:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Yup, always make sure I've included an informal edit summary when removing a CSD tag. :) Master&Expert (Talk) 08:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Ben greco

That was weird! :) --RedKiteUK (talk) 12:40, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, every now and again collisions like that happen. It's clear you were trying to do the right thing. Thanks for the good work. Toddst1 (talk) 12:44, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank u very much for the barnstar, it looks good! --RedKiteUK (talk) 13:04, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Curious

Who was the subject of the attack for User talk:Paulmch..(wondering if it involved me)? Cheers,
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 13:29, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

You and Largoplazo (talk · contribs) Toddst1 (talk) 13:58, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Must have done something right then. :) Thank you for taking care of it.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 14:38, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Brian Beacock

As soon as the semi-protection expired, vandalism resumed. Thought you'd like to know.Mr T (Based) (talk) 18:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Lots of thanks to you

Thanks for semi-protecting of malicious disco infobox Template. At last somebody ended that stupid Yanekleklus (& His Socket-Puppets)' edit war. Sincerely, RockandDiscoFanCZ (talk) 16:45, 9 December 2008 (UTC).

Denada. Toddst1 (talk) 16:50, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

89.167.221.3

Hi Toddst1. Would you mind reblocking 89.167.221.3 (talk · contribs · block log) with the so-called British ISP block settings, as it's obviously still filtering traffic for a large proportion of users. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:26, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

You bet. Did I get it right this time? I haven't done one of these since the fiasco broke out. Thanks for pointing this out. Toddst1 (talk) 22:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, looks good. Hopefully won't be too much longer, I don't think this IP is used for anything else. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Joy

 Marlith (Talk)  has given you a kitten! Gifts of kittens promote Wikilove and holiday spirt. Hopefully this one has made your day better. Share the WikiLove and civility with everyone and raise the holiday spirit! Send kittens to others by adding {{subst:Joy Message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

 Marlith (Talk)  02:11, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. Happy holidays to you as well! Toddst1 (talk) 02:21, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

IP block exempt

Is it at all possible that you could grant me an IP block exempt rights i do most of my editing at my high school during my study hall and any other free time I have. And the school's ip address commonly gets blocked so for ip and account log in which blocks me from editing also. Anyway I was just wondering if you could grant me the right. Hda3ku (talk) 18:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard of doing that. Can you point me in the right direction? Toddst1 (talk) 19:00, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

This is a link the the page on it Wikipedia:IP_block_exemption Hda3ku (talk) 19:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

So is it possible that you could grant me that ip block exemtion? Hda3ku (talk) 15:10, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

I've also been contacted about this. Geometry guy 19:48, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

User 69.180.145.190

While you have listed them as being blocked [59] and warned them [60] they do not appear to be blocked. About seven hours later they made these two edits [61] (where they reintroduced false info for the 3rd time) and [62] (where they reintroduced false info for the 9th time), ignoring your warning and all the other warnings. Edward321 (talk) 00:23, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Todd made the expiry 22Jan2008.... instead of 2009. I'll fix. Tan | 39 00:25, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Duh. Toddst1 (talk) 00:26, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Diffusingengineer

The user only made a bunch of redirects that are basically useless and without reason, I do not know if the process of speedy deletion requires a report on some admin notified page, thus I have reported those two users there. I am not asking for a block on them, just notifying admins about the situation that requires attention. BTW, there are more redirect pages created by that account that needs attention. MythSearcher^talk 16:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV is only for obvious vandals in need of blocking. WP:ANI might h ave been appropriate if you had already tried to talk to the user, which you didn't. Toddst1 (talk) 16:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, talking to someone who only contribute every 3 months seems to be rather useless. I will report to ANI next time. I am having rather bad experiences in wiki these few weeks, pardon for my lack of good faith if any. An obvious cases which wasted quite a lot of my time seems like totally unimportant to admins and I have to continue to waste my time. MythSearcher^talk 17:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I think you need to review the principles that we operate under here and decide if/how you want to participate. I suspect you could be exceptionally valuable here if you learned a little more about how we work. I hope you do. Toddst1 (talk) 17:07, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I might just be having a bad time these few weeks on wiki, I might just go and take a break for a few weeks and see if the problems that I was fixing will have someone else attending to them, if not, then I guess I might just give up. Thank you for your patience anyway. MythSearcher^talk 17:13, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Woot511

You might be interested in User talk:76.68.82.114 :) -- lucasbfr ^{ho ho ho} 16:48, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

How do you spell "obvious"? Thanks. Toddst1 (talk) 16:53, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I reported both Woot511 and the following user: User:Someone5489, for "someone" vandalized the following page: [63]. Kalajan 17:07, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

EHDI5YS

I declined EHDI5YS (talk · contribs · count) unblock request, though I did mention that it might be reasonable to petition for a non-indefinite duration. Just an FYI in case you want to comment on future unblock requests. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:31, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Could you comment on his second request?  Sandstein  21:53, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I really don’t know EHDI5YS other then working with him on projects for, Wikipedia:WikiProject Orders, Decorations, and Medals of Authorized foreign decorations of the United States military, but after reading his statement. I can understand why he is blocked. On the same hand 67.163.17.113 was also in the wrong for calling anyone retarded. Also on the conflict between EHDI5YS and 207.246.181.26 both used poor chose of words. But 207.246.181.26 did also threatened EHDI5YS with bodily harm with the statement of: Also I would talk however I want to anyones face, and I honestly wish I was talking to you face to face. All three at one point were in wrong. Also he did write a statement of intent about future interaction with other editors, when he said that he should have remembered and upheld the policies and guidelines. I support him on the shorter block from wikipedia. (talk) 13:54, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

EHDI5YS deserves to be banned indefinitely from wikipedia. his actions, among the three users were the worst. 67.163.17.113 was warned for making that statement, 207.246.181.26 saying he wants to talk face to face isn't really a threat at all, and EHDI5YS's comments were by far the worst. EHDI5YS was the only one that made an actual threat (to 67.163.17.113), i support the indefinite block of EHDI5YS from wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.43.37 (talk) 17:27, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

block

Thank you for granting my request to unblock, but I must reiterate that even though you happen to think it wasn't negative BLP, myself and another editor had both reverted the edits because we both believed it was BLP, and when I checked the talk page of the article I saw that a similar edit was tried in 2006, but the edits were reverted because they, too, felt it was NBLP. Now even if all of us are wrong, and you are correct, all you had to do was leave me a note that you felt I was violating 3RR and I would've stopped. Being so quick to slap a block on an established editor with a perfectly clean record is precisely the kind of thing that turns people off to helping out on WikiPedia. shirulashem (talk) 22:32, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Best wishes for the holiday season

Ecoleetage (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for the message on my talk page. Happy Christmas! Nomoskedasticity (talk) 06:56, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

jwh3 block

Any particular reason you just extended his block? If it's solely because he posted as on IP on my talk page expressing an intent to retire, I'd encourage you to rescind it: He's never coming back anyways, so it's not serving any purpose to give him more incentive to leave. Thanks, Jclemens (talk) 16:18, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

You're on the incidents board

See Wikipedia:ANI#Complain about Admin Toddst1. Thought you would want to know. J Milburn (talk) 12:25, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

96.229.192.150 (talk · contribs)

Thank you for your assistance. It's been tough keeping track of all the user's changes, but I think I've cleared up all the issues. The edits may well be true, but no proof has been provided, and due to their controversial nature they had to be undone. I'm not sure what else to do to try and bring the user into the project fold. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 19:39, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Toddst1 (talk) 19:40, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

User:76.30.202.149

Hey Toddst1. :) User:76.30.202.149, whom you blocked, is requesting unblock. He points out that he wasn't aware of the 3RR and that 55 hours are far too long. Perhaps you could comment on the talk page. Best wishes, — Aitias // discussion 22:17, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Just finished leaving the editor a note as you wrote this. Toddst1 (talk) 22:18, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

86.57.204.225

Hi, Todd, you recently blocked this anon for 3RR. You may also want to have a look at [64] - this is an ongoing thing, and the IP socking never ends with this guy... --Kaini (talk) 01:53, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: RMHED

Replied. — Aitias // discussion 04:52, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi and thanks for the welcome! Not sure how I'll best use my account yet, but the whole thing has certainly led me to spending hours on reading several WP guidelines and discussions! Looking forward to making my own small contribution to the project. Happy New Year! :) Antiouk (talk) 14:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

e-mail

I have sent you one. — Aitias // discussion 07:57, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Committed identity

Hi there. I've setup the committed identity feature on my account, but have forgotten what the string actually was.

I've created a new string, but the identity page is sysop edit only (User:Chrisch/hash). As you can see, I still have control of my account, and was just wondering if you can update the string on that page for me, to:

130d3cd14e0d9026cfe1c5a0331f7581473b8d67a743f1871894cafddddcab846a5cb0eaee821dc27d4f392ccced58aad456d901add9a2050ab7020330ff3da5

(SHA-512).

If you need to email me etc for further verification, feel free to :)

Chrisch^Talk 09:29, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Are you aware of any admins who are familiar with this feature, who would be able to make the change being informed on the feature? :)

Chrisch^Talk 09:41, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Charles H. Black

I think your point is fair. I've moved findagrave.com to an external link. Xn4 (talk) 09:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Andrew Princz

Hello, I noticed you were working on this page, and with the editor. Is he following the steps correctly for copyright permission? It seems as if he should be applying a tag to the talk page of the article. I never worked with that situation before, so I'm not sure. Thanks. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 16:44, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

It looks like he or she might be trying, but not succeeding in following the instructions. I had initially blocked the editor, then upon further investigation unblocked per Wp:AGF. Either way removing problem templates such as this is unacceptable. Toddst1 (talk) 17:10, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the follow-up. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 17:12, 31 December 2008 (UTC)