User talk:ItsZippy/Archive 3
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:ItsZippy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 10 |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 21:24, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
Methody, not Methodist College Belfast
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
A beer for you
|
Thankyou for participating in my request for adminship. Now I've got lots of extra buttons to try and avoid pressing by mistake... Redrose64 (talk) 16:03, 14 October 2011 (UTC) |
Re: barnstar
Thank you! – Zntrip 21:48, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Zippy - Really?
Content copied from User talk:Tide rolls where messages to me sometimes accidentally end up.
Im not sure if you noticed the post in which was referenced, but this user did not see the site in which was was citing an upcoming album from a famous singer. I was posting to THE USER with LINK IN HAND directly from the artist to clarify FOR THE USER. Please do not warn me when you're not reading what this is about. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nydaelia (talk • contribs)
- You are right - that was a mistake on my behalf. I'm sorry, I shouldn't have given you that warning, thanks for pointing it out to me. I'll remove the warning from your talk page now. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 22:12, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Your RfA
Hi Zippy. Entirely my own opinion, and I wouldn't want to rush you into a decision, but I fear that this RfA is not going to be successful and you may wish to consider withdrawing. Certainly give it another couple of days if you would like more feedback from !voters, but you can rest assured that I and a couple of others here would lend you all the support you need to prepare for a future attempt when you meet most peoples' criteria. FWIW, I wrote this esay. Best, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:09, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
- I would second that. I think the basic opinion of the opposers is 'too soon', and I'm afraid that's my view too. Get more experience in different areas relevant to admins. You can't speedy delete articles, but you can tag - and follow the procedure and see if the final decision is the one you'd have made. Follow up on other people's tags, especially if you don't agree or are unsure. (And if you find someone using A7 on a movie or a type of cheese, untag it and explain A7 to them...) Take part in AfD. Away from deletion, look at the requests for unblocking. Look at what they were blocked for, and follow to the result. Read the admin noticeboards. Ask questions if you don't understand, or if you tag something and the admin (or other) that declines doesn't say why. If you prefer gnomish work, shadow and help there. Get the edit count up - shadowing won't help there, but asking good questions will. Good luck for next time. Peridon (talk) 14:17, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Kudpung & Peridon, thanks for your feedback. I said in my application that if the community thought I need more experience, then I will accept that - it seems that most of the opposes are because of that. I think I'll give it a day or so, just to see what happens; if it still seems that the community want me to have more experience, then I'll withdraw the application. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 14:40, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
- I'd like to chime in as well if you don't mind. I meant what I said about you showing a very good understanding of this place from only three months experience. Back in the early days you probably would have been considered a shoe-in, but in 2011 standards have risen and it would be an extremely rare candidate indeed who would succeed at such an early point in their wiki-career. A lot of admins, including myself, failed in their first attempt. It's what we learn from that experience that influences your chances next time around, and the fact that you withdrew actually reflects positively on you and increases your chance of success next time around asi t demonstrates the ability to put aside pride and ego in favor of respecting consensus, a vital quality in a good administrator.
- FYI, regarding my question about low-participation AFD discussion, WP:SILENCE would apply, and we had a discussion and poll on these issues about a year ago that may give you a better idea of what the community expects of an admin in that particular circumstance. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:47, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback - much appreciated. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 16:03, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Deletion review for Gillian Andrassy Lavery
Gh87 has asked for a deletion review of Gillian Andrassy Lavery. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Gh87 (talk) 17:24, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. I've commented on the review - essentially, I think I probably got that wrong. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 18:23, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Review
My opinions: Q4 - I block without advance warning very frequently - spamublock. Spam only and username that represents organisation. Q5 - No restriction to one relist. I can remember two, if not three, relists. If nothing happens then, go and edit something else. Someone will sort it. (Not policy, just playing safe. You are never the only admin. If you can't make your mind up, leave it. Whatever you decide could be wrong. But look at what did happen later.) Q6/Q7 - OK. The main problem with A7s is that people will use them wrongly. A7 is people, groups of people and web content. A Church but not a church. That is, The Church of the Last Wikipedian, but not St Wayne's, a church built in 1978 in Squinge Road, Blackberry Gulch. Wecansortit.wiz, but not the SortIt antivirus program. Dombey and Son Mowers Ltd, but not the Dombey Acme Hedge Mower. Q8/Q9 - good. But you will get into SPIs. Good idea to monitor them now - see what goes on. Q10 - looks like you were being led to discuss WP:3RR. Multiple - over what time period? Your answer about discussing was good, though. Hope you don't mind me doing this quick analysis - there'll probably be a flood of people telling you I'm talking BS. They could be right. Check and see... Peridon (talk) 20:52, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for your feedback Peridon, I appreciate it. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:00, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
2011 Libyan civil war talk page
I've been removing the same comments for the better part of 2 hours now. He has switched IPs once already.... any idea how to get him to stop? Jeancey (talk) 17:39, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, Jeancy. I would suggest that you first post a message on the user's talk page, suggesting that he stop. It seems that no-one has yet notified him that the comments he is posting are unhelpful. If he continues, I would suggest taking it to ANI. If you need any help, just leave me a message here. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 18:42, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Reverting Edits
Thanks so much for reverting Runnigrun123's edits on my user page - I appreciate it. Thanks for keeping an eye out for vandalism! File:SoleteRayosÑajo.gif Pinkstrawberry02™ talk 01:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Please always notify me if you respond to my messages on your talk page by giving me the {{talkback}}. Thanks.
- No problem - glad I could help. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 18:21, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
A cookie for you!
|
For dealing with 31.193.8.154 Andrew Kurish (talk) 19:40, 23 October 2011 (UTC) |
- Ahh, thanks. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 19:41, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Hah
Alright... now that was just plain funny. :) Srobak (talk) 20:12, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Third Opinion Award
|
The Third Opinion Award | |
| For a near-perfect response at Ethics, schmethics. — TransporterMan (TALK) 14:33, 24 October 2011 (UTC) |
Thanks, I appreciate it. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 14:38, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Tech note re DRN closes
When you close a DRN discussion, the {{DRN archive top}} tag goes at the very beginning of the section on that dispute, just in front of the comments which read:
<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 04:57, 23 November 2011 (UTC) --><!-- PLEASE REMOVE THE PREVIOUS COMMENT WHEN CLOSING THIS THREAD. (Otherwise the thread won't be archived until the date shown.) -->
(the date in that comment will vary, of course) and those comments must be deleted so the closed discussion will be promptly archived instead of waiting 30 days (which is intended as a roll-off for stale discussions, not for closed discussions). No criticism intended, just a FYI. Best regards and thanks for your work at DRN, TransporterMan (TALK) 15:18, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for that note - I'll try to remember that. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 15:21, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
That was a classic move
oops.! Thanks for catching that. The Interior (Talk) 02:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
New Page Patrol survey
 New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello ItsZippy/Archive 3! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
Please click HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey |
Some stroopwafels for you!
|
Thanks for the third opinion provided at Talk:Moxon Huddersfield. Racconish Tk 19:58, 26 October 2011 (UTC) |
- Thanks - glad I could be of help. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:13, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
- You were. But the problems persist. I just commented on the article's talk page I would ask your opinion on recent changes. Would you mind giving it another look? Thanks, Racconish Tk 06:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- No problem - I've had a look and posting my opinion again. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 18:47, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks to you, consensus has been reached on some issues. As the discussion is inconclusive on a last point, the reliability of The Economist, I raised it at WP:RSN. Cheers, Racconish Tk 06:28, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
- That's great to hear - I'm glad the issue managed to get resolved. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 18:28, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
- Well, not exactly, as I just explained
.Racconish Tk 18:32, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
- Well, not exactly, as I just explained
- Ah yes, I see. Well, I hope the issue can reach a conclusion soon. If you need any further help from me, just let me know. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 18:36, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Depleted Uranium & Kh23
I don't want to get into an edit war but I don't know how to respond. The editor keeps adding in the fringe and original research information. He removed your warning from his talk page. Help? PRONIZ (talk) 18:34, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi PRONIZ, thanks for bringing this to my attention again. I'll have a look at the article and the discussion and provide my opinion. It seems that Kh23 is beginning to edit disruptively and it may be that we have to take further steps. As I said, I'll look over the recent edits & discussion and give my opinion first. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 18:42, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. Your efforts are appreciated. PRONIZ (talk) 19:13, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I really don't think that an AfD like this with many keep, delete, or merge votes should be closed by a non-admin (and, in fact, if you care to read the appropriate guidelines is strongly discouraged). I strongly suggest that you undo your closure and leave it for an admin to do this. Thanks. --Crusio (talk) 20:28, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- That was quick, thanks! --Crusio (talk) 21:06, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- See below. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:07, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Occupy Buffalo non-admin closure
Hi Zippy,
I just noticed your non-admin closure of the AfD for Occupy Buffalo. NAC says discussions "eligible" for closure should have a "clear keep outcomes after a full listing period" — true, the listing period has ended, but the consensus wasn't clear - 75% of the votes might've been keeps, but there's still those 25% of us who voted "delete". I'd suggest un-closing it and leaving an admin to it. Cheers! HurricaneFan25 20:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the concern of the above two editors. I think the concerns expressed are right, so I've reverted the closure to allow an admin to close the discussion. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 21:06, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! And if in doubt, don't do it! :) HurricaneFan25 21:14, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Good work :)
Good work with your efforts at DRN. Would you be interested in joining our email chat about ways to improve the dispute resolution processes? If so, shoot me an email, I'm at cro0016
gmail.com. Keep up the good work, it's really appreciated. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 09:23, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message. I would be very interested in joining you, yes. I'll send an e-mail now. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 10:37, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
Thank you
Thanks for the assist at Ratnam concept school. I'm going to leave off reporting to ANI unless the disruptive editing starts up again; lord knows the admins have enough on their plates at present. Good suggestion, though, and if it kicks off again I'll be there like a shot. Cheers, Yunshui 雲水 09:43, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
Yunshui has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can 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.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
Meh, looks like admin intervention might be needed after all:[1] Yunshui 雲水 10:30, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the cookie; I'm glad I could help. I think you were right to leave off WP:ANI initially and right to have taken it there since the last edit. If you give me a link to the report you make, I'll comment and give my opinion too. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 10:35, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
- "Don't template the regulars", so instead of {{subst:ANI-notice}}, here's a polite message to tell you that the ANI discussion has been started. Your input would be most welcome. Cheers, Yunshui 雲水 10:44, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll take a look. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 10:46, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
Membership of the Counter-Vandalism Unit
As you may know, the Counter-Vandalism unit is inactive. So for reviving the WikiProject, we will need to sort out the members. So if you are active, please put your username at the bottom of the list at Wikipedia talk:Counter-Vandalism Unit#Sort out the members.
You are receiving this message as a current member of the CVU.
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Counter-Vandalism Unit at 00:28, 30 October 2011 (UTC).