User talk:Toddst1/Archive 1

This page, Toddst1/Archive 1 contains archived talk page discussions for Toddst1 (talk).

Please do not edit this page.

Archives
2017 2016 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 before 2008

• Current time: March 7, 2021, 11:24 (UTC)

This editor was formerly known as Toddstreat1.

Welcome Toddst1!

Native American tribes in film

Native American tribes are very rarely featured in U.S. films, despite the fact that they have lived in North America for more than 11 thousand years. Thus, when documentaries or Hollywood films focus on a tribe, we generally include this in the individual tribe's article. Badagnani 20:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

St Barnabas Church

Hi, Thanks for allowing me to add pics to your excellent articles. I have enjoyed your contributions and appreciate the fact that I can add to them in a small way. It would be my pleasure to take some photos of St Barnabas Church. Right now I am traveling but will be back in Washington in a few days and so will head out there sometime in the next week. Best regards, John Quarterczar 16:29, 29 September 2007

Hi, I've added pics to the three articles you told me about. For St. Barnabas, I added a gallery becuase I had three pics I thought were interesting. Its alright with me if you want to move them or reposition them. I'm only glad I could help out. BTW Maybe you could help me with an article for Oden Bowie. I've tried four times to put together a memorial page to him at findagrave.com but the powers that be on that site kep telling me it isn't good enough (i.e. not long enough, not detailed enough, etc.) -- John Quarterczar 11:16, 2 October 2007

{{unreferenced}}

{{Unreferenced}} should be used only on articles that have no sources (references or external links). The {{Refimprove}} template is appropriate for articles with some sources but not enough. {{Unreferencedsect}} , {{Primarysources}}, or {{Citations}} may also work well for your purposes. Thanks--BirgitteSB 15:06, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Frankly, if you know enough to see that something is unreferenced, it would be nice if you provided some of the references yourself.Tedickey 23:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. I have spent enough time referencing articles to know which topics I can find a references on and which ones I cannot. I imagine everyone has similar issues, unless they happen to be sitting in a university library. At least this editor leaves messages for the creators [1]. That is better than most. If anyone means to add references, they should jump into the backlog at Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles rather than search through new pages. But if someone means to do some New Page Patrolling, they should feel good about adding the appropriate tags. You have to focus on the task you mean to do. I discovered an editor with a history of copyright violations in my referencing task, but I did not give up on my referencing and go through the editor's contribs with a fine tooth comb. Instead I left him a note asking him to clean up his mistakes from his early days and continued on. Hopefully when I check back in on him he will have done so. One person can't fix everything they come across.--BirgitteSB 00:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Oden Bowie

That's right, I was referring to governor Oden Bowie. :) Here is a link to the page I created:

http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GSln=bowie&GSfn=oden&GSbyrel=all&GSdyrel=all&GSob=n&GRid=20993283&

I hope it is OK to be talking about this page on wikipedia. Let me know if not. Thanks!

Thanks

Thanks for the help, I'm new to this and that is a great feature to use. Hopefully I can create some good pages and edits. Thecinderellastory 15:55, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Michigan revert

Hello! I noticed this revert which you made to Michigan. While it was a good revert (the same information appears in the article lead, and adding trivia is generally bad), it was not nonsense. Michiganders actually do use their hands for to indicate locations in both peninsulas. Just thought I'd let you know! :) -- dcclark (talk) 00:32, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Blocking

I've reverted this edit - since the user in question is not blocked (although if he continues uploading inappropriate pages, I agree he will be), and you have no power to block him, please don't issue misleading warnings. — iridescent (talk to me!) 23:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - Wasn't clear about that - I checked the template doc page and it didn't say you had to be an administrator, although I thought I read that somewhere. Toddst1 23:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Gerbschmidt

Why do you think the article is a hoax? The article itself mentions that he may not be real so where is the hoax in it?--E tac 23:42, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Someone pretending to be a person (but maybe not) sounds like a hoax to me. I guess it's in the context. From Yahoo reference:

hoax   
1 An act intended to deceive or trick. 
2 Something that has been established or accepted by fraudulent means. 

Call it what you want. It doesn't seem encyclopedic to me. I have no skin in the game. 8-) I've updated the AFD page as well Toddst1 00:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it's an article about a potential hoax, with local notability, which apparently is ok for WP. Toddst1 01:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl Gerbschmidt

Hi Todd. Saw your AfD nomination here. A hoax would be an article that is not based in reality; The article asserts that its subject may be fictional (and based on what I see on Google, probably is). Therefore, it's a little like a double-negative. Want to see some good old fashioned hoaxery? Anyway... Google/Yahoo are always good friends in sniffing out hoaxes. Happy editing. Into The Fray ^T/C 23:46, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

OK OK, nobody likes the word hoax. See above. 8-) Toddst1 00:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Smile

Nice work with the CSDs! -Domthedude001 02:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks 8-)Toddst1 16:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

George Lehmann

I rewrote the article, with seven refs. Does this pass muster now? Zagalejo^^^ 04:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

The Sound Lounge

A nationally syndicated radio show in a country of 31 million people is notable by definition. Bearcat 07:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Maybe as an administrator, you could provide sources or references that appear in reliable, third-party publications. Alone, primary sources and sources affiliated with the subject of this article are insufficient for an accurate encyclopedia article. Right now, it's just your OR, written into wikipedia. Toddst1 07:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

NOR refers to the promulgation of theories that aren't suitably referenced; it does not apply to a simple summation of neutral facts about a topic, such as what radio stations a show airs on. Bearcat 08:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

L.A.S.A.

I've removed your {{db-repost}} tag from this article. G4 covers material that has been deleted as a result of consensus at XfD and specifically does not cover reposted speedy-deleted material. — iridescent 17:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for pointing that out. What's the best way to handle a recreation of a speedily deleted article? This one was NN. Toddst1 17:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

If it's the same article, it will generally be deletable for the same reason as before (you can see the previous reason in the deletion log), so in this case it would potentially be {{db-group}}. In my experience, it's generally good practice to give it a while before you tag it, as quite often reposting means someone's continuing to work on it — iridescent 17:40, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Grand Lodge of New York copy vio

I think you are correct that the text was originally just copied from the Grand Lodge's website, ... but it has been substantially edited since it was first posted... I can do more re-writing if needed, to make it even more different (and thus no longer a copy vio.) Please remove the tag. Blueboar 17:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know that I'm allowed to do that. The template says:

Do not edit this page until an administrator has resolved this issue.

• To write a new article without infringing material, follow this link to a temporary subpage

I think you're supposed to provide the rewrite that way. If I'm wrong, please point me to the page that says I can remove a {{copyvio}} template if I was the one who added it.

Toddst1 17:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the tag - I see no resemblance between the two other than them being on the same subject. (Incidentally, be aware that under certain circumstances even a word-for-word reposting doesn't qualify as a copyvio.) — iridescent 17:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm confused. I see two paragraphs that are verbatim. Are we looking at the same page? Toddst1 17:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I see the first five sentences as virtually identical; however, since these are "it was founded in... by..." pure factual information, I can't see any way they could be substantially rewritten. The remainder of the section in question doesn't seem to bear any resemblance at all to the alleged copyvio. — iridescent 17:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I think we're on the same page now (pun intended). Thanks. Toddst1 17:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

In any case, I will continue to work on the page to make it even less of a copy. Thanks for being patient. Blueboar 18:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Todd McEwen

Why deleted?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mousehead (talk • contribs) 22:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:BLP with unsourced facts about his personal life and poorly sourced overall. Glad to help you work it up if you want. It looks like you got Lucy Ellmann into shape. Its probably worth starting with Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:Citation_templates. Another good idea would be to develop your articles in a user subpage of your own and when it's in good shape, copy it in to the main space. Toddst1 22:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Poorly sourced isn't a reason for tagging something for speedy deletion, unless it's negative in tone, which this certainly isn't. You should use AfD or PROD if you think an article is too poorly sourced or fails WP:BIO. WP:CSD#A7 is for articles which don't offer any hint of notability whatsoever, like "John Doe is a student at Smalltown High School. He likes The Simpsons, and would like to be an astronaut one day". Please don't use it for published authors who write for notable magazines - the article as it stood clearly asserted notability. Best, Iain99^{Balderdash and piffle} 23:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

RE: Not English Content on the Phitsanulok page

Please bear with me. I'm trying to put all of the data up for the Thai tambons and then batch translate them to English. There are several hundred of these tambon sites I'm doing at once. It's much easier to do it like that than to translate one by one. An example of one that's already in English because I did it that way (before I realized the project would take for ever if done one-by-one) is Nakhon Pa Mak. They will be in English, and they will have much more content. An example of one of my near-complete geo-cites is Phitsanulok Province. I'm trying to get the whole province up as quickly as possible. If there's a better way to mass-start several hundred sites on a template for a wiki-project, my ears are open. Thanks.Kevin Borland, Esq. 18:41, 19 October 2007 (UTC) By the way, in case you wanted to know the names of the villages in that tambon, I went ahead and transcribed that particular page for you. (I didn't do full translation yet, or add detailed content; I'll put in etymologies and stuff like that later).Kevin Borland, Esq. 18:52, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Franksbnetwork (this talk relocated from elsewhere in the page by Toddst1)

sorry im a newbie Thanks for the help --Franksbnetwork 13:30, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Thankyou also for helping me, im also new and it was good to know what you can and can't do.
--Franksbnetwork 13:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the quick reconsideration on Daphne, appreciated.--Alf ^melmac 14:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Your NPWatcher application

Dear Toddst1,

Thank you for applying for NPWatcher! You've been approved to use it. Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if there is a newer release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Report any bugs or feature suggestion here. If you need help, feel free to contact me or join NPWatcher.

SQL^{(Query Me!)} 07:43, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I've been checking it out. It's slower than Twinkle, but in some ways much nicer. Still evaluating. Cheers! Toddst1 00:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help!

Hi Toddst1,

Thanks a lot for the helping hand in keeping that Acmar Group nonsense in check. I may have Twinkle as my sidearm, but nothing beats some good ol' fashioned backup =)

Just wish I'd thought to report them for username violation before it escalated.... --jonny-mt(t)(c) 14:27, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Tell me how it should be improved

Hi! I recently created a page for Paul Adam (English novelist), I did it by researching the info that's available on the Internet, as well as reading several book covers that include a mini-bio. I'm not sure how this info should be worded.

Can you tell me how to improve it, so that the signs you placed at the top of the page can be removed?

Thanks.

Margamanterola 16:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Nice job. I replied on User talk:Margamanterola. Thanks! Toddst1 16:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Joie Davidow

Hey! I removed your PROD of Joie Davidow because I believe I was able to address your concerns. So I just want to make sure you agree that the concerns have been addressed. Cheers! --Mark (Mschel) 19:31, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Nice work!! Toddst1 19:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

The Talented Tenth, Inc.

I am the administrator for http://www.shsu.edu/~org_tt. I am trying to add the page to wikipedia but am running into errors. what do i do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Datboyjeff (talk • contribs) 00:31, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Check out 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 an ORTS ticket and can post the material verbatim. Thanks for asking!! Toddst1 00:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?

I am confused as to why this was vandalism I was in the process of writing a page and only the first paragraph was posted as I meant to preview what I had so father but published it by accident long before the article was finished. It was then put up for speedy deletion so i contested the by inserting ((hang on)). I went to write my explanation and when I came back my ((hangon)) messege was gone so i reposted it and you accused my of vandalism, which I don't understand as I am the author of the page and was only trying to contest its deletion.

Thanks, Please Respond. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nheeter (talk • contribs) 01:44, 25 October 2007
The preceeding question was moved here by User:Toddst1 because it was left on my User Page.

Creating an article with nothing but {{hangon}} is clearly vandalism, and bait for speedy deletion. Addding a {{hangon}} template to an empty article tagged with a speedy deletion template is also vandalism.

BTW, please don't create user pages for other folks like you did to mine - that's what talk pages are for. Toddst1 04:14, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Article Deleted: eClerx

Hi Todd, I am the author of the eClerx article. By the time I could put up the hangon tag, the page was (very speedily indeed :) deleted. I am trying to inititate dialog with the two users who put the page up for deletion. Meanwhile, I will try to create the page all over again. Please read http:/wiki/Talk:Eclerx and let me know if there are still any reasons why I should not put this article on Wikipedia. Nshuks7 08:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey there. If I remember correctly, I don't think there was anything in the article other than "eClerx is a company that... " without citing any WP:Reliable Sources. Unless you assert that there is something WP:Notable, vandal patrollers like me will probably tag articles describing a company for deletion. There are a lot of WP:Spam articles that get created every day.

If the issue is not having time to complete the article, here's what I suggest to everyone who is working on a new article: Create new articles in a personal subpage rather than the mainspace. This way you can save, preview, edit and pretty much do whatever you want to get the article in shape. Then when it's ready, open the article in the mainspace and copy/paste it in from your personal subpage. See Wikipedia:User_page#How_do_I_create_a_user_subpage.3F. Then, if anything happens, like your article gets deleted, you'll have a copy in your subpage to start improving it from.

I spent a fair amount of time doing vandal patrol yesterday and tagged over a hundred articles so I apologize if I didn't remember all the details. Hope this helps. Toddst1 11:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Todd. I have inserted some sources now and tried to keep it as factual as possible. I would appreciate it if instead of deleting it, you could help me bring the article to an acceptable form. I will continue developing content, citing sources and so on. Cheers.Nshuks7 12:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Good start. Unfortunately, the one reference isn't considered reliable as eClerx was the source for the finextra article. If you're actively editing the article and adding sources, consider placing the {{inuse}} tag in the article until you get some secondary sources in there. Happy editing Toddst1 12:33, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestions once again. I have added two references and corrected some language. Let me know if there are further changes required before the article can be UNmarked for deletion. It's kind of uncomfortable having a judgement like that hanging mid-air while you edit :-) Nshuks7 12:35, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Removing Needs Citation Tag

Toddstrea1, I have cleaned and added all the references to my Group_development article. I also removed the tags you had put on it. Is that ok? Can you take a look? Thanks! Jsarmi 22:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC) P.S. Btw, how can I request somebody to review the content and give feedback or does that just happen organically as people get interested in the content?

That looks much improved! Nice job. Regarding the second question, that pretty much just happens. The article will evolve on its own from here. Good luck and happy editing! Toddst1 23:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Your user page

Can I suggest that if you're not going to have a user page, you set it up to redirect to your talk page (just create a page with #REDIRECT [[User talk:Toddst1]] as the only text). At the moment, we've had to delete it five times so far due to people mistakenly leaving messages on it. — iridescent 23:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Good point. Several of them weren't accidental, rather I blanked it and db'ed it after vandalization. Thanks. Toddst1 00:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Mickey Mouse

Oda Mari told me he made a mistake by calling my edits vandalism Kevin j 19:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC).

agreed and reverted Toddst1 19:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Why the tag?

Why, dear Todd, did you tag my recently created article on Sensory Sweep for speedy deletion?Umzingeli 19:54, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

See Talk:Sensory Sweep Studios. I've changed the {{db-corp}}/{{hangon}} to {{Notability}}{{singlesource}}{{primarysources}}. Toddst1 19:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Better?Umzingeli 20:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I added a few more sources from online gaming review sites, so hopefully everything is sitting pretty now. :)Umzingeli 20:17, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

What the??

I created the Bianyifang article and haven't even gotten a chance to put the contents in. And you are flagging it for deletion. Benjwong 21:34, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Being an old restaurant doesn't make a company notable. It was tagged for deletion because it didn't appear notable.

If the issue is not having time to complete the article, here's what I suggest to everyone who is working on a new article: Create new articles in a personal subpage rather than the mainspace. This way you can save, preview, edit and pretty much do whatever you want to get the article in shape. Then when it's ready, open the article in the mainspace and copy/paste it in from your personal subpage. See Wikipedia:User_page#How_do_I_create_a_user_subpage.3F. Otherwise, if it's in mainspace, it will come under scrutiny and modification of others, potentially, deletion. Hope this helps. Toddst1 21:39, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Thomas-Mary Delest

I don't know if you can read French, but this article was about a child who was born and died today. You were of course correct to tag it for speedy deletion, and I have deleted it, but I must say that this one of the hardest experiences I have had on Wikipedia. Dsmdgold 23:34, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand any French (some Spanish, German and Italian), and I really appreciate your note. I just left a note from the author as well. Toddst1 16:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

Hi Toddst1, this page Garden_Networks was marked as speedy deletion. This was because i was still editing the page. Thanks for the tip above. I wasn't aware of this trick when I first created the page. Due to lack of experience, I copied and pasted and that override your speedy deletion tab. But still put on the hangon tag at the top of page to acknolwdge the speed deletion tag. I hope I didn't cause too much problems by overriding the original tag. I'd like to improve the page to meet the standard. Now my question is, if it's an issue (overriding the speedy deletion tag and not meeting some requirements) what am I supposed to do to fix them? Is it OK for me to remove the hangon tag?

I took care of it. Cheers. Toddst1 16:22, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Unfairipedia

I think it was unfair that you are going to kick me out of here if I "vandalize" this site. I don't get how adding a tag I was allowed to add and TOLD I COULD TO A CERTAIN PAGE is vandalism.

Landhermie 02:40, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Answered on User talk:Landhermie to be sure he/she'd see it. Toddst1 16:22, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Stage Gate Process

Hi Toddst1

I enlist your help in making Stage Gate Process so it adheres to your guidelines and policies. This is a process used in over 80% of companies in new product development. It is not blatant adverting...it talks about the process not the company.

````Sunil —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunil Bechar (talk • contribs) 18:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I believe you have posted that article a couple of times, violating copyright and posting promotional material which is not good. Please stop doing both of those behaviors. I would start with writing original text and citing WP:Reliable Sources. Better yet, take Ronz's comments on your talk page to heart and avoid posting in areas where you have a Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest or do so with extreme care. Good luck. Toddst1 19:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Joseph Joyner

I have a question about why the article is up for deletion. I found out as many facts as I could about Joseph Joyner to make the Wikipedia article thorough. I understand that there is many outside references, but that was to show validity to the site. Not only does Joseph star in one movie, but he also competes in Poker tournaments and is currently in medical school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jvferr (talk • contribs) 02:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think he meets Wikipedia's criteria for notable people. Rather than let me be the judge, I asked my peers at wikipedia to weigh in. Feel free to fix the article and/or persuade the community on the issue through the article's "Articles for Deletion" page. I suggest you voice your opinion there either way. Good luck and whatever you do, don't take this personally. Toddst1 02:32, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

hey we are college students doing a research project, and we everything that we are typing is true. You can delete this after we have presented this at 11 am tomorrow, for now just let it go. We are not anti-Disney, I love the Lion King. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Disneykids (talk • contribs) 03:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Patuxent River

"removed incorrect stmt" appears to apply to "British launched their attack on Washington, D.C., from their boats along the Patuxent at Benedict 22 miles (35 km) from the Chesapeake, Nottingham". What's the correct statement to add in its place? Tedickey 10:39, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Ted, Yes, unfortunately. The source I was looking at stated

"Within several days of the flotilla's destruction, Washington, D.C. was in ruins. When the British withdrew from the Patuxent, the flotilla remains became the target of significant scavenging".

The author didn't mention the actual landing. On the previous page he mentioned that the Americans were concerned about the possibility of it. Since you pointed this out, I did some further checking, and that seems to be a pretty big omission from the account of the skirmish, and that the fact was indeed true. I've restored the statement and added a citation. Thanks for pointing this out. Toddst1 17:16, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

HCA: Hermit Crab Association

The HCA: Hermit Crab Association was founded in March 2001 as a place for owners of land hermit crabs to get together and exchange information, and ultimately raise the awareness of the needs of land hermit crabs in captivity. On November 21, 2006 the name HCA: Hermit Crab Association was registered as a trademark (tm serial no. 78783774)

Recently a member of the HCA attempted to create a Wikipedia article about our organization, to detail its history, but Toddst1 told our member that the entry was considered vandalism (!!!) and the article was marked for speedy deletion.

We are hoping this was not done maliciously. The HCA: Hermit Crab Association has had to endure unfortunate attacks by disgruntled members in the past. This problem has died down a bit but we suspect there may still be some animosity on their part.

Thank you for your time.

Crab Diva 18:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at User_talk:Landhermie and Special:Contributions/Landhermie. Landhermie is a serial vandal with numerous warnings. He She created a new (empty if I remember correctly) article with the {{hangon}} tag upon creation which is vandalism. I have addressed this on His/her talk page. Any questions?

Good luck with your crabs. Toddst1 18:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Not that it matters but Landhermie is actually a teenage girl. She's been a member at our site for going on three years now, so we know her well. She generally leaps before she looks, so to speak, but is harmless.

One thing I am concerned about. If the HCA: Hermit Crab Association were to get its members together to write an article detailing our founding, our mission and history, our annual conventions and unique form of government, would that article be considered advertising? I've looked at the 5 Pillars and the other rules about self promotion but there are gray areas that I am not clear on. Also what could we do to prevent our former disgruntled members from engaging us in an edit war? We really don't want to cram our trademark down their throats and get nasty with them. Thank you again. Crab Diva 19:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out my pronoun bias. I've fixed it above. (best of intentions).

I would ensure that your article has sufficient citations from WP:Reliable Sources when it is posted in the Mainspace. Toddst1 19:46, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Disney Subliminal Messages

I believe you are unfairly removing content from this page. Snopes may be a rumor page, but their coverage on Disney is documented. Besides, if you would leave the content alone long enough, others would be able to add the citations that are lacking. There are credible sources out there that do state this information. Please stop removing content. This page is fairly new and deserves a chance to be developed. Stop tagging my edits as vandalism. I believe yours are doing far more damage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nilast (talk • contribs) 21:38, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I've added the {{POV-check}} tag back to the article. It was very biased against the company when written and I have no affiliation or particular affinity for Disney.

Regarding vandalism, reverting others' edits without explanation fits the bill. I've asked for comments on the talk page. Please use it. Toddst1 21:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I disagree, Sometimes we need to be tolerant that not everyone is as correct as yourself. Somnabot 23:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

That's why I've placed a {{POV-check}} tag on the page - so that it's flagged for others to notice and so others will get involved. Please do. Toddst1 15:27, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Ho Baron

I have responded to your accusation, and would like to know what you have to add. Thanks, Somnabot 23:09, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I am the author of the page - I just asked Somnabot to capitalize the "B" in Baron in the title (could not figure out the rename function), and he saw the copyright violation that was posted. Actually, the information on the TSOS site was written by Ho and I, not by the TSOS. I have responded in more detail on the Talk Ho Baron page. Sorry for the bother. Hobaron 03:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

It's not big deal folks. Hobaron, you're a new guy - we're used to helping newbies through issues like this. Here's what you need to do:

Check out 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 an ORTS ticket and can post the material verbatim. We do this all the time.

It's more of an issue when experienced editors knowingly violate copyrights - even their own. There's no two ways on that. Toddst1 15:22, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

What I feel is more of an issue, not only in this example, but also on a macro level, are the actions that some editors with the best intentions tend to take blind to understanding or reason. This isn't some kind of meandering personal attack. I understand that you felt there was a copy violation, however, you never did anything other than point your finger in a generally offensive manner. I really hope you didn't scare this new Wikipedian away; they have a plethora of time and talent that they are willing to share with this community. Come on, this is Wikipedia. Always be polite. Always assume good faith, and above all, always be welcoming. Oh, and no personal attacks, man. Somnabot 16:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I invite everyone to see what Somnabot thinks is a personal attack is: Take a look at what I wrote here. Toddst1 16:54, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Todd. I simply rewrote the thing this afternoon. Think I successfully added the image copyright tag, too. Still learning.Hobaron 18:22, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Reply on Angel Moxie

Hi there. I added {{hangon}} to Angel Moxie after discovering that there was an extensive edit history for a previous version of that article, which did not at any time include a CSD tag. It appears that an admin deleted that article without review back in January. I haven't had a chance to investigate other articles that User:Frank Lofaro Jr. has been re-creating yet, though I did find one with no delete history. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 18:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. That makes sense. Cheers. Toddst1 18:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

On further review, Altermeta also has the same problem, though its content was far more lacking. But it appears that someone just went and deleted the articles per A7 without there being a CSD review, PROD or AfD. These articles should be recreated and tagged appropriately. I'll restore them so they can be handled properly. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 18:14, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

That makes sense. The current recreations are a bit ... anemic.8-) I've struck my comments on User talk:Frank Lofaro Jr. accordingly. Cheers. Toddst1 18:17, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

This page, Toddst1/Archive 1 contains archived talk page discussions for Toddst1 (talk) November 2007.

Archives
April 2008-present May 2008- April 2008 December 2007-March 2008 November 2007 before November 2007 This editor was formerly known as Toddst1.

Dorothy Morrison

Gee, Toddst1, how about waiting longer than 2 freaking minutes before tagging an article as unsourced. You know, maybe give the editor a few days to gather some references when he SAYS it's just a stub at this point. Do you really think an author of this many books can't be supported by some citations, given a little time? Rosencomet 01:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

First, please don't take it personally. It's just an article. I've been doing Wikipedia:New pages patrol for a while and we look at articles as they're created. Take that tag as a suggestion on how to improve the article.

Here's a suggestion from having seen a lot of these issues: When you're developing an article, set up a user subpage of your own for the article and when it's in good shape, copy it in to the main space (create the article at that time). This way, it won't be speedily deleted as thousands are daily, or subject to scrutiny (like this) before you're ready. I hope this helps. Let me know if I can help. Toddst1 01:36, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

<< comment implying violence added by BomberJoe (talk) removed for the second time >>

eClerx Deletion

The eClerx page has been deleted once again. This time by someone who was not even in the discussion. I want to know why or how this is happening. It is harrowing to find carefully measured words being deleted every few days. Having to start over again is no fun either. Can anyone just drop by and arbitrarily delete pages?Nshuks7 07:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

It appears that the WP:AfD discussion has closed and it was deleted in due process Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eclerx. I hadn't looked at it since my comment on the 25th. Toddst1 11:25, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

And I had added more references and facts after your comment on the single, inadmissible source. *sigh* I guess I am better off starting other articles. Maybe later I'll come back to this. Thanks anyway. Nshuks7 15:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

It's tough to clean up an article once the momentum gets going to delete it. Check out my comments above about creating articles in a subpage. I really think that's the best way to start one. Then you can ask a couple of folks to take a look if you're in doubt. Let me know if I can help. Toddst1 15:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruth Ulrich

Be aware that you're stepping into a minefield here by nominating a Billy Hathorn (talk · contribs) article for deletion; while he has a very long history of uploading wildly inappropriate articles, people who nominate them for deletion tend to get dragged into a crossfire of arguments (this was my taste of it). — iridescent 16:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Jozef Baker and User:Buneeboi

Please be careful to avoid biting the newbies. The article, which includes the only four contributions of the user (and is now deleted), certainly wasn't appropriate for Wikipedia, but you accused him of adding an inappropriate page (which is fair), and then threatened him with blocking for vandalism (it isn't clear what that was for) and then again for blanking the page (when he tried to remove it because he agreed with the deletion). When dealing with a new user who may not be familiar with Wikipedia process and procedure, it's often better to take a little time to write a friendly, descriptive message rather than banging on a Twinkle template and moving on. Thanks for your help. Stifle (talk) 17:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Message

Dear Toddst1, Please accept my apology. I created that article before I read the appropriate article section on wikipedia. I now realize not to create controversial articles or articles with opinion. Thank you for telling me my mistake and I assure you it will not happen again. Sincerely,helraiser9191 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Helraiser9191 (talk • contribs) 17:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

entrepreneurs of tomorrow deleted article

(Refactored comment that Toddst1 left on User talk:Trenton Browne removed because it was out of context and appeared as if Toddst1 warned himself )

Why not respond to the points I made in my message? Please explain to me how it was NOT through prejudice and/or small mindedness that my article was deleted. Please explain to me what recourse I have against what seems like an editorialship that has been corrupted by power? Then block me if you you think that is the right thing to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.233.217.181 (talk • contribs) 21:54, 1 November 2007

I assume that you left that message as User:Trenton Browne but having logged out (please sign your posts on talk pages with ~~~~).

It appears that both Nyttend and NawlinWiki both left fairly standard explanations for the deletion on your talk page - that the author (I assume you, by your indignance) didn't establish WP:Notability of the organization when the article was created. That usually means citing some WP:Reliable Sources or at least implying that they exist. I don't think that I was involved in deleting the article - I almost always leave a notice on folks' talk pages when I tag something for speedy deletion using WP:TW, and there doesn't appear to be a note from me there. I think I remember the article though, and that fits what I remember.

That being said, I wouldn't expect to hear much from either of them after your personal attacks, if I were you.

If you don't understand what Wikipedia means by WP:Notability or WP:Reliable Sources, after reading those two sections, let me know and I'll try to help. Toddst1 23:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Sorry for the hangon thing and thanks for explaining it. I didn't know what I was doing before.

Landhermie 23:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

No worries. Let me know if you need help. Cheers. Toddst1 23:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Friendly bug

I fixed the signature bug that you encountered on User talk:Suzystorm earlier. Ctrl+F5 and you shouldn't have to manually edit it anymore. Ioeth <sub>(talk contribs friendly)</sub> 16:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

You rock. Thanks!Toddst1 16:10, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Lydiauhlir

I do not feel sorry when I tag speedy deletion on articles which are pure vandalism, spam, ad, self-bio, nonsense. But I think, I did at least one mistake. This chicago greeter, global greeter stuff deserve main namespace. But you and then me tagged it for speedy deletion. Obviously user is new and the way he wrote made us to think that it is advertisement. In fact it is about volunteers who welcome and guide tourists in cities. Such non-profit, selfless social services deserve regognition. Please see http://www.chicagogreeter.com

From now, I will slow down. TRIRASH 19:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Baleet

"Baleet" was a legitimate page, not vandalism, and should be reinstated.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhazared (talk • contribs) 15:15, 4 November 2007

It was not a legitimate page and though I was not the deleting administrator, I endorse the deletion and its tagging.--Fuhghettaboutit 15:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

In consideration that both "LOL" and "Banhammer" have articles, "Baleet" should be perfectly acceptable.--Jhazared 4 November 2007

You're comparing apples to kumquats. The article lacked context and thus read as nonsense; failed our minimum information standards for new articles; as the term is not the subject of significant treatment in independent reliable sources (see the general notability standard), it is not a notable internet meme unlike the pages you are comparing it to. Based on all of the foregoing, it was no more than an unsourced slang term and because Wikipedia is not a dictionary, or a slang, jargon, or usage guide, even if the article didn't suffer from so many problems, such articles should be avoided.--Fuhghettaboutit 18:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

All my recent changes

Hello Toddst1,

You have been undoing entries that I am adding to wiki. Can you please give us some guidelines so we know exactly why you are removing these entries? For example I was a close personal friend of Wally Schirra (one of the original seven astronauts) and Wally wrote a book called "The Real Space Cowboys" just before he died. We made an entry into his biography about the book (which can be clearly seen on the hyperlink you removed) and yet you trashed the entry tagging it as vandalism. Can you explain why this would be construed as an inappropriate entry? Is it because the hyperlink was in the wrong place?

Please explain.

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mheimbecker (talk • contribs) 16:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, these were links the Apogee Books shop site and appeared to be added to promote the sale of the book. Take a look at Wikipedia:External_links#Links_normally_to_be_avoided. What's your connection to Apogee and/or Robert Godwin? Toddst1 22:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Can I just clarify - particularly to Mheimbecker as a new editor who may not be familiar with our policies - that it is explicitly not forbidden to write about companies/people/products with whom you are associated. However, particular care must be taken in this situation to ensure that the writing's neutral, and I'd strongly suggest that external sources are cited regarding the book (which undoubtedly does exist - I've read it - and almost certainly actually warrants its own article). — iridescent 01:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Irie is correct (as usual 8-): It is explicitly not forbidden to write about companies/people/products with whom you are associated. However, there has been a recent flurry of activity around Robert Godwin and Apogee Books that bordered on advert/promotion and vanity between two registered users and two anonymous IPs. That was why I have been tracking down the Apogee shop site links and asked about the connection. Toddst1 03:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually I am associated with Apogee Books and the publisher Robert Godwin. Many of the Apogee authors have their own wiki pages and are wondering why their wiki pages don't mention their books, or why their books don't have their own pages. Many of these people are astronauts or very old people who contributed in a big way to winning the space race and have no comprehension of how Wiki works. e.g. Sir Arthur Clarke who has contributed to several of our books has individual wiki pages for practically everything he's ever written. One of our books is the book that inspired him to be a writer! He says as much in the introduction. (Conquest of Space by David Lasser) Buzz Aldrin has been running around the country doing signings of Apogee titles for almost a decade and was responsible for starting the imprint. Before he died Wally Schirra (one of the original seven astronauts) co-wrote "The Real Space Cowboys" for Apogee and appeared all over the world doing signings. His two books from forty years ago are mentioned, but not the Apogee one from last year just before he died. This makes no sense. Three of Robert Godwin's books are cited by someone else as references on Schirra's page. Godwin's other titles were used as primary sources for Dr James Hansen's official biography of Neil Armstrong "First Man" published last year. Surely these facts should be mentioned somewhere in the wikipedia? I have attempted to create a presence on Wiki without blatantly advertising the books. The links I had placed on Wally Schirra's page lead to an informational page about his book, which just happened to link to a page where it was for sale. No advertising was meant by this act. If we had wanted to advertise the books we could have shown the thousands of links to reviews, and news stories, or posted links to the thousands of articles in wikipedia which cite our books as sources. Or worse still, placed links to our shopping cart. Apogee publishes more space books than any other publisher on the planet but I didn't say that because I know it would be inappropriate. I would urge anyone who wants to delete these entries to actually try Googling some of these names and see how many tens of thousands of reviews and news stories there are relating to Apogee before making that call. Mheimbecker 20:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, I did suspect the conflict of interest. Thanks for confirming it. And as — iridescent pointed out, it is ok to edit pages that you have a conflict of interest on it. Be sure to familiarize yourself with WP:COI and often it's a good idea to make a note on the article's talk page stating your affiliation. While we try to remember to assume good faith, there are a lot of self-promoters trying to spiff their traffic, and folks creating vanity articles.

Depending on context, it could OK to say Apogee is the largest publisher of space books in a WP article, but you would need to cite WP:Reliable Sources which mean verifiable third party qualifications.

Just to be clear, you did place a link to the Apogee shopping cart: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wally_Schirra&diff=168797514&oldid=167373539 Good luck and happy editing. Toddst1 21:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't want to make a big issue of this, but the website that I linked to is an information page. There is a link on that page that leads to an online store selling the book, but there are also links to Amazon and other online book retailers. Is this against the rules? I would think that the publisher's official website for a book qualifies as a source that should be cited. Mheimbecker 18:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

The Story of a Noble Family

Hi! I have clarified this article somewhat, and believe it offers sufficient context to not be a candidate for speedy deletion. --Stormie 01:39, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that looks much better. Thanks for your edits. Toddst1 01:40, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Megadim (journal)

Please don't delete. I'm working on it, and it will have content within a few minutes. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 00:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the {{inuse}} tag - It looked pretty suspicious before. Happy editing. Toddst1 00:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

match.com

Hi Todd,

Having blocked my initial article on 121connection.co.uk, I'm confused why the index for match.com is there? Surely this entry should also be removed under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content and does not indicate how or why the subject is notable? It is blatant advertising?

Kind Regards

Mark —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcwillis (talk • contribs) 00:53, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mark, I didn't actually block 121connection.co.uk - rather I proposed it for deletion because it did not assert WP:Notability in my opinion. Re-creating the article with the same content isn't exactly constructive if it didn't meet the criteria in the first place. (WP:Notability is somewhat different from what some folks might consider notability, so please read that section and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) as well. If after reviewing those sections, you feel 121connection.co.uk meets that criteria, you should re-list the article (with appropriate citations from WP:Reliable Sources). If you cite WP:Reliable Sources, then your article is not eligible for speedy deletion. However, it may be subject to deletion under WP:AfD, the somewhat peer-juried Wikipedia process to determine whether an article should be deleted.

Further, if you don't think match.com meets those definitions, you can nominate it for WP:AfD yourself. If you follow the link I provided, it has instructions.

Good luck. Toddst1 16:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

esther muncaster

this is not a memorial

I've removed the speedy tag and wikified it a bit. I've added a few tags - it needs work. Toddst1 17:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

ManhattanGMAT

Toddst1,

Why would you want ManhattanGMAT to be speedily deleted? Another test prep company, Veritas Prep, has an article almost exactly similar to the one up for ManhattanGMAT right now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael.dinerstein (talk • contribs) 17:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

It isn't clear to me why the company is significant. See the description here. I've tagged Veritas too. Thanks for pointing that out.Toddst1 17:42, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Asami Edoh

Hi Todd, I think I fixed the Sybarite entry - I followed procedure and did the "hang on" tag and added some 'talk. I thought it was similar to some other entries, so didn't think it would be counted as spam. I certainly did not intend it as so. Thanks. Asami 22:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Attack pages

If you ever find a problem user like User:TIMMAYYYY posting vicious attack pages, and I'm around, just drop me a note and I will block immediately. Defamation like that is the worst form of vandalism and no series of warnings is needed in my book.--Fuhghettaboutit 02:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I see them all too often. My experience is folks who post garbage like that have not intention of contributing constructive edits. I can't count how many arv submissions I've made after tagging a series of them for speedy deletion. Thanks for the help. Toddst1 02:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. And you're welcome.--Fuhghettaboutit 02:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

Hi. Please do not mark pages for speedy deletion under criteria G1 unless that page is "gibberish, an unsalvageably incoherent page with no meaningful content.". The reason I am pointing this out is because of the tag you placed on Shane Hansen, which was clearly not nonsense. Thanks - Rjd0060 02:46, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Did you read the dates? It looked legit until I read them. Toddst1 02:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

It obviously is deletable, but not under G1. A7-non notable (currently tagged) is more appropriate. The text was "David (Shane) Hansen (1898-1947) was a Danish born post-modern poet that was an uninfluential poet during his time who later gained popularity with the early British Punk movement.". That is not incoherent at all. I can read it with no problems, therefore it does not qualify as "nonsense" by WP's definition. - Rjd0060 02:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

What would you say about Huston Sacajawea Antartica? (I'm assuming you have access to deleted articles as an admin.)? Toddst1 02:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. I'm not an admin. - Rjd0060 04:19, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Jumping in on your conversation here as I still have your talkpage watchlisted from our previous conversation here. The full text of the article was Huston is a beautiful little city found on the north coast of Antarctica. It is known for it's holidays and for contribution to music history. Although it's been speedied four times - who am I to argue - if I came across that with a speedy tag on it I'd instantly decline it. Although it reeks of a hoax, "hoax" is specifically and unequivocally never a speedy criteria. The admin who incorrectly speedied it as a G4 - which only applies to articles deleted via AfD - deserves a rousing WP:TROUT as well. — iridescent 01:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Irie, your comments are always welcome (and please don't unwatch me 8-). I continue to learn. Thanks, both of you. Toddst1 02:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Tagging of ASIX Electronics

I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on ASIX Electronics. I do not think that ASIX Electronics fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because public companies are usually notable, at least assertedly so. I request that you consider not re-tagging ASIX Electronics for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. You are, of course, free to tag the article with {{prod}} or nominate it at WP:AFD. Carlossuarez46 01:44, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

My Article Was Significant I Believe, Thank You Very Much

You deleted my article on Trading Nothing which took me quite a lot of my precious time to prepare, and you cited there wasn't an indication it was significant.

Well excuse me, but if you can point me to a more interesting or successful Internet trading up adventure happening anywhere in Europe right now, or even anywhere in the world, then I would really love to know. (OK, one red paperclip beats mine, no argument, but really that has finished happening).

If you can do that then maybe I have more work to do, but if not then I believe my trading nothing adventure is plenty significant enough to qualify for a place in Wikipedia.

Please do the world a favour and restore my short article to its rightful place.

Faithfully,

Andrew Henderson

--Tradingnothing 16:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

See: Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles Travb (talk) 05:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

ICOF

Todd, thanks for the welcome. I need some help. The subject material for this topic has been deleted. I don't understand why. Someone apparently has attempted to place an article under this topic in the past and met the same end. Admittedly there is not a great deal of published material on this subject from outside sources, but when I read articles in wikipedia like kwanzaa, I find way less. Other similar religious groups also have less notation and they remain on Wikipedia. The creation of such a large group is historically relevant and in the realm of Christianity/Religion even more historic. Your incite is appreciated. (Seenitall 17:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC))

Maleflixxx Television

Hey, you don't delete an article until there is a discussion done on it first. This is a notable subject just like any other television channel out there. What makes Playboy TV any more notable then this one? And I wasn't finished editing the article either, i was going to add more info to the age as well as references. This isn't fair, and if I have to I'm gonna report this. MusiMax 21:10, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Your article was tagged for speedy deletion because you did not assert the importance of the company. See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Suggestion: when writing an article, it's a good idea to set up a user subpage of your own for the article and when it's in good shape, copy it in to the main space (create the article at that time). This way, it won't be speedily deleted as thousands are daily, or subject to scrutiny (like this) before you're ready. Toddst1 21:15, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Eric Delony

please review my Eric Delony page with the cite to AASHTO --Saguinter 20:32, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Good work. Thanks for getting rid of the copyright violation. I took the liberty of editing the article a bit to make it more wiki-like and removed the speedy deletion tags now that we're free of the copyvio. The guy is clearly notable and this could be a great article. Good luck. Toddst1 20:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletions too speedy

Todd, I've noticed that many of your requests for speedy deletion seem to happen just a few minutes after the page has been created. Could you please note the advice in the first paragraph at WP:NPP#Patrolling new pages. Phil Bridger 14:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I don't understand why he deleted my article so fast. I specifically asked for some time to flesh out the article a bit: Equipment reservation policies. I'm guessing the entire neutrality thing has take a back seat to people's personal viewpoints around here. --Imagemonth 15:34, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Into what did you intend to polish it? And why do you think that it was suitable for an encyclopedia? Because I didn't see a single bit of what could have possibly become an article, I deleted that page. Wikipedia is not for publishing your gym's rules. MaxSem<sup>(Han shot first!)</sup> 17:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

There was nothing "gym" related in the article. The article was technology related.---- Imagemonth (talk) 18:28, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Right. My bad, already forgot what it was. Please explain how "In order to have reliable devices available to all employees, the official procedure is as follows: / Submit a Tech Request 48 hours before the device is needed to guarantee availability. In the Tech Request form select Equipment Reservation from the Type drop down menu. Be sure to enter both the proposed dates for checkout and return of the equipment in the description field. / The device should be picked up no later then 4pm." can be considered encyclopedic article. MaxSem<sup>(Han shot first!)</sup> 19:11, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, your article Equipment reservation policies wasn't deleted very speedily - it was tagged from the bottom of the list. I had nothing to do with you asking for more time as all I did was tag it. If you put a {{hangon}} or comments in the talk page after that, I didn't see them. That part should be taken up with User: MaxSem who deleted it.

Frankly, if I remember correctly, the article seemed to be cut and paste from a gym's web page or something along those lines with zero context for Wikipedia. Toddst1 16:33, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

There was nothing about a gym in the article. Perhaps you deleted the wrong article by accident.---- Imagemonth (talk) 18:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Nope - it was the right article, I just didn't remember it correctly. That is exactly the kind of article new page patrollers are supposed to tag with speedy. -- Toddst1 (talk) 19:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Toddst1, I think it's time that you went back to WP school and learn what needs deleting and what doesn't. You obviously don't have a clue what you're doing and the power of your Delete key is going to your head BomberJoe (talk) 17:46, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Bomber, Perhaps you should have read the article before commenting. Toddst1 (talk) 17:12, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Responding to Phil: you have a good point. Toddst1 (talk) 20:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Thoai Anh Pham

When you put a speedy deletion tag on Thoai Anh Pham, you put it as an attack, although it was clearly a spam page. In the future, read the content of the article before tagging it. Thanks, Redmarkviolinist (talk)

I disagree. It clearly wasn't WP:Spam. The article said something about her wrecking kitchens and putting gum all over people's walls. I would guess that she doesn't want that on her medical CV, so calling it an attack is fine with me. Either way, it should be speedily deleted. Toddst1 17:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Jack Clemmons

I think we should keep Jack Clemmons. He is in hundreds of books and documentaries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Persianhistory2008 (talk ��� contribs) 22:04, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

See Talk: Jack ClemmonsToddst1 22:30, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Haley Industries

Why are you being so aggressive with the speedy deletes? I had barely started this article stub when you came along and deleted it. Are you knowledgeable about what's notable in aviation history? Please restrain your disrespect and contact the author before hitting the delete button. BomberJoe 22:26, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

You may notice that I tagged the article with {{unreferenced}} and {{Notability}} as well as left you a note on Talk: Haley Industries. I'm glad you took my suggestion of the {{inuse}} tag. Without that, someone else would have surely deleted it as WP:NN by now. Toddst1 22:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

<-Impolite edit by BomberJoe (talk) removed->

Todd, nobody would have deleted this as WP:NN because that is not a valid reason for a speedy delete. I already pointed you to this guideline but you don't seem to have taken any notice, so I'll copy it here to save you following the link:

"It is advisable to patrol new pages from the bottom of the first page of the log. This should give the creating editor enough time to improve a new page before a patroller attends to it, particularly if the patroller tags the page for speedy deletion. Tagging anything other than attack pages or complete nonsense a minute after creation is not constructive and only serves to annoy the page author."

By ignoring this you are annoying lots of editors, and distracting them from doing useful work on their articles, and also taking up administrators' time in reviewing unfounded speedy deletion requests. Phil Bridger 23:01, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I meant to say WP:CSD#A7. Toddst1 09:15, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

< - second personal attack by BomberJoe (talk) 17:47, 18 November 2007 (UTC) removed - >

Speedy deletion of Shitty bands

Hi how r u you deleted my article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notkool35 (talk • contribs) 15 November 2007

IAHGames and its hanlding of Hellgate London

Extrakun 10:56, 16 November 2007 (UTC) Hi, I received the proposal to delete, but even before I can review, it has already been deleted. I have to say I am quite confused. I have even made an explanation on why I think the information should be around. I guess I will hold on writing the article till there enough information to suffice Meanwhile, I will just put the relevant information on the main Hellgate page. When it starts to clutter up again I'll move it to another article.

I added a {{prod}} template to it which normally would have kept it around for a week or so. It looks like it was deleted by User: RHaworth who left you a note. Toddst1 11:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

You asked why I was editing 'another' users page

My mistake. I forgot that I have two accounts on Wikipedia and used the wrong one to edit my User Page. Nanodave is a pseudonym for Ditaylor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nanodave (talk • contribs) 22:19, 18 November 2007

Ok. It looked really strange. Cheers. 8-) Toddst1 (talk) 00:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarding deletion of Nitish Mishra

Dear Toddst1

How are you doing?I strongly protest your mail where you have warned me about my disrruptive edition of Nitish Mishra.

Mr Nitish Mishra is a MLA in the Bihar province of India and he is holding the post of Sugar Cane Development Minister.If any other Indian politicians can find place in wikipedia then why not he?

You can type nitish mishra on google and see all references.Most of prestigious news papers have published about him.He belongs to prestigious Mishra Family of India.His father Mr Jagganath Mishra, his uncle Late Lalit Narayan Mishra and his cousin Mr Vijay Kumar Mishra all are on wikipedia.

I will appreciate your affort to restore him on Wikipedia and honour him which he deserves.

Regards

Bipin —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bipin dr2002 (talk • contribs) 13:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I added a {{prod}} template to Nitish Mishra on November 4 and notified you on your talk page. {{prod}}s are used to give ample time to anyone to object and/or comment on deletion. Since then, apparently nobody has objected to its deletion and another editor, User: MastCell saw fit to actually delete it on November 9.

It was several weeks ago, and I don't have access to the article's history, but the 'disruptive edits' were adding unsourced information. If I remember correctly, you added WP:OR and possibly WP:Peacock material about his family tree and there wasn't any other content in the article. If the material was true and relevant, you should re-create the article but the material must be cited with WP:Reliable Sources.

You have been adding quite a bit of unsourced information about families to several articles lately. Please review Wikipedia:Citing_sources. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 16:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Problems editing Abdul Qadeer Khan

I'm trying to add the following:

{{For| Abdul Quddoos Khan, the Pakistani microbiologist associated with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed |Abdul Quddoos Khan}}

to Abdul Qadeer Khan, but I'm getting errors:

Spam protection filter
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The spam filter blocked your page save because it detected a blacklisted hyperlink. You may have added it yourself, the link may have been added by another editor before it was blacklisted, or you may be infected by spyware that adds links to wiki pages. You will need to remove all instances of the blacklisted URL before you can save.
You can request help removing the link, request that the link be removed from the blacklist, or report a possible error on the Spam blacklist talk page. If you'd like to allow a particular link without removing similar links from the blacklist, you can request whitelisting on the Spam whitelist talk page.

The following text is what triggered our spam filter: http:// www . cceia . org

Return to Abdul Qadeer Khan.

It appears that the link is already in the article and it's preventing me from editing. (I inserted spaces above so I could ask the question) Ideas?? Toddst1 (talk) 19:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Thw1309. You should try
:''For Abdul Quddoos Khan, the Pakistani microbiologist associated with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed [[Abdul Quddoos Khan]]'' This looks like

For Abdul Quddoos Khan, the Pakistani microbiologist associated with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Abdul Quddoos Khan

Happy editing. --Thw1309 (talk) 19:48, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me so quickly.

That would work, but the point is, I can't edit the page because the spam filter is catching something already in the article. I'd have to remove the citation to save it. Ideas?

I have reported the problem at m:Talk:Spam blacklist. You should watch the page. They will correct the mistake or tell you, what to do. I'm sorry, but that's all, I can do. --Thw1309 (talk) 20:25, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - I'll keep an eye on it! Toddst1 (talk) 20:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

It was the link cceia.org that prevented edits to the article to be saved. The link is on the local blacklist here at en.wikipedia: MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist.

I removed the link from the article and it can be edited now.

--Jorunn (talk) 22:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!! Toddst1 (talk) 23:19, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Zavvi store locations

An article that you have been involved in editing, Zavvi store locations, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zavvi store locations. Thank you. -- John (Daytona2 · talk) 19:54, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion warnning

Hi,

The page about Mega AS Consulting Ltd is similar to other pages edited at Wikipedia such as Aladdin Knowledge Systems. This is not an advert or spam. These are mere facts about the company - in the same way and syntax as used by other companies in the same industry at Wikipedia.

Mega AS technology is young and innovative. Wikipedia is not intended (as I understand it) to be the advertising place for established companies. It is not intended to be advertising at all. It is supposed to treat all with the same respect and regards to the information provided and benefit for others.

The Mega AS product lines is different in the same way the RSA Hardware token or Aladdin eToken are. It is a new niche in the Identity Management market. It was recognized and awarded by technology peers.

What is the possible reason for singling it out.

Please contact me advise if there are any irregularities or you think that the information is missing. I'm happy to provide further explanations/information/documentation.

This information is relevant, factual and interesting to the people in the industry.

Cheers,

Arnnei — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arnneisp1 (talk • contribs) 03:09, 20 November 2007

The article wasn't deleted because of being an advert or spam, rather, the article is about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Check out WP:CSD#A7. Regarding Aladdin Knowledge Systems, it's traded on a stock exchange which makes it inherently WP:Notable. Toddst1 (talk) 04:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of The Steve Best Collection

Why is your reasoning delete my contribution on the independent film series? It was fully in compliance with speedy deletion criterion A7. It was significant as a Relevant example of independent film. The film series in question is studied as an example of independent film by Year 11 students at specialised technology status schools. Seriously you have impaired the contiued education of several students I personally know. Regards, --User:surfdarthvaderSurfdarthvader (talk) 11:49, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Students making a film doesn't make the film WP:Notable. There were a series of edits you made between October 2 and November 4 that were tagged for speedy deletion by both User:WebHamster and me that were well within the speedy deletion criteria. If you truly feel the films comply with WP:Notable, see: Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles. You'll need to add information to the article to show that the film meets those criteria. Toddst1 (talk) 14:14, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Improper accusations

You have left a note on my Talk Page that I have been attacking you on this page, yet when I review my comments I see that you refer to my comments as merely "impolite". You are not correct to say that I am "attacking" you when I complain about your behaviour on this Talk Page. If you are a beginning or self-appointed patrolman, please ask for help from a more experienced editor before whacking other peoples' contributions. It's easy to offend a huge number of editors by doing what you do - and it's not wise. Further, you cannot have me banned from Wikipedia simply because I am making a little noise on your Talk Page about your immature behaviour. It's not wise to prance about making such preposterous statements. BomberJoe (talk) 22:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

The edits speak for themselves:

• Edit 1
• Edit 2

Toddst1 (talk) 14:39, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Virgin Megastores store locations

An article that you have been involved in editing, Virgin Megastores store locations, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Virgin Megastores store locations. Thank you. -- John (Daytona2 · talk) 13:54, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Zachery Tims

Thanks Todd for your editing. Your warning message was kind of harsh well very harsh!!! I'm new to wiki and wasn't interested in "furthering my personal agenda" as you stated. I think he's a great person, my purpose was to enlighten Christians who believe he is who he represents himself as. The information you deleted IS true but I believe your adjustments are a good compromise. I guess it's up to the reader to do the additional research to find the truth OUTSIDE OF WIKIPEDIA. Peace and blessings my friend. Thanks for your time and your professionalism :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthofyahweh (talk • contribs) 05:44, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like we're on the same page with the article - it has to be WP:Verifiable. The situation sounds kind of sticky and Wikipedia has to be neutral. It's easy to have an opinion if you know the people (which I don't). Let me know if I can help further. Toddst1 (talk) 14:41, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Photo of Thomas Sim Lee

A photo of this gentleman is hard to come by. I did however find a photo of his wife Mary Digges Lee and have inserted this in the article. If you or someone else could locate an image of TSL that would be great.Rumbird (talk) 21:29, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! This is an improvement. I was/am hoping that as a former Governor there is a painting of him somewhere in Annapolis and that there might be a PD image. Toddst1 (talk) 21:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Dmitry Sitkovetsky

Hi Toddst1. I have raised some issues on the Dmitry Sitkovetsky talk page.Regards,--Atavi 15:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi again. I realize you may be busy or off line, but when you have the time, I would appreciate it if you would care to continue our discussion. In time, I might remove the two tags myself, but I want to make sure we're on the same page before I do that. Thanks,Atavi 19:22, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Just a note of thanks.--Atavi 20:52, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Erin Dolgan

you for some reason deleted my reference to the SOMB on Erin Dolgan's page as I was writing the article. Can you get it back as I cannot figure out how to do it.RKChesnutt 23:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

RKChesnutt 23:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)Todd, Why'd you delete my reference to the SOMB on Erin Dolgan's article. Is it a violation? I was writting the article as you were deleting!!!!

It seemed to be at best a misplaced reference and there was no indication that you were still editing it. I noted that it was misplaced in the edit summary. It appears that you've gotten the reference back in there as well as some content that it ties to. Check out the {{inuse}} tag for when you're doing serial edits on an article. Toddst1 00:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

John A. Trese

Hi, Thanks for the nice comments and removing the notability tag!I have been working on citations and cleaning up some external links. I think I'm done with the citations for now. Can we now remove the citation tag? Or is this done by a bot? --Peggy Brennan 23:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I am working on the John A. Trese page, and you have tagged the page, citing notability requirements. I'm working on them, with more 3rd-party references, and will be working on citations. If you can, let me know if I'm moving in the right direction. Thanks! --Peggy Brennan 20:52, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, how do we remove the in-text citations tag? I do have citations added now...— Preceding unsigned comment added by Peggy Brennan (talk • contribs) 12:17, 3 February 2008

Hi Peggy, You've made great progress on the article. Nice work. I removed the global {{nofootnotes}} tage and replaced it with two {{nofootnotes}} tags for the sections that need footnotes the most.

In general, you can remove them yourself, but it's always good to discuss it on the talk page explaining why you've removed them and leaving an edit summary.

Keep up the great work! Toddst1 (talk) 18:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

ProCurve Training

Hi,

thanks for review topic "ProCurve Training". You added the Advertisement tag. Please be more specific and give example how to make it better. Thanks haegi

It appears to be a catalog of HP services. See Wp:not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory Toddst1 (talk) 19:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Gustave Le Rouge

I have been writing the pages for most Categories: "French_science_fiction_writers" and "French_fantasy_writers" spun off from the French science fiction and Fantastique pages, which I also wrote. On these, we do have the following source:

It wasn't deemed necessary to recopy the same info on each and every author page. If you have time to do it, you are however welcome to do so. JMLofficier 16:27, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

You're a true Defender of the Wiki

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		I award this barnstar to you, Toddst1, for all of the fine work you have done combating vandalism and spam on the Wikipedia. Kudos, and keep up the good work! Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 14:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Rolf Solli

hi, I added 3 refs and removed the tag. Looks ok? Pundit|utter 15:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me! Thanks! Toddst1 15:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Morgenthaler

Glad you nominated both of them. I don't see why they can't be referred to in an article about that congressional district. Mandsford 21:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks and I agree. It seems that the primary race in Illinois is getting pretty heated. FWIW, I have nothing to do with Illinois or politics. Toddst1 (talk) 21:35, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Jonathan Boucher

Would it be better just to keep the short quotation from the final sermon in the Wikipedia entry, and move the full version to the Boucher page on Wikiquote? David Trochos (talk) 00:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't familiar with wikiquote. It seems like the perfect place for it. I'll move it now. Thanks!! Toddst1 (talk) 02:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Raphappy

Hello, I am new to creating articles in wikipedia, and you nominated my first article on raphappy.com for speedy deletion. Then it was deleted. Considering this as a critique for myself, I revised the article and added more references to prove its notability. Since two weeks, it is active and also stub sorted. I wanted to have your feedback on this issue. Do you think that my revision made the difference for the article to stay, or do you think is this article still not suitable for wikipedia? In my first trial, I was hoping other people to put in some words, references, etc.. so that the article could grow by itself. Is it not a good approach to create an article? Should the first posts always include as much detail/references as it can?

Thanks, Msinan (talk) 00:50, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't remember the article from early November. I'm sorry, but I've had about 3,000 edits since then. Looking at the article as it is now, it seems like you've not only asserted notability but demonstrated it. Great work! I can't imagine anyone tagging it for a speedy deletion now.

I've taken the liberty of converting your manual footnotes to more wiki-styled ones. The ones that weren't numbered in the text, I've moved to external links. If you want to tie them to statements in the article, move them back. Take a look at how I've done them, and you might want to take a look at this handy reference. I use it all the time. Happy editing! Toddst1 01:54, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

very short articles

According to WP:STUB, short articles are acceptable , as long as it is clear that the subject is notable. According to WP:CSD, db-context is meant only. for articles where there is so little information that it is impossible to tell what the article is even talking about. One sentence is enough, if it says what is necessary as in Royal Belfast Hospital for Sick Children, so i declined the speedy. DGG (talk) 04:11, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Chipeşii River

I don't understand why you singled out the Chipeşii River. It is part of the Wikiproject Rivers and there are several thousand similar articles. For the time being the structure of the hydrographic network is being entered. Other information will follow once the network is complete. This is valid also for the Chipeşii River. Afil (talk) 04:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the speedy. Right now it's just a statement that the river exists which should probably be deleted under Afd per Wp:not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_directory. I'll leave it alone and hopefully more relevant info will be added. Toddst1 05:26, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

List of people from Maryland

As a rule of thumb I generally consider all "list of X in Maryland" articles to have top importance in the Maryland project, unless X is an overly specific or obscure topic, which "people" is definitely not.-Jeff <sup>(talk)</sup> 16:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, it seemed way too broad to be a top priority when I looked at it. Toddst1 18:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

St. Barnabas Church, Upper Marlboro, Maryland

Hi, thanks for your message. The affiliation should be the present or in the alternative it could read Church of England original; Episcopal present, or something to that effect. Each national church in the Anglican Communion today is an independent church or denomination. The Church of England in Canada now calls itself the Anglican Church of Canada, for instance. The present usage pertains to governance. St. Barnabas is subject to the governance of the Episcopal Diocese of Washington, which in turn is subject to the governance of the ECUSA. The ECUSA, while a member of the Anglican Communion, is independent and is not subject to its governance. Keep up the good work. St. Barnabas is a very interesting article. clariosophic (talk) 21:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC) Italic text

Thanks! Toddst1 21:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Takazawa Masanao (karate)

Michael Wissot

I just saw that you're trying to delete this page. I realize that you're trying to protect the integrity of wikipedia, but I'm going to lose my job if this person gets removed (as a result of my own negligence). If you want it cleaned up, then that's fine ... I'll find someone who has more information. But it's been on Wiki for quite some time. And there are much more sources. I'd appreciate it if you'd remove these tags (for deletion) and I'll work on getting it fixed. But there is considerable notability here (than is currently shown)... I just don't have the validate info at my disposal. The bots have not had a problem with the page at all. Please show some compassion here. Thanks. --User:yardalestep 12:03, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Charles D. Metcalf

You flagged Charles D. Metcalf article with a notability and verifiability tags. Metcalf's 2-star military career is interesting; achieving an equivelant rank in the Federal Government's Senior Executive in his second careeer is more interesting, but what makes him "notable" is fact that he now runs one of the largest mueseums in the world--larger than the Smithsonian's Air and Space Museum. Nevertheless "notability" is somewhat subjective so here are similar wikipedia biographies to compare notability. Current director of Smithsonian's Air Space Museum is John R. Dailey. Note the Dailey biography is rated as a Start level article, and the sources cited are official government biographies (same as Metcalf article). Also, every Secretary of the Smithionian has biography in wikipedia--even thoughs who are far less accomplished than Gen Metcalf (e.g. Robert McCormick Adams). Regarding verifiability, Metcalf article is based on official Air Force biographies which were cited in Reference section. Here are ten examples of ther Air Force Generals who's wikipedia articles are based solely on the official biographies. James Alan Abrahamson Air Force Bio ; Ronald J. Bath Air Force Bio ; Gregory A. Biscone Air Force Bio ; Dana H. Born Air Force Bio ; Trudy H. Clark Air Force Bio ; Roger E. Combs Air Force Bio ; John B. Conaway Air Force Bio ; Susan Y. Desjardins Air Force Bio ; Frank Drew Air Force Bio ; Charles J. Dunlap, Jr. Air Force Bio ; and there are many/many more. In the case of Gen Metcalf, he actually has two official biographies--one for his military career (Major General Charles D. Metcalf, and a second from his Senior Executive Service career (Charles D. Metcalf, SES). Respectfully request you remove the tags from the Metcalf article.--Orygun (talk) 04:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

You raise a very good point on the notability and I've removed the tag. Thanks for pointing that out. However my concern remains that all the sources are U.S. Government sources. They're clearly not third-party sources. I think the {{primarysources}} tag is appropriate. That being said, it's a really interesting article. The guy has had a heck of a career. Toddst1 (talk) 12:13, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Have added a good number of non-Gov sources to support various aspects of the article. Please take look see if it's enough to clear the tag.--Orygun (talk) 04:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the template. Nice article, BTW. Toddst1 (talk) 16:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Great--thanks for your help!--Orygun (talk) 23:08, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow. Is this guy really worth his own page? I read the whole thing looking for anything to indicate that he did more than work diligently at his job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrick Neylan (talk • contribs) 03:51, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Flag officers tend to be notable. Toddst1 (talk) 13:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Parchise

No problem about the delete - I just followed a link to a stub and thought I'd redirect it to a more appropriate place. Sharikkamur (talk) 17:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Culiseta

Hello! Right before I ended my day, you put a couple of very funny templates on a page I set a layout for (I thought the outline there would make my next day go better). I saw the templates right before I quit -- actually, I added the commonscat thingie which pointed to a gallery that did not exist, had a lite laugh and proceeded to end my day.

I have 'fluffed' the page out with information since then. I was going to just leave the templates there and you alone because they provide useful links to where to get the citation information here quickly, but I just realized the extraordinarily useful fact that you can just paste the empty template and preview it -- a better url is delivered (along with a warning). So, now I am bothering you, friendly like but without a template....

I think it should be you who removes the templates on that page Culiseta and perhaps at the same while, peruse the information and make sure it is up-to standards and whatever. I feel like I am taking a refresher course for high school biology, except for the fact that I did not have a course in high school biology. Also, I just pasted the text from Walter Reed, it seemed to be good as it was and most of the interesting words there were easily wikilinked. I mentioned the paste-job in the summary and learned how to seriously cite a reference at that point -- so, if it needs to be reworded, let me know or reword it for me.

That was fairly painful reading about the species which is pictured there -- it should be the journal citation on the page. A few days later, I got to read how creepy some of Carl Linnius classifications were. It has all been relatively interesting in spite of the fact that it is about the one critter I have killed the most often. Do mammals swat at a mosquito that is biting as a reflex and not as a premeditated slaughter? Needless to say, I am sorry I did not take biology now in high school (my school had a loved and very respected teacher for it) but I still probably wouldn't because of the dissections. Eek! -- Carol 12:36, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I tagged the article with {{subst:tl}expand}} and {{unreferenced}} as part of Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol. The goal of the process is to improve new pages and ensure that new pages are slanderous, copyright infringement, etc. The tags were left as a clue to the next editor on ways to improve the article. While some may call things like citations fluff (I don't), it's the only way Wikipedia can ensure that it doesn't become a repository for garbage, neologisms, and myths.

I took a look at the article and it looks much better. I've removed the "funny templates". I FWIW, you seem like an experienced editor - I can't tell if your note is sarcasm or not. I'm assuming good faith either way. Cheers! Toddst1 (talk) 16:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Heh -- I had some demanding teachers long ago, well, I thought they were demanding. Also, I worked with some fishery biologists and some (let me invent a word for this) macrozoobenthoticians. Most of them loved their work and the science so while I moved data from online sources to here, there is always the threat that they might check in to see what has been done here, find my name and not like it. The woman at the laboratory who was in charge of getting their papers published was also the most exacting and picky thing that she could possibly be. All I have to do is think a little bit about her and suddenly citations are easier to complete and facts deserve a lot of checking. That blue mosquito was a problem as there was very little mention of it and even that made me think think think about those biologists.

The tags were warranted in that the page contained no information whatsoever just the ==headings== and the taxobox. I was actually mentally tired after my first foray into the world of taxonomy. I studied physics, eventually and I was only so-so at it. So sarcasm is just present and when the delivery vehicle is justified it gets to be not sarcasm. At the point that the justification is no longer present, it is a shared funny. Or, I didn't mind and I laughed and perhaps verbally cursed. I wrote something that I considered to be as sarcastic as your tags on the empty pages were. I think we have a classic win-win situation here! Yay! Thanks for taking the time to look at the blank page and the fluffed one. I appreciate a before and after eye any day. -- Carol 17:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Southern Maryland#Notable Southern Marylanders

What sort of reference would you expect in this section, since most of the entries link to specific topics that give associated references? Tedickey (talk) 20:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

It seems like the references in the associated articles should be easy to use. Toddst1 (talk) 21:11, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I stand corrected: I looked at the first one in the list, and nowhere in the article does it say Steny Hoyer is from Mechanicsville. I'm sure the refs are out there, if that's where he's from. I think that was my point in the first place Toddst1 (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I see - I've generally checked with google to see if the updates look valid, and remove or put a 'fact' on the ones that aren't. It's possible to overlook missing details in the person-topics (unless I was watching those topics). Tedickey (talk) 21:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Oden Bowie

HI! I noticed that my biography for Oden Bowie was finally accepted at findagrave! I'm not sure if you had anything to do with that, but if so, THANKS! I had gotten so frustrated and had lost faith. Thanks so much for any and all help you gave! Quarterczar (talk) 01:04, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Liburnicon

Hi Toddst1. I am new to wikipedia so sorry if I ask too much silly questions. I really tried to read all available articles about "speedy deletion" and I don't know how to improve my article any more. After hours and days of trying my artice was deleted. Can you please help me to improve my article? Thanks! Chaoticgood (talk) 23:31, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of Unio College, Tellippalai, Sri Lanka

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Unio College, Tellippalai, Sri Lanka, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Unio College, Tellippalai, Sri Lanka is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Unio College, Tellippalai, Sri Lanka, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 11:02, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

User: marktherufftheryder

you recently pressed a case against me (marktherufftheryder) as being a sockpuppet of james brown1605. despite the fact that i have been banned i just wish to inform you that i was not his sockpuppet. i have read the literature on meatpuppets on wikipedia and whilst i am aware that i might be classified as a sockpuppet according to the fact that wikipedia makes no disinction between the two i disagree wholeheartedly with the label you have given me. james brown1605 is a friend of mine who told me that his article was listed for deletion and so i went to his discussion page where i felt that people were not looking objectively at his page and disagreed with a number of points that were raised against it and so spoke in favour of it and edited it to meet the standards requested by other editors. james brown1605 in no way asked me to go onto the page and argue his case. i feel that as the afd page was not a vote i do not see in any way how simply adding another voice to the discussion can be so grossly going against the rules that you would list the user for a ban, it is not as if you can get 'shouted down' on a forum, but then again maybe you were only trying to get your edit count up. i am sure you can drum up some wikipedia technicality that proves you right and me wrong, bravo to you. the fact that you considered me or james brown1605 to be experienced editors is a joke since i have only ever done minor deletions on other pages and to my knowledge he has done no such editing on wikipedia before his article, but perhaps you were annoyed that an article you listed for deletion did not bamboozle its creators and was judged to be valid and met with support from other editors which might be why you only accused me of sockpuppetry after the case had been resolved in our favour. you probably do not care that you were incorrect about me as im sure getting another edit under your belt takes you one step closer to that much coveted adminship because godforbid you could actually achieve something in the real world but i just wanted you to know that some other people actually want to contribute to wikipedia despite your best attempts to stop them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Markruffryder (talk • contribs) 03:45, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Significant coverage not significant publisher

Trivial coverage goes to the description of the coverage itself, not who publishes. This mention is small, you claim it satisfies criterion 1 but that clearly states a brief summary of the nature of the content or the publication of Internet addresses and site do not count, which this is. #3 doesn't offer any significant coverage of the site, so regardless of whether or not they think the creator is an expert on the subject, WEB doesn't make an allowance for "if the owner of the subject is an expert it makes it notable". Hence why I referred to these as pieces of trivial coverage.--Crossmr (talk) 02:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Article EncSpot

hi, I noticed you have had recommended speedy deletion of the Article EncSpot, citing it as webcontent. I would like to point out that EncSpot was a "requested article" on Wikipedia. Encpost is about a software application and not web content. Additionally how come it got into the requested articles list? Thanks in advance for your comments. Aandu (talk) 09:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. As a web-distributed application, I considered it in the same category as a web site. It certainly asserted no level of notability, making it eligible for speedy deletion. I can't comment on the requested articles list. Toddst1 (talk) 14:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Tagging Midnight Snack Break at the Poodle Factory

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

Tagging an article for speedy deletion that was declined twice before is a silly thing to do, don't you think? Please do remember to check the history and remember that A9 also does not apply when the article has claims of significance even when the artist has no article. Regards SoWhy 06:17, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

SS Pendleton

See WT:SHIPS#SS Pendleton - I messed the ping up, so making sure you are notified. Mjroots (talk) 16:39, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Rehs Galleries Edits

I am not sure why you have decided to remove most of the content on the page, but a similar matter arose back in 2014 and was looked into by a number of higher-up editors. All the content was put back and the only thing requested was a notice at the bottom of the About Us page ... which was done and is still there. http://www.rehs.com/aboutus.html?contemporary=N "The text of this page is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts)."

I would ask that you please reconsider your edits to this page. All the best Howard L. Rehs (talk) 20:26, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

1. There are no higher-up editors.
2. You can't have both Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike and Copyright. Take your pick, then WP:OTRS is ->that way.

Toddst1 (talk) 20:43, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

This is what was requested by the previous editors to make it good: Unless otherwise noted on the specific page, all information and images displayed on this web site are the property of Rehs Galleries, Inc. and may not be reproduced in any manner or from without the express written permission of Rehs Galleries. Inc.

And the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike and Copyright is the 'otherwise noted'.

Also, why was the Scholarly Research section removed? There were plenty of references for all those projects:

1. Julien Dupré: http://www.ifar.org/artist_book_detail_in_progress.php?id=50024&nameid=1351
2. Daniel Ridgway Knight: http://www.ifar.org/artist_book_detail_in_progress.php?id=50033&nameid=1288
3. Emile Munier: http://www.ifar.org/artist_book_detail_in_progress.php?id=50011&nameid=1436
4. http://www.emilemunier.org/
5. Antoine Blanchard: http://www.ifar.org/artist_book_detail_in_progress.php?id=50312&nameid=1751
6. http://www.antoineblanchard.org/

Thanks! Howard L. Rehs (talk) 21:21, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

WP:OTRS is ->that way for the copyright stuff.

I understand why you might want it in the article to promote your gallery. However, I don't know the imact of this research nor do I understand why It should be included in the article, other than to promote your gallery. Toddst1 (talk) 21:33, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Are you saying that the definitive research on a particular artist is not important? Or that you do not understand what a catalogue raisonne is? Howard L. Rehs (talk) 21:48, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm saying Wikipedia is not a place to promote your business. Now, per WP:PAYTALK, please stop hounding me on this. Toddst1 (talk) 21:57, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Tramp (Lowell Fulson song)

Please explain how your deletion of the covers list dovetails with WP:COVERSONG. There was no discussion of any version in the deleted itesm. Tapered (talk) 21:54, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

For TPSers, I believe Tapered is referring to Tramp (Lowell Fulson song) ‎. Let me see if I can explain:

"When a song has renditions (recorded or performed) by more than one artist, discussion of a particular artist's rendition should be included in the song's article (never in a separate article), but only if at least one of the following applies:

• the rendition is discussed by a reliable source on the subject of the song,
• the rendition itself meets the notability requirement at WP:NSONGS."
  — as stated verbatim in WP:COVERSONG

There was no indication that either of those criteria was met by any of the covers listed. Does that help? Toddst1 (talk) 01:01, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Toddst1 List ≠ discussion. Tapered (talk) 03:34, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

What's to discuss? Neither of those criteria apply to the deleted renditions. Disagree? WP:PROVEIT Toddst1 (talk) 12:56, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

You removed songs from a LIST, and justify the action by referring to a policy about DISCUSSION. The was no discussion in the article of the covers that you removed. There is no policy, that I can find, prohibiting or circumscribing cover lists in a Song article. Your edit was a mistake. Tapered (talk) 01:50, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

@Tapered: It is very possible I have made an error. Let me help us get to the bottom of this with a question: Which of those renditions is discussed by a reliable source on the subject of the song? Toddst1 (talk) 04:02, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Listed or discussed? If you wanted to delist them because there was no reference, I wouldn't have lifted a finger. I used a Wikipedia article to verify (for myself, not for editing) that Salt N Pepa did indeed cover the song. My guess is the others also did. Which means that BMI isn't doing very well by the estate of Lowell Fulson, because the last version they list is Johnny Winter with Roy Head, whereas other BMI material on the Salt N Pepa album was listed in their records. So tell me, if the deleted covers were listed in BMI's database, would those be list-ready? Tapered (talk) 04:25, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

@Tapered: If there's a reliable source that discusses them, then they should be in the article. Just a database saying they were published isn't enough. Wikipedia articles are WP:Circular and not suitable. The whole point of COVERSONG is WP:GNG for renditions of songs. Toddst1 (talk) 04:28, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

First, I know that the Wikipedia article isn't a reliable source, which you might just have inferred from description. The BMI song database lists performers of works in their catalog. I dare you to remove any information verified by the BMI database—same for ASCAP. Tapered (talk) 04:43, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Just because they're in BMI's list or ASCAP, doesn't make them WP:Notable. BMI released a lot of non-notable stuff. ASCAP lists everything where royalties are due. I think you're missing the point of WP:COVERSONG but you shouldn't take my word for it. Perhaps you should raise this on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Songs. This is how I've always interpreted it but I could be wrong. Toddst1 (talk) 04:47, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

WP:N is a straw man—what I claimed is WP:RS. Both organizations exist to collect royalties. Tapered (talk) 05:46, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

WP:N is not a straw man. It is a guideline. Toddst1 (talk) 15:39, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Notability policy

Hi. I hope you are online.
Is there any essay which states "a good online presence does not mean notability"?

Also, your input on this issue will be appreciated a lot. Thanks :-) —usernamekiran(talk) 20:47, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Usernamekiran: I think WP:INVALIDBIO is as close as we get. I'm not sure how to handle the mobile issue. It seems like something that should go to WP:AN. Toddst1 (talk) 22:37, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks man :-) —usernamekiran(talk) 22:38, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

AfD courtesy blanking

Hi there. Re. this edit. I originally blanked the AfD back about 5 years ago in my capacity as an oversighter. A request came through requesting that it be deleted as some of the commentary was considered borderline defamatory and the article was appearing high in pageranks. Rather than delete/suppress, which definitely wouldn't fly, I opted to blank as a courtesy. The history, etc, would still clearly be there if needed. Anyways - that was the rationale. - Alison <sup>❤</sup> 06:45, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks @Alison:. It did seem a bit out of character. :) Toddst1 (talk) 14:12, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) also @Alison: If you don't mind me saying- off the cuff, like- it doesn't seem to have been a particularly hi-octane discussion?! Not questioning your judgment, just wondering what I've missed. — O Fortuna <sup>semper crescis, aut decrescis</sup> 14:21, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Indeed, it wasn't. But their take on it was that, given the original page had been deleted, all that was left was the horse-trading on the AfD and they felt that was really not okay. I was basically ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ so opted to blank in deference to them. Easily undone/redone as needed and a compromise vs. deletion which was definitely a no-no - Alison <sup>❤</sup> 19:18, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

The Hudson New Yorker

Hi there.

I noticed you had spoken on this talk page of the user User:The Hudson New Yorker. They have made further disruptive and unessacery edits on all five of the New York City Borough pages by changing the lead for no reason. With the possibility of them being a sock puppet of an account which already has a bad history, what should be done about this user? Thanks, WikiImprovment78 (talk) 16:31, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Calvin Harris

Hi User:Toddst1, can you add a bit to Calvin Harris please? How his musical influences are Jamiroquai and Fatboy Slim (he says here [2]) Because you'd phrase it properly and know which section it belongs in, hope you can help. :)--Theo Mandela (talk) 07:57, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Feldenkrais page

dear Toddst1, You have written that my text is unsupported, but it isn't- I was quoting from the Brain's Way of Healing by Dr. Norman Doidge. Maybe you would like to read it, and then re-edit this article. It seems that whoever has written the page has a negative bias which is damaging the reputation of the Feldenkrais Method: the sources to which are pretty out of date, as has neuroscience advanced a lot since 2009. If I have cited things wrongly, my apologies, I am not an academic, but have tried to follow protocol as I read it on Wikipedia. Any advice would be gratefully received. Yours sincerely, FGUK1

@FGUK1: I encourage you to restore that material with references. Toddst1 (talk) 00:04, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply- I did add references. But will try to do it better when I have a little more time. Which bits in particular did you object to? — Preceding unsigned comment added by FGUK1 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

• And do NOT just re-type in what is in the book. That would constitute a copyright violation. Also remain neutral in your writing. --Hammersoft (talk) 00:23, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Et tu Brute

In response to your information re COIs - please could you respond to the below comments?

Dear Toddst1, I have corrected a citation of myself BY SOMEONE ELSE, not added my own self-reference. The original citation: 1) had my name as "Kristy"; 2) referred to p.34 when that was the quotation number and it should have been pp.10-11; 3) was written in a way to suggest that it was my opinion that Brutus was Caesar's son (which is extremely erroneous).

Therefore by removing this entire section, you are removing someone else's section of work, which I was merely correcting as it was misquoting me and that was not acceptable.

Yours sincerely, Dr Kirsty Corrigan.

That's fine, but WP:EXCEPTIONAL still applies. Toddst1 (talk) 18:09, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

So how can the edit be requested through the proper channels, when the entire section has now been removed?

Also it is extremely concerning that anyone can write anything and misquote someone, but an expert cannot correct the errors - please explain how this can be possible?

Please note this is not my own theory, but is the well-known theory of all modern historians. Furthermore I did not cite myself, but was misquoted in this - the person who wrote the article was quoting the ancient historians' theory and attributing it to me incorrectly. How can I correct all of their errors? khc 18:57, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

It's removed now. I don't believe it belonged in there in the first place. Take it to the article talk page if you disagree, but there already seems to be consensus that my removal was appropriate. Toddst1 (talk) 22:27, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

The Liberty Conservative as a source

I'm disappointed you reverted, but I invite you to contribute here. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 22:38, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Grey's Anatomy (Season 14)

So even though the source linked shows a picture (of the actual script that the actual cast and crew read at the table read, which is EW's only source for the title) that lists the title as Break down the House, I'm supposed to leave the wrong title because Entertainment Weekly can't possibly have mistyped the title in the article text? Librarynerds (talk) 02:07, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

• Additionally, none of my edits to the page were me "protecting [my] preferred version of the page. They were, as I noted, me removing unsourced changes. Librarynerds (talk) 02:09, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps I should have said "Stop the fucking edit warring." Toddst1 (talk) 06:50, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

• What edits are you thinking are edit warring? There are no edits I've done on the season 14 Grey's Anatomy page that I've done multiple times. The title thing was one. Someone also removed an actress. The names of two actors were inverted from credited order. Someone added unsourced guests a couple times. All the edits were different. How is that edit warring? Librarynerds (talk) 14:27, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

[3], [4], [5] seem to fit the definition. Toddst1 (talk) 17:53, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

• All three of those are different, none of them are sourced, and one of those edits wasn't even me. Librarynerds (talk) 21:23, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

OneClickArchiver at DAYS

Hi Toddst1. I'm not sure why this happened, but I wanted to let you know that when you used OneClickArchiver at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Days of the year, it was archiving things to /Archive 1 when they should be going to /Archive 12. I went ahead and moved those threads to Archive 12. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 00:44, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

@Mz7: Facepalm. Thanks. Toddst1 (talk) 13:42, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Jeff King (consultant) for deletion

Could you offer further explanations as to why Jeff King (consultant) is unworthy of an entry? Many sources, campaign involvements, lineage, newsworthy and notable; all which are easily verifiable via the google machine. I thought that a post in your talk page would be appropriate because of your interest in the political arena and references cited.

Furthermore, there certainly does not seem to be any demonstrated desire for privacy; very much the opposite..

http://www.rollcall.com/news/hoh/baby-announcement-by-steve-king-gets-political --Wikipietime (talk) 14:12, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Did you see my comments and question on your talk page? Toddst1 (talk) 14:23, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes and thank you!

Just a quick heads up, I've restored this to Draft:Jeff King (consultant) after I closed the debate as debate (3x delete, 1x keep, all using policy arguments but just a straight disagreement on "enough sources"). Ritchie333 <sup>(talk) (cont)</sup> 19:59, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: Thanks for the heads up. No worries. Toddst1 (talk) 23:28, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Andrew Christian Page

Hi Todd,

Sorry about that, I just worked out what I did wrong!

your report

Why are you reporting me to the edit warring noticeboard? Clearly you are not familiar with this conversion. Please stop with this. LittleJerry (talk) 15:15, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Yup. Let the discussions continue and the edit wars stop. Toddst1 (talk) 15:19, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for speedy deletion of Martha'r Mynydd

Hi! I'm new to Wikipedia so this may simply be a lack of understanding, but could you please explain why you're deleting my article? It has three sources referenced as evidence of its legitimacy. It's a story told in Welsh schools. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TEDupont (talk • contribs) 14:15, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

If it isn't something you made up, you should give it more context - like saying "Martha'r Mynydd is a legendary character from <adjective> folkore/mythology." As you wrote it, it looked like a sham. Toddst1 (talk) 15:52, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of new Katharine Gorka BLP on same day of creation.

I see that SPEEDY deletion was successful derived from a consensus of editors. Would you please move the deleted article and talk pages to Draft or sandbox space? There were significant new news events that would have further distinguished her notability and worthiness for this revised BLP article. What is the a procedure for formally contesting this deletion? This action, deletion, does not "sit" right with me and a wider consensus of editors is warranted, in my respectful opinion. --Wikipietime (talk) 12:10, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I cannot restore or move the article. Toddst1 (talk) 12:35, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Toddst1, your edit to Wikipietime's talk page yesterday, plus this unhelpful response, is really rude. I can tell from their talk page the user has a habit of creating bad articles, but that doesn't mean they're all bad. Your attitude (along with your questionable interpretation of the discussion outcome) is downright terrible. I don't agree with the user's claims about censorship, but your actions (and other users on this topic) certainly don't help to dispel them.

To answer your question, @Wikipietime:, you can request a review here or request User:Metropolitan90 (the deleting admin) to move the article to your sandbox. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:44, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@Argento Surfer: If you think either of these two edits ([6], [7]) were rude or otherwise unhelpful, I suggest you develop much thicker skin. Toddst1 (talk) 12:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I think your response above was akin to a person asking for directions to a restaurant you had been to before, and you saying that you weren't hungry. Your statement at face value is true and accurate, but in no way helpful to the person asking the question. But hey, feel free to suggest I be the one to re-evaluate my behavior when I was the one expanding the article in question and providing the requested information. That's cool too. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:09, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Your point is taken. I may have been more verbose if I had had my coffee before I replied. Toddst1 (talk) 13:13, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

"We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented" -Wiesel

As recipient of;

"... If you can't go along with this consensus, re-creating this article, you may be blocked from editing..."

I do interpret as a threat which bothers me none. Maybe I get it, due to you familiarity with my contributions, most lately the failed attempt to creat an article on Steve King's son Jeff King. That is why I would have wanted a broader consensus with a more objective history. --Wikipietime (talk) 13:37, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

You could interpret warnings about violating Wikipedia policy and the likely consequences of your actions if they continue as threats to be blocked. These "threats" are fully appropriate and in line with our policies, and you almost certainly will be blocked from editing if you ignore our policies.

However, your recent editing and posting of quotations smack of WP:BATTLE. Toddst1 (talk) 15:21, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

The discussion of the article should have stayed on the talk page of deleted article, not spread on multiple talks. Excuse me if you feel a personal attack; but in case you may not have noticed I am battling for inclusion into Wikipedia a BLP who has obtained stature deserving of. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikipietime (talk • contribs) 16:27, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, but calling those that hold differing opinions from you "bullies" is personal. Toddst1 (talk) 18:24, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

was something about skin thickness that may have sparked the outrage. --Wikipietime (talk) 13:43, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

That comment wasn't directed towards you. Toddst1 (talk) 13:55, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Question

Hi -- I'm unclear why you made this change. It was better before. It was accurate before -- though the word currently is not needed. We don't say in Trump's article "he is president as of ..., using that template." Why do it here? Plus, it inserts the British date format. Improperly, for a US person, where we did not have the British date format before. 2604:2000:E016:A700:F9A5:6FB5:9D46:809F (talk) 18:17, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Have you read WP:ASOF? Toddst1 (talk) 18:19, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

First -- that does not explain why you would force a British date for a non-British, American person. Isn't that flat-out wrong?

Second -- It says "The "as of" technique is a method to deal with information that will date quickly." But we don't know that it will date "quickly." We know that it is an interim appointment, and that there is intent to have a full-time person (but the last full-time person in that position lasted only 10 days, so the title is not all-telling). People in interim positions can last for long periods of time. If there were a person replacing a President for example 10 days before the President's term ended, then we would know it would date quickly. We don't know that here, just because the appointment is "interim" in name. Given that the goal is to make sure people will update it in the future, I don't think there is much risk here that people will fail to do that here -- it is a very prominent article. I just don't see the real-world reason to use that. And the British date thing is awful, and simply wrong. 2604:2000:E016:A700:F9A5:6FB5:9D46:809F (talk) 18:31, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

You're kinda worked up over this trivial edit, huh? What's up with that? Toddst1 (talk) 19:38, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Well, the "let's use British dates for an American in the White House" bit is somewhat open and shut in my mind. One rarely is able to comment on open and shut issues! Beyond that ... blame it on two cups of coffee? 2604:2000:E016:A700:B5FF:B936:D6B1:D1D2 (talk) 22:18, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I kind of agree on the date thing, but WP:SOFIXIT applies. Toddst1 (talk) 22:46, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Jay Town

Thank you. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 14:07, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome. That was a mess! Your efforts there are appreciated as well. Toddst1 (talk) 14:08, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

As is often the case, it's a mess again, with much of the same content, poorly sourced. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 00:56, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Please respond

The wiki page was not put up by me. I do not understand why you have removed the page. I merely added some minor edits yesterday to make it accurate. It is now not accurate after your changes.

Category:Parents of criminals has been nominated for discussion

Category:Parents of criminals, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Opencooper (talk) 07:43, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Dam article

Hes referring to the the reference article headlines not being accurate, I just checked with archive.org and a couple of the website have changed their headlines since I posted the original references.Pastorma (talk) 23:10, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

edit

Bt sir why remove my editing section of Sonu nigam?? I think my information was true Sonu123456789 (talk) 17:45, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

It appeared to be something you saw yourself. Toddst1 (talk) 18:07, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Stabilizers

Hi Toddst1, Thank you for your message. I am one of the two principals of The Stabilizers and can confirm that the information in the wiki is currently correct - or close enough. I am the source for most of the other articles cited. This is why I removed the warning tag. If I've made an error, please advise. Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AgentAudio (talk • contribs) 19:20, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll follow up on your talk page with some info about how you should be influencing this article and how you shouldn't. Toddst1 (talk) 19:24, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Todd, Thanks again. I have withdrawn the info that caused the COI and will limit contributions to the Talk page in future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AgentAudio (talk • contribs) 20:11, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Re:Arbcom statement

My apologies, they have a 500 word limit and I played with what I wanted to say for over an hour so some stuff that was there originally got removed, trimmed, condensed, etc. I've noted that in the statement; if you spot any other inaccuracies lemme know and I'll fix them as soon as I am able to. TomStar81 (Talk) 16:21, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Some stroopwafels for you!

Thanks for tending to the COI editing on Jay Town the last few days! Marquardtika (talk) 02:48, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

@Marquardtika:, so you prompted me to find a stroopwafel - I had never had one. Pretty tasty! Thanks! Toddst1 (talk) 18:39, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Intheclouds

I'm glad there's another set of eyes on the page. I think the three editors are coordinating or otherwise working together. (and one seems to be the founder) I had considered tagging it as A7 (and I'm not going to remove it) but at least some of the bands have articles which might mean this label has a credible claim of significance. I was considering starting an AfD. 331dot (talk) 21:12, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

@331dot: It looks like a walled garden where the bands and the label reference each other for claims of importance/notability. There appear to be entire flocks of socks / WP:SPAs working on this. I've seen scenarios like this before. Toddst1 (talk) 21:15, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Good to know. I will trust your good judgement then and keep the page on my watchlist. 331dot (talk) 21:17, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

According to CensorMe the record label is asking people to edit the page. Just FYI. 331dot (talk) 22:43, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. It sure did smell like that. I've RPP-ed here. Toddst1 (talk) 22:53, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Not me

Hey Todd, just to inform you in the context of your message. I have made no edits at LoginRadius page. Please do not assume that I am doing the changes. If I will make any changes, I will do it being logged it :) Thanks, Prince — Preceding unsigned comment added by Princekapoor (talk • contribs) 10:03, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

It must have been a heck of an imposter! [8] Toddst1 (talk) 18:52, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Strange fruit

Stop edit-warring on this page: this is disruptive. Write your opinion on the talk but don't revert any of these covers again without discussing it first, thanks. What is laughable is that you let UB40's and Annie Lennox's names appearing in the lead whereas there ain't one single word concerning them in the body of the article. Valboo (talk) 23:14, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Removing content once is hardly an edit war. Go study your basics. Toddst1 (talk) 14:01, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Poppycock, you had already removed this content in 2016. Next time you make this arbitrary amputation, I report you. You're warned and don't even try to un-edit one of my contributions elsewhere or I report you for harassment. Valboo (talk) 16:09, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Wow 2016. Report me now. Perhaps @Valboo:'s eyesight is failing as the diff s/he provided shows me removing different material, most of which is unambigously failing WP:COVERSONG. I sure hope this doesn't go to Wp:ANI - people might find out about me! Toddst1 (talk) 16:50, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

List of Upsilon Sigma Phi brothers

Any idea how I can be "good cop"? I'd like to salvage both the list and the editor. And I'm not sure he's deleting any entries, just doesn't think that anything other than the 90 years is useful in that way.Naraht (talk) 17:22, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

I left notes on the IP's talk page, as did you and I left a note on the article talk page as well. I've also requested semi-protection. I won't revert again so as to steer clear of any issues around WP:EW. I don't know what else to do besides requesting a block if this continues, but I don't think that that's the best outcome. Toddst1 (talk) 17:24, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. A block might be best, *but* in the state that he edits it to in one of the cycles, and then edit it by hand, I think. I'm pretty sure he's copying and pasting given the speed that he's adding thousands of bytes. And *some* of the people added have pages. It will just take a lot* of editing. (and he's removing people who are just top notchers, so it isn't everything.Naraht (talk) 17:28, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

I've converted the 1920 generation, and I'm going with a fairly loose (though not as loose as the IP editor) criteria. For example one of the people in the 1920 became a member of the Congress of the Philippines. Even though he doesn't have an article yet, I think he belongs on the list.Naraht (talk) 18:18, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Seems like a great approach. Thanks! Toddst1 (talk) 18:46, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, let's just hope he sees what I've done. The length of the list actually doesn't surprise me Upsilon Sigma Phi is the oldest of the Greek Letter Organizatations in the Philippines.Naraht (talk) 20:21, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Wall of Severus

Hey Todd,

Thanks for your message, admittedly it's been about 12 years since actively using HTML etc., prior to the broadband/'"Brazil"' era, I was a little more capable - so after my first attempt to alter/stumble through the edit, I found the visual editor much simpler as I wasn't having to rely on what is now just a vague memory!

I hope you can see what I meant re the edit too, would appreciate your insight on the matter as I think it's quite a hot subject potentially, i.e. might go against currently held opinion... and it could be interesting to then try to work out where it could have been, if you follow my train of thought of course. And presuming you are interested in debating currently held views on this matter - if not please appreciate I'm not a 'n00b' I'm simply briefly re-familiarising myself with it, I'm sure there is probably a page for actual debate but I just thought given that you're there you might be interested etc, etc. If so:

Apart from what I said in the edit, and edit summary - the source provided on the Wall of Severus page confirms its' existence if you only interpret the texts as they were written by the authors. They were highly regarded and educated historians and scholars nearest chronologically and are saying in quite strong terms that he had himself built an entire wall from one sea to the other. What is perhaps a matter for debate is whether or not Severus' efforts were successful in providing fortitude. If that were the case, I suppose it'd still be standing today. There is not really anything to prove on the main page of Septimius Severus that he only re-strengthened Hadrians wall, other than suggesting he did.

Moreover, there is nothing other than 'previously held thought' on the main page of Hadrians Wall to assert he had only strengthened Hadrians Wall - whereas the texts included in the Domesday source I provided earlier and the Latin source I added to the page all seem to strongly support that he had built 'a wall', and I appreciate that what I'm suggesting means it would then have to be found to be proven but I really don't see anything that does prove that he didn't, other than.. like I said... just... because?? Right? :)

Thanks again

Rob — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.42.150.101 (talk) 01:52, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Note

I'm assuming Yellow Sunstreaker (talk · contribs) is either the Nazi troll or is merely generally trolling. What do you think? ←Baseball Bugs <sup>What's up, Doc?</sup> carrots→ 06:53, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

This bullshit says yes. Toddst1 (talk) 15:40, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

I didn't realize you were no longer an admin. I turned him in to AIV, but no action has been taken. I'm inclined to revert the troll again anyway. ←Baseball Bugs <sup>What's up, Doc?</sup> carrots→ 16:00, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

WP:ANIISLOUSY as you and I both know. Toddst1 (talk) 22:09, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Bertha Isaacs

I am completely baffled by your insertion of verify information on her birth and "provide quotation", as I provided that in my comment which you reverted. This source [9] states her name was "Albertha Madeline Hanna at birth on April 18, 1900". This source [10] of births in St. Matthews Parish, New Providence, states (entry #4) her birth occurred on 18 April 1900 and her parents were "Robert Samuel Hannah and Lilla Celeste Hannah Formerly Minns". This source, [11] her marriage record, shows that her middle name was actually Magdalena, confirms her spelling of the last name as Hanna and gives her father's name again as Robert. It should be irrelevant if you can access them as off-line sources are allowed and I find that often, since I do not live in the US that I cannot open sources others can open. I don't participate in edit warring and hope that you will remove your tag, as it is incorrect. The cited sources do confirm the information provided. SusunW (talk) 18:25, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi @SusunW:. Thanks for your note and explanation. I clicked on the note[1] in the article twice to verify and the wayback machine came back with nothing both times. It appears that this was a transient problem with the wayback machine as it is now providing the archived text. The note[2] in the article is to the birth record. When I searched on the transcription of the cursive for Isaacs, it came up with nothing. With your more specific guidance pointing to line 4, I see that it does also confirm her birth (pesky primary sources) I'll remove my tag. I'll also add those sources to her entry on April 18. Toddst1 (talk) 18:44, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Toddst1. I am pretty much a stickler for not putting anything in a record that I cannot confirm, as women's biographies seem to be particularly scrutinized. As I have often been written as Susan, I am sensitive to misidentification in secondary sources and usually try to confirm those things with primary records. Thanks for your note, and yes, Wayback has been having some really weird issues lately. SusunW (talk) 18:54, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Delia Weber

Citations on her birth are already given in the text as well. Even without a subscription to the oxford dictionary, you should be able to see [12] "Delia Mercedes Weber Pérez in Santo Domingo, the Dominican Republic, on 23 October 1900" The full source goes on to say her father was Johann Stephan Weber "a goldsmith who had immigrated to the Dominican Republic from Curaçao" and the second source [13] "Delia fue hija única del matrimonio de Juan Esteban Weber Sulié y Enriqueta Pérez (Santo Domingo, 1883-1950), nació en 1900" (Delia was the only daughter of the marriage of ... born in 1900). SusunW (talk) 20:16, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping me honest. Toddst1 (talk) 21:52, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

de nada. :) I am a wee bit anal about sourcing. SusunW (talk) 22:10, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Speedy

The article is involved in WP:COI, so I think it should be deleted. Adityavagarwal (talk) 22:46, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

@Adityavagarwal: (talk page stalker) It has been, as a copyright violation. Adam9007 (talk) 22:53, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Good call, Adam. I'm digging the role-reversal. :) Toddst1 (talk) 23:00, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Lol. Adam9007 I did not check for copyvio, as I thought the username was almost resembling coi (Dan Stalfire was created by dstalfire?). So, I thought it fell under G11 according to that. Correct me if I am wrong, as I would amend myself for the future! Adityavagarwal (talk) 23:02, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

G11 typically does't apply to drafts as that's where they're supposed to be improved. Autobiographies are not prohibited - only frowned upon. Usually drafts like this are never accepted, time out and WP:CSD#G13 applies. Toddst1 (talk) 23:06, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Toddst1 - Any CSD criteria that begins with the letter 'G' (for "General") can apply to any Wikipedia page. Expanding on this further: any CSD criteria that begins with an 'A' (for "Article") - can only be applied in the mainspace. 'R' for redirects, 'F' for file, 'U' for user space, and so on... :-) ~Oshwah~<sup>(talk) (contribs)</sup> 23:12, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) To follow-up though: If G11 is used correctly, it's for blatant advertising (pages created with the sole attempt to spam or advertise). I agree with you that G11 should not be applied on drafts that are not blatant advertisements. This essay I wrote helps explain what I'm talking about (for those here who may not understand) ;-) ~Oshwah~<sup>(talk) (contribs)</sup> 23:18, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

@Oshwah: Any CSD criteria that begins with the letter 'G' (for "General") can apply to any Wikipedia page Except G1 and G2, which do not apply to user pages. Adam9007 (talk) 23:16, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Adam9007 - Ah, yup good call. So, to revise what I said earlier: Any CSD criteria that begins with the letter 'G' (for "General") can apply to any Wikipedia page*

*Certain restrictions apply, see store for details! :-P ~Oshwah~<sup>(talk) (contribs)</sup> 23:22, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Sure, if you're zealously enforcing it. It would be silly to hit a draft with a G2 and G11 isn't too far behind. Toddst1 (talk) 23:23, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

October 2017

Hello, I'm Zackmann08. Thank you for your recent contributions to Stabilizers. I noticed that when you added the image to the infobox, you added it as a thumbnail. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). What does this mean? Well in the infobox, when you specify the image you wish to use, instead of doing it like this:

|image=[[File:SomeImage.jpg|thumb|Some image caption]]

Instead just supply the name of the image. So in this case you can simply do:

|image=SomeImage.jpg.

There will then be a separate parameter for the image caption such as |caption=Some image caption. Please note that this is a generic form message I am leaving on your page because you recently added a thumbnail to an infobox. The specific parameters for the image and caption may be different for the infobox you are using! Please consult the Template page for the infobox being used to see better documentation. Thanks! Zackmann08 (<sup>Talk to me</sup>/<sub>What I been doing</sub>) 23:47, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Huh? Toddst1 (talk) 17:15, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Grei Allen discographies

Thanks for your help with the Geri Allen discography. Each section has been referenced now DISEman (talk) 01:37, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia Lousy Article contributors has been nominated for discussion

Category:Wikipedia Lousy Article contributors, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. VegaDark (talk) 06:10, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

• Would you mind taking an fmbox instead of a category? It looks the same as categories but it's not part of category space. Details about fmboxes can be found here: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2017_October_23#Category:Wikipedians_who_wish_a_lot_of_users_would_come_back. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:33, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

I think Category:Wikipedians who are under investigation by the categories police might be a good example to follow. Toddst1 (talk) 23:02, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I have to disagree on that. Hard redirects don't work in category namespace (see WP:R#CATEGORY; basically, the category is a grouping of pages in addition to being a page itself), so that effectively amounts to recreating pages deleted at XfD. I will be clearing out Category:Wikipedians who retain deleted categories on their userpages in the near future, but my preferred approach is to talk to the users affected and offer alternatives. One of the alternatives is {{fmbox}}, which could produce the following display:

Wikipedia Lousy Article contributors Wikipedians who are under investigation by the categories police

Would you be open to using that instead of the category code itself? Thanks, -- Black Falcon <sup>(talk)</sup> 04:57, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I could use the fmbox, but I don't understand what problem you're trying to solve. Toddst1 (talk) 13:22, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

James Hickey Don Bosco Prep OC

I'm trying to create a Wikipedia page for my self and Football coaching career. I've been a HS football coach and a College Football coach I'm now at one of the top coaching positions in the country. How do I make a page? James Hickey (talk) 06:30, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

See WP:Autobiography. Toddst1 (talk) 06:31, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Sources for lists of articles...?

Hi Toddst1, thanks for your note. Could you elaborate on what you mean by adding sources to the 'Days of the Year' entries? I've tried to stay consistent with the style of the pages, and none of the 'Days of the Year' pages I've seen have citations attached to the list entries. I've been linking all new names to their Wiki-articles, and I've been fairly careful about choosing biographical articles which cite sources for birthdates.

I'm currently a member of WikiProject Women, and that's keeping me pretty busy right now, but I'll consider adding my name to the 'Days of the Year' project. There are definitely overlapping interests in these projects. I've actually been focusing on the year pages this week (e.g. "1900"), because I've only just realized that there's a pretty big gender gap in these year/date lists -- almost 7 times more men than women in lists of notable births, deaths, etc. I thought I'd work on bringing some of them up to parity. All the best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 21:43, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

There was a recent change to the requirements for Days of the year pages regarding sources. They used to have an exemption from WP:V but no longer. Take a look at the long gory discussion on the project talk page for details.

Keep up the great work on WikiProject Women!

Toddst1 (talk) 21:51, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Princess Adelheid of Hohenlohe-Langenburg

Hello again -- I don't understand what the issue is with this article. In the "Life" section of the subject's article, it is stated that "The Duchess died at Dresden on 25 January 1900", and this statement is accompanied by an inline citation from a 1900 obituary from The Times. What do you want? Do you want me to cite that Times source next to Princess Adelheid's entry on the January 25 page?

I read the 'Days of the Year' proposal to change project guidelines re: sourcing, and you're right -- it's gory. I'm unclear how it's planned to be implemented. Quite a few of the already existing entries on 'January 25' don't have any inline citations to back up dates of birth and death. I'm sure you have better things to do than police my edits, and I certainly have better things to do than make edits that may be promptly removed, so until I understand how the new guidelines are operating, I'll avoid adding anything to the DOY pages. Alanna the Brave (talk) 12:59, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

@Alanna the Brave: all you have to do is copy the source from the article to the DOY page when you list the person on that page. The article itself seems fine. Toddst1 (talk) 14:34, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Well, alrighty then -- that's what I'll do. Alanna the Brave (talk) 14:49, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

One last question: do the citation guidelines also apply to the year pages? I had assumed WikiProject Days of the Year and WikiProject Years were two separate things, with different domains (i.e. calendar days versus years), but you also reverted a few of my edits on the "1900" page. I knew about citations being necessary for notable events on year pages, just not births/deaths. Thanks, Alanna the Brave (talk) 16:34, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

If they don't, they should. Toddst1 (talk) 18:32, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

But they aren't. Mill 1 (talk) 21:51, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

We can fix that too. Toddst1 (talk) 21:54, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

@Mill 1: Wikipedia:WikiProject Years, do not have an exemption from references like WPDOY used to, so WP:BURDEN fully applies. Toddst1 (talk) 21:29, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Is see. You are going to be busy. Oh wait, try to get consensus first. Mill 1 (talk) 22:32, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

I can't tell if you're serious or trolling. IDK/IDC. Toddst1 (talk) 22:44, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Yardi Systems

The article Yardi Systems has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Promotional, but no significant coverage in reliable sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Huon (talk) 23:39, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Yardi Systems for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Yardi Systems is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yardi Systems until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Huon (talk) 04:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Glauben können wie du

Glauben können wie du, - why would you remove "Christian"? I'd normally say hymn which is generally understood as churchy, but - without the image of the Franciscan - there'd be no warning about religous context. "Catholic" would be wrong because the content is quite ecumenical. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:03, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: My German is pretty rusty but from what I can tell, and as you say, it's quite ecumenical. No direct or indirect mention of Christ, only God (Gott). Labeling it Christian seems like an opinion and an exclusionary one at that. Toddst1 (talk) 14:37, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Jesus is mentioned in the second stanza (not in the article, admitted), the addressed "du" is clearly his mother, three biblical quotations in the lyrics, reference to faith/hope/love: it can't get more Christian than that, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:54, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Wow - quite prominently. Maria too. I was apparently looking at the wrong text. I should have followed the external link instead of googling it. Thanks for pointing that out. I've restored it. Toddst1 (talk) 15:35, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Toddst1. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewing

Hello, Toddst1. As one of Wikipedia's most experienced Wikipedia editors, Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 04:32, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer granted

Hello Toddst1. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia, if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Alex Shih (talk) 17:44, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for lending your time to help improve Wikipedia! If you are interested in editing more often, I suggest you create an account to gain additional privileges. Happy editing!

ANI Experiences survey

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

@PEarley: When will the results be available and where? Toddst1 (talk) 23:48, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Hey Toddst1, I've updated the survey page with a timeline - because we're running a quantitative analysis as well, it's a bit longer than if we were just releasing the survey data alone. As for location: we'll make it as visible as possible, definitely uploading to commons, but also hosting a wikitext version on enwiki. We'll do a group ping for survey participants, and make sure the word gets out. Happy holidays, Patrick Earley (WMF) (talk) 19:27, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Removal of birth dates linked to existing Wikipedia articles

When adding a missing significant person's birth (I typically add musicians/entertainers of note) to the "Births" section of a calendar date, should I make sure the Wikipedia profile page (not created/edited by me) to which I've linked has accurately sourced the subject's birth date? I assume this has been the reason for the reverted edits.Crumptyjack (talk) 18:19, 9 December 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crumptyjack (talk • contribs) 07:07, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

@Crumptyjack: Nope - they need direct citations. See the added requirement at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Days_of_the_year#Style. The community is trying to raise the bar on those pages. Toddst1 (talk) 15:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

@Toddst1 - The NY Times On this Day external links on each date page are no longer functioning. Neither the BBC nor Canadian links seem to have comprehensive data on significant events/births/deaths for each date. I've been searching for an adequate database to cite for my notable birth listings, but many of those have reliability errors. Are you aware of a comprehensive database of notable births by date that meets Wikipedia standards for source material? Crumptyjack

No, I don't. Toddst1 (talk) 23:46, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Reference sections

If you're going to add references to every item in every day of the year article, e.g. this, please format the citation correctly, and please add a "References" section to the article to which you're adding the singular reference. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:39, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Or maybe you too could fix things that folks do in good faith. Toddst1 (talk) 23:06, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

And this where you remove J. Cole whose date of birth is clearly verifiable. What are you doing? The Rambling Man (talk) 23:17, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Please go harass someone else. Toddst1 (talk) 23:19, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

If you consider this harassment, please revise your editing approach to removing so-called "unreferenced" additions to days of the year articles. That's disruptive and harassment to the editors doing so (and who have been doing so for years). Your own approach is inconsistent and inaccurate, so please stop trying to impose your standards on others when theirs' is already superior and effective and helpful to our community, our encyclopedia and our readers. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:24, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Look, I'm not perfect, but at least I'm trying to improve things and I'm not being a dick. Go away. Toddst1 (talk) 00:04, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

How is this trying to improve things? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:18, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:ISAWIT listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wikipedia:ISAWIT. Since you had some involvement with the Wikipedia:ISAWIT redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Mathglot (talk) 07:38, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Little Quacker

It was a revert to a much older version, including previously removed interwiki links and unreferenced trivia. Trivialist (talk) 20:57, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Brief Talk

No, it's a fact that it has been used as a slighting term. BlackAdvisor (talk) 21:03, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

WP:BURDEN. Toddst1 (talk) 21:13, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Tiangong program

Hi, I'm the one who added the section about being able to view the Chinese Space Station.

You said you deleted the section due to lack of a reference/source/inline citation.

I didn't think that information that is available at numerous satellite-viewing websites -- like https://in-the-sky.org/satmap_radar.php or http://spaceweather.com/flybys/flybys.php?zip=85051 -- needed to be referenced. To me, if the info is available at numerous places, I tend to consider that to be "common knowledge" that is easily found/accessible.

Maybe a caveat of something like "visible to the naked eye within two hours before sunrise and/or two hours after sunset" should be included. But if anyone is familiar with satellite-viewing, they already know that. Plus, viewing times, and other info, are given at these sites.

But I leave it up to you as to whether or not to keep the section in the article.

As a side note, the same type of section could also be added to the entry/article on the International Space Station (ISS). 2600:8800:786:A300:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 15:03, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Articles for Creation Reviewing

Hello, Toddst1. AfC submissions Random submission 4+ months 4,914 pending submissions Purge to update v t e I recently sent you an invitation to join NPP, but you also might be the right candidate for another related project, AfC, which is also extremely backlogged. Would you please consider becoming an Articles for Creation reviewer? Articles for Creation reviewers help new users learn the ropes of creating their first articles, and identify whether topics are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Reviewing drafts doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia inclusion policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After requesting to be added to the project, reviewing is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the reviewing instructions before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 02:40, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hrithik Roshan January 2018

I did not add anything unsourced in January 10. I only added a person with an article born on this day.Neel.arunabh (talk) 03:43, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Re: This article contains content that is written like an advertisement.

Toddst1

I need to know what the concern is. All sources on this page are from university archives where Professor Winquist taught, including Cal State, Chico, and Syracuse University. Like the archivists at Chico State's library, archivists at Syracuse University requested their information be sourced with a simple acknowledgement. All the information from the info box, for example, comes from a curriculum vita sent from Syracuse University Libraries Special Collections University Archives (the photo was sent from California State University, Chico). Perhaps this the problem? All the other material comes directly from Charles E. Winquist's writings (what I have added, anyway). Perhaps the list of his books is the problem. I would hate to remove this; it is from the original stub, but it certainly is an ad-like reference. Please let me know how to improve this page. Thank you.Clyde DeForest Switzer (talk) 21:27, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

We could start with "Known for: making significant contributions to students and like-minded professionals in philosophy, theology and religion (e.g., student-centered learning, postmodern religion)." Toddst1 (talk) 22:29, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

How is classified spam link?

Hi Toddst1, I recieved "the next time you insert a spam link, as you did ..." could you please clarify more what is the reason? As the reference is well aligned with the topic page. Or was the problem with formal presentation? Jak sky (talk) 19:00, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

See WP:COI. Toddst1 (talk) 19:16, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Personal Attack @ User talk:RoguePilot

Can you please enlighten me on what you deem as a personal attack on my talkpage? Other than the time where CBG17 left his first message, I revisited my recent edit summaries, and see no such offense. All I was doing was removing peoples messages and request they leave me alone... Rogue1 20:37, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

You can't be serious: [14]. Toddst1 (talk) 22:12, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

I clearly said “Other than the time where CBG17 left his first message”. That was the first message he left, which specifically implied that edit summary I wrote. So I still fail to see what you are trying to prove. Thus, you had no business to warn me. Try again if you want to. If not, please leave me alone

Rogue1 23:33, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

To add, I love how we are talking about my edit summaries, when your[15] edit summary should be addressed as well. So consider your actions wisely instead of trying to tell me to consider mine. FYI, Wiki made the right decision to revoke your admin rights. You didn't deserve to be one. Carry on with more important matters.

Rogue1 23:48, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

About Lammin Sullay

Hey, Todd. Why do you think the article Lammin Sullay is of no importance? Because you don't know the individual yourself? If you put his name on Google you'll find quite a lot of information, mostly in Finnish or Swedish, but considering you're American, you must only speak English. However, fortunately for you there is information about him on English as well. Newspapers include articles about him, books by several authors include information about him, even the page from the Swedish Immigrant Institute includes a whole page specifically about him. In what way would this man not be important enough to be considered worth mentioning on Wikipedia? It's unfair how only one individual determines who is important and who is not, despite the evidence supporting otherwise. Regards, Sullay (Let's talk about it) 11:07, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Also, I would appreciate it if you didn't claim that a "major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject" when I've merely chosen my username after him. Regards, Sullay (Let's talk about it) 11:19, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

The subject of that article appears to fail all elements of WP:AUTHOR which is the criteria for inclusion in wikipedia for authors. As I explained on your talk page, your username impression that you are connected. I take you at your word that you are not. Toddst1 (talk) 18:02, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Help?

Hi. You helped earlier in the month with this editor, leaving warnings on his talk page. Now he did this. Very odd revert. It had a cite. I added another one since. But his revert and his edit summary made no sense. But now I am blocked from leaving messages on his talk page, so I am telling you because maybe you can help again. Thank you. --2604:2000:E016:A700:C8B1:1AA4:8F8E:BB14 (talk) 08:16, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Sock

The account that you tagged is almost certainly a sock of User:Nsmutte, rather than BattleshipMan. Joefromrandb (talk) 06:50, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Arbitration case reminder

You had recently provided a statement regarding a request for arbitration. We would like to remind you that the case is still open and evidence will be accepted until 11 February. Evidence may be posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Joefromrandb and others/Evidence according to the instructions of this page. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kostas20142 (talk) 12:37, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

January 27

You removed the Bill Belichick thing I put on January 27. Here is the source of his hiring on that day. Please put it back in for that date. Its in the 3rd paragraph of the link. [16]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsinger121 (talk • contribs) 17:56, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

@Jsinger121: Thanks for finding a source for that and adding it back. For the record, the WP:BURDEN to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material. Keep up the good work! Toddst1 (talk) 00:30, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

van Dongen

Quick question, why did you add a citation needed tag next to Kees van Dongen's birth day, in the infobox? Is that date listed differently elsewhere? Coldcreation (talk) 04:40, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

@Coldcreation: Because I couldn't verify it. I went looking for a source after someone added him to January 26 and I couldn't find one. Thanks for digging one up and adding it to the article. Toddst1 (talk) 14:32, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Arbitration case opened

You had recently provided a statement regarding a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Joefromrandb and others. This case will address the behaviour of Joefromrandb and editors who have interacted poorly with them. However, on opening, who those editors might be is not clear to the committee. Before posting evidence on the relevant page about editors who are not parties to the case please make a request, with brief supporting evidence, on the main case talk page for the drafting arbitrators to review. Evidence about editors already listed can be posted directly at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Joefromrandb and others/Evidence. Please add your evidence by February 11, 2018, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Joefromrandb and others/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Kostas20142 (talk) 18:18, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

KT, Shane, "Tom Dooley," et al.

Hello Toddst1 - I may have misread the tone of your Shane edit summary, so sorry. I appreciate your attempts to give some source muscle to some fairly loose sections in these articles. Of particular interest to me at the moment is your recent tag to the "Cover versions" in the "Tom Dooley" article. FYI, I have had rather little to do with the article overall and that section especially, though I can say from long and broad experience writing about folk music that pretty much all of those listed versions are legitimate significant recordings. My question here is simply how to proceed. Getting RS for each of the recordings listed would be relatively easy if a bit time-consuming, but the RS can establish mainly that the recordings were made and exist. Pls let me know if that will satisfy the WP:SONGCOVER protocol, which I have read and find a bit ambiguous on this point. regards, Sensei48 (talk) 07:20, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

@Sensei48:Thanks for your reply. Please don't take my actions personally. I find things pretty sloppy around here these days. I don't want to find Wikipedia being the next platform manipulated for political gain, so I take WP:RS pretty seriously. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 07:22, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Yeah - I jumped the gun there a bit and will rmv my unnecessary dig. Couldn't agree with you more regarding the sloppiness and the need to combat it. regards, Sensei48 (talk) 07:37, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Chris Jansing

So what would valid evidence for he date of birth be? I had the day and month, and used math to get the year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mw843 (talk • contribs) 13:44, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mw843: What you've done is synthesis. We need a WP:RS that states her date of birth. IMDB is explicitly not reliable. Toddst1 (talk) 17:32, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

New Page Review Newsletter No.10

Test

Hi. 76.243.120.241 (talk) 20:21, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Short explanation

Hello Toddst1. You rejected my change in the "Briefs" article because of "copyvio". You have the right to refuse my additions, i respect it. But I am asking you very much, do not accuse me of infringing on copyright. I didn't stole any photo. Best wishes Stan old (talk) 16:25, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Upcoming changes to wikitext parsing

Hello,

There will be some changes to the way wikitext is parsed during the next few weeks. It will affect all namespaces. You can see a list of pages that may display incorrectly at Special:LintErrors. Since most of the easy problems have already been solved at the English Wikipedia, I am specifically contacting tech-savvy editors such as yourself with this one-time message, in the hope that you will be able to investigate the remaining high-priority pages during the next month.

There are approximately 10,000 articles (and many more non-article pages) with high-priority errors. The most important ones are the articles with misnested tags and table problems. Some of these involve templates, such as infoboxes, or the way the template is used in the article. In some cases, the "error" is a minor, unimportant difference in the visual appearance. In other cases, the results are undesirable. You can see a before-and-after comparison of any article by adding ?action=parsermigration-edit to the end of a link, like this: https:/wiki/Arthur_Foss?action=parsermigration-edit (which shows a difference in how {{infobox ship}} is parsed).

If you are interested in helping with this project, please see Wikipedia:Linter. There are also some basic instructions (and links to even more information) at https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-ambassadors/2018-April/001836.html You can also leave a note at WT:Linter if you have questions.

Thank you for all the good things you do for the English Wikipedia. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry

If May 20 is the day when Cuba celebrates its independence, then how do explain this? https://publicholidays.la/cuba/independence-day/ 2600:8800:5A80:1394:402B:9598:36A8:D238 (talk) 23:43, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Your source contradicts your statement. Toddst1 (talk) 23:45, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

No it doesn't, it says Independence Day for Cuba is on October 10. It also says that Cubans do not believe that Independence Day is May 20.2600:8800:5A80:1394:402B:9598:36A8:D238 (talk) 23:48, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

My bad - I looked at the diff backwards. Toddst1 (talk) 23:52, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

No problem. 2600:8800:5A80:1394:402B:9598:36A8:D238 (talk) 23:54, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Anonymous Editing

Hi Toddst1,

You messaged me about anonymous editing. I have no idea how to do that - I remain logged in as Indianink all the time. I was not even aware one could edit without being logged in. As my computer skills are strictly limited, if you can explain what went wrong and how to avoid it in future I will. You also messaged me about adding the year of death of Roy Bentley to the births section on the page dedicated to May 17. I got the information from the Wikipedia page on Roy Bentley, and as far as I can see on the May 17 page, no other year of death is supported by an outside source, so I did not realise this had to be done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indianink (talk • contribs) 10:47, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.11 25 May 2018

Bill Oddie's birth date

Just a quick note to let you know that I have reversed your edit - where you stated that the date for Bill Oddie's birth was unsourced. Actually, the date that had been given was correct (and sourced), and a reference has now been added by me (a long-time Goodies fan). Best wishes. Figaro (talk) 05:28, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Same with Liza Weil. If in doubt, source it, which was easy as the subject herself certainly doesn't deny her birthday, nor does the AP. Nate • (chatter) 19:57, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Robert Rave

Hello Toddst1. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Robert Rave, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: published novel on notable publisher and claims coverage in RS (which probably still exists somewhere). Thank you. SoWhy 09:29, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Celebrity Birthdays

Can you stop changing the celebrity birthdays! Matt Campbell (talk) 02:33, 30 June 2018 (UTC)User:Matt CampbellMatt Campbell (talk) 02:33, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Bring a source. Toddst1 (talk) 02:34, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Maybe you shouldn't be on this Wikia!!!!! Take that!!!!! Matt Campbell (talk) 02:39, 30 June 2018 (UTC)User:Matt CampbellMatt Campbell (talk) 02:39, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Conflict

Just so you know about Chris Pratt, that is his date of Birth so I don't know why you are going around changing that, and another thing you edited my profile page without permission, you don't edit other users profile pages without permission from the user!!!!! Matt Campbell (talk) 02:28, 30 June 2018 (UTC)User:Matt CampbellMatt Campbell (talk) 02:28, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Maybe you could read all those warnings on your talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 02:29, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

Page Name Change

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Thank you for taking the time to alert me to the potential conflict of interest with my username. This account is not shared with anyone else; however, I understand the name is generic. Should I request a change to a username that would uniquely identify me within the organization? If so, how? Also, I am still getting up to speed on the Wiki markup, but I can provide citations for the changes I made and will make over the next couple of weeks. My employer, Tusculum College is moving to University status, so the entry on Wikipedia will need to reflect this. I researched a few other institutions that moved from College to University status, and it appeared the name change was made on their existing page, rather than to create a brand new page for the University status. We do want the history of Tusculum College up to the move to University to be part of the Wikipedia reference. I'd appreciate any guidance or best practices to follow for making these updates. Thank you. Tuswebmaster (talk) 14:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

When you post a question on the talk page of the user whom you'd like to respond to said question, it's not necessary to use the {{help me}} template. You only need to use it when you want to get help from some random editor such as myself. Since I'm already here, my take on your questions is as follows: 1) a name change is indeed necessary as usernames that denote a position within an organization that can be held by different people are against our rules (see Wikipedia:Username policy); 2) a disclosure of conflict of interest is also needed, see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Paid editors; 3) you can change the title of an article either by performing a WP:MOVE yourself (once your account is WP:AUTOCONFIRMED) or by requesting it at Wikipedia:Requested moves. The latter is probably better given your circumstances. 78.28.45.127 (talk) 15:51, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I've replied on User talk:Tuswebmaster. Toddst1 (talk) 15:40, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

St William of Perth

Hello, I don't know what I need to add St William of Perth. The link I added was a Wikipedia article. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 19:02, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

@Richardson mcphillips: Per WP:USERG, "a wikilink is not a reliable source". You should add a regular WP:RELIABLE SOURCE. For more info, see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. Toddst1 (talk) 19:28, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

NPP Backlog Elimination Drive

Thanks

Thanks, note takenDr Ugbede-ojo (talk) 11:37, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

John Spenkelink

In my effort to add the John Spenkelink execution to the May 25 page, I linked to his biographical article. Isn't that enough verification? John Paul Parks (talk) 19:58, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

"A wikilink is not a reliable source" per WP:USERG. Toddst1 (talk) 00:47, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Mosman

Hi, I’m entirely sure that a former assistant US attorney who did these things for many years for a living saying that Judge Mosman’s conduct is highly irregular is a reliable source. Moreover, his viewpoint was the experts’ consensus viewpoint until politics got involved. Wikipedia needs to be reliable; it doesn’t matter whether people who don’t like facts feel the facts aren’t neutral. If you have other the material facts that add to the discussion feel free to add them

I am reverting. Alterrabe (talk) 15:14, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Of course you are. :) Toddst1 (talk) 15:24, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Actually, I have now cited McCarthy, a legal commentator of national repute, in a mainstream national publication, whose description is much less diplomatic and restrained than mine was. I hope you enjoy it.Alterrabe (talk) 15:32, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the citation, it really escaped my mind.Dr Ugbede-ojo (talk) 11:56, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Better image of Galileo's tomb.

Hi, I added this today, and I've changed the image of the tomb for the page of the church itself, but it would be great if you (or someone else with editing privileges) could replace the rather poor image on Galileo's main page to this new image. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenjaminJamesCousins (talk • contribs) 09:33, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Days of the Year changes

Hello Todd, I was not aware of the change, so thanks for the heads up. I don't see that my edits have been reverted on DOY pages or on person pages where I've added a date of birth or death. I've read the links you provided, but am not clear on if I need to provide inline references for every person I add to a day of the year. Regards, Natalie Bueno Vasquez (talk) 08:04, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Yep. WP:BURDEN applies to DOY pages. Thanks for checking. Toddst1 (talk) 08:05, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar!Natalie Bueno Vasquez (talk) 19:35, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

June 21

I'm unclear why you are citing me for unverified content. The article in question had a reference for Bub's birthday prior to your feedback, and I tagged the reference in the infobox directly after your feedback. Please let me know what I'm missing, or restore the June 21 page to its previous state. Thank you. Sunsetastoria (talk) 20:56, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

I guess you didn't read what I wrote on your talk page before you deleted it. You need to include direct sources on DOY pages now. Toddst1 (talk) 21:58, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

July 1

Although I'm a bit perplexed why adding publicly available information about a significant figure at a significant university should be considered "controversial", given that all previous office holders have that same information displayed in full, I will respect this decision. I'll perhaps avoid adding this for any person going forward now that I am aware of this guidance. Thank you. Ash243x (talk) 23:44, 30 June 2018 (UTC-5)

@Ash243x: If it's publicly available, please provide a WP:Reliable Source as a citation and restore it. What we can't have is un-sourced (potentially incorrect or non-public) personal information about living people. Toddst1 (talk) 19:03, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

July 14

I'm confused by the message I got from you saying that changes I made to an article on July 14 didn't have a reliable source and that it's been removed. The small item is still there (1938 event, re Howard Hughes) and there is a source linking to the front page of the July 15, 1938 New York Times which confirms the info in the item. Gbevan55 (talk) 19:45, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

@Gbefan55: That's because I cleaned up after you. Toddst1 (talk) 13:03, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Danger Mouse (musician)

Hi there, you may or may not have read WP:DEADREF, which details the steps you should take when encountering a reference that contains a dead link. I have restored the citation you removed (along with the information that was cited by it) via point 2. It took me less than 10 seconds to do this. If you could try harder next time, that'd be great. Cheers, Nzd (talk) 22:05, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I am familiar with deadref. However, WP:BLPPRIVACY trumps deadref. We shouldn't publish personal info unless well sourced. Toddst1 (talk) 22:32, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

I understand that, and I applaud your efforts in this regard. The point I was making was that it probably took me less time to fix it, than it did for you to remove the information.. Nzd (talk) 22:47, 27 July 2018 (UTC)

Linda Cardellini

I fixed my first edit by sourcing IMDB which gives her birthday. What gives with the ban-warning? --Volvlogia (talk) 04:09, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

I am sorry

I did not Relize the DOB were unsourced I never added them ... someone else did Jena (talk) 23:48, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jena Fi: Thanks. You don't have to be sorry - just as long as you understand why we don't publish folks' personal information willy-nilly. Toddst1 (talk) 00:24, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

re: C.T. Vivian

His page says he was born 7/30, citing the same source as the 7/28 page.Stuartkau (talk) 02:24, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

I guess I forgot to fix that too. Apparently I got distracted with RL, thanks for pointing that out. In cases like that, this link works pretty well. Toddst1 (talk) 14:24, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.12 30 July 2018

Delete Casual Games

It'S Because i create articles on game of this genre, but Wikipedia don't considared them as notable. so i think this genre of game is not notable for Wikipedia because...

1. All casual playing releated site are not reliable on wikipedia.
2. Many user don't consider this games as notable.

So no casual games on Wikipedia is constructive. Thank you72.10.135.251 (talk) 17:38, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

I suggest you take this to WP:AFD, listing the articles you wish to delete. Repeated addition of {{PROD}} templates is not constructive. Toddst1 (talk) 17:39, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

• • Problem it's all the Casual Games Cathegory articles i want delete.72.10.135.251 (talk) 18:07, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:MULTIAFD is how you do it. Toddst1 (talk) 18:09, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

It'S better? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casual game72.10.135.251 (talk) 18:45, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:POINT would seem to apply here, if a bit unintentionally... ansh666 19:48, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

July 30th editing

Hi Toddst1,

I did not intend any 'disruptive editing' I saw your first message about references, thus I attempted to edit again, this time with reference tags in an effort to verify the birthday of the person mentioned. My intention is to edit the page properly.

Thank you

Cas96 (talk) 22:13, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Indonesian parties

What you did on my edits are unacceptable. The other parties have that as well (those are not my edits) and not erased. They were merely breakdowns from the elections pages (Indonesian legislative election, 2014 for instance). About August 5, there are no other reference besides yours, so in order to make consistency, the other events, births, and deaths should have reference as well. Just saying. If you want references so bad on those parties, I will have it presented in an hour. In the meantime, I will undo your edits. Thanks for the notice. – Flix11 (talk) 01:36, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

I have added the sources but you report me to the WP:AIV? What is wrong with you? I have followed your request. – Flix11 (talk) 04:05, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Improper use of warning or blocking template

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to User talk:32.218.43.187 has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. 32.218.43.187 (talk) 20:13, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Save it for the roses. Log in to your account if you want to start fights with people. Bishonen | talk 20:24, 8 August 2018 (UTC).

Accusing other editors of sockpuppetry without a single shred of evidence is WP:UNCIVIL.

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you.

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. 32.218.43.187 (talk) 20:57, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

What a lot of templates and jargon you know for an innocent new user. Impressive. Stop trolling before you're blocked. Bishonen | talk 21:20, 8 August 2018 (UTC).

Admins who don't know what dynamic IPs are should be removed. Admins who threaten editors who request a modicum of civility should be removed. 32.218.43.187 (talk) 21:46, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

That'll do it. And it's a static IP. Bishonen | talk 22:07, 8 August 2018 (UTC).

Read and take to heart, please

People would be a lot less snarky with you if you followed the guidelines at WP:PRESERVE. Reverting should be a last recourse, not the first step you take. Krychek (talk) 14:42, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

IP user

Hello. Thank you for taking care of the IP troll. However, it that this IP has several connected IPs with similar numbers. I reverted a couple of them at the Raymond Leo Burke article. This must've been what spawned the personal attack on my talk page. You might want to consider looking in that article's edit history and blocking some of those for the same length of time in order to prevent block evasion and more inappropriate behavior over the coming week. Thank you. Display name 99 (talk) 01:10, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome @Display name 99:. I'm not an admin though. Toddst1 (talk) 03:15, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry. Oversight on my part, Bishonen, can you consider this request? Thanks. Display name 99 (talk) 03:48, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

@Display name 99: I'm afraid the range is too big to block. I could semiprotect Raymond Leo Burke for a while, but I'd rather not; what the individual is doing there isn't exactly vandalism, but more a dispute. The problem is instead that they feel entitled to crap on people's talkpages. :-( I think WP:DENY is best in this case. Please let me know if a need arises to semi your own page. Bishonen | talk 07:43, 9 August 2018 (UTC).

@Display name 99: @Bishonen: The IP range 32.218.0.0/16 has gone through a couple 1w/2w corner-sits this year (thus an additional ping to blocking editor @TonyBallioni: for their 2¢) (they're a thorn in the side of Wisconsin editors, including me, and absolutely refuse to collaborate/just get a username already; I get some talk regular-templating from them when I try to work on WI articles they like to OWN), so a reinforcement block may be justified; there's also them reverting Coldcreation's great contributions for years of their long reviews about art per a very dumb definition of WP:BLOGS. I'm sorry you got a needless lecture, DN99. Nate • (chatter) 02:51, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Very interesting, thank you, Mrschimpf. I did take a look at the contribs from the range, and figured there were some constructive edits in there, presumably from other people; but I may well have looked too superficially. Also, IP editors, even if/when constructive, need to realize that getting caught up in a range block is an occupational hazard, and it's surely not unreasonably onerous for them to get an account. Range blocked for a month, and thank you, Toddst, for hosting all this confabulation. Bishonen | talk 05:26, 10 August 2018 (UTC).

Thanks for the action, Bishonen; honestly if they got an account and took responsibility for their edits and cooperated there wouldn't be all this going on, but their taking advantage of a very dynamic IP to evade responsibility and accountability needs to stop. Like Bishonen said, thanks for hosting this all on your talk page (even if it drove your pings up a wall), Toddst. Nate • (chatter) 06:59, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

All good. Toddst1 (talk) 21:39, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

Deprodding of Deborah Lurie

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Deborah Lurie, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think this article should be deleted, please do not add {{proposed deletion}} back to the file. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! I've made some additions to the article which should be helpful in establishing notability. There is still work to be done, but it's a start. LovelyLillith (talk) 00:45, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Re: Tao Porchon-Lynch

I'm not sure if a direct social media account from the person can apply. Could it be interpreted as a primary source since it's directly from her? https://www.instagram.com/p/Blbn6vQgBJg/?taken-by=taoporchonlynch

Thanks - TDI19 (talk) 04:36, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Good find, but is that really the quality of source that you want to build an encyclopedia on? Toddst1 (talk) 04:37, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Definitely a good point! I can understand that Instagram is not a typical source but I feel in this case it’s basically the same as the person confirming their birthday in an interview or something? TDI19 (talk) 05:24, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I'm sure there are folks that would accept this at WP:RSN but I'm not one of them. Your mileage may vary. I can tell your heart is in the right place. Toddst1 (talk) 05:26, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:GUAJATACA DAM NID Detail Report.pdf

A tag has been placed on File:GUAJATACA DAM NID Detail Report.pdf requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F10 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a file that is not an image, sound file or video clip (e.g. a Word document or PDF file) that has no encyclopedic use.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Pkbwcgs (talk) 09:53, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Your edits to Sharon Pincott page

/* August 3 2018 */

I have been trying to contact somebody from Wikipedia regarding this for days now, so I really hope you are able to help me. I am quite unclear on why my edits have all been deleted, stating it was "conflicts of interest" and because they appeared to be promotional. None of this is valid or accurate, and nearly every one of my sources is cited from newspaper clippings from the state's official newspaper, The Tennessean. I would appreciate if you could assist me in understanding why this has happened, and also to help me get back my edits since i put time into them and did so accordingly to all rules and regulations outlined by Wikipedia. Hsi2018 (talk) 20:35, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

@Hsi2018: Just because you can cite something doesn't mean it should be included in an encyclopedia article about a subject. WP:NPOV is critical. This is exactly why we discourage folks with conflicts of interest, as you appear to have in this case, from editing articles with which they have a connection. Toddst1 (talk) 05:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Abdelaziz Khourdifi

Hello Toddst1. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Abdelaziz Khourdifi, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: minor claim of significance with RS mention and book publishing. Since this was tagged for 5 days without anyone deleting it, I'm going to assume no one felt comfortable with speedy deleting this, so take it to WP:AFD please. Thank you. SoWhy 07:49, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Chuck Fairbanks

Hello, if you would stop your vandetta and actually take a moment to read the source information, instead of assuming "Bad Faith" you would find toward the bottom of the article the following passage.

"Fairbanks was born June 10, 1933, and played football at Michigan State under legendary coach Biggie Munn. Fairbanks coached three years of high school football, then joined the Arizona State staff of Frank Kush. In 1962, Fairbanks moved on to Bill Yeoman’s staff at the University of Houston, where Fairbanks occasionally would visit the Arkansas spring practices of Frank Broyles’. It was there Fairbanks met Mackenzie, and when Mackenzie became OU’s head coach, he hired Fairbanks as part of a staff that included Switzer, Galen Hall, Larry Lacewell, Pat James and Homer Rice."(CTRL + F is your friend, it helps you find key words like I don't know, dates of birth)-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 13:55, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

@UCO2009bluejay: What citation backs this information up? I can't find it. Ctrl+F back at you. Toddst1 (talk) 20:24, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

@Toddst1: Look I understand where you are coming from, we don't need false assertions, and unsubstantiated clutter. As such, I've even added DOB citations to some pages that I noticed didn't have citations for the dates. Such as Fairbanks. Notice the edit history for those pages, the past day or so. But I did link this article in the infobox for Fairbanks, and Barry Switzer. [17] where at the end it had the specific quote I listed in the comment above. I agree with the citation needed tag for his birthplace Detroit. I didn't put it there. I will admit I can be testy yet I am also reasonable. But in regards to June 10, or Fairbanks. The Oklahoman is a reliable source, and it does have that in the article. So I don't see what the issues are.-UCO2009bluejay (talk) 00:29, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Marc J. Cohen

Hi! Thanks for your note. I deleted that text as Cohen is not seeking a seat in the State Assembly at this time, and will not be present on the ballot come September or November. I didn't want folks to be mislead! Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.9.24.66 (talk) 14:12, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Pending Changes Mistake

Hi, I am a somewhat new pending changes approver, and i stick mostly to the pages of topics that i am familiar with. I am aware of the responsibilities that this right gives and am willing to positively contribute to wikipedia. When there are high pending changes left, i usually open 2-3 at a time and verify them at the same time, and i believe this is the first time someone has pointed me out as i have overlooked an edit.

August 7 change: Apologies if i might have overlooked something. The logs show that i accepted a revision including Lighthouse day, but i remember seeing(and approving) a different edit, something related to a massacre by the "Kingdom of Iraq", atleast that's what was shown to me by the Interface:

Old Text: 1933 – The Simele massacre: The Iraqi government slaughters over 3,000 Assyrians in the village of Simele.

New Text: "1933 – The Kingdom of Iraq slaughters over 3,000 Assyrians in the village of Simele.

I am not sure how I overlooked Lighthouse day. I will be more careful next time, i am at fault here. I was a bit busy at that time, and forgot to look down further than the blue highlighted text.

Regarding Edit war on Soap opera villians page: I approved a single change on the edit war, yes. There were 2 references to confirm the same thing, that "Adam newman" is a villian in a soap opera, I thought it was unnecessary as the first reference already points it out. I left a detailed reply on User talk:--XenaDance--, one of the parties in the edit-war. I also pinged a senior user JuneGloom07 who recently made an edit on the same page, because my approval was somewhat of a gray area. That Senior user reverted the edit in favor of Xenadance. In this case, what would you recommend I could have done? I guess i could have rejected the edit, then made a fresh edit of my own removing the reference and citing a proper reason in the edit itself. Again Apologies Daiyusha (talk) 18:11, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Linda Cardellini

I fixed my first edit by sourcing IMDB which gives her birthday. What gives with the ban-warning? --Volvlogia (talk) 04:09, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

CRussG's violations continue

Hi. Since you issued the last two final warnings to CRussG, and informed him that he'd be blocked if he continued, I thought I'd inform you that he has indeed continued his addition of uncited material to articles. Would you like to alert the proper admins, or would you prefer I do it? Nightscream (talk) 02:14, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

@Nightscream: I'm on my mobile and off to bed. If you can take care of this, it would be best. Toddst1 (talk) 05:34, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Okay. Do you know which noticeboard or resource is best for this? I forget. Nightscream (talk) 17:52, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Either WP:AIV or if it's too complex for them, WP:ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 19:17, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

@Nightscream:, you realize I'm not an admin, right? (although I play one on TV) Toddst1 (talk) 04:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

Deprodding of Myfreeimplants

I have removed the {{proposed deletion/dated}} tag from Myfreeimplants, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, proposed deletion is disallowed on articles that have previously been de-prodded, even by the page's creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{proposed deletion}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! — Alpha3031 (t • c) 08:16, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

And how does that help the quality of the project? Toddst1 (talk) 16:12, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing Ike Vern

Hi @Toddst1:, thank you for your very prompt review of Ike Vern; I had barely got the article uploaded and you were on to it! Much obliged, Jamesmcardle<sup>(talk)</sup> 06:08, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Sharon Pincott article

Coldstream Guards / August 13

Hey, just a head's up: I undid your revert on August 13, because there's a source for that date in the Coldstream Guards article. I don't feel it's necessary to add that ref to the August 13 list as well, but I'd gladly do so if you want. rchard2scout (talk) 12:23, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Rchard2scout:. Thanks for the notice. You're probably not aware of this change, but Days of the Year pages are no longer exempt from WP:V and direct sources are required for additions. For details see the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide. The burden to provide them is on the editor who adds or restores material to these pages. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 14:05, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Ah, must've missed that. Thanks, I've added the ref, and I'll be more careful when reviewing Pending Changes. rchard2scout (talk) 15:19, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Taha Afshar

Thanks you for your edits to Taha Afshar. I took the speedy off for copyright vio as the copyvios detector was only showing 17%, which is low. Closing it at Afd, where it will likely be deleted, allows the admins to SALT it. Obviously someone is pushing the article, so SALt will be helpful.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 06:59, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

OK, now I see you are a retired admin, so maybe you know better... i could always be (ad am frequently) wrong.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 07:01, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, the automated tools only show 17% but it looks like a few words were tweaked here and there to get that down. It's clearly lifted in my opinion, but as you say, AFD will take care of it. Thanks. Toddst1 (talk) 13:56, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Sources

Thanks for clearifying the sources issue on the Suis La Lune page! Iliketoknitfool (talk) 18:22, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Asterion • Crisco 1492 • KF • Kudpung • Liz • Randykitty • Spartaz

Optimist on the run → Voice of Clam

Interface administrator changes

Amorymeltzer • Mr. Stradivarius • MusikAnimal • MSGJ • TheDJ • Xaosflux

Guideline and policy news

• Following a "stop-gap" discussion, six users have temporarily been made interface administrators while discussion is ongoing for a more permanent process for assigning the permission. Interface administrators are now the only editors allowed to edit sitewide CSS and JavaScript pages, as well as CSS/JS pages in another user's userspace. Previously, all administrators had this ability. The right can be granted and revoked by bureaucrats.

Technical news

• Because of a data centre test you will be able to read but not edit the wikis for up to an hour on 12 September and 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time. The time when you can't edit might be shorter than an hour.
• Some abuse filter variables have changed. They are now easier to understand for non-experts. The old variables will still work but filter editors are encouraged to replace them with the new ones. You can find the list of changed variables on mediawiki.org. They have a note which says Deprecated. Use ... instead. An example is article_text which is now page_title.
• Abuse filters can now use how old a page is. The variable is page_age.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee has resolved to perform a round of Checkuser and Oversight appointments. The usernames of all applicants will be shared with the Functionaries team, and they will be requested to assist in the vetting process. The deadline to submit an application is 23:59 UTC, 12 September, and the candidates that move forward will be published on-wiki for community comments on 18 September.

---

Kosha Dillz DOB removal

Hi,

I saw that you removed his DOB information due to a lack of references. I found a couple and will be adding them. Just wanted to let you know so that you will understand when I revert the removal.

Thanks! 1980fast (talk) 22:31, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Talkback: Nils von Barth, Hard sigmoid

Deborah Marquit

Hello Toddst1. I was creating a reference edit on the page Deborah Marquit, for her designs in the music video, Aint None of Your Business, not at all as an advertisement, as you inferred, but as genuine fact. The credits for the designs are not in writing on the video credits, so I thought a link the video would work, not realizing that this is not the correct way to reference the work. The credits are for designs used for costume and if you would please note all the other references on the page as such. It is not an Ad, it is a historic reference to the designer's work. As I was trying to correct my errors and find the proper references, I was cut off from the page. Is it possible you can remove the content that is in anyway incorrect and reinstate the page to its place on Wikipedia? (I understand that the reference cannot be from tabloid journalism or from Youtube) Many Thanks, :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvmarquit (talk • contribs) 05:34, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

I have an idea: Why don't you read WP:COI and stop using Wikipedia to promote yourself? Toddst1 (talk) 05:36, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

With all due respect, you are incorrect, it is not a promotional page. You removed a beginning of a timeline spanning 35 years of historic fashion references with dates and work done for each, including the costume description for films, and videos. Can you put them back?--Dvmarquit (talk) 08:02, 3 September 2018 (UTC) thank you.

Hello Toddst1 ~ Would you kindly reinstate the status of the page Deborah Marquit as you found it. We were in the midst if editing and adding refernce updates, and much of the intense work involved was removed by you without prior notification.--Lovestar Horatio (talk) 18:07, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.13 18 September 2018

your blocking threat

It is in the NFL article that the APFA was founded on Sept 17, 1920 and again I do not see any..ANY sources for anything on these date pages.... 02:50, 15 September 2018‎ Newyearbaby

Re. Replace broken Canadian history link

Greetings. I am not sure why you reverted my active link to a Canadian History page and replaced it with the previous broken one. I've updated many, many of the On This Day Wikipedia pages.

quist (talk) 09:13, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

@Quist: See here Toddst1 (talk) 15:06, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

You messaged me regarding Sharon Pincott page

Hello Toddst1. I've been abroad and don't understand message addressed to me. I can see tho that you've made substantial deletions to the Sharon Pincott page I've inputted to in the past and you ask about conflict of interest? There isn't any conflict of interest. Why should there be? I've been assisting to keep page on specialist in a field I keep well abreast of updated with useful info. You've deleted such worthy info. You've left few references to published interviews but even deleted Forbes Africa. How many people get into Forbes magazine! There's also no mention anymore of all of the political intimidation and threats endured inside Zimbabwe which strikes me as terribly strange. Grateful please advise how I contribute to this page now although it doesn't appear conducive to updates any longer 01:52, 15 September 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReaderUSA (talk • contribs)

That article was nothing but a promotional piece. See WP:NPOV. I'm sure that she has done wonderful things but this is not a fan site. Toddst1 (talk) 03:18, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

What's the problem on September 18?

You've twice reverted my edit on the page for September 18. In the last revision, you explained "you need a reference for the dates of birth". But I didn't add or change any dates of birth. I added to Kerry Livgren's entry the name of the band he's associated with, because that is the more familiar name, and I added "politician" to Ben Carson as at this point that's at least as important with him as his medical and literary work. Am I missing something? Brettalan (talk) 20:25, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

You added slagel & celis with their dobs. Toddst1 (talk) 20:25, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

I certainly did not. Please stop saying that I did. That was someone else's edit. Brettalan (talk) 23:15, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

@Brettalan: This diff says you did, Lines 237, 322 and 422. Toddst1 (talk) 00:00, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Because I was undoing your edit, which you mistakenly listed as an undo of mine when in fact you were also changing someone else's. So I unwittingly did, but it didn't originate with me. I've never even heard of those people. Brettalan (talk) 01:56, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Brettalan: . Nope. No mention of you. To which you responded by restoring the unreferenced stuff while the WP:BURDEN was on you - which I reverted twice. You may be interested in the Law of holes. Toddst1 (talk) 03:46, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Dominique Monféry

Hello Toddst1. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Dominique Monféry, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: previous version of the article contains claims of significance. Thank you. SoWhy 08:08, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Lucy Ellmann

Hello Toddst1. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Lucy Ellmann, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: multiple claims of significance: Won notable award; Has notable family and spouse; Book reviews in NYT. Thank you. SoWhy 08:09, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Re: September 7 page edit

I am a novice in templating and such. You asked for sources, I can provide them, but I do not know how to add them. https://insomniac.games/game/spider-man-ps4/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0465602/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.56.65.44 (talk) 22:21, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

We don't use IMDB as a reference - see WP:IMDBREF and the second source doesn't support your statement. Toddst1 (talk) 00:11, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

The first one is fine for sure. It is the developer's own website. If IMDB is not acceptable, that's fine. I do not know the criteria for acceptable citations, but here. Take your pick:

http://madeinatlantis.com/movies_central/2007/shoot_em_up_production_details.htm https://www.allmovie.com/movie/shoot-em-up-v329115/releases https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/shoot_em_up/ https://www.metacritic.com/movie/shoot-em-up

Received your message.

Thanks for reverting the edit.BUT Some users are constantly changing my user pages and this leads to conflict more.I have decided now not to place any images in my user page account .its fine --Manavatha (talk) 08:58, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

CHI Records

I'm pretty sure this was complete bollocks. I did a google search for "CHI Records" "Spencer Durham" and got back some teenage kid. Ritchie333 <sup>(talk) (cont)</sup> 22:34, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Ritchie. It looked fishy. Toddst1 (talk) 23:54, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

A goat for you!

Good work on keeping the crap out of articles recently.

BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:21, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Been! Toddst1 (talk) 03:22, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2018).

Administrator changes

Justlettersandnumbers • L235

Bgwhite • HorsePunchKid • J Greb • KillerChihuahua • Rami R • Winhunter

Interface administrator changes

Cyberpower678 • Deryck Chan • Oshwah • Pharos • Ragesoss • Ritchie333

Oversight changes

Guerillero • NativeForeigner • Snowolf • Xeno

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the process for appointing interface administrators has been established. Currently only existing admins can request these rights, while a new RfC has begun on whether it should be available to non-admins.
• There is an open request for comment on Meta regarding the creation a new user group for global edit filter management.

Technical news

• Partial blocks should be available for testing in October on the Test Wikipedia and the Beta-Cluster. This new feature allows admins to block users from editing specific pages and in the near-future, namespaces and uploading files. You can expect more updates and an invitation to help with testing once it is available.
• The Foundations' Anti-Harassment Tools team is currently looking for input on how to measure the effectiveness of blocks. This is in particular related to how they will measure the success of the aforementioned partial blocks.
• Because of a data centre test, you will be able to read but not edit the Wikimedia projects for up to an hour on 10 October. This will start at 14:00 (UTC). You might lose edits if you try to save during this time.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee has, by motion, amended the procedure on functionary inactivity.
• The community consultation for 2018 CheckUser and Oversight appointments has concluded. Appointments will be made by October 11.
• Following a request for comment, the size of the Arbitration Committee will be decreased to 13 arbitrators, starting in 2019. Additionally, the minimum support percentage required to be appointed to a two-year term on ArbCom has been increased to 60%. ArbCom candidates who receive between 50% and 60% support will be appointed to one-year terms instead.
• Nominations for the 2018 Arbitration Committee Electoral Commission are being accepted until 12 October. These are the editors who help run the ArbCom election smoothly. If you are interested in volunteering for this role, please consider nominating yourself.

---

Advice

Hi! I'm a long term wikipedia and donator. I've stumbled upon Paul Reiffer's page, and I was shocked how fake it is! Thanks for emending it a bit. But anyway it made me want to start to edit articles. Where should I start? D1kiz (talk) 13:31, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

October 2018

Hi Toddst1, thanks for reviewing the page Sharifa Akeel. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johanry (talk • contribs) 09:21, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Days of year

Hi. User:JoeyofthePriuses has re-added a lot of entries that I previously removed, mostly about racing drivers, with references, but in some cases these appear to be unreliable. I don't want to get involved in an edit war with them, so I'll leave it to you to decide what action is appropriate. Deb (talk) 11:31, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

@Deb: Hmm. I'm assuming you're referring to this edit. Racing-reference.info is part of the NASCAR Digital Media Network. As the governing body of that type of racing, I'd think one of NASCAR's properties would be relatively reliable in terms of info about their drivers - especially their reference site. I could be wrong. Toddst1 (talk) 18:11, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

No, I was thinking more of this one and this one. Deb (talk) 18:54, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Got it. I've un-done and left him notes on his talk page. Toddst1 (talk) 19:19, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Jim Cooper article and COI

Hi Todd Re: Jim Cooper There is no COI. Jim Cooper and I have not seen each other for years. Many years ago we lived together and I knew his mother and siblings. That's why I have some documents on his life before 2000. My desire to edit his Wikipedia page is not done for pecuniary reason. I was just trying to correct the minor problems and to add facts I know from documents I have and can cite. Cheers Steve Farrow SteveJF (talk) 14:38, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

@SteveJF:, your relationship with Jim is the textbook definition of WP:COI. Please read the policy before you continue editing. Toddst1 (talk) 17:14, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Recent edit of Odenton, Maryland page

My edit of Odenton, Maryland was deemed less than neutral and removed. I only added the information on an upcoming high school opening and cited the news article I sourced from. Not sure as to how that is not neutral?

Jdynasty76 (talk) 00:00, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

It seems like WP:Advocacy, as was noted in 2015. At the very least it's WP:RECENTISM. Toddst1 (talk) 00:01, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Was it the line about many parents want a new high school? That was already on the page before my edit. Or was it the whole paragraph? It was my first edit, I am just making sure, so I am more careful in the future. Thanks Jdynasty76 (talk) 00:16, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

@Jdynasty76: Yeah - it was the whole paragraph. It was tagged in 2015 as being an advocacy issue. I removed the whole thing. Wikipedia is full of stuff like that. I can tell you're editing in the best of faith. Sorry you ran in to this on your first edit. :) Toddst1 (talk) 00:18, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for the help! Jdynasty76 (talk) 00:21, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

others' user pages?

This from August 2018

"You have been blocked from editing for a period of 12 hours for disruptive creation of user pages for other users."

I have absolutely no idea what this means or why it appears aimed at me. I have no idea how to create user pages for other users, nor would I do so. Perhaps my page has been hacked by malicious spyware?

Further, "speedy elimination...User Kgrad" is equally puzzling. Kgrad (talk) 02:44, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@Kgrad: I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't believe I've ever edited your user page. Toddst1 (talk) 03:26, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.14 21 October 2018

Terri Garr

My edit for listing actress Terri Garr in the December 11 "Births" was removed. One only needs to look up Teri Garr in Wikipedia to confirm she was born on December 11, 1944. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artwohl (talk • contribs) 15:43, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

@Artwohl: Yup, and all you have to do to not have an edit like that reverted is to provide a reliable source as a citation. I'm sure you know that Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Toddst1 (talk) 21:08, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Ruby Andrews

reversion

Savina Petrilli is not a redlink, and he did die in 1923. Why should I have not accepted the revision? HarryKernow (talk to me) 20:29, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

All new additions to WP:DOY articles require direct sources, which is a reason to reject. There is no source in the linked biography that could be added to the article. Toddst1 (talk) 20:32, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Would this or this work as a source? And none of the other additions have sources, to be fair. HarryKernow (talk to me) 20:33, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm going to re-add it with both citations, this should be fine. HarryKernow (talk to me) 20:54, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Thumbs up. Toddst1 (talk) 20:55, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2018).

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment determined that non-administrators will not be able to request interface admin access.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the Mediation Committee should be closed and marked as historical.
• A village pump discussion has been ongoing about whether the proposed deletion policy (PROD) should be clarified or amended.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether pending changes protection should be applied automatically to today's featured article (TFA) in order to mitigate a recent trend of severe image vandalism.

Technical news

• Partial blocks is now available for testing on the Test Wikipedia. The new functionality allows you to block users from editing specific pages. Bugs may exist and can be reported on the local talk page or on Meta. A discussion regarding deployment to English Wikipedia will be started by community liaisons sometime in the near future.
• A user script is now available to quickly review unblock requests.
• The 2019 Community Wishlist Survey is now accepting new proposals until November 11, 2018. The results of this survey will determine what software the Wikimedia Foundation's Community Tech team will work on next year. Voting on the proposals will take place from November 16 to November 30, 2018. Specifically, there is a proposal category for admins and stewards that may be of interest.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors will be invited to nominate themselves as candidates in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 4 until November 13. Voting will begin on November 19 and last until December 2.
• The Arbitration Committee's email address has changed to arbcom-enwikimedia.org. Other email lists, such as functionaries-en and clerks-l, remain unchanged.

---

Additions to DOTY articles

Someone started adding a lot of new entries to DOTY articles without references and I undid most of these. I would be grateful if you could take a look at these recent additions and tell me what you think of the sources used. Reliable? Deb (talk) 09:08, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

@Deb: Yeah, that is a heavyweight addition, but I didn't see any sources that do not seem reliable. Thumbs up both to the editor and you for your diligence. Toddst1 (talk) 23:53, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

What do you think of this as a reference? Personally, I don't think it's good enough. Deb (talk) 12:31, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:13, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.15 16 November 2018

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Toddst1. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2018

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2018).

Administrator changes

Al Ameer son • Randykitty • Spartaz

Boson • Daniel J. Leivick • Efe • Esanchez7587 • Fred Bauder • Garzo • Martijn Hoekstra • Orangemike

Interface administrator changes

Deryck Chan

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the Mediation Committee is now closed and will no longer be accepting case requests.
• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether members of the Bot Approvals Group should satisfy activity requirements in order to remain in that role.
• A request for comment is in progress regarding whether to change the administrator inactivity policy, such that administrators "who have made no logged administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped". Currently, the policy states that administrators "who have made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least 12 months may be desysopped".
• A proposal has been made to temporarily restrict editing of the Main Page to interface administrators in order to mitigate the impact of compromised accounts.

Technical news

• Administrators and bureaucrats can no longer unblock themselves unless they placed the block initially. This change has been implemented globally. See also this ongoing village pump discussion (permalink).
• To complement the aforementioned change, blocked administrators will soon have the ability to block the administrator that placed their block to mitigate the possibility of a compromised administrator account blocking all other active administrators.
• Since deployment of Partial blocks on Test Wikipedia, several bugs were identified. Most of them are now fixed. Administrators are encouraged to test the new deployment and report new bugs on Phabricator or leave feedback on the Project's talk page. You can request administrator access on the Test Wiki here.

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 3 December 2018. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous

• In late November, an attacker compromised multiple accounts, including at least four administrator accounts, and used them to vandalize Wikipedia. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. Sharing the same password across multiple websites makes your account vulnerable, especially if your password was used on a website that suffered a data breach. As these incidents have shown, these concerns are not pure fantasies.
• Wikipedia policy requires administrators to have strong passwords. To further reinforce security, administrators should also consider enabling two-factor authentication. A committed identity can be used to verify that you are the true account owner in the event that your account is compromised and/or you are unable to log in.

Obituaries

• Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (Raymond Arritt) passed away on 14 November 2018. Boris joined Wikipedia as Raymond arritt on 8 May 2006 and was an administrator from 30 July 2007 to 2 June 2008.

---

NPR Newsletter No.16 15 December 2018

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Can you look at a listing?

Would you be kind enough to look at the listing for Rehs Galleries and at least put in the actual periods of art the gallery handles? The gallery specializes in 19th and 20th century European and American art with an emphasis on 19th century Academic, Barbizon and Realist paintings. Artists would include Julien Dupre, Daniel Ridgway Knight, Emile Munier, William A. Bouguereau, Jean B.C. Corot, Henry Moret, etc.

https:/wiki/Rehs_Galleries

Thank you.

68.198.0.203 (talk) 19:20, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

January 1

As you can see, I've done a lot of work on this, adding references and removing unreferenced entries. But there is still a lot more to do and I've been working on it intermittently for months. This gives you some idea how long it's going to take without anyone else chipping in. It's difficult enough just to stop people adding more unreferenced entries when I'm not looking. Any suggestions? Deb (talk) 11:50, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Best wishes for this holiday season! Thank you for your Wiki contributions in 2018. May 2019 be prosperous and joyful. --K.e.coffman (talk) 23:07, 21 December 2018 (UTC) Noël ~ καλά Χριστούγεννα ~ З Калядамі ~ חנוכה שמח ~ Gott nytt år!

Administrators' newsletter – January 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2018).

Guideline and policy news

• There are a number of new or changed speedy deletion criteria, each previously part of WP:CSD#G6:

1. G14 (new): Disambiguation pages that disambiguate only zero or one existing pages are now covered under the new G14 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-disambig}}; the text is unchanged and candidates may be found in Category:Candidates for speedy deletion as unnecessary disambiguation pages.
2. R4 (new): Redirects in the file namespace (and no file links) that have the same name as a file or redirect at Commons are now covered under the new R4 criterion (discussion). This is {{db-redircom}}; the text is unchanged.
3. G13 (expanded): Userspace drafts containing only the default Article Wizard text are now covered under G13 along with other drafts (discussion). Such blank drafts are now eligible after six months rather than one year, and taggers continue to use {{db-blankdraft}}.

• The Wikimedia Foundation now requires all interface administrators to enable two-factor authentication.
• Members of the Bot Approvals Group (BAG) are now subject to an activity requirement. After two years without any bot-related activity (e.g. operating a bot, posting on a bot-related talk page), BAG members will be retired from BAG following a one-week notice.

Technical news

• Starting on December 13, the Wikimedia Foundation security team implemented new password policy and requirements. Privileged accounts (administrators, bureaucrats, checkusers, oversighters, interface administrators, bots, edit filter managers/helpers, template editors, et al.) must have a password at least 10 characters in length. All accounts must have a password:

1. At least 8 characters in length
2. Not in the 100,000 most popular passwords (defined by the Password Blacklist library)
3. Different from their username

User accounts not meeting these requirements will be prompted to update their password accordingly. More information is available on MediaWiki.org.

• Blocked administrators may now block the administrator that blocked them. This was done to mitigate the possibility that a compromised administrator account would block all other active administrators, complementing the removal of the ability to unblock oneself outside of self-imposed blocks. A request for comment is currently in progress to determine whether the blocking policy should be updated regarding this change.
• {{Copyvio-revdel}} now has a link to open the history with the RevDel checkboxes already filled in.

Arbitration

• Following the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: AGK, Courcelles, GorillaWarfare, Joe Roe, Mkdw, SilkTork.

Miscellaneous

• Accounts continue to be compromised on a regular basis. Evidence shows this is entirely due to the accounts having the same password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately.
• Around 22% of admins have enabled two-factor authentication, up from 20% in June 2018. If you haven't already enabled it, please consider doing so. Regardless of whether you use 2FA, please practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.

---

Administrators' newsletter – February 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2019).

Administrator changes

Enterprisey • JJMC89

BorgQueen

Harro5 • Jenks24 • Graft • R. Baley

Interface administrator changes

Enterprisey

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is currently open to reevaluate the activity requirements for administrators.
• Administrators who are blocked have the technical ability to block the administrator who blocked their own account. A recent request for comment has amended the blocking policy to clarify that this ability should only be used in exceptional circumstances, such as account compromises, where there is a clear and immediate need.
• A request for comment closed with a consensus in favor of deprecating The Sun as a permissible reference, and creating an edit filter to warn users who attempt to cite it.

Technical news

• A discussion regarding an overhaul of the format and appearance of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is in progress (permalink). The proposed changes will make it easier to create requests for those who are not using Twinkle. The workflow for administrators at this venue will largely be unchanged. Additionally, there are plans to archive requests similar to how it is done at WP:PERM, where historical records are kept so that prior requests can more easily be searched for.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2019 Steward elections will begin on 08 February 2019, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 28 February 2019, 13:59 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• A new IRC bot is available that allows you to subscribe to notifications when specific filters are tripped. This requires that your IRC handle be identified.

---

Regarding - Edin Velez Article

FYI - https:/wiki/Edin_Velez - let me know your feedback as you have reviewed the article of "Edin Velez" in 2010. Thanks Srirammedfri (talk) 05:54, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi

It's me. 173.11.92.205 (talk) 20:34, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Back again? Toddst1 (talk) 22:53, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

I am. 173.11.92.206 (talk) 22:54, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Hello?

Please explain how a reference and link of an established page that is about a Mar 14 observance in the Mar 14 section on observances is vandalism. Dlhyndman1964 (talk) 15:48, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

You reverted an edit I made for no obvious reason and haven't responded to my query regarding it. Should I just make the edit again since you aren't responding? Dlhyndman1964 (talk) 03:55, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – March 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• The RfC on administrator activity requirements failed to reach consensus for any proposal.
• Following discussions at the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and Wikipedia talk:Administrators, an earlier change to the restoration of adminship policy was reverted. If requested, bureaucrats will not restore administrator permissions removed due to inactivity if there have been five years without a logged administrator action; this "five year rule" does not apply to permissions removed voluntarily.

Technical news

• A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
  • paid-en-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
  • checkuser-en-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2019 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: Base, Einsbor, Jon Kolbert, Schniggendiller, and Wim b.

---

Hello again

It's me. Toddst1 (talk) 20:12, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Rickover article

Please explain your reversion. It's a standard thing to do. And in this case, you restored a factual error along with deleting cited/encyclopedic content. Regards, --67.48.200.162 (talk) 20:39, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

My mistake. I misread the diff. Toddst1 (talk) 22:19, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Ongoing vandalism on DOTY

There's a person using multiple IP addresses to keep adding unreferenced births (mostly Australian sportsmen) to these articles. I have protected a few of them to prevent IPs editing but obviously this can only be a temporary solution. I would be grateful if you look out for them as well. Take a look at recent edits on January 23, 24, 25, etc. Deb (talk) 18:25, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

@Deb:, Sorry - I haven't been on-wiki much in the past few months. RL got interesting. Thanks for your vigilance. I'll try to pitch in when things settle down. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 16:58, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

That's okay. Hope all's well. Deb (talk) 17:03, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.17

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2019).

Technical news

• In Special:Preferences under "Appearance" → "Advanced options", there is now an option to show a confirmation prompt when clicking on a rollback link.
• The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Please see meta:Community health initiative/User reporting system consultation 2019 to provide your input on this idea.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee clarified that the General 1RR prohibition for Palestine-Israel articles may only be enforced on pages with the {{ARBPIA 1RR editnotice}} edit notice.

Miscellaneous

• Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
• As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.

---

Reversion on May 2

Administrators' newsletter – May 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment concluded that creating pages in the portal namespace should be restricted to autoconfirmed users.
• Following a request for comment, the subject-specific notability guideline for pornographic actors and models (WP:PORNBIO) was removed; in its place, editors should consult WP:ENT and WP:GNG.

Technical news

• XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.

Arbitration

• In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
• Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.

Miscellaneous

• A request for comment is currently open to amend the community sanctions procedure to exclude non XfD or CSD deletions.
• A proposal to remove pre-2009 indefinite IP blocks is currently open for discussion.

---

DOTY

Hi. I've more or less completed the referencing of January 1 and have started on January 2 in earnest, but it's a huge task. I feel you should at least have a look. Deb (talk) 13:01, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

@Deb: . Amazing, awesome work by one of the stalwarts of the wiki! Toddst1 (talk) 13:35, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

NPR Newsletter No.18

Removal of material on DOTY pages

Hi Toddst1. Every other birth/death has no reference. Is this something very new that referencing has to be added? Surely the reference can be found on the page of the person who is linked? Regards Willbb234 (talk) 21:13, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

(Just noticed that referencing is on all of the January 1 births and deaths)

@Willbb234: You've undoubtedly read the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide by now. The requirement for direct sources has been in effect since 16 October 2017 after it was more than apparent that those pages were filled with wrong and/or unverifiable information.

There are a number of us who have added thousands of references and removed thousands of incorrect or unverifiable entries since then. Please join our ranks in cleaning up those pages as you are clearly a solid contributor. Toddst1 (talk) 21:57, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. I will add some references. Can these be taken directly from the reference on the subjects wikipedia article? Regards

Hi Toddst1, I just added a reference on January 3 article. Is this alright? Willbb234 (talk) 10:08, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that seems like a fairly WP:RS that directly supports the assertion. Thank you! Toddst1 (talk) 14:01, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

		The Award Barnstar
		Thank you for your help and hard work!

DotY pages

Thank you; that makes sense. However, few if any of the surrounding entries have them; it was rather easy to infer from that that no sources were required. Perhaps you should add an edit notice (or, you may already have done so and I missed it. If so, sorry). Daniel Case (talk) 17:56, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Yup. The edit notice should there for all DOTY pages. Change comes slowly. Toddst1 (talk) 19:00, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Second Summer Of Love

Hi - I'm new to Wikipedia and have added a contribution to the article which you have flagged as I haven't added the reference. I'm not sure how to do this - basically the reference is the amendment - it is the book that I have listed. I am not sure how to prove it but it is visible on booksellers like Amazon if that helps.

Could you add the relevant symbol or show me how to.

Much appreciated, Lee . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Youth Culture Expert (talk • contribs) 00:10, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

@Youth Culture Expert: See WP:CITING SOURCES. Saying you read it in a book is considered WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH. Toddst1 (talk) 00:12, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

May 23rd - Red Nose Day

Could you please clarify "constructive" vs "non-constructive" additions for holidays and observances? Where would something like "Red Nose Day" go on the "this day in history" pages? Or can things like that only be added after they happen? Or is there another calendar with things like "Red Nose Day," "ALS Awareness Month," etc. are inserted? --virginiatcombs (talk) 18:00, 21 May 2019

@Virginiatcombs: Perhaps you should have read edit notice on that page that you were presented with:

Please read – Thank you Each addition now requires a direct citation from a reliable source on this page supporting it. Simply providing a wikilink is not sufficient and additions without direct sources will be removed. The births and deaths listed on this page are only for people for whom there is a Wikipedia article (no red links and no redirects). Please do not add yourself (unless there is a Wikipedia article about you), or anyone without a Wikipedia article. Any entry added for anyone without an article will be deleted. The events listed on this page should be notable in that society and for some reasonable amount of time. Further guidelines for what should and should not be included are provided at Wikipedia:Days of the year. Events not meeting these guidelines will be removed. The formatting of this page is considered static and should not be changed without discussion (and consensus) at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Days of the year. The formatting is based on the template at Wikipedia:WikiProject Days of the year/Template and includes spacing, use of – instead of –, the number of sections, overlinking of years, and the use of references.

as well as WP:NLIST. Toddst1 (talk) 22:39, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Todd. I've read the guidelines, but it never hurts to read them again. I'm new to editing, and trying to do a good job. I hate when articles are not sited or contain conflicting information and I appreciate the seasoned Wiki editors keeping an eye on the pages and mentoring the next generation of editors. Is there a special "this day" calendar for events that fall outside the parameters of the main one? --virginiatcombs (talk) 20:50, 21 May 2019

There may be but I'm not aware of it. Toddst1 (talk) 00:02, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2019).

Administrator changes

28bytes • Ad Orientem • Ansh666 • Beeblebrox • Boing! said Zebedee • BU Rob13 • Dennis Brown • Deor • DoRD • Floquenbeam<sup>1</sup> • Flyguy649 • Fram<sup>2</sup> • Gadfium • GB fan • Jonathunder • Kusma • Lectonar • Moink • MSGJ • Nick • Od Mishehu • Rama • Spartaz • Syrthiss • TheDJ • WJBscribe

<sup>1</sup>Floquenbeam's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

<sup>2</sup>Fram's access was removed, then restored, then removed again.

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment seeking to alleviate pressures on the request an account (ACC) process proposes either raising the account creation limit for extended confirmed editors or granting the account creator permission on request to new ACC tool users.

• In a related matter, the account throttle has been restored to six creations per day as the mitigation activity completed.

• The scope of CSD criterion G8 has been tightened such that the only redirects that it now applies to are those which target non-existent pages.
• The scope of CSD criterion G14 has been expanded slightly to include orphan "Foo (disambiguation)" redirects that target pages that are not disambiguation pages or pages that perform a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists).
• A request for comment seeks to determine whether Wikipedia:Office actions should be a policy page or an information page.

Technical news

• The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Community feedback is invited.

Miscellaneous

• In February 2019, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) changed its office actions policy to include temporary and project-specific bans. The WMF exercised this new ability for the first time on the English Wikipedia on 10 June 2019 to temporarily ban and desysop Fram. This action has resulted in significant community discussion, a request for arbitration (permalink), and, either directly or indirectly, the resignations of numerous administrators and functionaries. The WMF Board of Trustees is aware of the situation, and discussions continue on a statement and a way forward. The Arbitration Committee has sent an open letter to the WMF Board.

---

New Page Review newsletter July-August 2019

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Robert K S reported by User:AussieLegend (Result: ). Thank you. AussieLegend (✉) 07:00, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

ENIAC

This is not a bad-faith post but a good-faith question, which you did not answer. Why are you wikithreatening me? Who is directing your actions? Specifically, what is your relationship to TPH and AldezD? Be honest. Robert K S (talk) 03:45, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

User:Bryan Calvin

Hi Toddst1, just to let you know, the user specified above has been adding multiple entries to DOTY pages, without references. I have already warned them but they have ignored me. Please review and maybe try to talk to them? Also they have been contributing to other pages, adding unsourced information, which may need reviewing. Reagrds, Willbb234 (talk) 11:37, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @Willbb234:. I've issued a final warning after he ignored your warning and added more stuff to September 2. If he continues, please file a report at WP:AIV. Sometimes they won't block folks there for unsourced edits. If you get declined, I recommend bringing it to the attention of deb (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Keep up the good work! Toddst1 (talk) 21:49, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Sure, I'm willing to block for disruptive editing if necessary. Deb (talk) 22:07, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – June 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2019).

Administrator changes

Andonic • Consumed Crustacean • Enigmaman • Euryalus • EWS23 • HereToHelp • Nv8200pa • Peripitus • StringTheory11 • Vejvančický

CheckUser changes

Ivanvector

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC seeks to clarify whether WP:OUTING should include information on just the English Wikipedia or any Wikimedia project.
• An RfC on WT:RfA concluded that Requests for adminship and bureaucratship are discussions seeking to build consensus.
• An RfC proposal to make the templates for discussion (TfD) process more like the requested moves (RM) process, i.e. "as a clearinghouse of template discussions", was closed as successful.

Technical news

• The CSD feature of Twinkle now allows admins to notify page creators of deletion if the page had not been tagged. The default behavior matches that of tagging notifications, and replaces the ability to open the user talk page upon deletion. You can customize which criteria receive notifications in your Twinkle preferences: look for Notify page creator when deleting under these criteria.
• Twinkle's d-batch (batch delete) feature now supports deleting subpages (and related redirects and talk pages) of each page. The pages will be listed first but use with caution! The und-batch (batch undelete) option can now also restore talk pages.

Miscellaneous

• The previously discussed unblocking of IP addresses indefinitely-blocked before 2009 was approved and has taken place.
• The 2019 talk pages consultation produced a report for Phase 1 and has entered Phase 2.

---

BHL info

Hi, I seem to have jumped again without looking. the external links were in the reference, and the BHL source is a basic reference for hagiography research (so very rs). I have done this in the past, with no problem. Can you help me so I don't waste more of your time? I looked over the WP/EL page and can't figure it out. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 13:29, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

@Richardson mcphillips: No worries. Yeah, BHL seems like a very solid source. The problem is how you're using them. For example here you kind of just plopped it at the end of the article text. It's kind of lost there and doesn't line up with the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout. Generally, you would use that as a source in a citation or list it in a Further reading section at the end.

To be honest, if I had a bit more energy last night, I would have (should have) just moved your BHL references myself to a Further reading section. Instead, I took the lazy way and just backed it out.

Keep up the good work! Toddst1 (talk) 13:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

DOTY

Hello, I have added multiple references on the January 3 DOTY page. The majority are citing websites and I have noticed that Deb (or other users adding references) have been citing mainly from books. I have read WP:RS, and it appears nothing is wrong with citing the websites, especially as I have checked the websites for WP:V. Is there anything wrong with continuing to mainly cite using websites? Regards Willbb234 (talk) 19:25, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

@Willbb234: Hey Will! I didn't go through all of the changes, but your work looks awesome! Websites in general are ok, but you should probably review WP:RSP to make sure you're using solid sites. Keep up the good work! Toddst1 (talk) 21:19, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Toddst1, can I add myself to WP:DOTY member list? Regards Willbb234 (talk) 20:14, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

@Willbb234:Of course!! Welcome to the project! Toddst1 (talk) 23:46, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Jeff_King_(author) Deletion

How can I get access to this page for reference?

You can't. Toddst1 (talk) 19:07, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Assume good faith please

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like you to assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Filet-o-fish king (talk•contribs•tools) 04:34, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2019).

Administrator changes

Bradv • Chetsford • Izno

Floquenbeam • Lectonar

DESiegel • Jake Wartenberg • Rjanag • Topbanana

CheckUser changes

Callanecc • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Oversight changes

Callanecc • Fox • HJ Mitchell • LFaraone • There'sNoTime

Technical news

• Editors using the mobile website on Wikipedia can opt-in to new advanced features via your settings page. This will give access to more interface links, special pages, and tools.
• The advanced version of the edit review pages (recent changes, watchlist, and related changes) now includes two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions". They will filter the view to just those namespaces.

Arbitration

• A request for comment is open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2019 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

Miscellaneous

• A global request for comment is in progress regarding whether a user group should be created that could modify edit filters across all public Wikimedia wikis.

---

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Sew Fast Sew Easy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sew Fast Sew Easy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ Sew Fast Sew Easy (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. (You had been involved in the 1st nomination.) Blue Riband► 14:07, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Days of the year pages

You left a note on my talk page about my being unaware of WP:V regarding additions to these pages. If you had checked my edit note, you would have seen that I wasn't adding info to the page but putting info in alpha order. Regards Denisarona (talk) 08:45, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. Denisarona (talk) 13:57, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

random stuff

Hello, I'm Filet-o-fish king. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. Filet-o-fish king (talk•contribs•tools) 04:21, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

What the heck are you talking about?? Toddst1 (talk) 04:23, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism report

Hi, Toddst1. The bot removed my comment on your report quickly, so I'll link you to it: [18]. I guess you didn't notice the particulars of the sig in the section above? I'm not sure it doesn't deserve an indef. "Assume good faith", indeed. Bishonen | talk 04:44, 5 September 2019 (UTC).

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

Awesome

Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:24, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you, then and now. Toddst1 (talk) 13:00, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the "now", thank Bibliomaniac for "then", please! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:06, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

and again today! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:42, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

and I was just reminded that you gave me my first barnstar, in 2009 ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:28, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

May 2019

Regarding your edit and your note re Please see MOS:NOBOLD, the article is now missing information that the bold text had previously identified. The Liturgical calendar should be an exception.ΙΣΧΣΝΙΚΑ-888 (talk) 12:41, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

We don't use bold for emphasis. Take it to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Text formatting Toddst1 (talk) 19:06, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Noone can destroy the traditional structure of Orhtodox Calendar! BOLD like any other formatting feature must help to structure of information. Your incompetent edits invertedly prevent it! Don't lead the normal rule to absurd! Don't prevent for Orthodox people to get a habitual calendar! Александр Васильев (talk) 19:46, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I come to destroy church. First I kill moose and squirrel. Toddst1 (talk) 19:37, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Please don't clown about! Especially because Your fist (now deleted) version of answer was really plain. (I mean: "I have no idea what you're talking about".) If You not understand that, would You like to simply keep Yourself from editing of so specific material like Orthodox Liturgical Calendar? Please let people who knows what they doing to do it! Александр Васильев (talk) 19:01, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

Removed Edits

Hi, I don't understand why my edits were removed if my information is true (and cited). I'm not writing in a biased manner and I do know more about him than anyone on this website could. Please let me know what the problem is. Cassiejaestew (talk) 02:50, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Replied on User talk:Cassiejaestew Toddst1 (talk) 13:57, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Hey

the edits I made to August 10, August 31 and October 29 got reverted, the explanation you gave was too confusing, can you explain why they we're reverted, I'm happy to help Great Mercian (talk) 08:08, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

@Great Mercian:The Days of Years (DOTY) pages were becoming a complete mess with incorrect and unverifiable info so all new entries (such as yours) require a direct source.

About a year and a half ago, the DOTY project looked at why and for some reason they had exempted themselves from verifiability. As a result, almost none of the pages had any sources to back things up, based on the naive (and against Wikipedia policy) belief that all entries would be backed by reliable sources in the linked article. It turns out that was not the case and the DOTY pages were filled with incorrect info and even worse, other places started believing the info there and publishing the incorrect info in newspapers, for example on "Today's date in history" type listings.

So the DOTY project took the bold step of requiring that all new entries be backed by direct reliable sources. Several of us have gone through and started cleaning things up. May 11 is an example of where wee want to be. For details see the content guideline, the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide or the edit notice on any DOY page.

We could use your help in:

1. Preventing new entries that don't include direct sources and when they occur, either supplement them with a reliable source or reverting them.
2. Helping us clean up articles. The project members have asked all participants to go through their birthday and clean the entries up by adding reliable sources to each entry, or removing entries where reliable sources aren't readily available.

I hope this helps. Toddst1 (talk) 16:31, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

so what this means is that i need to find a source to verify my edits from, do you mean from a site on the internet or a wikipedia article? Great Mercian (talk) 20:10, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Any WP:RS will do. Another wikipedia article and some web sites would be WP:USERG. Toddst1 (talk) 20:39, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, the page Wikipedia:Office actions has been changed from a policy page to an information page.
• A request for comment (permalink) is in progress regarding the administrator inactivity policy.

Arbitration

• Editors may now use the template {{Ds/aware}} to indicate that they are aware that discretionary sanctions are in force for a topic area, so it is unnecessary to alert them.

Miscellaneous

• Following a research project on masking IP addresses, the Foundation is starting a new project to improve the privacy of IP editors. The result of this project may significantly change administrative and counter-vandalism workflows. The project is in the very early stages of discussions and there is no concrete plan yet. Admins and the broader community are encouraged to leave feedback on the talk page.
• The new page reviewer right is bundled with the admin tool set. Many admins regularly help out at Special:NewPagesFeed, but they may not be aware of improvements, changes, and new tools for the Curation system. Stay up to date by subscribing here to the NPP newsletter that appears every two months, and/or putting the reviewers' talk page on your watchlist.

  Since the introduction of temporary user rights, it is becoming more usual to accord the New Page Reviewer right on a probationary period of 3 to 6 months in the first instance. This avoids rights removal for inactivity at a later stage and enables a review of their work before according the right on a permanent basis.

---

Speedy deletion declined: Mark McCoy

Hello Toddst1. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Mark McCoy, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: signed to multiple labels, member of multiple notable bands (which - if true - would satisfy WP:BAND#6). Thank you. SoWhy 07:45, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

Some advice

Here's some advice that could be useful; try to write on people's talk pages in a friendlier way. Your postings on my page obviously show how high and mighty you think you are, and it appears other fellow Wikipedians feel the same way by looking at your history. You can make commentary without the attitude. Have a great day!Scott218 (talk) 04:06, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

reFill

I noticed that you have added a huge number of references on May 11, thank you! You have done this with the help of reFill and I was wondering whether this is the best way to go about this? Regards, Willbb234 (talk) 15:20, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

@Willbb234: I don't use reFill. Perhaps I should check it out! Toddst1 (talk) 19:29, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

July 2019

When i was editing the List of Hispanic and Latino Americans. it wasn't any different then the other ones i did similar to it. Matt Campbell (talk) 01:31, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

WP:OSE? WP:BLP applies. Toddst1 (talk) 01:31, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

The list i was editing had to do with a list of people the just one person individually. Matt Campbell (talk) 01:32, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

I mean't to say not just one person individually, my mistake. Matt Campbell (talk) 01:34, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

When it's articles like that you don't have to add references. Matt Campbell (talk) 02:16, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Not true. Show me where you think a policy says that. Toddst1 (talk) 14:57, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Matt Campbell, the rule is at WP:LISTPEOPLE. Please don't make up your own rules for Wikipedia.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:03, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Versions, vernacular, and variations of English

While I respect your message regarding rejected edits of the 'versions' of English used.. and while I am indeed aware of, respect and note the policy that when a subject pertains MOSTLY or EXCLUSIVELY to the UK, that version (and spelling therewith) is utilized; I would note that in the case of, for example, "Dark Fiber(Fibre)" such not only does not pertain exclusively to the UK, but such had its origins in, and the term was coined in the USA. THUS, my suggestion to edit the english spelling version of such.

Otherwise, the policy then would be more truly: unless it is a subject pertaining only to the United States (such as what that would be I do not know), everything should be spelled (spelt?) regardless of whether such item, object, thing originated within the USA; British spelling rules apply. Being that any object, item known, spoken of, and utilized outside of the USA would abrogate the usage of American English spellings. One then would go to wikipedia and see British spellings applied to any and all things, objects and items, exclusively.

that is all. Curious as to the true explanation as I dont have any true skin the game other than trying to be as accurate as possible.

thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.115.220.130 (talk) 14:04, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

See WP:ENGVAR. Toddst1 (talk) 04:24, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

day of the year pages editing

Hi Toddst1

I have been asked to supply sources for alterations or additions to On This Day pages. I added the death of Johnny Kidd, which I sourced from the Wikipedia page for Johnny Kidd - I also checked another source and the date given by Wikipedia matched. Just so it is crystal clear - are you saying we are not to edit using Wikipedia as a source?

Thanks Indianink (talk) 12:50, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

@Indianink: Of course. See WP:USERG. Toddst1 (talk) 10:26, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Saboteur (cancelled video game)

Thanks for your note. I’d have taken this to AfD myself but was busy today so thanks for doing that too. Mccapra (talk) 20:25, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

De nada. :) Toddst1 (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• Following a discussion, a new criterion for speedy category renaming was added: C2F: One eponymous article, which applies if the category contains only an eponymous article or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories.

Technical news

• As previously noted, tighter password requirements for Administrators were put in place last year. Wikipedia should now alert you if your password is less than 10 characters long and thus too short.

Arbitration

• The 2019 CheckUser and Oversight appointment process has begun. The community consultation period will take place October 4th to 10th.
• The arbitration case regarding Fram was closed. While there will be a local RfC focus[ing] on how harassment and private complaints should be handled in the future, there is currently a global community consultation on partial and temporary office actions in response to the incident. It will be open until October 30th.

Miscellaneous

• The Community Tech team has been working on a system for temporarily watching pages, and welcomes feedback.

---

Hey Todd

Why are you from Washington having a gratuitous go at this article?Rodolph (talk) 00:36, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) (and ANI stalker) Rodolph 3 things

1. You've really been here long enough to know better than posting something like that. Even if you were accurate (which you are not), and it may technically fall inside the rules - challenging bright-line rules like WP:OUTING is never a good idea.
2. WHAT article?
3. Are you sure gratuitous is the word you're looking for? Even if he lived in Washington (which he doesn't), and even if he was editing one of the Washington articles (which I'm not seeing at a quick look), it still wouldn't be a COI without some real imaginative stretching; so what would be unwarranted or uncalled for about it? — Ched (talk) 03:12, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

2019 US Banknote Contest

	US Banknote Contest
	November-December 2019
There are an estimated 30,000 different varieties of United States banknotes, yet only a fraction of these are represented on Wikimedia Commons in the form of 2D scans. Additionally, Colonial America, the Confederate States, the Republic of Texas, multiple states and territories, communities, and private companies have issued banknotes that are in the public domain today but are absent from Commons. In the months of November and December, WikiProject Numismatics will be running a cross-wiki upload-a-thon, the 2019 US Banknote Contest. The goal of the contest is to increase the number of US banknote images available to content creators on all Wikimedia projects. Participants will claim points for uploading and importing 2D scans of US banknotes, and at the end of the contest all will receive awards. Whether you want to claim the Gold Wiki or you just want to have fun, all are invited to participate. If you do not want to receive invitations to future US Banknote Contests, follow the instructions here

Sent by ZLEA at 23:30, 19 October 2019 (UTC) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk)

Accusations about edit summary at Brooke Burke page

Please refer to this edit of mine that clearly shows that I added the reference to the BNP for the source of Burke's birthdate. Please stop accusing me of something that I didn't do. I would appreciate your cooperation. Funandtrvl (talk) 20:38, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

@Funandtrvl: Facepalm I apparently had both brain damage and an attitude on Friday. Mea culpa. Toddst1 (talk) 21:13, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

thank you, much appreciated! Funandtrvl (talk) 23:34, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Recent changes to a person's wikipedia page

Rockville

Hi. In regard to the motto of Rockville, I'm a little confused by your claim that "Just because it's on a web page doesn't mean it's their motto". It's not just featured on a web page, it's featured on the seal of the city, which you can see in the article (or, if that's not good enough, on the city's own website). Zacwill (talk) 22:57, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

@Zacwill: So find a source that says that's their motto. Words on a seal are just words on a seal. United States national motto is "In God we trust," but the Great Seal of the United States has other, outdated words. You should know you need a source, anyway. Toddst1 (talk) 23:04, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

By definition it is a motto (see here), but I'm evidently not going to find a source that'll satisfy you. The important thing, I suppose, is that the the completely unsourced (and incredibly lame) motto there previously is now gone. Zacwill (talk) 23:18, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

@Zacwill: I can tell that you're an expert on heraldry and have made these changes with the best of intent, however misguided. Governments follow different rules than typical heraldry, as the example I cited above proves beyond any doubt. Anything you publish on Wikipedia should be backed by a WP:RS, and if you can't find one, you shouldn't be adding it, and you should know that as long as you've been editing.

I'm glad you found the error in the previous claim for the motto. Toddst1 (talk) 23:30, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Nader Pop Culture

Akane Yamaguchi

Hello. This article is too long, need to omit some unnecessary paragraphs, help summarize this article (and copy edit). Thanks you. Olascf (talk) 13:29, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

You may be correct. Toddst1 (talk) 13:31, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Oreilly’s rainforest retreat correction

Hi Todd You asked about the source for the O’reilly’s rainforest retreat info. I know this as I knew the people and the location involved in this and I walked the old trail which is now known to very few. I have asked people locally if anyone can locate a photo as I know I have seen an old photo of the cars and the horses.

This site, gives some of the story about the two day journey by car and horse without the precise detail of the location I gave: https://www.smartstepstoaustralia.com/oreillys-rainforest-retreat-family-accommodation-in-the-gold-coast-hinterland/ O’Reilly’s is set in Lamington National Park – a 22,000 hectare park that is home to a variety of types of rainforest including ancient Gondwana Rainforests. The O’Reilly family moved from Ireland to the Blue Mountains before settling in the McPherson Ranges in Southern Queensland in 1911 to begin dairy farming. They cleared the tracks and farmland painstakingly by hand. When the area was declared national park, this isolated them but in 1915 they began hosting tourists in the O’Reilly’s Guesthouse. It used to take guests two days via car, train and horseback to get to the resort!” Marilyn Leask (talk) 14:33, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

@Marilyn Leask: Hi Marilyn, Yeah, that's kind of what it looks like in your edit. You're sharing your personal experience and knowledge. While we want to respect your knowledge, we can't have everyone entering their own experiences and opinions as fact in an encyclopedia. That's called WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH and is not allowed under the founding principle of WP:Verifiability. There's no way to know if what you are entering is correct. That's why we require WP:Reliable Sources to back stuff up. You might want to take a few minutes to review the WP:5 Pillars of Wikipedia. Thanks! Toddst1 (talk) 15:11, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter November 2019

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Deletion review

Since you tagged the page both times, you may be interested in the DRV of User:SashiRolls/SWAPP. Cheers! Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:05, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC was closed with the consensus that the resysop criteria should be made stricter.

• The follow-up RfC to develop that change is now open at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/2019 Resysop Criteria (2).

• A related RfC is seeking the community's sentiment for a binding desysop procedure.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors may now nominate themselves as candidates for the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections. The self-nomination period will close November 12, with voting running from November 19 through December 2.

---

Hey Todd

Why are you from Washington having a gratuitous go at this article?Rodolph (talk) 00:36, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

I hope my comment at ANI addresses this. I think we both need to AGF. Toddst1 (talk) 06:07, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) (and ANI stalker) @Rodolph: 3 things

1. You've really been here long enough to know better than posting something like that. Even if you were accurate (which you are not), and it may technically fall inside the rules - challenging bright-line rules like WP:OUTING is never a good idea.
2. WHAT article?
3. Are you sure gratuitous is the word you're looking for? Even if he lived in Washington (which he doesn't), and even if he was editing one of the Washington articles (which I'm not seeing at a quick look), it still wouldn't be a COI without some real imaginative stretching; so what would be unwarranted or uncalled for about it? — Ched (talk) 03:12, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

stalking my own talk page:@Ched: Rodolph is referring to the article Charles de Salis. Toddst1 (talk) 06:44, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

there seemed to be a rather over zealous and unwarranted dissing of the subject of the now deleted article. I wasn't sure that perhaps an American would get the nuances of a mid C18th British person? I use my real name but it is rather hard to get a sense of what is going on with all these strange pseudo-nyms people use? Rodolph (talk) 14:18, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

What exactly are you asking? Toddst1 (talk) 16:22, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Nigel Coates article

Dear Toddst1

Re. Nigel Coates article, I have made some small edits which I hope you will not categorise as 'puff'. Most importantly though, the word 'Architect' in the article heading (presumably there for disambiguation) is misleading as Prof. Coates is not actually an architect. (I appreciate this is counter-intuitive as he is responsible for a fair bit of architecture. Zaha Hadid or Thomas Heatherwick are somewhat similar. Research the way RIBA awards qualifications and the ARB registers architects in the UK if you require an explanation.) What change would you advise here? nb I have amended the description of Prof. Coates' occupation to an accurate one. If you change this it will be to the detriment of the article as I do not have the time to keep spinning in circles undoing your edits.

Best regards, Ace Morgan 12:29, 29 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acemorgan (talk • contribs)

Changes to Philip Ardagh

Hi Todd,

Thanks for your message regarding my edits made to the Philip Ardagh biog.

I hope to add citations to all corrections (except for one) but am learning as I go along. It's the coding/writing that's the challenge, not the authenticity of the content.

From what you say, I can work on the draft in history and then, once the citations have been added, repost it. Thank you.

There is one edit I would ask that you make in the meantime.

Nowhere does Philip Ardagh publish any of his works as 'Philip Ardagh Roxbee Cox' so this is very confusing. I can find only two public references to his full name: in the Oxford Guide To Children's Literature and Who's Who.

I know that he does not publicise his full name and uses 'Philip Ardagh' for all events, public appearances, talks, etc and is even known as 'Philip Ardagh' in all publishing meeting, etc.

If you feel it important that the name Roxbee Cox appear somewhere in the entry, might it not be possible to say later in the text that, according to Who's Who, his full name is Philip Ardagh Roxbee Cox, 'Ardagh' being his mother's maiden name?

I feel this would be much more helpful to all concerned.

Look forward to your response. Thank you. 16th October 2019

Skunfkins Trousers (talk) 14:39, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

@Skunfkins Trousers:Good suggestion - thanks and done. BTW, do you have a connection to the author? Toddst1 (talk) 14:41, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Toddst1, Many thanks for such a speedy response. Yup, I'm an intern currently trying to sort out the years of literary festival programme, articles, posters, publicity and other material he's accumulated over the years! Skunfkins Trousers —Preceding undated comment added 14:48, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Let's move this conversation to your talk page, where I think it would be better. Toddst1 (talk) 14:55, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Aclan Bates article

Hi Todd. This is Bedogan. I am currently trying to clean up and add citations to Aclan Bates' page to make it more credible. I am not being paid to do this.

I actually can't believe the page stayed as it was for years with no citation or corroboration until I tried to add citations! Then it got marked for deletion.

Broken Angel is a legitimate, full-length Hollywood film. It's not a 'stretch' to say that Mr. Bates directed it.

Mr. Bates is active both in the US and Turkey. He has numerous productions to his name in both countries.

Because the US productions are older, I'm having difficulty in finding source material to back them up. His more current activity, as it is taking place at present in Turkey, is documented in Turkish.

Since I am doing this in my spare time, I can't check the page or do research every day. And since the page stayed as it was for so many years, leaving it up until I can document it properly is not going to hurt anybody.Bedogan (talk) 06:32, 5 November 2019 (UTC)Bedogan

@Bedogan: you should take this to the discussion underway at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aclan Bates. It's out of my hands at this point. Toddst1 (talk) 20:08, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

Revert

Dear Toddst, you reverted me today. I guess you did not read the remark on the “talk” page of November 6, so i’ll Repeat it here. Please state your answer here or on that talk page please.

reference required in this case?

I corrected the new entry from an anonymous user to "1632 – King of Sweden Gustavus Adolphus dies in the battle of Lützen." But does this new entry also require a source from outside? (otherwise this book "Williamson, David. Debrett's Kings and Queens of Europe. pp. 124, 128, 194, 207. ISBN 0-86350-194-X." could be consulted if someone has access to this) Kind regards Saschaporsche (talk) 09:48, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Kind regards, Saschaporsche (talk) 14:02, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Saschaporsche:,

The Days of Years (DOTY) pages were becoming a complete mess with incorrect and unverifiable info so things have changed so that all new entries require a direct source.

The DOTY project had exempted themselves from verifiability. As a result, almost none of the pages had any sources to back things up, based on the naive (and against Wikipedia policy) belief that all entries would be backed by reliable sources in the linked article. It turns out that was not the case and the DOTY pages were filled with incorrect info and even worse, other places started believing the info there and publishing the incorrect info in newspapers, for example on "Today's date in history" type listings.

So about two years ago the DOTY project took the bold step of requiring that all new entries be backed by direct reliable sources. Several of us have gone through and started cleaning things up. May 11 is an example of where we want to be. For details see the content guideline, the WikiProject Days of the Year style guide or the edit notice on any DOY page.

We could use your help in:

1. Preventing new entries that don't include direct sources and when they occur, either supplement them with a reliable source or reverting them.
2. Helping us clean up articles. The project members have asked all participants to go through their birthday and clean the entries up by adding reliable sources to each entry, or removing entries where reliable sources aren't readily available.

I hope this helps. Toddst1 (talk) 14:08, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

User:Gcdonaldson

I've blocked this user for 2 weeks as I see he's had multiple warnings from you and has just ignored them. I'll be happy to give him a much longer block if he doesn't take note. Deb (talk) 11:56, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Pending changes

Hi, I noticed your post on User talk:Deb and was concerned because I think I accepted a DOY edit yesterday (the linked article supported DOB, and I didn't realize there needed to be a cite added on the DOY page). I'd like to fix my error, but I can't find the article. Is there a log or query I can run that would show edits that I accepted? Schazjmd (talk) 18:52, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Hey @Schazjmd:, take a look here. You can get there from your user contributions/logs and then select "Review log". Thanks for being proactive! Toddst1 (talk) 21:25, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Aha, so that's the trick! Thanks, Toddst1, I appreciate it. Schazjmd (talk) 21:41, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – December 2019

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2019).

Administrator changes

EvergreenFir • ToBeFree

Akhilleus • Athaenara • John Vandenberg • Melchoir • MichaelQSchmidt • NeilN • Youngamerican • 😂

CheckUser changes

Beeblebrox

Deskana

Interface administrator changes

Evad37

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC on the administrator resysop criteria was closed. 18 proposals have been summarised with a variety of supported and opposed statements. The inactivity grace period within which a new request for adminship is not required has been reduced from three years to two. Additionally, Bureaucrats are permitted to use their discretion when returning administrator rights.
• Following a proposal, the edit filter mailing list has been opened up to users with the Edit Filter Helper right.

Technical news

• Wikimedia projects can set a default block length for users via MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry. A new page, MediaWiki:ipb-default-expiry-ip, allows the setting of a different default block length for IP editors. Neither is currently used. (T219126)

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee Elections is open to eligible editors until Monday 23:59, 2 December 2018 UTC. Please review the candidates and, if you wish to do so, submit your choices on the voting page.

Miscellaneous

• The global consultation on partial and temporary office actions that ended in October received a closing statement from staff concluding, among other things, that the WMF will no longer use partial or temporary Office Action bans... until and unless community consensus that they are of value or Board directive.

---

Message from Project North Carolina

Hello Fellow North Carolina user,

I have reorganized and updated the content for the Wikipedia:WikiProject North Carolina. I hope it is useful to improving collaboration.

User:G._Moore Talk

Reversion

Hi,

Concerning this reversion, I would like to point out that it wasn't really an addition to a Day of the Year page, but a movement. You can see in my contributions that I first modified the person's entry, adding a reference for the date of birth, then deleted the text from December 12 and inserted it in December 6. So now, an entry has been lost.

Anyway, adding a source is always a good idea, and I have no problem with that. Just one question: the reference should justify the date of birth (like what I did when I edited the person's article) or the person's notability (like the Encyclopedia Britannica entry)?--Joutbis (talk) 10:29, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Just the DOB. Many of the linked articles don’t have anything to support the DOB, so we started requiring the direct cite. Toddst1 (talk) 14:30, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Guidance Barnstar
		This is for your help and advises given to me about reviewing pending changes related to days of the year project. Thank you very much for advice. Regards. PATH SLOPU 09:54, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter December 2019

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:11, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Boone, NC

Merry Christmas, Toddst1! Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 11:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Howard Knob is officially called just that. I posted a link to the USGS webpage to confirm this and there less accuracy in the article on Boone, NC do to editing to remove my edit. I did leave as part of my edit a mention of the alternative, though unofficial, naming of Howard's Knob.

Even the Wikipedia article on the mountain is titled Howard Knob with a mention to the alternative name with the possessive s. But the official name is Howard Knob.

thank you for the heads up re: December 14th

hey Toddst1 sorry about that, i don't edit too often but thank you for the clarification BurrShotHam711 (talk) 02:07, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – January 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2019).

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment asks whether partial blocks should be enabled on the English Wikipedia. If enabled, this functionality would allow administrators to block users from editing specific pages or namespaces, rather than the entire site.
• A proposal asks whether admins who don't use their tools for a significant period of time (e.g. five years) should have the toolset procedurally removed.
• Following a successful RfC, a whitelist is now available for users whose redirects will be autopatrolled by a bot, removing them from the new pages patrol queue. Admins can add such users to Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist after a discussion following the guidelines at Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Redirect whitelist.

Arbitration

• The fourth case on Palestine-Israel articles was closed. The case consolidated all previous remedies under one heading, which should make them easier to understand, apply, and enforce. In particular, the distinction between "primary articles" and "related content" has been clarified, with the former being the entire set of articles whose topic relates to the Arab-Israeli conflict, broadly interpreted rather than reasonably construed.
• Following the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections, the following editors have been appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Beeblebrox, Bradv, Casliber, David Fuchs, DGG, KrakatoaKatie, Maxim, Newyorkbrad, SoWhy, Worm That Turned, Xeno.

Miscellaneous

• This issue marks three full years of the Admin newsletter. Thanks for reading!

---

DOTY

Merry Christmas!

Thanks for being so kind to me early on. I'm sure I wouldn't have stuck around if it weren't for you. Cheers, Willbb234<sup>Talk</sup> (please {{ping}} me in replies) 17:50, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year Toddst1!

Gcdonaldson

Just blocked this guy for six months - his first action after returning from the previous block was to make another unsourced addition. Deb (talk) 09:14, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

McGruff the Crime Dog is on the job! Toddst1 (talk) 17:04, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

chencho gyeltshen

in first sentence club must be shortened to "paro" and either no confirmation for 0 (0) stats with tertons so make it empty, otherwise its clear vandalism! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.133.254.196 (talk) 10:55, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

My additions to the Deaths on DOTY December 26

I added Sue Lyon and Jerry Herman from the info on their Wikipedia pages. Is this not reliable enough? Or do I need an outside source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuartkau (talk • contribs) 20:35, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

@Stuartkau: That is exactly what I tried to explain to you here. Using Wikipedia as a source would be WP:USERG and WP:CIRCULAR. Each new entry on the Days of the Year pages requires a direct reliable source to be cited. Toddst1 (talk) 23:13, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Re: December 27 DOTY Deaths

Added this and used his Wikipedia article as the source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuartkau (talk • contribs) 20:39, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I understand now.Stuartkau (talk) 00:23, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Bertrand Stern

even in the version you first saw, the many publications are enough to make A7 inappropriate--and he is almost certainly actually notable. DGG ( talk ) 01:27, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Your user page

I was reading your user page. I liked the part about the Gazette and you being Wikipedia. Look at this [[19]] Watch the mark 1:14:36 mark about wikipedia. Then look at this [[20]]. I can positively confirm I am not in association with any organized crime figures but it was an eye opener for eure. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:14, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

@Hell in a Bucket: Pretty funny. Glad I never pissed off any mobsters on Wikipedia! Toddst1 (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Oh yeah one other minor point though, I'm not Chris K menitoned in the interview I'm Jake lol Hell in a Bucket (talk) 19:05, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – April 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2020).

Guideline and policy news

• There is an ongoing request for comment to streamline the source deprecation and blacklisting process.

Technical news

• There is a plan for new requirements for user signatures. You can give feedback.

Arbitration

• Following the banning of an editor by the WMF last year, the Arbitration Committee resolved to hold a Arbcom RfC regarding on-wiki harassment. A draft RfC has been posted at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC (Draft) and not open to comments from the community yet. Interested editors can comment on the RfC itself on its talk page.

Miscellaneous

• The WMF has begun a pilot report of the pages most visited through various social media platforms to help with anti-vandalism and anti-disinformation efforts. The report is updated daily and will be available through the end of May.

---

Precious anniversary

Precious

Six years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:58, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

No good deed goes unpunished

Toodst1, since you were kind enough to thank me for some of my edits to March 12, I am going to take that as license to pester you for advice. As you've probably seen I've been working through that article adding references, and I've come across a case where the DoB is sourced in the article to an offline publication that I don't have a copy of. There's apparently no reliable online source available. Should I assume good faith and copy the reference across without checking it, or delete the entry and add it to a list of sources to check? Realistically the chances of me locating a copy of Rock Sound from the mid-2000s are close to zero, so in this case (and, I suspect, many other cases) the latter option is going to mean removing the article from the list. Thanks, and seasons greetings, if you celebrate at this time of year, Wham2001 (talk) 18:50, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

@Wham2001: My approach is that when I clean up an article, if I can't verify the info based on what's in the article, I remove it. I'm sure there are folks that would think that is not optimal, but that's the only way I know how to clean up a DOY article.

I'm not sure if you took my thanks as sarcasm, but it was not. It was genuine thanks. We appreciate help in cleaning up those articles. Cheers and happy holidays. Toddst1 (talk) 19:37, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Re sarcasm, no, I appreciated the thanks and took it as intended. The section title was more to say that if you hadn't thanked me I would probably have pestered somebody else. I don't think my sense of humor translates very well to Wikipedia, sadly. Anyway, thank-you for the reply - your advice makes sense and I will follow it. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 23:25, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

After some work I have got to the end of March 12; it was quite good fun, if a bit monotonous at times. I'd appreciate any feedback you have to offer before I move on to another day. Best, Wham2001 (talk) 14:48, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – May 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2020).

Administrator changes

Gnangarra • Kaisershatner • Malcolmxl5

CheckUser changes

Callanecc

Oversight changes

HJ Mitchell

Guideline and policy news

• Discretionary sanctions have been authorized for all pages and edits related to COVID-19, to be logged at WP:GS/COVID19.
• Following a recent discussion on Meta-Wiki, the edit filter maintainer global group has been created.
• A request for comment has been proposed to create a new main page editor usergroup.
• A request for comment has been proposed to make the bureaucrat activity requirements more strict.

Technical news

• The Editing team has been working on the talk pages project. You can review the proposed design and share your thoughts on the talk page.
• Enterprisey created a script that will show a link to the proper Special:Undelete page when viewing a since-deleted revision, see User:Enterprisey/link-deleted-revs.

Miscellaneous

• A request for comment closed with consensus to create a Village Pump-style page for communication with the Wikimedia Foundation.

---

Administrators' newsletter – March 2020

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2020).

Guideline and policy news

• Following an RfC, the blocking policy was changed to state that sysops must not undo or alter CheckUser or Oversight blocks, rather than should not.
• A request for comment confirmed that sandboxes of established but inactive editors may not be blanked due solely to inactivity.

Technical news

• Following a discussion, Twinkle's default CSD behavior will soon change, most likely this week. After the change, Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. You will be able to always default to "deletion mode" (the current behavior) using your Twinkle preferences.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2020 Steward Elections, the following editors have been appointed as stewards: BRPever, Krd, Martin Urbanec, MusikAnimal, Sakretsu, Sotiale, and Tks4Fish. There are a total of seven editors that have been appointed as stewards, the most since 2014.
• The 2020 appointees for the Ombudsman commission are Ajraddatz and Uzoma Ozurumba; they will serve for one year.

---

Jimmy BUTLER [SEPTEMBER 14 DOTY]

Hi Todd, thank you for helping me find the way.

New Page Reviewer newsletter February 2020