User talk:Ithizar

Welcome

Hello, Ithizar, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thanks for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Newcomers help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

How to edit a page, and the Editing tutorial, for basic editing info
Picture tutorial - How to stick images into articles. Note that you can't hyperlink to images hosted elsewhere, you'll have to upload a copy to Wikipedia.
Naming conventions - "How should I name my new article? Why can't I start it with a lowercase letter?"
Manual of Style - this covers those details like "Is it okay to change from British to American spellings?"
The Five Pillars of Wikipedia - this covers the ground rules like don't pick fights with people.

Two other details: First, you can sign your posts on discussion (non-article) pages by typing ~~~~. This produces a signature letting everyone else know who wrote the comment. Also, you should take note of the edit summary box that appears below the editing area: you can put a short description of your changes there. You may want to mark it as a minor edit if it's something like fixing a typo. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. Happy editing! -- stillnotelf is invisible 11:20, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We are....Marshall

Good job on the university article. One minor note, however, dealing with wikilinks of years, the WP:MoS suggests that years only be wikilinked if part of a full date. Examples: January 2, 2002. In 1945, Joe Blow went to Foo... youngamerican (talk) 14:22, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of St. Joseph Catholic Church (Ironton, Ohio)

An article that you have been involved in editing, St. Joseph Catholic Church (Ironton, Ohio), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Joseph Catholic Church (Ironton, Ohio). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Nyttend (talk) 11:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quick thanks

Just wanted to note my appreciation for this particular diff. It takes a special sort of integrity and wiki spirit to encourage discussion that way. Thanks. – Luna Santin (talk) 05:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your rollback request

Hello Ithizar, I have granted rollback rights to your account in accordance with your request. Please be aware that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam/blatantly unconstructive edits, and that using it to revert anything else (by revert-warring or reverting edits you disagree with) can lead to it being removed from your account...sometimes without any warning, depending on the admin who becomes aware of any misuse. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 16:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on getting rollback, good luck in the future. Hope to see you around!--Coldplay Expert 18:12, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you!! Ithizar (talk) 18:10, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Bob Lutz (coach)

A tag has been placed on Bob Lutz (coach) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 18:24, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the {{hangon}} tag to the article and posted my rationale for keeping it on the Talk page. Thanks! Ithizar (talk) 19:14, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Bob Lutz (coach)

I have nominated Bob Lutz (coach), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Lutz (coach). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. noq (talk) 18:53, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads up! I appreciate the communication. I will hop over to the discussion page as soon as I can and give my reasoning for why I think it should stay. Thanks again. Ithizar (talk) 03:55, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of PROD from Imzadi

Hello Ithizar, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Imzadi has been removed. It was removed by JIP with the following edit summary 'removed prod notice, I think this book is notable'. Please consider discussing your concerns with JIP before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 19:50, 27 November 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 19:50, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

High School PRODS

Hello, I just deprodded two high school articles you proposed for deletion, as all high schools are deemed notable if existence can be verified. Fuller explanation/example can be seen at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Everest Public High School. Cheers.--Milowent (talk) 01:55, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Burns (Media Matters)

Hello, just to let you know that this article has been nominated for deletion. If you wish to contest this, please see WP:PROD and WP:Notability (people). Best wishes, Boleyn3 (talk) 18:09, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

== AfD nomination of Eric Burns (Media Matters) ==

An article that you have been involved in editing, Eric Burns (Media Matters), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Burns (Media Matters). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Boleyn3 (talk) 10:41, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Ithizar. I'm just adding a greeting at the bottom (not really associated with Eric Burns, MM). Thanks for your latest and inspired comment on AfD "you-know-where". Take with a grain of salt what I add to that . . . Will Be Back is making the article stronger by 'stirring-the-pot' from time to time.

btw, can you describe for me and all interested the term 'Ithizar'? (On your user-page) . . . I guess I could do a google search, but we would like to see what you say. FYI.

Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 14:42, 3 April 2010 (UTC) Thanks (tia) In Advance, Charlie[reply]

Sources

How do you make it clear on the page that the source is the movie itself, and that anyone can watch the movie to verify it. Ghostkaiba297 (talk) 02:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hotel Alindahaw

Adding a speedy after an AfD, is just fine. I checked the copyvio was correct, and speedy closed the AfD as such. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 22:34, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Juror B37

I made an edit request to redirect this, which you created, to State of Florida vs. George Zimmerman#Juror comments. Thanks. --JFH (talk) 17:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Ithizar. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Ithizar. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Ithizar. 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)[reply]

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) 00:06, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 01:21, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 00:23, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Angela Lansbury. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. Thank you. Aoidh (talk) 03:02, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your message. I appreciate your concern and your genuine attempt to be helpful. However, if you look at my edit history, you will see that I am not an inexperienced editor nor new member of Wikipedia. In fact, I have been an active member since 2005 and, although not as prolific as other editors, have over 1,100 edits. And while not an admin, I have been granted several special privileges over the years, including rollbacker. So I've been around the block.

No, I know my edit violated Wikipedia rules. That's the point. I wanted to. I did it deliberately. Because, as I said, too many Wikipedia editors have sticks up their butts.

Have a nice night. Ithizar (talk) 03:22, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Crazy-go-nuts" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Crazy-go-nuts has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 27 § Crazy-go-nuts until a consensus is reached. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 00:08, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:08, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2025

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 2 weeks for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 00:05, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, you don't get to make threats that editors who disagree with you may be arrested. Any recurrence of that behavior will be met with an indefinite block. Do you seriously think that was appropriate? Acroterion (talk) 00:07, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

<personal attacks redacted> Since this behavior is at odds with this long-term editor's history, I have indefinitely blocked the account. You will need to convince us that someone else has gained access to this account and that you have taken measures to ensure that it is under your control. Any further abuse will cause you to lose access to this talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 00:14, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It will need to be done via WP:UTRS.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:19, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at Ithizar's contributions out of curiosity, and I don't think the aggressive edit summary or knowing policy violation is at odds with this user's history at all – see edits one, two, three, four. Iiii I I I (talk) 07:20, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have gotten into some heated back-and-forths from time to time, that is true. However, I have never once engaged in any behavior that has earned me a block, even a temporary one, and I have never made legal threats against anyone. In addition, the purported "legal argument" -- that it is against the law to use the term "Gulf of Mexico" -- is ludicrous on its face. I still maintain that this particularly incident is not in character with my 20 years of editing history. Ithizar (talk) 08:49, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the Unblock Ticket Request System that have been declined leading to the posting of this notice.

Ponyo^{bons mots} 00:19, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Finding a federal law

Can you cite the law you mention in this edit summary? Michael Hardy (talk) 18:35, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He is currently blocked, but made a threat to those who said the Gulf of Mexico instead of the Gulf of America. StormHunterBryante5467 (talk) 19:34, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trump signed an executive order to change the Gulf of Mexico's name to the Gulf of America, which is the most likely law he is talking about. StormHunterBryante5467 (talk) 19:40, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! My account was compromised. I did not make the edits in question. I am currently working to get the block removed. Ithizar (talk) 06:16, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh alright, sorry to hear about your account getting compromised. I recommend you change your password immediately to prevent any hacker from compromising your information. Welcome back! StormHunterBryante5467 (talk) 01:20, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TPA restored

Admins considering unblock should be aware of two previous UTRS appeals: UTRS appeal #100152 and following. -- asilvering (talk) 03:16, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the restoration of my talk page editing! I greatly appreciate it. I will be back later tonight to submit a standard unblock request. Ithizar (talk) 03:22, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Ithizar (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My account was compromised. I did not make the edits nor legal threats in question. I have taken steps to secure my account. Ithizar (talk) 06:18, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Compromised account or not, we've got a promise the legal threats will not recur, and a warning that this is the last chance saloon. -- asilvering (talk) 01:40, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator comment) Do you think the person who got access to your account used your computer or network? If not, maybe a CheckUser could help shed light on this. QwertyForest (talk) 08:06, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do we know that you aren't the person who took control of this account pretending to be the original operator? 331dot (talk) 09:14, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see @Ponyo:'s notes at UTRS appeal #100152 Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:18, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For the reviewing admins, one of the things I noted at the UTRS case linked above is, in addition to the technical evidence, the fact that the juvenile snarky edits made by this account that led to the block were not out of character for Ithizar, so I'm not really sure the account was compromised at all.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:43, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that too, going back to at least 2022. At the time I blocked, I considered the possibility of an intermittent compromise, and felt that there was at least some possibility of more than one person accessing the account over a longer term. But that may be an overly charitable supposition. Acroterion (talk) 18:07, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask what edits the two of you are referring to? Also, I'm not certain how to go about "proving" what I have been saying. I can make my case here, but I'm not sure what sort of evidence you are looking for. I am happy to help with your investigation if I can, I'm just not certain how to do that. But I appreciate you discussing it here. Ithizar (talk) 18:16, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, what I was unimpressed by in the UTRS appeal was your claim of having a clean block log, when you appear to have something of a habit of playing chicken with admin warnings, eg Special:Diff/1215417908. I don't think there's any point in trying to determine whether the account was compromised or not. There is no material difference for us between "account periodically gets compromised by jerks" and "account used by a single person, who periodically acts like a jerk". Regardless of which it was, I think we can unblock now, with the understanding that if the juvenile snarky edits recur, we simply reblock and move on. @Ponyo, @Acroterion? -- asilvering (talk) 19:00, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If unblocked, it would be last chance saloon in my opinion. -- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:05, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can see your point of view. I have made the claim that the account has been compromised and you are doubtful, but either way it makes little practical difference I agree. I have taken steps to secure my account, including changing my password for the first time in a long time. I also honestly did not realize that it was possible to use two-factor authentication for Wikipedia, but I have been researching that today and plan to enable it.

In any event, if you will unblock me, I am perfectly willing to accept the condition that if another incident occurs, I will be re-blocked with no further discussion or appeal. I can live with that. Ithizar (talk) 19:39, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Federal law?

please tell us more about the federal law that compels speech from us about the Gulf of Mexico?

You wrote such a serious thing, so I look forward to hearing a detailed account of which federal law there is that requires speech on a political topic.

If you have a chance, share with us how it passes any first amendment scrutiny.

Thanks again! NdotoYaKenya (talk) 09:48, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]