User talk:Zimbardo Cookie Experiment

Welcome!

Hello, Zimbardo Cookie Experiment, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! --AAA! ^(AAAA) 00:52, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your username

I just saw your username come up on my watchlist, and I wanted to congratulate you on having the most original username I've seen. Here's a WikiCookie for your userpage. Happy editing! --Slowking Man 01:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's very kind of you. Thank you for the welcome. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 07:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is a creative username. Welcome to wikipedia. Bawolff 07:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

damn, i came here to congratulate you on your username and see that a bunch of people have beaten me to it already! -- frymaster 17:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I'd known it would generate so much goodwill, I would have wasted some of it vandalizing pages! Thanks to everybody. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 18:15, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh trust me, the vandals with good names don't get very much good will (whilly on wheels is a cool name). Bawolff 01:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

I would recommend doing a user page to tell us more about you. This is completely your disicion, but I think of it fun, and helpful to have a userpage. Magistrand My Talk 14:15, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thank you for the interest. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 14:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting vandalism

Yes, you're correct that reverting vandalism like on the Bradbury article is not subject to 3RR. You seemed a little unsure in your edit summary. Don't worry, you can revert "MATT IS A FAG" from any article as often as necessary. Thanks for cleaning that up. —Chowbok ☠ 18:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the reassurance! Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 18:56, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eliot Tokar

I honestly wouldn't have thought any of them were fake until you said lol. Maybe I am naive. They certainly are a wierd lot. He is probably not noteable really.Merkinsmum 20:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you like to report that they are suspected puppets? I wouldn't mind their muppetry, but they are quite aggro too.Merkinsmum 00:00, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'ludicrously faux english stig'

http://whois.arin.net Search results for: 65.188.192.230c Comment: Allocations for this OrgID serve Road Runner residential customers out of the Columbus, OH, Herndon, VA and Raleigh, NC RDCs. (I don't have a technical enough mind to know if this is conclusive.)Merkinsmum 01:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually he writes that he lives in the states now I think, so we can't prove anything:)Merkinsmum 01:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let's 'ave a cup of cha in his honour, me old china! If only Desi was as fun:)Merkinsmum 01:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Naw, me employers VPN routes out of Fairfax, VA so that's misleading. Instead I offer a little something from the old Savoy.

I, humble, poor, and lowly born

The meanest in the port division

The butt of epauletted scorn

The mark of quarter-deck derision

Have dared to raise my wormy eyes

Above the dust to which you'd mould me

In manhood's glorious pride to rise

I am an Englishman, behold me!

He is an Englishman!

For he himself has said it,

And it's greatly to his credit,

That he is an Englishman!

For he might have been a Roosian,

A French, or Turk, or Proosian,

Or perhaps Itali-an!

But in spite of all temptations

To belong to other nations,

He remains an Englishman!

Cherio! Stig --65.188.192.230 22:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another one. User:Bensachs - came on sounding authoritative, but no previous edits:)Merkinsmum 23:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:ElinorD I know from Gillian McKeith so I asked her to take a look but the nasty tone of Desi put her off I think. I know what you mean lol, they don't inspire one to work with them. P.S. I just looked up the cookie experiment- lol classic:)Merkinsmum 01:28, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You asked a good question about page size. We regularly run a bot which examines talk page size overrun times number of occurences and compares it to article page size and divides by number of days article has been in existence. The higher the value the greater the likelyhood that an article is in crisis and needs examination by our team. We always operate under new identities to protect our editorial indepence and impartiality. --Bensachs 03:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Zim-Who do you think is the 'we' referred to above?:)Merkinsmum 03:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are barking! We needn't contribute to the talk page now, 'They' are talking to themselves:) Merkinsmum 20:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mitt Romney foolishness

Great call on deleting the change sourced from satire on an op-ed page peddled as if it were fact. You're right, poorly sourced facts on biography don't have a three-revert limit: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Remove unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material. This is not the first attempt like this on one of the Mitt Romney pages. I've seen now three anonymous-IP editors find a humourous article or editorial and then try it out as cited fact on Wikipedia just for fun. -- Yellowdesk 04:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the vote of confidence. It was a mildly amusing story, but it's hard to understand people taking it seriously. Oh well; saved by WP:CITE. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 07:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Holla, sorry for blankin your page bro i was just angry that my world soccer daily contributions kept on getting deleted. But i thought in wikipedia ur allow to write facts without sources such as according to Steve and Nick The 2gs backstabbed them. Yes i know the rest was wack but cameron the robot is a racist mf and i take offence cause his offending my people

Anyways bro, soz once again and peace out,

Ur homie Jamaal

PS. Holla back at me once u've read this, take care

No harm done. I listen to the show quite often myself, and I share many of your opinions, but I hope to keep the page as clean as possible. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 16:50, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No edit warring

You seem to be having an edit war with 217.245.6.158 over the article Carl E. Schorske. Please discuss with him your reason for reverting his edits, and maybe you can come to an agreement. Thank you. --Chaffers ^(talk)/_{(contributions)} 17:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are several IPs involved, probably with a single user. I wrote a message to one of the previous IPs explaining that his contributions were in violation of WP:NOR, and I will leave a message on the talk page as well, but I think I'm correct to revert the long stream of incoherent nonsense that the user(s) keep posting there. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 17:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Sorry. I forgot to read what he kept posting; I posted this as soon as I saw you 2 (well, you and several similar IPs) consistently reverting each others edits. --Chaffers ^(talk)/_{(contributions)} 18:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clauda Costa

Hi there. sorry...I am not sure how to post on your page...I see you are on my history page. I am trying to edit my Claudia Costa page, and I am having problems with it...I think you reported it for the image not being licensed? I actually own the image, and just need some help getting the proper upload I guess. If you could help me I would really appriciate it. thanks xo cc- --cashkitten 07:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)user:cashkitten

I actually didn't report your image or being unlicensed, I just reverted some attempts you made to do an inline link to an external site. I'm not sure exactly what your problem with the image is; can you give me more details? Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 14:06, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have fixed the problem, I uploaded it and it seems to have posted to the main page. Although, I don't know how to lift the warnings off the page, I email Wikipedia about it. If you have a chance, and time...cruise by my page, let me know if you see anything I have overlooked...in terms of requirements etc.

Please tell me WHAT I am not referencing? the image? what should I do?

A hunting Mitt will go

Hi Zimbardo Cookie Experiment. A great name you have. If you do have pictures of Mitt Romeny killing animals with his bare hands, or better yet, clubbing a seal, would you please upload them to wikimedia so that non-English wiki projects might get a look at who will next get a crack at safeguarding America? Many thanks. CApitol3 18:39, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CCC

The general scheme of Wikipedia articles is to describe the subject in sympathetic language in the first paragraph, then include a summary of criticism in another paragraph. "White supremacy" is a term that is almost always derogatory in that it is rarely if ever used as a self-description. It is appropriate for s to say, later on, that they are called that by other people. I think that "white separatist" is a term that the group would accept, so perhaps that would be a better term to use at first. -Will Beback · † · 23:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Page

I don't know for sure, but it may be a good idea to RPP your page. --Amaraiel 18:35, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done - I'd not seen this :) - Alison ^❤ 18:36, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your userpage

... I semi-protected it per WP:PROT to give you a break. Silly nonsense :) - Alison ^❤ 18:35, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your help in this matter. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 18:36, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage

Man, your userpage is hilarious. Thanks for the revert on mine :P --Sesameball 19:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all your swift work reverting the anonymous vandal's edits. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 19:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

juninho page

ok now you make to restore the page of juninho. now you make to restore the page of juninho. now you make to restore the page of juninho. now you make to restore the page of juninho. now you make to restore the page of juninho

The page has changed in two ways: one, it no longer lists him as the greatest free kick specialist of all time, and two, it no longer has a table of his free kick goals. I'm neutral on the second change and absolutely supportive of the first. Although I actually agree with you that he is a great free kick taker, Wikipedia as a work doesn't want to take a position like that. We try to be neutral under WP:NPOV and to write things that can be sourced reliably. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 20:05, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

we want juninho page free!!!!

I am not in a position to unprotect the page; the protection will expire in two weeks. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 23:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is guilt of anonymous people user and above all yours zimbardo that the page of juninho hour continues to you to cancel all you must ask alison unblocking the page, why you and alison you are two dictators of wikipedia we want juninho page freee!!! now —Preceding unsigned comment added by Babboleolr (talk • contribs) 11:09, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

it is true from hour in then not cancelling the page of juninho.we want juninho page free! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rock2 (talk • contribs) 11:28, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

zimbardo hour I have marked that juninho is not best but one of the best.ok? stop this stupid war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juninho s (talk • contribs) 11:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

alexf it continues to cancel the page of juninho!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juninho s (talk • contribs) 11:50, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

we want juninho page free!!!!juninho is absolutly the best freekick taker in the world!!!!

you and alexf are two dictators!bastard! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.23.126.84 (talk) 12:38, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

we want juninho page free!!!!help me

As I said above to one of your many sockpuppets, I don't have any ability to remove the semi-protection from the Juninho page. In addition, if I were to have such an ability, I would not use it, because you have repeatedly refused to edit in line with Wikipedia policy, especially WP:NPOV. Wikipedia is not a chat board or a forum for our opinions about Juninho's greatness.

You have shown that you are very good at getting around the various obstacles that the administrators have put in your way. I hope that in the future you use that energy to do useful things, like updating stats for active players or correcting errors on team pages. Thanks. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 00:59, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good Evening,

I've been watching your edits for sometime now. Consider it random interest. I am an RCP and I honestly see more vandals then I do good editors. Of course, I guess that is my choice. Good job on reversions and the like, I hope you have a great time here at Wikipedia. --Amaraiel 23:35, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I very much appreciate the encouragement. I am very busy professionally and wish I had more time for longer-form edits, but I am glad there is a place for people who spend most of their time improving the project in small ways. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 03:51, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

King james halim

Hi... the creator blanked the page, which is considered the same as requesting deletion per Wp:csd#G7. no need to revert: just tag Wp:csd#G7. Cheers. --Rrburke^(talk) 02:36, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. Thanks for the info Zimbardo Cookie Experiment 02:37, 22 October 2007 (UTC).[reply]

No apology necessary. It was just FYI. --Rrburke^(talk) 02:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WoW

It just goes to show you how stupid Vandals are.AlexNebraska (talk) 23:50, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you are a idiot and son of bitch!!!!--79.26.126.205 (talk) 12:08, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation of Dr. Todd Gould on CVSD article

Hi. I am the one who keep modifying Todd Gould's name on the Cumberland Valley School District page. He is not just a professor. He is a medical doctor and world known scientist who is regarded as being in the top 1% of his field, and his papers are cited by many other scientists for their contributions in the fields of psychiatry and psychology. I included a reference for this in case you need some kind of proof for this. I hope this clears the matter up. Thanks.--Jim Line (talk) 13:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't take my removing his title as disrespectful. I edited the entry for two reasons: because Wikipedia style is to omit academic titles (see WP:NAMES), and because "world renown" is ungrammatical. I don't have any strong feelings about whether or not Gould should be there, but if we're going to mention him, let's do it in a way that's consistent with the rest of the site. Best wishes. Zimbardo Cookie Experiment (talk) 14:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Daly Page

See discussion page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by David Tornheim (talk • contribs) 22:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Claudia Costa

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

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Smilemeans (talk) 06:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Claudia Costa

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Claudia Costa. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claudia Costa (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:24, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Claudia Costa

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Claudia Costa. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claudia Costa (3rd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:13, 21 April 2010 (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) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]