User talk:Zippy/archive/1

24.222.105.251

When someone makes a comment on the text of an article, but incorrectly makes it on the article itself, the best thing to do, in my experience, is to move that text to the talk page. Just reverting them without comment will, I fear, just frustrate people and lead them to vandalism.

Perhaps I'm missing some wider picture? Martin 09:47, 27 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Ahh - I missed that you reverted him after he'd vandalised Catholicism, right?

It's unfortunate that there's no easy way to tell people that their content has been moved, not deleted. User talk pages aren't giving the "you have new messages" text, and newcomers might not even realise the talk page is there.

Maybe we should leave a brief clue in the page itself? (comment moved to talk:catholicism) or some such? It's a tricky one. Martin 12:46, 27 Aug 2003 (UTC)

---

I originally left this comment on Heine's page but he keeps deleting it, so in case you didn't see it while it was there; I left the talk page unprotected for him to respond as I thought it was important that details of his previous vandalism were visible, but your choice. Angela 02:30, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)

---

Hello, Zippy. I put my response to Talk:List_of_Japanese_authors. Sorry for late. -- Taku 00:31, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)

OH NO!

Are you as alarmed as I there is not references to Zippy the pinhead in wikipedia!!!! Dominick 02:44, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Eugene Scott doubled

Hi. Your last edits to Eugene Scott caused the page to become accidentally doubled (will anyone ever fix that damn bug?). I reverted them; can I ask you to try your additions again. Sorry for the inconvenience. -- John Fader 01:47, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I think I fixed it. -- John Fader 01:55, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

NPOV

Just a thought: NPOV means neutral point of view. Whilst this may be an oxymoron, what you deleted from George W. Bush definitely was POV, not NPOV. Cheers, Smoddy (_t^g_e^c_k) 22:08, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

D'Oh. I meant "entry not NPOV." --Zippy 01:09, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Vandal Vendetta

Certain AOL (who else?) user(s) are on a vendetta against me and are removing external links to my sites from Radio Boys, Grosset & Dunlap, Supermystery, Mildred Benson, Roy Rockwood, Clues Brothers, Casefiles, The Dana Girls, Hardy Boys Digest, Undercover Brothers, Harriet Adams, Ted Scott Flying Stories, Nancy Drew, Franklin W. Dixon, Rover Boys, Stratemeyer Syndicate, Tom Swift, Jr., Tom Swift, X Bar X Boys, Edward Stratemeyer, Hardy Boys, Tom Swift IV, While the Clock Ticked, What Happened at Midnight, The Yellow Feather Mystery, The Witchmaster's Key, The Wailing Siren Mystery, The Viking Symbol Mystery, The Twisted Claw, The Tower Treasure, The Sting of the Scorpion, The Sinister Signpost, The Sign of the Crooked Arrow, The Short-Wave Mystery, The Shore Road Mystery, The Shattered Helmet, The Secret of the Old Mill, The Secret of the Lost Tunnel, The Secret of the Caves, The Secret of Wildcat Swamp, The Secret of Skull Mountain, The Secret of Pirate's Hill, The Secret Warning, The Secret Panel, The Secret Agent on Flight 101, The Phantom Freighter, The Mystery of the Whale Tattoo, The Mystery of the Spiral Bridge, The Mystery of the Flying Express, The Mystery of the Desert Giant, The Mystery of the Chinese Junk, The Mystery of the Aztec Warrior, The Mystery of Cabin Island, The Mystery at Devil's Paw, The Mysterious Caravan, The Missing Chums, The Melted Coins, The Masked Monkey, The Mark on the Door, The Jungle Pyramid, The House on the Cliff, The Hooded Hawk Mystery, The Hidden Harbor Mystery, The Haunted Fort, The Great Airport Mystery, The Ghost of Skeleton Rock, The Flickering Torch Mystery, The Firebird Rocket, The Disappearing Floor, The Crisscross Shadow, The Clue of the Screeching Owl, The Clue of the Hissing Serpent, The Clue of the Broken Blade, The Clue in the Embers, The Bombay Boomerang, The Arctic Patrol Mystery, Hunting for Hidden Gold, Footprints under the Window, Detective Handbook, Danger on Vampire Trail, A Figure in Hiding and others. This is doubly annoying as I was the originator of many of the Wikipages and my web pages provide additional in-depth information on these subjects. This has been going on for weeks. PLEASE HELP ME!--FWDixon 21:42, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

2008 in Iraq

You just deleted this. I was in mid edit to remove the speedy tag and place it on AfD. While it was an obvious POV rant, it was not IMO nonsense in the CSD sense of the term. Please consider undoign your deleteion, or approving my undeleting it. i don't want to simply override another admin on such a point. DES ^(talk) 08:20, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I was mistaken, it does not meet the definition of patent nonsense. I believe it does however meet the speedy deletion criteria A1: "Very short articles providing little or no context." What is your opinion on this? --Zippy 08:30, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Speedlite vs Speedlight

Your edit to Speedlite was incorrect. Nikon use the very similar term Speedlight for their flashes. —Morven 21:28, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Ah, my mistake. Thanks for the correction. --Zippy 00:24, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

About dr Robert Cook

I added some data and some discussion to that mini-stub. I hope, sufficient to let that article survive some days. The problem was that Hiltrud Strasser article have a link to Robert Cook, but there was a problem of disambiguation - so I posted that very brief stub, just to let interested people to find his official website.--Alex brollo 19:33, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

As an equine veterinarian I think Dr Robert Cook is probably notable enough to be included. His bitless bridles are fairly innovative and so I think he should stay Malcolm Morley 16:26, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

R. Cook article done

I posted a "draft version" of that article today. Please, can you take a look and edit my English (that's far from good :-( )? There is a template saying "Please help this article editing English"?--Alex brollo 07:03, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

DreamGuy dispute

Hi Zippy, hope you are well.  :) I was wondering if you could help with something? I was participating in an AfD discussion, and have a user, DreamGuy, who has jumped to the conclusion that I am either a "sockpuppet" or "meatpuppet", and he's been throwing all kinds of abuse my way. I read up a bit on Wikipedia dispute resolution, and it advised that I should attempt to address it with him on his talk page, so I did that. But all he did was keep deleting my messages, and now he's accusing me of harassment (!). Looking into his history, there seems to be a long trail of uncivil behavior, though to his credit he seems to have also done some fairly good things around Wikipedia. Some people are advising me that I should file an RfC, though I was wondering, since you're an admin, and you've actually met me (and it was your excellent presentation at the HC that inspired me to get more involved with Wikipedia), do you think it would help if you assured DreamGuy that I really am a real person, and not just a sockpuppet out to get him? All I really want is for him to stop throwing abuse my way, and to either apologize for some of the insults (such as at Talk:Eenasul Fateh), or to delete the offending messages. As it's going though, things seem to keep escalating.

Thanks in advance for any help, Elonka 19:21, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

In general, I think it's best to ignore trolls. If someone wants to believe you're make-believe, while simultaneously thinking you're worth insults, well, just leave them alone. You're not going to convince them by rational argument, I suspect. And if this is their pattern of behavior, it will be clear to others too. --Zippy 08:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Plame Affair

No objection. I was close to doing that myself. --Woohookitty^{(cat scratches)} 06:58, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Notable Brandeis Alumni

I understand your concerns, but as a Brandeis alumnus myself, the number of "no-name" "notable" alumni was getting downright embarrassing. I think that in a context such as this, having a non-stub Wikipedia article PRIOR to be recognized as being "notable" is not particularly unreasonable. Alight 17:31, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I understand yours as well. I'm also a Brandeis alumnus. When I started contributing to the Wikipedia, there was no entry for Louis Dembitz Brandeis. I noticed that there was no entry for him because his link was red on the Brandeis article, and so I created a stub for him. I agree that there are a lot of people on the notable list who might not be notable, but I suggest that if you are pretty sure they aren't notable, it's better to move them to the talk page for a discussion.

The Wikipedia is not complete, and dangling links for people are what lead to the creation of stubs -- editors rarely jump in and create an article where there are no links to it. It's a chicken and egg problem. So, please delete people you believe are not notable, and even start a discussion about them if you are unsure. But if you assume that they aren't notable because they have no entry, you are really assuming that the Wikipedia is complete, and that's not the case.

Speaking of discussion, you might want to suggest your idea as Wikipedia policy and see whether others support it. If it gets support, it would be an easy rule to apply to trim out cruft from articles. And if it doesn't get support, that might be instructive too. --Zippy 19:15, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Notable RGS alumnae

There was quite a struggle to get some people with strong feelings about the school to stop whitewashing her name out of the list. The point was made that "notorious" implies "notable", so that should stay, and further, "pornographic actor" is a more precise and generally acceptable term, so it's best that that should stay like that as well. --Slashme 12:56, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I see. I edited in part because "notorious" feels like a violation of NPOV. But I respect the decision to use "pornographic actor." --Zippy 23:43, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

about alexa

hello Zippy, i just saw that you know some stuff about alexa. i was wondering if you could just give me some details about the users reach figures, because it is really confusing on their website. do they give us a percentage, or a number in millions? like for exemple for a 3 months average, when it is written "million users" in the explanation they detail about percentage and million. what is the right answer? thanks in advance Manzanita.

M, I believe Alexa current tracks its sample population and uses their behavior to come up with a percentage, which they express as "number of users per million". For example, here's the traffic page for MySpace. On the Y axis, Alexa gives the "daily reach per million", which means the expected number of users, out of one million, who will visit Myspace in a given day. In Alexa's definition for "reach" they explain that they calculate the percentage and then express this as number of users per million. So, if a site has a reach of 10% in Alexa's sample population, they say that the site has a reach of 10% * 1M = 100,000 users per million. --Zippy 20:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

All Things Buffet

Given the almost certain buzz about Buffet at the BH annual meeting this weekend, we should see an increase in traffic to his article and those of his family members. Many are tagged as needing a "cleanup" and some are tagged as POV. It might be worthwile to clean them up and, if not already done, take care of the innacuracies reported by that NJ newspaper editorial. I don't think I'll be able to contribute much time, unfortunately, for the next week, so I thought I might pass my thoughts along to someone who seems to be very familiar with these articles. --Dragon695 21:13, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Carl Feynman

Since you created the article, I thought I would give you a heads up that the article is currently being voted on to be deleted. Falphin 02:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Elonka Dunin

As per above, just letting you know that an article you created has been nominated for deletion, in case you would like to participate in the discussion. --Elonka 07:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Margaret Cho & Whoopi Goldberg

User 67.122.63.226 is trying to pull a fast one on you. There was no consensus to remove the Maxim citations. 67.122.63.226 returns regularly to unilaterally delete material. The vandalism is usually quickly reverted. MelonSmasher 03:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. --Zippy 07:44, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

VandalProof

I've recently noticed your name on the awaiting approval list for VandalProof1, and I thought I'd drop by to let you know that maybe you'd consider moving up to WP:VP2. There's no waiting list; you join IRC, a friendly list moderator asks you if you want to use VandalProof2, and you get walked through the installation steps. I personally use the tool from my home PC, and it's one of the easiest things to operate. And, since we all know patrolling is mind numbing work, there's often a chat in the IRC channel you can jump into, to battle off those headaches from fighting vandalism. So, join up (#vandalproof) if you're interested! Cheers! - ¡Kribbeh!^Speak!\_Contribs 17:22, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:Tajikistan-map.gif listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Tajikistan-map.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —Fritz S. (Talk) 14:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. I've de-orphaned the image and started a discussion on Talk:Tajikistan about whether to keep or replace. This map is much more detailed than the newer one which was being used in the Tajikistan article. --Zippy 03:57, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

TriangleBoy

hey dude u can be an awesome admin but you have no ability to encroach on reserved rights. theres only one page to internet law so try n hook that up for the people dont go soft-User:Newjeruz101

Hi NJ, I removed the link because "go find it on edonkey2k" wasn't encyclopedic. But if there's a legitimate d/l link (if the software is, for instance, GPL) then by all means post a link to it in a section like "External Links". I'm personally very interested in the software, so if it's not restricted by copyright and you can post a link, I would appreciate it. --Zippy 23:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Alison Hewson

Why do you think Alison Hewson isn't notable? She has appeared in media stories for many years; she is mentioned in numerous books and magazines; her views are regularly reported in the Irish media. Is your issue that she is married to someone famous or some other issue? MarkThomas 07:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the subject. When I read the WP article, it didn't seem to talk about her so much as her relationship to Bono - I don't recall mention of appearances in books and magazines.

If she's notable for being Bono's spouse (and I'm not saying she is, but when I read the article, it wasn't clear to me), then the description of her might best be placed in the entry for Bono. If she's notable in her own right, then I'd like to see the article have more emphasis on what makes her notable. This doesn't necessarily mean making the article longer - it could mean less emphasis on her relationship with Bono in the article.

Just so I'm being clear - I am not saying the person is or is not notable, only that the article in its present form doesn't make the notability clear to me. --Zippy 15:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

RobotGenius

Hey, thanks for the heads up. I deleted the article because mainly for the notability concerns mainly, and advertising was a distant second criteria (I mentioned that when I deleted the talk page). The advert justification was put by mistage (It was in the clipboard, I pasted it and hit enter. By the time I realized, it was too late. Sorry for that!).

Now that you have deleted the article, I have deleted the talk page as well. :) Cheers. --soum (0_o) 17:50, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Paris, Texas

This article is on the brink of an edit war based on viewing the latest changes. The article reads at one point "Famous Parisites", then list famous people that were born in the town. As a resident of the town, I can say this is both grammatically correct as well as in keeping with local dilect, we call ourselves "Parisites" as opposed to "Parisians" as many users keep editing out. I requested on the talk page that no one edit this word again until a discussion could be held as to the validity of the correct word. However, someone continues to ignore this and edits to satisfy their own personal whims. Can we please do something about this? 66.76.72.25 19:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

If you haven't already, I recommend actually starting the discussion on the talk page for Paris, Texas. Work to build consensus in the discussion, and then you can either edit the article to reflect the consensus view, or ask the other editor to look at the discussion and participate in it (leave a message on their talk page, too). One word of advice - be patient - many editors may not realize that "Parisite" is prefered over "Parisian." Showing a link to an external credible source (say a local newspaper or TV station) that demonstrates this prefered usage would be very helpful. --Zippy 22:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey Zippy. I was the one who posted the message above your reply about the "Parisans" vs. "Parisites" bit in the Paris, Texas article. Another editor moved it recently, and to avoid edit warring I left it alone. I noticed your comment about leaving the wording as is unless a source can be provided. Sadly, very little of our town uses online technology for which I can easily link you to. However, I have an older news article not found on the Paris News' website(due to age) that not only uses the term "Parisites" but goes into detail as to why and shows a survey taken at the time of the local residents. May I use this as a source for supporting my claim? If so, who/where might I email a copy of the text to? Sorry to be such a bother about this, but I'd just like to see it set straight. Please understand yes, a lot of comments from my previous IP address are utter vandalistic non-sense as that is, as I've told other admins, a school IP in which every student and faculty member can access at any given time (over 3000 people). However, I assure you this is a legitimate and constructive issue I'm trying to address. Thanks for the help! 74.193.86.114 05:48, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

An off-line source is fine, as long as it's something you can describe well enough that someone else could verify it - Article name, author, newspaper name, date, page number. Since we already have a source that seems to be reputable (the visitor's bureau) that says "Parisians" what may happen is that we'll have to weigh one source against another, and beyond describing a possible controversy over the "correct name", will probably choose the one that appears more widely used. --Zippy 18:54, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Request for your opinion

Hi Zippy, I notice you've made a number of edits to the Ridgefield, Connecticut article, so you might be interested in contributing to a discussion at the Talk:List of people from Ridgefield, Connecticut page. I'm trying to get a consensus on what to do with a list of three people who many believed lived in Ridgefield, but didn't. If you have an interest, please look at the discussion and, whatever your opinion, I hope you'll comment. (I'm being careful here not to violate WP:Canvas, a guideline I support. If this message annoys you, I apologize and won't be writing more to you unless you request it.) Noroton 16:09, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

The Original Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		I noticed that your edits were impressive and so I've decided to award you this Original barnstar! Wikidudeman (talk) 05:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

request

Richmond, California id like to make a request for comment in the 80 image section please. Cholga saYS THANKS!^{Cholga is a SUPERSTAR}¡Talk2Cholga!_{Sexy Contribs} 01:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:David-pines.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:David-pines.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 19:06, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Your comment(s) would be welcome

I'm interested in the source of your user name. I'm currently doing a study on children's television as technologies of self. Has this name in fact come from Rainbow (TV Series)? Thanks Vegetationlife 20:59, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

I'd never heard of that series, so I suspect the answer would be 'no.' --Zippy (talk) 08:58, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Classification of admins

Hi Zippy. Please consider adding your admin username to the growing list at Classification of admins. Best! -- Jreferee t/c 23:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)