Jump to content

User talk:ZimZalaBim/Archive 10

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12

St. Teresa of Avila Catholic School‎

sorry... i thought that it would be fitting, because it is from our city paper..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 02:03, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Please see our copyright polic. --ZimZalaBim talk 12:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

St. Teresa Principal

Hi ZimZalaBim, im not trying to be a smart alec, and make you angry, but what can i put then about the principal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 00:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

This is a curious question: Have you ever met the founder of Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 01:10, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

If there is something notable to say about the new principle, then say it, but by all means, you cannot just cut and paste from a copyright-protected news article on the topic.
And yes, I've met Jimmy Wales. Why? --ZimZalaBim talk 01:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Jelly Belly

Yes I know you can't "copyright" but I thought a sentence was okay especially since I used quotes.

thanks, Smuckers (talk) 17:53, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

There is no legitimate reason to cut & paste general prose which can be easily re-written in your own words. Further, you did not use quotes (nor provide a direct citation) to indicate that you have taken the text from another source (see "overview" section in original article you started). --ZimZalaBim talk 18:53, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

OK -- but it was meant to be in quotes. I changed it after that. Thanks, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smuckers (talk • contribs) 19:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Featured article review

Search engine optimization has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 23:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Requesting semi protection of Notre Dame Fighting Irish football page

Hello ZimZalaBim. Over the past few days there have been several IP addresses that have been adding vandalism to the Traditions and Uniforms sections of the page. I am requesting a semi protection to limit the page to registered users. Both myself and another editor have had to correct the same exact vandalism three separate times now. Thanks!Tedmoseby (talk) 01:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

St. Teresa of Avila Catholic School‎

sorry... i thought that it would be fitting, because it is from our city paper..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 02:03, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Please see our copyright polic. --ZimZalaBim talk 12:39, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

St. Teresa Principal

Hi ZimZalaBim, im not trying to be a smart alec, and make you angry, but what can i put then about the principal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 00:54, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

This is a curious question: Have you ever met the founder of Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 01:10, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

If there is something notable to say about the new principle, then say it, but by all means, you cannot just cut and paste from a copyright-protected news article on the topic.
And yes, I've met Jimmy Wales. Why? --ZimZalaBim talk 01:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Jelly Belly

Yes I know you can't "copyright" but I thought a sentence was okay especially since I used quotes.

thanks, Smuckers (talk) 17:53, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

There is no legitimate reason to cut & paste general prose which can be easily re-written in your own words. Further, you did not use quotes (nor provide a direct citation) to indicate that you have taken the text from another source (see "overview" section in original article you started). --ZimZalaBim talk 18:53, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

OK -- but it was meant to be in quotes. I changed it after that. Thanks, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smuckers (talk • contribs) 19:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Featured article review

Search engine optimization has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 23:13, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Requesting semi protection of Notre Dame Fighting Irish football page

Hello ZimZalaBim. Over the past few days there have been several IP addresses that have been adding vandalism to the Traditions and Uniforms sections of the page. I am requesting a semi protection to limit the page to registered users. Both myself and another editor have had to correct the same exact vandalism three separate times now. Thanks!Tedmoseby (talk) 01:46, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Why?

Why is it so important to sign your name on talk pages?--Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 19:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

It is good talk page etiquette. See WP:SIG for more info. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:14, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Oh i don't know, MAYBE that you r always picking on the article(s) i try to help out on. I'm just trying to help out, like the time about the St. Teresa School article.--Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 04:23, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Please assume good faith and remain civil. I'm not picking on anything, but you have shown a history of creating articles or making contributions that don't fully adhere to Wikipedia policies and guidelines, so it is natural for a more experienced editor to check and make sure that things are ok. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I keep noticing you keep changing my edits. Especially the Mario Kart edit. That took over 30 minutes, and I had to get it from the booklet. It wasn't easy. I did it out of my own time. I could have done other stuff, but I notice that I keep making edits, just for you to keep deleting them. Do you watch every move I do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 17:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The is a wiki, meaning everyone can edit, and that one's contributions might be changed or reverted. This also is an encyclopedia, with particular guidelines for what kind of information should be included, and what should not. As I mentioned above, your edit history shows you have yet to gain a full understanding of what are appropriate contributions here (either content, new articles, or images), which is why some of your edits are continually reverted by other editors. I'd suggest you read through some of the articles provided in the welcome message left on your talk page a few months ago. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok

Also, do admins work at home, or at a special office, and do they get salaries? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 16:30, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I've already provided you the answer to this question (that you asked another admin earlier) on your own talk page: User_talk:Dominic_Edward_Aragon#Admins. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:23, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, sir, for the trouble I have caused you, but are you following every move I do or what? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 21:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

First, as you've been (politely) instructed numerous times, please sign your comments on talk pages by adding 4 tildes (~~~~), which will automatically insert your username and a date/time stamp of your comment. Second, per policy, "...[user contribution logs] are public for good reason... proper use of an editor's history includes (but is not limited to) fixing errors or violations of Wikipedia policy or correcting related problems on multiple articles". That's why you see me (and others) reviewing some of your edits. --ZimZalaBim talk 23:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Hi zimzala, um, well see, for some of the NASCAR/Football articles, ive tried to add their religions (e.g. Dan Marino, Jimmie Johnson) and when I put it on thw wikibox [e.g.religion: Catholic], for some reason I save my changes, and when I look on the article, the religion isn't there. Would you be able to help me? Thank You --Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 22:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I have little expertise in infoboxes, but it's probably because the relevant infoboxes (such as {{Infobox NFLretired}}) don't have a variable for religion. And that is likely due to the fact that a football player or nascar driver's religion isn't vital to their profession. if you want to add that variable, I'd suggest you bring it up on the relevant talk pages. (and I don't see any edits from you on the two articles you note above). --ZimZalaBim talk 22:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey You!

Hey You! You deleted my page, "Jordan Torrez" If you allow other pages about miniscule people then you should allow mine. Every person makes a difference and make choices everday that affect themselves and everyone around them. You have your own page, and only God knows who you are! So why do you deserve your own page?

Thank You, Jordan Torrez —Preceding unsigned comment added by JNT-on-wiki (talk • contribs) 18:02, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I have a user page, which you can make as well at [[User:JNT-on-wiki. But we have policies regarding who can have articles in the encyclopedia. Thanks. --ZimZalaBim talk 18:05, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for helping me with the John Earle article. Also, I thought you were having a WP: wikibreak--Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 23:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure, but you should probably be using the {{NFLretired}} infobox. --ZimZalaBim talk 23:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Stalk note

I was helping the poster above since he has had troubles of being rude/harassing users before. Smuckers It has to be good 21:10, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

If you want to "help" other editors by pointing out what you feel is "rude/harassing" behavior, I'd suggest leaving a more detailed and constructive note on that user's talk page, not a cryptic and accusatory singular link to a policy page on an article's talk page. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok. I have question. Do you think my edits have gotten better. Smuckers It has to be good 00:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Use Wikipedia:Editor review for a neutral opinion. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Also, on Talk:Brett Myers, I added the Copyrighted violation picture that was requested.Smuckers It has to be good 00:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
You should provide full details when making such a claim up front. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for guiding me. Is your name Chris or Mike ? Just wondering. From, Smuckers It has to be good 00:56, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
My name is ZimZalaBim. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:39, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Struggling

Hello, I have one last question. I am struggling to figure out how to change font/color on my signature. Everytime I put the tags on the "my preferences" it says "Invalid" Help would be appreciated, Thanks!! Smuckers It has to be good 00:59, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

You can look at Wikipedia:SIG#Customizing_your_signature, and examine other editors' signatures in talk pages to see how they're rendered. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:40, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Random

What does it mean when you get chills (from watching a powerful scene or movie)..what causes it? Thanks ZimZalaBim, I do appreciate your help. From, Smuckers It has to be good 04:34, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Please use the reference desk for your random queries. Thanks. --ZimZalaBim talk 04:43, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

2070s

Hi zimzilly, well that event really happens in the U.S. in 2076. Cant you leave it on the article? Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 00:26, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Discuss it on the talk page, don't edit war. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:39, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

ZipLocal Article

Hi ZimZalaBim,

A few days ago I posted an article for a Canadian company called ZipLocal which deals primarily with localized business search. The article was deleted and marked as (G11: Blatant advertising) so I tried to reword it to avoid anything I could see as advertisement. The article was again deleted for (G11: Blatant advertising) so I again edited the article to try to avoid the same problem. The article was deleted for a 3rd time (G11: Blatant advertising) and the ZipLocal page was set to protected. I read the Wikipedia guidelines and was told to contact the editor that protected the page to try to get the situation resolved.

Below is the message I received back.


Hey RHaworth,

You are recorded as the Admin that deleted and protected the ZipLocal article/page. I am trying to understand the reason for the deletion of the the article as the company ZipLocal is very well known in Canada (Notable) and the article was worded to avoid anything I saw as blatant advertising (which was the prior deletion reasons given). If you could possibly clarify why it was deleted that would help me to avoid it being deleted in the future (I was in the middle of adding references when it was deleted).

Also how would I go about unprotecting the ZipLocal page so that I may try to post a new article in the future from a more neutral point of view? I am fairly new to this so any clarifications you can give would be highly appreciated.

Thanks in advance, Zipbudz (talk) 20:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


From RHaworth's advice (to find an established editor that has related posts) I found that you have posted quite a few articles which are related to search engines and companies closely related to what ZipLocal does. I was curious if it was at all possible to send you the ZipLocal information to post in a way that won't go against Wikipedia guidelines and won't be seen as spam (which apparently I was seen as)?

Thanks again and I appreciate any help you can give to help me with this situation.

Zipbudz (talk) 14:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

It appears someone has indeed created the article, and it is now being discussed for possible deletion. --ZimZalaBim talk 13:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

hello

That is an excellent and astute comment on the Star Wars/Trek AFD! Well thought out! Spevw (talk) 23:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

Well SORRY! I was just trying to be nice!! - Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 21:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Neuvo Mexico

Hi, ZZB? Do you know if there are any admins in NM? Also r u a NASCAR Fan? - Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 02:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea, and my personal interests shall remain personal, thank you. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

About St. Teresa

Hi, well in the St. Teresa School article, i put the website, but the website isn't the official website of the school (I made it for the school). Is it appropriate to have this unnofficial site? - Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 17:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Please consult our external link policy. If the school has an official site, that should be linked to, rather than an unofficial site. --ZimZalaBim talk 19:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The school dosen't have a site. But is it still ok? - Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 02:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

It is probably ok. But you should not be providing your Wikipedia user page as a place for people to contact you, as you are here. Wikipedia is not a webspace provider for you to receive non-Wikipedia related communication. --ZimZalaBim talk 18:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

UNFAIR WARNING

You just left me an unpleasant warning when I am within the "three reverts per day" rule. I removed the tags from the articles as they are NOT required! 78.105.139.244 (talk) 00:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Let's review: MSN Groups indeed is merely a list of seemingly trivial information, which should be incorporated into text. Web hosting service has only one reference, and more are needed. And Butlins has no references at all. Multiple editors have reverted you and warned you. Please consider the possibility that these tags are indeed appropriate. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Simon Curtis

Hi - you just deleted the page i was trying to create for Simon Curtis who is an actor/singer. You did not give me a chance to expand it further. There is a page for one of his upcoming movies already here on Wikipedia - Spectacular! And he has a CD called Altar Boy that is avaliable through his website. He is also a popular youtube star. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spacedub (talk • contribs) 02:57, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

The full content of the page your created (and your only edit on that page) was '{{ db-bio }}== Simon Curtis ==Simon Curtis is a pop recording-artist in Los Angeles.'. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Your first article before your next attempt to create an article. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:11, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Memeo

An editor complained to Ron Ritzman, as well as the deleting admin about the deletion of that page, and Ron wanted to see the content again to double check his tagging was correct. So he asked me to userfy it so he could view it, however, instead I opted to just temporarily undelete it. It should be gone in a few more minutes. Prodego talk 04:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I see you deleted it, that is fine, as he already looked it over. Happy editing! Prodego talk 04:10, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I understand now. I restored my deletion, as I didn't want to appear to contradict your action. I'll leave it for someone else to address. --ZimZalaBim talk 04:12, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I've never really bought in to the "don't reverse another admin's action without asking" philosophy; there is a reason any admin can undo another's actions. So no reason to worry about that, and I re-deleted it, as he has looked it over. Prodego talk 04:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I've thought about it and it probably could have been eventually made into a passable article but not with the content that was there when I tagged it. It was going to be either A7 or G12. I chose G12 because it looked a little spammy. On 20/20 hindsite I should have chose A7 though I don't think that would have made the author any less angry. That's the drawback with new page patrol. It's almost impossible not to bite newbies. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. It probably would have been best to just have the content e-mailed for review, rather than undeleting, but no harm done in the end. --ZimZalaBim talk 23:35, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

St. Teresa Catholic School

Hi, ZZB, on the St. Teresa school article, I wrote about 90% of the article. Now for the website I was telling you about (for the school) a few days ago, I wanted to put the EXACT material I wrote for wikipedia on the school website. Can I, or is it copyrighted? - Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 02:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Copyrights#Contributors' rights and obligations, Wikipedia:Copyrights#Reusers' rights and obligations, and Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. I claim no expertise in this area, so perhaps your question is best asked (and answered) at one of the outlets provided at Wikipedia:Questions. --ZimZalaBim talk 02:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

"Web blogging if you will"

Im not trying to be a smart alec, but what if i dont remove it? Just asking... Afterall its my site..... - Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 03:11, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

In general, failure to follow policies can lead to a block. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:21, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

You can check.... it gone.... stteresacatholicschool.synthasite.com - Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 03:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, ZZB, this isnt WP related, but I have asked people a question regarding the National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing that no one is able to answer. Do you know a little a bout NASCAR? Any help appreciated. Thank You - Dominic Edward Aragon (talk) 22:57, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Nope, sorry. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Known public information

Please do not undo information of public record that does not need citation. No formal retirement papers were signed by Brett Favre. This is known by most. There is no citation needed, being this is universally known, if one is familiar with contracted business. Untrue information existed on the football stars' page. Favre never actually retired, as the article showed. If he had retired (signed), he would've been released from his contract by the Green Bay Packers, and would've had a more difficult time being reinstated by the Commissioner of the National Football League. It was an announcement of retirement only. Not an actual retirement. Please respect accuracy, not inaccuracy. Undoing true information, and replacing it with untrue information is more harmful to an article than supposed citation disputes. Just being an administrator does not mean that your personal opinion is acceptable over accurate information. Leave well enough alone.Pflipper73 (talk) 03:43, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Let's see: if this is "of public record" and both "known by most" and "universally known", then I suppose you'll have no problem providing me a citation for this tidbit you seems so intent on including. --ZimZalaBim talk 04:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for helping to stop the Madden 09 edit war. Burner0718 04:37, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Uh, unless I'm drawing a complete blank, I think you've got the wrong editor. --ZimZalaBim talk 04:42, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
What about this? Burner0718 04:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
At Brett Favre, right. Your reference to "Madden 09" is what drew a blank. --ZimZalaBim talk 04:47, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I've been fighting a vandal on the Madden 09 article + Brett's on the cover. I got confused. Ah well. :) Burner0718 04:52, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Look at 99% of Wikipedia articles

You need to look at the vast majority of Wikipedia articles. I want you to tell me how many have information that isn't supported by a specific citation. Looks like you are going to be showering millions of Wikipedians with "citation needed" messages. I hope you have a lot of free time. Please use common sense. This isn't a senior thesis. It's an unofficial web encyclopedia where millions are bombarded with information that is not cited. Please leave the accurate information alone. Not all information needs citations. Use your administrative skills to remove inaccuracies, not accurate information, which I am trying to provide. Now, please leave the Favre article by the wayside, and "punish" those who are providing inaccurate information on thousands of other sites. I'm only trying to provide the public with accurate information that really doesn't need verification. I'm trying to be nice here, but for some reason, you have decided to dwell on the Favre article, which has blatant inaccuracies. Banish me if you will, but think about what is written here.Pflipper73 (talk) 04:49, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Favre pic on Commons

Please see my comments at commons:Image talk:D (332).jpg. Considering the time and trouble it would take to remove a website stamp (and I think all photos on that site come watermarked), I don't think it's a clear cut case of just taking an image off the web, and I'm willing to give the uploader a benefit of the doubt. Listing for deletion or asking the uploader for more source info is appropriate, but I don't think a speedy deletion is. --Mosmof (talk) 23:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

FWIW, when the images appear elsewhere on that site (ie, the homepage), they don't have that watermark. See [1]. I won't protest your removing of the speedy tag if you'd rather it be listed for deletion. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:04, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

yes it was accidently

thankyou but how may I ask do you use templates do you use copy and paste? thank you it is greatly appreciated. Can you make your own? --Zaharous (talk) 03:11, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Template namespace and Wikipedia:Template messages. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:14, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Ronald Wayne

ZZB,

You chastised me for deleting all the content of the Ronald Wayne article. I gave my reason for deleting it: the article is bogus; there has never been an Apple co-founder by that name. The three Apple co-founders' names are matters of public knowledge. How do I go about nominating it for deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by George415 (talk • contribs) 19:22, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Please review our policies regarding deletion of articles; simply blanking the page is rarely appropriate. Also, the article seems properly sourced, and while you might disagree with some of its content, that itself is not a reason for deletion. Please familiarize yourself with the policy before taking any action. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:42, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Ronald Wayne was not a founder of Apple, so I deleted his article. Let's talk about this some more, OK? If you can prove he was an Apple founder, I would love to see what you've got. The "history of Apple" books make no mention of him. George415 (talk) 01:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Please heed my advice above and take the discussion to Talk:Ronald Wayne. If you continue to blank the page you will be blocked. --ZimZalaBim talk 02:11, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi, seems that I got a spot on my record, and heck, nobody is going to believe that my girlfriend misused my computer (her's broke). Anyway, thank you for removing her epistle, and I explained to her that I am not really charmed by it...... Sorry! -- Kim van der Linde at venus 04:43, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Holler House

I have just created Holler House and see you are interested in Milwaukee topics wonder if you may be able to find/upload any free images of Holler House. Any article improvement would be appreciated too. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Holler House

I have just created Holler House and see you are interested in Milwaukee topics wonder if you may be able to find/upload any free images of Holler House. Any article improvement would be appreciated too. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Modern March article

You deleted it citing that the site isn't significant. What exactly constitutes as significance in order to make the Wiki article worth keeping and not deleting? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsmith016 (talk • contribs) 03:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Read the links presented to you on your talk page, such as Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (web). Further, if you are the Brandon Smith who runs the blog, you have a conflict of interest and should not attempt to create an article for your own website (if it is deemed notable). --ZimZalaBim talk 03:43, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

List of web browsers

I have added back a link to the Origyn web browser to List of web browsers. This new browser is the first (and currently only) W3C standards compatible browser to be released for the AmigaOS in the past decade.[2] As such, I feel it is notable enough for inclusion. Given that it was only released very recently, it is to be expected that no-one has written an article about it yet. You are also an administrator, you should realise that red links are not a bad thing—they help identify areas where the encyclopaedia can grow, and should not be purged just because they point to unwritten articles. I hope you understand — Nicholas (reply) @ 08:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Common Vandal(s)

Let's get these two clowns -- User:King1234567890, as a front for User:Marktna -- blocked indefinitely for using user pages to store and edit copies of articles that consistently violate notability standards, are nominated for speedy deletion, are deleted, and then are recreated as 3 other articles from the userpage storage. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 23:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I am confident that if their actions persist, blocks are imminent. -ZimZalaBim talk 01:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

68.223.157.54

I'm sorry i did not do anything - please advise and don't block me from editing since I did nothing. I don't even edit though. Thanks. 68.223.157.54 (talk) 19:44, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

I presume you are referring to the warnings and block on this IP address back in March 2007. I'd suggest creating a user account to avoid having the actions of an IP address to avoid being associated with an IP's previous bad acts. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Greetings ZimZalaBim,

I'm very new to WikiPedia and I guess it shows. I added an external link to the "search engine" page. The link was to searchenginedictionary.com which I consider a good and relevant resource as it's frequently referenced by search engine web sites. I had a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Spam#External_link_spamming and the link seems to be within the rules. Can you explain why you removed it? Many thanks.

Dac.Gunter (talk) 09:38, 29 September 2008 (UTC)dac.Gunter

When an IP address (User:41.247.241.62) only makes 2 contributions, and it is merely to add an external link to articles, the concern is about spamming. Feel free to suggest re-adding the link at Talk:Web search engine. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks ZimZalaBim. Will follow the suggested route. Dac.Gunter (talk)dac.Gunter

IFast

I was putting the link to be helpful because i thought other people might want to go to the web page so they would not have to go google it. So if i put something about google chrome are you going to take that off to? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Programmer888 (talk • contribs) 06:12, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Google Chrome clearly satisfies our notability guidelines (note the 65 citations to reliable sources at the end of the article). Simply adding an external link to a non-notable (and "in progress") browser is spamming. Please stop. --ZimZalaBim talk 14:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Programmer888

I alerted the user to the WP:AN thread and replied to it as well. Cheers! Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 14:35, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

IFast

It is not my browser contact them i was trying to be helpful. If it is not my browser i do not see how that is spamming. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Programmer888 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

attack on Andrew Bentley

Hi, a long long time ago in a part of Wikipedia that is far far away you made the last edit to User:Davopeo, I was about to nom it for deletion as an attack page, but I wondered if you'd like to take a fresh look at it first? ϢereSpielChequers 17:15, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Do as you wish. --ZimZalaBim talk 15:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Online Companies

There are a few reasons for nominating Online Companies:

- dot com is a a US term and it is not used in the UK anymore to a great extent - online is more universal - this is a category for online only companies - while many companies offer a variety of routes to market - a more common Google search is "online" rather than internet or dot com

I hope this makes sense

Regards

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:Online_Companies" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joshuavr (talk • contribs) 14:11, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Amos Zereoue

Is this edit what you meant to do? It restores a picture of the photographer to the article, and the subject of the article appears smaller than the photographer in the shot. NJGW (talk) 06:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Guess you went to sleep or something. I guessed from your edit summary that you did not make the change you had intended to make, so I reverted it. Please have a look through the history and see if that's what you intended. I've left a note at Charlie 77's page about inserting pictures with his face in them. NJGW (talk) 06:39, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
You were correct in catching my error. Thanks. --ZimZalaBim talk 14:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

President of the United States

Since you made this edit: Don't know if it's intolerant template code, but there is now the code 

[[Image:{{{image2}}}|center|border|120px]]
Successor
{{{successor}}}

visible in the template. I tried (via preview) reinserting the parameters with empty value strings, but that didn't help. Any idea? Everyme 07:24, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

It appears to have been fixed. --ZimZalaBim talk 17:57, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, seems somebody was experimenting with parameters. Everyme 23:35, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

SEO

there seems to be a misunderstanding i submitted an artical one that i was going to constantly edit as information came yet it seems the you here at wiki had a problem with the artical. i didnt quite understand at forst since i was new and reposted the artical serverl time after it was deleted or removed before reading my mail... i apologize for that. but one meggage says do not post false information well i insure you that all the information i obtained is the truth as i was a witness and member of SEO and any information unclear or unkown was left out. This is the first time SEO can be talked about on a public website if there is an issue with the content that its sensitive or seems to contain unsutable subjects then thats fine. i am still trying to get in touch with Chase Redelback about certain details. but i must go now. thanks and bye —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aynom (talk • contribs) 22:15, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Your persistent attempt to include information about some random club does not fit Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Please stop. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:28, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

PC-Addicts

Why did the article I created (PC-Addicts) get deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andylaw31 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

If you look at the deletion log, you'll see the reason listed is A7. You can read about it there. You'll also want to read Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted?. Finally, please sign your comments on talk pages. Thanks. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

The God Awfuls

Hi ZZB. I thought that this article had several assertions of significance, so I removed the speedy tag. It would merit an AfD discussion prior to deletion, in my view. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 05:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and I just found this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The God Awfuls. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 05:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Notre Dame edits

Hey, Zimzalabim, I'm excited you want to help work on editing the fighting irish pages and recap for this season. I'm sorry if you felt that my edits didn't have a neutral POV. So let's work together on the discussion pages to work up good additions to the pages that we think will help tell everyone about the Irish. I look forward to working with you!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.194.101.164 (talk • contribs)

All you need to do is provide citations from reliable sources, and avoid your own biased perspective. Thanks. --ZimZalaBim talk 19:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
I think you are very biased, including allowing the Notre Dame page on the 2008 season to include weasel words in the game summaries. But, all the facts about this season are provable, and i will prove them.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.194.101.164 (talk • contribs)
I fear you will have a difficult time finding edits of mine that show bias and weasel words. Indeed, much of my time on these ND-related articles is to remove such problems. --ZimZalaBim talk 19:14, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
Many of the phrases in the 208 season summary are veyr colloqiual and conversational. The specific phrase is "turnovers were the name of the game." Do you really feel that should be in an encyclopedia? I have to assume you do because you let it stay. Also, there are only game summaries for the wins. Sort of a sin of ommision thing. Plus, instead of working together with editors to edit together the summary of this season, you delete it. You knew (or didn't want to not know)that the game against USC had the largest point spread ever, or the loss to syracuse was the first loss in Notre Dame history to an eight loss team, but instead of saying, hey, can you go find the link to this, you delete it. Sad. Just sad. If it were a 10 to 11 win season, you know the page would have been updated by now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.194.101.164 (talk) 05:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Assume good faith and feel free to fix the article's shortcomings yourself. --ZimZalaBim talk 13:36, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your support at this AfD. I just can't believe people sometimes. —Politizer talk/contribs 01:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Haha, now apparently the fact that we agree on two articles at the same time makes us a tag team. Hopefully this will all boil over soon, —Politizer talk/contribs 03:54, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:56, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the message. I'm watching those guys' talk pages so I noticed this as soon as you posted it. Good catch. I marked the new article for speedy, since it's a copy of the old one. —Politizer talk/contribs 15:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Just a heads-up, Kikbguy is contesting his block and accusing us and Virtual Steve of being a cabal against him (diff). I think it will be pretty obvious to the reviewing admin who's in the wrong here, so I'm not even going to bother responding to him anymore(looks like I didn't do a good job of that). —Politizer talk/contribs 01:28, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Hilarious. --ZimZalaBim talk 02:38, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Request

List of articles without references to establish notability

I have scanned through most of the extensions on that page, and have tagged for sources or notability concerns when appropriate. It appears WP:N is the prevailing standard, and if notability isn't established, then the appropriate deletion process would be in order. --ZimZalaBim talk 19:52, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Bradley Center

Dude, first of all, to get in an edit war about legitimate additions to an article (that had been there for months) - not vandalism - is absolutely ridiculous. I live in Milwaukee and know that the section you keep deleting is more factual than the rest of the unsourced comments you left. Hardly anything in the article is referenced, so according to your logic the entire article should be deleted. Manutdglory (talk) 22:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Dude, if the content is "more factual than the rest", then you should have no problem finding and adding the proper citation from a reliable source. Simply undo-ing my edits without comment is not the proper way to improve the article. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Rikaichan

I rolled back the changes you made to Rikaichan. I don't see why you deleted the instructions for use and the URL to download the program. Also, something drastic as removing most of an article requires more than four words of justification: you should leave a detailed message. Even better, you should have discussed the matter before proceeding. Lastly, you try to fix the problems rather than delete so much stuff. urashimataro (talk) 22:50, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a how-to guide and it isn't appropriate for articles to have instructions on how to use software. Further, the URL is properly provided in the external links section. Show me the policies that support your assertions above. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:56, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
You are right about the URL: I deleted it. About these two sentences:

"Hover the mouse on top of Japanese words (kanji, hiragana or katakana) to display the translation. A more detailed kanji view shows the character's meaning, on/kun readings, number of strokes and other information."

This a not a how-to, but a simple and short description, completely normal within an article. urashimataro (talk) 03:35, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Physician assistant

Sorry about that. I'm just a passer-by who decided to attempt to moderate the edit war between News4a2 and Nomad2u001. I'm not interested in becoming part of the war myself. I didn't see the reason behind the history/college-admissions deletion because I was concentrating on the edits by those two users and didn't notice your recent edit summary. That's why I attempted to restore it - not that I have any particular reason to support the addition. -- Tcncv (talk) 03:03, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem. And I realize now that my plea to stop edit warring doesn't apply to you - got confused by the various usernames in play. Hope things settle down there - considering protecting the page for a bit.... --ZimZalaBim talk 03:39, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Your vote is requested here. Thank you. -- Tcncv (talk) 02:00, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

ZZB, my very best wishes for the festive season stay safe and talk to you in 2009.--VS talk 11:25, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, and you too! --ZimZalaBim talk 14:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

YouTube

Panda Disculpa los Malos Pensamientos (Evangelion) is definitely banned from apppearing in the YouTube "most viewed" charts, as with 98 million views at December 2008, it would easily make the all time great list if the view count were regarded by YouTube admins as legitimate. The video does not appear in the charts here, where it would be Number 3 if YouTube saw the viewing figures as genuine. This video was mentioned in a newspaper article a while back but I cannot find it at the moment. Quite a few videos have been banned from the YouTube charts for gaming the system, but Panda is the champion at the moment. Cut Chemist feat. Hymnal "What's the Altitude" Music Video is the runner up with around 93.6 million views. This may be re-added to the article with some more sourcing.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:06, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, find "some sourcing", and then feel free to re-add. --ZimZalaBim talk 19:09, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the removal of an image and subsequent reversions of that removal

Hello! You are an administrator, is there a policy on the English Wikipedia stating that material must not be removed from an article unless it is replaced, if there is not such a policy, why did you revert my removal of the image for which a section on the talk page was created to discuss this? User:John Smith's stated that the said image may not be removed, only when a "more appropriate" replacement image is found could the original then be removed. Again, I ask you, is there such a policy on this Wikipedia? If there is not, then his argument does not stand, while my original argument, User:Ohconfucius's argument and User:Cordless Larry's agreement are all in favour of the image's removal. The only other participant is you, which at first reverted because my original wording stated "recommend [the image's] removal", at which point, I reworded my statement. As far as I can tell, neither you nor User:John Smith's have contributed any further to the discussion of the removal of the image. Later replies were all concerned with what its replacement should be. Where it begs me to ask you again, is there a policy that states an image may no t be removed until a "more appropriate" replacement could be found? If not, then please tell me what is the policy that currently keeps me from removing the image, and why you or User:John Smith's keep reverting its removal? Should there be none, then I am entitled to the removal of the image now since as far as I can tell, there is currently no reason against the removal of the image, and plenty of arguments in consent with its removal. Thanks and happy New Year's! --Shibo77 (talk) 06:54, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Look here, and you'll see where I am actively trying to find a solution to this issue. --ZimZalaBim talk 13:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Marissa Mayer's article

Hi ZimZalaBim, About the Marissa Mayer's articile, I have deleted your reference to the article saying she will leave Google in 2009 because this rumor is without any founding. Nothing official, just a rumor, so it has to presented as a rumor or not presented in the article. This rumor has surelly been released by the blog Google Operating System as a speculation and not even as a rumor. This reference is not relevant. OK, next time I will let a comment to explain why I have remove a modfication. Regards. Dzertyx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dzertyx (talk • contribs) 22:48, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

If you read the article, the reference is being used to confirm that she went to school at Stanford as was one of Google's first companies. The article makes no mention of her rumored departure. As such, the reference remains valid. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:10, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Travoltas

Under the circumstances of a sudden death of a 16 year old, the fact that an autopsy, specifically one that will use more than one pathologist to essentially avoid issues that came up in the same place with Anna Nicole Smith two years ago, is of relevance to the article. I monitor a lot of articles with recent deaths and current developments in the situation are often added and revised as things unfold. I've spent the last three days keeping what is essentially crap out of the John Travolta and Kelly Preston articles. It would be more helpful for someone to help watch out for the Scientology bashers and vandals who have taken the occasion to insert commentary about the Travoltas refusing to acknowledge whether the boy had autism, or whether Preston had an earlier, more disabled child with her first husband who has been scrubbed from internet/media existence by "the Scientologists". I won't return or argue the relevance of this autopsy point, although I would suggest that it is a difference of opinion about it, the outcome of which would be interesting. I have returned the imbedded note about the autism issue in Preston's article because Preston bashers have ceased adding it since the note was placed. Wildhartlivie (talk) 19:59, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Your belief that using more than one pathologist is what makes this notable is original research. Find a citation that remarks that this is unique, and perhaps it is worth including. My $0.02. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:50, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Rock Harbor Church

I changed the words ROCKHARBOR to Rock Harbor to appear less "promotional" as you stated, however, you should know that ROCKHARBOR is the official way to write the name of the church and that is why I left it that way - did you notice the logo?

I realize you are an administrator, but I would expect you to actually check to see if my edits were actually copied from a website, rather than merely assuming. If you had actually done that, you would have seen that there is absolutely no way anyone can say that the article was copied from the website, because it's completely different. Having said that, why did you delete my contributions? An explanation would be appreciated rather than simply deleting entire sections. Thanks.Manutdglory (talk) 05:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Explanation? Did you read my edit summary and comment on your talk page? My reasoning seems pretty clear. --ZimZalaBim talk 05:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Manutdglory's images

To answer your question, no, I can't think of any more images - I think you got them all. Manutdglory (talk) 21:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm finding many more: for example, your version of File:Calvary.jpg (it's been deleted, and the commons version now appears in the file placeholder) is taken from here. I fear you've been doing this for quite a while.... --ZimZalaBim talk 22:15, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks ZimZalaBim. It get's difficult when there real GFDL-self images intertwined with ones taken from improper places. I think that many of the remainder are not his to claim - unless he owns lots of camera's ! - Peripitus (Talk) 00:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Clearpoint Mechanical Pencil

Hello there. I've declined the speedy on this article. Should you feel that deletion is still appropriate, please consider either WP:PROD or WP:AFD. Many thanks Gazimoff 18:04, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Edits by Feral-Golduck

Well done - I was going to revert them but you got there first! Springnuts (talk) 16:35, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

It continues, and I've blocked the account for 48 hours. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:37, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Coveo Page

Hi. I wanted to discuss your rejection of my update of the Coveo Page. It is true to say that I'm new as a writer on Wikipedia, but I totally understand the difference between Marketing and Fact, even if I work for Coveo. I simply updated the key people as they have recently change and also I have added products list. I based my text on what I read on 2 competitors of Coveo: Endeca Technologies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endeca) and Autonomy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomy_(company)). I reupdate the page without the Product part that you may find to marketing, but I would be interested to discuss with you the difference between our competitor pages. I will be more than happy to comply and write an objective fact based text. Lastly about the notability, I simply want to mention that Coveo is followed by Forrester and Gartner Analyst. Please let me know what else you would need to classifie our COrporation profil notable. Thanks and I appreciate your help to make me a better Wikipedia contributor. Alexandre Pelletier —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexandrepelletier (talk • contribs) 04:30, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

See WP:SPAM and WP:NOTADVERTISING about what makes an appropriate article about a company, WP:N & WP:CORP to learn about notability guidelines, WP:OTHERSTUFF regarding the fact you've found other similar articles, and lastly, WP:COI, if you indeed work for the company in question. --ZimZalaBim talk 04:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your Information and the comment on my Talk Page. I'm gonna take the time to review all info in order to become a good wikipedian! Alexandrepelletier (talk) 23:54, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
My pleasure, but please be sure to heed the warnings at WP:COI, if you do indeed have a conflict of interest regarding this page. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:49, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Indiana Wesleyan University

I appreciate you creating the Indiana Wesleyan Wildcats article and shortening the IWU main article- good idea. However, I've noticed that major contributions such as conference and national titles usually are included on the main article. For instance, note the UCLA and University of Southern California articles. Even though they have separate athletic articles, they both still list all their championships. Manutdglory (talk) 21:19, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't see any large tables, similar to the one's you propose to include at Indiana Wesleyan University, in either of those articles. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
True, but if you noticed the USC article, they list every title they won by sport. Plus, both the UCLA and USC articles have larger and more detailed athletics sections than the original IWU one. Manutdglory (talk) 22:36, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
So can I restore it the the IWU article? Manutdglory (talk) 07:09, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
It is not for me alone to decide. Make your changes, and consider discussing on the articles talk page, not here. --ZimZalaBim talk 14:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Tags on Housecleaning article

I read this: Wikipedia:Tagging pages for problems. All it needs, if anything is the cleanup tage according to that article. The article is not a how-to, so that parameter should not be there. If you want to see what a how-to is like see Wikihow.--Chuck (talk) 14:24, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm moving this discussion to the article's talk page, as that's where it should be taking place. --ZimZalaBim talk 14:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

your changes to the Wausau East High School's wikipage

I am the editor of the Wausau East High School page and as a Wausau East alumni I consider Jim Brezinski to be notable enough to be posted on my Wikipedia page. Mr. Brezinksi spent 40 years of his life to better the lives of students and continues to do so as a city council member for the last five years. If you disagree with that, I'll respect that and appreciate your contribution, but please do not tell me who is important enough to be placed on a Wikipedia page that is not yours. If you remove him again, I will take action even if you are an administrator.

Thank you.

Pheng Xiong —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pxion129 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

First, there is no single editor of an article. This is a community project. Second, please don't issue threats. Third, please see the relevant guidelines here and here that help describe who is appropriate to be listed on school pages. Just because he taught there for 40 years and was on the local city council does not necessary make him notable for inclusion in an encyclopedia. This isn't a memorial or webspace to feature your favorite teachers. --ZimZalaBim talk 15:56, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Manutdglory

Hello, you seem to be an admin who interacted with this editor. Can you comment on this? Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Rick_Warren Phoenix of9 (talk) 02:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

wb?

You don't look like [1] you're on wikibreak :) Gerardw (talk) 21:10, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

  1. ^ Special:Contributions/ZimZalaBim
...they pull me back in. --ZimZalaBim talk 02:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Watching - feel free to take your break :)

Just to let you know I am watching every edit at RW also and note your interest and assistance even when on a Long Wikibreak. If you can't keep away that's fine of course - but feel free to catch some R & R whilst I watch (admittedly with hammer at the ready).--VS talk 03:52, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, appreciate it. --ZimZalaBim talk 04:31, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

LGBT and religious categories on bios of living people policy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Categories Asarelah (talk) 22:59, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

?????

That was NOT a personal attack. It's an email I got from Dmacks@aol.com with that exact message. And you can't delete this message because there is nothing wrong with it. 71.115.3.186 (talk) 21:17, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you missed the note at the top of that page: This page is for discussion of the policy; if you wish to complain about a user harassing you, your request won't be heard by many people here; you will have better luck at Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance). --ZimZalaBim talk 21:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

The party in question

He keeps adding an inappropriate external link to the main article about his employer, apparently because he works in their web development section and thinks it's just the coolest thing on earth; and I've been trying to get across to him why that is inappropriate. I was trying to set up lines of communication, not "out" him: I feel he's done that already, since he has identified himself in edit summaries by employer and job, and there is exactly one name which exactly matches his username on the employer's public directory. I am well known on the campus of his place of employment, both under my mundane name and as "Orange Mike," and I thought maybe he'd see me and say, "Oh, yeah, that's Orange Mike. Hi!" --Orange Mike | Talk 14:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

The fact that you had to go to his employer's public directory to run a search to guess as to his name means he did not explicitly reveal his true identity on WP, which means your actions, and posting the results on his talk page, is dangerously close to an WP:OUTING violation. If you wanted to open up channel of communication, try sending him an e-mail. --ZimZalaBim talk 15:00, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
In retrospect, you may be right, although I don't see it that way; the offending item has been removed from his talk page already anyway. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Prop 8 on Rick Warren page

Hi ZimZalaBim. In hopes of facilitating consensus on the matter of how best to refer to California Prop 8 on the Rick Warren page, I wrote up a framework of seven points that I *think* interested editors agree on, and three points that I *think* interested editors disagree on, and put it on the discussion page. I'm hoping you'll return to that page and provide your input. Thanks.... Benccc (talk) 20:08, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

2007 ND-Navy game

Zim, to be listed, this game should have a reference that talks about the game in a historic context. The reference that went with it did not, expect to implicitly state its importance by pointing out the streak was broken. This is why I initially deleted it. This section is incredibly hard to police, and I fear that if there are not high standards for referencing these games people will start adding games to the list that are their opinions. On the talk page, the criteria laid out was that a game listed should be of importance to the history of college football AND Notre Dame football and that the game was talked about as such by a third party. Dale Arnett said in his edit that he thought the game was notablein his opinion. There are many ND games of historical importance, but they are not in that section if they don't have a verifiable source that explicitly discusses the game as historic. Just simply stating this game does because it broke a streak shouldn't be enough, as I believe it violates NPOV. I have no issue with the specific game, but I do with the reference, as it does not talk about the game in a historical context. I believe a better reference is needed for it to remain on the list. Tedmoseby (talk) 05:15, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Do either of these meet your specifications: The Power of Ending a Streak or Navy Enjoys Perks After Historic Win. --ZimZalaBim talk 05:26, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Definitely not the second and I am unsure about the first. They talk about the historic importance of the streak for the Naval Academy program and for the ND program, but not for the game of college football. Maybe I have really high standards, but the other games on the list are talked about in a way that go beyond the ND program and talk about the games in terms of historic importance to college football (i.e. game of the century, top games of the 20th century, etc). Again, there are probably a ton more games of significance to ND or the opposing team that don't make the list. I suspect it's a matter of time before this game is written in a larger context, but right now I can't find such a reference. That's why I don't necessarily dispute the game itself, just the current references that would lead to its present inclusion on the list. Tedmoseby (talk) 06:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

IUSB Page

Hi Zim Zala Bim,

Crotchety Old Man accused me of posting spam, warez and valdalism first. He also claimned the the campus report for IUSB from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education is spam and warez. If you look at the page, you can see that the controversies section was also removed from the site. I did not add the old controversies section but I have noticed that the site has been whitewashed. Could you please let Crotchety Old Man know that impuning my motives and attacking me as he did from the getgo is against the rules?? CampusFreedom (talk) 14:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Zim, Crotchety has now accused me of working for FIRE. I do not work for them and I am a part of the IUSB Community. I would like to know how to request Arbitration.CampusFreedom (talk) 15:05, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Just to be clear, he didn't say you worked for FIRE, but rather that you are associated with them. Given your username, and the fact that your only edit was to include this link to an organization dedicated to "campus freedom", it is reasonable to conclude that you have a conflict of interest. Rather than edit warring, making attacks and wikilawyering, I suggest you make an entry on the article's talk page asking to have the link included in the article, thereby letting neutral editors discuss and decide. --ZimZalaBim talk 15:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Zim,

Thank you for responding. I would like to point out that Crotchety Old man made no effort to discuss things with me. He just started making accusations. It has been mentioned on facebook that the IUSB wikipedia entry has been whitewashed of the controversies section so I started an account and looked and so it was. Perhaps I made an error in picking this particular user name, but wikipedia rules do say to keep it focused on the CONTENT itself. There is nothing objectionable about a link form FIRE, or the Journal of Higher Education or the Chronicle of Higher Education as these are all highly respected educational organizations. CampusFreedom (talk) 15:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

In all fairness, he did leave you two proper warnings/notices on your talk page immediately after reverting your edits. Unfortunately, your response was a threat and continued insertion of the disputed link. Your hands are not clean in this matter, I'm afraid. Again, just suggest the link on the talk page, and let the community decide.--ZimZalaBim talk 15:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Zim,

In all fairness, crotchety cut and pasted two "warnings" to use them as a tool to accuse me of spam, than he accused me of "warez" when there was no such thing. He could have discussed this with me in the discussion but instead he just accused me of being guilty of something that I was not.

You point out that I used a 'threat' to bring in real wiki editors as if that is a bad thing... but in a VERY link you posted it shows Crotchety doing the very same thing to ME first and here is the quote "If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Crotchety Old Man".

So do the "rules" only work one way or are they "applied" only one way? CampusFreedom (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Respectfully, I am going to disengage from this discussion. If you want the link included, I suggest you discuss it on the article's talk page. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of StyroHawk kite

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

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. B.Wind (talk) 02:02, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

File:Travis (chimpanzee).jpg

I added more to the reason for keeping File:Travis (chimpanzee).jpg after studying the article, Fair use. I understand fair use is just a defense. --Chuck (talk) 11:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Us Now

I'm new to Wikipedia and have spent the last few days trying to make the best possible article on the Us Now documentary. I would appreciate your feedback in order to achieve this.

Why is a review in the Financial Times not enough for Verification? This film has also been reviewed by Channel 4, the Sheffield Doc fest (one of the biggest in the world) and a number of leading political thinkers. Please find a sample of the reviews here: http://blog.usnowfilm.com/2008/12/film-reviews/

Us Now has been screened in London at the Royal Society for the Arts, all over Canada to more than 5000 people and Oslo, Paris, Washington, Haifa (Israel) etc... Is this not enough as far as notability goes?

I have read and understood the wikipedia policy and am determined to comply with it. I would appreciate if you could give me a few tips in order to overcome the prospect of having this page deleted. Thanks. Halfamatan (talk) 00:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

My reasoning for nominating the article for deletion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Us Now, where you can participate and make your voice heard. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2009

Ouch! You've used a template to send a message to an experienced editor. Please review the essay Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars or maybe listen to a little advice. Doesn't this feel cold, impersonal, and canned? It's meant in good humour. Best wishes. User:MiszaBot III (talk) 02:18, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Bullzeye contribs 03:40, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
If you're a regular, then you should know better in the first place than to paste a lengthy commentary about the nature of chimps on an article's talk page. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:44, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Opinions are like rectums, friend. A simple redaction of the text that offended you would have sufficed, but since you are clearly upset, I offer my apologies, per WP:AGF. In the future, I'd appreciate the same personal courtesy instead of a Twinkle template message like I've been leaving for vandals for about 3 years now. Thanks! :) Bullzeye contribs 04:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Brady Quinn

want to check the article - we reverted at same time, and I ended up in the wrong. Thankx — Ched ~ (yes?) 02:00, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I've already fixed it. Thanks. --ZimZalaBim talk 02:01, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Your consideration and comment please

Hello ZZB- please will you consider this thread on my talk page and give me your opinions?--VS talk 07:09, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Hulu

Hello ZZB,

I recently added a line in the history section of Hulu which you immediately removed (given your deletion, I will not reiterate the statement here; the history page will identify the sentence in question as my only edit for the page). I am fairly new to Wiki and thus, was just wondering why a statement that contains an authentic reference (Newsweek magazine and others that I did not get a chance to post) was deleted from the page? I just want to understand the justification behind the removal of the statement so that I do not repeat the same mistake in the future. Thank you. Wiki emma johnson (talk) 06:09, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I only saw your initial edit [3], which didn't include a citation, and thus, appeared to be unconstructive. As I was clicking to revert that edit, you must've completed your second edit, which included the citation. My revert inadvertently caught both edits. I'll revert back to include your inclusion with citation. --ZimZalaBim talk 13:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. Wiki emma johnson (talk) 02:48, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Ebay

Ok, one article was deleted due to being web content, why not Ebay? --Wikiapples (talk) 13:58, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

First, don't be disruptive and add deletion tags just because one of your articles (Sock geek) was deleted. Second, please read the notice that was placed on your page regarding the deletion of that article, especially as it relates to our notability requirements for web-related content and companies. --ZimZalaBim talk 14:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

message

U gave me that messege about reverting my etid just note that i dont care i hate wikipedia, they wont make me admin and keep blocking my ip even if i dont use it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supersaiyan474 (talk • contribs)

Ok. Bye. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:34, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Criticism of Facebook

I don't understand. I thought my contribution to the higher education section was spot-on and better than the information already included under that section (even though I did not delete what was already there). This is my second contribution ever.

Oh yes - one more thing - how is a book from Jossey Bass not a reliable source?

Edrprff (talk) 22:35, 8 March 2009 (UTC)Edrprff

Mere existence of a book on the topic doesn't mean that it should be mentioned in an encyclopedia article. And I don't know what you're talking about re "how is a book from Jossey Bass not a reliable source?". --ZimZalaBim talk 00:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

You are absolutely correct; however, the book was relevant to the discussion. Have you read it? Because I have. Edrprff (talk) 17:46, 9 March 2009 (UTC)Edrprff

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ZimZalaBim/Archive_10&oldid=1190121362"