Jump to content

User talk:Zeke Essiestudy/April 2015

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Zeke Essiestudy! Thank you for your contributions. I am Vanjagenije and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Vanjagenije (talk) 14:55, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

April 2015

Information icon Hello, I'm Liz. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Liz Read! Talk! 15:16, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

D:

All of my stuff got deleted. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 00:58, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

What stuff? Vanjagenije (talk) 13:34, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
80% of the April Fools stuff I contributed. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 19:32, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
You expected your jokes not to be deleted? Vanjagenije (talk) 20:19, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Well, I didn't expect them to stay, but some of the other jokes got archived... I don't know. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 20:25, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

James Caudy

The following section at James Caudy was indeed a mess. I worked on it with metapad. Is this better?

Marriage and issue

Father: William COODE b: About 1670/1675 in , , St. Mary's County, Maryland
Mother: Miss (Pearce) PIERCE b: About 1673 in , , St. Mary's County, Maryland

Marriage 1 Mary COODY Possible Reid b: About 1694 in , , Prince George County, Maryland
Married: About 1715 in , , Prince George County, Maryland
Sealing Spouse: 14 Feb 2003 in SLAKE

Children

Hellen CODY b: 8 Sep 1716 in St. Barnabas Church, Queen Anne Parish, Prince George County, Maryland
Mary CAUDY b: 24 Mar 1717 in St. Barnabas Church, Queen Anne Parish, Prince George County, Maryland, married Samuel Kinman
Katherine CODY b: 27 Mar 1719 in St. Barnabas Church, Queen Anne Parish, Prince George County, Maryland
Edmund COODY b: 7 Apr 1724 in St. Barnabas Church, Queen Anne Parish, Prince George County, Maryland
Margaret CAUDY b: 4 Jun 1726 in St Barnabas Church, Queen Anne Parish, Prince George County, Maryland, married Daniel Wood
Sarah CAUDY b: About 1728 in Capon Valley, Hampshire County, Virginia, married Joseph Hancher
James CODDY Jr b: 1730 in Capon Valley, Hampshire County, Virginia
Ann CAUDY b: About 1731 in Capon Valley, Hampshire County, Virginia, married a Mr. Dulany
David CAUDY b: About 1735 in Capon Valley, Hampshire County, Virginia (died in November 1782), married Martha Hiett

Marriage 2 Mary MCCOY Mrs

By 1761, Caudy married the widow of James McCoy, who resided across Great North Mountain in Frederick County, Virginia.Unsigned comment by User:Dthomsen8 (talk), 20:20, 4 April 2015 UTC

Yep. That looks pretty good. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 20:22, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

CSD tagging

G1 is very rarely used. It applies to true gibberish like "sdmiasd9qw3e90ion##$" and so on. Non-English content (Arabic in this case) does not fall under that criteria. In any case, the article you tagged was clearly eligible for A7 instead. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 20:53, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Ah, okay. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 20:54, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Would it also be eligible for G2?? Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 03:10, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

St. Emily Catholic School

Hi, I've removed the A1 tag because it clearly identifies the subject -- it's a school in Barrhaven, not sure what more is needed for context. ekips39 (talk) 01:51, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Okay. My apologies, I thought it was too short as it was. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 01:53, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

~~Hello Zeke, Thanks for picking up on my oversights. I have added categories and internal links to José Rizo (disc jockey). I will remove your flag if you do not mind.~~

No need to worry, already done. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 02:04, 5 April 2015 (UTC)


Re

Hi, No problem. I marked for SD and I didn't know it would reviewed. I'm from another wiki project, and things are very different here from ptwiki. Please let me know if I'm doing something wrong. Willy Weazley 05:06, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

why did you delete my work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hatzic Boy (talk • contribs) 06:00, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Read WP:G11. I'm sorry it couldn't stay, but...that's the way it is. Besides, I didn't delete it; I only marked it for deletion. It was Academic Challenger that did that part. Maybe you want to take your conversation to him? Anyway, be sure to read WP:SOAP and WP:YFA for help. If you have any more questions, feel free to leave them here. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 06:02, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
Just found out it's my script's fault. He is reviewing the pages when I mark for deletion.Willy Weazley 15:30, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Just a reminder

Films, books, and other creative works, are specifically excluded from CSD A7. (the exception is web content , which is almost always so unlikely to be of any importance that it should be quickly removed) This is because it is almost impossible for any one administrator to judge if there is indeed a possibility for an article--it takes someone who knows the relevant genre. Use WP:PROD or WP:CSD. (actually, check first for copyvio; G12 is a particularly important reason for deletion, and should be checked every time) . Most of what your doing is excellent, and I want to encourage you to continue your patrolling. I read WP:CSD and WP:Deletion policy every once in a while, to make sure I'm not drifting from the standard. There are a lot of details there, and they matter, because we do not want to discourage any hopeful new-comer. DGG ( talk ) 08:15, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest Noticeboard

When you report someone to the Conflict of Interest noticeboard, you must inform them that you've done it, which you didn't do with Pick2heal- the standard template is {{subst:coin-notice}} ~~~~.
Also, if a user is blatantly just here to advertise their company, and their username is a company/organisation name, you can report them to the username board (WP:UAA) instead- this usually gets a faster response for dealing with companies. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:57, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Please stop

Hello Zeke Essiestudy. First off, thanks for your contributions, and your anti-vandal work. That said, when you nominate a page for deletion, please do not change the actual content of the page. It's not constructive to add text to the body of the article that is irrelevant to the actual subject of the article, even if the page is deleted later. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 00:06, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh. Alright, sorry. There are times I put db templates in strange locations (example; replacing a spam external link with db) just to make it interesting, but if you say so, I'll stop. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 00:08, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
And please also make sure you notify the creator of the page you're tagging. If you're tagging manually rather than with Twinkle then just use the appropriate template on their talk page. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 05:02, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Please don't...

...blank everything promotional. Blanking as a courtesy is really for attack pages, but it gets done in Draft: space for copyright violations too. In article space, it only gets done for attack pages or when something is reported to the copyvio board, and that case a dirty great copyvio template gets slapped on instead. Attacks should be blanked, but something promo isn't doing all that much in the way of harm - and it saves time for the admin looking at it if it's left in view.... OK? It'll save you time too ;-) Peridon (talk) 21:55, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Ah, alrighty then. Can I do it for vandalism-only pages, or...? Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 21:58, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
No - just attack pages. I know that attack pages ARE vandalism, but I mean the ones that are about people or businesses, and could be regarded as libellous. They are flagged up on the admin dashboard lists and get priority attention. Most vandalism is just silly, but there are some very good hoaxes. Some of those lasted for years - but only (IMO) because no-one visited them, except for gnomes correcting the grammar or spelling without reading the article. (The gnomes do a great job, but I do wish more of them would actually look at the whole article and not just the typos...) New hoaxes tend to get spotted quickly because the patrollers are more expert than they were eight or ten years ago. Back then, referencing wasn't so important - but it is now. But always check - Bobble-head doll syndrome sounded like a hoax to someone, but someone else actually looked it up... Peridon (talk) 22:26, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
To get an idea of what goes on, you can look at some of the regular editors' talk pages. There's quite a few stalking my page (probably waiting for me to do something disastrous, but some do step in and answer things if I'm not around). JamesBWatson and MelanieN's pages can also be interesting. Don't answer queries yet - watch and learn. Look at WP:AFD, but just lurk at first until you get the hang of it. I started off here by signing up to remove a bit of drivel that had been in an article for three months. (I'd been using Wikipedia for some years, but didn't get involved.) Then I got into patrolling - but not new Page Patrol, I've never done that one. I monitored Edits by Recent Accounts (or some title like that) - accounts in their first few weeks. Unlike NPP, I often worked 12 hours behind the clock, and never took any notice of patrolled or not patrolled markings. Then, I got into AfD and from that into some interesting SPIs - and then I got a message asking if I'd thought of becoming an admin. Which I hadn't, really. Much to my surprise I passed WP:RFA, and here I am - still dealing with the rubbish, only now I don't fill the bins, I empty them... Peridon (talk) 22:42, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Oebares

i added a date and removed the clean-up template Whalestate (talk) 23:24, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Deletion of Lewys Martin: a message

I know you deleted my page on Lewys Martin, but I just decided to make a page that was on list_of_computer_criminals and give more detail about that person since it had the most detail, and i didn't mean to make it negative. Anyway, sorry of it :(

Thank you. -Ryguyrocky- Ryguyrocky (talk) 06:36, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

It's okay, you meant good intentions. However, the page had no references and just lacked any neutral/positive detail, so.... (By the way, it's not too late to fix that, the page isn't deleted yet) Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 06:37, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi zeke

Can you help me to edit the Ningbo Vision Display Technology term? There is nothing more but a company profile. Could you tell me what the ads words or something I need to change.

thanks

Thanks, Pyseptimo (talk) 06:46, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Mm... I'm honestly not sure. This company is fairly obscure and might not be fit for a Wikipedia article. I CAN try to stop it from being deleted, but even if I don't want it to, an administrator might do it anyway. Please don't be offended if it happens, instead, look through WP:YFA for help on how to make a good first article. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 06:48, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

thanks，it is not easy for a newbie. Pyseptimo (talk) 06:53, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Mm... I'm technically new as well. I'm only 2 weeks old as a Wikipedian (learning some stuff about Wikipedia some time before that). I did add the location, founding date, and some categories, which should decrease the chances a tiny bit. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 06:54, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot ,Zeke! Pyseptimo (talk) 07:16, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Itailevi sock farm

Check Special:Userlist users starting with Itailevi... WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:25, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Ah. Okay. He'd have a little less suspicion if he at least distinguished the usernames, but... Maybe 6 of these SHOULD be blocked (maybe 5 if he plans to use one as a legit alternate account). Not sure. Zeke Essiestudy (talk)
@WikiDan61: The list is 10 sock accounts now. :l Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 00:28, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
@WikiDan61: Now it's 11 accounts. ._.; Here's his new account; User:Itailevi20 Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 17:53, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Been (name)

If you place a CSD tag as you did on the article and the page creator removes it without resolving the issue you are entitled to replace it (and warn the user about removing the tag if you want). You only need to raise an AFD if the speedy is declined by an admin or another user removes the CSD as inappropriate. Nthep (talk) 21:45, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

I decided to AFD it because the person seemed insistent about keeping it, and I wasn't sure if it was an exact duplicate, but... Okay. Thanks for the tip. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 21:49, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
If it was a sourced statement about the name, then it copied be incorporated into the other article but it's still a duplication of topics.

Keeping Wikipedia Expanding Not Shrinking

Delete canvassing bullshit. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 04:54, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello User:Zeke_Essiestudy sorry for disturbing you. The reason I am writing you is we all love Wikipedia and we want it expanding. However there is a discussion going on to delete a notable game article because of biased opinions. I saw that you edited this article: Cyberfoot and let it stay for further expansion, update and keep growing Wikipedia. But I am also totally agree with you to let articles stay for improvements and expand Wikipedia. So I believe you are a neutral, professional, objective and who believes in expanding Wikipedia not shrinking it type of person. So I would like you to check out this discussion Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/MonsterMMORPG_(2nd_nomination) and make your comment based on references it has. References are here Talk:MonsterMMORPG. Please feel free to delete my message to you after you read it. Thank you very much have a nice day.176.233.41.152 (talk) 14:40, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Undermining the integrity of Wikipedia

Please do not act disruptively and try to make a fool of yourself by needlessly editing in the sandbox only to revert it afterwards. If you got any sense of human decency, you would be clogging up the servers with mindless edits. Thanks a lot.

.__.; Isn't that...what the sandbox is for? Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 01:27, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

The sandbox can be used for only USEFUL EDITS and nothing else.

....yyyeeeaaaahh.... I think you're missing something here. Please review this page carefully. Thank you. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 01:44, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
"The sandbox can be used for only useful edits and nothing else" my ass. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 02:46, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism testing

I'll admit that I laughed seeing the page suddenly covered in nonsense. Which is probably why I used to be a vandal... yeah... Well, I might need help figuring out why the bot won't respond even though I listed the page on the opt-in list. Maybe it needs to be approved or something. SarrCat ∑;3 02:03, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

'Nadia Hilker' corrections

Greetings, Zeke. I just wanted to know if the changes on Nadia Hilker are alright now, thank you in advance. User:Alanaxl182 (talk)

April 2015

Information icon Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at User_talk:WordSeventeen. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. WordSeventeen (talk) 07:02, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh...alright. I was hiding many of the IP's canvassing comments due to possible WP:DENY sock puppetry, but if you say so. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 07:51, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! Cheers! WordSeventeen (talk) 08:03, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Please refrain from doing this on my Talk page as well. I don't consider it to fall under the criteria of expected and/or helpful. Nick Number (talk) 12:43, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Concerning Canvassing IP

Given as how the message of 176.233.41.152 (talk+ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)) is copied and pasted from OnlineGamesExpert (talk · contribs)'s, who was blocked indefinitely, for spamming other editors in a single-minded attempt to rescue his page from possible deletion, shouldn't the IP be reported for being used for block evasion anyhow?--Mr Fink (talk) 21:36, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey Zeke thanks for patrolling my page Puerto Rico national beach soccer team. I accidentally forgot to add references but i'm working on adding those to the page right now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Da Drewster (talk • contribs) 01:53, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Zeke Essiestudy/April 2015. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Liz Read! Talk! 05:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

De-archiving SPI case

Pleae, do not de-archive SPI cases again, as you did here. Only WP:SPI Clerks are allowed to archive and de-archive SPI cases (see: WP:SPI/PROC). Even administrators are not allowed to archive or de-archive SPI cases if they are not clerks. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:53, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Ierp. Sorry. It's kinda the first time I've been on this site for a while, so... I promise I won't do it again. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 21:08, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the withdrawal here. Many editors become so bound to positions they take, that even in the face of contradictory evidence they "go down with the ship." You exhibited maturity with your action, for which I commend you. Best. --Epeefleche (talk) 03:07, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Positive Clinical Interventions

Hi, I noticed that you tagged my article and proposed that it be deleted because it is lacking in neutral language. I read through it again and made a few minor changes, but over all I think it is fairly neutral. If you disagree can you at least pinpoint some sections where I can do some rewording? This article is for a class project and I really can't have it be deleted. Thanks for your help. Meganmcculloch (talk) 15:25, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Sock tagging

Don't tag userpages of sock-blocked accounts. It's not your job. You've done it on at least two userpages. DoRD reverted you on one, and I reverted you on the other. Tagging is a decision made by a checkuser or an SPI clerk, or an administrator, depending on the circumstances, but it's not your decision.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:59, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Huh? I've seen many non-administrators tag accounts... But anyway, sorry. I was just adding tags for references. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 22:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
There are some non-admins who are nonetheless SPI clerks. If non-admin/non-clerks are doing it, they shouldn't be. Anyway, two "wrongs" don't make a right, so as long as you understand not to do it from now on, great.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:05, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Are simple non-sock indef tags allowed though, or should I not do that either? Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 22:10, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
I think you should leave it for the blocking admin. Some administrators don't like those tags. Count me as one of them.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:16, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Zeke, tags are sometimes not useful per WP:DENY. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:22, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

Well..

Case is not looking good? Had I been told to provide long term instances of tools abuse, I would had posted that on my first post. Can you please retract it or instead say that case is falling to decline?

One cannot be blocked during an ARC hearing, at least not for non-policy based reasons like I have been before. But it is correct that right after the case is declined, I would be indeffed for just any edit and I would get to know about it after I would be blocked. That needs to be addressed. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 22:39, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Fixed. "This case outcome is not looking good." Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 22:41, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Since you have already posted that to ARC, it wasn't required anymore. They all have that page on their watchlist. I have self reverted the SPI edit. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 23:36, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Since it was clearly urgent now, I have restored that edit, and told Nakon to address Arbcom first, before pursue towards an unauthorized topic ban. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 17:38, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Your comments there were not helpful, Zeke Essiestudy. The case request is not a judgment about OZ but a proposal to see if ArbCom wants to begin a case. It looks like they will decline which is what happens most of the time. But I don't see any backlash against OZ. Your comments are puzzling because they are speculative and not about the merits of whether the arbitrators should accept this case or decline it. Liz Read! Talk! 23:40, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
I was providing information for ArbCom. But I'll stay out of the debate from now on. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 23:42, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Black Helicopters

Re: "...what...the fuck is that zapatoni page? I don't even know what's going on here"

There are a few web pages that just leave you speechless. my favorites:

Isn't the internet strange and wonderful? (smile) --Guy Macon (talk) 07:03, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


... What...the...f......

...

And you wanna know something I've heard? 80% of the internet isn't indexed by ANY search engine... It might mostly filled with really bad things like stolen credit card numbers and NSFW child photography... no one knows. Every site we go to, every site Google indexes... is probably only 0.3% of the internet. Spooky. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 14:50, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

PROD on Rory Boyle (composer)

I see that you have prodded Rory Boyle (composer). I had tagged it as an unreferenced BLP but, as he is allegedly a Professor of Composition at a highly regarded institution, he should be intrinsically notable. All the article needs therefore is the finding of appropriate refs. If none are forthcoming after a week, the article will disappear anyway as an unreferenced BLP. I was just curious whether the PROD notice serves any purpose in these circumstances ? Regards  Velella  Velella Talk   17:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

"All biographies of living people created after March 2010 must have at least one reference to a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article", "If no reliable references are found and added within a seven-day grace period, this article may be deleted." It's a procedural tag. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 17:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi Zeke Essiestudy! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 18:42, Monday, April 27, 2015 (UTC)

Mission 1 Mission 2 Mission 3 Mission 4 Mission 5 Mission 6 Mission 7
Say Hello to the World An Invitation to Earth Small Changes, Big Impact The Neutral Point of View The Veil of Verifiability The Civility Code Looking Good Together

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Zeke Essiestudy! Thank you for your contributions. I am TYTA Mahesh and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! TYTA Mahesh (talk) 04:52, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Arbitration Case

The arbitration case Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/OccultZone_and_Others has been opened. For the arbitration committee, Robert McClenon (talk) 17:54, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

You were recently listed as a party to a request for arbitration. The Arbitration Committee has accepted that request for arbitration and an arbitration case has been opened at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/OccultZone and others. Evidence that you wish the arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence subpage, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/OccultZone and others/Evidence. Please add your evidence by May 15, 2015, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can also contribute to the case workshop subpage, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/OccultZone and others/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Robert McClenon (talk) 02:21, 1 May 2015 (UTC) Robert McClenon (talk) 02:21, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Zeke_Essiestudy/April_2015&oldid=1076219268"