Jump to content

User talk:ZimZalaBim/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12

WikiProject Green Bay Packers!

Hello fellow Wikipedian! I just wanted to let you know that WikiProject Green Bay Packers has recently restarted and we are now looking for participants who are interested in improving the quality of the articles on America's favorite small-town team, the Green Bay Packers! If you feel like helping out, please add your name to our list of participants, check out what needs to be done, and most importantly, improve the articles!


Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 03:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Chuck

Thanks for pointing that out. I declined the offer of mediation.... Sigh. Gwernol 22:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

It's funny/sad: each time I peak back into WP I find something new with our friend. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:09, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
You might also care to note his latest escalation: Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Chuck_Marean_vs_Gwernol —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gwernol (talk • contribs) 20:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
You made a sound and reasoned reply. If only he could channel his enthusiasm toward productive contributions.... --ZimZalaBim talk 20:55, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Two edits I disagree with

Two edits I disagree with: [[1]] and [[2]]

Chuck Marean 17:21, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, Chuck. Please consider the comments left on your talk page by Gwernol. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Please stop inserting this inappropriate content??

About my addition to Criticism of Google: You called it inappropriate. Please define inapropriate. This story is true, and it is old news in Israel. I want a good explanation to why do you call it inappropriate, or else I'm going to sue you for limiting my right to express myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Traaa (talk • contribs)

You've been blocked due to posting a legal threat here, and repeatedly warned about the inappropriateness of your edits. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Guidebook?

Regarding this [3] on University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, it is not a detailed traveler's guide. They are basic info about location, transportation and its unique feature. I have trimed it a little. Please stop deleting necessary contents. 76.17.116.98 (talk) 03:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia. Do you honestly think that every building mentioned here should have instructions such as "it can be accessed from the main campus through a 24-hour University Housing shuttle, MCTS Bus Route 21 that goes directly from RiverView to campus, and BOSS (the university shuttle service)" attached to it? This information does not belong here. Start your own website if you want to help people find this building via bus or shuttle. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:23, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

These are about the convience. I've trimed the info a little. 76.17.116.98 (talk) 03:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Again, this is an encyclopedia, not a website to provide logistical convenience. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:26, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

That is what that building is all about. 76.17.116.98 (talk) 03:28, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

What? Noting a new dorm exists is sufficient. Transportation alternatives are unnecessary. Also, please adhere to our three revert rule. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

"Riverview Residence hall is located several blocks west of Kenilworth Square. There are a 24-hour University Housing shuttle, MCTS, and BOSS (the university shuttle service) running between the residence hall and the main campus. First year students can also attend some class within the residence hall. " is no way a guidebook. 76.17.116.98 (talk) 03:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Despite your poor grammar, you just made that change, and I haven't commented on it, so your post here is premature. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean by inapropriate?

Why did you call my update to Google criticism inapropriate? It's true, and it's old news in Israel.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Traaa (talk • contribs)

This is original research, not properly sourced, and seems to be a personal rant. If it is, indeed, "old news in Israel," then provide a proper citation. --ZimZalaBim talk 21:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Your message

Concerning your message[4] on my talk page:I'm simply asking you all to stop criticizing me. I have not done what any warning on my talk page claims. Concerning this message [5] against looking for help in getting the warnings to stop, what do you think I should do? Just ask you directly? Ok, although the article on dispute resolution says to seek other opinions. The fact is all the warnings left on my talk page seem to me to be claiming I did something I was trying not to do. What is the purpose of that? I'm not sure if you all are trying to teach something or if it's you're idea of bold. I think by bold the writer of the policy means to "go ahead and edit articles". If I did not get a concensus for the Introduction edit, then why not explain how to get a concensus instead of criticizing me for editing, as it said I should? You wouldn't yell at someone for not knowing how to play basketball. The same thing should be true here. I'm trying to learn Wikipedia the best I can. I have good intentions, and I'm reading the directions even though I can't think of anything to write and don't know how to do research. Are there any articles on the subject? --Chuck Marean 10:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Please read your archives as this is clearly not the first time you have violated policy, been warned about POV edits, or non-consensus changes to policy. Links to all the appropriate policies have always been provided, along with helpful suggestions and constructive criticism. If you can't follow them, perhaps this isn't the place for you. --ZimZalaBim talk 13:07, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

hi

Can a cool admin help a guy out? I want to add one sentence to the world of Wikipedia. But I can't. The sentence is factual, provable, reliable (I chose the New York Times version.)

Circumcision may decrease a man's risk of getting HIV but it may also INCREASE a man's risk of getting herpes and chlamydia. (and some doctors even say other STD's too but I won't get into that and I wouldn't put caps on INCREASE.)

The article on circumcision mentions the term HIV probably 100 times (I'm not joking) and mentions "herpes" or "chlamydia" not Once. Click on the article. You tell me if it's an article on the procedure or a pro-circumcision propaganda pamphlet.

Can a cool admin stop two guys named Avraham and Jakew (the site's dictators) from deleting my one sentence I want to add? Or possibly get new Admins to take over this article, which has fallen way below Wikipedia standards. And if people's edits are automatically deleted, people won't want to get a user name and contribute in the future.

here's the New York Times piece... http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C07E4D91F3AF931A35757C0A961958260&fta=y

I used to love Wikipedia until I went to add a sentence, you know? Well, thanks. 70.114.38.167 (talk) 07:05, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Please use proper dispute resolution procedures, rather than canvassing multiple admins. --ZimZalaBim talk 13:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

playing for keeps

I'm new to this and still learning. bout a 1 /2hour or so. I've been listening to this story since it began and just wanted to have a page to share it with others who are looking to find more information on this novel that is written by Mur Lafferty (who has an entry already.)

I started it out using the formating from "snow crash's layout and have been editing the press release that was put out for some details.

Was it the posting of the press release what made it blatant advertising? I've been cutting it down since.

I'm looking for a little time to sort it out and changed it to under construction when it was deleted.

--Alphanitrate (talk) 02:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Please see the comment left on your talk page. Unless a podcast is notable for some reason (which is highly unlikely for any podcast, I'd guess), it should not have an encyclopedia article. --ZimZalaBim talk 02:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Twinkle

I read Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Twinkle & Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Twinkle/doc but don't have time for that sort of editing. I am reading the editor's and writer's manual little by little. Also, there is nothing wrong with complamenting an article on it's talk page. I don’t remember where I read that, but it's obviously better than looking for something to criticize. If I were to go around criticizing articles the Admins interested in them wouldn’t like it. Right?--Chuck Marean 20:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Talk pages exist for the purpose of discussing how to improve articles; they are not mere general discussion pages about the subject of the article. Thus, they are not places for your to add your personal reflections on what the article says, as you're doing with these edits: "The Main Page is neat because...", "Now I know where Bangladesh is and about something that happened there ...", "Now I see how it might be possible for one student to have time to write a term paper...". These comments are inappropriate and unhelpful. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:40, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
And why on earth are you reading about Twinkle and user scrips? I suggest you start here: WP:HELP. --ZimZalaBim talk 21:15, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Requesting 3rd opinion?

Your recent edit to Google Book Search makes me think you might be helpful in resolving a dispute affecting both this article and the corollary Google Books Library Project. If you have the time and inclination, please consider commenting on what you find at Talk:Google Book Search#University of Mysore. --Tenmei (talk) 02:51, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Seems someone already give a 3rd opinion. --ZimZalaBim talk 23:06, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

damned with faint praise

The Working Man's Barnstar
For having the patience of Sisyphus ;) -- Quiddity (talk) 20:13, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Unreasonable Deletion

A friend of a band has just created a page for that band and it was delete because of it not having any significance. It said that it wasn't worthy of an encyclopedia entry. I believe that this was unjust because an encyclopedia is to make people aware. The page was just making people aware of the band.

69.14.188.126 (talk) 05:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)Justin Maniaci

Please see the relevant notability guidelines at WP:MUSIC. And there are deletion review options available, if appropriate. --ZimZalaBim talk 13:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Deleting Background Information

A single paragraph on the criticisms of a Denver high school (Denver School of Science and Technology) was recently removed. I'm attending this school, and I happen to think some of the points brought up in that little section were valid. How about at least an explanation of the reason you removed it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.240.17.13 (talk) 22:19, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

My edit summary] explained that this was unverified original research. Just because you think "some of the points...were valid" isn't sufficient for inclusion in an encyclopedia. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Talk page

I removed your comments from my talk page, because it was acting as an invitation to the other editor to come to my page and attack me and post inaccurate statements. I'm not interested. He also came close to violating the 3RR rule (despite his page saying he doesn't get involved in edit wars), and he has POV issues too. I'm done with this stupidity. The New York Times page has POV issues and is leaving some current information out, but I don't want to deal with harassment from other editors over it. Good day, Enigma msg! 01:24, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

You're free to engage in discussions at Talk:The New York Times if you feel changes should be made in that article. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Earlier, I added my opinion on the sentence "liberal and conservative bias." I don't believe there is a consensus for that, and that's reflected in editors repeatedly changing it. I wasn't the first one to change it; the same changes were made recently and reverted by the same editor. The page has problems, but like I said, I'm not interested in arguing about it, especially when certain editors feel the need to abuse me on my Talk page. Enigma msg! 01:45, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Guinness Storehouse Festival St.Patrick's Weekend

Hi,ZimZalaBim Just have edited the article on Guinness Storehouse St.Patrick's Festival but it was deleted again..if you would have read it there was no promotial material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jana Sol (talk • contribs) 16:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Please familiarize yourself with WP:NOT and WP:NOTE. Your contribution doesn't meet these guidelines. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:50, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes the article was to inform people and not advertise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jana Sol (talk • contribs) 16:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Again, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place simply to inform people of a random event. If it is particularly notable, perhaps there might be a reason to include. But, thus far, your entry reveals no such notability. --ZimZalaBim talk 17:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Chuck, again

Hi Zim. I just blocked Chuck Marean again, for his latest round of accusations and personal attacks. I'm thinking of starting his inevitable RfAr, WP:AN complaint, WP:ANI complaint etc. just to get them over with </joke>. Sorry you've been dragged into his yet again. Best, Gwernol 07:58, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I support that, and I see he's already been e-mailing folks asking for unblocks... If he persists with that, I might even consider extending your block. --ZimZalaBim talk 13:57, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the support. At some point, I suspect quite soon, it may be time to propose a community ban. I know my patience has been worn thin. Gwernol 14:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I was leaning towards that like a year ago (can you believe its been that long with him!), and suspect we're nearing that juncture again... --ZimZalaBim talk 14:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Caledonian MacBrayne Edit

Hello ZimZalaBim,

Thankyou for your edit on the above subject. You will need to forgive me a little as I am new to the Wiki system and your edit took me aback a little. I was endeavouring to obtain the citations needed for both poems: http://www.virtualhebrides.com/scalpay/scalpay/scalpay_history/taylor/index2.htm for example. However, before this and the others could be inserted my contribution was deleted. I have given up posting further citations. With all due respect,perhaps it may be worth considering that the Wiki encyclopedia might be improved if it were not so antiseptic in the content it allows? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Russ McLean (talk • contribs) 23:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I've already replied on your talk page. I urge you, however, to continue editing, so long as you provide suitable citations. --ZimZalaBim talk 23:34, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Offtopic

Hi! I'm not up on the latest developments in protection -- "create" protection is new to me -- but.... this page doesn't look very protected. It says you protected it, but an anon user keeps editing it. Perhaps you could take a look? Thanks! FreplySpang 03:08, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, that's exactly what you were doing while I was typing the above. Cheers! FreplySpang 03:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Yeah, I think it got deleted between protections or something that canceled my first attempt to protect. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:39, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
On a related note, I don't think the protection you've put on Offtopic.com is effective if it's not deleted. --Closedmouth (talk) 13:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Request revisit of your tag to merge article.

""Merge Kite (Styrofoam-only) into here"" A merge would be inappropriate as to weight; the Kite types article cannot appropriately give such attention to each of the kite types. The specialized nature of EPS and Styrofoam deserves its own development. thanks for your interest. Joefaust (talk) 03:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

i'll revisit when I have time, but I doubt an entire article is necessary on kites that happen to be made of styrofoam. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Ryan wanna ask you why

Hey, why do you delete what i made, about the VA Red Devils Football Club?? My boss asked me to make it at wikipedia, and i wanna post it 1st, and i'm gonna add more details soon. Why did you delete it?? I dun understand.. Ryankam (talk) 15:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Read the messages at your talk page. Your attempt to create VA Red Devils FC made no claim of notability. --ZimZalaBim talk 15:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

So if i wanna create it again, this time with "notability", can u grant me the permission?? This is one of the project my boss asked me to do, which is increase the club publicity through net. Ryankam (talk) 02:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Please note that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a promotional venue. I'd suggest you create a draft of the article in your namespace, such at as User:Ryankam/VA Red Devils FC, and then check with an admin (such as myself) to see if it satisfies our notability guidelines. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Re-Editing Summaries

Thanks for the tip, I'll make sure I put the section in the /**/ tag and what I did after it. I apperciate the help! SDSandecki (talk) 16:42, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Offtopic.com

I think your create-protection here is redundant. (The article is not protected.) You should probably delete the article.   jj137 (talk) 18:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm trying to use the {{pp-create}} as instructed, but am having difficulties making it work properly. --ZimZalaBim talk 18:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Danny Sullivan (technologist)

Hello, I have a problem with your closure of the deletion debate Articles for deletion/Danny Sullivan.

  • You are not supposed to close debates in which you have participated;
  • You are not supposed to close debates on articles which you have significantly edited;
  • Your appeal to snow came after just two keep votes, one of which was your own!

I don't have a problem with the decision. But I would like to see proper procedure followed. It seems possible to me that you have a personal interest in this matter. To avoid such claims you should not get involved in admin-related tasks on articles you have edited.

I ask that you re-open this debate and let another admin, unconnected with the article, close it.

Thank you. MSGJ (talk) 20:23, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok. It has been re-opened. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I Don't Really Like Coco Puffs

I do, however, like stuff with salt. Should that article be salted? -WarthogDemon 23:52, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. But when I added {{pp-create}} as the protection reason, it didn't appear to render on the page as expected... --ZimZalaBim talk 23:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Strange. O_o Oh well, it's there. After reading I decided to go and see if I could make an article under that name and it won't let me. Must be a slow bug or something. :) -WarthogDemon 00:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Clear Play

Why did you delete Clear Play? I think that what they are doing is noteworthy. If my article does not meet the style guidelines, perhaps someone will improve the Clear Play Article. Why is NetFlix allowable but my clear play article is not? user:RichAlger —Preceding comment was added at 20:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Clear Play was deleted in accordance with Wikipedia:CSD#G11, as it was advertising that didn't assert its notability (which Netflix clearly has fulfilled). Please seek deletion review if you feel otherwise. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:48, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

clean films

That word "controversal" didn't look right, but I threw it into MS Word and it passed spell check. I think I need to have a word with Mr. Gates.--Cube lurker (talk) 02:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

LOL. --ZimZalaBim talk 02:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
BTW just saw the withdraw, thanks. That original article was certainly lacking. It was just one of those things that I personally remembered reading about.--Cube lurker (talk) 02:55, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Search Engine Strategies

I am sorry if I was a bit BOLD, but you seem to know about SEO field. Why would you nominate Search Engine Strategies for deletion. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 00:20, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm familiar with search engines, but an article on a particular SEO conference didn't seem encyclopedic (should we have articles on every major conference for particular fields?), especially since its sources were merely from the organizers themselves. Certainly, I'm happy to follow the consensus that emerges from the AfD process. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:25, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Your reasoning is sound, but if Google CEO Eric Schmidt attends the conference and Google publishes the trascript on its domain would that not make the conference notable per Wikipedia guidelines? Igor Berger (talk) 01:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
That's debatable, which is the point of that AfD. Let the process play out, and perhaps you won't be disappointed. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
No problem! Sorry about the canvas thing. Igor Berger (talk) 01:58, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

One of the conundrums of SEO topics that the publicity released by SEOs and their own blog posts tend to drown out reliable sources who generally don't optimize their stuff nearly as well. When judging notability of such topics, it is necessary to expend extra effort to hammer through all the noise. I've told some of these folks that they need to do a much better job of documenting their mainstream media appearances. Jehochman Talk 15:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. --ZimZalaBim talk 15:14, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Green Bay Packers

Hello fellow Wikipedian! I just wanted to let you know that WikiProject Green Bay Packers has recently restarted and we are now looking for participants who are interested in improving the quality of the articles on America's favorite small-town team, the Green Bay Packers! If you feel like helping out, please add your name to our list of participants, check out what needs to be done, and most importantly, improve the articles!

« Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 01:57, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Mahagonney

While I agree that the production history as it stands is a total mess, according to the outline of content for each article as part of the Wiki OperaProject, "Performance history" follows the general intro, and then the "Roles" box, then "synopsis" etc.

Here's the link: Wikipedia:WikiProject Opera/Article styles and formats

Viva-Verdi (talk) 16:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Feel free to correct my move of that section. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

User page edits

What is going on? El_C 20:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello? El_C 20:27, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
"Wikipedia Totalitarian Regime" is inflammatory and unnecessary. Are you not going to respond? El_C 20:29, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Anyway, I protected the page. It's not reasonable for a fellow admin to restore insinuation that those of us dealing with Igor are part of "Wikipedia Totalitarian Regime." Your lack of response thus far reflects poorly on you, I argue. El_C 20:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Patience. What am I supposed to respond to? If you think poorly on me simply because I'm not glued to my talk page, then perhpas you shouldn't be judging other users in general.
Yes, User:Igorberger's view might be inflammatory, but as stated on his user page it is not directed at any individual editor, and is relatively harmless. And, sure, it might be unnecessary, but again, on his user page, what does it matter? Igorgerber is entitled to his opinions, and should have some latitude on what he expresses on his userpage. By removing it, you are merely picking for a fight, which is not the best action at this juncture. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

The soapboxing attack you restored was added, seemingly, to insinuate that the restrictions facing him, and those behind it, are part of "Wikipedia Totalitarian Regime. And, no, actually, you make a contentious revert, you stick around, please. I am the admin who officially placed him under restrictions. Please do not undermine me like that without discussion again. Thanks. El_C 20:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, demands that one "stick around" and "do not undermine" sounds awfully like the regime Igor is complaining about. Relax, this ain't life/death. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Wow. El_C 20:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
What's up with this edit summary? --ZimZalaBim talk 20:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Looks self-explanatory to me. El_C 20:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Robert Gary James Glueck

Dear Mr. Zim Zala Bim... thanks for the delete! but Mr. Robert Gary James Glueck is a noted Architect and member of the FDA Food Code Team who publishes the Food Code Sanation Blue Book for the USA among other things. Mr Glueck is licensed in the 50 states, DC and Guam which is most unusual in itself. Sorry he dosen't fit your criteria. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.88.13.42 (talk) 04:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

See WP:BIO --ZimZalaBim talk 01:04, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

The Deletion of Novi Drumline's Article.

I strongly disagree with your choice of deleting Novi Drumline's article. We are not just a "High School Percussion Ensemble", we are a World Finalist in the WGI Circuit. Novi Drumline has a strong history, and you think you have the right to simply delete it? We are a WORLD FINALIST. as in 12th IN THE WORLD.

Honestly, stop deleting articles because you feel so empowered to. You had no right to delete this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.208.232.52 (talk) 18:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Note, I did not delete Novi Drumline, I merely nominated it for deletion, and the consensus dictated its fate. There are deletion review procedures, if you really think an article on this could satisfy our WP:MUSIC and WP:ORG guidelines. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Criticism of YouTube

I added the content you removed to History of YouTube. Before removing content plese consider moving it first. Thank you!--Kozuch (talk) 15:30, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

All I know is that it didn't belong there. Thanks for putting it somewhere more appropriate. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
On second thought, I removed them from History of YouTube as well. There nothing that makes these particularly notable in the company's history. Discussion is there. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:07, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Christopher Wangro

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

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

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:59, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

use of signature

Thanks for your input on the use of my signature. You said you noticed I have been adding my signature to some of my article contributions, such as the Nicktoons TV article. Thank you for correcting it. By "some" article contributions, did you mean I have made this error more than just on that occasion? As a new contributor, I greatly appreciate the help. Jethro butterworth (talk) 23:13, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe that was the only occurrence. The template message stated "some" automatically. --ZimZalaBim talk 23:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

wigle, gooki

i added 2 neologisms 2 wikipedia. u considered the´re are not constructive, but a few people are using this neologisms. im sorry but i felt free for add it to wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.54.166.106 (talk) 23:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

See WP:NEOLOGISM. --ZimZalaBim talk 23:47, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Cult of the Amateur

It's not something that I can find an established guideline for. I got support at the books project for deleting such redirects, but there was only one reply. I think it's generally better to leave links for articles that should be written red so that people don't get the mistaken impression that they already exist when linked to, or that a separate article need not be created. And the author can easily be found by searching, in the case of books. In analogous cases, e.g. with species, you wouldn't set up redirects for every species that didn't have its own article to the genus they are assigned to. But you disagree, so... Richard001 (talk) 04:35, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

BTW, I created the stub. --ZimZalaBim talk 11:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Which stub? Cult of the Amateur is still a redirect, so I'm not sure what you're referring to. Richard001 (talk) 23:03, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Oh, I see what you've done. I'll redirect this to The Cult of the Amateur. Richard001 (talk) 23:08, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

A Note

I must note that I enjoy the back and forth over policy quite a bit. You have proven yourself as sharp to the letter and full of convictions. Although I do not agree with you, I am willing to admit that I admire your approach. Ottava Rima (talk) 05:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. --ZimZalaBim talk 11:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Might not be Chuck?

Hi Zim, thanks for the note about the latest vandalism spree. I'm leaning towards the theory that this is not in fact Chuck at all, but another user causing problems. I've left my thoughts on ANI. Let me know what you think. Best, Gwernol 13:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I will stop reverting

But I must say that Alexwoods needs to be warned as well. He engaged in revert war with me and he is asking people to join him in a revert war see here. --Littlebutterfly (talk) 20:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Tibet

Hi, thanks for locking Tibet. I apologize for calling names. I would like to invite you, however, to take a look at Littlebutterfly's actions and the edits he made to the article. Alexwoods (talk) 20:41, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't protect the page. I have warned Littlebutterfly regarding the edit warring. You should also take note of the three revert rule. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:49, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I tried to reach an agreement with Alexwoods (talk), however he rejected my friendly approach and again threaten a revert war. See my talk on his talk page here and his response to me here.
What should I do with aggressive editors like this? --Littlebutterfly (talk) 01:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
There are various dispute resolution options available for you. Personally, I'd just disengage. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
He is blatantly threatening and actually engaging in revert wars that deserves warnings at the very least. --Littlebutterfly (talk) 01:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
He is reverting all my edits by calling them vandalism please see here. IN effect he is preventing me from editing the page. Can you stop him? --Littlebutterfly (talk) 02:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm not able to look into this nor involve myself. Again, use the dispute resolution processes I linked to above. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:17, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Christopher Wangro

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

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

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:date

You're correct, but I'm going by server time, because I won't be back to WP until London's halfway through the day already. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 02:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I pulled what was left anyway; people didn't think it was funny and took the merge tags down. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 02:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Go figure. --ZimZalaBim talk 02:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Multilingual SEO

I was going to nominate it for AfD, but I am in shackles..:), so left a message for Jehochman. I think this type of article is possible but not in the shape it was before you redirected it. Do you want to AfD it? Maybe someone can build it, if not, we delete it? Igor Berger (talk) 13:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Redirect is sufficient. --ZimZalaBim talk 14:12, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Requesting third party resolution of Notre Dame Football

Hello, ZimZalaBim, I am requesting that you check my recent edits on famous games on the Notre Dame football wiki page. I had started a list of games I knew to be notable and important to Notre Dame and college football and thought I should include them. I also added it to the talk page. Then User:Tool2die4 started saying it lacked NPOV. He then added a 2001 Fiesta bowl game to the list to try to "even the list out" for the sake of NPOV. This was my worry before I even started the section, that people would start adding insignificant games, or try to stretch certain games to make them important, or try to add wins and losses as part of a "fanboy" reaction. Again, the list is meant to include games that are considered important by outside writers, to clear up NPOV. I amended the talk page to say that perhaps it should be just those games, to avoid people adding a huge litany of games. To that end, I included on the list only those games that were identified as "games of the century", #1 vs #2 matchups, or had otherwise been written about as historic games to the game of football, not just Notre Dame. So when I edited the list, I did it by removing not only the 2001 fiesta bowl, but other bowl games and ND games that also did not meet the criteria. Tool2Die4 saw the edit and reverted it, labeling it as vandalism. He may have thought I vandalized the page since I cleared out the section in order to move it to another section. There was no actual deletion of content that would considered vandalism. But instead of asking for a clarification, Tool2die4 acted by reverting my edit, thus deleting all the sources I had just added. I reverted it back, arguing he was starting an edit war. He again reverted my edit with all the verifiable sources included back to the list that had none. I said I used "original research" trying to convey that the list had independently verifiable sources. He is now trying to use the phrase against me to say I am violating wikipedia guidelines and that it is now his duty to keep an eye on the page, like he owns it. He has since offered a compromise to add the Fiesta Bowl back to "let" me have the page reverted back. I believe this is not in the spirit of wikipedia and that he thinks he owns the page. Again, I took out all the bowl games, not just the fiesta bowl, when I edited the list. If he wants to add the game I feel he should find an article anywhere that calls it a game of importance like the other games have been written about, not as a bargaining chip.

Please refer to the talk pages to help inform you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tool2Die4#Vandalism_of_Notre_Dame_site http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Notre_Dame_Fighting_Irish_football#Tool2Die4 Tedmoseby (talk) 21:56, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Dispute has been "resolved" but I invite you to still look at the list of games. Thanks. Tedmoseby (talk) 00:48, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

definition of artist

i re-edited the park slope artist section to include stephenaustin. i challenge you to provide the criteria you are using to determine who is and who is not an artist. stephenaustin lives in park slope, is formally trained as an artist, currently practices as such and has been featured in shows and various forums. please provide YOUR definition of an artist if you would like to dispute my post again. either you have such a definition or i suggest you completely remove the artist list if you cannot provide it.

Ocmarts (talk) 03:50, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

it is not a question of whether this person is an artist, but whether s/he is notable. As it stands, all you provide is a link to a broken page, which is inappropriate. It will be removed. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:30, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

PAs malpractice

As PA in urgent care, it's highly mandatory that PAs, as medical practictioners in multiple fields - be aware of the liability risks in variant clinical specialty. Nomad2u001 (talk) 19:25, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not an employment guide, and providing links/quotes for liability insurance for a particular profession is outside its scope. --ZimZalaBim talk 19:30, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Cost-effective, applicable knowledge for a field that is expanding in practice on the basis of training internationally as well as nationally is appropriate in the employment section of the article. Nomad2u001 (talk) 19:41, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

SportsPNF

Yes, I saw that. The article itself is, well, mediocre, which is at least a step up from his previous attempts. Submitting it as a FAC was mind boggling to say the least, but at least it got the hearing it deserved over there. My personal view is that as long as he isn't actively defacing articles again, I'm leaving him be. I am, however, reviewing his contributions carefully. Best, Gwernol 10:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. --ZimZalaBim talk 11:38, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Notes in article space

Good call, thanks for the heads up. It won't happen again. -FrankTobia (talk) 15:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

House blogs

houseblogs.net and the has been removed from this article but as that site is relevant to the discussion of the growth of house blogs as they've been integral to the community growing as noted by the Wall Street Journal and New York Times, both very notable sources. DivineDeeds (talk) 19:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Removing the link makes it non-spammy, but I still question whether an entire article is needed on this topic, rather than just mention in the main blog article. --ZimZalaBim talk 19:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

SEO

Much like your edit, I was actually trying to remove the redundant wording. Thanks for correcting it. WilliamH (talk) 19:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

No prob. --ZimZalaBim talk 19:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Your editing philosophy

ZimZala,

As you can see, I'm (relatively) new to Wikipedia. I don't really understand why you're marking the pages I've been editing for "speedy deletion" and trying to undo my contributions to this site, when I am uploading content that I have produced myself and for organizations that are independently important of the fact that I, or anyone else, has been involved with them. Ask any human rights NGO and they will attest to the importance of the Lowenstein Project, for example, in the field of human rights advocacy. It's just that no one in those understaffed organizations has the time or inclination to create the Wikipedia entry themselves, but one of our partner organizations (Human Rights Watch) said it would be a good idea to create that page, so I did. When you asked me to take down the content that I myself had written but that I had also posted on another website, I did... and I hadn't had the time to flesh out the page yet, until now, and I come back and see you're already trying to delete it again.

If you're going to continue following me around and persecuting my good-faith attempts to add useful content to Wikipedia, then I'd just as soon not participate in this project at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BITE

Best,

Jeff

Sosa1998y (talk) 05:23, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, don't mean to come across as biting. But we do have rules and guidelines regarding content here, especially when it comes to copyright issues. Perhaps reading our help pages would be a good starting point for you. --ZimZalaBim talk 13:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleting prices

Hello! I just noticed that you deleted content on page "Communications in Armenia" explaining that wikipedia is not place for showing prices. So, how can you explain me why I see price-lists in almost other countries communications pages???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.139.0.101 (talk) 12:59, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

The existence of improper material on other pages doesn't justify its presence. Show it to me, and I'll gladly remove it. --ZimZalaBim talk 13:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


Showing materials

Ok! then please explore, for example, follow pages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_in_Hungary

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_in_Lithuania

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_in_the_Republic_of_Macedonia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_in_Montenegro

This is only a few percents of all pages. Please inform me about your further actions.

A Land without a people for a peopl without a land

I would appreciate if you allow me to make my case on the talk page before arbitrally removing the prod. Just because some editor removes it doesn't mean it has to go althogether. annoynmous 00:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Yes it does; please read WP:PROD. You are free to make your case at a full WP:AFD. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:58, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Can I add a different Prod with a another start date on it.annoynmous 01:38, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
It is obvious this is not a non-controversial deletion - just use the proper AFD processes that have been pointed out to you, and let it go its course. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)


Yes, It's just it's taking a while. Please be patient. I'm not an expert at this. annoynmous 02:12, 14 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.176.37 (talk)
I think I really screwed up the third step. I added the wrong thing in the wrong spot. It now says the page is blocked. Could you help me with the third step because I have seem to have fundementally misunderstood the instructions. annoynmous 02:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks I see you already have. I appreciate the help.annoynmous 02:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
So I can't ask other people fro help.
Also I'm adding things from the talk page to show evidence based's sockpuppetery.
The point I'm making is that if someone wants to redue the article from scratch fine. However, the article is completely unnaceptable as it is.User:annoynmous:annoynmous 04:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

what are you doing?

why are you removing my hang on flag with no repsonse in the discussion forum? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philswiftiwuk (talk • contribs) 00:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

In reference to Biosphere Expeditions, the article is not nominated for speedy deletion, so the {{hangon}} tag you keep adding is unnecessary and inappropriate. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:11, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Picnicface comedians

Surprise surprise -- another well-meaning Wikipedian is tired of your deletionist policy. Please look at Kyle Dooley's and Evany Rosen's talk pages. Beijing goalie (talk) 20:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Please remember civility and assume good faith. --ZimZalaBim talk 20:36, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
It's tough being civil when all you get is smarmy answers. You ignored my points, made irrelevant quotes from the wikipedia bible, and decided to delete the Picnicface article. I'd like some reasonable explanations please. Beijing goalie (talk) 02:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Please show me my "smarmy answers". And note that the Picnicface Comedy article has not been deleted, but merely nominated for such. You are free to participate in the discussion. --ZimZalaBim talk 02:58, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. I apologize for my previous snappiness. Beijing goalie (talk) 20:08, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Reason of Deletion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Concepcion

ZimZala,

I apologize for this consecutive deletion. There seems to be a problem with the page. That is why I continously also, create it. Please do also understand that I am new here on Wikipedia, and the fact that it turns out to be hard for me to handle this error concerning my article. Although for the meanwhile, just please consider this problem of mine. Thank you.

With much respect, Lea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Andreaonline&redirect=no —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreaonline (talk • contribs) 04:11, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

St. Teresa of Avila Catholic School

Please leave the St. Teresa School article alone! You never even went to the school, and STOP PUTTING YOUR NOSE IN EVERYTHING! Besides, leave it be because the principal is retiring, and he likes the article. Don't do it for me, but for my Grandpa, Mr. Garcia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 16:01, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, you don't WP:OWN that article, and a lengthy biography of the current principle (whether retiring or not, whether your grandfather or not) is not appropriate. This is an encyclopedia, not a place for you to include a personal tribute. If you insert this material again, you risk being blocked from editing for disruption. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

PLEASE!!!! MY grandpa, Mr. Garcia, loves this. Can you leave it until he retires please!? I BEG you! He loves it. I'll make the article better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 16:12, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

While I appreciate your desire to please your grandfather, Wikipedia is not a place to add tributes to people that fail our notability guidelines. There are plenty of free web providers where you can build the tribute you so much desire. This simply isn't one of them. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:14, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

im sorry i didn't know. Can I just put something about his retirement? Oh yeah, and I wasn't trying to act as if it were my article. Sorry. Its just sad to see him retire. H did so much for the school. Can i put a little something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 16:17, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

It generally is not appropriate to make mention of a random principals retirement, unless it is somehow notable. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

This is me just being curious, but did you ever go to St. Teresa? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominic Edward Aragon (talk • contribs) 16:21, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

No. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:24, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

name

Hey, do you know if i can change my name from Srmagnetismo to HAMM? I need it. ҢДMM®(Hundry Marquina!) 16:52, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Changing username. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand why my contribution was removed

My contribution to the Jonathan Zittrain wikipedia page was removed within an hour of it being posting. It's obviously of interest to wikipedia users that two famous people, Jonathan Zittrain and Jeff Zittrain, are brothers. Why refer to Jonathan Zittrain's parents and not his brother? Siblings are usually mentioned on wikipedia pages, especially if they are figures of note. Can you put my contribution back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tazerfish (talk • contribs) 22:40, 31 May 2008 (UTC) Tazerfish (talk) 22:45, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

If his brother is sufficiently notable, then he would/could have his own article. Otherwise, mention of him in a siblings article is superfluous. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you could help me.

I'm a new contributor, and I want live up to the wiki standards of rigor. I have assembled various third-party links to establish that Jeff Zittrain fulfills the notability guidelines, despite the fact that he doesn't have his own wikipedia page. His music meets a few of the "Criteria for Musicians and Ensembles." Should I sent these links to you, or to some other group to reach consensus? I'm confused by how the "sandbox" works.--Tazerfish (talk) 01:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Starting an article for help creating a new article, and pay particular attention to the notability guidelines. I can try to assess the sources you have, or you can propose the creation of the article and provide the links at Wikipedia:Requested articles/music/Performers and bands. --ZimZalaBim talk 03:18, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Sources for Jeff Zittrain notability

Thank you. Too make this easy, here is a cut-and-past of the criteria for notability as applies to musicians. The third-party sources I found are listed beneath it.


Criteria for musicians and ensembles A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria: 1. It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable.[1] o This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, and television documentaries[2] except for the following: § Media reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician/ensemble talks about themselves, and advertising for the musician/ensemble. § Works comprising merely trivial coverage, such as newspaper articles that simply report performance dates or the publications of contact and booking details in directories. § An article in a school or university newspaper (or similar) would generally be considered trivial but should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. 2. Has had a charted hit on any national music chart. 3. Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country. 4. Has received non-trivial coverage in a reliable source of an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one sovereign country.[3] 5. Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable). 6. Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such, and that commonsense exceptions always apply. 7. Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability. 8. Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury or Grammis award. 9. Has won or placed in a major music competition. 10. Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article.) 11. Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network. 12. Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast across a national radio or TV network.


Regarding #10: NBC-TV show “Ed” used Jeff Zittrain’s composition and performance of “Lullaby” in its series finale. To demonstrate this, I may have to go to iTunes and purchase the song.


Regarding #1: A. Here’s the review of Zittrain’s band, Famous Last Words, in “All Music Guide”: http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:j9frxqwsldse

B. Here’s the Famous Last Words review in Relix:

http://www.relix.com/Content/On_the_Verge/On_The_Verge_200410051652.html

C. Here’s from the dance “Collaboration” http://www.collaborationdancemusic.org/Choreos/Mayock.html And the review in Ballet Magazine: http://www.ballet.co.uk/magazines/yr_07/oct07/rr_rev_collaboration_dance_and_music_2007_0907.htm

Here’s another review from “Jambands”: http://www.jambands.com/CDReviews/content_2004_08_27.00.phtml

This one doesn't have editorial control but it is called "The Brothers Zittrain" and should establish the connection: http://flickr.com/photos/juliemelton/sets/72157603106458597/detail/

Is this sufficient to establish notability?

--71.204.131.107 (talk) 08:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

First, please don't paste large sections of policy into user's talk pages - we can read the policy at the source. Second, please log into your user account. Third, I don't really have the time or expertise to review your suggested sources. Take my advice above and either formally suggest the article at WP:RA, or follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Starting an article to see if it seems like the article will be acceptable. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Carlton Bolling College

Hello ZimZalaBim,

I wanted to talk to you about the changes you have done to Carlton Bolling College, I can unterstand that you don't want that article to look like a website, but I don't want the article to be short, I want to give more detail and information about Carlton Bolling College, I can understand that you don't want all those links linking to the Galleries. I added those Level 2 Headers but unfortunately I didn't have much time to write more information in each section, but I will get some photographs and some more information to put on. But could I possibly have the permission to undo the changes you've done to the article by using the history page of the article?, and I will of course remove those links to the gallery page and add more information and pictures into each section. OpinionPerson (talk) 15:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a web hosting service for a school to list every possible activity or piece of information. I suggest you work on adding useful, encylopedic information to the article. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I can unterstand that but other schools such as Bingley Grammar School have listed up information in detail. Could you please tell me the reason why I'm not allowed to do this? OpinionPerson (talk) 22:49, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Just becuase other problem articles exist doesn't mean we should allow more to be added --ZimZalaBim talk 22:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm not adding sewage to the article just more information, I really like the Wikipedia system and how administrators and other users prevent vandalism and always keep the system running, but I'm only adding information interesting to readers, I'm not trying to do any vandalism or add any nonsense to wikipedia. Have you got anything against schools? I'm not trying to list every activity just important, I know that there were a few boring, non interesting and "empty" sections in that article, but I'm planning to get more information and pictures for them, I will try to only write important information, then I will ask you if the article is OK? Is that alright? OpinionPerson (talk) 09:25, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Please assume good faith, as I generally support the inclusion of school articles, even if no explicit notability is claimed. However, Wikipedia is not a collection of indiscriminate information. Thus, articles must contain only encyclopedic information, not trivia or every little detail. Please keep this in mind when editing. --ZimZalaBim talk 12:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
OK, I'm just waiting for the pictures then I will edit it and then I will ask you if there is anything that needs to be changed. OK? OpinionPerson (talk) 14:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

outer rim territories

Hi ZimZalaBim, I was wondering about the article Outer Rim Territories. I feel this article is of major importance and should be included on Wikipedia. I plan on expanding this article and improving it. Please consider my opinion and thank you for your time.Iphoneorange (talk) 23:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

You seem to be creating various stub articles for random (and in my opinion, minor) elements of the Star Wars universe. Please note that not every element of a fictional work is notable for inclusion in this general encyclopedia. Not that the Wikipedia:WikiProject Star Wars makes note of this. I suggest you shift your focus to only notable subjects, or perhaps channel your enthusiasm toward Wookieepedia. Thanks. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Bunny Gibbons Notability

Hi,

I've done some research and I feel that the Bunny Gibbons article is quite notable now. I would appreciate it if you could review it and either remove the notability notice or give me some advice on it.

Thanks, Beijing goalie (talk) 02:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Importance of all articles

Hi ZimZalaBim, Let me start out by saying thanks for your reply. Unfortunately I disagree with your opinion on writing on Wikipedia. You say that these articles are unnecessary on Wikipedia, and should be placed on a different wiki such as Wookiepedia. In my opinion Wikipedia should be the encyclopedia with information on every possible subject. Even if the subject is a minor one, it should still be included because this is what makes Wikipedia the greatest database on the web. Please consider my side of the story and reply when you can. Thank you very much.
Iphoneorange (talk) 04:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Jeff Zittrain notability

The standards of notability for musicians are not whether they have their own wikipedia article. A musician is worthy of note if they meet one of the twelve criteria listed in the Criteria for Musicians and Ensembles. [[6]] Jeff Zittrain meets criteria #1 and #10, and is thus worthy of mention in an article about his brother Jonathan Zittrain. As an example, both Jonathan's Zittrain's parents are mentioned in the article, yet neither have their own article on wikipedia. I have a list of third-party sources to establish Jeff Zittrain's notability. Where do I send these sources to earn Jeff Zittrain a mention in an article about his brother? --Tazerfish (talk) 17:21, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[[]]

I'm well aware of WP:MUSIC, thank you. You can add appropriate mention of his brother with citations at Jonathan Zittrain and see if other editors consider it valuable, or you can discuss adding it at Talk:Jonathan Zittrain. Either way is more appropriate than bringing it solely to my attention here. --ZimZalaBim talk 17:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Rush Limbaugh/Frank

It is my own image because I captured it from my own video I thought that was ok. Help me!

Smuckers (talk) 18:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

As described in the message left for you, images taken from TV/film are typically covered under copyright and need a fair use rationale. See our image use policy. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

This is referring to the National Golf Coaches Association "Copyright" problem. I changed it. Now you can stop picking on me.

Smuckers (talk) 16:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

No one is picking on you. It is apparently you aren't familiar with our policies regarding copyright. I suggest you read those, as we must be sure not to include copyright-protected material in the encyclopedia. Thanks. --ZimZalaBim talk 16:25, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

But I am familiar. I read them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smuckers (talk • contribs) 16:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Then you would know it was incorrect to simply cut/paste content from a copyright protected website. Please don't do it again. --ZimZalaBim talk 17:03, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

3/4 of the pictures on this website are copyright violations. Mine is under the Creative Commons license. I wouldn't steal, I am not that kind of person. Smuckers (talk) 17:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

No, by far the majority of pictures on Wikipedia are used properly in accordance to our image use policy. I am very suspect of your insistence that the images you uploaded are either yours or licensed by the owner under a Creative Commons license. I've already proven that you found one of them at a website. It is very important that we take copyright seriously here. As a general rule, don't take images from websites. Thank you. --ZimZalaBim talk 17:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Random comment

Hey, I saw your username somewhere and I think it rocks!

Have a good day! J.delanoygabsadds 05:00, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

J.delanoygabsadds has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

My edits (Smuckers)

OK..I have to ask..I can't help but think as to why are you picking on me so much? All of my edits are very serious and I truly try to help out as much as I can. I put alot of thoughts into them and enjoy helping out pages by creating useful edits with references. I try to undo any vandalism I see. My Huggy Snuggy page had a credible source, but on second thought I guess the page really didn't need to be created. As to my Tiger Woods edits? Hardly vandalism..if a comment by Tiger that caused controversy isn't notable, then why would a small quip from Phil Mickelson be?

Other than that, all of my edits are serious and I try to contribute as best as I can. Please tell me why you don't like me/are trying to embarrass me-make me feel bad.

Smuckers (talk) 14:04, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Please assume good faith. I'm not picking on you, but as already mentioned, many of your edits are problematic, so it is natural for other editors to examine them to ensure we are maintaining Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines. Regarding Tiger Woods, I suggest you bring up your concerns on the talk page, as removing those items from the article has the appearance that your are upset that your own contributions weren't kept. --ZimZalaBim talk 14:07, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy tagging of images

I'm sure you know it already, but please don't tag images that claim to be free for I9. PUI will take care of them soon enough anyway, and as stated in the template it's not a very good idea if there's a reasonable doubt that they may be free. Cheers! -- lucasbfr talk 22:05, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:35, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
FWIW, I thought the ones I recently tagged I did as I3, but perhaps an I9 snuck in there by mistake. --ZimZalaBim talk 22:37, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

It's Smuckers again

PSU volleyball all time record - why delete? It took me a long time to write. I got it from the Penn State Volleyball yearbook and put it in my own format. Not copied, it's general information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smuckers (talk • contribs) 21:02, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

  1. Nothing was deleted. If you look at the edit summary in the history, and click the new link in the text, you'll see it was simply moved to a separate article: Penn State Nittany Lions volleyball all time record
  2. Please remember to sign your comments on talk pages.
Thanks --ZimZalaBim talk 21:19, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I know you made a new page for it and I think it's a good idea -- but I was referring to your comment "split this out from Penn State Nittany Lions volleyball, but I'm not entirely convinced it should even remain. This info is likely found on some university website, and doesn't need be to duplicated in our encyclopedia. I'm open for discussion." Thanks Smuckers (talk) 21:36, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

IMO, Wikipedia is not a place to compile non-essential athletic records and statistics. Anyway, this discussion should talk place at Talk:Penn State Nittany Lions volleyball all time record. --ZimZalaBim talk 21:46, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your calm edit summary and patience on Jonathan Zittrain. When I reached back to find an intelligentsia source I accidently re-introduced the photo you had cut--and that was a good idea to eliminate a photo. Sorry I didn't even scroll down far enough notice it was back until you fixed it again. Thanks again. —SusanLesch (talk) 18:11, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

No problem. --ZimZalaBim talk 00:53, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:ZimZalaBim/Archive_9&oldid=1190116373"