User talk:CT Cooper/Archive 10

Project newsletter
Hi Cooper,

I'm a little stumped as to what to write in the 'Editor's Message' section of the upcoming edition of the newsletter. So I thought I'd check by and see if you had any ideas, or wished to write something yourself in that section?  Wes  Mouse  12:03, 13 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the offer. I'll give it a go. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 13:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I've just finished writing it. I've kept it short and sweet in the hope that people will read it. Please feel free to give it a copy-edit. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I do like what you've written. It is short, sweet, but to the point.  And most of all, it gives a feel of encouragement and inspirational thought to those who read it.  I was stumped with newsletter's own little DYK? section, so I did a google search for fun and interesting ESC facts, and went with Katie Boyle.  Random, I know; but probably a bit quirky for those how didn't know that much about Eurovision-past.  All I need to do now is double-check the stats (in case those on the delivery message are out of sync) and then mailshot the darn thing.  Thank you, Coop, for your contribution.   Wes   Mouse  15:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. I'm really glad you liked it. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 17:19, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

User:RebeccaTheAwesomeXD
I saw how you left a warning on User:RebeccaTheAwesomeXD's talk page and I just wanted to let you know that she's been doing other things as well. On pretty much every Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2014 contestant's article, she's added completely unsourced birthdays, I've asked her about where she gets these from yet she just ignores me. Also, she keeps readding English as a language featured in some of the songs on the JESC 2014 page even though you and others, including myself have reverted it several times. I just wanted to let you know. { [ ( jjj  1238 ) ] }  11:38, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for letting me know. I'm keeping an eye on her edits and I'm giving some thought on what further action to take. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:07, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Make that two of us who are monitoring her actions. I have her on my watchlist, and going through every single one of her contributions with a fine tooth-comb.   Wes   Mouse  16:23, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I think we may need to air on the side of caution though. I have this strange gut-feeling that she is an minor, based on the type of contributions she has done, and the nature they are being done.  Let's just say it's a bit of psychoanalytic sociology profiling that is giving me this suspicion.  It is becoming well-known these days that females under a certain age start to behave nastily and will go to any extreme to cause distress to people who "target" them.   Wes   Mouse  18:09, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Argh! Noooo! Jjj. You cannot say stuff like that, per WP:OUTING.   Wes   Mouse  18:21, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Agh damnit. Let's pretend that didn't happen. Anyways, I do agree with you but that shouldn't stand in your way of punishing her if needed. { [ ( jjj   1238 ) ] }  18:24, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately we cannot pretend it didn't happen. Have you forgotten about page history? What you said is still here and here.  Wes  Mouse  18:29, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I know it was just a joke. I honestly didn't even know that was a rule, let alone saying an internet screen name would pass for it. { [ ( jjj   1238 ) ] }  18:31, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, but bear in mind about "outing" in future LOL. Last thing we want is an excellent editor like yourself to get into deep trouble like "outing".  Outing is there to protect Wikipedian's for their safety more than anything.  If a Wikipedian chose to reveal their true identity, then that is their prerogative and at their own risk too.  However as we are assuming that the above named editor may be a minor, then we have to be extra careful just in case our assumptions are correct and we could ultimately put a child's life at risk of Internet Paedophiles etc.  Coop, not sure if you may need to WP:REVDEL the the page history connected to this accidental outing?   Wes   Mouse  18:39, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes I'm definitely aware now and understand what that could've done. Sorry. { [ ( jjj   1238 ) ] }  18:42, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the apology.


 * The identity given appeared to be an alias, but as a precaution, I've deleted the offending revisions and I've sent an e-mail to the oversight team so they can do as they see fit. There are many legitimate reasons to discuss someone's conduct or monitor their edits, but there is a narrow line between legitimate scrutiny and harassment. In general, I would avoid speculating about someone's non-Wikimedia identity or their age.


 * If the situation continues in regards to, I may have to make a block, but I'm going to give her a bit of space for the time being. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 19:33, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I haven't heard anything back from the oversight team, so I presume they're content with things as they are. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 12:50, 26 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I suppose they say "no news, is good news". I'll still keep a monitor on contributions though, just in case.   Wes   Mouse  13:36, 26 September 2014 (UTC)


 * The oversight team have now got back to me – they send their thanks for bringing this to their attention, but they have decided that no further action is required. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 18:58, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

That is a huge sigh of relief; not just for Jjj, but for us and Rebecca (in some small way).  Wes  Mouse  19:02, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

We knew it would happen
Coop, I think our friend Giorgito Babatselo the URL fraudster has return (as expected). I came across a fraud URL address added by IP:178.121.151.236 on the article Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2015. Reverted the action, and added the IP to my watchlist for further scrutiny.  Wes  Mouse  14:57, 1 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Okay, I've added to my watchlist too and have added some tags to the talk page. Thanks for letting me know. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:15, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Map improvements
Coop, I'm toying with the idea of modernising the EBU members map (File:European Broadcasting Union members.svg) into an interactive-style map similar to File:EC-EU-enlargement animation.gif. Do you think it is a good idea, or one worth forgetting?  Wes  Mouse  13:12, 2 October 2014 (UTC)


 * As I said on Facebook, I think this is a great idea if it can be done. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 19:45, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Notice of discussion
I am notifying you of a debate taking place at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, in regards to several issues connected to ; in which you have also had some involvement with and may wish to have your say on the matter.  Wes  Mouse  15:04, 12 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I've responded. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 14:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Lost FAs

 * Coop, have you noticed that we've lost 2 FA's? I cannot for the life of me work out which ones have been demoted.  However, it has given me an idea for something which could potentially replace the A-Class tab we once had on the project.  A section dedicated to former GA/FA articles that become demoted - so that we have an account, and the minute one becomes demoted it can be actioned upon to bring it back to standards ASAP.  Do you think that is a good idea to introduce?    Wes Mouse &#124;  chat  13:35, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the newsletter. I'm probably responsible for that, as I removed the project template on two articles (1, 2). Some of the project tagging may have become overzealous as these articles are very distant from Eurovision and don't really fall under our scope, not to mention we were opening ourselves up to accusations of artificially boosting our FA/GA numbers. Perhaps this is another issue which requires further discussion. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 14:42, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Ah that's what are missing. How on earth did they get tagged to the project?  I hope it wasn't when I was getting stressed and tired out trying to handle the tagging exercise single-handedly in 2012.  I'll do another sweep from the beginning and double-check them all.  Anyhow, here is that draft essay I spoke to you about on Facebook User:Wesley Mouse/sandbox/4.  Needs a lot more work doing to it, but there's no real rush; and it is there to give me something to work on when I need a timeout/cooldown period from editing.    Wes Mouse &#124;  chat  23:57, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

About Template:Infobox school/doc
Hi, CT Cooper. This is just a message that indicates that after thinking through the suggestions I could have made. I decided to not suggest and discuss any changes about Template:Infobox school/doc. I left you a message so it would indicate that I have disregard the issue or suggestion. This came after a month ago, after I discuss about a suggestion on WT:WPSCH. Editor of 3000 (talk) 14:29, 28 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello, I'm afraid I don't really understand what you're trying to say here. I can find no record of you previously leaving me messages on this talk page. I reverted you at WT:WPSCH as while you editors are permitted to revert themselves, that applies within reason, and the number of times you were removing and re-adding the content was becoming disruptive. Nor do I really understand why you were unwilling to discuss your changes to the template documentation. Being bold is great, but this a collaborative project – which means that discussion with other people in order to reach a consensus over content changes is unavoidable if one is to be a productive contributor here. We have the civility and no personal attacks policies, so there is no reason why anyone should be afraid of a discussion. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

assesment of draft article on European School in Central Asia
Hi CT Cooper. I would welcome any comments you have on a new draft article Draft:European_School_in_Central_Asia which I am trying to get into shape for acceptance. ESCA is a non-profit community school providing international education in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. I know this is outside your normal area of interest but not too many people cover schools in this part of the world. Any comments would be most welcome. David1000000 (talk) 15:00, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your good work. I'm running on a tight schedule at the moment so I may not have time to offer any detailed input, but I see another user has been kind enough to do so. My main two concerns would be that there seems to be large gaps in the references and with the logo – it's very rare for logos to be released under a free license and allowing its use on Wikipedia only is not compatible with a free license. I would suggest re-tagging it as non-free with a fair use rationale. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 14:55, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi CT Cooper. Thank you for your very helpful input. I have changed the logo to 'non-free' as you suggest. The difficulty with references is that we are in a part of the world where independent reporting and references are very hard to find and I do not know how to resolve this. David1000000 — Preceding undated comment added 04:04, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

A-class
I'm toying with the idea to request the deletion of WikiProject Eurovision/Assessment/A-Class review page, and replacing it with something more useful for the project; a section that will contain a list former GA/FA articles, that could do with work to bring them back to their former glory. That way there would be a easy to view list, and I'd also be able to use some from the list in the newlestter publications so they gain attention and article improvements. Good idea? Plus I think a few RfC's are in order, one to review the assessment/quality scale; one to review categories; and one to discuss article format for [Country] in Eurovision, as people are just adding what they feel like and not one of them have any uniformity look.  Wes Mouse &#124;  chat  15:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I doubt A-class will ever get much use, so yeah, I think replacing the page with something else is a good idea. Other projects do keep lists of former GAs/FAs so I we could do also, or we could go even further and have a list of "Good article candidates" of strong B-class articles which have been identified as being within reach of GA. Naturally, another list could be done for GA articles close to reaching FA status, though I think the former list will prove most useful. What do you think? CT Cooper · &#32;talk 20:44, 28 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I think we could do all of the above. A list of Current FAs and GAs.  Then a list of Bs that could become GAs and GAs that could become FAs.  Plus listing the former GA/FA that could be reworked to regain their status.   Wes Mouse  &#124; T@lk  08:57, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * I'm glad you've noticed! Thanks for the kind thoughts. Yeah I usually check the place out at least once a day, and I plan to keep doing so until it is locked next year. I might ask to be a sysop on the 2015 Wiki at some point too, so I can act on trouble over there as needed. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:29, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Editorial
Would you like the honour of writing the editorial piece this month?  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  10:57, 9 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I would love too. I'll fit it in tomorrow if I can. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 17:07, 9 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Cool. I'll pre-warn you though, I've given the newsletter a slight facelift (again), made it easier to view and the newsletter now has its very own logo.   Wes Mouse  &#124; T@lk  21:50, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Well spotted
Well spotted with those template reversions. I think that IP is a vandal only account. They've done loads of similar edits across Eurovision articles, including a splitting paragraphs in the lead, despite the GA request. Counted 17 warnings since May this year.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  21:02, 22 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Looks like they've been on a oriiginal research/unsourced content-fest going back months. Yikes!  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  21:14, 22 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't call the IP a vandal, but certainly a number of the edits are problematic. I've placed it on my watchlist. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:23, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Eurovision - Urgent Message
Dear Project Eurovision Member,

There is a serious discussion been created at the WikiProject Eurovision talk page that requires utmost attention from all, or as many members as possible, as this could bear a huge impact on the project as a whole. Please click here to read the discussion, and participate peacefully. Thank you. This message was delivered at 04:41, 23 November 2014 (UTC) by MediaWiki message delivery (talk), on behalf of Project Eurovision Newsdesk

Eastleigh meetup
Hi Chris, thank you for coming to the meetup yesterday. :-) Marek  . 69  talk 20:21, 24 November 2014 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. Thank you very much for putting it all together. I really enjoyed it. :) CT Cooper · &#32;talk 20:54, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Talkback
I left a reply explaining that I understand what you said about WP:NOTBROKEN. I changed the redirect because of what was going on the article during June 2014 to August 2014. I understand that the redirect does not matter when the article title remains the same. Editor of 3000 (talk) 23:18, 26 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for getting back to me. I've replied on your talk page. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:19, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Straw Poll
There is a straw poll that may interest you regarding the proper use of "Religion =" in infoboxes of atheists.

The straw poll is at Template talk:Infobox person.

--Guy Macon (talk) 09:18, 6 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for letting me know. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 13:18, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Insight requested
Please could you provide some insight to the questions raised at Articles for deletion/Sabur Khan (2nd nomination)? Bellerophon talk to me  23:39, 16 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I have commented. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 17:53, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Seasonal Greets!

 * Thank you very much. I hope you have a great Christmas and New Year too. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 01:01, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Infobox stuff
Don't want to debate the issue endlessly on the clarification page, but do you have links to where Andy was "admonished for incivility?" I'd be curious to see exactly what was said. Montanabw (talk) 20:07, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello, the admonishment can be found here; he has deleted it from his talk page. This wasn't the only case of Andy making questionable comments, but this was the one he was admonished for. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 20:15, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Given the situation, I'd have called the other guy worse than a troll. Seems to be a classic case of WP:BAITing. You and I may not agree on that point, of course, but thank you for pointing out to me what the admonishment was.  (I once called someone a jackass and didn't get slapped any worse...)   Montanabw (talk)  18:55, 30 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Fulfilling a requirement to notify someone that they have been subject to an arbitration enforcement request is not trolling, particularly when said note is purely factual in nature. I privately advised against taking Andy to ArbCom, but I know the decision to do so was at worse done with ignorance rather than malice. I agree that when it comes to incivility this was a relatively minor incident, and a block would have been over-the-top, though Andy has not helped himself by deleting the admonishment with another rather questionable edit summary. I think he's his own worst enemy at times. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 19:11, 30 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, seems the drama at ArbCom will just have to wind its way down. Sigh.   Montanabw (talk)  00:03, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Clarification
It looks like our background is very different, and perhaps our understanding of English, - it's not my first language, please keep it simple. My view: the purpose of the clarification is to word a restriction (of September 2013) more precisely, because it has been misunderstood several times, always causing several people to waste time. (I - if I had such a request - would have waited for the new set of arbs.) - What do you see? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:00, 31 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello, again. Okay, I will try and keep it simple. I think you are correct that the discussion is mostly about clarifying the restriction. However, what I'm trying to say, is that behind all that is some concerns with Andy's behaviour. That is relevant, as it could mean that the discussion ends with the restriction being toughed-up, rather than the current interpretation just being clarified. At the moment, I believe that the restriction should only be clarified. Therefore, I do not think we are in disagreement on that point. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:27, 31 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Christopher, I don't know what you know about arbitration. I knew nothing when I was in the infoboxes case which was requested because too many infoboxes were reverted. I thought the case was about infoboxes, - a major mistake. It was about behaviour, - you understand that better than I did. If you have a bit of time read the so-called evidence, it's quite amusing, in retrospect. (The link to the case is on my user page, filed under pride and prejudice II.) - Did you know that by now FA Carmen has an infobox, and just today the way was opened for more on Mozart's operas? - Well, my reaction to the decision was Kafka, - it helped to have worked on that article. To clarify the decision is just as promising as to clarify a Kafka story ;) - Happy new year! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:06, 31 December 2014 (UTC)


 * All Arbitration Committee cases are about behaviour, since ArbCom doesn't directly resolve content disputes; that has always has to be done by the community. Happy New Year to you too! CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:40, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

hi
hi, perhaps have u ever studied in UOL? Assimifne (talk) 20:05, 28 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello. No, I'm afraid not; I'm an alumnus of the University of Southampton. If you have studied there, or are in employment there, you are welcome to continue editing, but please review Conflict of interest. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 23:19, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi there. How can i be an admin like you? You have created just few articles on wikipedia. Assimifne (talk) 11:56, 3 January 2015 (UTC)


 * There's more to being an admin than creating articles; having the community's trust and having a good record of experience is more important. To become an administrator one has to pass a tough process called Requests for adminship (RfA). Really, I wouldn't recommend making adminship a goal – make your goal improving Wikipedia and get the tools when you need them and are ready for them. For the moment, I would suggest reviewing Administrators, What adminship is not, and Guide to requests for adminship. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 12:13, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Inactive members
Chris,

Would it be possible to delete WikiProject Eurovision/Members/Inactive. Maintaining the inactive section is a ballache, and means someone having to trawl through every member's contribs to determine when they last edited - which is unfair and invasion of editing privacy (if that makes sense). If a member no longer wishes to become a member, then I'm sure they are capable of removing their names. Plus the project now has a spamlist for those who wish to be members but don't wish to receive the newsletter which is more convenient to editors (IMO).  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  21:00, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Scrap that proposal. My must be going soft in my old age to caving in to pressure from individuals who have a desire to keep a list of inactive members. The burden is on them to keep it updated, as it is a waste of human resources to be checking through edit history of over 100 people, time which would be better spent on improving articles instead.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  22:38, 4 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello Wes. One's contributions is a matter of public record so I wouldn't call it an invasion of privacy. I am sympathetic to the idea of keeping bureaucracy to a minimum, though unfortunately very few users who stop contributing remember/bother to remove themselves. To make it simpler, I would propose going through the list once a year and removing anyone who has made zero edits in the last year – this is easy with navigation popups. I wouldn't bother with checking whether their edits are Eurovision related edits or not, and the inactive list can go as well. Those who are removed can be mass messaged to re-add themselves at their leisure. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 17:43, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

EuroCup
We getting there with the Eurovision Cup. Now the contest page is created WikiProject Eurovision/EuroCup.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  12:20, 14 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I've given it a read over and it looks great to me. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 13:13, 14 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Hopefully people will see it as just a bit of fun. And if all goes to plan, it will mean a lot of neglected articles will receives some much awaited TLC.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  13:16, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikimania 2015
Hello CT Cooper, I'm Jim Carter. It seems like you are going to attend Wikimania 2015. So, I was wondering if you can attend my presentation. See you there. Thank you very much!  Jim Car ter  13:22, 24 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello Jim. I don't tend to think about what sessions I will actually attend until the final programme is drawn-up, and even then I will make final decisions on the day. I will however go through the proposals at some point and sign the ones I'm interested in. I've put yours on my watchlist for now. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 23:03, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah... Ok, no problem. Hope to see you there. :)   Jim Car ter  04:12, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I look forward to it. Good luck with the presentation. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 16:00, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Editorial invite
Chris, I am struggling to think of something to write in the editorial part of the newsletter. Would you like the honour?  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  21:20, 31 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah sure, I'll tackle it tomorrow. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 23:19, 31 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I've given it a good copy edit and finished the editor's message section. I decided to tackle the big issue of the month head on and perhaps educate some members on the copyright situation with Wikipedia content. On a separate issue, I've also decided not to add evidence to the ongoing ArbCom Infoboxes Review as one editor has already presented evidence from the Eurovision side of things, and I don't think there is much more I can add to that. As you were far more involved with POTW than I was, I'll understand if your perspective is different though – if you do choose to present evidence I would advice to stick to diffs and pure factual statements, as it's difficult to go wrong with that method. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:38, 2 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Cheers matey, that looks good and tackling the copyleft/right issue is a good idea. As for ArbCom, I think I will continue to be an observer for now, and if necessary submit further evidence and diffs. I'll make one extra tweak to the contest news section on the newsletter, and then mail it out to everyone. I've also left you a note at WT:ESC in regards to Mikheev. Again, thank you.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  11:04, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. I'll have a look as soon as I can. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:44, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Technical move required.
Chris, would it be possible to move User:Wesley Mouse/sandbox/60 Years of the Eurovision Song Contest to 60 Years of the Eurovision Song Contest and then move that to Eurovision's Greatest Hits? The show has been confirmed, and I feel keeping the draft edit history is only fair so that people know it has been an article-in-progress for quite some time. Thanks.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  12:17, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Panic over, I've page moved to Eurovision Song Contest's Greatest Hits, and re-pointed the directs of 60 Years of the Eurovision Song Contest and Eurovision's Greatest Hits to the new article.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  13:23, 3 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Great work. It was wise to maintain the editing history as there were multiple contributors to the page. I've kept the new article on my watchlist for now. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:47, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Project Eurovision Cup
I have a question regarding the Project Eurovision Cup: will the contributions of previous months be counted for the first cup? Or does it count for the first month only? It's because we never had the project before, and I have done a lot stuff for the project before, including an article being "upgraded" to B-Class. Sorry if I didn't have to post my question here. I just wasnt sure where I should post it, so I just though about contacting one of the judges. <span style="font-family: Gotham Medium; background-color:#00A2E8; padding-left:5px; border:1px solid #00A2E8">Dimitris talk 13:15, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * any contributions made prior to 1 March will not count. The competition is run on a monthly basis, so for example all contributions made throughout March will be counted, scored, and the winner announced on the 1st of the next month. Then the scores are reset for any contributions made in the following month.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  13:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Wesley's answer is the same as mine. Thanks for singing-up. If you have any further questions, I'm happy for you to ask them here. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 19:03, 4 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Alright, thanks to both. I'm looking forward to the Cup. <span style="font-family: Gotham Medium; background-color:#00A2E8; padding-left:5px; border:1px solid #00A2E8">Dimitris talk 19:21, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Eurovision rarity
How rare is it for a country to confirm their participation (or in this case their return) to a contest before the current one has even begun? Turkey have confirmed they will return in 2016. I've updated Turkey in the Eurovision Song Contest accordingly, including adding the 2016 row. But should I also update its template? And does this mean Eurovision 2016 article needs to be activated? Bit of an unusual one is this.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  20:09, 6 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it certainly is. Ultimately an article should be created when there is coverage from reliable sources for it, and since there is for 2016 ESC, creating it can be justified even if it's a few months earlier than expected. The templates should match the contents of articles and it will result in a mess having templates referencing ESC 2016 but not having an article for it. I'll happily unprotect Eurovision Song Contest 2016 as needed; I set the protection to expire two weeks before the contest having presumed it would be created at that time, but it's only semi-protection, so it can be ignored by established editors. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 20:18, 6 February 2015 (UTC)


 * The 2016 article would be very - erm - stub-like with just Turkey being mentioned. Although I wonder if it should be a case of unprotect in order to get it updated with this new information, then place it back on protection per whatever the rationale was previously. I'll redirect Turkey in the Eurovision Song Contest 2016 to its parent country article for now.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  20:21, 6 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Stubs aren't a problem, as long as they aren't going to stay that way forever, though the standard remarks put on all ESC YYYY articles will stretch it out a bit. A simple confirmation is not enough for a "X in the Eurovision Song Contest YYYY" article, so I agree with re-directing the Turkey in the Eurovision Song Contest 2016 article for now. On the protection, it was put in place to stop inappropriate creations, so once the article is created it has no reason to exist anymore, but it can re-protected as needed. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:59, 6 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I noticed it was semi-pp, so I added the padlock icon to the top of ESC2016 article. Suppose its current semi-protection won't cause that much of a problem. And it may prevent any IP vandalism.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  22:05, 6 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for creating the article, but I've removed the protection for now. I think it's best to see how it goes and if IP editing is problematic then pending changes may be a better option as I don't expect this article to be subject to high traffic in the near future. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:11, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Another visit from a sock
Hi, You recently blocked Gendersbender as a sock of Beloki/Lugnuthemvar. You might want to take a look at too... if you'd rather I file the full paperwork at SPI, can do that instead. bobrayner (talk) 19:20, 17 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Looks like Beloki is getting more devious with time, but it's still obvious enough to block on the spot under WP:DUCK, which I've now done. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 20:55, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Poor translations
Chris, you may wish to add Rosa López and Talk:Rosa López to your watchlist. An editor from Spanish Wikipedia has used a translation tool and copy/paste the entire content to the English article. - which caused it to lose all citations etc. I reverted the edit and left a note on the article talk page. Thanks.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  18:49, 20 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I have done so. You've given the right response so far though – simply cutting and pasting machine translations onto Wikipedia is not permissible. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 18:54, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

London 91
Hi, we met at London 91 yesterday - I've added you to my list of Wikipedians I have met. -- Red rose64 (talk) 12:33, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It was a pleasure to meet you yesterday and I hope you had a good time. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:23, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, indeed; as I mentioned, I don't manage to get to London terribly often, I'm mostly at Oxford meetups, such as next Sunday. -- Red rose64 (talk) 22:33, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Oxford is a little far for me as I live in Hampshire, but perhaps one day. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

New e-mail
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackbollda (talk • contribs) 02:09, 12 March 2015‎


 * Thank you for your e-mail. I will respond shortly. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 14:54, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Bohemia (group)
Hi, I was wondering if you could give your two cents at this deletion discussion for Bohemia (group). Thanks. <font color="#AB2B2B">{ [ ( jjj  <font color="#000000">1238 ) ] }  22:27, 14 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know. I'll try and have a look some time tomorrow. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 23:17, 14 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I have commented. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 13:13, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

User talk:RebeccaTheAwesomeXD
Thanks for your intervention there. Hopefully it will have some effect. It's one of the worst cases of "I didn't hear that" that I've come across lately. She shouldn't be allowed anywhere near BLPs until her mindset changes. Voceditenore (talk) 19:01, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. Yeah, Rebecca is a difficult one which I've bee following for a while as she does mean well but is nevertheless disruptive. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 20:46, 4 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm wondering if we've forgotten about the IP address that she also edited under, which was blocked for the same 1-week period? I would have though the Arbitration sanction would also be imposed on that - and now that Rebecca is blocked for 2 weeks, maybe her fixed IP address should be too?  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  13:20, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I decided not to re-block it as IP addresses frequently change and the autoblock should take care of any attempt to edit logged-out. She knows now that she's not allowed to evade blocks, but I'll be on the look out in case she gives it a go anyway. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 13:28, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I too, have got my eyes well and truly transfixed on her activity. Team work at its best!  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  13:29, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

New e-Mail

 * I've replied. Thanks. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 16:16, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Still Active at Assessing School Articles?
Hi CT Cooper - I recently (about 2 months ago) put in some time to expand my school's Wikipedia page. You are listed as one of the people who assesses school articles and I was curious if you were still active in that regard. The last assessment of the page was in 2007 anyway, so I believe its fitting for a quality update regardless. If you are not active in that area, do you know who I should contact regarding this or what step I should take next? Thanks! Wollastone (talk) 03:49, 16 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your contributions. Sadly, WikiProject Schools has been near dead for a good while. I tried to keep the Assessment Department alive on my own for a good while, but due to personal circumstances I was inactive on Wikimedia projects for much of the last two years, and in any case, there are other things which are always going to demand my time. In fairness to everyone though, I'm going to prioritise answering all the assessment requests that have mounted-up, then I'm probably going to re-work the assessment page to make it more low maintenance. In the longrun, I'm going to look into reviving WikiProject Education, which has an Assessment Department which has been dead for even longer, and moving much of WikiProject Schools, WikiProject Universities, and a few other WikiProjects activities into there so we can pool resources a little better. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 16:28, 16 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the quick reply! That's too bad it's almost dead - things happen and well, Wikipedia is voluntary stuff. Falls to the wayside for sure. I'm not sure if you have taken a look, but the backlog is not too bad on the Assessment requests. Maybe about 7 - All in the last year and a bit. Hopefully you find time to take care of your WikiProject Education - sure seems like a lot of work! Anyways, I guess the next step would be to wait? Keep updating the page and hopefully an assessment comes around sometime from someone? Thanks Again! Wollastone (talk) 22:00, 16 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, came in and saved the day, but unfortunately (s)he is now inactive as well. I'll see what I can do, and thank you for your kind comments. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:04, 16 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi both, I've added some thoughts to the page. :-), I hope you find the suggestions useful. , I was wondering if you had any additional thoughts? Best, <font face="Cambria" color="green">Duffit talk 11:02, 17 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the suggestions - I will get on those today. Hopefully I'll be able to get those fixed and improve it a little before  shares his thoughts.  Some of the older sections I didn't change all that much (other than updating Facts/Figures) so this is super helpful. Thanks again! Wollastone (talk) 14:38, 17 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Welcome back and thank you for stepping in.


 * Good work, but I'm unfortunately bogged down in work until the weekend. I'll add some additional thoughts then, which will give you some time to make further improvements if you wish. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:16, 17 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks again - don't worry about getting back to this right away lol. You've done a lot to help me already! With the suggestions, I've got some direction so that I can hopefully take the page to the next level. That was exactly what I was looking for.


 * Always a pleasure. If you need any assistance with consolidating the education-related WikiProjects I would be happy to help in any way I can. Best, <font face="Cambria" color="green">Duffit talk 11:24, 18 March 2015 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't say that WP:WPSCH is dead. It's a common fallacy that if actual project pages are not being edited, a project is deemed to have died. In reality, many such projects are actually quite active with editors working on articles that need attention or bringing them to GA, etc. There is hardly a day goes by that I don't do something for schools, in particular watching over listings for deletion, vandalism, COI, POV,and spam. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:53, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't say it's dead either, just nearly dead.. or perhaps in a state of hibernation. I disagree that the mere editing of relevant articles makes a project active, or even that bringing them to GA/FA does so. People can do those without being engaged with a WikiProject, which isn't a problem in itself, but it's less efficient and collaborative when looking at the bigger picture. I've been part of WikiProject Schools since 2007 and things have changed dramatically in that time – there are very rarely any active discussion at WT:WPSCH but there aren't fewer things to discuss, and WT:WPSCH/A which used to have a team of around five people, now has just one active editor. I don't think there is anything particularly about school articles or the project itself which has caused this decline – it's likely just a side affect of the general decline in people actively editing Wikipedia over the last few years. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:52, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Revision history of Eurovision Song Contest's Greatest Hits
Chris, It has only dawned on me that when I page moved Eurovision Song Contest's Greatest Hits from my sandbox, that the revision history of all the edits between 8 April 2012 to 4 June 2014 are not connected to the article, and were test edits from when it was just a bog-standard sandbox for other stuff. Do these entries need to be "hidden"?  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  15:07, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Well spotted – I think such edits are best kept out of the mainspace to avoid confusion. I've moved the old history back into your userspace. You'll find it at User:Wesley Mouse/sandbox/8, as this was an unused sandbox. If you would like me to move it elsewhere, then please let me know. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:51, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


 * That is fabulous, thank you very much. I don't know what got me looking that far back to be honest to have come across it all.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  15:52, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Ireland
Hi, I accidentally created the page Ireland in the Junior Eurovision Song Contest under the name Ireland in the Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2015. I can't rename it though because there's already a redirect with that name so can you help me with this? <font color="#AB2B2B">{ [ ( jjj  <font color="#000000">1238 ) ] }  10:23, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I have an idea to fix this. Leave it with me and I'll have it done in a jiffy.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  10:54, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Problem solved. I've removed the redirect from Ireland in the Eurovision Song Contest; cut/paste all you wrote into the new article. And placed a new redirect on the 2015 article, so hopefully, the page history will follow it. Although you can't really take credit for creating the main Ireland in the Junior Eurovision Song Contest, as I did that (including the original redirect) on 30 May 2014.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  11:00, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


 * , : I've history merged the pages just to be on the safe side. Thank you both for your good work. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:58, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Vote for admin
Could you please vote me for admin my name is Deontray hunter that is my wikipedia name — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deontray hunter (talk • contribs) 00:49, 2 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello there. Adminship is only granted to users with considerable experience and a strong record of service to the project. I'm afraid you are not ready yet. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 18:02, 5 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I was thinking the same when I read this the other day. Plus, canvassing for RfA votes! isn't a wise thing to do.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  18:17, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Happy Birthday

 * Thank you Wesley. I've had a very nice birthday. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 20:44, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Project Eurovision updates
Chris,

Seeing as the Pan Celtic Festival under Project Eurovision scope, as is Cân i Gymru (which is the Welsh selection process for PCF). I have decided to also add Royal National Mod and Festival Interceltique de Lorient under scope too. They are the selection events for Scotland and Brittany at the PCF. I only discovered all this after I did some research whilst doing a major re-write of the PCF article. I'm wondering if I should create a navbox template to place at the bottom of these articles (and any of the PCF artists who have articles), so people can navigate between them all easily.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  18:46, 11 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Wes. A new navbox seems like a good idea to me. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 14:03, 12 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Oh dear, looks like I didn't give enough thought to the navbox police. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 19:34, 13 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Yeah, they do seem to have come charging down like a pack of wolves. And now threatening to nominate the main article for deletion too, despite it fulfilling WP:GEOSCOPE when it comes to notability.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  09:23, 14 April 2015 (UTC)


 * For the record, I am not a member of the "navbox police". The template was added to one of my watched articles, and in fact it was only when my removal was reverted that I looked at it closely and saw how awful it was. So I nominated it for deletion (my first and possibly my last navbox). And I didn't "threaten" to nominate the article for deletion, just pointed out that the festival is not that notable (even in Ireland). Actually, I would probably vote to keep it if it were nominated. In general, I am an inclusionist. Scolaire (talk) 19:03, 14 April 2015 (UTC)


 * For the record, my remark was a general reference to the high (and sometimes overzealous) scrutiny which navboxes get, and wasn't a reference to any specific individual or group. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 14:58, 15 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Makes me laugh at the plethora of contradictory dialogue was used in the comment from Scolaire. To make a point of letting people know they are an "inclusionist" only to contradict it by "nominating for deletion" - isn't quite the inclusionist one prides themselves on. And in their own admittance above, it is clear the nomination was trying to prove a point. Had it not been added to the article on their watchlist, then they would not have known of its existence; and to "look at it closely" following a bold revert, also validates the fact it was a pointy manoeuvre. Doesn't the BRD process also include discussion? I was bold and reverted, so why couldn't the other party engage in a peaceful debate to explain their rationale, rather than causing all this pettiness.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  15:16, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Quixotic plea
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Wikipediholism test. Thanks. —  04:25, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Eurovision 2017 listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Eurovision 2017. Since you had some involvement with the Eurovision 2017 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Tavix |<font style="color:#FFFFFF;background:#000000;"> Talk 16:27, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for notifying me. I have commented. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:12, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride!
<div style="padding:3em; font-family:'Helvetica Neue',sans-serif; font-size:110%; line-height:1.75;"> You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride!


 * What? Wiki Loves Pride, a campaign to document and photograph LGBT culture and history, including pride events
 * When? June 2015
 * How can you help?
 * 1.) Create or improve LGBT-related articles and showcase the results of your work here
 * 2.) Upload photographs or other media related to LGBT culture and history, including pride events, and add images to relevant Wikipedia articles; feel free to create a subpage with a gallery of your images (see examples from last year)
 * 3.) Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Or, view or update the current list of Tasks. This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. Visit the group's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome!

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's main talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing!

User:Another Believer and User:OR drohowa

Any contribution you can make to this campaign would be much appreciated, Chris! Thanks for your consideration. Hope you enjoyed the rest of your time in Berlin. :) --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 05:28, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the message and for all your hard work. I really enjoyed Berlin and I look forward to returning at some point. :) CT Cooper · &#32;talk 11:48, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

... is, per WP:DUCK, back as. Just thought I'd let you know. Thomas.W talk 22:35, 4 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know, though I'm actually not too sure it's her. Though they share the same interests, the style of editing and writing is rather different. I'll keep an eye on the IP though. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:33, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Justin Bieber
It's been over three years since you semied this talk page. Can we try lifting protection and see how it goes? --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 23:30, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello, I was hesitant to lift the protection but I think a reasonable case can be made to give it a go and see what happens – many trolls have moved on, the page is generally viewed less than it used to be etc. There is very little chance of the article being unprotected, but if unregistered users can contribute to the talk page without too much trouble, then great. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:10, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll keep an eye on it and re-protect if necessary. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 21:16, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * So much for that. Reprotect? --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 15:45, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have done so. Given how quickly it was vandalised I don't think there is very much hope of the page staying clean while unprotected. I think it was worth a go though. Thank you for bringing the issue to my attention and I wish you well as an administrator. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:50, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Eurovision redirects
I think Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2016 is another candidate for G4 deletion.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  21:45, 18 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Done, thanks. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Poorly created articles
Chris, I've stumbled across a load of articles that should not even have been created as they are clearly overkill of WP:NOTSTATSBOOK. Articles about [Country]'s voting in the Eurovision Song Contest. All of which have been created by. I've tagged Azerbaijan's voting at the Eurovision Song Contest (WP:CSD and WP:CSD) and Serbia's voting at the Eurovision Song Contest as WP:CSD. But there are loads more like this. The full list is as follows.


 * Armenia's voting at the Eurovision Song Contest
 * Azerbaijan's voting at the Eurovision Song Contest
 * Belarus voting at the Eurovision Song Contest
 * Germany's voting at the Eurovision Song Contest
 * Hungary's voting at the Eurovision Song Contest
 * Latvia's voting at the Eurovision Song Contest
 * Moldova's voting at the Eurovision Song Contest
 * Romania's voting at the Eurovision Song Contest
 * Russia's voting at the Eurovision Song Contest
 * Serbia's voting at the Eurovision Song Contest
 * Ukraine's voting at the Eurovision Song Contest

I'll be tagged them all as #A10 of the CSD policy.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  12:11, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

I've opted to go down the AfD route instead.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  13:11, 28 June 2015 (UTC)


 * – Yeah, I think sending these to AfD is a good idea. Clearly these articles violate WP:NOTSTATSBOOK and the existing articles can cover anything substantive on a country's voting record. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 13:38, 28 June 2015 (UTC)


 * The AfD entry can be found here. There are other articles created by the same editor that are excessive listings of BLP's that have appeared on the cover of a magazine. I get the feeling this person is using Wikipedia as a personal "spreadsheet" for lists of data.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  13:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the link. Yes, you could well be right. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 13:50, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

She's back, and IP hopping.
Our old friend Rebecca is definitely back with a vengeance. This is definitely her work (especially as she has a habit to "sing lyrics" on talk pages and edit summaries. is definitely her though, as every edit that  made and subsequently had reverted after the SPI, that very IP was right behind like a shadow on all the articles putting the edits back. And despite the fact she has been caught out socking multiple times since the second SPI, she is now expecting to be unblocked in December 2015. She's never going to learn, and her lies are digging her a bigger hole. And going off Rebecca's signature edit style and the articles she is known to "hang around", then  and  are suspicious, as they are editing the same articles in Rebecca's infamous style.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  11:42, 2 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello Wes. Yes, I agree that she is almost certainly socking logged-out here. has blocked the two main offending IPs – I'm leaving the third as one edit isn't much to go on. I have now reverted many of the offending edits, regardless of whether they were constructive or not, as is permissible under WP:BANREVERT. I've also semi-protected Eliias as the situation there was getting silly. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:59, 2 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that, Chris. It is now getting to the point were I am tired of her coming back and making more hard work for the community then is needed. As for Eliias, that article may soon be getting merged into Sweden in the Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2013, looking at the way the debate is going at AfD; and the same could happen to all JESC bios that didn't win the contest.  Wes Mouse &#124; T@lk  16:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Community desysoping RfC
Hi. You are invited to comment at RfC for BARC - a community desysoping process. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:02, 24 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for letting me know. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 18:10, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Justin Bieber protection
I understand that the protection level of this talk page was only discussed a few months ago, with the result of the unprotection being the page vandalized again. Perhaps it would be a good idea to lower it to pending changes protection? sstflyer 08:17, 13 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi there. You are not the first person to make this suggestion, but unfortunately it cannot be implemented as pending changes cannot be activated on talk pages in any namespace. Please see Pending changes for more information. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 18:19, 15 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. So basically, that cannot be done with the current system. sstflyer 04:50, 16 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid so. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 00:20, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Help us improve wikimeets by filling in the UK Wikimeet survey!
Hello! I'm running a survey to identify the best way to notify Wikimedians about upcoming UK wikimeets (informal, in-person social meetings of Wikimedians), and to see if we can improve UK wikimeets to make them accessible and attractive to more editors and readers. All questions are optional, and it will take about 10 minutes to complete. Please fill it in at:
 * https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JJMNVVD

Thanks! Mike Peel (talk) 18:18, 20 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes check.svg Done CT Cooper · &#32;talk 18:56, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Gianluca91
Chris, we have a small problem that appears to be turning into a nastier bigger issue. It was brought to my attention that Gianluca91 has been repeatedly changing citations from other ESC websites into their more personal preference of ESCToday. Moldva96 raised their concern a mere few days ago. I advised Gianluca against their actions back in August. I think admin intervention maybe required at this stage, as Gianluca is not wanting to listen to advice.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  09:16, 21 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I've reviewed their edits and the talk page conversation. Unfortunately, this seems to be one of those users who won't acknowledge advice or follow instructions, regardless of their merit. However, I think he may have privately gotten the message that his edits can't go on as they are. For the moment, I don't think myself or anyone else going in guns blazing will help matters. I've placed the user's talk page on my watchlist and I'll see how things go. It'll be difficult for any admin action to be taken merely for changing sources, as that could be seen as a content dispute. However, if they carry the threat to simply not cite sources, then that'll be a simple case of not following policy, which is blockable after warnings. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 23:15, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Australian education research project
Dear CT Cooper,

My name is Gjeta Gjyshinca and I am working on a research project based on Australian education. My initial research is based on compiling an up-to-date list of all Government and Non-Government schools in Australia, taking into account closures, name-changes, and amalgamations of schools. I got your details from the Schools WikiProject page here and I wonder whether you could provide me with information on how the information on this page and all sub-pages was collected and how recent it is? Is it possible to download these lists in spreadsheet format?

I hope you can help me with this research or direct me to someone who can!

Many Thanks, Gjeta — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.14.178 (talk) 10:35, 21 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I think others you have contacted have answered your questions as well as I can. If you need any further help, then please feel free to leave another message here. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 23:20, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Lenzie Academy wiki page
Hi. Lenzie Academy page is being deliberately targeted and edited to reflect the school in a negative way. The information on the page does not comply with wikipedias requirement that information is for a neutral point of view. Anytime current data or referenced articles which portray the school in a neutral or faintly positive way is posted someone takes these down and reinstates the out of date. Some one has a profound grievance against this school and is using Wikipedia to express this spite

Current staff and pupils are blighted by this biased portrayal of one of Scotland's top performing state schools.

Please compare this school's page to other equivalent schools e.g. Williamwood High School. Please check editing history of the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott7117 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 6 November 2015 (UTC)


 * : I've put the article on my watchlist, and I'm happy to get involved as a mediator/uninvoled administrator. I will not be in a position to dictate the contents of the article, though I can advise on what good and bad practices are, and manage editing if necessary. There have only been 21 edits to the article over the course of this entire year, though I note there seems to have been a bit of longterm edit war going between individuals connected to the school and other parties. As an observer who knows little about the school, I'm inclined to believe that the current version of the article most certainly has issues, and seems to lean more towards the negative than is probably justified. However, I think it's best that you first review the Conflict of interest guideline, particularly WP:LUC. I would consider making a disclosure of your involvement, if any, with the school. Such as disclosure will not stop you editing the article, but will make it much more likely that editors accept that you are here to build an encyclopedia, rather than just to promote the school. Please note that such a disclosure is compulsory if you are receiving any sort of financial compensation for your edits e.g. you make edits to Wikipedia as part of your job. You are welcome to make such a disclosure here, and I'll add a note to the article's talk page. After that is settled, we can take matters further. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 20:26, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Lenzie Academy wiki page
Thank you for your opinion this is very helpful. I have no conflict of interest or decalaration to make. I am not paid to contribute to the page nor am I employed by the school or the local authority that governs the school. I am a parent of a pupil and was altered to the bias of the wiki page by other parents - I am just trying  to have this excellent school represented in a fair and balanced  way. For example with regard to academic achievement Lenzie Academy has been in the top 10% of Scottish schools for many years in terms of the academic attainment achieved by its pupils. In recent years there has been continued success, for example, in 2014 it was ranked 13th according to the Sunday Times Scottish School League Tables (1) (2). This builds upon the 19th position achieved in 2013 (3) (4) and the 16th position achieved in 2012 (5) (6). This demonstrates that the school is continuing to meet the needs of its pupils and indicates that the continued hard work of pupils, parents and staff is paying off. 1 = Sunday Times 23/11/14 2 = Education Scotland “Scottish Schools Online” 3 = Sunday Times 23/11/14 4 = Education Scotland “Scottish Schools Online” 5 = STV.TV/Scotland 6 = Education Scotland “Scottish Schools Online” I personally do not have the technical skills to effectively edit the page but I know an attempt was made to post this info on the page in 2014 but that it was taken down after just a few days. Any assistance would be gratefully received by parents and the current staff. None of the pupils currently at the school were present during most (if not all) of the controversies that are listed On the page, indeed neither were the staff as most of these issues occurred so long ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott7117 (talk • contribs) 22:24, 13 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for getting back to me, and for clarifying your relationship with the school. Please bear in mind that being a parent could potentially result in a conflict of interest, as would being a pupil or having any other association with the school, though I'm happy to let that matter rest for now.


 * On the issue of editing the page, while I could make edits for you, I think in the long-term it would be better to have more people feel comfortable editing the contents of the article. I would recommend reviewing Help:Editing, which will give you a crash course on editing articles. Contributing to Wikipedia gives a wider overview of contributing to the project. I think the best way I can help at the moment is to go through the article from top-to-bottom, then write-up some feedback, which will identify specific issues and potential solutions, and also provide more general guidance on how school articles are best written. I assessed school articles for WikiProject Schools for many years so I have plenty of experience in this area. I shall place my comments on the talk page at Talk:Lenzie Academy, which I think could do with more activity anyway. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 18:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Rebecca has a new IP
She's back under a new IP 166.171.57.172 and editing bios and in her usual style of altering dates of birth and not citing them. Plus her way of conduct via edit summaries is a clear quacking that it is her.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  12:37, 30 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for letting me know. She also appeared on my watchlist and I agree that it's obviously her. At the same time, she was playing games on her old IP as well. I may disable talk page access on IPs she uses if this continues. She must be using a proxy of some sort as her IPs are all over the place, so the blocks probably won't stop her, but they will slow her down. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 18:36, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I shall be voting shortly. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:35, 23 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes check.svg Done – voted. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:14, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks Chris for deleting the moved pages. I cannot even start to think what possessed the person to even move my own user space in the first place. Is there any chance of having it moved protected just in case they attempt again?  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  19:41, 5 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't know what he was thinking. I've move protected both your user page and user talk page, so it shouldn't happen again. I've left Tarkattack a note on his user page explaining why what he did was inappropriate. If he'd been an established user and hadn't immediately reversed the move, I would have considered imposing a block, but given that he deleted his userpage and is clearly still not very familiar with how things work here, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 20:00, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Happy adminship day
Wishing CT Cooper a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Tito Dutta (talk) 11:19, 3 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you, that's very kind. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 12:19, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Help decide the future of Wikimania


The Wikimedia Foundation is currently running a consultation on the value and planning process of Wikimania, and is open until 18 January 2016. The goals are to (1) build a shared understanding of the value of Wikimania to help guide conference planning and evaluation, and (2) gather broad community input on what new form(s) Wikimania could take (starting in 2018).

After reviewing the consultation, we'd like to hear your feedback on on this survey.

In addition, feel free to share any personal experiences you have had at at a Wikimedia movement conference, including Wikimania. We plan to compile and share back outcomes from this consultation in February.

With thanks,

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk), from Community Resources 22:01, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you, but I've already responded to the consultation via the survey. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:36, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for participating, CT. Apologies for the overlap in messaging-- I've been drawing from past conference attendees. I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 23:43, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Nomination
Hey,

I saw that you would be willing to nominate users to become an administrator. I'm fairly new to wikipedia, but have really been enjoying working on counter-vandalism. If you could nominate me, I'd really appreciate it.

Schuddeboomw (talk) 16:17, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your enthusiasm but becoming an administrator is a long and difficult process – to be successful at Requests for adminship (RfA), you'll need a substantial history of contributing to Wikipedia and a strong record of good judgement in contentious situations. For more information, I would suggest reviewing Administrators, What adminship is not, Advice for RfA candidates, and Guide to requests for adminship. I think for the time being you should simply continue editing and build-up experience. For example, was right to decline your speedy deletion nomination for Harkenbäk and your talk page comment will only serve to get you stuck in a hole. I would suggest reviewing the Criteria for speedy deletion more carefully – misusing the criteria is enough on its own to sink an RfA and rightly so, as once you have the delete button, you'll be able to carry out speedy deletions without anyone else reviewing them. Please remember that there is a difference between an article deserving deletion and it deserving speedy deletion – please consider other options such as Proposed deletion or Articles for deletion as well. I hope this feedback is helpful and happy editing. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 19:11, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for dealing with the AfD/redirect. I've never closed an AfD. Could you point me in the right direction for that? I should have been able to deal with that on my own! Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 22:03, 4 February 2016 (UTC)


 * You're welcome. WP:AFDCLOSE is the main instruction page, which I used today, as I hadn't closed an AfD in years! Deletion process covers the full procedure from nomination until closure. Most AfD closures are made by admins though there are situations where non-admin closures are potentially appropriate, such as with today's AfD – WP:NACD is the official Wikipedia guideline on this with Non-admin closure giving further details. I hope that helps. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:19, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It does. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 00:52, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Towards a New Wikimania results
Last December, I invited you to share your views on the value of Wikimedia conferences and the planning process of Wikimania. We have completed analysis of these results and have prepared this report summarizing your feedback and important changes for Wikimania starting in 2018 as an experiment. Feedback and comments are welcome at the discussion page. Thank you so much for your participation. I JethroBT (WMF), Community Resources, 22:47, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Tarkattack strikes again
He's replaced similar content on his user page again. This time for some fake "Indonesian Soccer Championship" which was "established" in 2005 and only features participants in Europe. Not quite a "unique" contest for Indonesian regions only.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  10:56, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for letting me know. Tarkattack has been given enough chances and I've now taken more decisive action against him. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:46, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * He is now engaging in sockpupperty. I received a notification telling me that had thanked me for this edit. New account created yesterday. The funny thing is, Tarkattack quacked about being known as Tarkspark on his own user page.  Wes Mouse   &#10002;  16:27, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * You're not the only one. Using the thanks tool while blocked is, strictly speaking, a form of block evasion, and he's clearly using it try and get attention, so I'll be blocking this account shortly. I'll give him some slack though and leave the block on his master account as it is. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 17:50, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


 * With respect to this user, please see the discussion at User talk:Bbb23. I have reblocked Tarkattack as a sockpuppet of another account blocked last May. Thanks ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:26, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I'll respond on Bbb23's talk page shortly. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 19:08, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Admin for editathon?
Hi, Just wondered if you would be open to acting as admin for an editathon event I'm hosting at the University of Edinburgh Tuesday to Thursday this week or be able to suggest someone else who might like to help in this regard? Just looking to make sure unnecessary deletions/reversions of articles don't take place so newbie articles can have best chance of life. Let me know anyway Cheers Stinglehammer (talk) 19:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi there! I can't guarantee that I'll always be online when the editathon is happening, but I'm happy to help out where I can. If there's any articles/user accounts in particular that need watching, then please let me know. I'm sure there are others who would be happy to help as well – I see you've already asked Harry; might also be interested. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:58, 15 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi, we'll be updating the event page on Wikimedia with the users as we get their signup details 2-4pm today along with the topics they decide to work on. The link to the event page is here: https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Creating_an_Open_Body_of_Knowledge_editathon_series If you can help us look after our fledgling articles this afternoon or on the Wednesday or Thursday sessions then great. I'd really appreciate the help. Cheers. Stinglehammer (talk) 13:07, 16 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Excellent. I'm active on the WMUK wiki so I'll be keeping an eye on the page. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 18:54, 16 February 2016 (UTC)


 * As it turned out we ran out of time today and a lot of good preparatory research & article creation work remain in the sandboxes. 3hrs went by SO quickly. Basic editing training went on tooo long so cutting down on editing training tomorrow (17th Feb: 10am to 5pm GMT) and the day after (18th Feb: 10am to 5pm GMT) to allow for more writing and editing. Returnees should also be able to improve on their sandboxed articles too. Hopeful for much more content tomorrow and Thurs. Cheers.Stinglehammer (talk) 22:51, 16 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Okay, thanks for the update. Unfortunately I won't be around tomorrow afternoon and early evening, though I will check-in during the morning. For Thursday though I should be around for most of the day. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 23:00, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you
Is like to say. Thank you for keeping me on task. I strayed away from the goal of Wikipedia and I'm very sorry I hope you can forgive me. Thanks! Spicy :) 22:06, 18 February 2016 (UTC) Spicy :) 22:06, 18 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by IAreggano (talk • contribs)


 * You're welcome. Ofcourse I can forgive you, as long as you don't do it again. By the way, as you appear to be using a custom signature, please ensure that it follows the guidelines. In particular, ensure that you have at least one link in your signature to either your user page, your user talk page, or your user contributions page. This is so people can easily see who you are when you comment on talk pages, per WP:SIGLINK. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:21, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Another misuse of user space
There's another user misusing their user space for some fake Eurovision-style contest. See here. I have warned them about it several times now, and feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  12:47, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, I've now noticed that he is ignoring you. I will look into and take appropriate action either late tonight or tomorrow. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:30, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I've given him one more chance to make amends himself by giving him a seven day amnesty. After that though. he'll have used all his chances. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 00:28, 6 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Looks like someone else took action and removed the content. I wonder if this "kid" is being watched by more of the community than I realised.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  00:30, 6 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I saw. We'll see if he re-adds the content going forward. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 00:35, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

You are welcome.
Dear User:CT Cooper. Thank you for taking care of the User talk:Sugar Bear pages. If you think that the whole set of pages should be blanked, or deleted, or what else, don't hesitate to proceed. For my part, I think that the whole site (including this set of pages or any other set of pages) should be maintained in order that our archiving bots don't fall down due to poor configuration creating unwanted loops. Moreover, understanding what occurred could be useful, and without microscope and tweezers, there is no real progress in science. In any case, you can help at User talk:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis. Best regards. Pldx1 (talk) 22:58, 8 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello, I appreciate your efforts and I agree that these pages should be maintained but this user is banned and is very unlikely to be coming back. His talk page should be blanked except for important notices and all archiving bots should be switched off on those pages – as far as I know, that has now happened. Occasional bot messages still land there but such messages can be pruned manually without too much difficulty. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:20, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

You've got mail

 * Thank you, I've got your message. I'll get back to you shortly. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:38, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I've responded. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 19:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Rebecca's back again?
I think is back again under a new. A bit weird that the edits are similar, I.E. removal of templates including BLPPROD's from young singers. Only this time they are not JESC, but Junior Turkvision. Highly suspicious if you ask me.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  23:33, 7 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, I think you're right, these edits match the signature behaviour of RebeccaTheAwesomeXD reasonably well. She hasn't edited from this range before, though the massive variation in previous IPs she's used seem to indicate that she's using proxies. This IP address has already been blocked by, but I've tagged the IP address to alert users in case she returns after the block expires. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 21:22, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

A question
Hello CT, I have been thinking about applying for administratorship for some time, and I was wondering if you would consider nominating me on the rfa page? Johnsmith2116 (talk) 10:37, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi John. I appreciate the offer to allow me to nominate you for adminship. Personally, from what I've seen so far, you have a good record of contributions and adminship should certainly be on the table for you. However, RfA is a hard and difficult process and it would not be responsible of me to nominate you if you've not got a good chance of passing. I think it was a good idea to put your name name down for the candidate poll, as although the results should not dictate whether you will run for adminship, they will give some indication of the likely outcome and the feedback could be very useful. For the time being, I think it would be best to allow more users to comment and work from there. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 17:46, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid recent events seem to indicate adminship is not for you. I'm not going to be offering a nomination and it is very unlikely that I will do so in the near future. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:18, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Genocide denial
Would you be able to take a look at the Genocide denial article? It may need a period of protection too? (Sorry to bother you with this again. Happy to be directed towards an admin noticeboard.) Cmeiqnj (talk) 09:23, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Never mind, another admin has responded on the talk page. Cmeiqnj (talk) 11:44, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * The stick seems to have been dropped for now. I am travelling at the moment so my visits to Wikipedia will be infrequent, so feel free to ask for another admin to assist where necessary. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 11:35, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Precious
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:22, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your kind thoughts. I really appreciate it. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 11:37, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Cenk Genocide
Hello CT - I just wrote a response to your comment on the Cenk Uygur talk page where you forbade the mention of the Armenian Genocide issue on his page. An entire section has been removed and is staying off the page at your insistence, even though it was all referenced, and a very simple, straightforward recounting of his views, touching on the controversy of it, and his most recent statement on the matter. There's nothing special about the section, except of course that there are people who don't want the Armenian Genocide mentioned, and that is not acceptable. I ask you to go back and instead of wading through the talk page, just read the section that was removed, look at the references, and decide for yourself if it should not be up as a reasonably well written and referenced Wikipedia text. I don't think there's anything controversial about what's in the section itself, other than it seems like one user would really like the article to not have this in there. If you don't think the real reason this is being debated is because of genocide denial/revisionism, then I disagree, and I think by trying to be above the fray, you are actually playing into the denial. If it makes any difference, I think there is a consensus on the talk page except for that one user. --RaffiKojian (talk) 03:29, 5 May 2016 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid I do not accept your description of the situation. Multiple users have raised concerns, including another admin who has reviewed similar material at Genocide denial. There is nothing close to a consensus on including the material and so it stays out until there is one. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 11:47, 7 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm afraid that if a person stating their view in 3rd party published opinion pieces and letters to the editor, and then changing their view on their own blog isn't enough evidence of their view, then something is broken on Wikipedia. It's beyond ridiculous, as this is by far the best possible representation we could have of someone's view.  --RaffiKojian (talk) 12:25, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2016
As a participant of WikiProject LGBT studies, you are invited to participate in the third annual Wiki Loves Pride campaign, which runs through the month of June. The purpose of the campaign is to create and improve content related to LGBT culture and history. How can you help?
 * Create or improve LGBT-related Wikipedia pages and showcase the results of your work here
 * Document local LGBT culture and history by taking pictures at pride events and uploading your images to Wikimedia Commons
 * Contribute to an LGBT-related task force at another Wikimedia project (Wikidata, Wikimedia Commons, Wikivoyage, etc.)

Looking for topics? The Tasks page, which you are welcome to update, offers some ideas and wanted articles.

This campaign is supported by the Wikimedia LGBT+ User Group, an officially recognized affiliate of the Wikimedia Foundation. The group's mission is to develop LGBT-related content across all Wikimedia projects, in all languages. Visit the affiliate's page at Meta-Wiki for more information, or follow Wikimedia LGBT+ on Facebook. Remember, Wiki Loves Pride is about creating and improving LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects, and content should have a neutral point of view. One does not need to identify as LGBT or any other gender or sexual minority to participate. This campaign is about adding accurate, reliable information to Wikipedia, plain and simple, and all are welcome! If you have any questions, please leave a message on the campaign's talk page.

Thanks, and happy editing! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 19:53, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Threats of revenge on my talk page
Chris, I've received, albeit in French, a threat of "revenge" and personal attacks from, via my talk page. I've posted a warning on his page, but I doubt they will ever get the message through to their thick skull. Are you able to intervene? Thanks.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  18:43, 8 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know. I wouldn't take their threat of revenge too seriously, but it is still unacceptable so I've left a further warning and will block them if this conduct continues. I suspect this is a WP:NOTHERE case but they'll get one more chance. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 22:14, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Ana kasparian
Ana Kasparian's name is misspelled in Armenian, it should be Անա Դավաճան Կասպարօղլու։ You can check with her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PeterKarajan (talk • contribs) 18:30, 18 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I neither know Ana Kasparian nor speak Armenian, but I do know that the comments you left were degrading and weren't going to improve the article, so were removed per policy with a message left on your talk page informing you of my action. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 11:53, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

toxic
Next time you want to remove information take the time to at least edit the article to include the references to how poisonous the unripe fruit is. I would much rather have a reference that would save peoples lifes than have an admin that wants to troll. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podophyllum — Preceding unsigned comment added by SGT-Craig (talk • contribs) 18:35, 6 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Firstly, we are not a dietary advice service and "saving people's lives" is not a function of Wikipedia. Your behaviour at Talk:Agenda 21 made clear to me that your edits required close scrutiny and I make no apologies for doing so as an administrator. Your material was removed for a very clear reason - it was a copyright violation as you had just copied the source word-for-word. I was under no obligation to re-add the material in another form - personally it looked unencyclopedic to me but I'll leave the article as it is for now. However, if the point has not been made clear already, if you add copyrighted material to Wikipedia again, you will blocked. Simple. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 11:32, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

When you read something that clearly shows a plants fruit in an unripe state to be a poison you remove it? You might want to rethink that rather than just hit delete. Wikipedia may not be a "dietary service" or a service to "save peoples lifes" but just a tad of common sense would go far here especially as a admin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SGT-Craig (talk • contribs) 14:20, 9 May 2016 (UTC)


 * It's unfortunate that "common sense" does not extend to understanding that it's inappropriate to copy other people's work then pass it off as your own. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 19:32, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

@Cooper - This might come as a shock but your going to have to use some common sense next time in your edits. You can not just haphazard make edits that might get people hurt just for the sake of it. With great admin power comes great responsibility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SGT-Craig (talk • contribs) 21:04, 24 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I hope you apply the same level of caution and courtesy to your future edits. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 19:45, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

@Cooper - Always cooper, I can't let admins just edit things and get people hurt. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SGT-Craig (talk • contribs) 15:56, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Kindness campaign.
Dear CT, I remain hopeful this does not mean you have decided to become less kind... (Only kidding, of course...) Please keep well and joyful. With kindest regards; Patrick. ツ Pdebee.(talk)(guestbook) 18:49, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you! You too. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 20:04, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * It's closer to a full retirement really – I may occasionally make an appearance to answer queries and that kind of thing and I'm never going to completely rule out returning to active editing at some point in the distant future, but other than that, this really is it for me. A variety of factors ultimately led me some time ago to reach the conclusion that it was time to move on. I've sat on it for a while and I haven't changed my mind. Now I'm actually doing it, I do feel rather sad, but I remain strong in the belief that I've made the right decision.


 * I really appreciate the barnstar – that's as kind a sendoff as anyone could give! Thank you again for your support! I do wish to leave on a high note and being reminded of my many contributions over the years is a good way to do that. I'm sure they will live on for a long time. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 19:37, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you! Your kindness is appreciated. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 16:33, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

No no, you can't leave!
Not when there is a 3RR case with sock allegations, in an area where you might have some knowledge. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 21:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I've handed in the admin tools so I can no longer take any direct action myself, but I'm still happy to comment on issues that concern my past actions or where my knowledge would be helpful. On this one, I appreciate the invitation, but I think you're handling it well. I don't see any clear evidence to link these accounts to – she has a distinct editing style which isn't apparent here. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 11:48, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Sorry to see you go
Hi Chris. I'm really sorry  to see you  go  but I realise it's a decision  we all  have to  make sooner or later. I'm fortunate that I had the opportunity  to meet you briefly in London and I  would like to thank you  for all your  support during  my pre-admin  days so long  ago, and especially for all your  hard work developing  the WP:WPSCH project and helping me get involved there. Take care, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:26, 1 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi there! Thank you for the kind thoughts. It is good to feel valued. My time with WikiProject Schools will remain among my happier Wikipedia memories – I got to work with many great people, yourself included, to make a real difference to the quality of school articles and to make the project into a success. It was a pleasure to finally get to meet you in person in London. I wish you and WikiProject Schools all the best going forward. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 12:05, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Your Country Needs You listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Your Country Needs You. Since you had some involvement with the Your Country Needs You redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Rob Sinden (talk) 13:22, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:16, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you! I do still appreciate the recognition. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 11:02, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


 * I will always appreciate the enormous work you did on WP:WPSCH, Chris, and sadly I'm going to have to retire from it too someday. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 11:44, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


 * You've done a very good job since I've left which I appreciate too, though I do understand that these things are very difficult to keep-up indefinitely, particularly when you've got few other hands to help you out. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 13:59, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Peace of mind
Hi I don't believe you know me, but I'm Tux, an editor at WikiProject Eurovision who joined after you retired. Anyhow, I understand that you know or knew Wes personally, and I was just hoping you could give me some peace of mind. His edits stopped pretty abruptly several months ago and I know that he has been going through some rough spots in life. Is he okay? I'd be grateful if you could let me and the other editors at the project know, 'cause I do worry for him. That being said, I fully understand if you would prefer not to disclose anything of a personal nature.

On a side note, thanks for all the work you did do on the project back in the day. The place feels a lot more quiet with both of you guys gone. Kindest regards. — <font color="black" face="Ubuntu">Tuxipεdia <font face="Ubuntu">( talk ) 09:16, 14 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the kind thoughts. We're not in contact anymore but from what I can gather he's okay and he's either just taking a long break from Wikipedia or has also moved on. You may want to leave a message directly on his talk page to see if he responds. If not, I wouldn't worry about it. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 11:55, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Precious three years!
Miss you --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:18, 5 May 2018 (UTC)


 * You're very kind. It's always nice to be reminded that my contributions were appreciated and still are by some, so thank you. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 12:40, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
miss you --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:59, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


 * You're very kind Gerda. I have to admit I find it quite shocking that it's already been nearly three years since I left. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 12:30, 4 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Kindness, I try, and what's three years? Nice that you still watch. I came the wrong day ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:04, 5 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Nearly three years since I left Wikipedia. I don't really watch anything on Wikipedia or other projects any more but it does still notify me via e-mail if anyone leaves a message on my talk page, which is a very occasional thing now. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 14:09, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
miss you, - good wishes for what you do now! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:15, 5 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks Gerda! Well remembered! CT Cooper · &#32;talk 11:29, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Eurovision Song Contest
The Eurovision Song Contest, which you have looked after now and again, has been listed as a Good Article. Though retired, I'd like to thank you for your contributions. SilkTork (talk) 15:10, 1 April 2021 (UTC)


 * : Thank you for the acknowledgement, it is very much appreciated. One of the reasons I left Wikipedia was because I was tired of being looked down upon for not having a long list of good and featured articles and for not being accepted as a contributor by some despite the huge amount of work I actually did. I'm glad that there are people such as yourself in the community which think differently. Regardless, I wish to congratulate for his hard work in getting the article to good article status. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 15:24, 1 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I know how you feel. Being acknowledged for the work one does helps the motivation. Being ignored leads to people getting disillusioned and leaving. Come back and do some more work on Eurovision material. Sims2aholic8 is a great person to work with. SilkTork (talk) 15:47, 1 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for understanding. I may return to editing one day, as it's not events related to that which really pushed me out of the Wikimedia world, but Foundation/Meta/chapter stuff which I'm unlikely to ever go near again. I've had an occasional look on events since I left and little has happened to indicate that things have changed, but sadly a great deal has happened to indicate they haven't. In the meantime, I'm focused on other things and trying to get my life back together on the back of a pandemic and some longstanding personal matters, but who knows what the future holds. CT Cooper · &#32;talk 18:58, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:49, 5 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you! :) CT Cooper · &#32;talk 12:02, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

"Groom (Disambiguation)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Groom (Disambiguation) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 24 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 16:28, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Future-Class Eurovision articles


A tag has been placed on Category:Future-Class Eurovision articles indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. ✗ plicit  12:37, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Shalom! CT Cooper · &#32;talk 19:59, 5 December 2023 (UTC)