User talk:Tiptoety/Archive 12

Question
Hello. I was wondering, do you think I'm ready for rollback?-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 02:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Looking into it. Tiptoety  talk 03:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * At this time I am going to have to deny your request. I encourage you to keep up the great work you are doing, but seeing as it was removed only a few weeks ago I do not feel comfortable giving it back. Might I recommend that you further discusses this with the admin who removed it? Tiptoety  talk 03:16, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It has been discussed a few weeks ago. They told me to wait a littlt while so I decided to let you review my request. Any comments?-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 03:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I simply feel that at this time I know too little to adequately understand why it was removed, and no little other than the reason given in the logs. If you discuss it with User:Friday, he may be happy to give it back. I am just in no mood to wheel war over it. Tiptoety  talk 03:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I will talk to him/her. Thanks. Also, I trust that your a good admin. I see you almost all over the place.-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 03:29, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I just think it would be best to talk to him first so I dont get myself or you in any hot water. You know what I mean? Tiptoety  talk 03:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Message

 * Hi. Thank you for the lovely barnstar, it feels nice to be recognized for your work sometimes. But know that it was not just me and a few other users that contributed to hopefully saving a life but you as well and for that I must give you a pat on the back: "good job". Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 15:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Wisdom89 3
Hiya Tiptoey. Per your previous input at admin coaching, just to let you know the above is up if you wish to co-nom. Pedro : Chat  22:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Give me a sec. I still want to! Tiptoety  talk 22:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Tiptoety  talk 22:52, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. I'll remove it then.   weburiedoursecrets  inthegarden  15:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll go and do that. =D   weburiedoursecrets  inthegarden  15:04, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Removed! Apologies, didn't mean to step on your tiptoes ;-) Sorry that joke was awful! TheProf - T / C 16:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, okay then. :) I'm currently searching through contributions for my new signature diff nom. Rudget  17:26, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Recommended administrators
Hello, i have created a section on my userpage for other users to find administrators recommended by me. I would like you to add yourself to the list so it can have your unique signature! Please use to add yourself, as this will omit the date. If you do not wish to be on the list, thats okay! I respect the choice of every administrator/user on wikipedia. Have a nice day :-) TheProf - T / C 20:19, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Tiptoety  talk 04:08, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Request
Can you please change the first word from The to A on TFAempty. It really dosent make any sense, "The featured article".... What? "A featured article" sounds better. Nobody is responding on the talk page and its pissing me off.  R k O r  T o  N  21:12, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I cant really make a change like that without a consensus, I think there was a prior decission to have it the way it currently reads. You could always start a thread at WP:AN. Tiptoety  talk 04:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Juxtaposition COTW
Howdy Ho WikiProject Oregon! Time for another installment of Collaboration of the Week. The last few weeks we’ve knocked out quite a few articles of our current state legislators, and even a few former ones too. Great job to all those who helped make it happen. On a related note, we have had several DYKs from this and now have 53 DYKs so far this year (not counting multiples), less than four full months into the year. Last year we had a total of 83 DYKs for the entire year, and 7 combined for 2006 & 2005. So we are well on our way to another record year. Each time an article makes it to the main page as a DYK it will typically get an extra 1000 hits, which is usually far more than the typical 100 hits per month most minor articles receive. With that said, this week we have two requests, Portland Lumberjax and Silicon Forest. As always, to opt out, opt in, or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Aboutmovies (talk) 03:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Adoption Offer
Hello. I just wanted ask if your adopting. If you are, may I be your adoptee? Why? Becuase I have been told many times that I am inexperienced and I should consider adoption to learn more. For more info about me, check the following: Thanks.-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 03:33, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I am not currently taking any new adoptee's. I apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you. Tiptoety  talk 04:23, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I thought that you would be a great adopter, considering that you have your own program. I have been told many times to be adopted since I'm so inexperienced. Are you sure? Can't you please take one more? I would really appreciate it.-- RyRy5  ( talk ) 00:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Block
This user had not edited after their final warning, and the reporting user has a habit of issuing multiple warnings at the same time, without giving the account a chance to stop. Can you please review. Thanks TigerShark (talk) 19:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Not that I'm Tiptoety, but my two cents - vandal only account, warned by three different users, timestamps link up - no reason not to block. Tan   |   39  19:16, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * What definition of "vandalism only account" are you using? The user had made a total of 3 edits in the space of 2 minutes and had not edited past the final warning. TigerShark (talk) 19:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I am tempted to keep the account blocked, looks like they are here for one reason to me. But... it does appear they where not given a chance to correct their disruptive behavior and for that reason would not care if you went ahead and unblocked (with a nice "dont do it again/welcome" message) :-) Tiptoety  talk 19:18, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I will go ahead an unblock. Cheers TigerShark (talk) 19:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia needs to stop being friendly to the vandals. Tiptoety was right to block that user and the user should stay blocked! (IMHO) TheProf - T / C 19:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Prof there are good reasons for giving "vandals" a chance, which the community have arrived at after significant discussion and experience. I am the last person to say that we should be "soft", but indefinitely blocking users after 3 edits is rarely constructive in the long run. Consider that the user will only be autoblocked for 24 hours anyway, less if they are using a dynamic IP, and many users may be caught in the autoblock too. When they do return they will now be annoyed, and far less likely to get over the initial fun of vandalism and become a constructive user. TigerShark (talk) 19:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, either way to account has once again been blocked. Looks like they where not here to contribute constructively after all, what a shame... Tiptoety  talk 21:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 *  I'm resisting the temptation to say "I told you so!" ;-)  Have a nice night! :-) TheProf - T / C 21:50, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

For learning purposes
Hi Tiptoety, I saw username blocks etc on Usertalk:Sk8ter_shoes and was wondering what about that name means it should be changed. This is for my education – I don't always get stuff. Thanks, Julia Rossi (talk) 04:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well the original account name was Catolog of buggery, and it appeared they where creating promotional pages in relation to their username (which violates our username policy). So another admin blocked for that reason, but because the user is new and was unaware of all of our mountains of confusing policies requested a unblock and I assumed good faith and seeing as he was not disruptive allowed him to be unblocked so that he could make a username request. He did, and look we now have a constructive editor. Hope that answers your questions, cheers, Tiptoety  talk 04:23, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks – couldn't be more clear. Good news as well. : ) Julia Rossi (talk) 08:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Comment
Please comment on my recent message about adoption. Thanks.-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 04:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Kurt
I closed the discussion before I could say something I'd regret. By the way, I see your IRC discussion up the page: I suppose I'll have to break down and set it up, since it would have been useful in getting someone's attention today. I'm not especially fond of IRC though.  Acroterion  (talk)  04:10, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yea, probably best that I stay away from that thread too. I broke down and got IRC for the same reason, never had a use for it before. We will see, I am liking it alright so far. Tiptoety  talk 04:15, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Did you request a cloak?  Acroterion  (talk)  04:18, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I did. Tiptoety  talk 04:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Apparently it wasn't issued or didn't take as I could see your hostname: I was similarly uncloaked.  Acroterion  (talk)  23:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I guess there is a waiting list to get a cloak now, it appears it is about a week. Tiptoety  talk 23:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Me!!!!
Heya, please go on IRC :D :P ! Steve Crossin  (talk)   (anon talk)  15:12, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey Steve, I am not currently on a computer that has an IRC client or would even allow me to download one. Sorry, Tiptoety  talk 15:13, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Use mibbit. :) Steve Crossin   (talk)   (anon talk)  15:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protection
Hi Tiptoety, could you please indef semi-protect my userpage? There is no need for the page to be editable by IP's. Cheers! TheProf - T / C 19:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Sorry if i'm being annoying, but could you also semi-protect these sub-pages aswell?


 * User:TheProf07/Tasks
 * User:TheProf07/Recommended
 * User:TheProf07/Userbox
 * User:TheProf07/Awards
 * User:TheProf07/Funny

The reason i've left my sandbox off, is because i'd prefer vandals to use that. Better than them using an article :-) Cheers! TheProf - T / C 21:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ And do not think you are annoying me, I was given the tools to serve the community, and you are part of that community. Let me know if there is any other way I may be of assistance. Tiptoety  talk 21:39, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I think thats it (for now!), and i think this should some up my thanks;


 * Thank you very much. Tiptoety  talk 21:48, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Steve Crossin Adoption Offer
He/She was asked for him/her to adopt me. I noticed that the user was one of your adoptees. May I have your opinion on him? Also, do you think he can run his program (almost) like you? Oh, and when he was your adoptee, was he online often?-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 00:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * He is one of the best users I have come to know here at en.wiki, and appears to be very dedicated. I think he would make a wonderful adopter, and recommended you to him. He seems to be online quite often. Tiptoety  talk 00:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll consider accepting his offer. Also, if your not busy in some occasions, can you just check and see how he and I are doing? I'm just a little concerned that he has only been here 2 weeks later than me. But for what you said, I feel confident. But still, do you mind checking on me on your free time (although admins are always busy)?-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 00:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I would be willing to to check in every once and a while, but have confidence he will do just fine. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 00:20, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/RyRy5
Please check and see my contribs. Thanks.-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 03:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * All looks fine, one thing I noticed is that you were generally using uw-delete far too often, even when the user did not really delete content but instead clearly vandalize, let here. I mean, in the long run a waring is a warning, but sometimes being more specific helps. Keep up the good work. Tiptoety  talk 03:16, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Understood. But if a user blanks a section, do I use uw-delete?-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 03:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep. Tiptoety  talk 03:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

BTW, do you think that Jackie Robinson is ready for WP:GA. I nominated it 2 weeks ago but got no responce yet. I would like to see if I should put it on hold. Thanks.-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 03:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Users leaving Wikipedia
I haven't got any knock knock jokes but maybe you can get in touch with the Clown. Seriously though what do you think of TheProf07's final comments that there are too many admins that assume bad faith and the policy at the moment only helps the vandals? And then Maxim having enough of the project and another blaming of the admins? What are your suggestions to make the project better, does the RFA process need a carve up or more scrunity? I think they go through enough already! You've been on wikipedia nearly a year and an admin for nearly 2 months what do you think? Say maybe after one year you think you will have enough as well? Maybe im asking the wrong person, maybe someone who has been here a long time and see if they have the same dedication and motivation as they did when they first started. I dont know, just your suggestions thats all. Thanks Roadrunnerz45 (talk) 09:41, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

RPP
I noticed that you declined my request to salt LALALALALA, can I ask why? Honestly, there will never be a page called LALALALALA that won't get deleted, so why not salt it?  D u s t i complain/compliment 19:04, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Because pages are not protected preemptively. There has only been two deletions, and no real signs of abuse, and likewise you never know when an article might be actually created using that name, I mean Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg, and Donaudampfschiffahrtselektrizitätenhauptbetriebswerkbauunterbeamtengesellschaft have a really long strange name, but it is still a good article. Tiptoety  talk 22:54, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
I see that you denied "for the time being" my request for rollback. Now, by for the time being, are you waiting on the admin who I have tried to contact? Undeath (talk) 07:33, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. If you are unable to get a hold of them by their talk page, maybe try emailing them. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 13:52, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Chris19910 and rollback
Hi there Tiptoety. Just a courtesy call to let you know that I have revoked User:Chris19910's rollback access in the light of his recent contribution history and the concerns raised about his editing by several admins on his talk page. He has been using rollback excessively and inappropriately in both mainspace and randomly on other peoples talk pages as well and has ignored all attempts to rein in his behaviour. Hope this is OK. Kind regards, nancy  (talk) 08:10, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, thanks for leaving me a message. I have no issues with his rollback being removed, if he is blatantly abusing the tool along with disregarding concerns raised on his talk page, then it needs to be removed. Thanks, Tiptoety  talk 13:51, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Co-Adoption
Hello. Steve has been doing a great job so far. But can you co-adopt me? Of course I will ask Steve my major questions most of the time. But as co-adopter, I would like you to do the minor stuff since I know your busy. Or mybe I can ask you questions when Steve's off to work. Accept?-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 14:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Glad to hear that! I will have to decline though, as I simply am not interested in having any more adoptees, and has nothing to do with you. I will how ever be happy to answer questions from time to time as you need. Please understand that I am very busy currently and do not have the time I would like to commit to a users adoption (even being it co-adoption). Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 16:34, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand. Thanks anyway. And sure, I will ask you some questions from time to time, but mostly when Steve's offline. Well, do you know anybody with an adoption program similar to yours besides Steve's?-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 16:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your understanding. Actually, myself, Steve and Hersfold all use the same adoption program (Steve and mine are the exact same, while Hersfold's is a bit different), but he may be someone to ask. Cheers as always, Tiptoety  talk 18:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look at User:Hersfold's program. I may consider that user co-adopting me. Cheers.-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 18:48, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Policy and guideline knowledge
Regarding your comments at Pete's RFA, keep your vote, but I'd like to point out some issues regarding WP:NOTE (or as encompassed by WP:BIO/WP:CORP) from articles you have started, for instance Terry Schrunk & Gresham Police Department. With both, neither is entitled to an automatic waiver, and neither one when started had independent, substantial coverage in WP:RS that demonstrated notability. Mayors of cities do not get a free pass (state legislators do), they need substantial coverage in RS. With Schrunk neither source you used gives substantial coverage, and neither qualifies as a RS. With GPD, the sole source is from the city, which means it is not independent of the source, thus it cannot be used to establish notability (ditto with all but one source for Multnomah County Sheriff's Office). Every notability guideline requires that sources be used to demonstrate notability. This does not mean they are not notable, just that these articles do not assert notability per the guidelines, and as such are subject to deletion. Please take this into consideration with your comments at the RFA as you are now an admin, specifically regarding deletion and the strong ties between the notability guidelines and deletion process. Notability is one of the few issues that cannot be overcome in a deletion debate simply by cleaning up the article, copyvio would be another. Basically, admins obviously do not need to be familiar with every single policy/guideline to function effectively. Aboutmovies (talk) 21:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Thanks for supporting my recent request for adminship which was successful with 89 supports, 0 opposes, and 2 neutrals. Unfortunately all I can offer is this lame text thanks rather than some fancy-smancy thank-you spam template thingy. I was very pleased to receive such strong support and to hear so many nice comments from editors whom I respect. I’ll do my best with the tools, and if you ever see me going astray don’t hesitate to drop a note on my talk page. Thanks again for your support!--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 01:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

block
Hello. Please block my account for a time of indefinite too. I'm gonna stop editing the Wikipedia. Thanks. Johan Hager (talk) 12:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * According to WP:SELFBLOCK (a section of the blocking policy) I am unable to fulfill that request, I am however able to blank and full-protect your talk page if you wish, or if you are making a choice to vanish, I am able to delete your talk page. Tiptoety  talk 12:24, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * If you wish to stop editing, the easiest way is just not to log again. That way, if you ever want to start editing again, you just need to log back :) -- lucasbfr  talk 12:39, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Turn 2 Foundation
I'm planning to make it a DYK so I would like your utmost help and opinions. Thanks.-- RyRy5 ( talk ) 18:53, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah
I slipped up there I must admit, I saw caps and the fact that it wasn't the first edit of that style that he he put on the article, and if there was a content dispute he would have stopped trying to make changes to the article. None the less, my bad.-- Kerotan Leave Me a Message  Have  a nice day :) 23:53, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, in regards to the deleted article, it appears to just be a mistake and there is no real harm done. In regards to the other article, I would still continue to put in a edit summary even if the user you are reverting continues because otherwise it can appear to be a edit war. Once you have reverted leave messages on the users (or IP's) talk page and if they continue after a few warnings (making sure they disruptively edit after some sort of final warning mind you) then report to WP:AIV as such, if it is a large content dispute WP:ANI or WP:MEDCAB would be a better place. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 23:56, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Y am I blocked?
Why did you block me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.144.91.109 (talk) 13:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You where blocked because of attacks like this and vandalism like this. Please understand that this is may be a shared IP, shared by multiple users, and as such you may have not been the user who made those edits listed above, though someone from this IP address did. My recommendation to you is to create a account. Tiptoety  talk 14:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Archiving
Thanks for your note, I will archive the whole thing in a couple of days. I'm just waiting until May Day for the hell of it. It won't get so large in the future, don't worry.--Bigtimepeace | talk | contribs 19:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Okey Dokey, :D Tiptoety  talk 19:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Puppygriff's
I had just speedy tagged that article, but upon inspection, it appears it was an in-universe article, not pure vandalism. Might be a speedy on other grounds, but I wanted to let you it might not be vandalism. Best, -- B figura (talk) 22:50, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It appeared to be a hoax to me as none of the content was cited and the idea seemed somewhat far fetched (with falls under G3-vandalism), but if I am wrong I thank you for pointing it out. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 22:53, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Bot
Bot is a clear violation of the username policy. There is really nothing to be discussed. The block notice explains why, directs them to read the policy, and then on how to create a new username. Not much for me to do. KnightLago (talk) 19:39, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Hm, I guess we differ in opinions there. Why can we not extend them at least a little bit of good faith and not be bitey? How are they to know they are in violation, and how do we know they are unwilling to change it if we ask? Other users that have bot in their username have not been blocked, and I think that showing a little good faith can go a long way, take a look at this. Tiptoety  talk 16:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)


 * This is a long standing part of the username policy and is enforced with regularity. The block message explains to them that they can change their name or make a new account, I don't think it is bitey at all. You can however suggest change at WT:Username if you like. undefinedUntil  16:59, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank'ee
...for deleting my U1 page. As a token of appreciaion, have a joke I made up in elementary school: What do you call a pirate's disagreement? ... An ARRRgument!  21655  ταλκ / 01ҁ 18:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * :D You are very welcome, and thanks for the laugh! Tiptoety  talk 22:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

The battle against Editor652
I really don't understand your declining protection for Ethnic groups in Central America. It was vandalized at 13:42 today, less than 2 hours after its semi-protection expired. Prior to that, it has been vandalized by anonymous IPs at 03:45, 28 April 2008, 02:30, 28 April 2008, 20:51, 27 April 2008, 20:45, 27 April 2008, 00:15, 25 April 2008 (newly created user, specifically created to perform this vandalism), 23:54, 24 April 2008 (ditto), 06:07, 22 April 2008 (ditto), 02:04, 22 April 2008, etc. There hasn't been a valid edit to the article at all since December 2007. The last 300 edits have been doing and undoing the exact same piece of vandalism. One article is bad enough, but spread across the four: (Ethnic groups in Central America, Demographics of Honduras, Honduras, Afro-Latin American ), that's a lot of vandalism to fight individually.Kww (talk) 16:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It was simply do to the fact that there was only one disruptive edit since the protection has expired, and being that there is no justification to protect the article. Who knows, maybe the protection made some of the regular disruptive IP's move on and away from vandalizing the article in question, and until there is enough evidence to prove otherwise the article will remain unprotected. If you think my actions are not the right ones, you are more than welcome to relist your request at WP:RFPP. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 18:17, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm...I guess I was unaware that all the vandalism to those articles came is all from a sock farm. I am talking with the admin who protected the articles. Thanks for pointing that out. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 18:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Saw your comments there. Editor652 and his sock drawer seem to have a personal obsession with this topic, not a desire to vandalize Wikipedia in general. He edits articles about South American airports as well, and, so far as I can tell, does so responsibly and accurately. The historical background is that the Honduran government is guilty of census underreporting, and has tweaked the definition of "black" so that not many citizens will qualify. That puts us into a WP:V problem, because we suspect the "true" number is higher than the "verifiable" number. Multiple editors have tried to find a reliable number that is larger than the 150K quoted in the article, and worked constructively with Editor652 when he edited in that persona. None of us could find a source, even though we could understand his point. Ultimately, he began just inserting personal best guesses into the article, and got blocked for it. He resurrected himself as Honduran72, MTA25, MTA254, various anonymous IPs, and continued. That means he is now blocked for block evasion, and, whether he is personally right or wrong, can't edit.Kww (talk) 18:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know, I was unaware about the history behind all of this, and it substantially changes my opinion in regards the my declining protection. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 21:01, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * One more question ... did you not see that the four reports were grouped together? My original report was
 * long term semi-protection Target of statistics corruption since December, 2007. began corrupting the numbers. After he was blocked, his sock,  took up the charge, followed by  and . Now, he just uses anonymous socks. Articles were recently semi-protected for a 3-day interval, and corruption began again shortly after the semi-protection expired. Please ... long term. 90 days or so.
 * I notice that you declined the first three and didn't process the fourth. How could I have written the report better so that it would have been taken care of at RFPP?Kww (talk) 21:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I did not notice they where grouped together, though I did notice that the vandalism appeared to be the same on all three of the articles I looked at. Maybe you should have grouped them together under one heading, then in the reason for request just say: "I am also request protection of these articles as well as they are being vandalized by the same abusive account as this one (reffering to the original article you are request protection for). Then list the other articles you are request protection for. I do not think there is a need for each of them to have their own heading, and actually I have seen it done the way I just described multiple times. Hope that helps, Tiptoety  talk 22:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Locking CoM
I think my comment of the request for protection request was caught up in your edit:
 * I would prefer that before such protection be placed, that the article be set back to the consensus page. The user used his 3RR for the fourth day in a row before gaming the system by asking RPP to lock his version in place. If it is to be locked, I would ask that we not reward this behavior, and dispute lock it into the previous version.

Could I trouble you t revise your protection so as to reflect the edit, and not reward an edit warrior? - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  18:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like we got a edit conflict there. Let me ask some other admins. Tiptoety  talk 18:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * /me gives Tiptoety a cookie for having the wisdom to seek a sanity check. [[Image:SMirC-beam.svg|22px]] east. 718 at 19:01, May 1, 2008

WikiProject Law Enforcement Barnstar Proposal Poll
 Hello there ,

We here at Wikiproject Law Enforcement are currently in the process of deciding wither or not to make this WikiProject Law Enforcement's official Barnstar award. Being that you are a member of Wikiproject Law Enforcement, we are humbly asking you to voice your opinion here about our new Barnstar.

Thank You and All the Best, Mifter (talk) 20:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

--Mifter (talk) 20:47, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay then....
Knock knock...
 * Who's there? Tiptoety  talk 23:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Norma Lee.
 * Norma Lee who? Tiptoety  talk 23:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Normalee I don't go knocking on doors, but do you want to buy a set of encyclopedias? Joelster (talk) 23:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * :D Tiptoety  talk 23:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Hope it helps to liven up your talk page. Joelster (talk) 23:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I always appreciate a good laugh. Tiptoety  talk 23:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

With regards to your block of
If the problem was communication with the user wouldn't it be simple enough to bypass the titleblacklist and create their talkpage for them?--VectorPotential Talk 00:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * titleblacklist had nothing to do with it really. Tiptoety  talk 00:11, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:U was changed some time ago to allow for non-latin usernames.--VectorPotential Talk 00:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The glyph is a symbol, not a character. It should be blocked like ☺ would be blocked.  Nakon  00:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Agree. KnightLago (talk) 00:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Re Calton - Thanks
Calton, I went ahead and cleaned up the mess you made


 * Whew! Thanks. Back when we were dealing with the template I removed well over 100 of Calton's taggings of non-indef blocked users (out of well over 500 user pages he'd tagged).  What a pain it was.  Did you use a particular tool by the way?  When I did it, I used AWB to find and edit but had to manually check the block status in my regular browser.  Is there any automated tool that allows checking block status?--Doug.(talk • contribs) 00:47, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I wish, I had to do it all by hand. Tiptoety  talk 00:52, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Sleeper accounts
What do you mean, sleeper accounts? Bob the Wikipedian, the Tree of Life WikiDragon (talk) 02:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sleeper accounts are usually created (in great numbers) by a troll or a sockpuppetter for the sole purpose of not being used until either (1)their main account or IP has besomed blocked, or more common (2)until the account has been auto-confirmed allowing them to edit semi-protected pages. Often sleeper accounts will go unused for years. Hope that helps, Tiptoety  talk 02:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That's an interesting strategy on their part. Yes, it definitely makes sense.  Hopefully there won't be any of those... Bob the Wikipedian, the Tree of Life WikiDragon (talk) 01:26, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

New Project
Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 02:27, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Rollback
Thanks. Yeah, I've learned that lesson. Unfortunately, the blocklog doesn't include commentary as that last block was done for fairness of the situation, even though the reverts were in good faith. I had two Admins actively discussing whether I should get it. I since decided not to put myself in that position again. I realize how easily even a simple "undo" button can be abused, so I'll probably go light on the "rollback" feature. Thanks again for the extra vote of confidence, I'll try not to let anyone down.  BIGNOLE     (Contact me)  04:13, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You are welcome, please tread carefully. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 04:15, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Re: Blocking
Thanks for that, it's been a while and I've had a long night. I see you went ahead and resolved it and blocked for the legal threat. Thanks again. ZsinjTalk 05:22, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
 * No worries, I assumed something like that. Thanks for writing back! Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 15:11, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Kakofonous
Hi Tiptoey. Sorry about the duplicate vote at the above RfA. I assure you it was pure carelessness with no malicious intent. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 20:49, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey. I in no way thought you intentions where by any means malicious, and instead I thought you just made a simple mistake and one I have made myself. Cheers, Tiptoety  talk 00:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it is a bit embarrasing though :) -- Mattinbgn\talk 00:38, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh well, it happens to the best of us. :) Tiptoety  talk 00:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Cinco de COTW
Greetings once again from the Collaboration of the Week at WikiProject Oregon. Thank you to those who helped out with the last set of articles. This week we have the lone Stub class article left in the Top importance classification, Flag of Oregon, and by request, Detroit Lake. Help where you can, if you can. To opt out of these messages, leave your name here. Adios. Aboutmovies (talk) 22:08, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * Why thank you my friend. Tiptoety  talk 01:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Socking
I have thousands of socks, all of them abusive, and I don't ever intend to stop socking. I also rather dislike Jehochman. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathan Howarth (talk • contribs) 10:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Odd...possibly a compromised account? Bob the Wikipedian, the Tree of Life WikiDragon (talk) 13:20, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Compromised? No, just a troll. Tiptoety  talk 22:17, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for protecting the Kodomo no Jikan article. I came across it last night when I was checking over the new users, as I sometimes do, and that thing was turning into one HELL of a nightmare. I don't condone that show or its subject matter, but the vandalism was becoming beyond stupid. I recommend, however, a longer protection than just 72 hours... Just a thought! --InDeBiz1 (talk) 23:20, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You are welcome. Lets see if the 72 hour protection works first. Tiptoety  talk 23:27, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Paper Mario Section
There are too many duplicates in that section and needs to be shortened. --Jhuhn (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 02:32, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, but that does not mean you can just blank half of the article. If you feel that there is an issue with the section than take it up on the articles talk page, and when you do choose to remove the duplicate information make sure to say why you are removing that content in the edit summary. Tiptoety  talk 02:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Booo!!!
Boooo!!!! --InDeBiz1 (talk) 02:39, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I will loose count if I dont put it back. :D Tiptoety  talk 02:40, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I know, just raising a little hell. Cheers!  --InDeBiz1 (talk) 02:41, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * :P, already have plenty of that on my talk page tonight. :D Tiptoety  talk 02:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC)