User talk:Toddst1/Archive 9

Precious again
  brevity

Thank you for quality articles, biographies, buildings, Murder of James Craig Anderson, for teaching, for your "willingness to help out editors in difficult and thankless situations", for, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian (15 May 2009, 22 June 2009)!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:25, 5 December 2013 (UTC) A year ago, you were the 683rd recipient of my  Pumpkin Sky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:38, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Sorry to see that you are gone
RIP (Toddst1 KIA in the battle against the Double Standard)  King of Nothing (talk) 18:33, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:30, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

I miss you.
You really had spunk. :(

SupremeRulerGFG (talk) 16:35, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Gravin Kumar
Hi, Regarding the page for Gavin Kumar - do not remove PROD templates from pages you start. If a user does this, they will be reverted. To read more on this, see Template:Proposed deletion. Curro2 (talk) 03:42, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * False. Have you read the link you quoted? It says, "Any editor (including the article's creator) may object to the deletion by simply removing the tag; this action permanently cancels the proposed deletion via PROD." Elizium23 (talk) 03:53, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Beyond that, not only did I NOT start the page, I nominated it for speedy deletion ! Toddst1 (talk) 13:52, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Wrong. This was a straight forward case of speedily deleting an article. If you continue to Wikistalk me, randomly reverting my edits as you did to Nadia Murad and Turkish philosophy, I will report the behavior to WP:ANI. Curro2 (talk) 17:34, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Anyone making edits outside of policy as you are doing is subject to reversion - that's not Wp:HOUNDing. Hounding is when someone is followed in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work Toddst1 (talk) 01:02, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You have been warned, you have indicated here that you intend to violate more Wikipedia policies. If I come across you stalking me again, I will report you and you will be blocked. Instead of trying to justify bad behavior, why not step back and read about the deletion process? There's very little to learn. Curro2 (talk) 03:56, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You've completely mischaracterized my actions and it seems misunderstood your own actions on Gravin Kumar. You've told me that I need to learn about the deletion process.   You've threatened to have me blocked for being a stalker.
 * I don't believe that your contributions in general appear to be made with a good grasp of our policies nor interactions with other editors of the standard expected here. I don't see anything good coming of further interactions with you and  I'll politely ask you to move along and focus your edits elsewhere.    Toddst1 (talk) 20:16, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Fred W. Glover page
Hello, thank you for your list of reasons why there may be concerns with my entries on Fred W. Glover's page. However, the concerns don't apply as far as I can tell. I've done careful research and all the articles and topics are cited to the books or journals they come from, and the phrasing is impartial. What then is my recourse for replacing the content on the page without it being summarily pulled down again? Yes, I am a newbie here -- so, again, thank you for your patience. I AM related to Fred, but the content contains no opinions, it states the facts and cites sources. I'm absolutely open for content to be removed or edited which is in anyway partial. However it is quite frustrating to spend hours on a project and have it all disappear without recourse. I welcome your advice and guidance. Thanks, Dana Joan Reynolds (talk) 00:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC) Dana Joan Reynolds
 * What you wrote appears to be a publicity piece for your client. It comes nowhere near the standard of WP:NPOV and your edits do not conform to the WP:MOS.   If you're here to build an encyclopedia, perhaps you should try editing subjects that you don't have a connection to.     Attempts to use Wikipedia for promotion are not appropriate.  Toddst1 (talk) 15:38, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your guidance, Todd. Please help me understand how I might list an individual's accomplishments which are historically important in the field of operations research without sounding like 'publicity'? It is important work. Simply stating the facts of it are indeed impressive, as are the entries of many people who have impacted science and industry. How is this different? Can we please go through this point by point and designate which posts are violations and permit those which are historically accurate? This seems like a reasonable request instead of summarily pulling it all down in a blanket assessment without considering the actual content. Please help me find an appropriate way to move forward. Also, Fred is not my client, if it matters. I am not being paid. I am trying to bring important work to light. Also, I am curious how one might post content one is not connected to? I'm not being facetious. I really don't understand. I have reviewed my content for NPOV as you recommend, and I would like for you to point out examples within the work I posted. I will also be happy to edit per the MOS, but am reluctant to do so without assurances that the WIP will not be pulled. Thanks again for your kind consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dana Joan Reynolds (talk • contribs) 00:55, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * What part of WP:COI is unclear? This is Wikipedia.  You will never have any assurance that any work "will not be pulled."  Toddst1 (talk) 13:45, 9 February 2016 (UTC

J. J. Jeczalik
Hi,

I was am trying to put correct information on Wikipedia about JJ Jeczalik and it has been removed I would like it put back please as it can be verified. I just haven't had the chance to finish it as there is a lot of information.

I can't work out how to do citeations

Noisemaster K — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noisemaster K (talk • contribs) 19:31, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it's best to put the information on the talk page with URLs that can be used to make citations.  We can't have unverifiable info such as uncredited appearances added to articles.     Toddst1 (talk) 19:33, 4 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Not sure if I am using this reply page correctly. Would it be possible to restore my work please and then it can be verfied but I can't get the hang of those [1] numbers as when I have tried they end up with another number. It has taken me a long time to write the JJ Jeczalik biog and to find it removed even though it is entirely accurate. Hope this can be sorted out :)Thanks  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noisemaster K (talk • contribs) 20:00, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking that with your connection to the subject (see WP:COI), it's probably best that we put that stuff on the talk page and go from there. I'll do that shortly.  Toddst1 (talk) 20:02, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for getting back to me, If I post my article here with the sources would you allow it back on?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noisemaster K (talk • contribs) 20:03, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Better yet, post the sources on Talk: J. J. Jeczalik where I put the contested material. This way other editors can be involved too.   It's not up to me to allow it, BTW.   Cheers!  Toddst1 (talk) 20:06, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Toddst1


 * I'll add my the article here tomorrow. The information is not a violation of copyright of what I was putting in. If someone could look at it and where it is sourced from you will see where I am coming from.


 * Thanks for your help, I had a seizure about a year back, I can write normally but things like The Edit Source and codes <> and stuff come across as rather complex now unlike before where I used work in IT and as you can tell I haven't been able to grasp them :). I would like to apolgise for messing up the system. No harm or hacking was intended. I was just trying to put up something factual rather than a few lame random lines. Noisemaster K (talk) 23:06, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Please don't post it here. It is better posted on Talk:J. J. Jeczalik as I mentioned above. Toddst1 (talk) 07:09, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Hellow Toddst1 I will provide more information and sources about Bonadea ,please remove deletion tag
Sirsirsir100 (talk) 21:55, 8 March 2016 (UTC)]

Erin Gee, New Media Artist
This needs spiking, ASAP. Totally fails usual criteria. Basically an ad. Or C.V.? 19:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC)19:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.230.65.134 (talk)
 * I tend to agree. Toddst1 (talk) 20:41, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Deletion of Wikipedia page, The Tremors soccer comic strip
Hi Toddst1, I understand the proposal for deletion of this page of mine. Thanks, I will carefully read through the rules and improve on my work any future pages. I remain a wikipedia fan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikealando (talk • contribs) 20:01, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Need help with first article!
I really could use some help editing my first article page about Royce Pinkwater, a real estate notable. I need help with citations and making the article sound more credible so it is not deleted. Thanks! Gabriellesimonenyc (talk) 19:47, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * What's your connection to Pinkwater? Toddst1 (talk) 22:00, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Judy Wajcman page
Hi Toddst1. I was with Judy and we updated her page together. She would like these changes made to her bio, so I'm wondering how we can best go about doing that? I'm happy to state this officially in the edit summary? Thanks, griderick — Preceding unsigned comment added by Griderick (talk • contribs) 19:40, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Replied on User talk:Griderick. Toddst1 (talk) 19:49, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Skippool
Just seen your edit. Skippool is a tiny area of the English coast that the author is claiming to be a major port. The editor who expanded this from a redirect has made many hoax edits to Wikipedia, many of which blend real facts and fake information. If you look, a major part of the article is talking about the 'Crompton Atlantic' company. It's fake. The article says it's based on a tax haven on a Canadian island named Altair Island. Real island (apparently), no tax haven. (No inhabitants either, as far as I can tell.) Another editor created an article about an aristocratic title called the 'Count of Skippool'. Fake too.

The article is cited to a few blogs and guides about local walks. Bits may be real, I can't tell. But honestly nothing this editor writes can be trusted. I've opened a sockpuppet investigation on them now. The article was created as a redirect, I think it can stay so without doing anyone any harm. Thoughts? Blythwood (talk) 20:56, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * e/c. I was going to say that we should deal with the editor.  I'll revert.  Toddst1 (talk) 20:59, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello Toddst1 why am I being accused of a sock puppet and why was my Skippool article deleted? User talk: AstraBlackwood)

Help with Potential Vandalism
Hi Toddst1,

I manage the Golden Key International Honour Society Wikipedia page. We have someone placing comments on our page claiming that we are are scam, which is incorrect. We our a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization based in Atlanta, GA. So we reverted the sentence. Then we received a warning about entering into a edit war.

We are new to Wikipedia and not sure how to handle this situation. How do we know who the user is? We reverted and I don't see their username anymore.

Can you please provide assistance?

Thank you,

Ahouska (talk) 18:31, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You don't manage that page, despite what you think. More reply here. Toddst1 (talk) 18:48, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Alessio De Sio
If the author blanks a page, that normally means he wants it deleted. Adam9007 (talk) 00:06, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, but the other 5 editors' contributions mean his/her wishes are irrelevant. Toddst1 (talk) 04:54, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Montagu Sharpe
See my comments on the speedy deletion page. Jackiespeel (talk) 22:07, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

As I was contributing what might be described as OR it needs 'someone else' to take on its development. Jackiespeel (talk) 09:31, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Toddst1
Saw some messages on my account that I could have multiple accounts for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Mazochi I only have one account. I was editing the site as a fan of the artist and I am not being paid and I am not expecting to be paid by said artist. Sofiadeanclarke (talk) 23:21, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Gardner-Webb University page
Hello. For several years, there was a section in the Gardner-Webb University page about an athletics scandal that made national news. A few weeks ago, someone deleted it without explanation. I see that it was reinstated today, removed again, and then the page was locked. Now the article reads like it could have been written by the university's PR department. The scandal section could been better written, but the content was accurate. If anything, the person who removed it committed vandalism. I am hoping that, with some added citations, this section about an important part of GWU's history will be left in place. This is only one of many sources which can be easily located via a Google search:

Johnny J Blair
Hi--I'm updating the page for Johnny J Blair. I see notices that it needs verification. What links or sources would you like? Please advise. Thanks, JJB 3/31/16

Moved from your user page
Todd,

Yes it is a first article. I understand that the section A7 declares that significance must be placed on the page.

The significance that I posit is that Chimera Mobile is the first mobile gaming company of Benjamin Carson. It is an attempt to gamify the works of Benjamin Carson. Please consider this a claim to significance.

Uncertain as to whether a web link is possible or violates TOS. The idea was to return to Wikipedia when I had some time to read up on the TOS and ability to post links.

Thank you for your time.

Bentlyjaggs

PS I don't even know if this is the proper channel to talk to Toddst1, but I was going to edit the post today, so here is something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bentlyjaggs (talk • contribs) 02:43, 4 April 2016
 * , is Benjamin Carson someone you work with? Toddst1 (talk) 14:43, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Spark (horse)
Spark received 1633 views for DYK. However, another article that I was inspired to write off Spark pertaining to Lord Baltimore was Lord Baltimore penny. It received 6,434 views for DYK. If you need any hints on how to improve any of your articles, I'll be glad to help. Form your "help needed" in the way of a specific question and I'll see what I can give you for hints.--Doug Coldwell (talk)
 * I'm so lucky to have such a humble mentor. Toddst1 (talk) 14:58, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


 * One idea for making an excellent article is to order through the ILL system many books for the subject you are writing about. All these books I ordered at one time or another for the various articles I created. Sometimes then it becomes a Did You Know article quickly. Hammer Historical Collection of Incandescent Electric Lamps I created on April 19. Two days later on April 21 it was an official DYK on the main page. So "research" is the key here for an excellent article.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:55, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Benjamin Loxley was another that took only 2 days from being created to becoming a DYK. Again, heavy duty "research" is the key.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:17, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you Doug. Now go away.  Toddst1 (talk) 14:31, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure - just trying to help out. Just showing you if you do much more research on your articles, then you are more likely to get this kind of a result from a new article, like the one I created yesterday. It is in the lead position with the picture for Prep 3 and probably will become an official DYK tomorrow. As you can see the nomination goes a lot quicker when there is much research put into an article ahead of time. Notice also that so far, nobody has made any edit improvements to this article (only added categories and WPs). Just dropping you hints for improvements for your articles. Don't worry, I won't give you any more ideas for improvements = I'll keep all my secrets to myself and continue to make some more DYKs.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:39, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Patricia Driscoll (executive) move
Regarding, did you actually click Move twice? Even if you did, I'm having trouble understanding why there are two log entries &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  21:50, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think I did. When I moved the article, I got an error message.  I was suprised to see it was in fact moved.   I suspect a wikisystem hiccup.   Toddst1 (talk) 22:24, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Do you recall what the error said? Thank you for the info, trying to diagnose the issue &mdash; MusikAnimal  talk  15:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't remember. Sorry.  Toddst1 (talk) 21:52, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Dr. Sammy Gitonga
Hi Toddst1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nativityconcepts (talk • contribs) 21:39, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Howdy, Nativity Concepts! Toddst1 (talk) 21:40, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Toddst1, Please can you enlighten me on the reason for deletion, so as to help me develop better. The article is for a Public figure in South Africa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nativityconcepts (talk • contribs) 21:43, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * A tag was placed on Sammy Gitonga requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appeared to be about a person, but it did not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable. Toddst1 (talk) 21:45, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

I will read more about publishing and create again another time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nativityconcepts (talk • contribs) 21:47, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Karen Kvashay
Hello, Toddst1. I just wanted to let you know that you may have been a bit hasty in reverting a change made by anonymous user 205.155.11.240 who had added information about Karen Kvashay in the article about T. C. Boyle. You characterized it as unsourced, but the source which referred to Boyle's three children (and which was shown as the source for the info about Kvashay) actually verifies the Kvashay information as well. I'm aware that anonymous user 205.155.11.240's track record has not been a good one, but it seems that in this case he (or she) was trying to do the right thing.--Akhooha (talk) 20:10, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing that out. I've reverted my edit. Toddst1 (talk) 20:12, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Wow, that was quick work!--Akhooha (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

To be clear
I was not talking about you. That other editor doesnt understand civility. DaltonCastle (talk) 00:12, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

2016-17 United States network television schedule page
That editor, 69.118.146.138, keeps splitting up the TV by the Numbers sources and I have to keep putting them back together again. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2016–17_United_States_television_network_schedule&type=revision&diff=717926416&oldid=717921229 AdamDeanHall (talk) 15:18, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I just repaired those links that were broken, including the link https://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2016/03/11/the-flash-the-100-and-even-crazy-ex-girlfriend-renewed-all-11-cw-series-picked-up-for-2016-17/. AdamDeanHall (talk) 15:37, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I also had to correct the TV Series Finale Undateable article http://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/undateable-nbc-sitcom-cancelled-no-season-four/ in both the 2015–16 United States network television schedule and 2016–17 United States network television schedule pages. AdamDeanHall (talk) 15:53, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey, this IP user has prematurely adding shows that are not officially canceled by prime time networks and therefore is a disruptive editor, regardless on how you see it. Your actions defending this IP user has no grand standing. Look at one editor had to reverted here. Those networks did not say these shows are canceled officially and this IP user keeps on ignoring that. AdamDeanHall maybe disruptive at time, but that IP user is just as disruptive, maybe more so. There are other editors who have to keep reverted that user's edits and you are defending him/her without looking at his edits real carefully. In fact, you are being very rude to the editors who tried to fix the problem the IP user has been doing in those articles. BattleshipMan (talk) 16:50, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * That's great. {{yo| BattleshipMan}, you've discussed this on which talk pages with the IP?  All I see is a bunch of vandalism warnings and a report.  Whether or not the edits are 100% right, the editor appears to be trying to help.  That's why we have talk pages.  Toddst1 (talk) 16:59, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Actions with Wiki members.
Dear Toddst1,

I feel that it is very rude of you to be snooping around peoples articles and telling them off. I am the one who created this article about MYSELF in-game. From what I know, I am allowed to do this. I suggest you stop going around and reporting people. If you have nothing better to do, then go do it somewhere else. Once again, It is very rude of you to go snooping around and I suggest you stop. Wikipedia is a free thing. As for, you can not decide to make me change anything. If there is a problem. I would be glad for Wikipedia to direct contact me, and I can deal with that. If you do not stop, I will be sure to contact Wikipedia and let them know that you have been policing everyone with the wrong information.

Thanks, Creatorforparks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Creatorforparks (talk • contribs) 16:42, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Please do. Toddst1 (talk) 16:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Bullying and Threatening of Wikipedia Users by Toddst1
Toddst1,

You need to STOP doing what you are doing. I suggest you stop going around and threatening to permanently ban users based on vague accusations concerning edits that are, in this case, almost a year old. Obviously you have nothing better to do. You need to take it somewhere else. Once again, what you are doing is basically bullying other users and and I suggest you stop. Wikipedia is, by design, an information source meant to be edited by its users. As for you and your threats, you can not direct me change anything. If there is a problem, Wikipedia will contact me, and I can deal with any issues at that time. You need to stop randomly policing and threatening Wikipedia users immediately. If you don't believe me that this is what you are doing, then look at YOUR own talk page. Including myself, 4 out of the 5 topics are users telling you that you are doing either what I just outlined or something similar. You are NOT in ANY WAY, according to your Wikipedia user page, qualified to police ANY of the topics that you have. You are doing it, according to other users that have posted on your talk page, to what seems to be random topics and users.

As for my edit on the Christopher Titus page, everything that I said about the relationship between Titus and his ex-wife was verified as being talked about on his stand-up special entitled Love Is Evol. The false accusations of domestic violence, the lengthy court battle, Titus's feelings about his ex-wife, etc. are all part of his stand-up set in that special, and some of it also comes from his earlier stand-up special Norman Rockwell Is Bleeding. It is obvious that you have not viewed those particular stand-up routines or any other for that matter. Lastly, I highly suggest you not use the word "defamatory" anymore, which heavily implies something that is said with purposeful malicious intent. I will be undoing your removal of my edit. If you remove it again, I will report you to Wikipedia administration using your own talk page as proof that what I and others are alleging that you are doing is true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfdemt (talk • contribs) 01:30, 2 May 2016‎
 * I don't think you could be much more misguided about how Wikipedia works. It looks like "Wikipedia" has already "contacted" you and you are "dealing with those issues."   Discuss your desire to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS with someone else when your block expires.  Toddst1 (talk) 18:38, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

re: May 2016
In today's case, i cut this information from the wrong header and put it here for the sake of clarity and appropriateness.

There are times when i do multiple edits on the fly. For example, when adding a reference used multiple times and it is a redundancy to write that i cut something from one section, and then that i pasted it somewhere else. In those cases i generally just say what i did when i am done. Yes it is technically easier to use the Edit window, but when the coding is as complex as it is on Wikipedia, it is much easier to edit in smaller windows with less text for the sake of clarity, especially when adding or moving text with many reference links.

In other minor cases such as here, or here, or here, any edit under 100 bytes - generally in those cases, after i press Save Page, i do a quick scan to make sure what i edited registered and i notice a minor typo. In those cases i quickly go back in and edit the typo for correctness. I try to type my edits quickly and don't catch every typo on the first pass, so i often give edits a quick QC scan to make sure i didn't miss anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DionWright (talk • contribs) 22:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries - it did look a bit out of character. Toddst1 (talk) 22:44, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest notice?
I'm curious, could you clarify on what makes you think that I have a conflict of interest with respect to West Ridge Academy? I am probably biased, we all are, and I do try to keep it in check - but bias is not the same thing as COI. To my knowledge, there is nothing about my situation (I have never had any personal, financial, or other relationships or roles with WRA) that puts me in conflict with WP:COI on that article. But maybe I'm missing something. Thanks. --FyzixFighter (talk) 13:02, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Just an observation - it's one of your most edited pages along with a bunch of other LDS-related articles, and your recent deletion looked a lot like whitewashing. If no COI, then so be it. Toddst1 (talk) 18:24, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Irrelevant accusation of "Conflict of interest"
I am putting it here because it really looks like you don't understand what's going on. Let me summarize:

1/ For years, there have been wikipedia articles of ethnographic nature/athropological/cultural about family names. many are stubs because the information is so hard to find. One of them happen to be the name "bakkali".

2/ Recently, someone (I don't know who, but NOT ME !!) created a "Zakaria bakkali" wikipage, after the footballer of the same name. The person who did this, not on;y created the Zakaria Bakkali page, but DELETED the anthropology/family name "bakkali page" and REDIRECTED from Bakkli to "Zakaria Bakkali" !!! Now all those who are looking for the athropology information, are automatically redirected to a football player that noone gives a s**t about!! This is obvious vandalism !!

3/ I have tried to recreate a stub of the family name/anthropology "bakkali page". I don't know how to remove the redirection from "bakkali to "Zakaria bakkali" but this is clearly something wrong that should be removed. The real people to blame are the authors/agent of the footbal player who deleted all the other articles just to be the sole on wiki, leaving out academics. If you are a honest editor, you should do something abaout it, because it's really vandalism and piracy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Milshake3000 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
 * No problem, Mr Bakkali. Toddst1 (talk) 00:09, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
 * A sock, Todds? Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  11:29, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
 * For sure a Wp:SPA. Toddst1 (talk) 13:47, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Leave MY report in place.
I was adding my rebuttal to your report _and_ adding mine, so leave MINE in place. You have no more right to falsely report me than I have to report you. Who R U? (talk) 07:07, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
 * You are welcome to add comments below but do not change my report.  Toddst1 (talk) 07:08, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

VA-64
Sorry about saying that I started this article. I started a lot of squadron articles a year ago or so, and didn't realize that this wasn't one of them. I'm working with a somewhat crippled system right now, and I didn't have an easy means to verify that claim. I relied on memory, usually not a good thing to do. Lou Sander (talk) 05:19, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. Toddst1 (talk) 15:49, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

2016 Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Community Survey
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
 * Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:50, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Source provided, still ignored
First of all, providing the source for why an invention named after a Norwegian mathematician is Norwegian seems superfluous, especially since both articles reverted had several keys to why they should be part of the categories.

Second, I mentioned sources multiple times in the edits - where else should I put this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcarisland (talk • contribs) 20:50, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The content in the article must directly support the categories. That the sources may say something is immaterial if the article doesn't state it.  And when the article states it, it should be referenced for WP:V.  Toddst1 (talk) 20:52, 9 June 2016 (UTC)


 * The content in both articles DID provide the necessary sources. Source no. 15 in Object Oriented programming directly stated it. And source no. 1 in Abelian Groups mentions that it's named in the honour of Niels Henrik Abel because as the article mentions:


 * Abelian groups were named after Norwegian mathematician Niels Henrik Abel by Camille Jordan because Abel found that the commutativity of the group of a polynomial implies that the roots of the polynomial can be calculated by using radicals. See Section 6.5 of Cox (2004) for more information on the historical background.


 * How do I provide any further sources when all I did was add a category, where it would be, unlike in the middle of the article, pointless to add footnotes? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcarisland (talk • contribs) 20:58, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * That's the point. The category doesn't belong since the article doesn't support it.  The article states ""Xerox PARC (by Alan Kay and others) in the 1970s, introduced the term object-oriented programming" in direct conflict with what you're trying to promote here. Toddst1 (talk) 21:03, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

why are you threatening me???????????
Seriously... why? Reverting unsourced material is EXACTLY what the guidelines state we are to do. Why are you and others threatening me over it? I'm bewildered over this behavior. 47.55.192.66 (talk) 00:53, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm your boogie man, that's what I am. I'm here to do whatever I can. Be it early morning, late afternoon, or at midnight, it's never too soon.... Toddst1 (talk) 03:02, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

ANI notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 47.55.192.66 (talk) 01:10, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Well. That didn't seem to get you very far. Muffled Pocketed  02:00, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Pronoun
Sorry -- I was referring to the IP Reporter. I added that in to the entry I made on ANI. My bad! Kosh Vorlon  16:59, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * No worries. "Pronoun trouble" is pretty common around here. :)  Thanks. Toddst1 (talk) 17:44, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

KDF-55
Hi Toddst1, I welcome your participation at Articles for deletion/KDF-55 (I messed up the pinging). Widefox ; talk 10:19, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

The Big Fix
I thought my addition was quite relevant, but I am not going to get into it with a page-stalker. Ciao. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.16.210.62 (talk) 17:44, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

SAP S/4HANA
Hi Toddst1, thank you for removing the odd formatting in the SAP S/4HANA section on SAP SE. The editor who first made the formatting change also deleted the word "In" at the beginning of the sentence in the first paragraph, and now it doesn't quite make sense. Would you mind reinserting it? As an SAP employee, I can't directly edit the page. Many thanks! Harper70 (talk) 14:16, 22 June 2016 (UTC)Harper70
 * ✅ Toddst1 (talk) 19:25, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Addition to mortgage discussion (Canada)
HI Todd the additions made to the Canada part of the mortgage page were made to inform consumers of the personal covenant normally found in mortgage contracts. This is not covered anywhere else and it is a very important of mortgage contracts in Canada. The link was to an article I wrote to inform consumers that was well researched and linked to other authoritative government sites in Canada. The link was consistent with others I see throughout Wikipedia such as realtor.com and trulia.com. Not sure how else to add value like this when it is not covered anywhere else. As a professional, I deal with these issues with consumers every week and it is surprising to find out how many are unaware of the information. Your thoughts?

BCBrett — Preceding unsigned comment added by BCBrett (talk • contribs) 17:54, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Adding links to your website falls under WP:COI. Not the best idea, even if well intended.  Toddst1 (talk) 18:40, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

COI
Toddst1, Talk:Kinetic degradation fluxion media you're not serious are you? I thought you want to "move on" but after making unfounded accusations you now have to defend yourself from the consensus at the talk page. I can read the article as being notable, but these personal attacks are obviously baseless and will be seen as such. I'm disappointed as you've kept a COI editor off one of my articles recently, so I have a lot of respect for you. Widefox ; talk 15:08, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing my name. Two of us have asked you to withdraw it. I think it best to clear the air completely by apologising for the several WP:AGF issues in your dealings with that article. You're against the local consensus, so I'd rather you realise this sooner, rather than me push this. For heavens sake, I've done a fair bit of COI work. It doesn't even add up as an accusation as if I knew them why would I want an advert gone? Do you think reconsidering may be worthwhile? Per WP:BURDEN this permastub isn't going away Toddst1. Widefox ; talk 12:04, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't see what's wrong with the current sourcing and I don't understand why you are so negative about this article in its current state. If you have no COI, I don't get it.   Sure, it was garbage when we both stumbled across it, but I think it's now in decent shape.  I've been pretty merciless on other articles that are promotional too, but in it's current state, it doesn't seem to me to be a problem.   If you disagree, please take it to AFD.  Toddst1 (talk) 14:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I think you've done a great job turning it around. Really. You succeeded finding sources where I failed. Agree that one could look at the sourcing and say job done. There's a but, I respect your good faith attempts at improvement. It's at AfD now, and with a fresh look it's debateable about notability. I don't think it's "negative" to tackle COI, spam, copyvios and crap articles - a real TNT. I'm concerned that stuff like this is in here. Even your good rewrite doesn't address the fundamentals. I respect those that want to save them, but against the long term effects per WP:BOGOF. Anyhow, why are you blaming the messenger with the COI? Choosing to put yourself up to save an article is honorable, but so is choosing to not have to bother. Widefox ; talk 14:32, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Erm, WP:SYN now? Step back, realise how ludicrous this looks to others. Read SYN. Read LEDE. Read brass. Note sure you noticed, but the talk page also has two copyvios detailed by two editors. Can you explain why you didn't take them seriously? This isn't a content dispute anymore, so where do you suggest I take this? COIN? ANI? Making all these accusations and not backing any of them up, this is just going against consensus and common sense now. Widefox ; talk 15:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what the issue is.
 * You removing reliably sourced content and replacing it with your unsourced observation/summary is not cool. None of the literature refer to this alloy as "brass."  Why would you?
 * The article is at AFD as you wanted.
 * I really don't understand the veracity of your interest in seeing this article removed. As I've said before, it seems like something else is going on.  You say nothing else is, so be it.
 * Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean it's a problem. If you think this is an issue for ANI, then by all means, discuss it there.   Toddst1 (talk) 16:14, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Bob Ross
Hi Toddst1;

I see that you reverted/disallowed my edits to the Commemoration & pop culture section on the Bob Ross page. (I wrote a sentence on Bob Ross being mentioned in an episode of the T.V. show "Chuck".) I just wanted to know why you didn't think it should be allowed. I am not well-versed in Wikipedia editing but I have read as many rules as I have the time to and I thought my contribution, though slight, at least conformed to the guidelines. My feeling was that my edit was definitely a valid Pop Culture reference to Bob Ross, and similar to the line about a Bob Ross-inspired character in "The Boondocks". If I need to change the way the episode is referred to (for example, that the reference was in an episode titled "Chuck versus the Tango" which first aired in 2007) that's fine, I can do that. But will you please let me know what you thought it was lacking?

-SJM — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjmiller J.D. (talk • contribs) 07:30, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
 * We generally frown on adding every mention of something in an encyclopedia per WP:TRIVIA. If a mention was significant or WP:NOTABLE then we generally include it.  Toddst1 (talk) 16:36, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to give an explanation. I can see after reading the WP:TRIVIA article how the subject of my edit could fall under Trivia, especially the way I had quoted it. The strongest argument I have for it being a worthwhile Pop Culture reference and not trivia is because I didn't know anything about Bob Ross and the "Chuck" reference actually informed me enough to look up Bob Ross and find out more about him, hence my edit: As per the WP:TRIVIA article, "In determining whether a reference is encyclopedic, one helpful test can be to look at whether a person who is familiar with the topic only through the reference in question has the potential to learn something meaningful about the topic from that work alone." I did learn from the episode reference that Bob Ross was a painter with a show on PBS, wore an afro (or perm) and had a soothing voice, although I acknowledge that some may not consider that "something meaningful about the topic". However, I understand that my attempted edit did not really get that message across. I'll keep the information in mind for future edits. Thanks. Sjmiller J.D. (talk) 11:04, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Accusations abandoned
As you've closed the section above, and don't want to discuss here, for the record I'm assuming all these accusations and assertions have been abandoned, and we need say no more about them. Widefox ; talk 18:32, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Sławomir Biały (talk) 11:20, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Template editor granted
Your account has been granted the "templateeditor" user permission, allowing you to edit templates and modules that have been protected with template protection. It also allows you to bypass the title blacklist, giving you the ability to create and edit editnotices. Before you use this user right, please read Template editor and make sure you understand its contents. In particular, you should read the section on wise template editing and the criteria for revocation.

You can use this user right to perform maintenance, answer edit requests, and make any other simple and generally uncontroversial edits to templates, modules, and edinotices. You can also use it to enact more complex or controversial edits, after those edits are first made to a test sandbox, and their technical reliability as well as their consensus among other informed editors has been established. If you are willing to process edit requests on templates and modules, keep in mind that you are taking responsibility to ensure the edits have consensus and are technically sound.

This user right gives you access to some of Wikipedia's most important templates and modules; it is critical that you edit them wisely and that you only make edits that are backed up by consensus. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password.

If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.


 * Useful links
 * All template-protected pages
 * User:AnomieBOT/TPERTable – outstanding template-protected edit requests (bot-generated)
 * Request fully-protected templates or modules be downgraded to template protection

Happy template editing! — xaosflux  Talk 02:07, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Laura Fortman
Hi Toddst1, I'm surprised that you slapped such a large tag on this page because of Fortman's two degrees. I thought that personal details like dates of degrees were fine to source to a primary source, as long as the subject herself is adequately verified by secondary sources. But I have gone ahead and removed the dates of her degrees and most of the LinkedIn citations. I'm not sure I understand why this is "written like an advertisement" – it's just a dry bio. Yoninah (talk) 22:01, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * What's your connection to Fortman? Toddst1 (talk) 22:03, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * None. I have been improving articles for WP:Women in Red, and have assiduously worked through the Maine Women's Hall of Fame list to remove all the redlinks. Today I finished! Yoninah (talk) 22:05, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Battle of Barrington
I do not understand why Toddst1 is accusing me of vandalizing the Battle Of Barrington article. I am the individual who has practically written and edited the article and have done research concerning the article. Everything is accurate. Nelson was shot 17 times, I found this in a memo written by J.Edgar Hoover. I've have been polishing this article for quite sometime and I do not understand why, now, Toddst1 has accused me of vandalism. I use my full name, Frederick Crowe, on Wikipedia and do not hide behind a screen name. I hope Toddst1 reconsiders his hasty appraisal of what I have been doing to better the article and Wikipedia. I have had an account on Wikipedia for a long time and frankly, I feel hurt at what Toddst1 has stated. I completely believe in what Wikipedia is doing, I have donated to Wikipedia and I would never do anything to undermine this encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frederick crowe (talk • contribs) 23:17, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Femerald? Really?  Toddst1 (talk) 00:23, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Fred W. Glover
Looks like you get another shot at trimming the puffery if you want it. :(Naraht (talk) 02:09, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * And you wanted it...Naraht (talk) 13:33, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Yay trimming.

Naraht (talk) 13:33, 8 July 2016 (UTC) 

Confused with Images
Thank you for checking in on my Chimelong Group article. I would like to add their logo, and maybe some park images but hesitant because I don't know how and am worried about copywrite — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThemeParkFan1988 (talk • contribs) 19:30, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not an expert on image copyright issues but there is fair use allowed for low-resolution copies of images in many cases like this.  MOS:IMAGES will have more info.  Toddst1 (talk) 19:35, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Greetings from
Don't revert my edits without looking at the history. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.162.138.228 (talk) 22:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I looked at the history. Toddst1 (talk) 22:38, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Another article
Hey, would you mind also taking a look at Black Riders Liberation Party? It's... well, it's awful. It looks like a good candidate for WP:TNT.142.105.159.60 (talk) 03:12, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Huey P. Newton Gun Club
Toddst1 Wondering why you keep changing the HPNGC page, when you are not affiliated with anyone in the group? Also are you the one who is putting in all these citations that aren't coding correctly on the page? Ogoodson13 (talk)ogoodson13Ogoodson13 (talk) 05:11, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * That I have no affiliation with the group is very correct. Do you have an affiliation?    I don't know what you're talking about citations not coding correctly. I see you deleted a bunch of seemingly well sourced info without discussion.  That's been reverted.   Please play by the rules. Toddst1 (talk) 12:37, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

add The
Please keep The Duchess of Cambridge, as this is her correct title. Without The is for Divorced wives of titled men in the british royal family. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pm0385 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Quantico
Please explain your revert at Quantico (TV series). Please refer to the history of the article throughout this discussion. My revert was based on the mass-reverts by the IP editor 202.168.10.108 when they mass-reverted the split and necessary coding performed here (e.g. the onlyinclude tags are required for the List of Episodes page). My revert was not one that needed discussion; rather, it was reverting unexplained edits by an IP editor who didn't know what they were doing. Furthermore, I have requested page protection for further occurrences of this. Alex&#124;The&#124;Whovian ? 00:55, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Your edit seemed like such a bold, wholesale reversal that it should have come with some explanation on the talk page or at very least, a better edit summary.
 * If you choose to reply, please focus the conversation on your talk page as it appears that I'm not the only one who has taken exception to your edits on that page and there's an active discussion there. Toddst1 (talk) 13:11, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * "Seemed like". Interesting. So you assumed and reverted without questioning first. I see. Alex&#124;The&#124;Whovian ? 12:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * No. It seems like you're WP:OWNing that page. Don't be a bully.
 * I already asked you to continue this on your talk page where others have objected to your edit. Toddst1 (talk) 18:37, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you...
Really appreciate your actions on my father's page. Thank you for understanding. Ssamenow (talk) 01:57, 23 July 2016 (UTC)Jason Samenow
 * Toddst1 (talk) 15:16, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

DemExit
Hello. First, I am sorry that you have had to waste so much time on this stupid DemExit Wikipedia. The person who wrote the note about me creating the user name in an attempt to get the page removed is right. I really have NO idea at all how to do anything on Wikipedia but it was brought to my attention that something I own the website for and have the twitter and facebook usernames for now has a Wikipedia. It upset me greatly to see something I created turned into something political and have the writer slant everything to fit her agenda towards recent events. I actually am not contesting deletion. I want it deleted and in fact want to know if it can be deleted permanently never to be re-written again. Seriously, this is nothing more than a hashtag. It's a small movment but not even worthy of a Wikipedia page. The only reason I made edits at all was to try to get whoever is in charges attention to get all the stuff removed. I am not good in English and as I said I have no idea how to edit. I just couldn't stand watching some lefty making a Wikipedia page just to help some political candidate. I read the rules that the owner of something cannot be the editor because its bias but people are editing things on that page and putting totally false info. This #DemExit hashtag did trend on twitter. I don't know what else to say. Sorry for all the garbage. The guy is right its complete drivel. Please speedy delete and I hope the page doesn't pop up again. I don't want to get banned from here I am just trying to get this page taken down

I will post Hi todd on Twitter.com/DemExit so you can see what I am saying is true. I own the fb, twitter and website.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by DemExit (talk • contribs) 06:53, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey - thanks for your comments on my latest article.

I have been asked to create this page in recognition of her work to the academy. I believe it would be very difficult to find any references online, given this person has no internet usage whatsoever.

Any ideas? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12gasmas34 (talk • contribs) 20:09, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

German American page edit
At the start of the article it says partial ancestry. I have about 30 percent german in me. I don't feel like that makes me a "German" I just don't feel that's right to call someone a "german" so to speak if this is the case. I'd say most americans at this point are pretty mixed. The 46 million makes no sense to me. LarrySonic (talk) 23:21, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your opinion. This is an encyclopedia.  We work on WP:V.  The sentence you removed was cited by a seemingly reliable source. If you disagree with a statement, the article's talk page is the place to discuss it.  Toddst1 (talk) 23:22, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll check that page out right now. LarrySonic (talk) 23:24, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I now understand and get your point of view. I just kinda wonder if many of these german americans have something like 20-30 percent german ancestry and if that's enough to be considered german (for me very debatable). But I get your point about sources above all for this website. LarrySonic (talk) 23:33, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

helly nahmad article
Hi Todd, I received a message from you pertaining to my edits on the helly nahmad page. There are several, provably inaccurate claims on that page, and I am trying to edit them. Please let me know what steps I need to take in order to have that page edited. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhirsch41 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The material you object to appears to be sourced. If you want to change it, you need to provide sources that support what you believe the correct info to be.   A discussion on the article's talk page would be helpful as well.   good luck.  Toddst1 (talk) 16:51, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Radio Suomipop
Just a quick thought about the above article. I'm not really sure why it is on the English version, as there is a substantial entry in the Finnish one https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Suomipop which presumably meets the notability criteria.

It was originally marked for swift deletion as it had no references at all, so I happened to be passing by and added some. Perhaps some sort of redirect might be in order, but as I'm new to this and have no idea what to do, thought I might raise it with you.

Regards

CPBearfoot (talk) 16:44, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I think Notability probably will be established and I doubt it would go down if someone brought it to AFD. I tagged it to note that it still needs work in that department.  Thanks for your work there. Toddst1 (talk) 16:47, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Ingrid Schorr for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ingrid Schorr is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Ingrid Schorr until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. John from Idegon (talk) 22:49, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Reverting
Hi, thanks for reverting my edit here and not shouting at me. For future reference - If an article cites or lists in its bibliography a "world federation" or government organisation/division" reaches notability criteria? Thanks again, Nicnote  •  ask me a question  •  contributions  22:59, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi To me, that it is an international sports tournament sanctioned by a notable federation seemed to assert some level importance.   Now, the tournament may not be sufficiently notable to survive an WP:AFD discussion, but it seems like a discussion on deletion should occur.   I don't know much about badminton and its governance, but it also seems like it might pass WP:GNG.   Toddst1 (talk) 23:03, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

List of Android email apps
I only read wiki, i do not edit it so I don't understand how it all works, but it looks like you did some serious changes to List of Android email apps page. Just curious why did you delete the Aqua Mail entry from List of Android email apps? It was a helpful chart that showed that Aqua Mail is not cloud based and does not access your credentials or store your email in their cloud. Am i misinterpreting Aqua Mail's Privacy Policy? 98.233.93.56 (talk) 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:SAL was the basis of my changes. What's your relation to Aqua Mail?    Toddst1 (talk) 04:44, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks like WP dissuades lists with no context to explain the list. That makes sense sure. I just thought it strange that you deleted many rows of data from the list but kept many other rows intact. The Aqua Mail entry had a citation to justify its note that emails and uid/passwords are not stored in any cloud. I am not affiliated with Aqua Mail, just an Aqua Mail user. I came back to the article to start verifying what I had read because I am about to buy into the full version - and noticed the wiki article was all chopped up.Thanks for the info, it makes sense. I appreciate it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.233.93.56 (talk) 19:28, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

no collapse please
Please refrain from collapsing my comments in AFD discussions. Thanks. -- 1Wiki8 ........................... (talk) 05:42, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Try to comment on the article instead of the vitriol leading to that wall of garbage you and the other disruptors have made it.   Toddst1 (talk) 06:31, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Discussion continued on Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/PromptCloud. --  1Wiki8 ........................... (talk) 07:30, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Brittanya Page
First this is not an advertising, this girl had enough references maybe there was some sentences that are similar but i have take care of the biography including the controversies part.

I did not see i should no remove the Tag myself apologizes for it... if anything else i should no do just let me know, all i am trying is to collaborate no to cause any issue, and again this is about a famous person that is not on wikipedia all i did was try to collaborate apologizes if i did something wrong on it, please let me know if the changes i have made may help to remove the tag and you more than welcome to edit the article if you beliefe is done no right at the end is a living person who is pretty famous and have several interactions with the news as the reference shows — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inuevayork (talk • contribs) 21:20, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Also wanted to ask you on one of your revisions you mention "one of the contributors maybe" is associated with the person? I really know the producer because I am latino but it no means that i do know personaly this person, and i have no add anything personal or him his favor all the information i add is public and can be corroborate by big sources, Just curious i am no a big editor i will love just to follow the rules i have try to learn and i will love to learn more — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inuevayork (talk • contribs) 21:35, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Fabrizio Moreira
I found you remove most of the valid references, are coming from News Papers, but this dude was actually perscute by Hugo Chavez and is all over the news you remove all the references? Is fine for me that you think i am associated with them just because i write of them but in fact is real references all are real, he is a politican a pretty well known one — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inuevayork (talk • contribs) 21:47, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

You add a tack that is disambiguate but here a link http://www.ecuadorinmediato.com/Noticias/news_user_view/ecuadorinmediato_noticias--85762 that effectively talk about of him getting accuse for doing activities against the government things that the media clearly estates (accusation) was false — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inuevayork (talk • contribs) 21:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

examine the edit
I suggest you ought to examine the claims being sourced to Seventeen (magazine) at Richard J. Jensen  and the precise wording of the source. I suggest you will find the source is not a reliable source for the claims of fact ascribed to it, and that the use of that source is violative of WP:BLP. I further suggest that you will indeed find that I was not engaged in an edit war with my three edits from July to date. I further point out that you seem to not understand the use of "Nevertheless, her paper was considered sufficiently worthy "  which is not neutrally worded, and which wording is not used in the Oxford Journal which is a primary source for such a publication. Also one should note Fried has revised that article on 6/20/2016. Collect (talk) 20:07, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You seem to not understand that I don't care about that content. The edit war is plain and I'm not a party.  Toddst1 (talk) 20:10, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Horsefeathers.  The fact is that the BLP issue was clear, the "edit war" was three edits in three months, and it is clear that saying you do not give a damn about WP:BLP is unimpressive as an argument.   In addition, you ignored WP:DTTR.     And your edit saying "this clears things up" managed to insert your own editorial view about the content, where the issue had been raised in the past, as you ought to have noted. If you in future have a question about the reasoning for an edit  on a BLP, I suggest you read WP:BLP/N histories concerning that article first.   Cheers. Collect (talk) 07:21, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Duh. You'se confusing essays with policy.  I will TTR when TRs are EW any  day. Now move along sonny and stop disrupting "feathers".  Toddst1 (talk) 05:27, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your quite novel interpretation of WP:CIVIL. Collect (talk) 14:31, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Tjin-A-Djie
Hi Toddst1, I have never had any affiliations or external relationships with any member of the family. My research is based off of information gathered from institutions and libraries in Suriname. - Flotsamflip — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flotsamflip (talk • contribs) 13:25, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm having a tough time showing my sources of my edits. Where do I exactly site my source when editing a page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaysin Cadell (talk • contribs) 05:41, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

SAP S/4HANA section on SAP SE
Hi Toddst1, would you be willing to review my suggested edit to the SAP SE page regarding the announcement of the SAP HANA Express Edition? It's at the bottom of the talk page. Please let me know your thoughts on it. I'd appreciate any feedback. Thank you! Harper70 (talk) 17:31, 27 September 2016 (UTC)Harper70

HPNGC and "Black Separatism"
Regarding this edit, I wanted to clarify that designating HPNGC was a "black separatist" group is a controversial statement, and this claim needs to be supported by a reliable source and discussed on the Talk page. I have already explained the BBC source and concluded that it does not actually support the claim that HPNGC is a black separatist group. If you disagree, please explain your decision to re-insert this claim into the article. Thanks. -Iamozy (talk) 14:19, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Women in music
Hello Toddst1. I deleted those paragraphs from the Women in music page because they were interviews that do not have fact to them. They are not neutral in tone, as Wikipedia encourages. Those quotes are in fact opinions and not appropriate to be in the "conducting" portion of the page. They do not give any fact for the reader to use and learn from. I would appreciate you seeing that these few paragraphs are opinion based and should in fact be removed from the page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Weeziefhorn23 (talk • contribs) 20:49, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
 * They were presented as opinion. You removed them because you objected to the opinion.  While I don't like those opinions much either and we strive for WP:NPOV, we don't delete stuff because WP:IDONTLIKEIT.   I think you should raise your concerns on the article talk page.  Toddst1 (talk) 21:05, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I've started a discussion here. Airplaneman   ✈  06:40, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Michael Shiner and references
Thanks so much for your work combining the references in the Michael Shiner article. I really should learn how to do this myself, rather than leaving a mess for other people to clean up. Can you point me to a link where I could learn this? ThanksABF99 (talk) 21:44, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
 * First off, you didn't leave a mess. I just saw a work in progress and thought I'd jump in before you got too far down the road.   The best way to learn about citations is Citing sources.  Check out the WP:TW tool which makes creating them much easier.  Good luck and feel free to ask me and others for other pointers.   I can tell you're here to do some incredible work for the project.  Toddst1 (talk) 03:57, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll check it out! ABF99 (talk) 15:11, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Meatpuppetry v. canvassing
When informing editors about wp:canvassing, please use the term "canvassing" rather than "meatpuppetry", especially with newbies? See the bottom of the wp:meatpuppetry section. Thanks Jim1138 (talk) 11:04, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Richard Wisker
I can only assume that your revert of an IP editor undoing very obvious vandalism was a mistake. Qwfp (talk) 13:34, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep. Looks like I goofed. Toddst1 (talk) 13:40, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

October 2016
Good spot that the Rich List wikilink didn't actually cite the Gilmour info. You did the right thing to rv my rv.

Having said that, I for one would respectfully recommend a little more WP:Civility and less templating of established editors who are clearly acting in good faith&mdash;let alone double-warning them for a single edit ... richi (hello) 08:41, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Jon Jang post
Hi Todd-

I just reposted to add Jon Jang to an Oberlin alumni page, then I saw your email. I have a source now (it's not even on Jon's website!) so will add it to the page. http://www.allmusic.com/artist/jon-jang-mn0000255877/biography

Thanks. Grant — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grantdin (talk • contribs) 23:32, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Editing mypage
Thanks Toddst1, I will visit Article Wizard take my time and get back to have the page done properly

Regards SaddamopieeSaddamopiee (talk) 01:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

ANI
Just to let you know, someone has (wrongly, in my opinion) complained about your activities at WP:ANI. -- Scjessey (talk) 03:22, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Toddst1 (talk) 16:36, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Greetings I am not so sure on how wiki works just yet as I am new. I just received an alert from you and now know what to do and what not to do this accident will not be made again. If need be please change the page to its original form. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Core Music Group (talk • contribs) 00:45, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Kenny Doughty
Hi, the image with the copyright info has been put back without the copyright info, and says own work. Atlantic306 (talk) 21:25, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Smells like a paid contributor. Toddst1 (talk) 22:55, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Kenny Doughty
Hi There

I am Kenny Doughty and I did a photo shoot with Sarah Dunn. We both own the photo's. I just wanted to give her credit for the picture. Can you help me with this?

Thanks

Kenny — Preceding unsigned comment added by OfficialKennyDoughty (talk • contribs) 23:29, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Connected contributor Template
Hi! I would like to disclose that I have a conflict of interest. I am new to Wikipedia. Could you help me fill out the following template?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by GlobalHealthatYale (talk • contribs) 21:32, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for asking for help. Paste the following into the talk page of the one you want to declare:
 * Save the change. Then look in the talk page history and paste the diff of the edit that saved the template where "otherlinks" is.    If you need help with the last bit, I can do it for you.  Just let me know here.
 * Also, you should put a note on your talk page saying you're connected to the program, but this is not required, just a good idea showing good faith. Toddst1 (talk) 21:38, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, this is helpful. I added the template and the note you suggested to the talk page. Could you review the edit? I'm not sure I added the diff correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GlobalHealthatYale (talk • contribs) 14:58, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

✅, thanks. I figured the diff would be tough. I cleaned up a bit - you're good to go. Toddst1 (talk) 15:30, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

David Hume
Who are you? You seem to be American. What do you know about British issues? David Hume was British. Are you some sort of police officer or something? 86.163.88.137 (talk) 23:06, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm Your Boogie Man. Toddst1 (talk) 01:51, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:35, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello, and thank you for lending your time to help improve Wikipedia! If you are interested in editing more often, I suggest you create an account to gain additional privileges. Happy editing!

Thank's for your help
Hello Todd, I saw that you welcomed my question, but as you addressed, "the wolf child" didn't exactly help.

04:35, 5 December 2016‎ Thewolfchild (talk | contribs)‎. . (154 bytes) (-358)‎. . (Undid revision 753096101 by PEPSICO (talk) no.)

I do indeed have a question about my username. Today I received this-

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "PEPSICO", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because It suggests shared use as a corporation. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username by completing this form, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. Dan D. Ric (talk) 04:39, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Will I have to change my username if it violates the policy? PEPSICO (talk) 04:02, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, It sounds like you should change your username and while you're at it, you should probably state what other usernames or IP addresses you've edited under, just to be completely above-board. Toddst1 (talk) 05:57, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 14 December
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
 * On the Coram's Fields page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=754860834 your edit] caused a URL error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F754860834%7CCoram's Fields%5D%5D Ask for help])

Re: Page protection
Hello. Thanks for telling me about the protection edit. I thought that adding the template protects the page! Could you tell me how to protect a page? Thanks if you can! Info2Learn (talk) 00:45, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Non-admins can't do it themselves. You can list the page at Requests for page protection though.  Hope that helps.  Toddst1 (talk) 00:48, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Mack EH
At Talk:Mack_model_EH_trucks I just archived most of the past discussions, most personal between me and one other person. I then pasted the beginning of the discussion back onto the talk page. This leaves all discussion except some personal stuff on the talk page. Within minutes you reverted that. I would appreciate it if you would replace the archive. Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 01:45, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * When you blank out a large portion of a talk page while archiving, leave an edit summary. Otherwise you look like a vandal.
 * When you archive a talk page, be sure to leave a pointer to it on the talk page.  Toddst1 (talk) 01:46, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for replacing it. I did not know how to flag it, I just left a link. That being said, you jumped the gun, made a quick (and incorrect) judgment, and acted on it. This was sort of a no-brainer, and you missed it. It's not a race. Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 02:20, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Your edit stands on its own and looked like vandalism.  Either way, you did a lousy job archiving the talk page and it needed to be cleaned up by someone else and you should be using edit summaries.   If you feel the need to project that on to someone else, good luck collaborating on Wikipedia.  Toddst1 (talk) 02:26, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Your edit stands on its own and looked like vandalism.  Either way, you did a lousy job archiving the talk page and it needed to be cleaned up by someone else and you should be using edit summaries.   If you feel the need to project that on to someone else, good luck collaborating on Wikipedia.  Toddst1 (talk) 02:26, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Well, thanks for the firm scolding. The no edit summary might trigger a flag, but you made the bad judgment call. Then you talked down to me and gave that drive-by at the article. Here's your answer, by the way:

The "wheel arrangement" designation is number of wheels x number of driven wheels. There are two wheels per axle, dual tires are counted as one wheel. Some series have both single and dual tire versions. plus any US Army TM 9- series operators manual.

I made a good faith edit on an article that I have contributed more than half the content. Someone stopped by in minutes, did not check the page or talk page history, did not understand what was being moved, instead just reverted and started dishing out crap. After all these years I don't really need it. Thank you.Sammy D III (talk) 03:26, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Alexandre Mars
Hi Todd, yes. I am the same user: jennepicfoundation. You are correct, I will log in. Did you delete my content? It was all verified through articles, websites, etc. What happened? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.106.210.10 (talk • contribs) 14:57, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Replied on Talk:Alexandre Mars. Toddst1 (talk) 19:36, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Talkback
Alex Eng ( TALK ) 20:24, 20 December 2016 (UTC)