User talk:Ute in DC/Archive 1

WikiProject College football January 2009 Newsletter
The January 2009 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:13, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject College football February 2009 Newsletter
The February 2009 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Wayne Howard
Good job expanding the Wayne Howard article! I nominated it for Wikipedia's Did You Know? front page entry. DragonflyDC (talk) 11:45, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Awesome. Thanks! Ute in DC (talk) 19:02, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your assessment of Arkansas Razorbacks football, your comments will be helpful in the advancement of the article. Brandonrush   Woo pig sooie!  14:32, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of 2005 Utah Utes football team
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article 2005 Utah Utes football team, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process&#32; because of the following concern:
 * A page for the team is fine, but for each season? Wikipedia is not a sports almanac.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Stifle (talk) 10:48, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

 * Thanks for helping me fill out Utah Utes football under Ron McBride. It seems like a lot of typing just to get the basic information for the season in, so my motivation was running a little low for getting additional info (like attendance figures) put in. I'm glad you put those in. Perhaps, after getting the last few seasons thrown in, it can get expanded a bit more and get bumped up to something resembling B-class or better. Oh, and thanks for the barnstar, too. Nice to know that some of my WP:GNOME activity gets noticed. :) Happy editing! DeFaultRyan 19:51, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, but while you're at it, could you add citations for some of that data, like the attendance figures and assistant coaches? I've looked for that info, without success, so I don't know where it's coming from, otherwise, I'd just add the citations myself. If everything is cited and verifiable, I think this article could easily get up to B or GA status. DeFaultRyan 15:10, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Usually the numbers are coming from individual Deseret News articles, which means each game would have its own citation. I will start doing that, but it will make for a long reference list. Ute in DC (talk) 22:00, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

WP:Hornbook -- a new law-related task force for the J.D. curriculum
Andrew Gradman talk/WP:Hornbook 02:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Good Job!

 * Sorry about that, I had a few windows open at a time and just added the post script to the wrong one! Thanks. I have made the change to Utefan16's barnstar. I will let you change the one on your user page. You also may want to consider moving it from the side bar to the actual body of the page since I think it messes up all your user boxes, or at least did on my computer (Windows, IE7). Thanks. Glennfcowan (talk) 17:59, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

File:UtahHelmet.png listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:UtahHelmet.png, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Andrew c [talk] 20:15, 1 October 2009 (UTC) Andrew c [talk] 20:15, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
— BQZip01 — talk 06:04, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Utah unis
They're a very rough working prototype, but here's what I've done so far. --Kevin W. 20:53, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It looks good! Would it be possible to switch the position of the red and black jersey's? Utah only wears the black jersey during the "blackout game" so it should be the alternate. The red jersey is what they usually wear at home. —Ute in DC (talk) 01:15, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * So red/black as the primary and black/red as the alternate? --Kevin W. 02:03, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes. Thank you for your help! —Ute in DC (talk) 02:04, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I misunderstood. The red jersey should go with red pants as the color jersey. The black pants should go with the black jersey as an alternate. —Ute in DC (talk) 16:34, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Image use policy clarification
If you have the time I'd like your input on my proposed clarification of WP:Image use policy concerning fair-use/copyright versus public-domain/trademark image use. The proposal is contained here. Thanks. BillTunell (talk) 21:35, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Ute homecoming games
Thanks for updating that info. Where did you find it? DeFault</b><b style="color:blue;">Ryan</b> 16:53, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * From the Utah football media guide. Page 161 of the Ute Record Book pdf lists them all. Sorry I didn't put the citations in for each article. I'll get on that. —Ute in DC (talk) 19:53, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

User:Carthage44 out of control
Can you help report him? Bcspro (talk) 03:33, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Blocked 24 hours, thanks for your help. Bcspro (talk) 03:54, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Help on reversion
Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to University of Utah.

If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both  and one or more   referring to it. Someone then removed the  but left the , which results in a big red error in the article. I replaced one of the remaining  with a copy of the  ; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any big red error.

If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks! AnomieBOT ⚡ 21:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC) <small style="color:#888">If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add  to your talk page.

DYK nomination of 2005 TCU Horned Frogs football team
Hello! Your submission of 2005 TCU Horned Frogs football team at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Coldplay Expért <sup style="color:#DC143C;">Let's talk  03:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 01:30, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Air Force/SDSU logos
I'm having trouble finding good images to use for those logos. I can't get the right lightning bolt for Air Force and the only SDSU logos I can find are straight, not curved like they are on the helmet. That's why they don't have the logos. If you can find me good examples to use, please don't hesitate to let me know. --Kevin W. 23:05, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, I got SDSU and Air Force's helmets done. I still need to do SDSU's collar logo though. --Kevin W. 03:07, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Re: Utah Utes football under Ike Armstrong
Perfect! Great idea. De Fault  Ryan  03:26, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

rationale for accepting revisions to Six Day War?

 * What's your rationale for accepting revisions to Six Day War that removed verified information? What's your connection to the article? Have you been involved in any discussions? have you read any of the sources? Thanks &bull; Ling.Nut 23:44, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you misunderstand the Reviewing process. The reviewing process is not to make sure that all edits improve the article. The reviewing process is not a substitute for the consensus process. The reviewing process is designed to make sure that the edits aren't vandalism. The edit that I accepted was not vandalism. The user provided an explanation in the edit summary for the reason for the removal of the quote. I see you have worked a good deal on the article. I defer to your better knowledge about the propriety of the edit I accepted. —Ute in DC (talk) 00:41, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * thanks. &bull; Ling.Nut 01:17, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * By the way, it appears the edit also rmvd well-sourced material, noted by "Tag: references removed" in the edit summary. In my book, if an IP appears out of nowhere, swoops down and rmvs sourced material in a one-shot edit, it's vandalism. Please do remember to check for that possibility as well. Tks. &bull; Ling.Nut 10:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Accepting IP Edits & IP 38.117.242.194
Hi Ute,

You approved an edit by.

Well, if you look at their edit history/contributions, you will see that the only thing this IP ever does is add links to sensational articles from USmagazine.com.

This is a link/spam monkey, only here for one purpose.

For example; in this edit "On the cover of Parade's Healthy Lifestyle, Michael's revealed that she had a nose job, but did not reveal when.", they took a story from another vendor (Parade) and just repackaged it to drive eyeballs to their website.

1) Why not just cut out the middle man and go directly to the source? Parade is the source, not US.

2) If all this user wants to do is add links, they are not welcome here.

3) If you actually look at the article in Parade, she also said a lot of others things, but spam monkey 38.117.242.194 picked out the most sensational to drive eyeballs.

Just because it does not appear to be vandalism with a quick glance, doesn't mean that it is still a good contribution.

What do you say?

Thank you. > Best O Fortuna (talk) 21:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Then I think the appropriate action is to work to block that IP address. The IP address will continue to be able to make edits and it is going to be impossible to alert every legitimate editor of the spammer's M.O.. As for the edit in question, I looked at the citation and it supported the information added. I agree that it would have been better to cite Parade magazine. But when reviewing edits, it is not the job of the reviewer to make sure that an edit is the best of all possible edits. See Pending changes: "The process of reviewing is intended as a quick check to make reasonably sure edits don't contain vandalism, violations of the policy on living people, or other obviously inappropriate content." In short, we are supposed to weed out vandalism. I checked the talk page to see why that page was semi-protected, and it appears to be due to rumors about sexual orientation. The nose-job seemed uncontroversial. You appear to know more about this spammer so I'll defer to your judgment. Based on the information I had at the time I accepted the edit, I stand by my choice. —Ute in DC (talk) 21:51, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Are your Ute's going to be better this football season? > Best O Fortuna (talk) 22:20, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Probably. At least, I hope so. Utah has most of their offensive players returning. Although, Utah has been pretty good the last few seasons, but I guess there is always room for improvement. Who do you follow? —Ute in DC (talk) 22:25, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I went to OU, so I mainly follow them. And, although I live in a Mountain West Conference area, I don't care for the team and refuse to follow them.  I just noticed that Utah's football, basketball, and baseball teams all seemed to be down last season.  They were the premier team in the MWC for the past decade (de-throning BYU who was for the 1970s, 1980, and most of the 1990s; except for Tarkanian's short run in BB at UNLV).  And, I do follow my local team in BB and baseball, just refuse to support their football program, so when the top team in the league is down, I think the entire league suffers.  You want your worst team to improve the conference, not see your top team fall down.  > Best O Fortuna (talk) 22:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)  PS: When I first saw your user name, I thought you were of Ute origin in the Four Corners.....

User talk:121.54.2.91
sorry sir for what i have done, please forgive me, i just want to share my knowledge upon other users. sorry for deleting the files in President of the Philippines, the files i deleted was my edit, and i think it mess the articles. i know that you'll forgive me, i'm Wikipedian for 2 years and i'll fell sorry for hat i have done, if you want i will put again that information. sorry sir if i use your time and effort for warning me, sorry sir when my grammar is wrong, just please understand it,because my Lingua Franca is not English, once again sorry sir, i hope that you will understand my reasons and i hope that you'll forgive me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.2.91 (talk) 08:20, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

1933 Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference championship
Ute in DC, I saw your recent edit to Ike Armstrong regarding the 1933 Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference championship. My source for the three-way tie was the College Football Data Warehouse (http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ii/rmac/champions.php). I emailed David DeLassus, who maintains the College Football Data Warehouse, about the conflict with the RMAC website, and he explained that his source was the 1934 Spalding Football Guide, which states: "'The foot ball championship race finished in a triple tie between Utah University, University of Denver, and Colorado Agricultural College, each school winning five games and losing one. Denver and Colorado Agricultural played a scoreless tie, which did not count in the standings, according to conference rules.'" Just wanted to fill you in about that. Thanks. Jweiss11 (talk) 07:39, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for filling me in. I wonder why the RMAC does not remember their own rules. They are a conference that still exists, but their rules must have changed somewhere in their history. Utah's media guide lists it as a tie too, which was how I thought the "mistake" got started. But I looked at the standings, saw Utah had the highest winning percentage and checked the RMAC website. Based on that, I was comfortable declaring Utah as outright champions. Anyway, go ahead and change it back. That's excellent research on your part. —Ute in DC (talk) 07:50, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I see you made the change back to a shared championship. I'm not sure what the true, correct answer is here.  My guess is that 1933 was indeed ruled a shared championship at the time, and the current listing on the RMAC website was made without regard to the finer historical points.  I know the Big Ten Conference ignored ties in its early days (until 1945, I believe) when crowning champions. Jweiss11 (talk) 05:11, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Suraj Randiv
Thanks for reverting my "test edit" to the page. I had made the edit just to check theta the protection I had applied to the page (as User:Abecedare) were working properly, and had intended to revert my change soon; but you were just too fast for me :-) Cheers and sorry for creating the extra work for you! AbecedareClone (talk) 05:10, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. I figured out what was going on when I clicked on your talk page to leave you a warning and got redirected to your main account. Anyway, I'm sorry if I prevented you from seeing what you wanted to see. Suffice it to say, I saw the change to Suraj Randiv from the Pages with pending changes page so the protection is working. —Ute in DC (talk) 05:15, 17 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It's always good to see systems working as intended. Happy patrolling and editing! Abecedare (talk) 05:20, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

This person is now editing all sorts of Wiki entries without any knowledge or merit
Take for instance Hamfatter - an English pop band. What on earth do YOU know about them, that you declare yourself an expert? And Scot Biao - you have edited various Wiki entry changes with the most subjective and obsessive meddling I have ever seen on this site. Are you some kind of crazed Biao fan? I am reminded of the Stephen King novel "Misery". You don't 'own' Scot Biao, you know - and you don't own the Internet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.12.192.73 (talk) 22:11, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No, but I can try to keep you from introducing false information into articles. You know perfectly well that Scott Baio's middle name is not "Chachi" and his boyhood home is not in "Happy Days." You edited the Scott Baio article just to vandalize wikipedia and destroy it for anyone who wants to get legitimate information from it. If you ever want to make constructive, factual additions to wikipedia, you will be accepted with open arms. —Ute in DC (talk) 22:38, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Roman
Hi, I agree with your restoration of Roman in a few places. Please see: User_talk:Hmains. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 01:31, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

LSU
I noticed that you undid my edit to this page. LSU is ranked #16 in the current week's poll, as I edited. See ESPN.com. Neither Northwestern nor Vanderbilt were ranked in the preseason poll. See again, ESPN.com. Please do not remove accurate information and add inaccurate information. Thank you. —Ute in DC (talk) 02:20, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry ment to put it back You deleted Vanderbilts ranking I ment to put LSU as #16. LSU is ranked 25th, 16th, and 19th. This is not a preseason poll it is when the teams meet or met. I know a lot of you do not want to see anyone out of the top 25 however ther is a spot for ranking so why not use it.

<span style="font-weight:bold; color:blue; text-shadow:grey 0.7em 0.7em 0.7em; letter-spacing: 4px; padding: 3px 6px;"> MDSanker  MDSanker  15:22, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

The poll you are citing to is not the "Coaches Poll". That is one website's listing of the 120 programs of the Football Bowl Subdivision. It is no more authoritative than many other blogs. Wikipedia requires reliable sources. If you want to mention that CBSSPorts.com ranks Vandy as the 86th program in the nation, be my guest, but you need to do so in the appropriate place. Putting it in the table that identifies it as the Coaches' Poll is simply false. The CBSSports.com ranking is not the Coaches' Poll. It's not even a "poll" per se because the rankings come from the CBS staff and not from people all over the country. A better place to mention this ranking would be in the game notes section, if you intend to include it. —Ute in DC (talk) 03:55, 8 September 2010 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MDSanker"

Well on the poll you are refering to your team is ranked 19th not 16th. <span style="font-weight:bold; color:blue; text-shadow:grey 0.7em 0.7em 0.7em; letter-spacing: 4px; padding: 3px 6px;"> MDSanker  MDSanker  MDSanker (talk)  16:01, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

No look at it at espn and see for your self Coaches poll LSU 19 not 16. http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings <span style="font-weight:bold; color:blue; text-shadow:grey 0.7em 0.7em 0.7em; letter-spacing: 4px; padding: 3px 6px;"> MDSanker  MDSanker  MDSanker (talk)  16:10, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Template hater?
Hey Ute -

Do you think keeping the SEC football schedules updated in two places is a better way to go than to create one template? I thought I was improving the efficiency of keeping the information updated. Isn't that why they are there? Sorry that you disagree. <font face="arial, sans" color="#990000"> DAWG <font face="arial,sans&#39; color=">in <font face="arial, sans" color="#000000"> Roswell  01:58, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think if you are going to do that, you need a link on the schedule so that anyone can edit it. Many people who edit college football articles do not edit often and aren't familiar with templates. Also, by switching to the template, you took away the citations that were within the schedule. The switch to templates could work, but you really should have talked to other editors before implementing a big change like that. —Ute in DC (talk) 02:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with this it is okay to link the page from the year by year page to the main pag since that one will be removed at the end of the year. —MDSanker (talk) 03:18, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks, Ute in DC, you are the king of clean-up. I'm glad you reverted the edits from BSUorangecrush...I'm a bit worried about that user's intentions (he added in all that obviously subjective stuff about Tennessee being the 8th best SEC team and Poole gashing Oregon's defense. I'm going to look and see if this is a pattern. If it is, I'll let you know. Obamafan70 (talk) 21:25, 13 September 2010 (UTC)


 * How can you tell where IP's are? I'm guessing you are an admin, then. haha Obamafan70 (talk) 21:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I'm not an admin. Anyone can find this out. Click on the IP address. On that screen, there are several links on the bottom in small writing. One of them is "Geolocate". If you click on that, it will tell you where their Internet Service Provider is providing the IP user access to the internet. —Ute in DC (talk) 22:02, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Shaky Smithson.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Shaky Smithson.jpg, which you've sourced to Stuart Adams. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MilborneOne (talk) 19:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Minnesota
Ute--- thanks for watching this page. The edits were however in good faith:, but trivial and do not belong in the article. Regards, Kablammo (talk) 20:27, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thanks for clearing that up. —Ute in DC (talk) 20:30, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Head Coaching Record Legend
Arch Rivalry Winner is a legitimate and necessary addition. I will seek proper action if you attempt to change it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.99.82.237 (talk) 23:54, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

AIV
I've requested clarification on your AIV report. Could you explain how the edits are vandalism, then I'll reconsider the report. Thanks, HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   03:34, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Blocked, thanks. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   03:38, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Yikes!
Thanks for dealing with that state title garbage. Jweiss11 (talk) 03:52, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem. I knew I was right and I enjoyed fixing it. I just wanted others to back-me-up so that I would have some evidence when I request a block. —Ute in DC (talk) 03:54, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Rollback
I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback correctly, and for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. —  Tivedshambo   (t/c) 21:44, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File:DeVonte Christopher 11-27-10.jpg


A tag has been placed on File:DeVonte Christopher 11-27-10.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:15, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Infoboxes for NCAA bowl games
I know...I have begun re-adding them... Bcspro (talk) 03:31, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I'm not sure why I was misreading the editing history. Sorry for my confusion. —Ute in DC (talk) 04:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Sharon Osbourne
Welcome to Wikipedia. Please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not include unsupported or inaccurate statements. Whenever you add possibly controversial statements about a living person to an article or any other Wikipedia page, as you did to Sharon Osbourne, you must include proper sources. If you don't know how to cite a source, you may want to read Referencing for beginners for guidelines. Thank you. —Ute in DC (talk) 19:32, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello. The source is her current US show The Talk (TV series). She just said her birth name was Sharonn Rachel Levy. For the other edit, the reason why I took out Arden is because one is only born with 1 maiden name birth name. For Sharon it is Levy. In the 'personal' section it is explained that she/her changed their names from levy to arden. Thank You. 69.140.66.37 (talk) 19:45, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * You (allegedly) watching a tv show is not a reliable source. You need to have an inline citation. —Ute in DC (talk) 19:55, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Why are you saying allegedly? It is the 8 Dec 10 episode of The Talk (TV series). TV is a reliable source. I didn't ask you to approve the edit. I will now go ask someone who knows what they are doing. 69.140.66.37 (talk) 20:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the nice welcome message! I was looking for a concise listing of everything. Much appreciated :-) Cheers - Lord Roem (talk) 00:51, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. If you have any questions, feel free to ask! —Ute in DC (talk) 00:55, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I actually do have a quick question - I've been seeing all these cool boxes on pages, like on your main user page. How can I add these? Lord Roem (talk) 01:00, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you are referring to Wikitables. See Help:Wikitable for the basics of building a Wikitable. That's not my strong suit so I usually have to create one through trial and error. I find a table or box that I like and snag the code — copy and paste — and then I modify the colors and whatnot as needed. I usually preview the changes I made before saving, by clicking on "Show preview." If that doesn't answer your question, I'd be happy to try and clarify. —Ute in DC (talk) 01:06, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm referring to those boxes like "This user graduated from Penn" or "This user has been on wikipedia for X years". They seem like fun little things to add to my profile. Lord Roem (talk) 01:53, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for clarifying. Those are userboxes. See Userboxes for the basics. At the bottom of the linked page are further links to thousands of userboxes. For example, there is a link to Userboxes/Education where you would find education userboxes. Here is a link for some userboxes related to how long a person has been editing. Here's a link to Pennsylvania College userboxes. It looks like there are at least 5 UPenn userboxes already designed. I hope you do decide to put some userboxes on your page; it helps to build the sense of community on Wikipedia. —Ute in DC (talk) 02:10, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Great! Thanks again! :-) Cheers, Lord Roem (talk) 02:14, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. I had not known there was a construction tag. What what I do without you? ;-) -- Lord Roem (talk) 06:21, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

The award is very nice, thank you. :) -- Lord Roem (talk) 23:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the barnstar and happy holidays. All the best for the new year. Jweiss11 (talk) 07:47, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

MyLifeIsAverage
You accepted a non-neutral addition here of this edit, which I have reverted. Cunard (talk) 07:33, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Help?
So, I am trying to add information to an article, and I would like to use a source that has been cited previously. How do I do that? Page I am working on. Notice that sources 1 and 5 are the same. Thank you! Jhunt47 (talk) 15:01, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay I made the citations the same in your workspace. Here's how you do it. Within the ref tag the precedes one of the citations write <ref name="XXX Whatever"> . The other times you use the same citation, you don't have to include the reference information. Just simply write for every other time you want to use it. Don't forget the forward slash. Is that clear? I'm not sure I'm being clear. —Ute in DC (talk) 19:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Yea, that makes sense, and I can see what you did on that page. Thank you! Jhunt47 (talk) 09:44, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

You accidentally vandalized tonight
Pillow.

Not a big deal but please pay close attention when reverting multiple edits.  — Soap  —  01:50, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I see. That's not "vandalism" as such. Careless, but definitely not vandalism. —Ute in DC (talk) 08:44, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011
Hello Ute in DC. Thanks for the speedy deletion work you are doing; it's a very important activity! I did want to let you know, though, regarding The Norwegian Sway, that current consensus holds that it is bad practice to tag articles for speedy deletion as lacking context (CSD A1) or content (CSD A3) moments after creation, as users may be actively working on the article content. Ten to fifteen minutes is considered a good time to wait before tagging such articles under either of these criteria. Please note that before an appropriate waiting period is over, the articles should not be marked as patrolled, so that the wait does not result in the article escaping review at a later time. Nothing here is meant to apply to any other criterion; attack pages and copyright violations especially should be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks. Reaper Eternal (talk) 22:40, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks for letting me know. I'll be sure to adhere to that consensus. —Ute in DC (talk) 22:41, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I have to contest this. That article was an obvious candidate for speedy deletion, regardless of how long it had been posted, and your tagging was perfectly appropriate. Tagging to quickly is a legitimate concern, but this was a borderline attack page that mentioned a minor by name. The sooner something like that is gone, the better. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:13, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * For reference, here is the entire content of the deleted article, with the name omitted: "The Norwegian Sway" was first introduced in Roseville, CA, by foreign exchange student name redacted . This qualifies for at least two, possibly three different criteria, no context, no assertion of notability (in fact quite the opposite), and possibly an attack page. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:18, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry if you do not agree, Beeblebrox, but current consensus does hold that A1 or A3 tags should not be applied moments after creation of the article. In WP:CSD, under criteria A1, it gives an example of an even dumber article which it still says should not be tagged moments after creation. In the footnote, it mentions that at least a ten-minute delay should be given. The article may have qualified as an A7, I won't contest that, but it was not an attack page since it did not threaten or disparage its subject. Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:32, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * So we should let an article that identifies a minor by name sit for ten minutes as a gesture of good faith to the user who created it? I don't think so. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:34, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * How do you know it was a minor? Exchange students are almost always adults. Anyway, upon retrospect, I believe I was wrong about the hasty A1 tagging warning, since it completely identified it's subject. "Norwegian Sway" is a company. Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:42, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess we have an entirely different experiences with exchange students. I have never in my life met one who was an adult. The high school I went to participated in AFS, we traded kids our own age with foreign schools. I've met college students who came to study at American schools, but never an actual "exchange student," I wasn't aware they even had such programs past secondary school. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:58, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

RE: A Belated Welcome!
Thank you for the welcome, Ute in DC!! And don't worry about it being late =] Swimnteach (talk) 02:52, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Formal mediation has been requested
Formal mediation of the dispute relating to Mercer Island High School has been requested. As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. The process of mediation is voluntary and focuses exclusively on the content issues over which there is disagreement. Please review the request page and the guide to formal mediation, and then indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Discussion relating to the mediation request is welcome at the case talk page.

Message delivered by MediationBot (talk) on behalf of the Mediation Committee. 16:14, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

the College Football Project doesn't rank the importance of articles
I noticed that after I made the edit and I asked why on the template's talk page. Do you know why that is? --Muboshgu (talk) 20:03, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No I don't really know. On WikiProject College football/Assessment it simply says "For various reasons, importance scale criteria are not included in Wikiproject College football labels." I think the project had trouble coming to a consensus on a proper scale. Many editors kept putting a lot of weight on who played well in the NFL. Other editors thought that should be irrelevant to the College football project. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 1 for the discussion. As for me, I don't find the importance scales helpful on other projects. For the most part, editors choose which articles to edit based on what subjects they find interesting. —Ute in DC (talk) 20:15, 17 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay found it. I found the relevant College football project discussion: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football/Archive 5. In a nut shell, editors decided that an importance scale was unimportant and no one used it. —Ute in DC (talk) 20:39, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Excited!
Hey! If you don't remember, you first welcomed me to Wikipedia. :) I just realized I broke 1000 edits!!! I just want to celebrate, and why not with the first person I met? Best regards, Lord Roem (talk) 23:17, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Well done indeed. It took me over half-a-year to reach that many edits. Furthermore, from all appearances, your first edits seem quite a bit more substantive than my first edits. Keep up the good work. You've been a valuable new member to Wikipedia. —Ute in DC (talk) 23:23, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you :) -- Lord Roem (talk) 03:10, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome!
It's much appreciated, Ute. When you first step through the gates, it seems like a mighty big city, so it's good to be welcomed. How does one award a barnstar? :)

BTW, right on, bro/sis, with that user citing a TV show he/she alleged watched. If standards aren't maintained, we'll soon have cites to characters in MMP games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rittenhoused (talk • contribs) 06:31, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

FYI
Thanks and - a link you might need to know about regarding http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Naughtiestboy - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Another_account - SatuSuro 09:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Talk
Thanks Ute for the warm welcome to Wiki. I did not realize that I had signed a talk page other than my own. Did I make some sort of mistake? Sould I be signing (~ ~ ~ ~)on the "Edit Summary" when I edit an article? Thanks! TheGrouchWho (talk) 09:36, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected
The request for mediation concerning Mercer Island High School, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. An explanation of why it has not been possible for this dispute to proceed to formal mediation is provided at the mediation request page (which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time). Questions relating to the rejection of this dispute can be directed to the Committee chairperson or e-mailed to the mediation mailing list. For more information on other available steps in the dispute resolution process, see Dispute resolution.

For the Mediation Committee, User:AGK (talk) 21:14, 23 January 2011 (UTC) (Delivered by MediationBot, on behalf of the Mediation Committee.)

Copyedit
Hey Ute - I saw you're a member of the Guild of Copy Editor and as I know you as well, I want to see if you would be able to go through and copyedit my artice Legal Services Corp. v. Velazquez, as I want to increase its quality and try out an FA. Whoa that was a long sentence. Anywho, cheers! Lord Roem (talk) 00:06, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure no problem. I'll take a look at it. —Ute in DC (talk) 01:24, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Lord Roem (talk) 17:51, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Are there any law review articles that strongly approved of the Valazquez decision? The analysis section is largely a critique with no one praising the decision. I think some balance there would improve the article. —Ute in DC (talk) 19:13, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I have tried to find others, but most (if not all) believe that its 'distinction' with the earlier Rust case is improper. Nevertheless, I will keep searching. Lord Roem (talk) 20:32, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's probably in the nature of law review articles. There's a lot less to say if someone agrees with the Court's decision. —Ute in DC (talk) 20:45, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Ha, too true. ;) Lord Roem (talk) 22:44, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Newpage patrol
Hey, just a friendly reminder to mark as patrolled pages you tag for speedy deletion so other patrollers don't run across them again. Thanks for helping out, and feel free to delete this message once you've seen it Feezo <FONT SIZE="-2">(Talk)</FONT> 07:26, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Anamika Kaka Datta Roadies 8
Hello Ute in DC. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Anamika Kaka Datta Roadies 8, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Being featured in a notable TV show (MTV Roadies) is a claim to significance. Thank you. -- Lear's Fool 12:05, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Just so you know, I've proposed the article for deletion. -- Lear's Fool 12:19, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Eastenders the butchers and jacksons
Hello Ute in DC, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I deleted Eastenders the butchers and jacksons, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow and specific, and the process is more effective if the correct criterion is used. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. nancy 21:24, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * That does not explain what your problem was with my tagging. It appeared to me that the "article" described an unremarkable family so I tagged it as describing an unremarkable person. I didn't choose the tag randomly; it was the closest category that fit. —Ute in DC (talk) 21:28, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
 * A7 only applies to real people, groups, companies. It does not apply to fictional characters. As the article said, the Butchers and Jacksons are characters in the TV soap EastEnders.  nancy  09:38, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The article most definitely did not say that they were fictional characters. It presented the characters as a "real" family. It was written in WP:INUNIVERSE style. The only mention of "Eastenders" was the title of the article. Because I am not familiar with that soap opera, I thought this was someone trying to write an article about a family that lived on the east end of London. Most of your original note was fine with me, but I was upset that you instructed me to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion. I am quite familiar with speedy deletion criteria and found that particular sentence to be condescending. —Ute in DC (talk) 09:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that; it was certainly not my intention to be condescending. The text is automatically generated by CSD helper which is an admin tool for processing speedies. WRT to your other point, the first sentence of the article was "The Butchers are a family in Eastenders". Best,  nancy  10:20, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

What do you ask? — Preceding unsigned comment added by VJ-Yugo (talk • contribs) 21:45, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry. I'm not sure I understand your question. I ask questions of people who can clarify Wikipedia procedures or policies. Are you asking me what questions you should ask me? You can ask me anything you want and I would be happy to help. —Ute in DC (talk) 21:58, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Palestinian Christians
Hi Ute, I do not agree with your last edits and do not appreciate them at all; why did you delete them? even though they were sourced from many different websites, including Christianity today which is a very well known and objective website?--82.213.38.2 (talk) 07:49, 2 February 2011 (UTC)--82.213.38.2 (talk) 07:49, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * You need to start following Wikipedia policies. The edits I made removed inappropriate content. Please review these policies: wp:Neutral, wp:verifiable, and wp:reliable sources. Specifically, on Wikipedia's policy of Verifiability, I call to your attention that Wikipedia is "not truth" and Wikipedia should not comment on the falsehood of the conviction of Ameer Makhoul. I will add back the information sourced to Christianity Today, but the other information was poorly sourced or not sourced at all. —Ute in DC (talk) 07:57, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

here are just some example of a quick search:

Website: Washington Interfaith Alliance for Middle East Peace Title: Reflections on Bethlehem “Bethlehem, the biblical birth city of the Lord and Savior Jesus, is one of the oldest continually inhabited cities of the world. Today in Bethlehem, the descendants of Christ’s first followers are still present, maintaining their churches and honoring their faith. They are the Living Stones in the Holy Land, and they continue to be our Living Church 2,000 years later.” http://www.wiamep.org/events/bethlehemreflections.htm

Website: Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation Title: Housing Rehabilitation Program (HRP) “The Holy Land (Jordan, Israel and Palestine) is home to over 350,000 Christians, most of whom are descendants of Jesus' disciples and those whom the disciples converted. “ http://www.hcef.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=56&Itemid=69

Website: The Bethlehem Association Title: Pilgrimage to the Holy Land “The pilgrims enjoyed a tremendous spiritual enjoyment in tracing some of the steps taken by Jesus Christ, but also saw first hand the difficult life endured by the descendant of the Disciples, the Christian community in Jerusalem and Bethlehem.” http://www.bethlehemassoc.org/sub_pages/AlbertHazboun.htm

Website: Mission Islam Title: 30 Little Known Facts About Israel “Did you know that Palestinian Christians are considered the "living stones" of Christianity because they are the direct descendants of the disciples of Jesus Christ?” http://www.missionislam.com/nwo/littlefacts.htm

Website: Al-Busha (The Official Website of the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem for the Arab-American Roman Catholics) Title: Christians Are Leaving the Holy Land “But the plight of Palestinian Christians - the living descendants of Jesus and the apostles “

Website: Counter Currents Title: There's Nothing Christian About Zionism “I responded just as fervently that the Palestinian Christians are the descendants of those who first followed Jesus and they have been denied inalienable human rights by the Israeli government.” http://www.countercurrents.org/fleming130610.htm

Website: Western Voices World News Title: Gaza's Orthodox Christians Celebrate Dark Christmas “Palestinian Christians, descendants of church congregations literally founded by Christ's Apostles,” http://wvwnews.net/story.php?id=6394

Website: Australians for Palestine Title: Early Palestine “The Christians among them are descendants of the first Christians, who adopted Christianity at the time of Jesus Christ and the Apostles. “ http://australiansforpalestine.com/history/pre-1948

Website: The Seattle Times Title: Christianity in the Holy Land Author: Floyd J. McKay, a journalism professor at Western Washington University, is a regular contributor to Times editorial pages. E-mail him atfloydmckay@yahoo.com “Palestinian Christians, descendants of the Apostles and their followers” http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2001822015_floyd24.html

Website: the official website of the Episcopal Church Title: Don't forget the Holy Land's indigenous Christian population “ Somehow, it was not obvious to me that Christians in the Holy Land, descendents of the Apostles, are Palestinian. Those blond Jesus images from childhood take a long time to erase. Palestinian Christians did not convert to Christianity; they've lived and spread Christ's message throughout the region over the last 2000 years. “ http://www.ecusa.anglican.org/80050_126617_ENG_HTM.htm

Website: Al-Busha (The Official Website of the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem for the Arab-American Roman Catholics) Title: THE FORGOTTEN FAITHFUL: PALESTINIAN CHRISTIANS Author: Dr Anthony McRoy “The Palestinian Christians of today are the descendants of [the] early Christians... Palestinian Christians of today are the present generation of that great cloud of witnesses to Jesus who came before them and who will, God willing, come after them until Christ comes again. They and their ancestors have maintained a living witness to Jesus and his Resurrection from the beginning of the Church, and they should see themselves dynamically continuing such a witness in the land, witnesses to the Resurrection.” http://www.al-bushra.org/latpatra/anthony.htm

Website: Christianity Today Title: The Palestinian Christians: Strangers in a Familiar Land “My new friend soon informed me that Palestinian Christians had lived in the Holy Land since the time of Jesus, “ http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/news/2003/aug8.html

Website: Jerusalemites Title: Arab Christians: An Endangered Species Author: Bishop Riah Abu El-Assal “Two millennia later, Arab Christians, largely unnoticed and in serious danger of extinction, still inhabit the land, keeping the faith and the heritage as the descendants of the first church.” http://www.jerusalemites.org/jerusalem/christianity/2.htm

do you need any more evidence and sources?

please revert back all the last edits. Thanks--82.213.38.2 (talk) 09:29, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Ute in DC, after providing all these reliable and informative sources, don't you think its the time to revert back the last edits?--82.213.38.2 (talk) 14:58, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Ute in DC, I think you shouldn't have restored that material, the cited article is far from an academic reliable source for such fact. The article says "when I asked for a missionary kid as a roommate and the college matched me up with a Palestinian Christian. My new friend soon informed me that Palestinian Christians had lived in the Holy Land since the time of Jesus". Do you consider the missionary kid a reliable source for the fact "Palestinian Christians had lived in the Holy Land since the time of Jesus"? Clearly, this is a controversial claim with political significance and must be based on a reliable, academic source. Marokwitz (talk) 08:17, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

@Marokwitz: maybe Palestinian Christians came from the moon or mars, according to your political biased views! there is also something called logic and common sense.--82.213.38.2 (talk) 09:29, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. It's not a reliable source. The content of the claim is not particularly controversial: Christians have lived in the area for thousands of years. But if you feel it's best to remove that edit, go ahead. —Ute in DC (talk) 08:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * It is non controversial that Christians have lived in the area for thousands of years, but implying that the current Palestinian Arabs descend from the first Christians surely needs better sourcing to a serious research involving genetic tests, historic documents etc. Marokwitz (talk) 08:47, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

@ Marokwitz, again, all ur edits are politically motivated and not being objective at all.--82.213.38.2 (talk) 09:29, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I advice you to do a little research before you delete information just because you do not politically agree with--82.213.38.2 (talk) 09:29, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


 * 82.213.38.2, the deletions have nothing to do with objectivity. Again, as you have been told several times, please read the relevant Wikipedia policies, it seems that you are not aware of Wikipedia's definition of "reliable sources". You need to distinguish between opinion articles / self published articles, and high quality academic sources. Marokwitz (talk) 11:41, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

I would say the exact same thing to you!

Moreover, your deletions have proved that you use wikipedia to promote political agenda by adding what you think is right and deleting what you do not politically agree with--82.213.38.2 (talk) 12:32, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Ute in DC who reverted your recent edits, as well as the administrator who locked the page, seem to agree that those sources are non reliable. Are they too using Wikipedia to promote their "political agenda"? Marokwitz (talk) 12:59, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Ute in DC: after providing all these reliable and informative sources, don't you think its the time to revert back the last edits?--82.213.38.2 (talk) 07:33, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think you read the page on wp: reliable sources because those aren't reliable sources. —Ute in DC (talk) 03:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

I did read it long time ago and I read it again, but I could not find what you are talking about, as the vast majority of the links I provided above are reliable!--82.213.38.2 (talk) 07:52, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Hossam Badrawi
Good afternoon. I think he deserves an article. I have expanded a bit Hossam Badrawi. I hope someone will expand it. I will go to rest. Could you please save it from speedy deletion? Stuff are going here very quickly! Regards --Youssef (talk) 19:43, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Proposed deletion is not speedy deletions. It has one week to have citations added to demonstrate wp:notability. All biographies of living people (WP:BLP) must have at least one citation to an unaffiliated reliable source. —Ute in DC (talk) 19:45, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok. Thanks for the answer. Events are happening quickly in Egypt. Perhaps it is better to wait a bit to find good references. --Youssef (talk) 19:51, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * And now that it has a citation to the BBC, I've removed the proposed deletions tags. —Ute in DC (talk) 19:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome, and a question
Hi - thanks for posting the welcome on my talk page. You said I could ask you questions, so here is a question I have.

If I see a page that is tagged as having a problem, such as an "orphan", and I fix the problem, for example by adding links to the orphan from other pages, should I remove the tag, or should I leave it for someone more experienced to later come along and review what I did and remove the tag?

Michael Barkowski (talk) 16:39, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Stade de France
I'm seriously at a lost for words here......I see you have reported the user for possibly using sock-puppets. I'll support you if necessary. I, initially, had a problem with the same exact issue this person is having and, once I was informed of the guidelines for a hatnote, I relented. This user simply won't accept it. Even when you provide proof of why the hatnote must be on the page. Aside from the sockpuppetry, what is protocol on this issue? — Joao10Siamun (talk) 10:18, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Well it's one user with two names. If Wikipedia works as it is supposed to work, an administrator will ban both accounts and the page will easily be returned to normal. Sometimes it is hard to get an administrator's attention at this time of day, but eventually this should all be sorted out. It will just take a little patience on our part. —Ute in DC (talk) 10:21, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Dave_Hensman
Hi, I have requested semi-protection of the above BLP page due to the recent (and seemingly ongoing) vandalism. I think that there is some sockpuppeting going on as you'll see from the history & advice given to the "various" vandals on their talk pages. Hope this is ok with you. - Sitush (talk) 21:40, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * You don't need my permission to ask for page protection. If you believe that is an appropriate remedy, then bring it to the attention of an administrator and they will do what they feel is best. —Ute in DC (talk) 21:43, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I think it is an unfortunate remedy - you, me and others are spending too much time fixing a problem on a BLP. I'd rather not see it protected but this game of ping-pong will run and run otherwise, I fear. See what happens. - Sitush (talk) 21:45, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Jimmer links
Why did you mark those links as spam? Both are informational links on Jimmer Fredette. You will note that the AnnArbor.com (Ref. 20 - http://annarbor.com/sports/um-basketball/byu-guard-jimmer-fredette-takes-lead-in-third-annarborcom-national-player-of-the-year-poll/) straw poll report of Player of the Year references JimmerPOY.com, in addition to ESPN's story (http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/22753/jimmer-mania-gives-us-epic-facebook-thread) of the Michelle Peralta "Jimmer Worship" story. The story originated on JimmerPOY.com, hence the "Hat Tip" by ESPN at the end of the story.
 * The first link was Jimmer Fredette for Player of the Year, which violates WP:FANSITE. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a way for people to drive traffic to their blog. —Ute in DC (talk) 04:18, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Windom, Minnesota
Hello, you recently removed my edit on the Windom, Minnesota page where I labeled myself as a notable native. Although I fully intend to one day be put on that page for the very reason of becoming President of the United States, I understand why it should not be there. (I was slightly hoping to have it there so when I ran someday people would know I have planned on it for a long time) I will be more careful to keep my future posts unbiased and verifiable. Thank You --Ryan Vesey (talk) 23:57, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia and find a way to add productive edits. From what I can see, most of your edits have been constructive so keep that up. —Ute in DC (talk) 00:01, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

ChHP211
If you give me the name of a popular website where I can promote my books for free I promise not to try to promote anything on here again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChHP211 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Daniel Harding
Thanks for your one revert back on 9 February from the NPOV edits by CAMIEkaterina, who unfortunately has struck again at NPOV'ing the Daniel Harding page. I've edited in back, but have no doubt she'll be back again. From her name, she clearly works for Columbia Artists Management Inc (CAMI). Given that Daniel Harding is the only wikipedia page she's edited, IMHO, she clearly needs to have her access blocked, or the article needs to be protected. I saw that Falcon8765 has also tried to revert the page and I will send essentially this name communication there as well. Cheers, DJRafe (talk) 00:26, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

March 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive
Hi. On behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors, I am inviting you to sign up for our March Backlog Elimination Drive. Win a barnstar! It's fun. -- Diannaa (Talk) 01:32, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Go Ute
Loved the fruit, and smiled at the finding them as alternative to cookies, :-). Hope UTAH becomes Pacific-10's protagonist and wins the conference in their very first year! --Napoletanamente (talk) 05:22, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I look forward to Utah's admission to the Pac-12 and the improved competition. —Ute in DC (talk) 05:26, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

KABOOM!
And nothing is left except the soothing smell of pine.. Half  Shadow  05:30, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the revert. Sockpuppet has been blocked. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 18:35, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you Ute for the very nice welcome! I've always found Wikipedia very useful and decided to finally give back! :D Am treading lightly right now by just adding internal/external links...and correcting my mistakes! Thanks again Aislesoffiles (talk) 02:11, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Monty the meerkat‎
I'd like this article to be used for DYK for April Fools Day, in which "tricks" are not only allowed, but encouraged, and besides, if I did not find the article in Amateur Photographer everybody would have believed it to be truth, because neither The Times, nor Daily Mirror never corrected their mistake. Could you please revert yourself at least for now? Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:49, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Tonga national football team
Why are you undoing my posts, do you know tonga like I do? I live and breathe tonga. I feel my edits are legitimate and are well known around the footballing world. Feldmans are the new greatest sensation. Seriously, what would you know about Tonga. I was born in Nuku'alofa Tonga. I know what goes on there. Are you in any sense Tongan or just a loser who edits random posts. Please let me know as I am really sad that the world is being deprived such truthful and delicate knowledge such as the one i am trying to spread. Do not want to sound mean or to instigate people, but I know TONGA! you do not! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Utedchater (talk • contribs) 07:11, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * One does not have to be an expert to recognize vandalism. And your edits were obviously vandalism. You gave literally every player on the team the surname of "Feldman" which is not even a Tongan last name. You also said that a player scored 78 goals in one game. I've been editing Wikipedia long enough to spot vandalism. —Ute in DC (talk) 07:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

You still have not answered my question. Are you Tongan, or do you know anything about the Tongan soccer team? Mario Gomez, is a German national football star. Is Gomez an German name? Eduardo da Silva, croatian star...Is that anything remotely close to croatian. NO!!! Can you name one Tongan player currently? I listed a Toghill and a Vunga in there. Have you not heard about the Rata Tohgill referendum? Obvisouly not. If you do not know anything about soccer than you should not be editing. It is not impossible to score 78 goals in one match. Check this link http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2002/nov/01/newsstory.sport5, the same guy scored all their goals. 149 in total. So do not give me this bull crap about vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Utedchater (talk • contribs) 07:31, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Do not Vandalize!
You are a vandalizer. Wikipedia would be much better off without people like you destroying knowledge of which you do not possess. If you are ignorant, leave the information alone.

Utedchater — Preceding unsigned comment added by Utedchater (talk • contribs) 07:16, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Billy Murray article
Hi there, so I would like to set things straight on the subject of bill murray's son Cooper Murray. My name is Jackson Murray and I'm coopers older brother. You may consider adding the nickname "the ram" may have been vandalism but I assure you in all reality that Cooper honestly goes by "the ram" so if you could I would very much appreciate you not editing any information that I post in regards to Bill Murray as I am in fact a primary source. Thank you I'm very sorry for the missunderstanding. Dooglefish (talk) 01:24, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 04:49, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism
Hi Ute. Thanks for your warm welcome. I wonder if you can help me stop continuing vandalism on the page that I have substantially edited on February 8, 2011 for Chado Ralph Rucci. Mr. Rucci is an American fashion designer who exhibited garments from his collection in quite a few museums. The only museum outside of the U.S,. however, is the Russian Fashion Museum, in Moscow. This fact has been widely covered and I have referenced it in the article, as well as provided bibliography. For some reason, wiki user RosinaR, without any justification, is repeatedly removing all information pertaining to this exhibition, as well as the relevant bibliography and the link -Руччи, Ральф - to his page on Russian wikipedia. User RosinaR is also removing well researched information on younger celebrities who are known to wear his designs – highly important fact, as Rucci is often perceived (erroneously) as the designer who caters exclusively to older ladies. This is vandalism. Can you help me protect the page and put a stop to RosinaR's vandalism? Thank you. --Robert Biddulph (talk) 15:41, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * No worries. This matter has been resolved positively with the help of wiki administrators.--Robert Biddulph (talk) 07:20, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 14:40, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Pow!
You didn't warn that 71.191 vandal. It is also sad that this is coming from a n00b (I've been here only a week). Who needs names? talk the talk 07:14, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive update
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 06:58, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Adoption
Hey. Saw your add on the adoption page and I am looking for someone to show me how to be a more active contributer and noticed you because you mentioned being active in the college football project and I am a huge college football fan and have a lot of random knowledge on the subject. I'm on Wikipedia all of the time, but I only make edits when I see vandalism or something small when I see incorrect information. This is due, not only to my ineptitude with HTML but also because I'm really just not very sure on what to do. Look forward to hearing from you. Mikist4 (talk) 19:43, 15 May 2011 (UTC)mikist4


 * Thanks for getting back to me. I only have a few questions as of now. First off, is there any way to get in touch with you outside of the talk page? Communicating on here is still a little bit confusing for me.  Also, I need a some help setting up my user page...no idea how to do that.  Finally, if you want to check out my contributions, I recently added to the talk page of the North American Beaver as well as the talk page of Michele Bachmann both with questions about changes I think should be made.  If you would mind giving them both a look, I would appreciate it.  Thanks.  Mikist4 (talk) 18:32, 17 May 2011 (UTC)


 * So, I finally got my user page set up a little bit. I was wondering if there was any way to link my contributions to it or anything like that? I don't have too many yet, but it would still be pretty cool to have some sort of counter or even a link to the page that shows them. Thanks for your time. Mikist4 (talk) 18:22, 8 June 2011 (UTC)\


 * Thanks, exactly what I wanted. Final question (for now, at least) is do you know of any user boxes that will auto count the edits that you have made.  I have seen them on the pages of users who have made thousands of edits, but it seems as though they put the number in themselves.  Thanks. Mikist4 (talk) 20:10, 10 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I finally created my first article on Dewey Bozella. It's just a stub as of now because I've been pretty busy.  I didn't have much trouble with it, however I don't know how to cite a source that is used more than once.  I see some articles have the little [1] or whatever the source may be appear multiple times throughout an article.  What is the code to do this? Thanks for your help and feel free to check out the article and offer any advice.  Mikist4 (talk) 19:07, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

New editor
Thanks for the hello and links, especially to make new articles. I'm going to use that soon. I've run into some editors in circumcision who have questionable ethics. Any advice?Earthsales5 (talk) 00:01, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Try using the talk page to work out differences. It looks like you have been running up against the WP:3RR. It's best to try to work towards compromise when editing an article. If, on the other hand, you are removing pure WP:Vandalism, notify an administrator through the Administrator intervention against vandalism. I hope that helps. —Ute in DC (talk) 00:26, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It's talk page or edit summary writing that's badly motivated, prompting my Q. I didn't know 3rr and looks like I came close once but won't again thanks.  How do you report specific editors violating text and changes?Earthsales5 (talk) 03:29, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 08:26, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive invitation
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 09:33, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 17:22, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

College football season records table
Ute, your opinions and votes are solicited at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 17:03, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 02:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

USU
Hey Ute,

I need help. I'm looking to improve the Utah State University page, and I've put it up for Peer Review. Would you mind taking a look at it? I have been working a lot recently on some of the smaller USU pages (RCDE, Alumni) and if you see any improvements that can be made on those as well, I would appreciate hearing your thoughts. Thank you! Jhunt47 (talk) 23:23, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll look it over later this evening and start copy editing it. I'll get back to you with suggestions after I've done that. —Ute in DC (talk) 23:27, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Running_up_the_score
Hey Ute, re: the "unexplained deletion of sourced material" on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Running_up_the_score#Wisconsin, I made the deletion because the statement "On November 13, 2010, the Wisconsin Badgers throttled the Indiana Hoosiers 83–20, drawing criticism from Indiana coach Bill Lynch. [10]" is clearly contradicted by the cited-to article, see:

"But one place the disapproval did not come from was the opponent. Indiana's head coach Bill Lynch put all the blame for Wisconsin's 83 points on his own team.

"I didn't have any problem," Lynch said in the Big Ten coaches' teleconference Tuesday. "I said it after the game, and I feel the same way now. I think it's our responsibility to stop them, and we didn't do a very good job of that. And we didn't take care of the ball. … That's on us.'" Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.90.144.23 (talk) 18:58, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

cfb rivalry pages
would you like to help me restore the series record to World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party in that case? I've tried to add the series record to that page and it gets reverted. editing wikipedia is useless if i'm just gonna be reverted, which is part of the reason i choose not to have an account — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.32.129.220 (talk) 00:56, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


 * is the WLOCP page with the series record. To be fair I have included the series as it is according to UGA and according to UF. Others have said it looks horrible but I don't see any better way to include it without violating NPOV, etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.32.129.220 (talk) 01:44, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment request
Since you were interested in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football, I feel you might have an interest in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject College football. Basically, there are three issues. 1. Should we have rivalry navboxes for conferences; 2. Should we have a policy to make each conference's navbox include non-conference rivalries and/or non-football rivalries; 3. Should we have individual school rivalry navboxes.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:17, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

GOCE newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 11:39, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE 2011 Year-End Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)