Here's that first assignment for finding three vandalism edits.

• Diff 1: [1] Replaced "Generation" with "fudge" :P.
• Diff 2: [2] Replaces "hummus" with "humans." I guess this could be just someone who thought it was supposed to be humans, but I doubt it.
• Diff 3: [3] Completely removed a section.

Oh and for the next part, it said let you know if I use a different browser from Internet Explorer. I mostly use Opera, and I'd prefer if I could continue to use that (it rocks), but I'd be glad to use IE if I had to. Voyaging (talk) 17:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, just saw the 2nd part of the How to revert is section. Voyaging (talk) 17:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

And my answers for the final assignment.

1. What is vandalism? Vandalism is an edit that is done intentionally that does not help Wikipedia at all. Correct
2. What are obvious indicators of a vandalism edit while watching recent changes? A large change in file size, editing from an IP address, or an edit summary that says Blanked the page, or Replaced page with. Correct
3. How do you revert vandalism? You can use undo on the diff page, or use Twinkle on the diff page to rollback the page to the most recent revision other than from the most recent author. Correct
4. What warning template would you use if a user removed or blanked all the content from a page? {{uw-delete1}} or a more severe one. Correct
5. What warning template would you use if a user add the words "i really hate wikipedia!" to an article? {{uw-vandalism1}} or a more severe one. Correct
6. How do you add an article to your watchlist? Click the watch tab at the top of the article. Correct
7. If you misuse such tools as WP:TW or WP:VPRF what could happen? You could be blocked. Correct Voyaging (talk) 18:23, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

All looks good here, will officially grade this later as I am really busy right now. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 18:52, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I'll go ahead and start working on the other lessons. Just get to them whenever you have time. Thanks! Voyaging (talk) 19:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

100% Tiptoety ^talk 23:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I've decided to keep this in the same section, but divide it into smaller sections to make it easier for you to keep tabs on. Let me know if these smaller headings aren't allowed in talk pages. Here's my sandbox page for the assignment. User:Voyaging/Sandbox Voyaging (talk) 19:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

No, having smaller headings is just fine on a talk page. The sandbox looks alright, but I would like to see it look a bit cleaner, as in no so scattered around. More ascetically pleasing if you may. Tiptoety ^talk 19:10, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I revamped the sandbox page. User:Voyaging/Sandbox Voyaging (talk) 20:36, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Great, that looks much better. Keep up the good work! Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 22:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I reverted more than 30 cases of vandalism, here's my contributions: Special:Contributions/Voyaging Voyaging (talk) 02:44, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Here's my list of 15 cleaned up articles:

1. Egyptian Sun Temples of the 5th Dynasty
2. Enron International
3. Schuldt
4. Torbothie
5. AD Vid-Notes
6. Agassiz family
7. Andohapatsakana
8. African aesthetic
9. Atari Coldfire Project
10. Avalon Hill's Advanced Civilization
11. John Edward Ames
12. Bahrain Centre for Studies and Research
13. The Baker Street Boys
14. Bryan Bowers
15. Brinkler classification Voyaging^(talk) 17:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Great! Give me a little while to review them. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 17:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I marked at least 15 articles for CSD. Here are my contributions: Special:Contributions/Voyaging Voyaging^(talk) 23:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Great work, as you will notice, I went through and deleted most of them myself and am pleased that there where no cases where I had to deny your speedy request. I am going to ask you to tag a few more though, just because there was quite a few times that I deleted the article for a much different reason than the article was tagged for. Often an article can be deleted under multiple reasons and the deleting admin chooses which one they like the best, but some of your tagging did not fall under that category. Might I recommend that you re-glance over my deletion lesson and take a look at WP:SPEEDY? Keep up all your great work! Tiptoety ^talk 23:28, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I did a few more. I wasn't which of the A7 tags to use for the albums I marked, and the people/organizations/groups seemed more general, so I used that. Should that have been the A7 for bands instead, since it's about a band, even though it isn't a band page? Voyaging^(talk) 23:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

That would fall under the normal A7 (People, bands, groups, web sites, ect...) take a look here for further information. Tiptoety ^talk 23:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I meant which A7 under Twinkle, because Twinkle has a bunch of different options for A7. Voyaging^(talk) 23:50, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Right, the normal A7 (People, company's, groups), the first option on twinkle. Tiptoety ^talk 23:52, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Did you want me to tag anymore? Voyaging^(talk) 00:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Nope you are good. Tiptoety ^talk 00:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I've got a few questions about this lesson. You said to take a look at "some of these" articles and review them. Do you just mean any articles? Also, how many should I review? I'm just finishing all the articles for the sake of completion. Thanks! Voyaging^(talk) 23:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Any articles listed in that lesson is what i meant, but if you would rather do other articles that is fine too. Oh, lets say 5 articles or so. Tiptoety ^talk 23:29, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

• Eagle Scout (Boy Scouts of America): Definitely FA. It is brilliantly written, a bit short, but only because there is nothing more to cover of the topic. Definitely a good amount of references for the length of the article, plenty of pictures, and just overall a great article.
• Albert Einstein: Probably at FA-caliber, and if not then without a doubt at A-Class. Covers the topic extremely thoroughly, has plenty of citations, though a few are very vague (#61 for example). It might need a bit of work, and it could definitely qualify for FA.
• Elephant: B-Class. It has copyright issues, and is overall very poorly structured. Informationally it's GA quality, but the layout needs serious work.
• A Midsummer Night's Dream: B-Class. Pretty well written, but has issues with citations, so definitely not GA, but also definitely not Start.
• Ubiquitous computing: Start, almost B-Class. It's not too bad, but it's pretty messy, so a bit of work and it could definitely be a B-Class article.
• Julia Pfeiffer Burns State Park: Probably Start, but maybe Stub. I think it's definitely better than Stub, but it lacks comprehensiveness on the topic. Layout wise it's fantastic, it's got an infobox, pictures, it's wikified, good grammar, etc. With a bit of expansion, it could even make it to B-Class. Voyaging^(talk) 00:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I saw you had placed a notice that looks like a template, can you direct me for the template for it? (I have looked). Thanks! Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 21:06, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Please direct me to the page that I placed the template on, that I way I can direct you to the template in question. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 00:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I can't find it, I've gone through 10 days of your edits, I simply don't remember where it was at. :( Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 06:59, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I am going to take a wild guess and say that it could have been {{pp-dispute}}? Tiptoety ^talk 21:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

No, it was similar to the vandalism warning and the stopsign, saying the next action is to be blocked. Sorry to say, I was stuck in one of these wars for a while, with a now-banned user because he was that way on every article he touched. :( Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 00:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe it is {{uw-3RR}}? Tiptoety ^talk 00:10, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Bingo! Right on the nose! Next question, not frivolous though it sounds it. How do I extricate myself from an edit war, when I know by leaving it alone the article will be poorer and incorrect? You'd figure by 37 I'd have that, but the only way I can see it to patiently and consistently revert. It's not exactly vandalism on their part, but it is POV, which has no place here. I've explained my rationale, there is no dialogue... Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 00:16, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Great! Glad that we figured that out! Okay, first I would start a discussion on the articles talk page and hope to god that the user in question starts to discuss there as well. Leave the article the way it is, no not continue to edit war and for sure do not violate WP:3RR. If they continue to edit war or violate 3RR you can report them and they will be blocked. But remember it takes two to edit war. Tiptoety ^talk 00:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[4] No probs! Best, PeterSymonds | talk 17:03, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

For the quick attention to the "fake bot"! -Pete (talk) 17:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

You are more than welcome! Tiptoety ^talk 21:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the immature way I acted back at WP:AN. I was just so eager. Now, I'm starting smaller via getting more mainspace edits. Nothing444 17:57, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your apology. Tiptoety ^talk 23:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick revert. Guess you beat him. Thanks again - - Milk's Favorite Cookie 21:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 21:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Now that I've completed all the lessons, what should I do next? Take the final exam? Voyaging^(talk) 01:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Please take a look at User:Tiptoety/Adoption/Voyaging, that outlines what you need to do in order to graduate. Tiptoety ^talk 02:26, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, how can I take the final exam? Voyaging^(talk) 03:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

You must complete all the other requirements first. Tiptoety ^talk 03:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, okay, I'll get started then. Do you have any recommendations for an article for me to improve? Voyaging^(talk) 04:07, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe try Terry Schrunk‎, but you should really choose something you are interested in. Tiptoety ^talk 04:14, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi. An IP which you just blocked here had added some information to April Fools' Day which included what appear to be telephone numbers and names of two individuals here. The user urges people to call "these sick freaks" etc. Is this something that qualifies to be removed from the edit history? Thanks. --- Taroaldo (talk) 05:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

When in doubt, just file a request for oversight, they will decide if it needs to be removed. Personally I would say yes, it needs to be removed. Tiptoety ^talk 05:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. --- Taroaldo (talk) 06:02, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Glad to help. Tiptoety ^talk 06:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm assuming it isn't one of the areas you usually focus on, but there's a backlog at SSP. The reason I notice is because I've been monitoring a particular report; one that I encouraged to be filed. Regards, Enigma ^message 06:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I will head on over and see what I can do. Also it might be helpful to let some other guys know over at WP:AN. Thanks, Tiptoety ^talk 06:17, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't usually post there, but I made an exception in this case. Thanks for the help. Enigma ^message 06:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Someone seems to be unhappy with you. You might want to clarify it with them. And, they said you locked it for four months. They posted it here Steve Crossin (talk to me) 21:22, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I already saw this one comming when I protected it. I am just gonna let it work itself out. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 00:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

East718 showed me what he did: [5]. And considering the vandal told me to "go get rejected for adminship by my peers" and to "fuck off and write articles about girly bands" I would it seems it's a sock of User:Adam Pirolo, whom I'm pretty sure is a sock of User:Mr_Bullockx. If I'm right, this is what started all this, believe it or not... insane. -WarthogDemon 03:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

User created List of Kyrgyz after your t4 warning. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 14:07, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[6] Thank you, I am going to write up a little something for him to read while he is blocked, and maybe when he comes back will start creating proper pages. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 14:11, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks like you beat me [7]. :) Tiptoety ^talk 14:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks like it. :-) Let's hope he reads better than he writes. (Sorry, is that in bad taste?) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 14:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Hehehehe...well maybe just a little...but I was thinking the same thing, so. :) Tiptoety ^talk 14:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/BirgitteSB
I think you should reconsider your oppose on this RFA. The user has stated only that they would not use the tools as often as some others do. I have very extensively reviewed this user's contributions, and I see no problems whatsoever. In fact, I don't understand why this user didn't apply earlier.
I think that if someone is honest enough to actually outright say, in their RFA, that they are not intending to use their admin tools incredibly often, Wikipedia almost cannot afford not to have them as an admin. In addition, only using the tools occasionally is not necessarily a bad thing. As Pedro says/said, admin tools are free, do not rust, and we have an inexhaustible supply of them.
Also, the candidate has added something to the Q1 answer which greatly clarifies their reasons for accepting the nomination.
I think you should give it another look. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 18:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I'l try to be more careful to trace IPs and be lenient with IP blocks. Thanks again! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 18:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

G4 is recreated material; is there a better cat? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 22:43, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

G4 is for recreation of material that was deleted through an WP:AFD, not just any old speedy. Tiptoety ^talk 22:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

So, got a better way to get rid of made-up stuff like this? - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 22:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Umm...erm...uh...yeah, it is called G1-nonsense, maybe you should take another look over WP:SPEEDY, but just because you do not like the article does not mean you can delete it for what ever reason you want. Please understand I am not arguing that the article was any good, I deleted it myself, I just wanted to make sure you where aware that G4 is only for articles deleted through WP:AFD. Tiptoety ^talk 22:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

patent nonsense does not apply if it is legible and you can understand what the user is trying to convey. Patent nonsense only means gibberish or nonsensical words strung together to appear logical but really aren't. - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 22:52, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, you are right, it is G3 then, "This includes blatant and obvious hoaxes and misinformation, and redirects created by cleanup from page-move vandalism.". I guess I should have been more specific, just G1 and G3 are so close. Either way, I just though I should let you know about the G4 thing, I was not wanting to get into a debate about an article. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 22:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Not for long we don't! [8] You! - Crank dat Soulja

:) Pretty sure that has not been approved by Wikipedia:Requests for process. Tiptoety ^talk 01:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

But the request was handled by You! So shouldn't you block yourself for not having permission to carry out the unblocking process? You! - Crank dat Soulja 01:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, wait.... *starts to panic* Shit, and here comes de-syoping. Tiptoety ^talk 02:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you referring to the new button I added to your arsenal? That might get me in trouble. You! - Crank dat Soulja 02:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hahaha...tricked ya! (I am surprised it worked) Tiptoety ^talk 02:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Aww I just realised that it didn't work. :( My addition of admin vision failed. You! - Crank dat Soulja 02:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Close, if you would have put "Push this button and get a piece of candy", I probably would have gone for it without even thinking first. Tiptoety ^talk 02:37, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Can you see the button? I can't so I assumed it didn't work. You! - Crank dat Soulja 02:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it linked right to the deletion page. Tiptoety ^talk 02:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh I meant the button that says "admin vision" up near edit, discussion and delete. I meant to add one but it failed :( You! - Crank dat Soulja 02:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, no I can not see that. :( That would have been awesome though! Tiptoety ^talk 02:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

In what way does this edit, or this one, for example, "appear to be a content dispute"?? The user is inserting blatantly false information for some perceived humorous effect. I may have not understood how to warn him properly but perhaps you could provide a proper warning? Or do you really believe it isn't vandalism? csloat (talk) 03:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

This edit defiantly constitutes vandalism, but like I said before the rest appear to be a difference of opinion and ultimately a content dispute. As for issuing them warnings, here is a page full of them. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 03:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Look at the first edit I linked. The editor changed the words inside a quotation to be something else that he presumably thought would be funny. Or how about this edit, where he changes Orrin Hatch to David Duke, or this one where he inserts nonsense -- are you telling me you believe there is just a difference of opinion here? A content dispute? Really? csloat (talk) 03:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I would rather not sit here and argue with you about it. That is obviously my opinion sense I removed the report for that reason. If you feel I am wrong, please re-report and let another admin take a look. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 03:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I assume this edit is an April Fool's Joke, right? Thank you. --Kyoko 11:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, yes it is. :) Tiptoety ^talk 13:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Good, you had me going for a moment. I'll let Keilana "unblock" herself if she wishes. Sorry about any edit conflict you may have had -- I was trying to put one of those "new messages" bars on my talk page, but I changed it so that it actually works, and it doesn't fool people either. --Kyoko 14:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hehe. :) Nope, no edit conflict. Have a great rest of your April Fools! Tiptoety ^talk 14:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

What the hell do I have to loose go check WP:AIV. Rgoodermote  14:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I cant believe it worked! When I try and report myself using WP:TW it says "You do not really want to report yourself do you?" and it will not let me report. I removed your request from WP:AIV. :0 Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 14:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh wait, [9] never mind. You didnt use WP:TW. Ha! Tiptoety ^talk 14:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Was about to say that, you know I really did just want to report myself. just got warned not to do it again. Worth it. Rgoodermote  14:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I requested semi-protection on the article Lisa Graham Keegan. You recently reverted changes made by 156.42.68.4. These were actually an attempt to undo previous vandalism done by 130.13.6.126. Before I made any further changes, I wanted to let you know about the situation. It would probably be most appropriate to change the text to the version of 18:06, 21 March 2008. Thank you. WildGooseWest (talk) 21:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to correct any mistakes I may have made. Tiptoety ^talk 22:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

This site has been vandalized again. Although the vandals cite narrowly selected news sources, they are presenting a biased view of a matter that is currently under litigation. Ms. Keegan is an adviser to the McCain presidential campaign and vulnerable to a wide range of politically motivated attacks. Please reconsider providing semi-protection. WildGooseWest (talk) 14:00, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi. About this IP I reported to AIV, you marked it as not vandalizing since the final warning. This was not the case, the user had vandalized since my final warning and received a second final warning, which may have been the confounding factor.

No need to do anything because another admin saw that it was a valid report and blocked the user. We all make mistakes... heck I just clicked on a "new messages" button thinking I would get *gasp* new messages. It was just a joke, sigh.

I read the instructions at AIV and I will take care only to make valid reports. Thanks. Sam Barsoom 14:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, well the user had not vandalized past final warn when I checked, but it looked that after my comment was made on AIV they did, and was blocked. Happy April Fools day! Tiptoety ^talk 18:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Not that it is important, but user got final warning(14:15), user vandalized again(14:26), I make an AIV report(14:27). Sam Barsoom 19:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, please note that the warning at 14:15 was in fact a level 3 warning, not a final warn which is a level 4. Yes I know, dumb, but that is how the system tells me it works. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 19:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I see, I was under the impression that any warning that stated the one would be blocked if they continued was a "final" warning. One of us must be wrong. hehe. Sam Barsoom 00:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

No, the final warning template looks like this: {{uw-vandal4}}. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 00:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, now I am curious, I have started a discussion at WT:AIV#What constitutes final warning?. Thanks for your time. Sam Barsoom 00:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Great, I will be glad to hear what the community has to say. Thank you, Tiptoety ^talk 00:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding this, I got a little cranky, to be honest. Theres a difference between fun and games, and nuisancy. AIV still gets legit reports, even on April Fools day, and saying "Now try reporting yourself using WP:TW, I dare you!" is clear vio of WP:BEANS, isn't it? ;) It happened to me as well, I told MoP not to block me, he was asking "can I block someone for 1 second", and I said, don't you block me, or I'll have you desysopped :P (On IRC). Look what he did [10]. So, remember BEANS. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk to me) 14:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I do want to point out that...I was going to report myself eventually. Rgoodermote  14:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I can say this. I'll be glad when April Fools Day is over. Not that I'm a grump. Just, some things get under my skin. Anyway, no harm was done. Steve Crossin (talk to me) 15:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well good thing WP:BEANS is just an essay, and WP:FUN is a policy. So, whats gonna happen? De-syop me for having some fun? Tiptoety ^talk 18:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I dont see {{Policy}} on WP:FUN ;) Point out where it is? Steve Crossin (talk to me) 19:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[11] Looks like someone revert my edit. Either way, Steve I do not mean any harm, and I think having a little fun once and while does not hurt anyone. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 19:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, very true. I know it's april fools day. I just feel that there are places to joke around, and places that shouldn't be. There was no harm done, but really? If I was an admin, I would have continued the joke, and blocked them for 15mins for their trouble :P. We discussed it on IRC, and agreed AIV isn't really the place for jokes. No harm really done, just, I feel people should be a little more tactful. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk to me) 19:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For trying to lighten the mood today. Destroyed 22:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you much! Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 22:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Tiptoety,

I'm keeping the "RfJ" in my user space as a memento of a fun April Fool's gag. I'd like to keep the MfD as well, since it was part of the joke. As I noted on the MfD's talk page, I deleted all categories and logs related to this MfD, so it really wasn't harming anything where it was. However, I decided early on that if any admin objected to it's being there, I'd userfy the MfD. So, a couple of questions:

1. Were you just tying up loose ends, or do you really dislike the fact that there's a joke MfD archived (and with all categories and references in logs removed) in Wikipedia space?
2. If it's the former, do you have a problem with me restoring it?
3. If it's the latter, I assume you have no problem if I userfy it, but I'll ask anyway.

I really don't have a problem if you don't like it being there; the only effect it has on me is the 5 minutes of reformatting to move it to my userspace. Just let me know. --barneca (talk) 01:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey there Barneca, personally I have no issue with it remaining in wiki space at all, it is the fact that others do. At this point in time I do not think restoring it would be the best idea, but would not be opposed to it being placed in your userspace? Is that okay with you? Tiptoety ^talk 01:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Meh. I think restoring it in its current location would not be disruptive (you wouldn't know it was there except if you were looking for it). However, I now have a sinking feeling that you're right, it would probably annoy someone, and that's not what I'm looking to do. I won't restore it.  :(

I'll userfy it myself. Thanks, --barneca (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree with you, and will not consider it wheel warring if you restore. Just thought I would save some room over at WP:ANI (if ya know what i mean). Let me know if there is any way for me to help! Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 01:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Heh, yeah, I know exactly what you mean, and that's what I'm trying to avoid. I've userfied. Thanks! --barneca (talk) 01:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

this list does not label every. It seems to forget that Several users (amazingly not just me) reported themselves to WP:AIV and the page Humans was put up for Deletion .I actually have a copy of that here. Didn't want to add anything myself. So I thought I would mention it to you. Rgoodermote  02:07, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

:) You are more than welcome to add yourself and other pranks to the list! Tiptoety ^talk 02:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I added me and The The Obento Musubi WP:AIV entries you got anymore from that day? Because I know we are not the only ones to have done it that day. Rgoodermote  18:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Nope, was too busy pulling pranks of my own to really keep a close eye on AIV *slaps hand* "Shame on me!" :) Tiptoety ^talk 18:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Well at least you weren't the only one. But it doesn't matter know we are all Business today. Rgoodermote  21:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 01:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

No problemo, he sure acted like a 5 year old. Tiptoety ^talk 01:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

You're right. Beans feel really funny up there.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, no worries, we all do it. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 01:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

 Done. Of course, if you prefer the old way, I'd be happy to do so. The Chronic 02:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, no I think I will leave it this way for a while. I am actually thinking of re-doing my whole userpage all together. Tiptoety ^talk 02:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

and I hope this message isn't removed by some random person, because I really do what to know what the problem is. -129.97.51.133 (talk) 16:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Erm.... Tiptoety ^talk 16:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I have to say i am asking for you to be blocked probably temp because of what you have been saying in your edit summary's. Also "External links" is the same over wikipedia and is the same on all articles regardless of how many there are ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 16:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

My edit summaries? Tiptoety ^talk 16:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

No the Ip's :) Have a look in his contribs. I would never do anything against you Tiptoety. ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 16:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

"Whew" *wipes sweat off face* Okay, you had me scared there for a minute. Actually he has already been blocked, and an abuse report has been filled. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 16:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and glad we got this sorted. I hope to do some more stuff with you like this in the future Tiptoety ^^. ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 16:14, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Ditto. Tiptoety ^talk 18:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Tip, had to point out that your thinking Addshore meant you when he referred to edit summaries is something that happened last night also. We have a lot of respect for you, and wouldn't call you a "vandal" (that was last night) or ask for you to be blocked (above). I'm commenting here to make sure you saw my clarification on PDMDrive's talk page. Enigma ^message 19:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey there Enigmaman, I did read PDMDrive's talk page and saw that it was just a mis-understanding, I was getting confused because the comment was made in the same thread where I was talking about edit summaries as well. I appreciate you leaving me a note letting me know though, and like you of I, I respect you as well and appreciate all the great work that you do here. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 21:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

That IP you removed from AIV where there was a question about the contributions - there was a discrepancy in the IP #'s. The main report (I think) had 99.244, while the other link to contributions had 99.224. Aleta ^Sing 21:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahh...thanks for clearing that up! I was thoroughly confused. If the user in question continues to vandalize you are more than welcome to re-report. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 21:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hah, I was trying to figure out if I should block the person, but then you went ahead and removed the report. Maybe it's over anyway. We can hope. :) Aleta ^Sing 21:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

*cough* I knew you where an admin *cough* (Sorry there are over 1500, and I just cant memorize them all) It should have read above :You are more than welcome to re-report block if they continue to vandalize. Sorry! Tiptoety ^talk 21:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

LOL No worries. I don't expect you to know who all the admins are, especially those of us who are new to the mop. Aleta ^Sing 21:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

??? Can you explain that, plz? Maxim_(talk) 21:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Is that actually you? Because that day we have a troll create over 25 accounts using en.wiki admins usernames and use them to vandalize, so I blocked it. I am more than willing to un-block if it is actually you. Tiptoety ^talk 21:57, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

No it's not... I was just curious what was going on. Thanks. :-) Maxim_(talk) 22:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

K, good. Because I was sure that it was confirmed through a chekuser that it was a sock of JtV. Tiptoety ^talk 22:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi tiptoety, thanks for your response to my request for page protection. At what point is an article considered to be under heavy vandalism, as opposed to moderate or minor vandalism? Al.locke (talk) 22:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Well there is no set rule or amount that would classify an article to be under "heavy vandalism" but the rule of thumb is when the vandalism is getting so bad that it gets missed/looked over because of a time laps between previous vandalism and reverts. So if IP 65.72.122 vandalizes and then 2 seconds later IP 89.090.188 vandalizes and then someone comes and reverts only 89.090.188 is going to get reverted and the vandalism from the other IP will stay. But I do not see that happening quite yet. Let me know if you have any other questions. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 22:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I still think the article should be semi-protected but my attachment to the subject is far too insignificant to warrant continued debate ;) Al.locke (talk) 22:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I will keep an eye on it. Do not worry all the vandalism appears to be being reverted rather quickly. Just so that you know for the future, the reason that articles on the mainpage are not protected often is so that because it will be the most read article, and maybe it we are lucky will get someone who knows more about the topic then any of us who wishes to make a constructive contribution, but then when they go to edit it find they cant...it just does not look good, and wikipedia just lost a valuable contribution. We can revert vandalism with simplicity and simply replace it back to what it once was, but we can not promise that that one user will ever return to bless us with his/her knowledge, which is not quite as easy as a revert. Tiptoety ^talk 22:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

That makes sense, thanks for taking time to explain. Al.locke (talk) 23:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, keep up all of your good work! Let me know if there is any other way I can be of assistance. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 23:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the support! KnightLago (talk) 00:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey Tip, that's mighty kind of you to offer to co-nominate me. I think in the next few days I'll prepare my main question answers and drop a note to Pedro regarding when I should run and who would like to co-nominate me. If you would like, as I suggested to User:Rudget, you may drop a comment at User:Pedro/Admin_Coaching. Cheers man. Wisdom89 _{(T / ^C)} 00:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I already left a note for Pedro on his talk page. Tiptoety ^talk 00:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Since you've interacted with Voyaging (talk · contribs) the most of any admin, could you review his request at Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser/CheckPage#Users? MBisanz ^talk 05:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the slow delay, I was getting some much needed sleep. Anyways, I went ahead and approved him for it. Most of all of his contributions have been cleanup/CSD tagging so I think he will use the tool just fine. Thanks, Tiptoety ^talk 14:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thats what I should've been doing then, but sometimes Huggle is like crack, very addicting. MBisanz ^talk 19:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

If you remember you and I both commented here. The requester later stated that he had reported people to AIV over the years. According to this he can't have more than four edit in AIV. Do I see this correctly? I was not sure how reliable these things are. I won't bother to mention this on the RFA (that would be mean!), but it would interest me. Hope you understand what I mean (I'm dreadfully muddle-headed at times). Thanks in advance and keep up the good work on RFA! --Cameron (t|p|c) 21:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Huh, it does appear that way. Like you I am not sure how acurate that tool is, but do know that it is not off by all the much. It actually might be something to mention in the discussion section of the RfA. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 21:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

You are free to mention so if you think it will help people to decide on how to "vote"...I think I will leave it this time. --Cameron (t|p|c) 14:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I saw on your userpage you had the template {{User SUL}}. How do I sign up for SUL? Please respond on my talk page. Thanks! SwirlBoy39 22:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

At this time it is limited only to administrators, and they are currently working on making it avalible to all users. Kinda sucks, huh? Tiptoety ^talk 22:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I do have to agree. :( Oh well. SwirlBoy39 21:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Where will it be held? Therequiembellishere (talk) 17:24, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

On the Rollback discussion page, so at Wikipedia talk:Requests for rollback. Tiptoety ^talk 00:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

You went over the top on this RfA. 10 questions. Most copy and pasted recycled from other RfAs. Please don't ask so many pointless questions again. There's now 26 questions there, a possible record. Asking stock questions on mass is a useless exercise, as the answers are all available in archives. Thanks for your consideration, Majorly (talk) 01:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Do not wish to be rude, but I will ask as many questions as I like. Yes they where probaly crap questions, and I for sure could do with making up some new ones. But the reason I asked those is because I was unclear as to the way I was going to sway it that users case, and their answers to some more questions was going to help me decide. Is that not why the questions are there? Tiptoety ^talk 01:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I think ten is way, way too many. If you need clarification, ask one or two. And yes, new questions would be nice, especially ones that require the candidate to actually think (e.g. how would you close this particular AfD?). It's not the idea so much as the number you asked. There's 26 questions asked. That's more than what some users got asked to be on ArbCom. Majorly (talk) 01:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Well...I guess that is where we must agree to disagree. Tiptoety ^talk 01:53, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Ergg....really thought hard about that.......and I think you are right.......a few good questions are better than a whole bunch of shitty ones. Tiptoety ^talk 02:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

You hardblocked User:Hacker.gul based on no contributions and with no explanation besides the generic one. What in the world are you doing? Are you misunderstanding the word hacker?

I can see this showing up on Slashdot tomorrow: "Wikipedia Bans Hackers". I would like to unblock the account unless you have an explanation. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 03:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

What in the world am I doing? Good way to approach it.... it was beacuse the username included the term "hacker". I am abviously wrong, maybe you need to read WP:AGF. Feel free to unblock. Tiptoety ^talk 03:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, this didn't seem like a case to beat around the bush. When you place a block, you take the responsibility of ensuring that you are doing the right thing. Please read up on what hacker means in geek culture, and AGF yourself when you use your admin powers against a newbie. You're an admin; you can handle harsh words better than a possibly good-faith newbie can handle being hardblocked the moment they register. Self-identifying as a hacker doesn't even merit a softblock. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 03:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, could not agree with you more on the whole responsibility thing. Sorry I bit your head off in my response, this just is the first time that someone has "not beat around the bush" when it comes to this sorta stuff (which really has not happened before). I will consider it a learning expereince. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 03:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

But say that you'll stay

Forever and a day

C'mon, we all encounter stressful situations. Try to take a break and find a way to relax and come back! Maybe you're simply trying to do too much right now. Enigma ^message Review 04:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Yeah mate, don't leave. Really, we need you :( Just take a wiki break and come back soon OK? :) Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 04:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Eep, I'm sorry. I probably just contributed significantly to your bad night. I've made mistakes as well, incidentally, and some of them I've been criticized for and some of them just lingered for me to notice later. If you need a wikibreak, that's fine, but it would be great if you came back. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 04:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Wikipedia's probably best used in small doses anyway. In the roughest times DGAF can be a good antidote. Hope you come back after the break. Cheers- --- Taroaldo (talk) 04:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I think I have decided to stay (after a good amount of thought mind you). While I still feel that Wikipedia has many many flaws that sometimes feel unfixable, nothing will ever change if I sit on my bum and pout about it. I may being hypocritical here (at least I am not afraid to admit it) but I think the leading issue with the project is peoples egos and a unwillingness to admit they are wrong, or approach any situation with a willingness to listen to another users opinions. While I wish there was, I do not think there is anyway to change this, and as such was one of my reasons I was not going to come back. But I feel overall the positives here overwhelm the negatives. Also, I am flat out addicted with Wikipedia. Thank you everyone for your kind words. Tiptoety ^talk 23:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		so, should I just take RFPP, AIV, and UAA off my watchlist? You're getting them pretty well, don't you think? Well done, and thank you. - Philippe 03:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much kind sir. Tiptoety ^talk 03:21, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Even though I left a note at WP:AN I want to say personally good bye to you. You are a good admin with a good sense of humor. By the way sorry for getting you lectured on the 1st. Some people take volunteer work to serious. Anyways, Live Long and Prosper. Rgoodermote  04:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do not go, you are a great user, one who will someday make an excellent admin. Is there any way I can get you to reconsider. Oh, and don't worry about the "lecture", it comes with the mop. :) Tiptoety ^talk 04:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello fellow WikiProject Oregon folks and entities. Thanks to those who helped out with improving Vera Katz and History of Oregon during the last Collaboration of the Week! As you may have noticed, we have changed the banners a bit, but not our dedication to everything Oregon! This week, in honor of the political process, we have: Current Oregon Senate members & Current Oregon House members. Hopefully by November we can have an article on every current member of the Oregon Legislature. So feel free to turn a red link blue or expand an existing article. Since it is an election year, there should be plenty of newspaper stories. Plus, the state archives has this site that allows you to go back and see when they started serving and district info, plus at a minimum show they were a state legislator from a WP:RS. And per WP:BIO, all state legislator's are notable so no need to worry about AFD. As always, to opt out, opt in, or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Aboutmovies (talk) 07:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know that i now have an admin coach :). ·Add§hore· ^Talk/_Cont 10:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Great! Glad to hear it! Tiptoety ^talk 14:09, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

im basically the sole writer of the neurofunk article since 2006. it ended with a B score and in order to achieve an A status, some changes were necessary such as proving some statements. one of the statements by artist matrix was actually said to me in his flat in london since i happen to know him but i couldnt prove it in writing so i deleted it. another statement by artist optical was on knowledge magazine but again, i couldnt get the link to it because its not online so i deleted it. there are no further statements to prove, i cleaned the article and its highly improved. ive tried contacting user zeibura to help me set in THE PHACE MIXMAG INTERVIEW quotes since i have little knowledge of net manipulation and techniques - my knowledge boils down to music production since im a professional a&r/concept producer - but it seems that his user page was deleted. so im requesting your help in bringing in this interview as the last effort to achieve an A score, according to the rules exposed on neurofunk talk page.

best, robert (Kridian)

<yeswiki>

Hello, Tiptoety. You have new messages at Steve Crossin's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

<yeswiki>

Hi Tiptoety/Archive 10! Thank you for your support in my RfA (87/3/3). I truely appreciate the many votes of confidence, and I will exert myself to live up to those expectations. Thanks again! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 17:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

But say that you'll stay

Forever and a day

C'mon, we all encounter stressful situations. Try to take a break and find a way to relax and come back! Maybe you're simply trying to do too much right now. Enigma ^message Review 04:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Yeah mate, don't leave. Really, we need you :( Just take a wiki break and come back soon OK? :) Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 04:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Eep, I'm sorry. I probably just contributed significantly to your bad night. I've made mistakes as well, incidentally, and some of them I've been criticized for and some of them just lingered for me to notice later. If you need a wikibreak, that's fine, but it would be great if you came back. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 04:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Wikipedia's probably best used in small doses anyway. In the roughest times DGAF can be a good antidote. Hope you come back after the break. Cheers- --- Taroaldo (talk) 04:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I think I have decided to stay (after a good amount of thought mind you). While I still feel that Wikipedia has many many flaws that sometimes feel unfixable, nothing will ever change if I sit on my bum and pout about it. I may being hypocritical here (at least I am not afraid to admit it) but I think the leading issue with the project is peoples egos and a unwillingness to admit they are wrong, or approach any situation with a willingness to listen to another users opinions. While I wish there was, I do not think there is anyway to change this, and as such was one of my reasons I was not going to come back. But I feel overall the positives here overwhelm the negatives. Also, I am flat out addicted with Wikipedia. Thank you everyone for your kind words. Tiptoety ^talk 23:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)