welcome to Wikipedia, Mistercontributer. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions
. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Rampart (film), as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. --SubSeven (talk) 01:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
SubSeven, thanks for the reminder. Mistercontributer 18:54, 6 August 2012
Disambiguation link notification for October 2
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bobby Dodd, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Punter and Tailback (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
I went ahead and created the FAC tonight. Sign next to where it says "nominators", if you don't mind? I know you're looking forward to this :) Disavian (talk) 02:26, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great work there. A couple of points though - we don't use forums or open wikis as sources. I found a replacement for the forum you linked to and put the citation tag back on the other. See
Thanks for the belated welcome, feedback, and information. I will follow these guidelines going forward. The reference work was my Christmas present to everyone who has contributed to that article. Mistercontributer (talk) 02:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would be glad to help, but I do not want to do anything to hurt the nomination. Would it be helpful if I worked on copyedits in response to the reviewer comments? Mistercontributer (talk) 03:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
History of Georgia Tech and G. Wayne Clough will eventually be selected as featured articles. Both are well written and well referenced articles. Also, both articles have interesting and informative content. We may also consider nominating Bobby Dodd as feature article sometime in the future. There are many football fans on Wikipedia who would probably help with reviewing that article. Mistercontributer (talk) 01:14, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply
I agree. I think we should keep trying. I made edits in response to the first reviewer's comments, except for the comment that there were too many references. Please make improvements to my edits as appropriate. Thanks Mistercontributer (talk) 20:42, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I made several edits today in response to feedback from the most recent reviewer of the G. Wayne Clough article, but this last reviewer had several comments and questions which still need a response. I also reviewed the Georgia Tech Research Institute article, which is very thorough and also very well written. Hopefully these articles will eventually be selected as featured articles. I will continue to help out where I can. Mistercontributer (talk) 23:27, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
John Kennedy Jr. (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject
Hi Mistercontributer, thanks for your work with the Clough article. Feel free to ping me when you are finished, and I will do my best to respond asap with my second round of comments. ceranthor19:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation link notification for June 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Roy Riegels, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Alexander (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of
"Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it 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! Drmies (talk) 02:08, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply
]
A beer for you!
Mr. Contributor, you've done good work and you're a good sport. Now, in true Bear style, I'd offer you a Pepsi, but I couldn't even do that to my worst enemy. Cheers and Roll Tide! (..."send the Yellowjackets to a watery grave...") All the best. :) Drmies (talk) 02:53, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bobby Dodd may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
university-of-florida-athletic-hall-of-fame&pg=5924%2C2336850|title=Graves' Record Among The Best]|publisher=Ocala Star-Banner|date=1987-08-20|accessdate=2013-06-30}}</ref>
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited
Georgia Tech main campus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Goatman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject
Sorry for the delayed response, I'm dealing with an extremely over heating laptop which shuts off whenever it feels like. I did list my major concerns, especially with comprehensiveness and sourcing and I await your response. Thanks Secretaccount19:11, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
DYK for James E. Dull
DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
Thanks for the feedback. This proposed hook has been revised. Please let me know if the number of characters for this proposed hook needs to be reduced further? - Mistercontributer (talk) 00:08, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The hook is not in the archive because it was pulled from Prep by Espresso Addict a couple of hours before it went to the main page, here, but they forgot to remove the credits along with the hook which is why the articles are credited as successful DYKS when in fact they never appeared. Gatoclass (talk) 13:20, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Some Georgia Tech articles for expansion
Thank you for your extensive contributions to Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets football. I am personally fond of your lists, and usually use them as a template when I feel I need to make one. Here are a few notable Georgia Tech football players of yesteryear which could use some more contributions:
Thanks Cake. Your color scheme for the GT templates has grown on me. I also appreciate the work you have done with GT football articles. I have kept a list of articles that I have worked on since I became registered user on Wikipedia as a reference. In the past I have revisited these articles and looked for additional opportunities to make improvements. However, I am currently on a semi-"Wikibreak." I still review changes made to the articles on my watch list, but I am not actively making improvements, at least not very many. When I become more active again I will consider working on the articles listed above. Thanks again and keep up the good work! - Mistercontributer (talk) 01:04, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
By all means take your time, just know I will relish any edits to the above articles. That's a good thing about the colors. I can understand the wish to avoid white on gold for fear of lack of contrast, but I noticed that GT helmet seemed to work just fine, and followed the university standards to mimic it. If only the same could be done for Notre Dame or Pitt or the other schools which, to an outside observer, seem to just toss in the navy with the gold. Surely even green makes more sense for Notre Dame, but then I am rambling. My reason for responding was to share this tidbit: Shaping college football contends 1925 is the first year with the widespread use of the forward pass in the south. If this is true it makes the image of Doug Wycoff a great one. Cheers. Cake (talk) 00:36, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Although your edit-warring over my decision is disruptive, I will give you a fuller explanation of why your comment is unhelpful and therefore inappropriate. You are using a particular case to discuss the alleged deficiencies of the socking policy. What you are saying, although superficially in response to the misguided speculation of other editors, could be said about any sock master at any SPI. That sort of comment, if it goes anywhere, would go at
WT:SOCK
, not at an individual case.
In addition, some SPIs are more cluttered with comments than others. That makes it difficult for the SPI team to evaluate them. Your comment exacerbates an already busy SPI. That would still be okay if the comment were helpful to evaluating the case, but it's not.
SPI is not like other noticeboards. Although not a perfect analogy, it is more akin to an arbitration proceeding than boards like
WP:ANI. In any arbitration proceeding, the arbitrators and clerks are entitled to remove comments, as well as block editors who refuse to accept their decision. Think loosely of SPI CheckUsers as arbitrators and SPI clerks as arbitration clerks. Although SPI clerks do more substantive work at SPI than arbitration clerks do in arbitration proceedings, they both have the authority to remove editor comments if they are inappropriate. If, as here, the editor whose comment was removed objects, then the proper venue is the clerk's or CheckUser's Talk page. That doesn't mean your comment will be re-added, but it affords you an opportunity to explain why you think your comment should remain and the clerk or CU the opportunity to discuss it with you. Battling with the CU or clerk is not something you should ever do. I am going to revert you again. Please don't force me to block you for disruptive conduct by re-adding your comment (in any guise).--Bbb23 (talk) 12:32, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply
]
@Bbb23: For the record, I am not edit warring. I was making a valid point in that case, which you seem determine to censor. Adding the comment back with an explanation was the only way I knew how to explain why the comment should be included in that thread. I will not add that comment back again due to your heavy handedness and abuse of your administrative function. I have never been accused of edit warring during the seven years I have been editing Wikipedia. In my opinion, you reverted that comment since it pointed out a weakness in the system, which directly impacted the case being discussed. Mistercontributer (talk) 14:55, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The following comment initiated the discussion above: "If this is what is happening, and this editor becomes blocked again, then this editor will most likely create another sock to get around the block, using software which changes IP address, or simply edit Wikipedia from another location. Not being critical but this block system does not seem to be very effective with addressing these types of issues." This sock case involves a user suspected of being banned multiple times and creating socks to bypass the bans. The banning system is obviously ineffective since it does not prevent problematic editors from causing disruptions. The first step in solving a problem is identifying the problem. Much time, energy, and effort is spent documenting evidence required to catch and re-catch socks. There must be a better way, such as developing software program to help identify these types of issues, otherwise we will continue to struggle with this problem. Mistercontributer (talk) 03:32, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Slowly but surely covering Tech football from 1915 to 1928. Given any images are going to be in black and white, the "uniform" parameter seems useful to at least show what the jersey looked like in color. If only I could draw. The 1921 football yearbook and a 1925 game program seem to show at least the 1920 and 1924 uniforms. Can say from at least 1921 to 1927 they had the same "look" or shapes with the possible exception of the socks. I forget what that type of uniform is called, with the sort of semicircles on either breast. Do you know of any other depictions of Tech in color from this era, or where to find e. g. covers of football yearbooks? Cake (talk) 22:00, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cake; good work on the John Heisman article. I have not yet found any other depictions of Georgia Tech football uniform in color from the 1920's era. I will keep looking. I will let you know if I find anything. Mistercontributer (talk) 02:29, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ANI Experiences survey
The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.
The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:
is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy
describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Rampart (film), as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. --SubSeven (talk) 01:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
