User talk:ItsZippy/Archive 10

Protest on Deletion of EnableDoc

itsZippy,

I am perplexed about deletion of EnableDoc page.

1) The article clearly mentioned the importance, as the first company that tightly integrates speech recognition into EHR systems, both very important to doctors. It's only later that two other corporate giants joined hands to do a similar feat.

2) I am shocked to see that although this page, which is a historical landmark has been deleted, while other pages like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drchrono and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allscripts (which is pure company promotion) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VistA_EHR (Pure Marketing of a clearly poor quality software) continue to exist.

In the spirit of being a true record of the history and evolution of the EHR technology, I feel that EnableDoc should be granted its place. If there is ANY other company in the world that can make a claim to fame, they should com to this page and dispute the timeline.

Goyell (talk) 13:58, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Goyell#Enabledoc. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:17, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

My RFA

Hi, I just wanted to leave a note saying thank you for partcipating in my RFA, and your comments will be taken on board and acted upon. Hopfully, I will be of a level you can support in a future RFA. MrLittleIrish ^(talk) © 13:15, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniela Georgieva

Good close, but I think you made a typo. You have a sentence, "An IAR appeal to a special situation is generally the argument made for deleting the argument." I think you meant for the last word of that sentence to be "article." I take "Please do not modify it" seriously, so I will let you make the change, assuming I am correct. Neutron (talk) 18:56, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, thanks for that. Fix it if you like - I'm in the middle of closing this, which might take some time. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:58, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Good luck with the dog. Neutron (talk) 19:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Seamus (dog) (2nd nomination)

I don't see any possible keep close - there are more delete votes than keep - no consensus is the most you can assert - Youreallycan 19:50, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree, I would really like to see your rational. Arzel (talk) 20:01, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

My rationale is coming, don't worry. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:06, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

There you go. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:15, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

It looks like an opinionated super vote - writing a lot doesn't make it authoritative - clearly there are more keep positions in the discussion than delete - as I said - no consensus is the most you can assert - Will you reconsider? Youreallycan

(edit conflict) Youreallycan, I tried to assess the strength of arguments presented with reference to the relevant policies - that's what consensus is. Consensus is not about how many people voted for something, but which side is best supported within the framework of Wikipedia's policies, guidelines and accepted practices. If you don't think I've done that sufficiently, I am happy to explain, but please tell me specifically what you have a problem with; I cannot really help if you just tell me that I was wrong. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:27, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Would you please specifically name the votes that you are discounting on both keep and delete positions - or, if you would rather, as there are more delete votes than keep simply reclose as no community consensus - Youreallycan 20:34, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

ItsZippy, I thought that your rationale for keeping the Seamus article was excellent. Thank you for giving such a detailed explanation of how you made you decision. Debbie W. 20:39, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I did not discount certain !votes in the manner you suggest. Rather, any unhelpful argument (mostly WP:IDONTLIKEIT and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, which were used for both sides of the debate) I ignored. However, if someone made such an argument but also commented on something else (the reliability of the sources, for example), I would have considered that part of the argument. The number of keep and delete votes, though not completely insignificant, was not the most important consideration; I was more concerned in reflecting the whole of the debate and then determining which side had made the stronger argument according to the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia. I did not consider each vote individually, but the overall strength of the many arguments presented on each side. That is what I hoped to get across in the rationale I provided. I did not close the debate as no consensus because the argument seemed to strongly favour keeping the article. I can see that you disagree with me (which is not surprising); I will leave a note on the administrators' noticeboard to see what other people think. If the general feeling there is that my closure should be changed, I will accept that. Does that sound ok? ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:46, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

- No , not really - Its your close and asking for second opinions is out of scope - There is a clear majority to delete the article - a keep close under that situation is controversial - I have had a look at all the AFD user comments and there are keep and delete comments that fall outside policy and guidelines .. but none of that leaves me with a clear keep close - please report here the delete and the keep users you have rejected , so I can understand your close - or simply re-close as an acceptable no consensus thanks - Youreallycan 20:59, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I cannot just list the users that I discounted because that is not how I closed the debate (and would, I think be quite irresponsible). I did not go through each editor and decide whether their vote should be counted; instead, I read every single argument posted, worked out what the common themes were, decided which arguments could be discounted and then determined which of arguments had the strongest support. I believed and still believe that the arguments to keep the article, though perhaps under and different name and perhaps with some improvement, were stronger. I have told you how I closed the debate and explained why providing a list of 'discounted editors' is not possible; even if you do not agree with it, I hope you can understand the closure I made. I will not change my closure based just on your complaint but have said that if another administrator wished to review the closure and thinks that an alternative would be more appropriate, I'm happy to listen. Regardless of our opinions on this closure, I think that getting outside, uninvolved opinions would be beneficial. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:06, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Well - I am sorry you are unwilling to respond to my request - If you are unwilling to respond to such a request you should not close contentious discussions - I suggest to you that as you are unwilling to respond and expand on your rationale, a re-close as no consensus is a correct close - and as per the failure of resolution of our discussion deletion review is perhaps the best remaining option ? - Youreallycan 21:13, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry you are unhappy. I have tried to explain my actions as fully as possible to you; I am not sure what it is you want from me. If you really want to pursue deletion review, I have no problem with that and I'll accept the outcome. If I'm wrong then I'm wrong and that's fine, but please do not accuse me of ignoring your request when I have provided you multiple times with an extended rationale of my closure. If it just that I have not provided you with a list of users whose vote I have ignored, then you will be disappointed - as I've said time and time again, no list exists and I did not close the debate in that way. I'm off to bed now; I should be around tomorrow evening to answer any further questions anyone might have. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:21, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes I am busy also - I accept your refusal to reclose and I do intend to request review tomorrow - thanks - Youreallycan 21:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Zippy, I am not sure how you came to two of your conclusions. A brief discussion existed about the name of the article and a possible merger. However, it emerged that difficulties with the last attempt at this (edit warring and giving the issue undue weight on the Romney article) make this untenable.

That statement simply does not hold up under scrutiny. The initial decision was to merge during that discusion, however one editor did not like that a cut and paste merger was clearly undue weight in the manner in which she tried to include the entire incident, complained to the closing admin and his reply was no-concensus keep. Thus a policy violation of one editor resulted in that situation.

Your other statement. Merging with the Obama dog article, as noted, would not be correct as the two issues are very different in nature. is simply hard to understand. The Seamus article, you would have to agree, is nothing more than a political issue. All evidence points to this fact. The Obama dog eating story is the response to that political story. How can you make the statement that they are very different in nature when one is clearly the response to the other? Arzel (talk) 03:40, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Arzel, thanks for the note. The comments I made on a potential merger were less comprehensive because they seemed to occupy less of the debate. Although there were calls for the article to be merged, keeping the article seemed more popular - my comments about it passing the GNG led me to believe that the discussion favoured keep over merge; the additional issues added to this. I should probably have made that more clear. I hope that's ok. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:25, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Requests for permissions

Hey ItsZippy! I was wondering why my request at requests for permissions was skipped, thanks.  :) --Plasma (Talk) 20:31, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Plasma. It wasn't skipped, I just have a peculiar tendency to work from the bottom of that list. I just accepted your request as you posted this message. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:32, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, thanks!  :) --Plasma (Talk) 20:33, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Seamus Talk Page

I noticed that the link to the recent AfD on the Seamus talk page actually linked to the first AfD from February. I modified it to link to WP:articles for deletion/Seamus (dog) (2nd nomination). Debbie W. 21:04, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Huggle

Hi, whenever I try to log into Huggle, it seems that it says that Huggle is not enabled my account...any advice on that? Exact message: "Huggle is not enabled for your account, check user configuration page". Thanks.  :) --Plasma (Talk) 21:10, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not sure what the problem is - I'm not an expert with the technical side of Huggle. Are you sure you're logging into the right project (en.wikipedia)? Otherwise, try asking at the feedback page. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:16, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I logged into en.wikipedia, I'll try asking on the Huggle IRC channel. Thanks.  :) --Plasma (Talk) 21:22, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Go to Special:MyPage/huggle.css then change the content to:

enable:true

--Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 21:53, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Recall

You are listed as open to recall. I am unable to find your criteria. Under what circumstances would you give up your tools? Thanks! Hipocrite (talk) 21:39, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me, Hipocrite. Determining my recall criteria was not a priority initially but it had slipped my mind and I do need to get it done. I will have a think and look at what other people do; I'll try to get something together by the weekend. If I've got nothing by Monday or Tuesday, feel free to remind again. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:27, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• Account activation codes have been emailed.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• The 1-year, free period begins once you enter the code.
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 04:43, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey

Afternoon! I dropped by to ask a little bit of advice. (You said I could... you did!) I want to start getting some article content under my belt, with only 11+ mainspace edits, I could do with bumping that up a fair bit if I choose to run for RfA again, and just wondered the best (and easiest way) to make a positive start? As you know, I tend to hang around behind the articles and do a tiny bit of anti-vandilsm, so I know a fair bit on the policy side of things, but not content creation. Anywho.. I think I explained myself well enough for one to understand? MrLittleIrish ^(talk) © 13:02, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Just work on whatever interests you in real life. Click on links. See if you can find a way to improve the article. If all else fails, hit special:random a few times. When you're more established, sign up for SuggestBot and it'll find pages similar to those you've already worked on and suggest things that need worked on in them. It's too easy to get caught up on process here. Just start hitting edit whenever you see any positive way to improve an article. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 14:35, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi. If you have a good command of the English language, you could try copy editing. Right now the Guild of Copy Editors is holding a backlog elimination drive, and you are welcome to participate in that. If you're new to copy editing, there's a lot of good information to get you started at Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/How to. -- Dianna (talk) 14:47, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't know I had talk page stalkers. I feel flattered. Anyway, the above advice is very good. Personally, I choose to edit things I am interested in - I look for topics that interest me that need improvement and do it. It might be a good idea to determine what really interests you - what you like finding out about beyond Wikipedia - and looking to edit those articles. It might also be a good idea to join a WikiProject based on something you like - they'll often have lists of articles that need improving and can give more specific support. Decide what kind of thing you're interested in first, then look to see where the holes are. If you need help finding things to be improved once you've chosen your subject, let me know. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:32, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

• Afternoon! Was wondering if you could take a look at Little pieces (Virus) and let me know how I could make it better? It was tagged for speedy, which got declined, then I came along and made it better and added source. MrLittleIrish ^(talk) © 14:40, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

electro hop

electro-hop & Electro Hop & Category:Electro-hop songs must go too, I guess. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:57, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that - I missed those. I've speedied electro-hop and Electro Hop under G8, but I think Category:Electro-hop songs might still be a reasonable category, regardless of the fate of the article. I suggest WP:CFD for that. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:05, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

How this category can be reasonable, i.e., how articles may be assigned to it, without being original research? Staszek Lem (talk) 22:11, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Also there is G8 waiting for Electrohop, electronic rap, electro-rap, Techno-house, Techno-House, techno house, elettrorap. What links here, man :-) Staszek Lem (talk) 22:17, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Burma protection

Could you unprotect the article? I'm ok with the edits by the other editor so there won't be any edit war. Thanks. --regentspark (comment) 20:29, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

No problem. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:36, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Seamus close

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For a well-reasoned and clearly well-considered close at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seamus (dog) (2nd nomination) Seraphimblade Talk to me 21:14, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

And let me also compliment you on your extraordinarily good composure in the face of criticisms from those who disagreed with that closure. You have handled yourself with grace under pressure. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:41, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the compliments, I appreciate it. I have fixed the link in the barnstar; hope you don't mind. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:50, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

New Pages update

Hey ItsZippy/Archive 10 :). A quick update on how things are going with the New Page Triage/New Pages Feed project. As the enwiki page notes, the project is divided into two chunks: the "list view" (essentially an updated version of Special:NewPages) and the "article view", a view you'll be presented with when you open up individual articles that contains a toolbar with lots of options to interact with the page - patrolling it, adding maintenance tags, nominating it for deletion, so on.

On the list view front, we're pretty much done! We tried deploying it to enwiki, in line with our Engagement Strategy on Wednesday, but ran into bugs and had to reschedule - the same happened on Thursday :(. We've queued a new deployment for Monday PST, and hopefully that one will go better. If it does, the software will be ready to play around with and test by the following week! :).

On the article view front, the developers are doing some fantastic work designing the toolbar, which we're calling the "curation bar"; you can see a mockup here. A stripped-down version of this should be ready to deploy fairly soon after the list view is; I'm afraid I don't have precise dates yet. When I have more info, or can unleash everyone to test the list view, I'll let you know :). As always, any questions to the talkpage for the project or mine. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:25, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey!

Add me to the recall list? I wouldn't, but still. - Anyway, I've now made 100+ articles and had 2 DYK's. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 17:09, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, Tom. I trust you, but I don't think picking an editor who I've mentored and influenced is a good idea - it would look too much like I'm trying to only pick editors who will support me. I'm still open to criticism from any editor. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:11, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. I made some recall criteria for me if I ever do get rights. It's here. Comment on the 100+ articles and 2 DYKs? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 17:12, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

You've certainly created a lot of articles recently. They look ok, but be careful not to get hasty with them (I see someone raised an issue with you earlier this week). Also, remember that the number you create is not incredibly important: one or two really good, well referenced articles is better than 100 stubs. On that note, the work on DYKs look good - that would be a good area to spend more time in, as DYKs (and GAs and FAs) contribute much more to Wikipedia than new stubs. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:17, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

What would you say about Louisiana Highway 593 and Compton-Belkovich Thorium Anomaly? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 17:19, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

They look ok. It's difficult for me to comment, because I really do not know much about wither of those two subjects. It might be worth asking at the relevant WikiProject - they can probably give you tips on improving those articles. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:23, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I know nothing about the subjects, but I wrote the articles fine! :D --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 17:28, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Which is why a review from someone with more knowledge would be beneficial. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:32, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I've asked Surajt88, he is in WikiProject Astronomy. :D Also, take a look at this - did I spam up NewPages once? :( --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 17:35, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

A question about redirects

Hi ItsZippy. As you recently closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Clemmensen, I would like to ask your opinion on a related case.

I recently redirected the Bradie Webb article to Short Stack, and while I was at it I also looked at the Shaun Diviney article which was also a redirect. I noticed the Shaun Diviney article had a WPBiography category on the talk page which seemed redundant so I removed it.

Unfortunately, another user seems to think that this category is useful and keeps reverting my edit (and we have also had a slagging match on my talk page!).

I can't find any explanation as to why a redirect would need to be in the Biography articles of living people category, but as the other user mentions there is a class=redirect option available. memphisto 18:47, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Hey! (again)

I see you blocked 81.131.142.185 (talk · contribs). I can confirm to you that this is a boy who goes to my school, using a dynamic IP to get past his block. His WP account (was) Bradkill2 (talk · contribs). Thanks ItsZippy! --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 15:34, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. It might be worth notifying me or another admin if you see any other sockpuppets. An SPI might be worthwhile. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:05, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I'd say not, as it's a Dynamic IP, and the only one I can find for him. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:53, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

True. A rangeblock might be worth considering (but you'll need to find an admin who knows how to do those) if he's causing significant problems. Though the semi-protection of your userpage might put him off for now (let's wait to see if it works first). Otherwise we can keep blocking until he gets bored. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:59, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

A rangeblock would do any 86. Dynamic IP (BT, TalkTalk or Virgin Media) I think. I use BT, so there is a chance it could 'annoy' other editors? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 21:01, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I've not looked into it a great deal; a rangeblock may be completely inappropriate. If so, protecting your userpage and blocking any further IPs may be all that we can do. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:06, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Better Idea: I shout at him very loudly on the school bus? :D --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 21:07, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

If you think that'll help... ;-) Seriously, though, I suggest you just ignore him. If he's trying to annoy you, then showing that you're annoyed will make it worse. Ignore him, reporting any new IPs to admins when necessary, and he should quickly get bored. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:12, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll try. Anyway, what should I do about the temp. password emails? I got one from a 69.(something) IP. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 21:30, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, what do you mean? ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:49, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

The forgot password button. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 17:57, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Do you mean people are requesting password reminders for your account? ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Yup. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 18:13, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, I don't know. Ignore it if you can. You could try asking someone else - I'm afraid I'm not incredibly informed about these more technical issues. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:15, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Still Creek Ranch

Still Creek Ranch (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) - It has 70 students. I've seen some schools get AfD'd with 1000+ students. Not notable. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:30, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Then nominate it for AfD. G11 applies only to pages that are unambiguously promotional - however non-notable this school may be, the article is not pure promotion, so is not eligible for speedy deletion. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:37, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Would PROD or AFD be ok? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:44, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Up to you. PROD if you think it will not be controversial, otherwise AfD. Schools are often redirected to their district; you could propose a redirect if you think that would be more appropriate. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:46, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Close of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2009–10 Northwich Victoria F.C. season

Just a heads up. When you closed this afd, you forgot to delete the other two articles that were nominated along with the one in the title. Cheers. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:29, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

2009–10 Northwich Victoria F.C. season AfD

Hi, I see you closed this AfD with the result being delete; however, the other articles that were nominated, 2010–11 Northwich Victoria F.C. season and 2011–12 Northwich Victoria F.C. season, haven't been deleted. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 07:33, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - got those. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

All the best for your exams. I hope the revising proves fruitful. -- Trevj (talk) 10:14, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

New Cannon

Hi ItsZippy,

I run New Cannon and often look at the wiki page that was created by someone about our company to check if all information is correct. I have now found out it has gone. Is it just because we are not a big company or was there some problem with content on the page?

Best Richard — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.5.118.41 (talk) 12:19, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

John Chilvers deletion

Hiya, I see that you have just deleted a page which I recently created for a friend of mine. Please could you explain to me why you did this, and what, if anything, I can do to rectify the situation. Thanks Dyed Purple (talk) 18:39, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi there Dyed Purple, I would be more than happy to explain my deletion. I am afraid that Wikipedia is not for page about people you know, even if you think that they are important. I deleted the page according to this criterion, which allows the speedy deletion of an article which does not assert the significance of the subject. Although your friend is a member of the youth Parliament, that on its own is not significant enough for a Wikipedia article. If there is anything else about your friend that would make them significant, then you'd need to mention that. However, the article still may be deleted according to the much stricter notability guidelines in a deletion discussion. For the article to remain on Wikipedia for any length of time, you would need to provide numerous reliable & independent sources (newspaper reports, books, government websites, etc) which give substantial coverage to Chilvers. If you cannot, I suggest you find something else to work on at Wikipedia. If you have further questions, let me know.

Whilst I am sure that my friend will contest that he is important enough to warrant a Wikipedia page, I can see that (at least according to Wikipedia's criteria) he probably is not. I'll just wait until he becomes prime minister... Dyed Purple (talk) 19:07, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Heh, that's probably a good idea (and I wish him all the best). ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:08, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Question about a relist

Hi! I noticed you had just relisted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princeton Progressive Nation for a second time. I was a bit curious about this decision, since the only keep !vote argues that even though the GNG is not met the article is inherently notable by virtue of being a group at Princeton, which I don't really think will hold water. As such, I'm not sure what there is left to discuss. That being said, it isn't really a big deal if this is relisted or not, I was just curious. Thanks!--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:08, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Yaskar. I relisted it just to allow further discussion. The keep argument wasn't incredibly strong, you're right; that still only leaves two delete votes - an extra week's discussion won't really hurt. I'm guessing it'll be closed next week, and most probably deleted, but there's no reason to rush a closure, I don't think. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:11, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Got it, thanks for answering.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:13, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Наташа vol.1

Just to let you know, it turns out that Наташа vol.1, on which you declined a speedy yesterday, actually isn't a real album by a real musician at all — the "article" was actually a copy of Talk That Talk, the last Rihanna album, with some of the information changed to nonsense (but not enough to really hide the fact that it was a hoaxtastic pile of fake if you looked carefully enough), and the purported artist, "Ashley Sircoul", is entirely unverifiable as the name doesn't bring up a single hit on Google that isn't either the Наташа vol.1 page itself, or one of Wikipedia's new page bots detecting it. At any rate, the article actually did qualify for speedy, just under the "music recording by a redlinked artist" and/or "blatant hoax" criteria instead of the "no substantial content" one.

Just wanted to fill you in. Bearcat (talk) 03:20, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for getting that. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 16:38, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage prototype released

Hey ItsZippy! We've finally finished the NPT prototype and deployed it on enwiki. We'll be holding an office hours session on the 16th at 21:00 in #wikimedia-office to show it off, get feedback and plot future developments - hope to see you there! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 03:33, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

FLparkhrs template

I nominated it for speedy deletion because

1- It's not a template 2- It's unreferenced 3- It has no context.

No context is grounds for G1....William 13:02, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi William. You are right that I declined the CSD for the wrong reason (I mentioned vandalism in my summary, which is for G3, not 1). However, the template isn't patent nonsense (you and I can understand what it means), and it was created in good faith, with a reasonable use in mind. I suggest you nominate it at TfD instead. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:38, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Teahouse

Hi ItsZippy! I hope you are doing well! I really appreciate your contributions at the Teahouse! It appears you haven't been able to be that active at the Teahouse lately! I hope you don't mind, but, for now I am going to remove you from the your hosts page and move you to our past hosts page which will be linked from the hosts page. You are of course encouraged to move yourself back to the active host page anytime, including now if I am wrong! Or just drop by to lend a hand at your convenience. I'm really glad you were able to participate in the pilot! Enjoy the spring and see you for a cup of tea soon! Sarah (talk) 17:31, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

		A Barnstar Point
		Thanks for deleting my db-userreqs. benzband (talk) 18:54, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Hio

I've now got 3 DYKs and 2 GAs. Also, Compton-Belkovich Thorium Anomaly is listed at WP:DYKSTATS. Second best non-lead hook ever. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:01, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Very good - I'm impressed. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:05, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't even see how CBTA got 59,000+ views. Odd. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:07, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Request to discharge deletion tag on Ijebu Owo 2 Community

Hi Thank you for your action with explanation. I must tell you that Ijebu Owo is a sprawling community of loving people that leave together in harmony. At this time they have a monarch and the population is approaching 20,000 of industrious people . Ijebu Owo was founde by Ojomo Oludipe by reason of his allegiance to his brother Olowo Elewuoken,That sigle act demamd that we write something about Ijebu ,so that the world readership can make reference to the reward of honesty, dedication and allegiand. I promise to provide more verifiable information and data about Ijebu Owo. please allow the article to stay. Thank you. Joluata--Joluata (talk) 19:15, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Joluata, thanks for the message and your explanation. I would suggest you create the page at Ijebu Owo, which would probably be the best name for the community. Make sure that you explain what it is in the first sentence, and also that you provide reliable sources to show that it is notable. If you need any help, let me know. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:23, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Recurring jokes in The Simpsons

May I ask whether you considered my action an editorial or administrative action and what exactly was the basis for your protecting the redirect now? Thanks --Tikiwont (talk) 19:45, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Tikiwont. I protected the page because of the dispute about whether the page should be a redirect, which has been slowly going on for about a month, and to encourage those who don't like the page to discuss the issue rather than continually revert it. Thus far, I'd say you've acted in an administrative role, though some might see your restoration of the redirect as involved. Is that ok? ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:50, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I believe you meant to protect it for 1 day not 1 month. Remember Wikipedia is an encyclopedia where everyone can edit. Even if it is a redirect. IMHO.—cyberpower ^Chat_Online 19:58, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Well the redirect has been stable for some time, based on a discussion that i linked to. There was just one person reverting it without new arguments even in edit summaries, who I had already warned inviting them to open up a discussion with the previous version in place which they did elsewhere, me just adding links, so I don't see basis for protection nor really for a comment that looks as if directed also at me. nevermind the last part the was the same identation. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:01, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, you might be right - I'll unprotect the page, then. It seems that this is a case of one editor trying to make a change without discussing it, so you're right - there's no need for protection. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:12, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. We'll see. Sometimes editors need to be protected from themselves. --Tikiwont (talk) 20:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Tony Scaglione

Hello. I am Tony Scaglione and for some reason there has been some discussion as to delete my personal page that I created. I'm not that savvy with Wikipedia but I don't see what the problem was with my page. It seems to me that some other member may have some personal agenda for requesting my page to be deleted. I hope you can help. Everything listed was from my own personal biography and discography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PTD67 (talk • contribs) 00:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Tony, thanks for your message. Unfortunately, your article was nominated for deletion a little while ago, and the resulting discussion was that it should be redirected to the band you are in. You can find that discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Scaglione. The guidelines that we generally run by suggest that a musician must be notable (that is, there must be multiple reliable sources about them) independently of their band. If you really believe that you deserve your own article, you could start a discussion at the Whiplash (band) talkpage, but I suggest you read Wikipedia:Notability WP:BAND and first - it is unlikely that you'll get much support for your own article. Let me know if you have any problems. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:06, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Sadler

I've nominated William S. Sadler at FAC, in case you'd like to take a look at it. It has changed a bit since you did the GA review, hopefully for the better. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:31, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah, good luck with it. I'll see if I can comment at some point (though I'm not great at the deep level of review required by FAC). ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 17:57, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Status Update

2 GAs, 3 DYKs. 114 articles created. GA mentor. (Short and simple). Also, I got told to request autopatrolled rights here. Did I handle it well? Anything else you want to know? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:50, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

You are doing very well with article creation - it's great that you've found things that you can do some really good work on. You handled the autopatrolled thing well too - speaking to MBisanz first was the right thing to do. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:09, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Take a look at User:Tomtomn00/Articles Created please? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 09:21, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Please? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:59, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I can't right now - not got a great deal of time. I'll have a look later. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:30, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Just look at the massive number in section 2? --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 20:31, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not congratulating you just for creating lots of articles. If you really want me to review your article creation I will, but it'll take some time. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:32, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I was hoping it would get to that. Made 500+ stubs, I want a review on a few of 'em (almost all identical). --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 20:33, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Admin 'coaching'

Hey, I see that you put yourself down as one of the editors willing to be contacted to nominate users, plus your user info makes you appear rather nice and friendly. I've been doing new pages patrol and AfC for a while now, and am now looking to do other roles besides these, and eventually become an admin (still don't know if that's what I want to do yet). The admin coaching program is closed, but I am just wondering if I have any questions, will you be willing to answer them? Cheers. Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 20:07, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kinkreet, thanks for your message. I'd be delighted to answer any questions you might have about editing/adminship - feel free. If you're looking for more detailed advice, I can do that but not until the weekend, or early next week (I would want to be able to put aside enough time to properly review your contributions and conduct). Still, any questions - fire away. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:11, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, first, thank you for giving up your time, I appreciate that. Secondly, I am not trying to get nominated now, I am in no way ready, it's just sometimes I read some of the policies and it confuses me, or it overwhelms me and I need someone to point me in the right direction. So yeh, I just need someone I can 'nag' when I have these questions. Like I have one now: Good discussions are an important trait in an admin. Which discussions are the easiest to be involved in? (like AfD is pretty easy, and maybe something I can do while having lunch for example @_@, what other do you recommend?) Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 20:19, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

It's great to hear you say that - a willingness to gain more experience before applying demonstrates the exact qualities we need in future admins. Anyway, I would be delighted to help you. That's an interesting question... I'm not sure there's a definite answer. I think the best idea would be to join in discussions you enjoy, and get involved in a lot to find out what you enjoy. AfD can be quite easy to get into - although there are many different policies, they can be picked up easily, and you often do not have to get drawn into a long discussion. On the other hand, there can be tiresome people there who have an axe to grind, which can be difficult. Dispute resolution I personally find really rewarding - it is much more of a commitment, though. If you find that you have reasonable communication and dispute resolution skills, they'd love to see you help out at the dispute resolution noticeboard and will more more than willing to help you with that. Those are the two areas of discussion I've enjoyed. Having said that, I wouldn't get involved in anything that you won't enjoy - don't do it because you think you ought (I'm sure you already know this). Find out what, if anything, you enjoy discussing and do that. I'm sorry I can't give an absolute answer; I hope that helps. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:26, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks already, I'll check it out. It's always better to know you have a fallback. Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 20:35, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Admin nomination/advice

Hey, I saw you were on the list at WP:RRN and also saw that we have significant common interests (namely philosophy/theology). I am seeking to become an admin at some point over the next few months. This isn't a direct request for nomination (unless you think I'm ready), but I would very much appreciate any sort of advice/coaching you may be able to provide. Thanks. Voyaging (talk) 05:15, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Voyaging, thanks for your message. I am more than happy to help/mentor you over the next few months and will answer any questions that you have. I will consider nominating you for adminship, but would of course want to give adequate time to review your contributions and conduct - I wouldn't be able to do that immediately. If you have any questions you want to ask now, go ahead; if you want me to give more general advice and feedback, it'll have to be sometime after the weekend. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks much for the response! I am in no hurry at all and certainly realize I am not ready for adminship yet, but it is an honest ambition. I guess my first question is, where should I be spending most time on WP to prepare myself? After the weekend would be great, I will work at your convenience. :) Voyaging^talk 18:38, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

There's no straight answer to that. Honestly, just do what you enjoy doing - whether that's editing articles, participation in AfD, anti-vandalising, new page patrolling, or whatever. If you would like to become an admin in the future, you'll need to be willing to work in administrative areas, and most people will want to see some article creation. Provided you've got some experience of both under your belt, it doesn't really matter where it's from. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:46, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Article creation as in creating new articles that don't yet exist? Voyaging^talk 19:04, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, that was ambiguous of me. I meant content creation - either creating new articles or improving existing articles. If that's not your favourite thing, you don't needs loads of experience, but people will want to see that you understand the process of improving articles. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Gotcha. Not sure if you had anything in mind as far as general coaching/advice but anything would be appreciated. Perhaps what I most urgently need to work on. If you don't have time that is fine as well. Voyaging^talk 04:37, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Deleting pages

Why do you randomly choose to delete pages? The reason I ask is there are a few pages, that I know of you have randomly selected to delete, without researching. For an example- there's a band called The Tone Deaf Pig-Dogs- they were huge in the southeastern United States, and had a pretty good following in the midwest. In maximum rock-n-roll (A magazine) a lot when I was a kid and I think had a few write ups in Rolling Stone. They still play today. Recently, at UW (University of Wisconsin) where I attend, we were doing project on the social impact of punk music in the 1990s, the Pig-Dogs were mentioned because they led the charge back to old school and how much of the punk rock had become saturated with insane messages, etc. etc. about 10 of us out of 18 knew who the band was, so we looked up their website, and the Wiki link had been deleted. I am confused by this because I thought Wikipedia was an encyclopedia, run for the people by the people. We actually got out research completed through other sites. But it's unfortunate that 2 people (one of them you), 18 years old I believe you mention on your Wiki site, can just step in an destroy a wiki page of a band that had been around for over 20 years, just because you can. Did you not research the band? The band spawned 5 or 6 other bands that are all still going today. I am a little disgusted that a kid younger than the band, just went an erased them. That's what's wrong with Wikipedia. On a good note, after the fall out during the project, the class agreed and the professor, to block Wikipedia from all future projects as any sort of reference. Because we started looking and realizing, especially after seeing how many pages you yourself have deleted, anyone can become an adminstrator, and delete anyone for any reason, which makes wikipedia an extremely unreliable source for any type real information. It's very sad. I hope you have fun deleting things, but as you seem to big into the christian way, isn't it, do unto others? Sad indeed. I'm sure as an Adminstrator you will try to have my account removed as well. It's ok I will delete it myself, after my Professor and my class at the University of Wisconsin send our complaint to Jimmy Whales. Take Care- -C. Amidon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Revo67465188 (talk • contribs) 15:45, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Nobody randomly deletes articles. If they don't have a place here on Wikipedia according to policies, then they will be deleted. This is not personal. Don't take it that way. MrLittleIrish ^(talk) 申 15:50, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

• By the way, it was due to this. --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 16:17, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi C. Amidon, thanks for your message. I'm sorry that you've not had a good experience here but, as has been said, I do not randomly delete pages. As an administrator I have the ability to delete pages only when the community believes that a page should be deleted (if I started deleting pages just because I didn't like them, I wouldn't remain an adminstrator for very long. The link Tomtomn00 provided above is the discussion where it the consensus was to delete the article. If you believe that the Ton Deaf Pig-Dogs are notable enough for an article, then you are more than welcome to recreate the article, provide you can cite appropriate reliable source. If you need help with this, I am more than happy to do what I can.

As for blocking Wikipedia as a source of reference, that's probably a good idea. Wikipedia is a great encyclopedia and is often reliable; however, for your university course, it would be inappropriate to use as a source. We try as much as possible to reference everything that we write on Wikipedia - most of our articles will have a list of reliable sources at the bottom. That can be a good place to find reliable sources if you are researching something. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:25, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Seriously, Tone Deaf Pig-Dogs should not have been deleted. You go through the trouble of deleting a page before you research any of the facts for yourself. As far as helping to cite references, why didnt you offer to help cite referneces before you deleted the page? Your method makes no sense. Now all that material needs to be recovered again, and we thought it would be safe here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.97.40.18 (talk) 18:58, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

I understand your concern and, if the band really is notable, that I agree that there should be an article on them. If you can provide reliable sources about the band (either URLs or references to offline sources) which, according to our guidelines on reliable sources and notability, would establish notability, then I will happily restore the page. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:04, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Wait, as talked about before, a social media class at a university did consider wikipedia a possible site, no loger. I am just disgusted that (this doesn't mean you ItsZippy- I am talking about the people who origianlly started the issue) a "guardian" of wikipedia, a teenager who lives in a different country, judging something some from anther country, has the right to contact you, as an admin, and you along with many other people from a different part of the world have decided to delete something. That's what's strange. The Pig-Dogs had links to Maximum rock-n-roll, rolling stone, thrasher magazine, fat wreck chords, Creative Loafing, Flagpole, and the Sloppy Meat Eaters, which is funny because the Sloppy Meat Eaters don't have nearly as many links, but are still up. So there is quite a lot of contradictions in the reasoning. I assume is something personal someone has against the band, and because adminstrators seem to be friends with each other, they delete it. It's ok to be doing what's called "Good Old Boy Politics", just admit it. But I have notice, things get deleted a lot if they don't fit in the frame of reference many adminstrators are interested in. Not wikipedia policy, I mean personal choices of adminstrators seems to be an issue on deletion. So actually our professor is doing a new paper for us, to research the deletion of wiki pages, and the truth behind it. So, maybe we'll get to the bottom of it. Too bad bands liek the Tone Deaf Pig-Dogs suffer due to personal agendas and not policy. -C. Amidon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Revo67465188 (talk • contribs) 21:54, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Let me make this clear: I did not delete the page for political reasons, because of my personal taste, because someone asked me to, because it would make someone happy, or any other reason beyond what I have already said. The only reason I delete the page was because the discussion, linked above, supported the deletion of the page, based on the lack of reliable sources. I have just had a look at the the archive of the deleted page and reviewed all of the sources that were used - every single one was either unreliable, unable to provide notability, or both. If you really believe that my closure of the debate and subsequent deletion of the page was wrong, deletion review exists as a place to challenge such decision - if people decide that my judgement was wrong and my decision is overturned, I have absolutely no problem with that. However, accusations that that I acted out of my personal choice or to satisfy other people are simply wrong - I closed the debate based purely on the debate and the relevant arguments and policies; nothing more. If you're still unhappy, please go to deletion review. If you don't want to, I have nothing more to say. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:53, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, ItsZippy. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Guide.
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

(New email). --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 18:42, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I get automatic e-mail notfications, so there's no need for YGM in future. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:04, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Okay. (and another). --Tomtomn00 (talk • contributions) 19:09, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

FYI

Hi there! I liked your edits in the first sentence of the article about Sin. It has been changed, I believe the old introduction was more clear and I restored it. 212.116.76.77 (talk) 17:28, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Hio ItsZippy!

I renamed myself from Tomtomn00 to Thine Antique Pen. (See this). Have you looked at the 700+ articles above? --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 19:12, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I've noticed. I haven't managed to review the articles you've created yet. As you said, there are 700+ of them (that's quite a lot) and I really don't have a great deal of free time at the moment. I'll try to have a look at some of them soon if I can; in the mean time, is there anyone else you can ask to help? ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:14, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I wouldn't say so, other than Dr. Blofeld (87K articles created) who helped me out fixing them up, and with my creation template. --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 19:17, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Please fill out our brief Teahouse survey

Teahouse logo

Hello fellow Wikipedian, the hardworking hosts and staff at WP:Teahouse would like your feedback!

We have created a brief survey intended to help us understand the experiences and impressions of veteran editors who have participated on the Teahouse. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you edited the Teahouse Questions or Guests pages some time during the last few months.

Click here to be taken to the survey site.

The survey should take less than 15 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback, and we look forward to your next vist to the Teahouse!

Happy editing,

J-Mo, Teahouse host

This message was sent via Global message delivery on 01:13, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

New Page Triage/New Pages Feed

Hey all :). A notification that the prototype for the New Pages Feed is now live on enwiki! We had to briefly take it down after an unfortunate bug started showing up, but it's now live and we will continue developing it on-site.

The page can be found at Special:NewPagesFeed. Please, please, please test it and tell us what you think! Note that as a prototype it will inevitably have bugs - if you find one not already mentioned at the talkpage, bring it up and I'm happy to carry it through to the devs. The same is true of any additions you can think of to the software, or any questions you might have - let me know and I'll respond.

Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:18, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Rollback

You recently declined my request. Since then I have gained considerable experience in this area [1], and would appreciate if you could advise me when this request might be reconsidered.Ankh.Morpork 23:03, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:07, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I will start studying the manual.Ankh.Morpork 20:10, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Autopatroller Nomination

Thank you for approving User:Wilbysuffolk's nomination of my User account for Autopatroller rights. That was somewhat unexpected, but still appreciated. --TommyBoy (talk) 04:40, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clampco Sistemi

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Non-admin closure question. -- Trevj (talk) 12:27, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Nancy Hirsch Rubin

Ambassador Rubin is a part of President Obama's Council for Community Solutions members listed here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/12/14/president-obama-announces-members-white-house-council-community-solution She one of the veterans of the group, yet while everyone else has a wiki page, she does not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arikaye (talk • contribs) 19:46, 31 May 2012 (UTC) Also, her replacement, Eileen Donahoe has a page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eileen_Donahoe — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arikaye (talk • contribs) 19:47, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok, thank you for the clarification. I think you are probably right about notability, then, because of the office she has held. Nevertheless, additional reliable sources would help to improve the article - if you know where to find any, they'd be great. Are there any new stories she's been involved in? Or perhaps books, or a profile on an independent website? I'll have a look too to see what I can find. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:57, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Host feedback needed at the Teahouse!

Hi! We're seeking your feedback as a current or formal host at the Teahouse about the project. Please stop by and lend your voice at your convenience, here. Thanks :) Sarah (talk) 20:10, 31 May 2012 (UTC)