User talk:Bigpoliticsfan

Things I can do to help WikiProject U.S. Congressedit list Ongoing: Upload [please add links to the senate rules for each of these committees.] Ongoing: Upload new district maps and incorporate them into articles (November 19, 2013) Ongoing: Apply {{US Congress party summary}} on all Congresses (February 20, 2018) Ongoing: Create edit notices for all articles. (February 15, 2010)

I think you should just look at the page so you will see how much vandalism that has built up. thank you. Creeper919 (talk) 00:35, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm 139.228.53.35. Your recent edit appears to have added premature information about a reported sports transaction, so I removed it for now. The transaction is based on anonymous sources and/or awaiting an official announcement. If you believe the transaction has been completed, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. 139.228.53.35 (talk) 00:32, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed that Roll Call is not official, but I looked for the release you mentioned from the caucus and found nothing other than numerous references to it being between DeFazio and Grijalva. Never saw Holt's name in the mix (especially since he is running for Senate), so I reverted to the previous revision. Can you point me to the link? --Esprqii (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see your intention, and it makes sense, though the original text did not indicate that you were aiming to contrast the Senate Appropriations Committee with the House counterpart - and, truthfully, such a comparison seems a bit tangential. Erru il 1988 (talk) 22:10, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. At least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at the welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make some test edits, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Your speedy deletion claim is blatantly false. ViperSnake151  Talk  00:41, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We went through a very long list of your requests at RFPP today, and I'm sorry to tell you that none of them were necessary.

I also read some of your recent comments there. It's not necessary to make non-admin comments at RFPP, like some non-admins make at AN or ANI, as administrators almost always disregard them and make their own judgments about the individual situations. If you wish to engage an editor who has made a protection request, please do so at their user talk page or on the article talk page.

The protection policy is clear about which pages need protection. It borders on disruptive editing to place so many unnecessary requests that require administrator attention in the space of five hours. I hope that wasn't your intent, but I want to make sure you understand that such requests prevent us from responding to the pages that need to be protected quickly.

In any case, please make sure you understand the protection policy before you make another page protection request. Thanks. :-) KrakatoaKatie 07:03, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your nominations of Richard Jefferson, Paul George (basketball) and Chris Paul. I was considering quickfailing each of them. Please make sure that each one has at least one WP:IC in each paragraph (since in a well-structured article a new paragraph indicates a new topic). Jefferson also seems to be quite thin biographically. Please expand his high school and college career. What did he do to earn Pac-12 Basketball Hall of Honor induction? "integral part of the varsity basketball" - Was he all-state? all-area? Scoring leader? Did he set school records? Try to track down his college bio. They usually detail both high school and college. http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jefferi01.html says he was a McD All-American. He must have done some impressive things in high school. I'll check back in in a couple of days before I decide whether to QF any of these.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Paul Krugman you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:50, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Paul Krugman you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Paul Krugman for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:02, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Bigpoliticsfan,

I noticed that in the past 48 hours you've been nominating a lot of articles for GA, and that most of these have been closed as quickfails by me or other users. Before you nominate any more, I'd suggest you look at the instructions at WP:GAN/I. I appreciate your enthusiasm for these topics, but you don't appear to have worked on most of the articles before nominating, and several of your nominations had outstanding cleanup banners. I'd also point you to the sentence: "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article prior to a nomination." Nominating unready articles, unfortunately, is just a waste of everyone's time.

I do appreciate your interest in the project--I'd just suggest you pick one or two articles you've worked on at length and checked against the GA criteria before nominating more. Taking those through the process will give you a better idea of what does and doesn't make a good nomination. Cheers, and let me know if there's any way I can help, Khazar2 (talk) 20:08, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Blue Dog Coalition you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:10, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article United States Senate election in Arkansas, 2014 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:12, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Blue Dog Coalition you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Blue Dog Coalition for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:22, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article United States Senate election in Arkansas, 2014 you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:United States Senate election in Arkansas, 2014 for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:22, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -- Khazar2 (talk) 23:03, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll stop posting requests at RFPP and nominations at GAN for the rest of the year. --Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 23:07, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. FWIW, I don't think anyone would have any objection to your nominating articles you've worked on to GA if you feel they meet the GA criteria; it's just the "drive-by" nominations of articles needing cleanup that are the problem. -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:08, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You just did this again on Wilson Chandler. If you're going to nominate articles, work on them first and get them to that status, otherwise it just wastes everyone's time. Wizardman 19:38, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Last warning. You nominate another article that's not clearly GA quality and you're blocked. Wizardman 22:50, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You've moved on from the nuisance of nominating articles for GA to seemingly random solicitation for someone else to nominate them. Stop this or you will be blocked from editing. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 00:58, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Paul George (basketball) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.

Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Yellow Evan -- Yellow Evan (talk) 13:53, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Paul George (basketball) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Paul George (basketball) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Yellow Evan -- Yellow Evan (talk) 01:52, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your tag on Gloria Petyarre. I've fixed it and cleared the tag, but you might want to take a read of WP:BLPPROD - as I read it, Gloria Petyarre should not have been marked as a candidate for BLP deletion, because it had valid external links that referred to at least one of the stated facts in the article (two of the ELs were dead, but the other two work). Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 12:08, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bigpoliticsfan. A couple of points regarding nominations of pages for deletion.

When you nominate a page for deletion, you need to be careful to make sure that the reason for deletion that you give actually applies to the page in question. For example, in this edit you added a PROD BLP to an article that does have a reference. It is not a good reference, and the article might well be deleted by another process, such as PROD or AFD, but a PROD BLP is only for use on an article which has no source cited at all. Also, please note that a source cited in an article is a source, whether it is labelled as a "reference" or not. Sometimes inexperienced editors just put the sources in an "external links" section, but that does not mean they are not sources, and an article with such sources does not qualify for a PROD BLP, as here. This edit proposed speedy deletion as "lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article", but it is perfectly clear what the subject of the article is: it is a plant of the genus Ligularia and the family Asteraceae, and there is a picture of it and a link to its page at the Euro+Med plant base, so there is no doubt whatever what the article is about.

On a separate matter, you should not use "subst" with speedy deletion nominations. I know that this seems confusing and arbitrary to a newcomer, as PROD is substituted, but speedy deletion tags should be left as they are, e.g. {{db-person}}, not {{subst:db-person}}. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:17, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• You are still doing it: [1]. Please stop. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:29, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Also, tagging as sourced articles which do have sources. For example [2]. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:33, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, tagging an article for speedy deletion is not a minor edit. When tagging articles for speedy deletion, you should make sure the reason is valid, and you should not check the box noting it a minor edit. —C.Fred (talk) 14:31, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Barney the barney barney (talk) 14:26, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What is your reason for believing that this article should be deleted? Tiderolls 02:54, 20 January 2014 (UTC) I blanked the log entry after realizing I had nominated the wrong article. --Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 02:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of blanking you should have removed it from the AfD log and nominated it for speedy deletion (after any translusions of the page have gone off the server cache preferably). I have done these maintenance actions for you. jni (talk) 09:35, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Am I missing something in your edit here?

Your edit summary says you are reverting an edit, but you weren't reverting an edit, you were removing an entry.

Were you trying to revert an edit, if so, why?

Or were you trying to remove Nikki McCray, if so, why?--S Philbrick(Talk) 22:29, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

People do make errors, and I am a big fan of forgiving editors who make mistakes (because I know I do on occasion). However, failing to engage in discussion is more serious. The fact that you failed to explain why you made the edit, which might turn into a learning experience, is troubling.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:06, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Anup. I undid your one edit made on January 25 article. That entry into the list was correct and can be verified using source cited in the article Avianca Flight 52. I also found no edit summary for your revert made. I'll request you to leave an edit summary for every edit you do make. It helps other users to understand your changes. Regards, AnupMehra ^✈ 02:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion at Talk:United States presidential election in New Mexico, 1996 on whether a picture and its accompanying caption should be included in the article. Your input would be appreciated. Thanks, Tiller54 (talk) 16:26, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to read WP:RFAADVICE to know what is expected of RfA candidates. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:19, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(Personal attack removed) 50.159.28.153 (talk) 14:14, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you for opening a sockpuppet investigation into the series of I.P. vandals we've been having lately. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 18:33, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for nominating me for adminship. Regretfully, I have withdrawn the RFA, as it is clear that it will not succeed. I will address the concerns raised about my editing, and perhaps try again later. Once again, thank you. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 23:30, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

VQuakr (talk) 00:42, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

—Bagumba (talk) 03:15, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bigpoliticsfan and thank you for helping to revert vandalism on Wikipedia. A number of the requests you've made at WP:RFPP have been declined because there isn't enough activity to warrant protecting the article. Please review the protection policy and have a look at some of the declined and accepted request at RFPP before making any more requests. Thank you, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:21, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am fresh out of wiki kittens; please accept this cake as a thank you for your support and thoughtful comments during my (now withdrawn) RfA. What doesn't kill me... Cheers, Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:EL, this section in particular:

A well-chosen link to a directory of websites or organizations. Long lists of links are not acceptable. A directory link may be a permanent link or a temporary measure put in place while external links are being discussed on the article's talk page. Many options are available; the Open Directory Project is often a neutral candidate, and may be added using the {{dmoz}} template.

Please stop reverting valid edits, using edit notes of "Rv to last clean version", and requesting protection for articles to prevent valid edits in future. Thank you. 71.23.178.214 (talk) 02:30, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings and saluations! An I.P. vandal (50.159.28.153) who was blocked for vandalism and being uncivil and disruptive, has, in evading the block, returned under a new address (108.169.6.36 and 24.44.203.79). I respectfully ask, in the vein of WP:DUCK that you please open an investigation into this evasive vandal or raise the issue on WP:ANI. Please don't tarry, for time is of the essence. With the best of regards, Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 04:11, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could you explain the vandalism in [3]? Thanks! Hipocrite (talk) 19:52, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are back. Have you considered addressing this? Hipocrite (talk) 19:24, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could you explain the vandalism in [4]? Hipocrite (talk) 19:29, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And [5]? Hipocrite (talk) 19:30, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And [6]? If you don't respond within 1 hour of your next edit, I'll seek to have your rollbacker right removed. Thanks. Hipocrite (talk) 19:35, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There were some words in each edit I undid that flagged them as possible vandalism. --Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 19:37, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Were they vandalism? Hipocrite (talk) 19:38, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I now realize that some of them were not actually vandalism and will try to be more careful from now on. --Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 19:46, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please cease reverting. Here's another error [7]. Hipocrite (talk) 23:24, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also WP:NOTVAND - [8]. Hipocrite (talk) 23:27, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Hipocrite (talk) 12:48, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bigpoliticsfan, as Hipocrite stated above there is a discussion about you at the administrators' incident noticeboard, and we would very much like your participation. We have questions and advice for you, thank you. -- Atama頭 08:54, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What pages didn't exist that led you to make this revert? Hipocrite (talk) 10:03, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain what exactly you are trying to prove by nominating a ten-year-old article with multiple contributors and multiple references for speedy deletion as CSD 11 "obviously invented"? [9] AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:27, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Further to this, I see that you have twice recently been the subject of discussions at WP:ANI. Since it appears that you have failed to take note of what has been said, I can see no alternative unless I get a prompt and valid explanation here for the edit but to report you again, and ask that you be blocked from editing. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:38, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had a momentary brain freeze, and will be much more careful about doing this kind of stuff in the future. --Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 22:39, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, not good enough. I've just seen this ridiculous bit of fly-by tagging [10], and it is clear that you simply don't have the competence to edit Wikipedia. You have been wasting too many people's time for too long, and I see no reason why we should have to put up with this crap any more. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:46, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

I suggest you respond - ignoring it isn't going to work this time. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:08, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Martin tamb. Your recent edit to the page List of current National Basketball Association head coaches appears to have added premature information about a reported sports transaction, so I removed it for now. The transaction is based on anonymous sources and/or awaiting an official announcement. If you believe the transaction has been completed, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — MT (talk) 02:12, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Livelikemusic. An edit that you recently made to List of General Hospital cast members seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! livelikemusic ^{my talk page!} 00:06, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Children of General Hospital, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Ned Ashton and Danny Morgan. 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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Volume 7, Issue 4 • Fourth Quarter 2014 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Maple Syrup Report Portal selected articles and pictures	Features The U.S. Roads Project Is Turning 10! 2014: The Year in Review Setting the bar for 2015	State and national updates CA, DE, MD, MI, MS, MP, OR Project news
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 10:38, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Volume 7, Issue 4 • Fourth Quarter 2014 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Maple Syrup Report Portal selected articles and pictures	Features The U.S. Roads Project Is Turning 10! 2014: The Year in Review Setting the bar for 2015	State and national updates CA, DE, MD, MI, MS, MP, OR Project news
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 10:48, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bigpoliticsfan, I am a student at American University and am currently in a class about Wikipedia. I am interested in contributing to the Wiki project about the U.S. Congress. Do you have any suggestions or tips on how I could be of useful in to this project? best, me3154a Me3154a (talk) 01:05, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Volume 8, Issue 1 • Winter 2015 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features Be part of the turnaround... now become part of the solution Raising the speed limit on KML creation RCS coming for the Texas FM/RM routes The bar is set for 2015	State and national updates CA, DE, MI In other project news...
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 (talk · contribs) 18:37, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I see that you added an "outdated" tag to the article Scott Peters (politician). Could you tell me specifically what you found to be outdated, so that I can fix it? Thanks! --MelanieN (talk) 21:04, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

His committee assignments. --Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 02:27, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks, I'll fix that. --MelanieN (talk) 01:37, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at List of General Hospital cast members, you may be blocked from editing. You do not just remove information inappropriately without reason or edit-summary, nor do we just delete them. livelikemusic ^{my talk page!} 17:34, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Volume 8, Issue 2 • Spring 2015 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features Route description 101 The nitty gritty of in-depth research	State and national updates Editor updates In other project news...
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 12:09, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bigpoliticsfan, I noticed that you are listed as a participant for WP:USC and have worked on a few Congress-related articles recently. Would you be able to help with a request I have for the Rep. Tom Graves article? In discussion with another editor, I recently posted a proposed suggestion for a section of the article covering a somewhat controversial topic—a real estate deal that went south. However, this editor has been off-wiki for some time, and I'd like to see if someone else will consider making the update. The reason why I do not edit myself: I'm an external (paid) consultant to Rep. Graves, and I'm keen to follow WP:COI and avoid direct edits. The full details of my request are on the Talk page, here, if you can spare a few minutes to take a look. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 15:20, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This edit is typical of a string of recent edits in which you have spotted what you think is a problem and added an "update" tag, rather than fixing the problem, which in this case is utterly trivial; all that needed to be updated is to change the year from 2014 to 2015 as a term-end date for the mayor in the infobox. About a quarter of your most recent 500 edits involve adding an "update" tag. As a Wikipedia editor who is apparently a big politics fan, you would do a far greater service by endeavoring to improve the articles in question rather than demanding that others fix the problems you've identified and almost always failed to describe or discuss in any meaningful fashion. Alansohn (talk) 14:59, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I notice you're on Wikipedia:List of administrator hopefuls. Wikipedia would benefit from more admins. If you have been editing for more than 12 months (preferably 24+ months), and have been editing fairly consistently for the past 6 months (preferably 12+ months) with at least 100 edits a month (this tool will help) - or an explanation for any gaps, and haven't been blocked in the past three years - or a good explanation for a recent block, don't have a recent history of edit warring or arguing with other editors, feel you can explain why you wish to be an admin, can demonstrate some understanding of Wikipedia's procedures and processes, or know where to go for guidance, and are confident enough to go through a RfA, please get in touch with me. We can talk about it some more, and if all looks OK, I'll nominate you. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:21, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for volunteering to nominate me. I would be very honored. The reason there are such big gaps in my editing is because I mostly focus on cleanup, maintenance tagging, and reverting blatant/obvious vandalism; also I'm usually only available on Monday through Thursday evenings/nights and weekends and holidays. As for policies, I have learned quite a bit about the nuances of each since registering this account, and if made an admin could probably enforce them in a fair, polite, and respectful manner. --Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 23:25, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for getting back to me. I've looked at your contributions - [11] - and you haven't been much involved recently. Less than what I suggested you would need. There are also some concerning notices on your talkpage - people asking you to stop being disruptive, etc. I would suggest you would need at least 12 months of consistently positive contributions to the project of at least 100 edits a month so that the community has something to assess. Involvement in quality article building, such as taking an article to Good Article level, would be useful. Involvement in AfD would also be helpful, along with getting involved with other maintenance areas. If after 12 months you have done this, and still want to be an admin, get in touch with me, and we can talk further. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 15:51, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Volume 8, Issue 3 • Summer 2015 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features Road to the past: Some tips on researching history sections Getting to know the editors behind the lenses	State and national updates State updates In other project news...
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—MediaWiki message delivery (talk) delivered on behalf of Imzadi1979 05:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 (talk) on 23:58, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As a recent editor to United States Senate elections, 2020, I'm giving you a courtesy notice to inform you it's been submitted for deletion. LavaBaron (talk) 01:44, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, 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. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 (talk) on 22:59, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bigpoliticsfan. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Katie^talk 14:21, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	Hawkeye7 RfA Appreciation award
	Thank you for participating in and supporting my RfA. It was very much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:52, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Bigpoliticsfan, I noticed you edited Five Families page in the past, so maybe you can answer a question I have about the names of Mafia families.

Under what circumstances does a Family get renamed? for example, Joseph Profaci was boss of the "Profaci Family" for 34 years and, unless I'm wrong, was given his own Family by Lucky Luciano. After the Commission retired Joseph Magliocco they made Joseph Colombo boss and the Family got renamed Colombo, and although he was boss for 10 years he seems to have been a puppet for the Commission. Considering he's been boss for 43 years and counting and his sons and nephews have high-ranking positions, why hasn't the Family been renamed for Carmine Persico?

Another example: The Gambino Family was under the control of the Gotti brothers non-stop from 1985 to 2011 (26 years), but the Family's still called Gambino long after Carlo Gambino's death.

The only conclusion I can come to is that Families are renamed when the new boss is appointed by the Commission, considering Persico and John Gotti seem to have taken the position for themselves and weren't given it by the Commission. Maybe you can shed some light on it? But if not tell me how you think it works, cheers. --Emperorofthedaleks (talk) 20:56, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid you're asking the wrong person. My main interests are politics, sports, and the weather, not the mafia. Sorry. Wish I could be of more help. --Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 21:52, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks anyway. --Emperorofthedaleks (talk) 02:44, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
56		Port Charles (fictional city) (talk)	Add sources
35		Lists of United States congress (talk)	Add sources
119		Shane Donovan and Kimberly Brady (talk)	Add sources
21		Holly Sutton-Scorpio (talk)	Add sources
201		Lulu Spencer (talk)	Add sources
2,118		Nutmeg (talk)	Add sources
117		Lame-duck session (talk)	Cleanup
30		Mac Scorpio (talk)	Cleanup
85		West Liberty University (talk)	Cleanup
257		Carly Corinthos (talk)	Expand
74		Next Latvian parliamentary election (talk)	Expand
124		Nikolas Cassadine (talk)	Expand
4,733		Kid Rock (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
4,128		Maryland (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
48		Jasper Jacks (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
14		Drew Cheetwood (talk)	Merge
51		Hilal (crescent moon) (talk)	Merge
168		Appropriation bill (talk)	Merge
18		Hardy/Webber family (talk)	Wikify
584		Smite (video game) (talk)	Wikify
285		Driving (talk)	Wikify
18		Rule 48 (talk)	Orphan
4		Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act (LARA) of 2015 (talk)	Orphan
12		Barron's 400 Index (talk)	Orphan
15		Christopher Obure (talk)	Stub
19		Senate Republican Policy Committee (talk)	Stub
7		French River (Massachusetts) (talk)	Stub
74		Erica Grow (talk)	Stub
10		Ray Girardin (talk)	Stub
8		David Lynn (architect) (talk)	Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 22:49, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

^{[April Fools!]} --DashyGames (contribs) 15:40, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

		The Surreal Barnstar
		For "BushdidKatrina" - I laughed out loud and, well, Canadians don't spill beer but I came close. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:28, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 on 01:03, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to post other usernames for your questions at RfA. Most who vote on RfA have seen the usernames, thus they are likely ineffective. Thanks! RileyBugz^会話_投稿記録 19:22, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take that under consideration. --Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 19:33, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, and more convincingly, more candidates will almost "spill [their] beer". :P RileyBugz^会話_投稿記録 19:40, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Amandajm, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Amandajm and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Amandajm during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:33, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for supporting my run for administrator. I am honored and grateful. ) Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:48, 23 July 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Hi there, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh666 21:56, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, don't forget to sign your comment! Cheers, Airplaneman ✈ 21:08, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder, I just went and did it. --Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 21:49, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:19, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:18, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, 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. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi 1979 → on 19:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]