User talk:Gattito

September 2026

Information icon Hello, I'm James. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. SimEditor07 (talk) 15:25, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

Leave Ch1p the chop alone

I have just been through Ch1p the chop's contributions and your logs, and frankly this is a bit much. A new biography of a Scottish sportsman gets a {{db-test}} tag within a minute of being created (Special:Diff/11124), a {{uw-create1}} lands on their talk page in the same minute (Special:Diff/11125), and then come the reverts and the level 2 and level 3 "vandalism" warnings (Special:Diff/11132, Special:Diff/11414). That is not how we treat someone who is trying to write about a real athlete. Please back off and let them get on with it. Pug of the day (talk) 09:34, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Agree with Pug of the day. WP:BITE could not be clearer: newcomers are going to make mistakes, and the answer is patience and a friendly explanation, not a deletion tag and a stack of templates. WP:CSD#G2 is for pages that are obviously tests, not for a biography somebody is still in the middle of building. And WP:DTTR is about regulars, but the spirit applies twice over to a new user: a hand-written note costs nothing. Bellow me and hunker down (talk) 09:35, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

+1. Leave them alone. GDX420 (talk) 09:40, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, all. I'll reply once here to keep it in one place. For the record: the {{db-test}} tag (Special:Diff/11124) was placed because the first revision of the page was a user-sandbox template and an unrelated emissions table, not a biography; the reverts and the uw-vandalism2/uw-vandalism3 warnings were SimEditor07's, not mine (Special:Diff/11132, Special:Diff/11414); and my only other edits there were an attribution dummy edit and a talk-page note (Special:Diff/11392, Special:Diff/11393), because text had been pasted in from another Wikipedia article without attribution, which WP:CWW requires. None of that had anything to do with the subject's nationality or his deafness.

That said, the page has ended up as a patchwork of pasted fragments, the subject is clearly notable, and a tag is a poor substitute for help. I have withdrawn the tag and I'm happy to work with Ch1p the chop to turn it into a properly sourced article. Ch1p, I'll start a thread at Talk:Crawford Carrick-Anderson. SimMoneyTrees (talk) 09:45, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Crawford Carrick-Anderson

I made that page because Crawford is a brilliant Scottish athlete and he is deaf and nobody had written about him on here. Every time I add something it gets tagged or reverted or I get another warning. I am not a vandal. Please stop following me around. Ch1p the chop (talk) 09:36, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Seconded. Stop harassing Ch1p the chop. Pterodactylus vs Tyrannosaurus (talk) 09:43, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Hounding

I would also like to raise WP:HOUND. Going by the history of the pages involved, Ch1p the chop's edits to Told by an Idiot, Benjamin Evan Ainsworth, Jackson Goldstone, Izabela Yankova, Red Bull Rampage and Crawford Carrick-Anderson have nearly all been picked over by you, often within minutes. The guideline talks about singling out one editor and following them from page to page in a way that is likely to cause them distress. I am not saying that is the intention, but from where Ch1p is standing that is exactly what it looks like. Doctor Rhubarb (talk) 09:37, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Notice: perceived prejudice against disabled athletes and Scottish people

Warning icon Please do not single out article subjects, or the editors who write about them, on the basis of disability or nationality. Your recent actions on Crawford Carrick-Anderson, a biography of a profoundly deaf Scottish athlete, and towards its creator have given the appearance of prejudice against disabled athletes and Scottish people. Wikipedia expects all editors to be civil, to assume good faith and not to harass other contributors, and administrators are held to a higher standard of conduct (WP:ADMINCOND). If you continue to target this editor or this subject, the matter may be raised at the administrators' noticeboard. Eichhornia Crassipes (talk) 09:38, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Endorse this notice. A Deaflympics gold medallist from Dunblane is exactly the sort of subject we should be welcoming, and the page was tagged for deletion before the ink was dry. Whatever the intention, it looks terrible. Omniscients (talk) 09:42, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Noted, and I understand how the timing looked from the outside. I do reject the suggestion that disability or nationality played any part: the reviews were about attribution and copyright (WP:CWW, WP:COPYVIO), which apply to every article in the same way. I'd rather put the effort into the article itself, so let's continue at Talk:Crawford Carrick-Anderson. SimMoneyTrees (talk) 09:46, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Assume good faith, please

Per WP:AGF, could I ask you to take a step back here? The attribution business (Special:Diff/11392) I understand: copied text needs attributing under WP:CWW, fair enough. But a friendly note explaining how to do it would have fixed that, and escalating to "vandalism" warnings over a good-faith article is exactly how we lose new editors. I would suggest you voluntarily stop patrolling Ch1p the chop's contributions for a while, or better still, help them fix the article instead of tagging it. Johnny three shoes 96 (talk) 09:41, 28 September 2026 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Pug of the day (talk) 09:55, 28 September 2026 (UTC)