Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 13:28, 23 March 2008

Welcome to Jayron32's talk page. Please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). Place comments that start a new topic at the bottom of the page and give them ==A descriptive header==. If you're new to Misplaced Pages, please see Welcome to Misplaced Pages and frequently asked questions.

Archives

/Archive for Sept-Dec 2006 /Archive2 for Jan-Apr 2007 /Archive3 for May-Aug 2007 /Archive4 for Sept-Dec 2007 /Archive5 for Jan 2008-

Peer review for Jack Warner

Hi Jayron32, If you have time, I'd really appreciate your feedback on the film biography, Jack Warner, which I recently nominated for peer review. Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 23:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Jayron, I was dissatisfied with the lead but couldn't put my finger on what was wrong with it. Your comments put a spotlight on the problem. I'll revamp the lead and move on other issues tomorrow. For now, I placed all the material on Warner's professional life in one section and created a new section titled "Death and legacy". As you recommended, material on Warner's career as an independent producer is now in the "Professional life" section. Thanks, again, for your feedback! Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 02:50, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

3RR block

Hey, Jayron, I'm a bit perplexed about your recent block of 70.168.196.48. It seems to me that this revert is a self-revert and thus shouldn't count toward the rule. Maybe I'm missing something, and you could explain it to me. Cheers, Heimstern Läufer (talk) 03:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

oops. Missed that. Unblocking now. Good catch. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:56, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured list candidates/List of recessions in the United States

Hi, I don't think your Oppose vote was fair. We changed from international recessions to United States-only recessions about 5 minutes ago. At the very least, I would appreciate it if you changed it to a comment before voting immediately like that. Gary King (talk) 04:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

If the list is that unstable, I see no reason why my vote should not stand. At least decide what the list is about before nominating it!!! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

User talk:70.168.196.48

He's not guilty of breaking the 3rr rule... but (as I said on the intervention page) he is guilty of consitently ignoring warnings and general vandalism... removing valid tags fromt he article without discussing it. In my opinion, a short block is waranted for those reasons.--Dr who1975 (talk) 05:49, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Let's let it go for now. The IP has stopped, there's nothing to do for now... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Can you at least put a thrid/final warning on his page... he's just going tocome back and do it again in aday or two. I don't like to be the one to give out all the warnings.--Dr who1975 (talk) 05:56, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

At this point, there's not much of a point. Given that many IPs are assigned dynamically, or to public computers, given that it has been hours since that IP was used to edit, there is no guarantee that the next person to use that IP is the same that has been vandalising. At this point, lets just wait and see on that one. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I respect your opinion but I'm going to put a third warning on the page... it ic clear from the history that this IP has been consistently used by one user in[REDACTED] during the last month.--Dr who1975 (talk) 06:06, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

OK. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:07, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

How could you sponsor the deletion of Somebody Else's Problem field... that's like blasphemy... I think I even made a few of the edits to that page (P.S. since inflection doesn;t come through on message boards... let me say that this message should be taken in the tone of good natured ribbing... although I do really wish you hadn't had it deleted... not that I plan on bringing it back).--Dr who1975 (talk) 06:16, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Although... 2 and a half days is kind of short for a deletion debate isn't it?--Dr who1975 (talk) 06:18, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

(pre-ec comments)Eh... ribbing accepted. I expected some flak for that, but I think I made clear in my nom that I was clearly a fan of the books, but even being so I still could not see why the article existed... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

(post EC comments) I didn't close it. I only started it... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah... and I see now it actually lasted 6 days. Oh well... it was a funny summary you wrote.--Dr who1975 (talk) 06:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I try! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

regarding

before you start accusing me of being disruptve please read what i actually wrote instead of reading wht you think i wrote. i told him that it did NOT matter what he siad about homeopathy here only that he had to convince the blockign admin that he wdid not intend to be disruptive. i really would like it if people gave me warnigns based on things that i actually did wrong instead of things that i did right but they didnt take the time to read carefully and understand. Smith Jones (talk) 16:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps if you worked harder on conversing with others in coherant English and maybe used appropriate sentance structure, spelling, and grammar, then people would not so easily misunderstand what you are saying. Proper communication is not hard, and perhaps if you focused on more carefully crafting your messages before you hit the "Save page" button, these kinds of misunderstandings could be avoided. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football March 2008 Newsletter

The March 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:23, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

New England Patriots

Hey Jayron. I don't think you saw the message all the way above. So here it is again: New England Patriots is about to have its FA status removed. It may have almost hundred percent to do with this edit you made. That was pretty big. I understand what you were trying to do, but that removed 3/4 of the article and about 40 references. Please reply on my talk page. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 16:15, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Bathrobe

You should maybe add the material and weave that your bathrobe is made of to the caption in the article. bibliomaniac15 I see no changes 02:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

The March 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 06:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

The Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter Volume I, No. 5 - March 2008 February issue | April issue Project News There are currently 3,647 Good Articles listed at WP:GA. The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 185 unreviewed articles. Out of 237 total nominations, 42 are on hold, and 10 are under review. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance! The oldest unreviewed articles are: Ian Browne (cyclist), Tony Marchant, Reginald fitz Jocelin, Annie Russell, Brodie Croyle, and Jimmy Moore. The top five categories with the largest backlogs are: Sports and recreation (39 articles), Theatre, film, and drama (34 articles), Transport (23 articles), Music (21 articles), Politics and government (18 articles), Culture and society (13 articles), Places (13 articles), and World history (12 articles). The backlog at Good Article Reassessment currently stands at 13 articles up for re-review. If every participant of WikiProject Good Articles could review just one article in the next week, the backlog would be almost eliminated! GA Sweeps Update Two members joined the sweeps team this month. They are Jwanders and jackyd101. Jwanders swept Physics sub-category quickly and is now sweeping "Astronomy and astrophysics". Meanwhile, jackyd101 is sweeping "Armies, military units and legal issues". During February, 66 Good Articles were reviewed. Including those articles that were under GAR or on hold, 33 were kept as GA, 21 delisted, 17 currently on hold or at GAR, and 1 was exempted as they are now Featured Articles. Reviewer of the Month Blnguyen is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for February, based on the assessments made by Epbr123 on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Blnguyen is from South Australia and has been editing Misplaced Pages since 2005. He was also the reviewer for the month of December 2007, so this marks the second time that he has been GAN's Top Reviewer for the Month. Congratulations to our GAN Reviewer of the Month for February! Other outstanding reviewers recognized during the month of January include: Blnguyen (talk · contribs) David Fuchs (talk · contribs) Derek.cashman (talk · contribs) Dihydrogen Monoxide (talk · contribs) Calbear22 (talk · contribs) Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) Jackturner3 (talk · contribs) TimVickers (talk · contribs) VanTucky (talk · contribs) Wrad (talk · contribs) Member News There are now 185 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to the 9 new members that joined during the month of February: Bibliomaniac15 (talk · contribs) Canyouhearmenow (talk · contribs) Chrisisinchrist (talk · contribs) Ed! (talk · contribs) Juliancolton (talk · contribs) Kakofonous (talk · contribs) LOTRrules (talk · contribs) Matthewedwards (talk · contribs) Nousernamesleft (talk · contribs) Did You Know... ...that the shortest timespan for a GA to be listed and subsequently delisted is 8 minutes? (The article is Project Chanology and currently listed on WP:GAR) ...that the current nominations system started on March 10, 2006? ...that in May 2006, number of GA surpassed number of FA? This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all! One GA Requirement - The Lead Section By Geometry guy In this issue, we will focus on one of the requirements for good articles: a good article article should follow Misplaced Pages's guideline on lead sections. So what does this guideline say, why does it say what it does, and how can good article reviewers help? The lead section is particularly important, because for many readers, it is the only part of the article which they will read. For instance, they may have come to the article by following a wikilink in another article simply to obtain a quick overview before they continue reading the original article. They may only read the first paragraph, or even the first sentence. On the other hand, one of the joys of Misplaced Pages is the way that it embodies the endlessly branching tree of knowledge; if a lead is well written, it may encourage even such a reader to read on and learn something new. This is reflected in the terminology: "lead" is a word taken from journalism, where it recognized that many readers will only read the beginning of a newspaper article, and so it is important to convey the key points first, before going into detail. Note that "lead", in this sense, is pronounced as in "leading question" and is sometimes spelled as "lede" by journalists to distinguish it from lead, the metal, which was once very important in typesetting. Misplaced Pages supports both spellings. Misplaced Pages:Lead section is written with all this in mind, and describes two different roles for the lead: first, it should introduce the topic; second it should summarize the article. This is not always as easy as it seems; indeed, it is almost impossible to write a good lead if the article itself does not cover the topic well. It has a side benefit that an article which satisfies this guideline is probably also broad: if the lead is both a good introduction and a summary, then the article probably covers the main points. The good article process is often the first place in which an article is judged against this criterion, yet many current good articles may not meet it. A common fault is that the lead is purely an introduction, while the rest of the article contains other information, which should be summarized in the lead, but isn't. So, how can reviewers help to improve this? One approach is to read the rest of the article, and not the lead, first. Make a note of the significant points discussed in the article. There is usually at least one important issue in each section. Then, go back to the lead and ask the following questions: Does the first sentence of the lead define the topic, as described in the article? Is the most important information mentioned in the first paragraph? Is the lead a suitable length for the article? The lead guideline recommends 2–4 paragraphs depending on the article length, but judgment is more important than counting. Are each of the significant topics that you noted mentioned in the lead? If the answer to each of these questions is "yes", then the article probably meets the guideline. If not, you may be able to fix it yourself by summarizing the article. If you can't, then it suggests that there are not only problems with the lead, but also the rest of the article. That is the beauty of Misplaced Pages:Lead section. Finally, there isn't universal agreement on whether the lead should contain inline citations. As long as the material in the lead is developed and cited elsewhere in the article, then inline citation is not required. There are exceptions, the most significant being quotations and controversial material about living persons. Good luck helping more articles meet this important criterion! From the Editors Well, this is somewhat GA-related but at the same time not totally GA-related. However, I think this is important. Thanks to everyone who supported me at my 2nd RfA. It passed unanimously at 79 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral. As many are impressed by my work in Good Articles processes, I want to take this opportunity to thank everyone giving me a very enjoyable time at GA. There are 2 people that I want to explicitly say thank you to. They are Nehrams2020 and Epbr123. They patiently taught me how to do GA reviews properly in summer 2007. I couldn't achieve better without them. Now that I have the mop and the bucket, some of my time will be working on reducing Commons image backlog. Nevertheless, you will still see me once in a while in matters related to GA. OhanaUnited Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue here. Dr. Cash Contributors to this Issue Dr. Cash (Lead Editor, Distributor) OhanaUnited (GA Sweeps and Did You Know correspondent) Geometry guy (News Correspondent) Improving Misplaced Pages one article at a time since 2005! WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Misplaced Pages. Nominations: Dick Simpson (politician) (talk | history | start review) • Vince Gill (talk | history | start review) • Climate change feedbacks (talk | history | start review) • Interstate 85 in North Carolina (talk | history | start review) • Rico Krieger (talk | history | start review) Reassessment: Precipitation • Otelo Saraiva de Carvalho • WSJ Magazine • World Chess Championship 1972 • Green Lantern (film) • Cú Chulainn • Wings (1927 film) • Electric vehicle warning sounds • Vampire folklore by region • Henry VIII • British Library • Mikhail Gorbachev • Bleeding Through • Task forces: Project quality • Sweeps • GAN Backlog Drives • GA Cup WikiProject Good articles newsletter (last updated January 2013) Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations list | edit

24.190.155.118

I don't understand why you'd remove an IP because it wasn't "recently warned" when it was the same person who was warned last time. The Evil Spartan (talk) 13:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Really, because after a month between edits, there is no evidence of that. Most IP addresses change more often then that. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

My bad. I thought this was a different IP. Sorry! The Evil Spartan (talk) 14:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the bad tone, BTW. The Evil Spartan (talk) 14:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Is The Evil Spartan saying I am Skibaby? What is going on? The comment Evil Spartan has left on my Talk page is very confusing. I have not been on WP very long, and I am certainly not a vandal. I work hard at these edits, and this flippant comment is no fun, unless The Evil Spartan is serious, and then we have some serious hacking to look into. I use Sprint PCS from San Diego, and I am unaware of anyone having access to my Sprint account and certainly not to my computer from which I edit. Nukeh (talk) 19:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Now you

Who cares about your stupid bathrobe!And I apoliges to Hammer1980,And man if this block was still goin on,you would've blocked me on my birthday!And I didnt do no "Sock Puppets".JUST GO AND NEVER COME BACK!!! -User:Solo28 (What's up Doc?)

Nuts.

You're no fun today.  :) After that Big Al character spent three months running roughshod on this site, a kick in the hindquarters on his way out the door is the least we can do. IMO, we need to stop taking the moral high ground regarding idiots like that and show the world that they are, in fact, idiots. NPP is stressful enough with a never-ending supply of similar idiots who are all to happy to take over. To thumb our noses at a particularly fine example of the breed is a nice way to relieve the tension. Just my two cents'. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 19:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Eh. One could say that taunting him in that way is only feeding a troll and will likely inspire him to try harder to be a pain in the ass. If you just ignore him, he is more likely to go away. There are many other ways of relieving stress. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

ROTFLMAO!  :)) Oh, those links are priceless! You're right; leave us not to feed yonder trolls. The guy just torqued me off and anger got the best of me. As for me, it would appear that I have my choice of stress relievers...ah, what a beautiful predicament...--PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Jkaharper

Hello. I was wondering why User:Jkaharper was blocked and why Category:Supporters of gay marriage was deleted.

The biographies, such as Al Sharpton, mention support for gay marriage (see Al Sharpton#Gay rights). Where is the WP:BLP violation?

Granted, User:Jkaharper shouldn't have been reverting without an edit summary, but he was not engaged in vandalism. — ] (] · ]) 22:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't about the Al Sharpton issue. The addition of people to LGBT categories is a common way of violating BLP; especially if such additions are unreferenced. If you feel these additions were done in good faith, feel free to unblock him. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

If I were an admin, I would. I think that User:Jkaharper's edits were inappropriately characterized as vandalism. Two of the three articles cited as examples of "vandalism" have lengthy, and well-sourced, quotes from the subjects in support of gay marriage. — ] (] · ]) 00:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

If he wants an unblock, he can request it. Again, I didn't not block him blindly just because someone used the word vandalism in a warning or an edit summary. I investigated his contributions, found them to be in violation of WP:BLP, which has nothing to do with vandalism, and I blocked him for that. People are blocked for many more reasons that vandalism, and admins such as myself take our jobs seriously and fully investigate all users that come to our attention. If you wish to have the block reviewed by admins, please post a notice at WP:ANI and see if another admin wishes to review the block. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you. — ] (] · ]) 00:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

You posted this on my talk page

I have had to remove several reports at WP:AIV which do not comply with the guidelines. Please take some time to read the boilerplate at the top of WP:AIV as well as Misplaced Pages:Guide to administrator intervention against vandalism. Please note that you must demonstrate that you have exhausted all other attempts at getting a user to stop problematic edits BEFORE they will be blocked. Try leaving a friendly, handwritten note on their talk page explaining what they are doing wrong. If that doesn't work, leave a sterner warning. Users that have not been warned multiple times, and given ample opportunity to correct their own behavior are not likely to be blocked. Blocking is the last resort, not the first, when dealing with problematic editors. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps Wikifan51893 (talk · contribs) is not a vandal account as I've thought, however, 8HRE (talk · contribs) appears to be a sock or troll. Or else, how would the user know me? Did you take a good look at 8HRE's contributions? Please reply below, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:09, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

If he is a sockpuppet, the proper place to report him is at WP:SSP or perhaps WP:ANI. Unfortunately, WP:AIV is not set up to handle such requests. AIV has a very limited usage, for such situations where no investigation is needed by admins, and for cases of obvious and repeated vandalism where other measures have not worked. For issues that are not a quick "check and block" situation, or where concerns require a lengthy explanation or considerable investigation by admins, then other venues are more appropriate. I will not say one way or the other whether 8HRE deserves to be blocked or not; but AIV is not the correct mechanism to deal with sockpuppetry problems. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

That's understandable, don't know why I didn't think of those better options. I talked to another sysop about the editor, who said they'd watch him/her, but I'd rather go ahead and leave a quick comment on WP:AN/I. Thanks, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 02:22, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

:D

Fully protected for a period of forever. After forever the page will be automatically unprotected . . . . . oh you make me laugh :P Tiptoety 05:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, you know, after Judgement Day, he can edit again... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

My unblock and comment

Hi. I'm grateful to you for unblocking me and have a couple of requests. You wrote on the box that unblocks me on my page that you don't believe me when I say I haven't edited Misplaced Pages before. I'm assuming this means you're saying I'm lying, but what you've written isn't true, I already said that I have edited Misplaced Pages before, just read the bit above the box. Could you change what you've written so that it's not accusing me of lying by saying I haven't edited Misplaced Pages. Sure, accuse me of lying, I don't mind that but just don't accuse me of lying by saying something that isn't true about me when you can see it's not true by reading what I wrote. The bit where I said that I have edited Misplaced Pages is just above what you've written if you need to see it. I'm not accusing you of anything so please don't ban me, I'm just asking that what you wrote about me in the box is true. The other request is about the comment I wanted to leave on Jimbo's talk page. I got banned because I left the comment. Is there somewhere I can get my comment approved so I can leave it or someone that can give me permission to leave the comment or tell me how to change it so I won't get banned. Thanks for your help AntHolnes (talk) 08:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

You've been unblocked. I don't really care about the rest of this. Have fun editing articles. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 11:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

OK I understand, thanks for replying and thanks for unblocking me. Could you at least let me know what I can do about it, even if you don't care. You're the one that wrote it you see. You've written in a big box on my page that I'm a liar because I said I never edited Misplaced Pages. Above that I had already written prior to that in plain words that I have edited Misplaced Pages. Don't you feel a responsibility to be accurate? Anyone else that sees that is going to believe that I'm a liar because I said that I haven't edited Misplaced Pages before, when I never said that. They won't like me and they'll ban me again because you've put that I'm a liar on my page. I need to do something about that or I'll be banned again There must be someone that can do something about it, it's obviously and provably not true AntHolnes (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 12:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Sure. I'll help you set up an archive for your talk page. It'll just take a second. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 15:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I should have done that myself, except I suppose I was hoping you would feel some responsibility for claiming something about me that is obviously not accurate when you read a sentence just a few centimeters above it. Never mind, you've tried as best you felt you could, for which I really am grateful. AntHolnes (talk) 01:25, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

New IP range

Guess who is back? Since this is a persistent bugger, what else can be done? I've PPed Epcot for the time being. seicer | talk | contribs 22:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

JUst semiprotect all of the pages he hits. Given the nature of his IP, its our only recourse. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 22:25, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I've added this new IP to the puppet case, but this will just get old. I'm researching if there's yet another registered account involved, based on articles edited and same M.O. as presented here. Thank you both for your help. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 22:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Nobody533

Just looking for any comment on this user's current unblock request. They're claiming it was a friend (difficult to prove or disprove) and pointing out that they've had a history of helpful edits in the past (which seems to be true). Contribs date back to 2006, at least, even if there's not a lot of them. Took a quick look and didn't see any obvious sock farm, but you may know more about this than I do. Might we shorten the block from indef, perhaps? – Luna Santin (talk) 23:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for having a look. – Luna Santin (talk) 05:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Appreciation

		The WikiProject Film Award
		I, twelsht (talk) 05:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC), hereby award Jayron32 the WikiProject Film Award for their valued contributions to WikiProject Film. Thank you for your assistance on Jack Warner. Awarded 05:00, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

THANKS! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:34, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your sensible comment on the issue. --Avinesh Jose  T  06:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Band Notability - The Agency

The page that you deleted was a band that had notability, if you had cared to read it!

Under WP:BAND: "6 - Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such. "

Mike Marsh is the drummer of the band Dashboard Confessional, who are a notable band, therefor, The Agency IS a notable band on Misplaced Pages! --HitchhikerGriff (talk) 21:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

OK. Do you feel better now? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:44, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Much! Alright. Maybe I overreacted a bit! HitchhikerGriff (talk) 16:46, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for blocking 216.11.243.60

Thank you for blocking User:216.11.243.60. I was thinking about notifying an admin when I saw you'd done it already! Nunquam Dormio (talk) 13:59, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I had blocked that IP earlier, and had it on my watchlist. As the problems continued unabated, a long block was unfortunately necessary. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 14:03, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for unblocking me

I have responded on the page where I was reported. I really wasn't trying to cause a problem. I have learned that editors are very touchy about that article and don't really read edit summaries or even the talk page. I did revert a few times before I was told about that article being sensitive. I will not revert more than once there per day going forward. Thanks again. --70.109.223.188 (talk) 14:24, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Why do the Las Vegas area casinos say they're in Paradise, Nevada?

If that is the guidline then why don't the Orlando resorts say the specific city they are in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.163.224.123 (talk) 18:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

If you look at the category Category:Casinos_in_Las_Vegas, you'll see that regardless of the casino's mailing address, they're still listed as being in Las Vegas for sake of the category. If this is not what you are looking for, then you will need to be more specific with your question. I also recommend that if you have a specific question that it is better to ask it on a single appropriate page rather than to post the same question on multiple user's talk pages. SpikeJones (talk) 18:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I am not making any decision in this area. 74.163.224.123/Miamiboyzinhere is being blocked because he pushes his version of the article without discussing it on the talk page. He may have a good arguement, and his version may be right, however since he refuses to behave in a cooperative manner, his arguements will continue to be ignored. Remember, Miamiboyzinhere, you aren't be blocked for what you are trying to add to the articles, you are being blocked for your behavior. If your behavior does not change, you will continue to be blocked. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Anika_Rahman

poking you since you appear to be online. I just did the re-direct for this AfD since it appeared logical and there appear to have been some issues with the nom/nominator (see the other AfDs and apparently s/he's banned (? don't get that if s/he's posting). At any rate I don't feel right doing a non-admin close of an AfD that isn't mine, but I'm not sure what should be done now since I did the redirect and it certainly doesn't need to run for 5 days and clutter an already crowded Afd. Thanks! TRAVELLINGCARI_{Tell me yours} 05:08, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

And done... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! TRAVELLINGCARI_{Tell me yours} 05:19, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Wake County, North Carolina

Hello there, I notice you've edited the Wake County article in the past (and I see you live in my old hometown, Raleigh). If you get really bored, would you mind scanning the article to see where improvements could be made? I've recently added alot to the article and am looking for some feedback from an experienced user. The history sections I marked for expansion will be fixed later this week. I e-mailed the Wake County Historical Society and asked for some help with those sections. I can't seem to find a web source for information dealing with the 19th and 20th centuries. Anyway, if you get a chance to read it that would be cool. Thanks. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 05:37, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

L33t-Geek block

Just a reminder, don't forget to block the other socks as well. Thanks for your help with the situation. Cheers!!! Baegis (talk) 05:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Someone (Yamla I think) already picked those off a while ago. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Nahuatl GA-nom

After a considerable revamp I've renominated Nahuatl for GA status. If you have the time I'd appreciate if you'd give it a review.·Maunus· ·ƛ· 12:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Elle oh elle

Dude, srs. That's not helping. XD I'm in such a bad mood, the giggles help, but I'm sure they'll come back on us. You really should join IRC, if for no other reason than to partake in the hilarity that is the BRC chan, however, you'd like all the admin chat, too, I'm sure. TINC, Lara❤Love 14:54, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, well sometimes people need to take themselves less seriously. Him included. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 14:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

IRC

I confirm that my freenode nick is Jayron32 --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC) try again... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

User talk:209.43.19.188

This Diff would seem to be counter to Misplaced Pages:Talk page guidelines Users may freely remove comments from their own talk pages, though archiving is preferred. They may also remove some content in archiving. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. Thoughts? Jeepday (talk) 02:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

• Response at my talk Jeepday (talk) 02:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
• Response Jeepday (talk) 02:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
• Posted at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#IP Blanking their talk page Jeepday (talk) 03:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you kow if you are funded by HD? Please encrupt and provide key. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nukeh (talk • contribs) 06:50, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Ahrimanius

Sorry, I don't have any records on or recollection of it any more - it was almost 2 years ago. However, that fact that he would create the account on May 3 2006 and not use it until March 5 2008 is very odd, don't you think? Jayjg 04:11, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Homestar1936

Please go ahead and unblock. I understand where he's coming from, so let's see how he does. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 06:38, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, but I do not understand. Nukeh (talk) 06:43, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, unless I've lost my mind, I thought this response to your question should be clear. Am I missing something? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

You haven't lost your mind. I have. Never mind me, I'm an idiot. Carry on! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:03, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

User talk:86.40.200.196

Bah, I protected the page while you were typing. I hope you don't mind ;) -- lucasbfr 17:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Be my guest. He has nothing useful to add... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:55, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping a new WP'r

Basically, no clearing anything, including rejected stuff on Article Discussion pages, self contributed. Always archive you own User Talk Page before nuking it. Wave Power seems a little to serious for me, so I think I will edit this for a while: http://en.wikipedia.org/Sexuality_of_Abraham_Lincoln Nukeh (talk) 18:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Thumbs Up Award

Slakr's Thumbs Up Award For your excellent contributions, I hereby award you this thumbs up. Well, actually it's a dismembered hand with its thumb pointing upwards, which is kind of weird when you think about it, but it's the thought that counts, right? :P Anyway, great job on all of the unblock requests, fighting vandals, speedy deletes, and, well, everything. Plus, you've got a killer bathrobe. :) Thanks for helping out. Keep up the great work =) --slakr 04:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, thanks for the thanks! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:45, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:hAl

The user is fighting all over Office related articles. He honestly doesn't seem quite able to understand what we're explaining to him. Already off of his block: 1) User renames a section 2) hal changes it back and I warned him for that. Do some people never learn? Your call on what to do... I'm fed up with trying to explain things. Scarian 09:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Additional note - I've left edit war warnings on the Standardization of Office Open XML and Office Open XML articles. It's the same gang of users in a content dispute (Article bans, anyone?). I feel outnumbered and as if my policy/guideline rantings just aren't getting through to anyone... I'm exhausted. Scarian 12:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Take this up at WP:ANI to get additional support for the article bans and/or wider blocks on all involved parties. I will support any reasonable proposal you give there to curb this problem. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Jack Warner FAC

Hi Jayron32, This message is to inform you that I recently nominated Jack Warner as a featured article candidate. Your comments would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, again, for your review of the article, which inspired a substantial reworking of the lead and reorganization of the body. Cheers, -- twelsht (talk) 09:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Kenny199

He stopped eleven minutes before final warning. Bad AIV report, please consider undoing. - Revolving Bugbear 18:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

He also has one real edit. - Revolving Bugbear 18:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Done. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review quotation

Hi Jayron: I'm wondering if it would be okay with you if I quote you in a dispatch on peer review for next week's issue of the Misplaced Pages Signpost. Please follow the link to see the draft, and the quote I have in mind. Thanks, Geometry guy 18:45, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Good deal! Go ahead and quote me. If you need anything else, just let me know! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Cheers Jayron! Geometry guy 18:51, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Sock

This guy is claiming that you blocked him before, any idea what he's talking about? Dreadstar † 02:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

No worries, the guy was blocked indefinitely for abusing socks, evading blocks and generally tedentious editing. At least three unblock requests were denied and his userpages protected for unblock abuse. You done good...;) Dreadstar † 20:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Prague Spring

Hi Jayron, you think you could take another look at that article and give me a few tips for improvement? I wish to take it to FAC soon, so any comments would help me now, thanks! The Dominator (talk) 02:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Can you point to what you are talking about?

Hi Jayron, you left me a note about my editing. A single purpose IP account reverted a number of my edits without edit summaries, so I considered this vandalism. Is that not correct? If so I apologize. I have been working on correcting nationality in the lead sentence of biograpahies. Can you please look at my edits and see if you agree or not? I am trying to use edit summaries and the talk pages. Thank you. --70.109.223.188 (talk) 15:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inductees

Hi, on the page you said the Lifetime Achievement & Non-performer categories were merged. However, the source you provided only said the non-performers one was renamed, and the rest of the official site gives no indication of a merge of the two categories. Is there something I'm missing? -- Scorpion 19:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

It is a bit of a tricky issue. As far as I can tell, the achievement category no longer exists and for a while seems to have functioned as the non-performer category. However, I think the two sections should remain seperate for the time being as they are currently recognized as seperate categories on the official website. -- Scorpion 02:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Blatant advertising

OK, if Misplaced Pages:Administrator intervention against vandalism isn't the place to report it, then what is the correct place? Thanks. -- Dougie WII (talk) 03:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Point Taken

I was just looking through the rules. Thought the Arbitration Committee might be interested in their actions. Sent an email to the arb com and put them on notice for BITE'ng me. Anyways, thanks for caring man. InvisibleDiplomat (talk) 06:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Seriously. The arbcom has better things to do than to deal with this. Ryan and Metros have done nothing wrong, and this line of action is sure to go poorly for you. Just go back to editing articles, and let the whole thing drop. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Mortgage Guaranty Insurance Corporation

Please keep an eye on this article for slow moving sockpuppetry and libelous allegations. The Evil Spartan (talk) 08:12, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Blocked as a Justjihad sock. Keep me aprised if similar problems come back again. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:59, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Unblocking Me

Thank you for understanding and removing the block. Im glad this situation is behind us and the vandals have been stopped.--L33t-Geek (talk) 16:23, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. Please return to civil, uncontroversial editing. Good day. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

unblock on WNDL42 - why?

Can yo explain the following?Y

"Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Autoblock of IP REDACTED FOR PRIVACY REASONS lifted or expired."

I am apalled by the amount that in going on in hidden emails here. There is no transparency at all, and given the character involved I have every right to be 100% paranoid. He is "requesting" to all and sundry it seems. My belief in Misplaced Pages is dwindling with each event here. The language in the "reason(s)" above is impossible to find any meaning in. EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT IT MEANS!!!????! --Matt Lewis (talk) 17:02, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Another admin lifted the direct block, but forgot to lift the autoblock. You are going to have to talk to Rlverse or Dreadstar, who ACTUALLY unblocked him. I have no idea other than that. Good luck. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Ncmvocalist

There was 15 minutes left in the block. What was the point of the unblock? It's not like he's going to stop complaining or anything... Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not love)} 17:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Of all things, now he probably thinks that you support his side. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not love)} 17:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

If he continues to be disruptive, I will personally reblock him myself again. Just let me know. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:29, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for assuming good faith (clearly, unlike certain others) in removing the block. Given that this action was taken before the block expired and appears to be in entire agreement with the reasons for my request, I have reconsidered. I am postponing the action I initially intended on taking immediately against the admin who enforced the unreasonably unnecessary block. Hopefully, this action will not be necessary at all in the future. However, if the admin continues to make similarly poor decisions, or continues to assume bad-faith (as above) and the like, then I will not hesitate to proceed as I had planned earlier to review his adminship, and this incident will be used as evidence. Due to the circumstances surrounding this case, I think this is quite a reasonable step. Still, I would like to thank you for your time, patience and understanding in fulfilling my request. Ncmvocalist (talk) 02:40, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Honest to God. I was just screwing with you. I think you've been totally unreasonable, and I think the block was fully justified. I fully support Nishkid's block, and if I were him I would reinstate it. I only unblocked you because I thought it would be silly to remove the block 5 minutes before it expired. Don't take it as anything besides me being a dick... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

fwiw, Ncmvocalist is back rv warring minutes/hours after coming back. He's warring on Carnatic music - an article on which he already has a 3rr vio in the past. Please check his contribs. Thanks. Sarvagnya 03:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Heh, that was a fast reblock. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not love)} 04:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: User:Another Four Plasmids

I was observing what is occurring re: this. I know you're an administrator and know the policies quite well, but I still wanted to say that I was the person who first noticed the use of Slim Virgin's page when I went to the the user's page to leave a message and found it to be quite confusing. WP:Harass says "Harassment is defined as a pattern of offensive behavior that appears to a reasonable observer to have the purpose of adversely affecting a targeted person or persons" which is what it initially did until I sorted out what had happened. I couldn't understand why an administrator would purposely insert a fragment like "is also a prominent substance abuser" into the lead sentence of an article. WP:Harass also says "There is no way to spell out all the behaviors that can be considered harassment from the early incubation of a pattern to an unmistakable offense" and since Slim Virgin approached this user first and removed her page material, and when it was removed again by Crum375, the edit summary specifically said "This is a form of harassment -- please stop." AFP was aware it was objectionable, thus negating any argument that he/she has violated no policy. I admit that my own experience with this user wasn't the best, it also tended to lean toward the disregard of requests and perhaps purposefully evasion of actual issues. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:13, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Confused by blocked IP

Hey, Jayron. IPs can't be autoblocked, so this is probably one of my Shankbone rangeblocks. I'll check it out. east.718 at 06:15, March 13, 2008

It's me!

I know you remember me. Hehe! I changed my name. See my page, and I think you'll recognize who it is. How are you doing, by the way? おべんとう むすび (Contributions) 08:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw you changed your name. DOing pretty good here myself! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Riana's request for bureaucratship

Dear Jayron, thank you for taking part in my RfB. As you may know, it was not passed by bureaucrats. I would, however, like to thank you for taking the time to voice your support, despite concerns cited by the opposition. Although RfA/B isn't really about a person, but more about the community, I was deeply touched and honoured by the outpouring of support and interest in the discussion. I can only hope that you don't feel your opinion was not considered enough - bureaucrats have to give everyone's thoughts weight. I also hope that the results of this RfB lead to some change in the way we approach RfBs, and some thought about whether long-entrenched standards are a good thing in our growing and increasingly heterogenous community. I remain eager to serve you as an administrator and as an editor. If at any point you see something problematic in my actions, please do not hesitate to call me out. ~ Riana ⁂ 12:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Pretty flower, not goat-fucking owl. Sorry, maybe next time. ;) ~ Riana ⁂ 12:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Per our discussion on IRC

• Peer review for Homerun (film): I am the primary contributor to this article and am aiming for GA status; I do not intend to take this article through the endless nitpicking and incivility that is FAC. This article has already received two reviews; you may wish to do the other one first.
• Peer review for Flag of Singapore: The primary contributor, Jacklee has not edited the article recently. Although I am currently aiming for GA status, this article is a potential National Day Main Page FA, so review with FAC in mind.

When you have the time, please read the articles and post your feedback at the peer reviews. Thanks.

--J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 15:34, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

ZZ

LOL, I do believe that's the first time in my life I've ever been called a "zealous Zionist." Funny, just a couple weeks ago I was accused of "spreading anti-Semitic hate speech." Sometimes you just gotta laugh ... And thanks for the assist; I don't feel so bad about blocking that one right off any more. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 16:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, we don't need that shit around anymore. I protected his talk page and said "Shalom" to that tool... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Block evasion

Please see User_talk:The_Evil_Spartan#Possible_3RR_block_circumvention_by_Gni. The Evil Spartan (talk) 17:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

IP 12.186.80.1

This user has been unblocked due to my request. Just thought you should know. Dusti 17:51, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

All good man. You were the wronged party, so it is entirely up to you... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:10, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Its all good. I know who did it and they were just joking. Its all moot. Dusti 18:11, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Adoption or Joint Adventure?

After 2 weeks on Wave Power, it is fairly clear that page is very important to Alternative Energy and it needs to be re-written to bring it up to speed and exceed the Discovery Channel. No joke, I just added 2 patents to the main article, tracked the assignee, and saw their work on a Discovery clip. Fabulous stuff. Given that I am conflicted with www.gewp.org , what can we (mouse in my pocket) / I do to help re-write the article and push it up in importance in the appropriate portals? Not only am I conflicted with gewp, but I am running Google Adwords on the keywords "alternative energy" and "wave power", world-wide. That's half my income, so you might be able to see that I am very serious about doing anything I can to head off (buzz words deleted) over energy.Nukeh (talk) 20:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Did you just say that you have a financial interest in seeing this article's position in search engine's improved, and that is your motivation for editing it in a certain way? I just want to be clear on that. Please clarify --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I am financially conflicted in the opposite manner as normally encountered: My work for gewp.org is pro bono and gewp.org itself places all new technology into the public domain, creating a patent bar immediately upon publication. My payment for AdWords is a charitable contribution to gewp, and gewp is a 501(c)3 nonprofit in formation. I do this as an experienced inventor in biotechnology, having ~600 uspto.gov patent references. One of my patents was litigated through three levels of court up to the CA Supreme Court in 2006, and the award was a record: $34.5M. I also figure the US government has ~ $50M in me via grants and training over a 30 year period. Given the status of energy in our world, and some of the obvious consequences for the future (war, stagflation, greenhouse, nuclear proliferation, etc.), I feel that I have no choice but to act in a charitable manner as an inventor. My affiliations are exclusively to www.gewp.org, and other charitable organizations, having retired from all other work years ago. I have no financial interest in anything except blinded CA State bonds which are the current source of my charitable giving.Nukeh (talk) 02:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Still, you have, as you say, a vested interest in pushing certain things up in importance in appropriate portals; which to me means that your editing is based on search engine hits and NOT on producing the best encyclopedia. That is a conflict of interest of the WORST kind, regardless of whatever financial stake you have in the matter. The fact remains that you aren't interested in creating balanced, neutral, or accurate articles, only in playing the Google game. That is directly counter to Misplaced Pages's core mission. You should seriously reconsider your motivation here at Misplaced Pages... Your actions will likely get you into trouble. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

If the wave power article is not as current as a Discovery program, and someone has blanketed the article with wave gizmos that consist of 404's and "contact the company for more information", why would you question my philanthropic motives? Every day, I am bidding directly against Chevron and others to increase traffic on keywords such as "alternative energy".

We are all in trouble: The fact of the matter is that it is now feasible to convert either to solar or wave power for a Hydrogen economy. The references are on www.gewp.org. These references need to be on WP, because WP is seen as more authoritative than gewp.

Here is another problem: It appears that there is no legitimate purpose for new nuclear plants if solar and/or wave is adequate. If that becomes both USA domestic and foreign policy, then we are in a strong position to deter nuclear proliferation via reactors constructed on the premise of energy supply. However, to say that solar and / or wave power is adequately sufficient to power all of mankind at 100 terawatts is also to say that the oil industry is condemned.

Please direct me to the appropriate WP rules for a sole inventor, sole source, philanthropist who wishes to contribute to articles. Nukeh (talk) 05:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

You are argueing like I care about the specifics of the situation. As a Misplaced Pages administrator, I am officially neutral on those issues, and take the official position of not caring at ALL about this information. However, you REALLY should read WP:COI and take it to heart, because it clearly looks like you have a conflict of interest in the articles in question...--Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:21, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. WP:COI is a specific instruction that I will read and follow. Nukeh (talk) 05:25, 14 March 2008 (UTC) I should add that I am potentially conflicted by , too. Nukeh (talk) 05:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I have read conflict of interest:

Some editors declare an interest in a particular topic area. They do this in various ways. Many Wikipedians show their allegiances and affiliations on their user pages. You may choose to reveal something about yourself in a talk page discussion. Disclaimer: Misplaced Pages gives no advice about whether or how to use its pages to post personal details. This guideline only raises some pros and cons.

Advantages:

By declaring an interest, you pre-empt anyone outing you or questioning your good faith.

Most editors will appreciate your honesty.

You lay the basis for requesting help from others to post material for you, or to review material you wish to post yourself.

So, I believe I am in compliance, and no one seems to understand: "requesting help from others to post material for you". Nukeh (talk) 05:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but I'm not really interested in posting the material for you. Try the talk page of the relevent articles. Someone there may be able to vett the information you wish to add, and be willing to help out. I'm just not that interested myself... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Gni ban

Jayron32, I hope you'll reconsider what you wrote here: "Actually, having looked over the whole of the changes to the article, it is you who proprose the major changes while several other editors seem to independently ALL disagree with your changes, and wish to maintain the article's status quo."

The major edit which was being battled over was the insertion into the first sentence of the judgment that CAMERA is pro-Israel (as opposed to "is cited as pro-Israel," which appears in a later sentence and is obviously accurate.) For almost the entire history of this article, there was no such assertion in the first sentence. It was added quite recently, and I was trying to revert to the previous status quo -- while discussing on the discussion page. The other editors would revert this change immediately, and often wouldn't engage in real discussion that addresses specifics questions I raised in the discussion section. Now, it may be true that 3 or 4 editors -- whose biases I won't bother to discuss -- disagreed with me. But that doesn't seem to be a reason to block me, remove the 'neutrality disputed' tag (not you, but the other administrator), and allow the others free reign to make their one-sided edits. (I should note also that there was someone else who backed my view, but he, too was ignored. Even Nagle, who doesn't tend to agree with me on this article, was ignored when he proposed compromise language. Now a new person is proposing compromise language, and is being ignored. So what can be done?) Thanks for your comments. Gni (talk) 03:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

One more thing, as an aside -- I wouldn't exactly call this morning's edits 'sock abuse.' They were me making changes before realizing I wasn't logged on, as I often do. Only when I realized this and logged on, at which point I saw that I was blocked. Gni (talk) 03:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Eh... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

This user has resumed edit warring with a vengeance. Boodlesthecat (talk) 21:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't appreciate Boodlesthecat's uncivil attempt at defaming me. He apparently feels it's appropriate to level charges of "edit warring" at anyone whose edits he doesn't like. If anyone is warring, it is him, as he seems to be following my history and undoing any edits I make on any site. With the exception of the one 3R slip up, my edits are fully within the spirit and letter of wikipedia's guidelines -- though apparently not in accord with Boodles' politics -- so I would appreciate it if Boodlesthecat would stop his harassment, and maybe even, if this isn't asking too much, if he would start paying attention to various people's compromise proposals on the discussion pages instead of reflexively undoing any changes he doesn't like. Gni (talk) 21:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

This is the sound of me not caring... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

User talk:ShirleyPartridge

I have been staring at that for like an hour now myself trying to figure it out......hmm...I will be interested to see what the issue is. Watch it will be something really obvious..lol Tiptoety 05:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I unblocked her earlier today... there WAS a legitimate autoblock on her, which I lifted. And she STILL says she can't edit. Could it MAYBE be on her end, like a browser cache that needs clearing? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea, this is an interesting puzzle, i just really wish I could solve it! Hm.... *think* *think* *think* Tiptoety 05:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, at least we know it is not the browser cache . This just keeps getting more "wicked bizz-ah". Tiptoety

It appears that the autoblock was due to User:DATBUS, and User:Beatmakerz where both socks of User:BGMNYC and where both blocked with autoblock enabled. Also it appears the User:Seicer is the blocking admin, when the unblock request says it is User:Jehochman. Tiptoety 06:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

That did it. Thank you Jayron32, Tiptoety and B, you are each both brilliant and more importantly, kind gentleman.ShirleyPartridge (talk) 06:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Hurrah! Tiptoety 06:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert

here. I feel so honored that the IP was so attached to a hoax article :) TRAVELLINGCARI_{Tell me yours} 11:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

inspiron600m

i am talking on behalf inspiron600m's accout what does sock puppet mean, and why was he blocked for itInspiron6m (talk) 14:57, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

The block

The block was on an IP that is used by all public libraries in Washington, D. C. It is a bit frustrating to be blocked in a situation like that one. Thanks. -- BRG (talk) 18:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

I understand your frustration. Unfortunately, people continue to abuse, disrupt and use Misplaced Pages for their own perverse purposes... The day they stop is the day that unfortunate collateral damage like your case stops also. I apologize that you got caught up in that. It happens and it sucks, and I am just glad we got it cleared up... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review idea

Hi, I have made a proposal that no peer review request be archived without some response. To aid in this, there is a new list of PR requests at least one week old that have had no repsonses beyond a semi-automated peer review. This list is at Misplaced Pages:Peer review/backlog.

There are just over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, so I figure if each of these volunteers reviewed just one or two PR requests without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog (as there have been 2 or 3 such unanswered requests a day on average).

If you would be able to help out with a review or two a month from the "no responses" backlog list that would be great (and much appreciated). Please discuss questions, comments, or ideas at the PR talk page and thanks in advance for your help, Ruhrfisch _><>° 00:08, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Jack Warner FAC

Hi Jayron32, Thanks, again, for your feedback and support on Jack Warner. Your comments certainly improved the article, and I wanted to let you know that it was recently promoted to FA status. With appreciation, -- twelsht (talk) 04:12, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the unblock!

I will let you down! 81.149.250.228 (talk) 08:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

\o/ Yay for him letting you down! Lara❤Love 16:47, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I have pretty low standards. I am quite hard to let down... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Sockery

Looks like we may have an IP address used for frequent socking for someone you blocked: see unblock requests on User talk:Cage with no bars.. 71.58.56.181 (talk) 15:44, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Good wording

I liked your phrasing on the unblock of the Wooden guy. Nice, firm yet conciliatory; well done! --Orange Mike | Talk 21:29, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Kevin Parcell

You might want to rethink that warning you gave this user as AGAIN he's recreated the article Kevin Parcell Wildthing61476 (talk) 17:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Francine Shill

Normally, I would have given her the full panoply of warnings; you will notice that I only blocked her briefly. But the "article" about herself was so shameless and brazen that I felt we had to send her a message. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at her userpage! --Orange Mike | Talk 18:16, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Not sure if you're watchlisting. Or care...

but I replied to your oppose here. I'd be interested in your thoughts (here, there, or anywhere. Cheers, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 18:17, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Wake County, North Carolina (II)

Yeah, so I guess the Wake County Historical Society never checks their e-mail or else given their organization name, they're stuck somewhere in history and still use the Pony Express. ;-) They never responded about my inquiry for historical information that I mentioned to you a few weeks ago. I'm going to head over to the Georgetown library or some other library this week and ask about that book exchange program you mentioned. I decided to work on the Raleigh history section until then. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 03:44, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello, Jayron

Hello Jayron,

I am editing an article of MyTino and adding more references to it. Please give me some time.

Thanks for you understanding.

Aaron

Oh, surely you'll understand!

Please forgive me for all this; I am nearly in tears with stress. Let me explain myself in point form; that might make it more intelligible:

• I saw in the AIV that he reported a user for being a sockpuppet, and provided an example (the page is on my watchlist).
• I went to him, and explained that I didn't understand why it made the user a sock.
• He explained, but I still didn't get it. This went on for some time.
• He finally got angry, and told me to go away.
• It's my own fault, but I have an obsessive desire for the last word, and this occured, but he removed the comment.
• I felt offended by this, since I tried to be polite, and counter-attacked by reporting him to AIV.
• Another user removed that, and directed me to the right place to report supposed personal attacks.
• This whole ordeal went as far as you know it, and I explained myself again. He removed it again.
• You warned me about where this could head, and now I've come to you.

Please understand that I didn't mean to harass AgnosticPreachersKid; I've been through this before, and have tried to learn from my past experiences. I just wanted to explain myself, so I didn't look like I had no basis for my original comments. He might listen to you; please go to his talkpage and deliver this message to him, for I nearly stroked out with anger and distress (and the melodrama is in fact accurate). It would make me feel a lot happier and a lot more relaxed if you did. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 04:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

If that's the best thing that can be done, well, O.K. And I'm sorry if the usersubpage was inappropriate; I meant for it to look at all my past bad situations in a lighter mood. Thank you for your consolation; I can't guaruntee it'll always be so, but for now you've earned my respect as a Wikipedian. Thank you. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 04:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I think that's a wonderful idea. One more thanks to you, and let's close this chapter at that! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 04:43, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for sorting the autoblock

--Peter cohen (talk) 05:58, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

No problemo! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

He's still at it.

Oh Jayron, please put an end to this. User:AgnosticPreachersKid won't let go, and has said I'm a sockpuppet! I don't know if you were in on that or not, but I swear to you, as God is my witness, I am not! I have never had an account other than that of "User:Wilhelmina Will", and the IP address I had before I registered, which I since have not used. I said I would leave him alone, and thus have kept true to my word, please get him to leave me alone! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 07:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Frankenstein says, "Yeah Jayron, Wilhilmenia has 'really' left me alone" AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 07:36, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I said if you would leave me alone as well. Which you have not done. And I said I wouldn't speak to you on your usertalkpage. Unless you're the sockpuppet here, this ain't your usertalkpage. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 07:40, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

(Jayron, I'll stop posting after this so as not to spill over this discussion on your page) You added my name before I posted that sock case. If you want to talk about this, do it on the sock case page, not here. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 07:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

To Wilhelminia: Please don't litter my talk page with this drivel. I am sorry to get rude at this point, but this is really getting bothersome. Quite frankly, I had my suspicions of your sockpuppetry based on some very confusing edits you and several IPs made in short order. This goes beyond coincidence... Really, you doth protest too much, methinks... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Soccermeko again

He's back, now attempting to delete the article we won't let him edit.Kww (talk) 16:18, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. He's keeping my sockhammer busy. Just keep me notified when he comes back... I will block his socks again. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Bft

That's teamwork - I started by posting the unblock template then went to unblock, whereas you'd unblocked and were on your way to post the template. I guess we crossed somewhere in the middle. _GB 18:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Great work man. I noticed that too! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day of Spring!

Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~

Mooch ass grassy ass! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

CAMERA and Gni again

Gni has relaunched his contentious edit warring and spamming for CAMERA. I did try to remind him of the advice from admins to step away, to no avail. Boodlesthecat 19:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

The dif you provided is on the talk page of the article, and actually looks like he's trying to work it out. Now, don't we WANT editors to use talk pages to discuss problems? He looks like, in this one case, he is doing what he is supposed to, which is to achieve consenus and compromise on talk pages... Unless you have additional evidence that he is edit warring (and, for example, you AREN'T) then please provide those difs... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

You're right, probably not edit warring per se, but more attempts at putting in the organizations spin with unreliable sources and false claims of consensus and compromise. I suppose I was so flabbergasted with seeing him come roaring back with the spin doctoring even with the COIN thing happening an the advice to stay away from the article that it seemed like a declaration of war. I'm better now. thanks. Good night. Boodlesthecat 15:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Majority Muslim countries issue

Hi there I was editing the page Majority Muslim countries by editing it with correct approximate percentages of the countries from recent census's as the sources, but after the edits I have made to the article I was told by the user 'Angelo De La Paz' that I have violated and has warned me that I will be blocked from editing but he has no right to tell me that - I have not violated and he is not an Admin to decide this, please view this issue please, Thankyou Admin! Moshino31 (talk) 21:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Angelo De La Paz to Moshino31: 20 March 2008

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did to Majority Muslim countries, you will be blocked from editing. Angelo De La Paz (talk) 18:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

• Really? I need to hear your opinions and weigh this article: Majority Muslim countries, crated byMoshino31 who is a Muslim and extreme pro-Islam. I have added some tags on this article because it's lacking many sources, violated NPOV and the neutrality is in dispute...and he's called my revisions as vandalism in my Talk Page. Let's see the different between my revision and his revision here and its talk page so you can see how Mohshin pro-Islam and as you can see in his early version of User Page, he could be a Muslim extremist

Please weigh it as soon as possible. Thank you so much and have a nice day! Angelo De La Paz (talk) 21:27, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

A Muslim extremist by editing a poxy percentage facts of an article based on Muslim countries - geneius mate! Suddenly Im an extremist! Moshino31 (talk) 21:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh yes! You did because you was not used all estimates from the source of CIA Factbook only (you didn't added the lower estimates of Muslim percentage in some countries although it is from the same CIA Factbook) and you always choose the highest estimates of Muslim percentage. Here is my evidence .

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 21:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 21:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

- I have just ratified the highest percentages available on the internet, I dont see a problem with that? Moshino31 (talk) 22:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Ya! That is no problem with you who is a Muslim and pro-Islam but it's violated NPOV and you are promoting the Muslim strength.Angelo De La Paz (talk) 22:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey! Keep this crap off of my talk page. If you guys need mediation or help, try WP:RFC or WP:3O or something. I'm not here to solve your childish disputes... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Maynard James Keenan Peer review

Yo, dude. We're going to FA on this. If you can either go over and make some improvements or do a PR or whatev, that'd be great! Lara❤Love 05:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for you help. Lara❤Love 17:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

You know I'm good for it. I will do what I can... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:11, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Al Siebert

An article that you have been involved in editing, Al Siebert, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Al Siebert. Thank you. B. Wolterding (talk) 15:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 3

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 2, Issue 3 • 22 March 2008 • About the Newsletter
Departments Project news Deletion debates Featured member From the editors Coming and going	Features Scope debate causes issues A-class review sets new rule Three editors get triple crown award	State and national updates Leaderboard California Connecticut Kansas Michigan Nevada New Jersey New York Oklahoma Texas Utah Vermont Washington
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? – It's all here. —О бот (т • ц) 21:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Using Explicatives

You threaten to block me because I used the explicative "hell" when I come to your page and you have the F word right on it? Okay then, I have changed it to "heck". --Eckre (talk) 00:19, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Nope... I never did such a thing. See your talk page for reply... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:21, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Apologies

for any insults I lofted your way during that process. 72.0.180.2 (talk) 00:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I investigated the situation, and it was clear that the BLP issue in that case took precedence. Thanks for the apology, and next time, please do not assume that admins are out to get anyone... It just took me some time to investigate.... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "the BLP issue in that case took precedence". The blocking admin addressed and rejected the claim that the BLP exemption could be properly invoked in this edit, and his argument certainly seems sound to me. Policy says such claims are to be "narrowly construed", after all. (Looking as his contrib list it also appears to be his last word on the subject -- did you follow policy and contact him before lifting the block?) The way you left it it appears to me that 72etc may well conclude that his BLP claim was ultimately accepted. Nor did 72etc respond to what you said here, "...you were blocked for edit warring. You clearly were doing so, and I have seen no assurances that you intend to stop doing so."

I was not around for any of the discussion, and therefor did not rebut any of the false claims. E.g., 72etc claimed that his posting on the BLP noticeboard had not been replied to, helpfully supplying a redlink so that you could not easily check. Here is the actual link, and you can see (and confirm in the edit history that the time stamps are accurate) that that was false. Also see where I explain to him for the umpteenth time why failing to describe what Martin wrote and what Insight wrote clearly enough to see that they are different is a POV-advancing act. It is after all this that he says "I do not use talk". Only 108 edits to that particular article's talk page so far!

I really think you got taken in. At the very least you should fill in the reason on the unblock template, which you left blank, with text that makes it clear that the BLP exemption was inapplicable and that that three reverts per article per 24h is an absolute upper limit in all except the narrowest, clearest, completely uncontroversial BLP vios. Andyvphil (talk) 09:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

And speaking of 72etc's expansive view of the powers granted him by BLP, what route would you suggest I pursue to prevent what I undid here? It went undetected for three days or so. I really shouldn't have to watch him for this. Andyvphil (talk) 13:28, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Still going at it at User talk:Larry E. Jordan

Looks like they aren't giving up on this issue from what I see. Momusufan (talk) 00:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather see him spending time here than wonder what the next sock is doing. Also, the next sock will have more fodder, if we take away all his recourse here. I don't see any reason to protect that page. Equazcion •✗/C • 01:39, 23 Mar 2008 (UTC)

No, the next sock will be blocked immediately. I see no reason to continue to allow him an "outlet" to be disruptive. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:41, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

An ongoing discussion on a single talk page doesn't constitute a disruption. They were expressly discussing the reasons for the block, "they" including admins. I don't think this was a good protect. No offense. Equazcion •✗/C • 01:45, 23 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Then unprotect it then. I don't really care... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 01:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, but I'm flattered that you would assume so :) Equazcion •✗/C • 01:56, 23 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Please unprotect User talk:Larry E. Jordan

It was improper for you to protect this Talk page, as you are the blocking administrator; by protecting it, you make it impossible for him to address any issues raised by your block, there is clear conflict of interest in this. I do assume from the above that you will not object to unprotection, but it is better if you do it.--Abd (talk) 02:43, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Happy Easter

Sadly, Former First Lady Nancy Reagan has been abducted by the Easter Bunny's evil cousins, Frank and Billy Ray. But don't let that stop you from having a great Easter! Cheers. The one and only ----> AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 07:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)