User talk:Jehochman - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by David.Mestel (talk | contribs) at 12:14, 18 November 2007 (Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sadi Carnot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 12:14, 18 November 2007 by David.Mestel (talk | contribs) (Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sadi Carnot)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) Leave a new message. Extra credit for politeness.

Archives
June 2006 – Mar 2007 Mar 2007 - August 6, 2007 August 7, 2007 - October 25, 2007 October 25, 2007 - the mysterious future This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to User talk:Jehochman/Archive 4. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

A clean talk page!

(edit conflict) While it might not be my place to contribute to the discussion here, I apologize if my handling as a first-timer made matters difficult for either of you. I don't hate anyone, and this wasn't a wtichhunt, at least, not for me. it was just my first time preparing trying to create a reply, and I wasn't anywhere near succinct (I was also concerned that too much brevity might be perceived as glibness). i have endeavored to be more so as I learn more about how this works. My apologies if any ineptitude on my part complicated the relationship between you two. That would indeed upset me. - Arcayne () 08:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry over it. Lessons have been learned all around. - Jehochman 08:36, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Biography of living persons policy

Hi, received your note on my talk page, but not sure to which article you're referring. The only recent edits I've made for living persons are here, here, and here - all of which were simple typo corrections or removal of vandalism. In the future please include a reference to the article in question - otherwise it's difficult to learn from my mistakes. Thank you - Chewyrunt 15:35, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Okee dokey, I removed the message because it looked like I may have left that on the wrong page. Sorry. - Jehochman 15:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem! Thanks for the quick response Chewyrunt 16:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Callmebc

Someone else got it, which is ok under these circumstances, but thank you for asking me first! -- But|seriously|folks 18:29, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it's always a good idea to keep people in the loop. - Jehochman 18:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

TyrusThomas4lyf

Hi -- I've responded to your question at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#TyrusThomas4lyf. Thanks for asking! Myasuda 20:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

...For your help. Can you on my userpage explain my history please? KingPuppy 21:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

approval for photo posted

dear Jenochman, as an Admin,would be kind to have a look at the photo i posted of Alfred Rosenberg at http://en.wikipedia.org/Image:Rosenberg.jpg??i actually spent good time on this with the help of a friend of mine who's a lawyer.thank you much sir :)Grandia01 06:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I am not sure about the copyright status on that. - Jehochman 06:58, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

can you please tell me why??please let me know if there is anything to correct.i just highly doubt that anyone can claim credit to it and thus make it illegal to be hereGrandia01 07:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

ANI and complaints

I noticed the Dbachmann thread you closed. You said "ANI is for complaints, not investigations", but at the top of the page it says "this is not the Misplaced Pages complaints department"... :-) I also noticed that you said "Participants are counseled to prepare a detailed report to support their complaints." That's Arbcom arbitrator/clerk language! :-) Carcharoth 11:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. :-D - Jehochman 12:05, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Sri Lanka Reconciliation barnstar

		The Sri Lanka Reconciliation Award
		For your merits in bringing about the Sri Lanka dispute resolution, the WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation herewith presents you this Sri Lanka specific award, which is the blossom of one of the world's most loved drinks. — Sebastian 05:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Please let me know whenever you need help. - Jehochman 05:30, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi there

I hope you don't mind me bringing our conversation that was happening on AN/I here - I think it's probably a more suited venue for now (feel free to cross post, or move back, or move to my talk at your discretion).

I think your idea of a central repository of community resolutions could be very powerful and useful - and perhaps not just in the area of editor's restrictions (which is indeed a sensible application). What would you think about somehow structuring content or policy discussions into it in some way? - You may have become aware that WP:NPA has returned to being a somewhat combative atmosphere, after a period of calm for a few weeks. Could this idea be applied there somehow? Just a thought at this stage.

Regardless, it's nice to meet you, best - Privatemusings 05:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Nice to meet you. I am very interested in community restrictions that are less than blocks or bans. For instance, if an editor has a problem with civility, instead of blocking, we may be able to agree to civility patrol as a lesser alternative. That should be recorded on a list so that if future problems occur, the prior agreement can be found. Searching the ANI archives for stuff isn't practical.

Can I give you a bit of unsolicited advice? You would probably catch less criticism if you spend a but more time in article space. Have you ever created a Did You Know?, Good or Featured article? Your interest in policy areas is fine, but to be most effective you should try to balance your participation with mainspace contributions. I hope this helps. - Jehochman 05:59, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Although I'm prone to being one of nature's cynics when it comes to badges like 'GA' and 'FA', I would indeed like to get an article up to meet that standard. Do you know anything about Socrates? It's a very important article, which I've been working a little on both off and on line (when not indef. blocked.) - I'll look for your proposal on the Village Pump, because i think it has merit. best, Privatemusings 06:07, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Just a point

I was edit-conflicted with the archiving of the AN/I thread, so I just thought I'd post what I'd written here, since it responded mainly to you: That's a very good point; I've spent a lot of time recently looking for exactly why, where and what non-ArbCom restrictions have been placed on various editors. I urge you to propose something at the Village Pump.

Of course, I should point out that I having read the above discussion in its entirety and at one go, I can't see it being "supported by the consensus", but that is rendered moot by PM's suggestion.)"

Cheers! Relata refero 06:01, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Random compliment

Your skill with chipmunks is unparalleled (yes, I know that isn't you, but for the sake of this compliment we will pretend it is). :) Cheers, Master of Puppets 06:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Deletion Review of Latitude Group

I have taken Latitude group to deletion review here, if successful I would like to have the content from Latitude White (which you speedy deleted) restored so that it could be merged into the main article. ]

RfA

I considered not spamming talk pages but not saying "thanks" just isn't me. The support was remarkable and appreciated. I only hope that I am able to help a little on here. Please let me know if I can help you or equally if you find any of my actions questionable. Thanks & regards --Herby 12:34, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

An idea for consideration

Seems like trolling by Privatemusings
Hi Jonathan (again), I noticed this post of yours; An important question to ask, Privatemusings, is whether one's participation is helping the encyclopedia, or hurting it. I don't mean one's own opinion, no, I mean the consensus opinion of respectable Wikipedians. If an account is a net negative, sooner or later it will be blocked or deleted. If a person operating a set, or series, of accounts is a net negative, sooner or later that person will be banned. Policies and guidelines are written so we don't have to repeat ourselves, but they don't dictate what we do. One cannot point to rules and use them to justify a net negative. - Jehochman Talk 17:33, 15 November 2007 (UTC) And it got me thinking (hopefully this isn't a bad thing!). My first thought was a bit defensive - to point out that according to your logic, the fact that I am unbanned currently reflects the fact that I am 'approved' by the community consensus (as indeed are you, and all active editors). My second thought was that you have consistently seemed to be a most approachable, reasonable and calm person, which led me to my third thought. Although I did need a cup of tea at that point. I wonder if you might be prepared to enter an open and honest dialog - preferably 'on-wiki' - with the aim of me understanding a bit more where you're coming from - and you perhaps offering some advice, thoughts, feedback, conclusions etc. etc. I hope you'll find me polite and reasonable, even in disagreement, and personally, I hope to be able to calmly discuss my perspective with someone who's prepared to calmly give their opinion directly. I'm hoping something personally quite useful (and possibly with valuable insight for application elsewhere on the wiki) may come of such a process - and I'm asking you because I think that if any of my points have any value, and you can see the value in them, then yours would be a very strong voice in spreading them (I speak here of bigger picture issues such as civility, ethical editing, pseduo anonymity, and most importantly, quality content development). I've got some specfic questions off the bat - perhaps initialy concerning this post; (edit conflict) Good block. That set of accounts created too much noise and not enough signal. - Jehochman Talk 20:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC) and if you're prepared to read and respond a few posts a week for a little while, then I'll create a subpage and we can try and get somewhere. I will understand completely if it only takes you a couple of seconds to realise that you'd rather spend any spare time at all removing your toenails than involve yourself further with me - but I really would appreciate you considering it. Thanks, and have a nice day. Privatemusings (talk) 06:27, 17 November 2007 (UTC) Go ahead and create a subpage in your user space if you would like to discuss things. - Jehochman 01:01, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Thanks very much Jonathan - here it is; User:Privatemusings/ConversationWithJonathan Privatemusings (talk) 02:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Seems like trolling by Privatemusings

Hi Jonathan (again),

I noticed this post of yours;

An important question to ask, Privatemusings, is whether one's participation is helping the encyclopedia, or hurting it. I don't mean one's own opinion, no, I mean the consensus opinion of respectable Wikipedians. If an account is a net negative, sooner or later it will be blocked or deleted. If a person operating a set, or series, of accounts is a net negative, sooner or later that person will be banned. Policies and guidelines are written so we don't have to repeat ourselves, but they don't dictate what we do. One cannot point to rules and use them to justify a net negative. - Jehochman Talk 17:33, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

And it got me thinking (hopefully this isn't a bad thing!). My first thought was a bit defensive - to point out that according to your logic, the fact that I am unbanned currently reflects the fact that I am 'approved' by the community consensus (as indeed are you, and all active editors). My second thought was that you have consistently seemed to be a most approachable, reasonable and calm person, which led me to my third thought. Although I did need a cup of tea at that point.

I wonder if you might be prepared to enter an open and honest dialog - preferably 'on-wiki' - with the aim of me understanding a bit more where you're coming from - and you perhaps offering some advice, thoughts, feedback, conclusions etc. etc. I hope you'll find me polite and reasonable, even in disagreement, and personally, I hope to be able to calmly discuss my perspective with someone who's prepared to calmly give their opinion directly.

I'm hoping something personally quite useful (and possibly with valuable insight for application elsewhere on the wiki) may come of such a process - and I'm asking you because I think that if any of my points have any value, and you can see the value in them, then yours would be a very strong voice in spreading them (I speak here of bigger picture issues such as civility, ethical editing, pseduo anonymity, and most importantly, quality content development).

I've got some specfic questions off the bat - perhaps initialy concerning this post;

(edit conflict) Good block. That set of accounts created too much noise and not enough signal. - Jehochman Talk 20:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

and if you're prepared to read and respond a few posts a week for a little while, then I'll create a subpage and we can try and get somewhere.

I will understand completely if it only takes you a couple of seconds to realise that you'd rather spend any spare time at all removing your toenails than involve yourself further with me - but I really would appreciate you considering it.

Thanks, and have a nice day. Privatemusings (talk) 06:27, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead and create a subpage in your user space if you would like to discuss things. - Jehochman 01:01, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much Jonathan - here it is; User:Privatemusings/ConversationWithJonathan Privatemusings (talk) 02:44, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I see you've been blocked. This discussion is moot. - Jehochman 08:40, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi; thanks for your support to my RfA, which closed successfully at (51/1/2). I'll keep this brief since I don't like spamming anyone: I'll work hard to deserve the trust you placed in me. Thanks again. — Coren 23:25, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Hospital VIA

Hi Jehochman; with regards to the speedy deletion of this article, I'm not sure how a job title classifies as a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content (or blatant advertising, as was previously tagged). I removed any references to specific hospitals. There seems to be enough material on the subject, even if it eventually turns out to be unnotable, but that's a different matter. Marasmusine (talk) 08:50, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

The way it was written, and the totally irrelevant Google results I saw for the term seemed to support the tagging rationale, but if you would like to restore it, be my guest. Perhaps a better title would help. Happy editing. - Jehochman 08:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Birendra Shah

Howdy, I noticed you had just deleted the Birendra Shah from CSD. It seems reasonable, since the article said virtually nothing. However, I think the subject is fairly notable, and was just about to remove the speedy and add a sentence or two describing the subject. Would you mind terribly if I recreated it and added some notes about the notability (briefly, Shah was killed by Maoists in Nepal a week or two ago, seemingly related to his journalism ). Thanks, --TeaDrinker (talk) 08:53, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

When creating a new page, be sure to assert notability before you save it. That will avoid problems like this. I have recreated it for you and added the hangon tag. Please leave a note on the talk page soon, or it may be re-deleted again by somebody else. - Jehochman 08:56, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I would have recreated it myself but I didn't want to step on your toes (I was running through C:CSD when I saw it). I replied to your note on the article talk page. Certainly, given what was on the page, your deletion was well justified. It just happened I googled the name as well and found "the rest of the story" as they say. Thanks again, --TeaDrinker (talk) 10:06, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Disruptive blocks

I am concerned that you seem to have taken on a course of actions outside of consensus and and the processes of Misplaced Pages. You appear to have arbitrarily decided that certain contributors are problematic and are executing blocks without prior discussion or warning the "offender". I shall be reviewing the case of User:Academy Leader to see if any Misplaced Pages rules, policies or guidelines have been violated and will be seeking sanctions, supported by the community, regarding your use of admin tools if they have been. Please regard this as an official warning. LessHeard vanU (talk) 11:47, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Sadi Carnot

This arbitration case has now closed and the decision may be found at the link above. Sadi Carnot is banned for one year, and the remaining parties are encouraged to "move forward from this unfortunate incident with a spirit of mutual understanding and forgiveness". For the arbitration committee, David Mestel 12:14, 18 November 2007 (UTC)