Misplaced Pages

User talk:Jehochman: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 07:09, 11 November 2007 edit24.19.33.82 (talk) TyrusThomas4lyf← Previous edit Revision as of 07:11, 11 November 2007 edit undoJehochman (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers46,275 edits Your block: Are you El C?Next edit →
Line 118: Line 118:
::I'm aware that this is not a chat room. As a consultant with what looks to be money riding on your participation in this endeavor, you might find it interesting to know that, according to Wikimedia Foundation's legal team, WP is not an encyclopedia, which, after all, would be a publication, but an "interactive service provider." ::I'm aware that this is not a chat room. As a consultant with what looks to be money riding on your participation in this endeavor, you might find it interesting to know that, according to Wikimedia Foundation's legal team, WP is not an encyclopedia, which, after all, would be a publication, but an "interactive service provider."
::Re my comments, not every comment containing unpopular observations is "flamebait." It's well-known that several of the participants to the conversation are sockpuppeteers or even sockpuppets, and I think it quite valid to observe that the goal underlying the reformulation is to figure out a way for popular administrators to retain their puppeting rights while tightening the rules for others. As a courtesy, I've refrained from naming the puppets or their puppetmasters and will continue to do so, so long as I'm treated with some modicum of courtesy and respect in return. Thank you for your consideration.] 07:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC) ::Re my comments, not every comment containing unpopular observations is "flamebait." It's well-known that several of the participants to the conversation are sockpuppeteers or even sockpuppets, and I think it quite valid to observe that the goal underlying the reformulation is to figure out a way for popular administrators to retain their puppeting rights while tightening the rules for others. As a courtesy, I've refrained from naming the puppets or their puppetmasters and will continue to do so, so long as I'm treated with some modicum of courtesy and respect in return. Thank you for your consideration.] 07:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

:::Are you El C? - ] <sup>]</sup> 07:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:11, 11 November 2007

Leave a new message. Extra credit for politeness.
Archive
Archives
  1. June 2006 – Mar 2007
  2. Mar 2007 - August 6, 2007
  3. August 7, 2007 - October 25, 2007
  4. 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.



We need your help BADLY

Hi, it's me from the Toto page from a month ago. On the page for the "Barenaked Ladies", there's one poster who won't stop using sources that are not reliable. He's using only 2 sources for the entire page and they are from 2 alleged tv specials even though there's no evidence that these tv specials actually aired. Please help, can you look over the page and talk to the poster TheHYPO. I've told him he needs more sources and better sources. He's just ignoring me, he has a bad attitude. You were such a great help last time with the Toto page, I trust you 100% with these situations.

Writer1400 Writer1400 12:09, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm heading out the door. Please take this to editor assistance for quick action. - Jehochman 12:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Goodness, Gracious!

I certainly hope that your faith in Lin Shukun does not turn out to be misplaced.Kww 21:47, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

If it is, there is no harm done in being nice. You see how I was nice to Sadi Carnot twice before. Watch how the case resolves. - Jehochman 22:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Sri Lanka related

See here and here. Is this acceptable ? Thanks Taprobanus 18:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I've issued a warning. Hopefully the editor will adjust. - Jehochman 19:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks we are progressing towards total peace and quiet for a change in these articles. Thanks againTaprobanus —Preceding comment was added at 15:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Establishing Notability/COI issues for article

Hello; I'm trying to clean up COI issues and establish notability for Road_&_Travel_Magazine. I left a note on the discussion page citing a source about 10 days ago, but I'm not sure how to proceed next, as there's been no response. Thanks very much for any tips. Erikd7 19:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

You could post a notice at the conflict of interest noticeboard and ask for help. That should work. - Jehochman 19:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Thank you; I will do that. Erikd7 19:44, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright violation?

Good morning Jehochman - I hope I can ask a favor of you. I came across this image today, and it seems to me to be a violation of copyright, or at least, a misrepresentation of who the owner of the copyright actually is. It's virtually the same as this well-established image, just with a bit of color and the Chinese characters edited out. I have to confess that I'm not very familiar with the procedures for questioning the copyright of an image, and my brief search for answers didn't yield much fruit. Would you mind having a look, and take whatever action you think necessary? And, if you'd be so kind, could you point me in the right direction of the proper procedures for this sort of thing, so I don't have to bug you in the future? Many thanks  Folic_Acid | talk  14:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

This is what I did, and you can do the same:
{{copyvio|http://www.nndb.com/people/974/000086716/cks-sm.jpg}}
Best regards, - Jehochman 14:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Outstanding - I'll tuck that under my hat. Cheers  Folic_Acid | talk  14:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Technical point

We need to renumber the Proposed findings of Fact, because there are two number 14s. Could you protect the workshop page for a couple of minutes and do this before the problem gets any greater? Thanks in advance. Physchim62 (talk) 14:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I have to run to a meeting. The clerks will take care of this, or you can do it yourself if you like. In spite of the robust debate, I would still like to be your friend, and am happy to settle this case by a mutual statement of principles if you like, and I am willing to strike any negative comments I've made if you would do the same. - Jehochman 14:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Re this edit: LOL! thanks for taking care of this. Physchim62 (talk) 16:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
You're welcome. - Jehochman 16:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Another violation in SL realted articles

Violation of 1RR 1st,2nd, 3rd and violation of WP:NPA calls in the edit summary

Continuing discussions

You may not be aware of further discussions here and here. As one of the administrators involved in the case and/or in its discussions, I think it would be useful if you could comment. Thank you in advance, Mondegreen 17:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm only involved a little bit, and there seems to be a crowd already. - Jehochman 16:32, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Your last edits

You wiped mine and Durova's comments under "Phsychim62 refused to abide by the consensus". You wiped yours, too. I restored mine and Durova's, but if yours was an accident, you might want to put it back as well.Kww 23:28, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.- Jehochman 16:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi!

Hello Jehochman, how are you? I leave this message because of your "faith in the system", and because I have recently opened a policy RFC. I share your faith in the wikiprocess and value your opinions. Peace and good days! Can I be Frank? 03:26, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hey Jehochman. First, I would like to thank you for your help with the Sri Lankan issues. Your work is much appreciated. Can you also comment on the following issue here please. Thanks Watchdogb 07:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Nipping SixString in the bud

Thanks for catching MindGuerilla. As you can probably tell, I don't have a lot of experience with sock-puppets, and what instilled my zero-tolerance attitude was good ol' SixString there. You didn't happen to catch the IP there, did you? Again, I appreciate you acting quickly. - Arcayne () 07:34, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

RFC Talk: Wheel war

Template:ExampleRFCxxx DMcMPO11AAUK/Talk/Contribs 09:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

extra note - look at the signature, did you use 4 tildes or 5? DMcMPO11AAUK/Talk/Contribs 09:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Click there to open your card! → → →

Dearest Jehochman,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 137 supports, 22 opposes, and 5 neutrals. Your support is very much appreciated and I look forward to proving you right. I would like to give special thanks to The_undertow and Phoenix-wiki for their co-nominations. Thank you again and best regards.

LaraLove 20:23, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
Credits: This RFA thanks was inspired by The Random Editor's RFA thanks which was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks.

TyrusThomas4lyf

Any chance you could reinstate the block regarding Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#TyrusThomas4lyf? The sock-puppet activity has resumed unabated. Thanks. Myasuda 23:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Your block

Mr. Hochman, I'd be curious to hear why you chose to block me as an "abusive sockpuppet" without leaving a message on my talk page, or making any attempt to communicate with me.24.19.33.82 06:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Because you were posting flamebait. Don't do it any more, and you will be fine. This is an encyclopedia, not a chat room. - Jehochman 06:30, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm aware that this is not a chat room. As a consultant with what looks to be money riding on your participation in this endeavor, you might find it interesting to know that, according to Wikimedia Foundation's legal team, WP is not an encyclopedia, which, after all, would be a publication, but an "interactive service provider."
Re my comments, not every comment containing unpopular observations is "flamebait." It's well-known that several of the participants to the conversation are sockpuppeteers or even sockpuppets, and I think it quite valid to observe that the goal underlying the reformulation is to figure out a way for popular administrators to retain their puppeting rights while tightening the rules for others. As a courtesy, I've refrained from naming the puppets or their puppetmasters and will continue to do so, so long as I'm treated with some modicum of courtesy and respect in return. Thank you for your consideration.24.19.33.82 07:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Are you El C? - Jehochman 07:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)