Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:30, 1 February 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-

Third party observation

I'm currently looking at the atuff in the talk section of that article (REM - Accelerate), and should have something in there soon, once I get caught up on all that is happening... Edit Centric (talk) 17:46, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Grassy ass... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:47, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Dude, that album isn't even out for 3 months. What if it sucks? What if only one of them thinks it sucks and the other likes it? Have fun with that. I've looked at it too, the protection was appropriate. They both (Dudesleeper and Eyesbomb) need to step away slowly. An edit dispute over an non-released album? See WP:LAME. Keeper | 76 17:54, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not even concerned about that. Its the throwing around threats of getting others "banned" that is problematic for me. I agree, both need stop the pointless war, but it is getting beyond that state... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

RE: Habhab38

Sounds fine to me! I am more than willing to extend WP:AGF to him. --Kralizec! (talk) 18:39, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for the heads-up! --Kralizec! (talk) 18:55, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and commuted it to time-served . Hopefully this assumption of good faith will not come back to haunt me. --Kralizec! (talk) 15:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it appears that he chose poorly . I will not make the same mistake twice . --Kralizec! (talk) 21:37, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thankyou very much for directing me to the page for making my user page prettier!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Princess Janay (talk • contribs)

idea?

Let's form a small RFA class of 9. These are admin who became admin at about the same time. John Carter, Jeepday, Rudget, Jayron32, Archtransit, Appraiser, Kbthompson, Canley, J-stan. It would just be a friendly support group or like a school class. No administrative tasks needed to form this group, just know each other so if we need an opinion or want to discuss something, we'll be there for each other. Archtransit (talk) 19:20, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Always glad to help out where needed. Count me in! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:29, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

REM - Accelerate Discussions

Jayron32, can I retain you for a bit on this, just as a safety net? As I am not an admin, I don't have the ability to block users or protect articles. I'm going to try and facilitate some constructive dialogue between all the editors, but if it degrades into a "free-for-all" or one or the other editors goes "rogue" on us, I'd like some calm, concise and rational backup, if you would be willing to provide that. Thanks! Edit Centric (talk) 19:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Awesome deal! I really don't know a lot about the topic of discussion, other than it's an upcoming REM album, and that I like REM. Other than that, I'm "Switzerland" on the whole thing... Edit Centric (talk) 19:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Smileys

Is it bad to use smileys on Misplaced Pages like ;)? I heard it from User:Rgoodermote, but I want an admin's opinion. — Cuyler91093 - Contributions 04:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Uh, what? :) Smileys? No problems using them on talk pages :) Have at it! :) I wouldn't use them in articles, but that goes without saying.  :) That being said, if they offend another user, don't antagonize them :). But seriously... c'mon... did someone really object to a smiley :)... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

For your help in unblocking account User:Sumple. I was foolish to not have noticed it - and kept posting on AN/I for all that time! Thanks again, --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 06:04, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Need Help

IP address: 70.88.142.249, seems to have been unblocked and has moved on to vandalizing the Walter Camp article. I have no idea how to request a block. Any assistence will be appreciated. Aepryus (talk) 15:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Blocked him again. See User talk:70.88.142.249. If he returns when this block expires, just let me know and we can try this again. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Adoptee discussion

I replied on my talk page. Did you add it to your watchlist? — Cuyler91093 - Contributions 19:38, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Messenger?

No, I don't have it with me right now. Perhaps on the weekend. On weekdays, this is my only option. — Cuyler91093 - Contributions 20:33, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

No questions. :D Thank you! How very detailed! — Cuyler91093 - Contributions 22:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I added some references to BKD llp.

I added some references to BKD llp. I think the article is better now. --Eastmain (talk) 01:41, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Year Wikilinking

Copy that last message, Ghostrider, fixed my own flub! Good on ya! :-D Edit Centric (talk) 04:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Andrea Bocelli: opera or popera?

Hi Jayron32, I noticed you reverted Bocelli back to opera from popera. I had changed him to popera based on it being a more accurate description (besides the fact that he is probably the most famous embodiment of popera today) and because of his inclusion in the popera article. If you check my talk page, you will see tangerines acknowledged his oversight of bocelli's inclusion in the popera article. As you requested verification indepedant of that page, here's a mainstream article where he is described as the 'king of popera.' (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/08/27/1093518069667.html) And strictly speaking, operatic singers are people with a full, traditional training in operatic singing and whose roles are in the opera house. They may occasionally crossover to mainstream (eg. Pavarotti). A popera singer goes the other way. Background is in popular songs but with an opera-like style (like Rufus Wainwright), and then perhaps crossing over to actual opera. Belcanti (talk) 05:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm fine with the compromise, although it might look a bit funny citing him for operatic pop. That would almost be like citing Pavarotti for tenor. But in the absence of a better solution, I'm fine with it. By the way, it appears that operatic pop and popera are synonymous. I don't think tangerines realizes that the two terms refer to the same wiki article. Belcanti (talk) 05:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Synonymous, maybe, but popera carries a bit of perjorative taste to it, where as Operatic pop does not. Plus, Operatic pop doesn't sound like a neologism. Its always nice to use more formal English rather than somewhat made-up word.--Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:30, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

U2 FAC redux

Hi Jayron32, I just wanted to see if you had some time to take a look at the U2 article and support (or oppose) its FA nomination at Misplaced Pages:Featured_article_candidates/U2. I saw that you were an enthusiastic supporter during the last FAC barring some minor critiques that I hope have now been resolved. Any support is much appreciated by me and the other Wikipedians who've worked hard on this article over the last couple of years. Misplaced Pages brown (talk) 09:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Some suggestions implemented - more to come...

I've made some changes that you've suggested, and I will look at some of the others - as I hope others will. Please keep an eye out and offer suggestions as appropriate. regards --Merbabu (talk) 14:24, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I've added a few things too in response to your suggestions. Let us know if there's anything else we can do -- hope we can spruce it up enough for you to change your mind. Misplaced Pages brown (talk) 18:01, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank You

Thank you for your help.

Thanks,

Tovojolo (talk) 12:27, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

S Club peer review

Hi there! I've just nominated S Club at WP:PR and I was wondering whether you would be so kind to maybe check out the article and tell me what you think? I'm aware this reads horribly, sickly sweet, and like a standard copy/pasted response, but I really don't know what to write! It'd be great if you could get around to checking out the article. :) (P.S. This isn't a copy and pasted message) - ǀ Mikay ǀ 12:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Prague Spring

I just nominated the article for Peer Review and would appreciate anybody taking a look at it for writing style, wiki-formatting and pointing out spots that need better coverage. I am hoping to eventually get the article to GA status so could use some help, thanks.--The Dominator (talk) 15:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, could you return to the article for a few seconds and skim through to look where I still need sources, cause I referenced every paragraph and most of the statements, I also consulted printed sources like you said, but it still seems to me like its missing something. Could you take a look at that please?--The Dominator (talk) 16:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again, I can't believe I missed the Tom Stoppard thing! Anyway, I wanted to ask about websites where the author or other information isn't given, is it a complete necessity to have it there? Does lack of author indicate a non-reliable source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dominik92 (talk • contribs) 19:37, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

U.S. Roads Newsletter, Issue 1

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 2, Issue 1 • January 19, 2007 • About the Newsletter
Departments Project news Deletion debates Featured member From the editors Coming and going	Features B-class audit shows stunning results	State and national updates Leaderboard California Illinois New York New Jersey Oklahoma Pennsylvania Wisconsin
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. —32 20:11, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Madeleine McCann

This is the reason why this article needs semi-protection, not the single edit by the IP who added the info about the PIs. This kind of vandalism happens pretty much on a daily basis when the article is not protected, and is not always caught quickly. There are serious WP:BLP issues surrounding this article, as well as issues about prejudicing an eventual trial, and Misplaced Pages has a responsibility to prevent this kind of thing from happening. Please consider restoring semi-protection.Harry was a white dog with black spots (talk) 10:02, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree that there is a lot of vandalism on Misplaced Pages. But most of the vandalism doesn't involve WP:BLP. Misplaced Pages could be sued for the instance above, and for this subsequent one. In order to mitigate its liability, Misplaced Pages would have to show that it did everything possible to stop the libelous contributions. Immediate reversion is good, but it doesn't always happen. If it can be shown that IP editors are responsible for the vast bulk of the vandalism on a given artice, preventing them from editing the article would show that Misplaced Pages is taking its responsibilities seriously. There is good precendence for this on other articles. Where libel issues are concerned, one instance of vandalism per day is far too many. Harry was a white dog with black spots (talk) 13:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

ideas?

What I see is a huge rush to ban the guy. Why? Why not some deliberation? I never said "this guy should not be banned".

Look what other's wrote:

I want to stress that I do not agree or disagree with the block - I just think it needs to be discussed to ensure that there is community support for an action: B

…and may be a tad too controversial about how edits are made, but he/she isn't totally wrong.: Anynobody (referring to the blocked user)

Has CltFn been a party to any form of DR at all?: Anynobody (I think there’s been no DR)

I think an indef. block is a bit harsh, considering what he did. CltFn has, after all, been good for over a year since the last block…I am very confused as to why this disserves an indef. block.: Yahel Guhan

All I am proposing is that we give him one last chance to change before an indef. block after a month. Heck, we give repeat vandals that opportunity all the time, with 1 month, 3 month, 1 year blocks, but almost never indef. Besides, at least he remained on the talk page for the most part this time, rather than in the article, where he is less disruptive, which may mean he might be trying to improve himself: Yahel Guhan

Not that I am trying to sanction what he did, but I do think an indef. time period is excessive, at least at this point: Yahel Guhan

A suggestion for formal WP:DR has been made onthe user's page. Perhaps, given his long-term contributor status, it may be to our advantage to let him try that process?: ThuranX

I am however also happy to endorse Thuran's proposed course of action and comments above also.: Orderinchaos struck by Orderinchaos 17:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC) - selective quote misrepresents my position

based on looking through his contributions, if an admin is willing to keep a close eye on a problem user, that's a low risk proposition: B

I don't have a problem with Archtransit's action providing tha the follows through on it. I do have a problem with the same admin who originally made the block reimplementing it.: B

Of course, it's easy to do nothing and look the other way. Given the above quotes, I thought that immediate ban was not indicated. I thought that a compromise was in order. The details of a compromise is not the question but if there should be a compromise.

This is not wikilawyering. Wikilawyering would be a hard line stance for unblocking to counter the hard line, no bargaining stance of the pro-immediate banning side.

I think feelings are too hurt or opinions too entrenched in this case for quick resolution. However, why the quick ban. Some cooling off, hand holding, mentorship of each edit, or allowing 1-2 days (or more) of editing followed by review are just some ideas. There hasn't even been discussion of the bad edits in question. All of this can be done in a few days, not 15 hours. After all, RFAs take 7 days, ArbCom elections take 14 days, featured article candidates are on the board 2 weeks or so, why the rush to ban the editor forever and denying him the chance to defend himself? Archtransit (talk) 19:59, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

He had the chance to defend himself. If you wish to defend him, do so at ANI. If YOU think the block is unjustified, provide the evidence that exonerates him. However, to say he has not been given the opportunity to behave himself is inaccurate. He was placed under a reasonable set of guides for editing the last time he was indefiniately blocked. He broke those restrictions not once, not twice, but 3 times. WP:DR is for users that are involved in disputes with each other, not for users whose behavior is patently and repeatedly disruptive over a long period of time. There is a difference between a dispute (which involves 2 or more editors) and outright disruption (which is one editor acting like a WP:DICK). Again, if you have evidence that would indicate that the block was in error, please provide it at WP:ANI so consensus can be reached on how to handle it. But please do not undo the actions of other admins without reaching consensus at ANI first. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:05, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The editor is blocked. He cannot respond to ANI. At the least, he should be conditionally unblocked and allowed edits to DR and ANI. Archtransit (talk) 20:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Go ahead and make any proposals to ANI you wish then. Not that you need it, but you have my blessing to do so. See what the other people say there. If you can build consensus, good job. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Chantilly cake

Thanks for that. :) I was afraid it would be deleted. How are you doing? — Cuyler91093 - Contributions 05:34, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Doing good man. How about you? Have you gotten more involved in deletion processes yet? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I added a ref to the article. The permissions on the image may be a topic of discussion. Uploading to Commons would be a better idea. the_undertow 05:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool, but the article itself is still not speedy material. Good stuff on your reference though. Well done. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I didn't say anything about the article. I said to have a chat about free-license vs. just allowing an image to just one page. We are trying to keep it free, yo! the_undertow 06:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Well you go ahead and have that chat... I will not stand in your way... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I'm doing okay. I haven't been getting involved in deletions as much. I'm focusing on creating pages and redirecting pages. I have finals coming up, too, so I can't get that much more involved. See ya later! — Cuyler91093 - Contributions 00:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Kewl. Well, have fun on your exams. As always, if you need any help, let me know... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 00:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion for GATEWAY - The MU* Community

An AFD for this article already exists. Just FYI. 71.192.54.222 (talk) 06:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed unsuccessfully with 25 support, 18 oppose, and 6 neutral. I'll look forward working with you. --BritandBeyonce (talk) 07:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Streetboxing

See my comment on the article's talk page. It's a hoax; Google search yields no results. Gromlakh (talk) 01:44, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll just AfD it instead. Thanks for the response! Gromlakh (talk) 01:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Whoa! BroadwayWorld.com is not spam

Hello. BroadwayWorld.com is an important, verifiable reference source for musical theatre articles. I wish that, before you blocked links to websites entirely, you would leave a message at the project talk page for the projects whose articles use the links, so that the question could be better discussed. This has happened in many articles that I edit, especially in the WP:G&S project. What should I do in the future when I notice valuable links being deleted? It seems like it is usually too late by then. It may be that some editor misused links to the website, but that doesn't mean that the website it no good. Are they permanently blocked? Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Um, wrong person. I have asked Betacommand to NOT blacklist the site. You may want to take it up with him... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, I didn't mean to criticize you specifically, I just saw that you were involved in the discussion at ANI. I'm just trying to understand how to avoid these premature blacklisting. I left a message at Betacommand's talkpage, and I would be happy to add my voice to yours. I'm only saying that it would be great if, before sites are blacklisted, the issue is discussed at relevant project talkpages instead of just at the ANI page, which most people don't monitor. Best regards, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssilvers (talk • contribs) 16:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Hublot

You denied speedy for Hublot. I won't dispute the point but so that I can do a better job in the future while on New Pages Patrol, could you please identify the multiple claims of importance? I still don't see them. Sbowers3 (talk) 16:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I really need your help

HeaveTheClay tell him to stop he personal attacked me he takes reliable things off pages he undoes off topic thing please help i really don't want to get by this user please he aleasy person attacks me please help.--DarkFierceDeityLink 00:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

So your going to let him talk to me like come on look at the history he's up to no good no matter what we tell him he does it anyway i'm not guna let him keep callin me a troll even after he personal attacked me 3 times just to let you know he hurt by calling me this "I have no reason for being upset but if you lack the mentality for knowing my actions on the Smash Bros series page then you really should stop talking to me. I'm asking you now to stop trying to troll me. Grow up.--HeaveTheClay" Do your job I have dyslexia 1st off and as rules say he should at least get a warning.--DarkFierceDeityLink 00:31, 23 January 2008 (UTC)(not sure if you read this)

WHY DID YOU

why did you revert my edit in the talk page of wikipedia: etiquette? The reaosn i did that edit was because new additions to the Etiquette page should go on the etiquettes main space rathern than its talk page. the users had accidentaly placed them there and i moved them to where they belonged. Smith Jones (talk) 00:28, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

okay i undestand now but i really think that ALL of the discussion belongs on the main space with the rest of the entries in the etiquette page since the last time i accidentally put a complaint on the etiquette's talk page it was moved to the main page and i was informed that it was policy to limit any new entries to the main page rather thatn the discussion page. Smith Jones (talk) 00:31, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I really need your help

I'm having trouble with some people in two articles and i need your advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Onepiece226 (talk • contribs) 02:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Well this person in the Ed, Edd, n Eddy section is giving crap for adding information that I had a reference for.Onepiece226 (talk) 03:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)Onepiece226

Jayron32, please explain to this person the basics of Misplaced Pages: that it is an encyclopedia, and that we do not publish rumors and speculation. He found a site that he tried to link to, which was nothing but a collection of demos for some future episode of Ed, Edd n Eddy. He then tried to list this unaired and unfinished episode on a page of already aired episodes, as if it had aired and is real. He does not understand what Misplaced Pages is about, and sees my defending of the article from rumor and speculation as a personal attack. Thank you. -- Elaich 16:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not getting in the middle of this to decide who is right and who is wrong. Please seek dispute resolution by using such venues as Third Opinions and Requests for Comment to seek out uninvolved editors. Thank you. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Accelerate - Latest developments

Well Jayron, it looks like things have quieted down quite a bit over at that article's talk space, and that the editors are finally working together to make the article a good one. (We did it!) Thanks again for all of your help and attention to things there, YOU rawk!

I have another issue that I've just picked up this evening. (Please see Wikiquette alerts section for details.) Looks like a "subject matter expert" (hmm, if an "ex" is a has-been, and a "spurt" is a drip under pressure...) and an anony-mouse IP editor are getting into a revert war over content. If I find that this has tiptoed into 3RR territory, I might need your "velvet hammer" to be applied. I just don't know yet, as the details are being fleshed out as we type... Edit Centric (talk) 04:47, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I am going to stay uninvolved in that one, if only because it appears both parties have now agreed to go to the talk page to hammer out their differences... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Well THAT was quick, but again a good thing. Let's see how that one goes, but looks promising right from the out... Edit Centric (talk) 05:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:AIV

Guess I'm the one who broke the AIV bots. Sorry about that. I see you were doing all of the work for them. I guess its all fixed now. - Rjd0060 (talk) 18:30, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Eh... whatever. No big whoop. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:31, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

E-mail

U hasz it. </lolcat> - Revolving Bugbear 18:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

U hasz mi anzer --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you please insert the following for me?

Unlike DFDL, HTC's user talk page is locked right now from editing by lower-level editors. Could you do me a BIG favor, and post this to the page;

Post-block discussions

HeaveTheClay, once your block is lifted, I cordially invite you to participate in discussions on the article at Super Smash Brothers Brawl. Please remember when participating in these discussions, to follow the following suggestions;

• Please remain civil.
• The past is exactly that, the past. Leave it at the door.
• Be constructive, clear and concise in describing what you would like to accomplish.
• NO REVERT WARRING. 3 Revert Rule applies dynamically.
• Try to work towards concensus, or at the least, compromise.

Again, once your account is unblocked, I encourage you to take part in these discussions, as they can not only serve the article and Misplaced Pages as a whole, but also build your skills as an editor. Thank you, and I look forward to seeing you there! Edit Centric (talk) 20:05, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Pretty standard stuff, I posted identically at DFDL's talk page... Edit Centric (talk) 20:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

You ARE the bomb dot com! Edit Centric (talk) 22:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Andrea Bocelli

Hi just wondering if you could have a quick scan for me over the article? As you will see I have virtually re-written the entire article. I have also worked with Belcanti who has also helped me today after my final edit by sorting out some stuff. The criticism section is one area that seems to create strong views. When I was researching into it I read through one review fro the New York Times chief Music Critic as well as another one he did a year later. What I then did was expand to explain where the criticism was from etc, but also added some responses to his criticism in the form of letters to the paper. When I added them I was unsure of their verifiability, but did so on the basis of showing how the general public viewed the criticism. Belcanti has (quite rightly) pointed out that these are very opinionated. I added them though really to show how music/opera fans viewed that criticism. Now I'm not sure whether they fall within the bounds of what is acceptable or not on wikipedia and wondered what you think? Thanks.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 22:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's an idea. Don't call the section "Criticism". Call it "Recepeption". And in the section, include a sampling of positive and negative reviews of his work. That is more neutral. Also, letters to the paper aren't exactly reliable in the sense that they aren't written by respected music critics. The public reception is best gauged by album sales; they wouldn't buy it if they didn't like it. I would stick to music critic responses, and I would neutralize the section by changing the focus to be about critical reception by respected music journalists both positive and negative. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

But does it stop?

I could stop right now, but he's clearly forum shopping in the hope that he'll find an admin who'll do something. Best way to make it go away? As I said on ANI, close the AfD per WP:SNOW. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 04:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes it stops. Trust the admins. We aren't foolish. No one is going to act on this... If you both continue down the road you are traveling, you both risk being blocked for disruption. If either of you stops now, then the one who stops will not be blocked. If you both stop, no one gets blocked. Capesce? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

And stop forum shopping. Lara❤Love 05:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

"Capesce"? (Sorry mate, I had to laugh, I haven't seen or heard that one used in a while, made me think of Jack Sparrow, saying "Savvy?") Edit Centric (talk) 05:11, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

"Trust the admins. We aren't foolish." - thanks, I needed a good laugh. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 06:03, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Denied AFD's

Alot of the articles you've failed to deleted seem very strange to me , but i don't really know the process so i've asked for a review Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard#Denial_of_speedy.27s_by_User:Jayron32 Gnevin (talk) 08:39, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Invite

You might like to partcipate in Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Cue sports, given your creation of the Tom Jennings and Dick Lane articles. — SMcCandlish ‹(-¿-)› 11:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Lifting autoblocks

There's probably another way to do it, but the quickest way I've lifted autoblocks is to go into Special:Ipblocklist, search for the account blocked (the IP that the blocked account used will be listed, but only as a series of numbers so the IP isn't revealed, see here), and unblock the IP. Unblocked IPs and accounts are not listed in there. Acalamari 19:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

See, I did that (look at the links I provided) and I didn't see ANY blocks listed on the IPblocklist... Weird... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

That's because the user himself was unblocked, but the IP was still blocked. You had unblocked DarkFierceDeityLink‎, and so they weren't in the blocked list, but their IP was still blocked, and was still listed there. To search for the IP, the best thing to do would have been to use your browser's search feature to search for the text of a username. I found DarkFierceDeityLink‎'s IP by increasing the block list to 500 and searching for DarkFierceDeityLink‎ username using my browser. As DarkFierceDeityLink and their IP are no longer blocked, they will no longer be listed. ‎I hope that helps. Acalamari 19:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

It does. Thank you! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) Glad to help. Acalamari 20:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Your input requested

You may have missed it - I have a question for you at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#the final touch? - thanks. KillerChihuahua 22:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Or I may have just not been online. Sorry, happens to the best of us... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Unresponsive user

You commented on a user I reported for vandalism. I've tried explaining the situation to this user and engaging in dialog, but I can't get a response. Is there something else you would suggest that I try besides blocking? I'd rather explain it than block this user, but I can't find a way to get a response.

• 68.2.156.53 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • trace • RBLs • block user • block log) - On Wagner tuba; vandalism after final warning. This IP address has been blocked twice for vandalism this month, once on Jan 16 and again on Jan 20.. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 18:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

This doesn't look like obvious vandalism. Its not exactly useful contributions, but it looks like the user is trying to be helpful, even if misguided. This does NOT seem clear cut to me. Has anyone tried talking to the user to explain what the problem with the edits are? Templated warnings aren't really helpful in a situation like this. Has anyone tried to really talk to them? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's the messages about this change that this user has previously received. I've tried explaining it several times, but I haven't been able to get a response from the user. Initially, I did do specific explanations rather than template warnings, as you can see below. Also, when I have used template warnings, I added an explanation.

• • "You edited Natural horn repeatedly to add "French" in front of horn. The consensus is to use the terminology of the International Horn Society, i.e., just horn. See the discussion from the Horn article for the explanation. You are welcome to join the discussion if you would like to make arguments for your point there. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 03:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC)"
  • "Once again, you edited an article to put French in front of horn, and your edits to Paxman Musical Instruments were reverted. Also, you put links on the words "French horn" in several other articles. Links to "French horn" redirect to the primary page for the horn. When you add links, add them to the primary page rather than to a page that just redirects. If you have any questions about how to do that, feel free to drop me a note on my talk page. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 05:03, 13 January 2008 (UTC)"
  • "Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did to Alto horn, you will be blocked from editing. As noted here several times, the consensus is to use "horn," not French horn. Your repeated changes to add "French" will continue to be reverted every time you make them. Also, please don't link to the phrase "French horn," which redirects to Horn (instrument), especially when a link already exists earlier in the same sentence as you did in Mellophone. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 16:08, 22 January 2008 (UTC)"
  • "The next time you vandalize Misplaced Pages, as you did to Wagner tuba, you will be blocked from editing. Adding French in front of Horn is vandalism. If you want to discuss this matter, please use the talk page for the main article for the [[Horn (instrument)))."

WeisheitSuchen (talk) 23:10, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

• • • Looks like someone already blocked them. Yeah, looking closer, you definately did the right thing. Sorry I wasn't more help before, but they have been blocked now. For the record, since the blocking path has apparently been opened, if THAT doesn't get the user's attention, and the same problematic behavior continues, buzz me and I'll see what I can do. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:02, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. This is the first user I've ever reported, and I'm still learning the process. I wanted to check whether there was some other path I could take. Hopefully the repeated blocks will be enough to get this user's attention. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 15:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, looking it over, the block was probably warrented. It wasn't really vandalism per se, since that was what I was looking for, that's why I declined the block (handling AIV reports means I tend to look for certain patterns of behavior before I block; I don't always catch the "non-vandalism" reason for blocking when I work there). However, the user was clearly ignoring attempts to discuss his changes. If you make reasonable requests that a user stop making changes, they should stop and use the talk page before adding them over and over. Repeatedly ignoring pleas to work it out on talk pages can be seen as disruptive, even if not vandalism, it is still blockable... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 15:56, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

This user is back from his block, and back doing exactly the same disruptive edits as previously. I think the ideal solution would be to get this user to engage in dialog on the talk pages so we can understand his perspective. I'm stumped as to how to get his attention though. Therefore, I'm going to take you up on your offer to see what else can be done. Any ideas?WeisheitSuchen (talk) 17:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

New Semester, New Appeal

This semester I am teaching academic writing to a group of teachers at my school. This course starts on Monday Jan 28. I would like to know if you are still interesting in "mentoring". You can see the syllabus at Misplaced Pages:School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/SyllabusIf so, please leave a message on my talk page and update the mentor's page Misplaced Pages:School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/Mentors, if . If not, please remove your name and information from that page. Thanks! Thelmadatter (talk) 00:27, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

List of Cuban Americans

You just unblocked the page and I see you reverted an edit a user made until the dispute has been resolved. Problem is XLR8TION isn't responding to the discussion on the talk page anymore and hasn't made any contributions on Misplaced Pages for a week. So now what? InMySpecialPlace24 (talk) 00:37, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Entries in 2007 article

Hey Jayron, a quick question for you. When copyediting, which tense is used in the article; "WAS shut down", or "IS shut down"? Edit Centric (talk) 04:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Woo... I would personally use the past tense, but my copyediting skills are not exactly what they should be. Try the League of Copy Editors, they are very good at fixing these things. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Dude

Yahoo. Lara❤Love 06:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Yippee. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:33, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

From Brokenchicken

Thank You for the Smile Award on my Brokenchicken page, this will be good for Monday!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Brokenchicken (talk • contribs)

Glad to be of service. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 08:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Battlestations!

Psst! Jayron, time to let you in on the sitch; this is a TEST. I want to see how everyone responds to the situation, and to what degree they are willing to work together to reach a consensus, even on something as trivial (yes, you are right. The entire idea is minutiae at best!) as the back cover art. In the Navy, toward the end of Basic, they have an excercise called "Battlestations", where recruits are put in a real-life situation to see how they handle it, if they're going to break, etceteras. I know it's possibly "dirty pool", but I needed to get an idea of everyone's thought processes so I could troubleshoot deeper if needed. I LOVE your input on this though! Edit Centric (talk) 20:28, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah... Sorry about that. Just trying to be helpful... Oops... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:31, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

No! By all means, you ARE being helpful, you're providing catalyst input, a beautiful thing! Edit Centric (talk) 20:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

AH! Well, then I am unsorry about it. Glad to be of help?--Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:35, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Consider yourself "un-frelled"! (LOL!) Actually, I'm more concerned with the fire at the Monte Carlo right now, have some peeps in Vegas. But it looks like the blaze is mostly contained now, it was WEIRD watching that facade burning! Edit Centric (talk) 20:37, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

St. Martin Island-Michigan

I added some citations to the article about St. Martin Island. The island is in Michigan not Wisconsin and the article should be saved. Thank you for helping. RFD (talk) 21:00, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it mentioned Green Bay, and the Niagara Escarpment, so I made a guess as to where it was. It was really just a shot in the dark... Good catch...--Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:04, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment-RFD (talk) 23:24, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Dariusisdaman

Hi there. I originally reported the person behind the account to Blnguyen. The first account he used was "Dariusdaman". Indeed he actually admitted to having both accounts on the talk page (Dariusisdaman), but tried to claim the first account was from a year ago and he had lost his password - despite the fact Dariusdaman was created on 15th January 2008.

So, QED to your question of evidence of sockpuppetry, though you may have already spotted that anyway. John Smith's (talk) 00:16, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

O.... K.... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:38, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

You should have answered in Latin. the_undertow 03:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Erm, coito ergo sum... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, yer ready for the bar. the_undertow 03:54, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Quod erat demonstrandum. John Smith's (talk) 10:03, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Nullus excreta, Sherlock! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:22, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not torturing (excreta) you. I think you're thinking of the word "faex". John Smith's (talk) 21:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Or this meaning of excreta... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:21, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Cosmetic Second

Please see . Jfire (talk) 04:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

CAELinux Delete

Mr Jayron32, today I created an article about CAELinux at work when I came home, I see the the comment about "Blatant advertising", create the body of an article take time and I uploaded it to stimulate people to complement the article (actually I'm not an expert in CAELinux, even in FEA). I think CAELinux package have something to highlight in an encyclopedic article, it's a complete CAE suite opensource, you can do whole muliphysics analysis with it.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicoguaro (talk • contribs)

ATTN Jayron32

Dear Jayron32. Recently you gave a Warning to user:Angelo De La Pazfor not allowing others to edit or re-add missing context in to Islam in India article. User Angelo De La Paz again is showing discrimination in article.

User was suppose to add the paragraph when Christians converted to Islam. (Christian/Muslim conflict section). in Islam in India due to Hindu politics. The Paragraph was related to Hindu/Muslim conflict. he also is again not allowing anyone to edit articles. User is abusing Authority. please inform User:Angelo De La Paz to re-add missing context from Article and proper usage of wording(because he makes the article look like a bad view) Thanks and sorry for disturbing you.--HinduMuslim (talk) 00:12, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not a talkative person but Jayron32, you can compare our last revisions here:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Islam_in_India&action=history

HinduMuslim has deleted the part of "Muslim-Christian Conflict" without any reasons.

And here you can see his vandalism in my Talk Page too:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk%3AAngelo_De_La_Paz&diff=186697210&oldid=186669799

And here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=186706716&oldid=186696708

Shame on you, HinduMuslim!Look at your vandalism!

And I have some witnesses who has seen your vandalism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:HinduMuslim&curid=15304601&diff=186707275&oldid=186669909

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Angelo_De_La_Paz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angelo De La Paz (talk • contribs) 00:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 00:26, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply

I think you had mistaken. I didn't say that I play games in WP:FUN/department of fun nor Misplaced Pages. Secondly, I HAVE BEEN IN WIKIPEDIA FOR ABOUT A MONTH and thirdly, I have been contributing over 100 times AND YOU SAID 17? I didn't post a RFA too and YOU DIDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!(The block letters is to emphasise, not to be rude nor harsh).--Mark Chung (talk) 06:25, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

RE: User:Mark Chung

Hi there! Just wanted to drop a notice about the above user; I was helping the user on his talk page and I noticed your responses to his questions. Thanks for helping and all, but please consider being a bit more courteous; we wouldn't want to bite the newbies, and I don't think that words in all-caps are particularly nice. I appreciate your desire to help, but if you could consider being a bit gentler I would be deeply greatful. Cheers, and thanks, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 07:03, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

You're right. My bad... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 07:04, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, it's all good. :) Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 07:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Jayron! Have you been biting the newbies again? You know, 4 out of 5 dentists surveyed think that's bad for your teeth! (LOL) 30 lashes with a wet noodle for you, mate! Edit Centric (talk) 07:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

But they taste SO GOOD... Yum... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 07:12, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Might I suggest Altoids instead? They're easier on the teeth, and better for the breath... (No, I'm NOT saying you have halitosis...) Edit Centric (talk) 07:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply

RFC has been tried. But he's the only one that has had a problem with the addition of those names on the list. So if he's not there to argue his point then there's really no where to go. He stopped commenting on the discussion as soon as the page was blocked. InMySpecialPlace24 (talk) 02:59, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Blocking

Can you explain what exactly you meant by "protracted edit war on Indophobia", why exactly did you block me, did you actually go through the edits. And can you reply to the concerns I raised here.

Thanks

Pahari Sahib (talk) 17:34, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello

In light of what you just said, namely "The issue was the series of reverts and un-reverts that occured between 09:15 22-Jan-2008 (UTC) and 05:59 26-Jan-2008." However bearing in mind this edit I added a source on 21:07, 23 January as per talk, I did one revert after that and believe it or not I was going seek outside assistance if GG reverted my edits, which he did, but I was robbed of the opportunity. Looking at the talk page, I have clearly noted what I disagreed with, I have was contacted by an aggrieved editor, but as per talk advised him we needed sources.

In response to the statement that "The issue was that the same edits were being made over and over without any regard for achieving consensus or seeking outside help." I would say this, I was not trying to revert to the same edit over and over again - I was responsive to the talk page, my second from last edit was made directly to address. Personally I think all that Martial races stuff from earlier on was a synthesis, but I let it pass.

Anyway to reiterate I would not have kept going in loop, endlessly reverting - I was actually going to let the edit stand and mark as pov, I feel that you have prejudged me based on the past behaviour of other editors - and the fact that the article has seen a lot of activity. But the thing that bugs me was that I was not informed that Wiki considers grounds for a banning, I've heard of 3RR, but not whatever you did then - surely as an editor who has never had any warnings or anything, shouldn't the onus be on you to let me know. I mean this sincerely, because the ban came like a bolt out of the blue and to be frank I was a little pissed off, especially I am not one for arguments - and did not consider this to be edit warring (was I only blocked because GG undid my edit?, if he hadn't would I have still been blocked?)

But anyway, now I've got all that off my chest, and my annoyance has finally subsided :-), I can say on the plus side at least I know how things work (errm sort of), it still would have been nice to have told me this beforehand!

Anyway it transpires that Ghanadar galpa was a sock of a serial mischief maker and has been banned. I am going to make a few points on the talk page, not quite yet, but would like it if you would review it - and if you deem it acceptable, then I (or someone else) will make the changes without me getting banned again :-)

Deal?

Regards Pahari Sahib (talk) 03:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

Blocked

--.talk.contribs 17:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

There are no warnings due to your persistant vandalism. You may contest the block if you feel it is necessary.

Lol. Are you going to leave that there as a trophy, or should I delete it? :P · AndonicO 20:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Awesome. My talk page has been vandalised. Kewl Beans!!! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:19, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm Truly Sorry

Sorry for accusing you before. I didn't know that you are talking about mainspace edits only. Next, i think I didn't ask properly about summaries and caused misunderstanding about RFA. Also, I said NEARLY A MONTH, didn't I? I'm sorry for everything and could you please forgive me?--Mark Chung (talk) 02:19, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Dude, chill... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

LOL

I gotta say, Image:Size of English Misplaced Pages broken down.png is the funniest thing I've seen on wikipedia.

But when I think more about it, it sadly has a grain of truth in it.Bless sins (talk) 05:19, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Adminship

I'm thinking of nominating myself for adminship. Would you like to write me a co-nomination? I hope you say yes. By the way, I've been participating in speedy deleting new pages now. I believe I got over 100 to 200 pages deleted. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 06:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

One small question... what is administrator recall? — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 06:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, that doesn't sound good. I wonder why people ask for people's opinions on it... — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 08:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I know this doesn't sound good, but I've only been doing CSD for a few days (although working really hard on it). AfD's been somewhat sporadic, here and there. I've tried fighting vandalism, but I can't get to seem VandalProof working. :( I think I'll post at the Village Pump right now and get some more information about it. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 08:47, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Although, I've been getting compliments for my admitting of errors. Does that count? — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 08:48, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Why is the village pump protected? It says I can only view the source. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 08:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Notifying

A thread relating to an admin action of yours has been started here Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Bad_faith_speedy_deletion_and_general_behavior_of_an_editor MBisanz 08:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Sock

Hey Jayron, I'm willing to draw a line under all that stuff, we discussed earlier on, but one question remains, looking at Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Hkelkar, it seems that Ghanadar galpa was on the list from last year, why was he allowed to edit until yesterday? I just want an understanding of how you guys operate that is all.

Thanks :-)

Pahari Sahib (talk) 15:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:Apology

Jayron, regarding your apology, just want to say thanks and no hard feelings :-) The page history is a bit of a mess, everyone is human - you don't know me, so I can now see how this mistake happended.

Regards
Pahari Sahib 19:22, 28 January 2008 (GMT)

Airmen's Cave Reinstatement Request

Ok, So I started this whole quest to have Airmen's Cave created as a wikipedia article the wrong way. I am leaving this message on all 3 admins who graciously pointed out my previous errors in my origional 3 creations and I would like to state my case to have this article re-instated.

1st regarding the blatant copyrite infringement. I have rewritten the article in complete to remove the copyrite problems, and even the paraphrasing I attempted in my second attempt at the article. All of the text in the current version of the article is my own, with facts pulled from relevant sources.

2nd My article was deleted based on Misplaced Pages:CSD#A7 which to my understanding is a policy there to prevent trivial articles. I would like to cite the following 2 sources to both prove via what I think qualify as credible sources that my article is both not trivial and that the information contained within is citable.

- is a news story from dailytexanonline about 3 students who were lost in Airmen's cave and rescued by the local firefighters. This story was carried by multiple other news sources (CNN CBS

My second source to cite information about the cave is from . If you scroll down to the United States on from their site you will see Airmen's Cave listed, with information including it's total length.

3rd My original retype of the article included information from the personal web site of Michael Wescott Loder who is accepted as one of the caves original explorers and did significant work mapping the cave. This information sadly, is not citable yet since I have not been able to find credible coverage to back up the information presented on his web site. The current write up of the Airmen's Cave article I would like to implement will not include information from this source until I find a credible and scholarly way to cite it as accurate. I would like to link 2 sites here, which are people's personal sites that though not citable, do backup in greater detail much of the information I've put forth here. I believe these to might qualify for being added as external links to allow readers to navigate to the pages and read and decide for themselves.

Lacitpo (talk) 04:05, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Portal

I have created a portal called Portal:Animal and I am lacking of experience to edit it. Could somebody help me to improve it?--Mark Chung (talk) 14:24, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Math... I am teh suck at it.

I'm going to flunk that portion of the SATs. I've spent like three hours this morning studying my SAT book, the math section. I don't get it. I remember that I used to get it, but I've forgotten because, just as I suspected then, I've never had a real world need for such knowledge. And I doubt I ever will. How much will you charge to dress up like me and take the SATs? If Maynard can pull off a wig and nail polish you can, too... right? Lara❤Love 18:55, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Co-nomination again

Hey, do you have something in mind? Would you like more information? I'd be happy to provide you with some. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 00:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

You just had an unsuccessful RFA two weeks ago. You won't succeed with less than three months between nominations. Lara❤Love 17:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Nomination

Fair enough, I agree. Okay, I'll just leave it as is, and I'll put it on the RfA page when I get a reputation on those parts. Thanks for your advice. I'm glad that I have come across you in the image tagging process. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 18:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Dealing with Disruptive Edits

I'm at a loss as to how to deal with 68.2.156.53's disruptive edits. He's been blocked 3 times previously. Each time the block has been lifted, he's been back making the same changes again. I've tried repeatedly to get him to discuss on the talk pages (see #40 "Unresponsive User" above where we discussed this before). You correctly observed that his edits are really disruptive rather than technically vandalism. The blocks don't seem to be getting his attention, but you said you might be able to do something else. So, I'd like to take you up on your offer to see what else can be done. Any ideas or help would be greatly appreciated. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 01:28, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I am about to give up on him. That he refuses to use the talk page at all, or even read his own talk page, shows me a complete reticence to work with others. Intentional disruption and willful ignorance of others is just as blockable as blind vandalism. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:56, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Shiny mops

Good block here, man. :) How are you liking your new mop? GlassCobra 06:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

That one took me about 30 seconds too. I like to strike hard and fast like that. Hoo-ha... Love the new mop, BTW. Well balanced, nice action... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:47, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you guys are looking out for me. Since I have you two BRC types about, you should check out the meetup page. I dropped you guys a line there. Thanks again for the revert/semiprot, Jayron. Caknuck (talk) 07:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, even Doc Brown can't help me... Unless he can come up with some serious cash and a good baby sitter with references and a background check... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 07:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Thamarih

You blanked this user page. I'd ask you to reconsider. This user has been disruptive and most abusive. I'm pretty sure that he was a sock-puppeteer a couple of years ago until he settled on this persona. The other personas were User:Haqiqat101 & User:Curandero101. All three edited almost exclusively on two articles, and these edits consisting of planting the {{NPOV}} tag on them and flaming the regulars on the talk pages.

He's taken two blocks for personal attacks and edit warring, and I'm about to report him for more more of the same. If memory serves, several of the items up there on his user page were related to his conduct and, I believe, are supposed to be posted there. If there were warnings, then shouldn't these should go to his talk page? MARussellPESE (talk) 01:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 05:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

The Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter Volume I, No. 4 - February 2008 January issue | March issue Project News There are now 3,485 Good Articles listed at WP:GA. The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 206 unreviewed articles. Out of 251 total nominations, 37 are on hold, 7 are under review, and 1 is seeking a second opinion. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance! The oldest unreviewed articles are: Johan Derksen, Trafford, J. Michael Bailey, Greg Skrepenak, Paleolithic-style diet, Alan Dershowitz, Natalee Holloway, Slovenian presidential election, 2007, San Francisco Municipal Railway, and Marcela Agoncillo. The top five categories with the largest backlogs are: Sports and recreation (57 articles), Theatre film and drama (34 articles), Music (19 articles), Transport (17 articles), Politics and government (16 articles), World history (13 articles), and Meteorology and atmospheric sciences (13 articles). The backlog at Good Article Reassessment currently stands at 8 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 During January, 57 Good Articles were reviewed. Including those articles that were under GAR or on hold, 35 were kept as GA, 20 delisted, 9 currently on hold or at GAR, and 3 were exempted as they are now Featured Articles. Reviewer of the Month Ealdgyth is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for January, based on the assessments made by Epbr123 on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Ealdgyth, known in real life as Victoria Short, hails from Central Illinois, and has been editing Misplaced Pages since May 26, 2007. In this short time, she has made significant contributions to 9 Good Articles, including Baldwin of Exeter and Hubert Walter. Her interests in editing are in the areas of the Middle Ages, History, and horses. Outside of Misplaced Pages, she is starting her own photography business, and owns three horses. She likes to read science fiction, history, and geneology books. Congratulations to our GAN Reviewer of the Month for January! Other outstanding reviewers recognized during the month of January include: AnonEMouse (talk · contribs) Canadian Paul (talk · contribs) Casliber (talk · contribs) Derek.cashman (talk · contribs) Dihydrogen Monoxide (talk · contribs) Drewcifer3000 (talk · contribs) Jackyd101 (talk · contribs) Johnfos (talk · contribs) M3tal H3ad (talk · contribs) Miranda (talk · contribs) Nehrams2020 (talk · contribs) VanTucky (talk · contribs) Member News There are now 176 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to the 15 new members that joined during the month of January: Atlantik (talk · contribs) Auawise (talk · contribs) Cyclonenim (talk · contribs) Dihydrogen Monoxide (talk · contribs) Ddstretch (talk · contribs) Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) FamicomJL (talk · contribs) Hamiltonstone (talk · contribs) jackturner3 (talk · contribs) Kbthompson (talk · contribs) Keilana (talk · contribs) Miranda (talk · contribs) pcbene (talk · contribs) Skeeker (talk · contribs) Snowolf (talk · contribs) 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! On Hold versus Failing an Article This month, I thought I'd focus on a less technical and more of a procedural issue at WP:GAN – determining what the appropriate course of action to take when reviewing an article. Currently, there are four options to decide what to do with an article: Passing – it meets all six of the good article criteria; add it to WP:GA and add {{ArticleHistory}} or {{GA}} to the article's talk page. Failing it – it does not meet the criteria; remove the article's listing from WP:GAN and add {{ArticleHistory}} or {{failedGA}} to the article's talk page. On Hold – The article meets most of the criteria, but might fall short in a few areas; keep it listed at WP:GAN, add #: {{GAOnHold|ArticleName}} ~~~~ below the listing and add {{GAonhold}} to the article's talk page. Second Opinion – Similar to the on hold option, except an editor is either inexperienced or not knowledgeable enough about a given topic and asks another reviewer to offer another opinion before passing or failing; add #: {{GA2ndopinion|ArticleName}} ~~~~ to WP:GAN below the article's listing and add {{GA2ndoptalk}} to the article's talk page. So how to you know when an article fails outright, or fails initially, but meets "enough" of the criteria to be placed on hold? The answer to this question probably varies by about the same amount as there are reviewers of Good Articles! Everybody treats this slightly differently. The most important thing to consider is that articles should not be on hold for longer than about one week. Although there is no hard and fast time limit for this, most editors would probably agree that five to seven days is enough time to address any GA-related issues with the article to get it to pass. Some editors have extended this a few days in the past, due to other extenuating circumstances, such as an article's primary editor being very busy with school or work, so they have asked for extra time. But as a general rule, a GA nominee that is placed on hold should meet enough of the criteria to be able to be passed within five to seven days. Some examples of articles that might be placed on hold would be: the article is mostly complete, but might be missing one topic (subcategory). minor copyediting is required (needs a few minor manual of style, spelling, or grammatical fixes. mostly well sourced, but missing maybe a handful of references. a couple of images need to be tagged with appropriate copyright tags. On the other hand, an article should be failed if it: is missing several topic categories, or there are several sections which are very short (1-3 sentences per section). contains numerous sections which are just lists of information, as opposed to written out as prose. there's entire sections of text that have no references, or there are a lot of {{cn}} or {{unreferenced}} tags. has evidence of an active edit war in the article history. has major neutrality issues. has any {{cleanup}} or other warning tags in various places. Did You Know... ... that on July 19, 2007, 1,548 good articles that have not been categorized at all were categorized in 15 days? ... that in Chinese Misplaced Pages, articles need to have at least six net support votes before they are promoted to GA? ... that the English Misplaced Pages has the most Good Articles, the German Misplaced Pages has the second most (at over 2000), followed by the Spanish Misplaced Pages (at over 800), the Chinese Misplaced Pages (at over 400), and the French Misplaced Pages (at over 200)? ... that Simple English Misplaced Pages has zero Good Articles? ... that "Sport and games people" category has the most Good Articles? ... that Virginia Tech massacre (which is now a featured article) was promoted to GA just only about one month after the shooting incident, but took more than seven months to reach FA status? From the Editors Originally, I wasn't planning to do "Did you know" other than as a fill-in for Dr. Cash. However, I decided to continue writing this section until I ran out of ideas. 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) 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: Pete Astudillo (talk | history | start review) • 2022 Fife Council election (talk | history | start review) • New England Revolution in international competition (talk | history | start review) • Swim School (talk | history | start review) • Chennai Super Kings (talk | history | start review) Reassessment: Forbes Field • Boron • Khandoba • Architecture of the medieval cathedrals of England • Haile Selassie • USS Texas (BB-35) • 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

Thank you for the AfD closure/Assistance/Feedback request

Aggie Bonfire leadership is the second AfD Cumulus Cloud has submitted (in which I have been involved) that was rejected. I am concerned with his attitude and would like your feedback regarding his edits, most recently on the Kyle Field talk page. He has made numerous misquoted, misleading, hostile, and threatening statements, to try and get his way. He has carried this "technique" over to almost every major page I have touched. No end is in sight.

That said, I realize I am in the heat of the dispute and it is possible I am missing something, so a third party opinion would be appreciated. As an admin I respect (though someone with whom I don't always agree), your opinion would be appreciated You can respond on the talk page or on my user page, whichever you feel is appropriate. I do NOT intend this as an attack of any kind on CC, merely an attempt to get feedback/guidance and see if I am missing something. — BQZip01 —  05:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)