Misplaced Pages

User talk:Jayron32

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Blaxthos (talk | contribs) at 22:34, 24 April 2008 (→Caution requested: long reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 22:34, 24 April 2008 by Blaxthos (talk | contribs) (→Caution requested: long reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

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.

This is me in my bathrobe

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-Feb 2008
/Archive6 for Mar 2008-


User:IronCrow

Hello Jayron, I got your name of of the list of sysops and I was wondering if you could check something out for me. This user is adding 'Christian Rock' to Family Force 5 genre(s) and is using heavily-biased, first-party sources to back up this claim. Also, in these sources the band does not refer to themselves as 'Christian Rock' they merely talk about being Christians. I have informed the said user of policy and they continue to revert my edits when I try and fix the problem. He/She says policy does not apply here and I need to use common sense. If I am wrong and policy infact does not apply here I will gladly step down, and drop the issue. If you have the time to check this out I would greatly appreciate it, and if not I understand. Thanks and have a great day. Landon1980 (talk) 17:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your time and opinion. I'm not trying to cause problems here. My only issue is how he is sourcing his claim. He is using first-party, heavily-biased sources to do this. Within the sources the don't even contain the words 'Christian Rock' He is using the statement "We don't care if ppl label us a Christian Band or not" to back up his claim. I just feel that if this claim were true they would say "We don't care if ppl label us a Christian Band, because we are a christian Band." Or at least something to that effect. I have frequented wikipedia for years now, this is my first account, and first time doing much editing but I am familiar with policy. I have never seen primary sources, and heavily-biased sources be used for things like this, let alone ones that you are expected to draw a conclusion by reading, and use common sense. I would think if they are going to be these kind of sources they should at least be explicit. If this claim is true he should be able to properly source it, or at least use a proper primary source. I'm not going to continue to clutter up your page with this. Just answer one question for me and I'll leave you alone. Why does policy not apply in this situation so I know in the future. On the said article ppl have tried to do what he did for months, now all of the sudden he comes along adds that genre and it sticks. I follow policy and all my edits are reverted. All I want him to do is properly source his claim, if he cannot do this it isn't my problem. Landon1980 (talk) 01:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Because it is up to the user adding the content to find and add the references for it. He and I have reached an agreement anyways. I thought Christian sites were biased, if you just ggogle Family Force 5, instead of "Family Force 5 Christian review" nothing regarding Christianity pops up. I'm not going to mess with the article any more. I'll leave that up to someone else. I just thought if you want to put in an article someone eats tomatoes, the best place to verify this isn't a site that promotes eating tomatoes. I'm sure you know what I mean. Actual reliable un-biased sources for the most part call them alternative rock, or crunk Rock. The Christian sites are the only that do otherwise. Some good sources call them a Christian crossover Crunk Rock band, but certainly not 'Christian Rock'. You don't have to worry about this, I'm not going to mess with the article. Landon1980 (talk) 03:32, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Grace Engineered Products

Jayron I put up that page for Grace Engineered Products heres the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Liberated169/DRAFT let me know if there is anything else i need to do to it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Liberated169 (talk • contribs) 18:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject College football April 2008 Newsletter

The April 2008 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:31, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Just so you know

Wheely Willy does not necessarily have anything to do with Misplaced Pages vandalism. DS (talk) 03:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, please see Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Willy on Wheels. While you're at it, it wouldn't hurt to brush up on WP:AGF and WP:BITE. —David Levy 04:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Yes, that was my bad. You are right, I am wrong... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: 203.89.179.3

I was using Huggle, and Huggle interpreted it as vandalism after final warning, given the recent level 4 warning. Additionally, it has edited twice today, not once. Regards, Enigma Review 04:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Eh... Have they edit again? Then was a block necessary? If they do return to vandalise in short order, and need stopping, re-report. Otherwise, what is the utility of a block at this point? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I understand your reasons. I'm trying to explain two things: 1)Why it was reported. 2)That it had 2 edits, not 1. Enigma Review 04:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
OK.... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Take it easy on the edit summaries, Jay: . Not nice, eh? Scarian 16:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

You are entirely correct. I was unneccesarily curt, and that was wrong of me. Please accept my apology for being so. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 16:34, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Fluxus at rutgers

Any suggestion for the appropriate tag for that article?--Cube lurker (talk) 05:43, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Problem over at Maitreya

User:Thamarih has repeatedly been removing cited material from the Maitreya article (see the discussion here). This article is just one of many that they have vandalized. If you refer to their talk page you will see a long history of vandalism (apparently ONLY to articles about or mentioning the Bahai faith) and blocking. I feel their account is only being used for vandalism. Can you please intervene? --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Semiprotection for Soccermeko targets

I have asked a couple of times to get Soccermeko's most common targets semiprotected (you apparently slept in this morning, and missed a couple of sock attacks). The best I was able to persuade the regulars at WP:RFPP to give me was a 72-hour semi on Nicole Wray. I think we both know that Soccermeko is far more determined than that. What I would like is a few weeks of semi-protection on Nicole Wray, as well as semi-protection on the articles listed in this AFD. User:Hello Control nominated a whole series of articles that Soccermeko created in January. These articles were hit during today's editing (which is I think how Hello Control noticed them), and you know that when Soccermeko notices it, life will not be good. Please, a little preventive semi-protection?Kww (talk) 20:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

April GA Newsletter

The April issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is now available. Dr. Cash (talk) 03:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

The Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter
Volume I, No. 6 - April 2008

March issue | May issue

Project News
  • There are currently 3,868 Good Articles listed at WP:GA.
  • The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 195 unreviewed articles. Out of 267 total nominations, 57 are on hold, 13 are under review, and 2 are 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: A4232 road, New York State Route 63, Great American Boycott, First Great Western, Duck Soup, Sanja Matsuri, Code of Conduct (affiliate marketing), Prospect Mountain Veterans Memorial Highway, Aliens (film), and Roanoke Regional Airport.
The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film and drama (27 articles), Sports and recreation (25 articles), Transport (24 articles), Music (19 articles), War and military (19 articles), Politics and government (18 articles), Religion, mysticism and mythology (16 articles), Literature (14 articles), World history (14 articles), and Video and computer games (14 articles).
The backlog at Good Article Reassessment currently stands at 12 articles up for re-review.
GA Sweeps Update

The GA Sweeps process is progressing nicely! During the month of March, a total of 92 articles were reviewed. Of that total, 74 were found to continue to meet the GA criteria, and 18 were delisted. There are currently 14 articles that are still on hold in this process, awaiting revisions. Congratulations to Nehrams2020 (talk · contribs), who sweeped a whopping 51 articles during the month! Jackyd101 (talk · contribs) also deserves congrats for sweeping a total of 26 articles!

Reviewer of the Month

Dihydrogen monoxide is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for March, based on the assessments made by Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Dihydrogen monoxide hails from Brisbane in Queensland, Australia, and has been editing Misplaced Pages since April 6, 2007. He has contributed to 8 Featured articles and is an avid reviewer and contributor to the Good articles program. Other reviewers should check out his Noob's Guide to GA Reviewing. Congratulations to Dihydrogen monoxide!

Other outstanding reviewers during the month of March include:

Member News

There are now 195 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to the 13 new members that joined during the month of March:

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!

To delist or not to delist, that is the question

So you’ve found an article that, on the face of it, does not merit its good article status. What next? Especially where there are many glaring issues that need addressing, it’s tempting to just revoke its GA status and remove it from the list, but although we are encouraged as editors to be bold, this approach (known to some as "bold delisting") is not recommended good practice. There are many reasons why a listed article might not meet the assessment criteria—it’s always possible that it never did, and was passed in error, but more likely the criteria have changed or the article quality has degraded since its original assessment. Either way, we should treat its reassessment with no less tact and patience than we would a fresh nomination.

This, in fact, provides a good starting point for the delisting process. Approach the article as though it has been nominated for GA review. Read it and the GA criteria carefully, and provide a full reassessment on the article talk page. Explain where and why the article no longer meets the criteria, and suggest remedies.

Having explained why the article no longer meets current GA criteria, allow its editors time to fix it! In keeping with the above approach, it may help to treat the article as on hold. There is no need to tag it as such, but give editors a reasonable deadline, and consider helping out with the repair work. Bear in mind that more flexibility may be required than for a normal hold—the editors did not request or expect your reassessment and will probably have other projects taking up their time. They may not have worked on the article for months or even years, and at worst the article may have been abandoned and its authors no longer active. As always, communication is the key. It sometimes helps to post messages to relevant WikiProjects (found at the top of the article talk page), or to contact editors directly (this tool is useful for identifying active editors for any given article).

Only once the above process has run its course, and sufficient improvement has not been forthcoming, is it time to think about delisting the article. Communicate your final decision on the article talk page, even if there was no response to your reassessment and hold, and take the time to fill in the various edit summaries on the article talk and GA list pages to ensure the delisting is transparent and trackable. If you have any doubts about your final decision, you can list the article at Good article reassessment or contact one of the GA mentors, who will be happy to advise.

Article reassessment is perhaps the single most controversial function of our WikiProject, and the one with the most potential to upset and alienate editors. Yet it is one of the most necessary too, since without the ability to revoke an article’s status we would be unable to maintain quality within the project. However, if we approach reassessment sensitively and with the goal of improving articles to the point where sanctions are unnecessary, we will ensure that delisting is the last resort, not the first.

From the Editors

As we near the 4,000 Good Articles milestone, the project continues to grow and to gain respect in the Misplaced Pages community. Nevertheless, we continue to have a large backlog. If every member of WikiProject Good Articles would review just one article each day during the month of April, the backlog would be eliminated!

Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue here.

Contributors to this Issue

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.
Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log
Nominations list | edit

Request for peer review

Hi! I was wondering if you'd be able to look over this peer review (article). It's got a long way to go, and any input would be greatly appreciated. :) This spam message brought to you on behalf of the current Tzatziki Squad collaboration. Thanks, Keilana| 22:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

IP Unblock (again)

Thanks for clearing that IP block. It's like being in a solitary cell and wondering if anybody knows you're even there. I gather that you're in NC, USA, so the particulars of the background story won't mean anything to you; I was hoping you could explain how that block is working. Will it come back again if that guy tries to edit again? Can it be/has it been replaced with a particular block on the sockpuppet? Retarius | Talk 05:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that, mate! I hope (but doubt) that he's got it out of his system. That article's infested with sockpuppets and meatpuppets and it could turn very nasty yet. I wouldn't waste a keystroke on it myself and I don't need blocking every time they have a bash at each other.
On a more pleasant note: what's with the bathrobes? Do you guys actually know each other and socialise? Retarius | Talk 06:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

PR Request

Hey, I found you on the volunteer list and was hoping you could pop on over to a little article I'm hoping to make into at least a GA. The article is Posting system (PR). Any help you can provide would be appreciated! Thanks! Torsodog (talk) 00:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Halo3zune

Thank you. That was prompt. ~ S0CO 06:19, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Unblock

Thank you for fixing the block on my office. You are a most fair admin. Seattlehawk94 (talk) 15:48, 13 April 2008 (PDT)

slmn

Hello Jayron32. A few months ago, you hard blocked user Slnm (talk · contribs · block log) for harrassment. I doubt this person is a serious troll, but I thought I should let you know that a user called ] (] · ]) claimed yesterday that he/she was slnm ("slnm strikes again"). Cheers, Face 22:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Recluse

I don't approve of your recent decision to become reclusive. It's bad times. Lara❤Love 15:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I second that. I haven't heard from you in 20 years...and yes, I exaggerate like a million times a day. P.S. Someone took some great pictures around Raleigh for articles. Lemme know if you have some free time in the near future to take a picture of the State Bank of North Carolina or Leonard Hall (Shaw University). If you do, I'll name my first-born after you. (I might be a Friend of Dorothy, but I'm currently off the pill, so you never know what may happen). :P AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 18:49, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Great. Make me feel even worse. Yeah, I'll try to get the camera out for those. I pass Shaw quite frequently, several times a week. I should be able to snap a picture or two of that one. The State Bank looks to be pretty close to the Governors mansion. Maybe I'll take Andrew around downtown and snap some photo's of major landmarks. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
On second thought, Jayron32 would be an awkward name for a child. I'll stick with the original name I have planned, Shaniqua. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 20:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Well fine then. Fuck that. If I don't getta your firstborn, you don't getta da pictures. Capesci? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Ok, deal. Shaniqua will be the middle name. Hmmm, Jayron32 Shaniqua Miller. Wentworth and I aren't planning on having kids for at least another year, but I promise that will be the name that's on the birth certificate. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 20:34, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

"Dave the Pookieboo Pattywhacker"

Nothing like spending a beautiful morning having cyber-abuse hurled at you by a moron and his friends. You deserve a cookie. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:57, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

PMDrive1061 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

omnonmnomnomnomnomnom... thx... ummy cookie! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 15:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
  • A pleasure. May your Bathrobe of Truth be forever doused with its crumbs. As for me, I'm off to spend a Starbucks gift card while hoping that the volcanic fumes from Lassen Peak don't damage those dweebs any further. See ya! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


Image copyright problem with Image:Munson 2.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Munson 2.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by STBotI. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 03:12, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Thriller album

Hi there the Thriller album is on peer review. I would appreciate your input very much. Please help in anyway you can if you have the time. Thankyou. Realist2 (talk) 03:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

1995 Japanese Grand Prix

Hi Jayron32. I notice you are down as a peer review volunteer under the everydaylife section, covering sports. I was wondering whether you could possibly peer review the 1995 Japanese Grand Prix article for me. The peer review is located here. Regards, D.M.N. (talk) 09:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Theguywhoisme

Hi Jayron, saw your decline here. Another editor has reverted his re-addition of the material, not sure why it appears to be a good faith edit. He seemed to create the article solely to vandalise. How many more edits should I give him before re-reporting? Thanks! TRAVELLINGCARITell me yours 20:19, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Guy who is whats his name -- love it ;) Will do, see where I can get. Would love it if he's a + editor TRAVELLINGCARITell me yours 20:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
I'll keep my fingers crossed and keep you posted if necessary :) TRAVELLINGCARITell me yours 20:43, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

User:74.62.65.206

He's been vandalizing again following the end of his ban. 74.78.98.109 (talk) 01:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured list candidates/List of New England Patriots head coaches

I took care of all your comments except #6. What exactly do you mean in that? Thanks, Milk’s Favorite Cookie 20:20, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

... and  Done I think I got everything. Thanks, Milk’s Favorite Cookie 02:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
  • "Also, re-read the lead. It still lists Saban as a member of the pro football HOF, and the caption on Parcells pic is wrong as well. Also, as another thing, for sake of completeness, you should probably have links to all of the references for each coach's record, and use the same website for them all. I prefer jt-sw for my football stats (they are the most complete of ANY of them, IMHO) but just be consistent" - I'm done with that, but you never striked that.
  • "As requested at my talk page, to clarify #6: The situation in 1978 was similar to 1971. In 1978, it was learned that Chuck Fairbanks was negotiating with other teams, specifically the University of Colorado Buffaloes, to leave the Pats and accept a head coaching job there. The Pats responded by removing Fairbanks (rather than fire him, they suspended....." Done with that, but you never striked that. (Put that in the lead)
  • "Again, the coaching record is all wrong. For example,..." Done with that you never striked that.
  • "The unusual situation at the end of the 1978 season should probably be noted somewhere. Heck, if the list immortalizes Phil Bengston'..." Done with that but you never striked that.
  • Also, re-read the lead. It still lists Saban as a member of the pro football HOF..." Done with that you never striked that.

Milk’s Favorite Cookie 13:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay.... I think I got everything. (Including Peanut's comments) Milk’s Favorite Cookie 15:40, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks.
The Running Man Barnstar
For significant work to List of New England Patriots head coaches, and other sports-related article, I Milk’s Favorite Cookie hereby award you this Barnstar. Thanks again for the help. Milk’s Favorite Cookie 19:15, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

THANKS! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of $cientology

Hi, I noticed that you speedily deleted $cientology under criterion R3, and just want to bring this RFD to your attention. There's probably no need to restore the redirect (it had no really useful history), but there is some support for retargeting it to Satiric misspelling#"$" replacing "S"; "€" replacing "E", "£" replacing "L". – Black Falcon 16:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Eh. Go ahead and undelete it then. No big whoop from my point of view... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:14, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Done. Cheers, Black Falcon 17:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Couchbeing

Sorry I missed your first note. I got some subsequent messages and I didn't see yours. I'm compiling some info that I'll email to you. ·:· Will Beback ·:·

Caution requested

Hey man. If you could, please be very careful when summarizing editors' actions when posting to ANI (and elsewhere). In this edit you state that "The main crux of the problem was some low-grade edit warring between Jsn9333 and User:Blaxthos." Although it's not a big deal (and I don't want to make it one), I must take exception to your characterization of the incident. It most certainly was not "low grade edit warring"; it was a pretty involved case of a disruptive SPA constantly attacking and berating anyone whom didn't agree with him (including two administrators and multiple editors). Taking him at his word, and then summarizing it as fact in WP:ANI does a disservice to both the ANI action implemented by R.Baley and my reputation. I hope this message isn't offensive (it's not intended to be incendiary or chiding), but I would ask that you carefully consider these sorts of issues in the future. Thanks for your help, and have a good weekend! /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 21:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Heya, thanks for the note. I have no doubt that your intent was altruistic and served to attempt to de-escalate the situation. If all things were equal (which you appropriately assumed) then it would certainly have been a satisfactory move. I see that you're going to great lengths to maintain good faith, however this could lead to misstatements of fact. This process was very long and entails probably at least a megabyte of raw text to review. As far as I know, the only uninvolved admin to have reviewed it in its entirety is R.Baley. I know in a lot of situations I'm tempted to read the summarization of points without diving into the entire body of evidence; in this case it would lead one to believe that it was simply an edit war or a content dispute (which it obviously was not). I'm not an admin (nor have I ever asked to be one); I'm obviously cautious of giving advice to admins about adminstuff. However, perhaps the best thing to do is provide a link to the actual ANI proceeding instead of attempting a summarization that may not properly reflect the entirety of the circumstances. Then again, that often times just means it will be ignored by the majority of the editors (reference my earlier statement). It's kinda a catch-22 I guess. Also, although I support objective review of all actions taken (by admins and editors alike) I usually try to err on the side of caution when questioning another admin's actions and assume that there is a pretty good reason why something happened the way it did. R.Baley has done an outstanding job of reviewing the evidence, and gave the editor in question ample opportunity to avoid being blocked. It is my personal opinion that disruptive editors often count on WP:AGF and the good faith of neutral parties to advance trolling/strife/disruption. It's the nature of the beast I guess.  ;-) I've typed *way* more than I intended, and so if you've made it this far then please accept my thanks for responding and know that I take no offense and hold no ill will. Thanks! /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 22:34, 24 April 2008 (UTC)