Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jayjg (talk | contribs) at 18:07, 14 February 2012 (→Editing my talk contributions). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This is Jayjg's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43Auto-archiving period: 14 days

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Oops - quick apology

Sorry for reverting that edit on Talk:Ed Miliband. I added a few editing scripts (which I'm trying to get a hang of) and must have accidentally reverted an edit on that page without realising. Peter (Talk page) 22:58, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I guessed it was something like that. Thanks for explaining. Jayjg 17:29, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

XsitePro

Hi Jayjg,

I noticed that you recently deleted an article I have created (XSitePro). I wondered if you could give me some advice on how to get this article approved. Since then it seems my userpage has also been deleted.

I would very much like to see this go live soon and I am willing to adjust my article if you could give me some feedback.

Thanks in advance for your help :)

Carlpeterson300 (talk) 11:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Carl. The article was deleted as a result of this discussion: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/XSitePro. If you wish to have the article stay, you need to address the issues raised there - in particular, you need to find significant coverage of the topic in reliable secondary sources. I see this has been explained to you on your User:Talk page several times over the past year, by several different editors. Jayjg 20:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Question from Jones7224

Why do you keep deleting my Gina Raimondo page? I worked hard on it. I put it up, and you delete it repeatedly. Why? Shall I begin to delete pages you dedicate time and effort to? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jones7224 (talk • contribs) 13:37, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The article was deleted because that was the consensus of the discussion here: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Gina Raimondo. I'm sorry you feel your efforts were wasted, but Misplaced Pages has a Misplaced Pages:Notability (people) guideline which indicates which people meet Misplaced Pages's requirements for an article and which do not. Jayjg 20:44, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Another Question from Jones7224

Yes, I have enjoyed Misplaced Pages as a reader for many years. I want to contribute and be a part of this community. However, I am finding the experience to be quite frustrating. My Gina Raimondo page has been deleted again. I understand there is a speedy deletion function in place. In your post on my talk page, you included some information on contesting speedy deletion. However, you did not include a link or instructions for doing so. I have read the user and intro guides. I am computer literate. Please, I am asking kindly for your help. I would like to create a Gina Raimondo page. Misplaced Pages touts itself as an accessible community of information. So far, it has not been accessible, rather, creating barriers to my contribution of information. Please assist me. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jones7224 (talk • contribs) 18:09, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jones7224. If you wish to contest the deletion of the article, please go to Misplaced Pages:Deletion review and follow the instructions there. Best of luck! Jayjg 20:38, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Message from Jones7224

I am sending this message to you and User:JamesBWatson , both of whom have deleted the Gina Raimondo page I recently created. I understand your actions, but I politely ask you consider the following.

I am reaching out because the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review%7CWikipedia:Deletion review page] states that when reviewing a speedy deletion, one should first invite the admin to take a closer look. That is the exact intent of this message. I hope to resolve this issue with you courteously.

I understand the page was deleted by Jayjg because it had been deleted per a , and that User:JamesBWatson deleted the page for the that reason and also because the page was "unambiguous advertising or promotion". Regarding the previous discussion, I must point out that the discussion took place in July of 2010. Since then, Gina Raimondo has been elected to office. MelanieN stated at the conclusion of the discussion that if Raimondo were elected the article could be reconstructed. 39 other State Treasurers/"Treasurer equivalents" have Misplaced Pages pages, see .

As for the other reasons, "unambiguous advertising or promotion", I accept that the content of my recently created page needs to be edited. Therefore, I respectfully propose the following: I will edit the content of the page and then you can reevaluate the worthiness of the page. I am assuming you have the ability to remove a speedy delete. If not, you could recommend to the appropriate person that the speedy delete be removed, granted that you approve my page.

I thank you in advance for your help. I apologize if I have been long-winded, but I have tried to be as precise as possible. I am new to the world of Misplaced Pages editing, though I have joined in part because I would like to one day contribute to this information community in the way you both already do. I hope we can resolve this issue together. Please let me know if this is an acceptable plan, and I will then begin creating a page that meets all of Misplaced Pages's standards. Jones 01:02, 3 February 2012 (UTC)Jones7224

Thank you for your thoughtful comments. I have restored the article to User:Jones7224/Gina Raimondo. Please edit it there, and when you feel it is ready, let me know so I can help you evaluate it. Jayjg 01:43, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your understanding. I will let you know. Jones 4:48, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Original research in Burchett article

Request for help. I have recently reverted text on the Wilfred Burchett page which seems to me to be original research. Karlkuzmich insists on using as a reference a purported KGB document. I do not want to get into an edit war, but I have explained that it is important that such an allegation needs a reliable source as a reference, yet he/she persists. Could you look at it or point me to somebody who might be interested in the issue.Joel Mc (talk) 20:30, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

I've protected the article for a short while so you can work this out on the Talk: page and avoid edit-warring. Jayjg 02:23, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Alderman Article

You wrote to me: "Enough of this nonsense. This trivia is improperly sourced and a WP:BLP violation. Take it to the talk page, or I'll semi-protect this a..."

Is this the assumption of good faith?? To me this sounds pretty much like bullying on your part because you can given your reputation.

I had provided better referencing both times I had restored the line. I will restore it again once the PCC publishes the outcome of its ongoing investigation if you disagree with the points I raise on the article talk page. I think you need to step back and be objective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.29.138.196 (talk) 03:15, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I think it is imperative that you carefully review WP:BLP, and my comments on the article's Talk: page. Please continue all discussion at the article. Jayjg 14:23, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

You resorted to an ad hominem, in calling a well intentioned edit "nonsensical". That is offensive and that is not acceptable and is in contravention of wiki's rules as you well know. I will not continue this discussion on the alderman article talk page since it has to do with your behaviour, and not with my edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.29.125.84 (talk) 23:13, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Civility

I think you should be a little more thick-skinned about civility. Saying you won't respond to perfectly legitimate arguments because an editor accused you of sophistry doesn't really help the consensus-building process. Honestly, I do not think any of the comments you have labeled personal attacks even come close. Reacting the way you do actually does more to create tension with other editors.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 04:35, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

TDA, I think it's exactly the opposite. Every argument and comment Guinsberg has made until now has, based on his comments, apparently been premised on the notion that those who disagree with him do so for purely personal or ideological reasons. There is no possible way one can come to an understanding with someone with this kind of approach. In such cases it is only by forcing the discussion to stay on the extremely narrow parameters mandated by WP:NPA and WP:TPYES that one can have a hope of reaching some sort of agreement or compromise. This is not a personal matter with me, and it should not be with Guinsberg either; rather, it is a discussion about what material is appropriate for a specific Misplaced Pages article. When Guinsberg realizes that the only thing we will be discussing will be policy and article content, the discussion will go much more smoothly. Jayjg 14:13, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but you are misconstruing WP:NPA to suggest something was an attack when it was not. Going after another editor's argument is generally expected on a talk page. On the other hand, repeatedly citing that policy to try and argue that anything criticizing your argument is reason to ignore the entirety of an editor's argument does represent incivility.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 17:19, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but you are misconstruing WP:NPA to suggest something was an attack when it was not. Talking about individual editors - speculating on their thoughts, beliefs, motivations, etc. is a personal attack. On the other hand, insisting they follow policy, and refusing to engage when they violate WP:NPA and WP:TPYES is not in any way uncivil. I am a volunteer here; if an editor refuses to follow WP:NPA and WP:TPYES, then I have no obligation to read, respond to, or pay any sort of attention to his comments. And if editors spent more time encouraging strict adherence of WP:NPA and WP:TPYES, and less time enabling those who violate them, there would be far fewer disagreements on article talk pages. When everyone knows the rules and knows they must follow them things settle down pretty quickly. By contrast, when editors say things like "you should be a little more thick-skinned", then policy is meaningless, Talk: pages become unpleasant free-for-alls, and nothing constructive is achieved. Jayjg 18:12, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

When you repeatedly use WP:NPA in a wikilawyer-type fashion to not engage in discussion with another editor it does reach the level of incivility. You repeated it again in response to a comment that was once more far from being uncivil. Someone suggesting that you are going by your personal preferences as opposed to input from other editors is not uncivil, at least not in the way Guinsberg phrased it. "Comment on content, not on the contributor" does not mean you are free of all criticism. In fact, the policy explicitly accommodates "constructive criticism" of another editor's behavior and arguments under acceptable discourse. One thing it certainly discourages is repeatedly citing WP:NPA instead of focusing on the content of an argument.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 22:06, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

TDA, WP:NPA states quite clearly, as its second sentence "Comment on content, not on the contributor". That's very, very clear, and it's repeated in WP:TPYES. It's easy enough to avoid this problem - don't use article Talk: pages to discuss other editors. What is "wikilawyering" is trying to find a way around this clear and sensible dictum, or claiming that quite reasonably invoking WP:NPA is somehow itself an example of "incivility". "Constructive criticism" is fine in its place, which is not an article's talk page. Save the "constructive criticism" for user talk pages, RFCs, etc. Instead, of enabling policy-violating behavior, please focus on getting Guinsberg to stop using article talk pages to talk about other editors, per WP:NPA. Jayjg 22:14, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Alpha_Quadrant 16:22, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Burchett again

Thanks for you help, but we don't seem to be getting anywhere. Take a look. I have been trying to find secondary sources which are reliable but nothing turns up which surprises me as Burchett was a controversial character.Joel Mc (talk) 16:37, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Archiving on Talk:Lua (programming language)

Please don't "fix" the archiving on Talk:Lua (programming language) again before discussing it on the talk page. I've restored the previous settings; they follow WP:A-A.--Oneiros (talk) 00:12, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

WP:A-A is meaningless; it's just some guy's personal preferences, and carries no weight. Also, it was you who first changed the settings last week, also without discussing it on the talk page. If you really think discussion is needed, we can restore the original settings, including the 30 day archive rate, and open a discussion. Jayjg 00:27, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Jayjg,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Misplaced Pages administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, where it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 07:16, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Einstein is jew

lol he was atheist. 1 - You obviously don't wikipedia rules of contribution. Misplaced Pages is not a place for religion wars. I properly filled the the commit log, even you said the opposit. 2 - Sources are not valid : a source that says that einstein is jew cannot be valid. 3 - The page could be renamed "list of nobel prises of jewish ancestry". And a column could be added which indicates the real point of view of the laureate about religion. As is this page contains many obvious lies, it cannot stay on wikipedia. 4 - Most physicists are agnostic since the discovery of non classical physics. 5 - In doubt, I removed only the laureates in physics that shared the same sources as for the Einstein case. Because those sources are wrong, they cannot be used. KevinPerros (talk) 10:58, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Jews are an ethnoreligious group; that means that there are millions of Jews who are Jewish only by ethnicity. See also Category:Jewish atheists, which contains hundreds of names, and Jewish atheism. Misplaced Pages goes by what reliable sources say, not your personal opinions. Jayjg 16:12, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I agree. There are interrelated concepts of ethnicity, religious affiliation, and religious practice. That he may not have been religiously observant would only be part of the multifaced-equation. The categories are far broader than that. Indeed, he was Jewish enough to have to leave Germany in 1935 to get out of the way of Nazi persecution for being a Jew. The sources are all therefore contrary to KevinPerros's personal opinion. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:22, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I understand your point. But I disagree. In France, we have traditionnally no-notion of ethnicity : it is considered as a form of racism, or lack of religious freedom. I bet it is the same in Sweden, The Netherlands, and in many non American countries who read the wikipedia. I think that we are in the case of some people willing to structure EN.wikipedia with an American point of view, as usual (see the propaganda about Irak or Afghanistan on en.wiki and compare that with the same pages of the french or spanish wikipedia and you'll understand). Why not create US.wikipedia for that and let en.wikipedia for a world wikipedia ? I am kidding. To give another example, in France Palestinians are mostly considered as an oppressed people, whereas in the US they are mostly considered as terrorists. I bet that if you compare both wikipedia pages, you'll see a totally different content, because in case of an edit war in the fr.wiki you'll have a vote with 10 average Frenchies, pro-palestinian, and in the us.wiki a vote with 10 average Yankees, pro Israel. It is a problem for wikipedia not to be able to solve that recurrent problem. 82.67.113.149 (talk) 18:05, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages content is based on what reliable sources say, not your personal views of ethnicity. Jayjg 18:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/Richard_Feynman says "Feynman himself was not only atheist, but distanced himself from being labeled Jewish even on ethnic grounds". http://en.wikipedia.org/Ethnic_group says "An ethnic group (or ethnicity) is a group of people whose members identify with each other". So Feynman didn't "identify with each other", so is not an ethnic jew. So the 3 sources that say that he is ethnically jew are wrong. So those sources are not valid sources according to wikipedia policy.

Feynman doesn't have the final say in these matters though, and we don't make decisions about people based on definitions in Misplaced Pages articles. Please review WP:RS and WP:NOR. Jayjg 18:38, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I used to have parts of those pages copypasted on my page... So on what basis do you decide who is an ethnic/religious jew ? If you have a better definition than wikipedia's page that is used internally, maybe you could write that definition down in the corresponding article. KevinPerros (talk) 18:45, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages makes these decisions based on what reliable sources say. I keep pointing you to that guideline for a reason. James Gleick, in his Pulitzer Prize and National Book Award finalist biography Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman, describes him as "a New York Jew distinctly uninterested in either the faith or sociology of Judaism..." (p. 85). That sounds about right. Jayjg 18:51, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

You have a definition of ethnicity that is reduced to genetics. And ethnicity goes beyond that, it is a mix of culture, religion, genetics... A jew that converts to islam is no more a jew, even if he has jewish parents. A muslim that converts to judaism is no more a muslim. A jew that converts to atheism, and don't live in a jewish culture is not a jew. You take a purely jewish religious, or islamist point of view, where you cannot abandon your religion/ethnicity. If you take a more modern point of view, every American (european) has freedom of religion and ethnicity. Anyway wikipedia is not meant to reflect one's country principles or the others. I think that modern principles of freedom of religion apply. My point is very precise here, I have understood that Einstein who was agnostic, but who made Israel inherit from him after his death, was of jewish ethnicity, and as a consequence belongs to the list. It is right to say that Feynman was of jewish ancestry, not ethnicity or religion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KevinPerros (talk • contribs) 19:15, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Unlike you, I don't have any definition of a Jew. Misplaced Pages just goes by what reliable sources say. Have you read that guideline yet? That is all that matters. Read it please. Also, please read it. And in addition, please read WP:RS. And finally, if you remove Feyman from the list again, you'll be blocked for 3RR violation. Jayjg 19:20, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok I'll put the source saying that Feynman disregarded its ethnicity. As an admin you could temporarily ban me ? KevinPerros (talk) 19:26, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

If you keep reverting, you'll get temporarily banned for violating WP:3RR. Jayjg 19:33, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

And you cannot act as an administrator when you are one the opponents in a conflict. I know a few rules. KevinPerros (talk) 19:38, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

He can remind you of the rules though and report any 3RR violation seeking third party enforcement.--MONGO 19:41, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

My last edit was automatically reverted, whereas it only contained a small precision, about jewish religion and ethnicity, MONGO I request your assistance if you are and admin. I am reporting to http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Geopolitical,_ethnic,_and_religious_conflicts — Preceding unsigned comment added by KevinPerros (talk • contribs) 19:51, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

It wasn't "automatically reverted", someone reverted it because the insertion was obviously inappropriate (not to mention poorly written), and there's already an RFC on the subject. Jayjg 19:54, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

I think on a list "Jewish Nobel laureates", to put Einstein with three refs, kind of suggests that Einstein IS a Jewish Nobel laureat and that you can read so in the sources. It should be much clearer that Einstein did not identify himself as a Jewish Nobel Price winner, as now it is not so clear that "three "reliable" source say this, and other reliable sources say something else". Just the phrase "This Misplaced Pages article lists laureates of Jewish ethnicity, not only those of Jewish faith. As an example, many physicists were agnostic like Albert Einstein." in the beginning of the article is not enough in my point of view. It should say so right there at Einstein's entry. Beyond that, I find lists of Nobel laureates by ethnicity quite controversial. Where are the White, Christian, Finnish or Sovjet-lists? I thought Nobel prizes were to celebrate human achievement? But we're not having that discussion here :). -- Honorsteem (talk) 19:02, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, if you google, you immediately see that this list is subject to viral propaganda on social networks, aiming at showing jewish superiority of genetics, especially against muslim.KevinPerros (talk) 19:17, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

What kind of nonsense are you going on about? Einstein had to flee Germany because he was a Jew! He was one of the founders of Hebrew University of Jerusalem! He was offered the first presidency of the State of Israel! Please do some real research before you post comments. Jayjg 19:22, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

The stuff you have deal with...you're a better man than I for such patience.--MONGO 19:31, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! It's encouraging to get a bit of support from time to time. Jayjg 19:33, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Jajy, are you suggesting that we should use Nazi guidelines to define who is a Jew and who not? According to the Nazis guidelines, even Hitler was a Jew, but for obvious reasons not gassed. And we don't see Adolf showing up in any Jewish honours list.... So yes, Einstein fled Germany, as the Germans would have persecuted him, but that simple fact doesn't make him an ethnic Jew anymore than you or me, unless he identified himself as such. -- Honorsteem (talk) 20:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

No, I'm suggesting we follow Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines, which say all material is based on what reliable sources say. And by the way, Hitler wasn't a Jew "according to Nazi guidelines", that's just something his enemies made up about him in the 1930s, and which historians have now debunked. Please inform yourself on both history and Misplaced Pages's guidelines and policies. Jayjg 20:25, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Honorsteem..."According to the Nazis guidelines, even Hitler was a Jew"...I'm "learning" something new everyday!--MONGO 20:27, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Jay, when you run out of patience, I have a two by four in the backyard that you are free to borrow. I do need it back, though. Happy days, Drmies (talk) 20:30, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I may have to take you up on that! Jayjg 20:34, 12 February 2012 (UTC))

This entire thread is full of lols. Jay, sometimes you just have to accept that certain people are interested in arguing, facts be damned.JoelWhy (talk) 14:09, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Completely unrelated to this issue being discussed, but just as a nice little note, the Nazi criteria for who was a Jew was actually a great deal stricter than Jewish law requires. The requirement of four Jewish grandparents was actually specifically about having a weak criteria given that a more open criteria would have meant countless more Germans, including many members of the Nazi party and hundreds of thousands of German soldiers, would have been considered Jewish. The only question with regards to Hitler having significant Jewish heritage has been the paternity of his father, with some suggesting that the father of Alois Hitler, i.e. Adolph's grandfather, might have been Jewish. While that speculation is taken less seriously, the paternity of Alois Hitler has not been clearly settled as some think the man who married Alois' mother was actually not the father, but the man's step-brother who was married at the time Alois would have been conceived.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 22:33, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

More conspiracy theories...why am I not surprised.--MONGO 23:47, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Very well deserved, although I think we all would perhaps wish that there were, in general, maybe welcome it if editors in general did not act in such a way as to make this sort of recognition necessary. John Carter (talk) 20:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, and you're right, I wish this kind of recognition wasn't necessary. Jayjg 20:51, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

So we can safely assume Einstein left not because he was Jewish but because he felt it inappropriate to stay in a country where the Nazi's came to power, similar to many other German intellectuals at the time. What was the other argument again? Oh, and Drmies, please store your 2x4 in a location void of sunshine, thank you. -- Honorsteem (talk) 23:56, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

• Don't worry about my wood, Mr. Cleanstart. Drmies (talk) 00:38, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Daniel Pipes

If it no unconvenience to you, please elaborate on your view of the (in)correctness of the sourcing of my adding of the 6 figure fundraising by Pipes for the Dutch Party for Freedom on my talk page. -- Honorsteem (talk) 13:16, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, lost track of the discussion. I've now responded. Jayjg 16:19, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Reza Aramesh

I think you gave the wrong protection on Reza Aramesh. The user asked for a create protection, i.e., a salting. Ten Pound Hammer • 18:47, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Fixed, thank you. Jayjg 19:13, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Oscar De La Hoya

Can you downgrade the protection of Oscar De La Hoya to semi-protection, which seems is what you intended to do? Thank you. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 20:20, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, you're correct, and I've done so. Jayjg 23:37, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Tirelessness

Jayjg, I present to you this irrefutable evidence that you are tireless. I therefore wish to know what kind of coffee you are drinking. John Shandy` • talk 03:19, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Editing my talk contributions

Please stop editing my contributions to Talk:Daniel Pipes. I have moved the thread there for obvious reasons. For your appeasal I will replace the diff links to the ones from my talk page. Honorsteem (talk) 18:06, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Please stop giving the impression that I commented on that page. Jayjg 18:07, 14 February 2012 (UTC)