User talk:Jayron32

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

• /Archive for Sept-Dec 2006
• /Archive2 for Jan 2007-

Contents 1 User Talk 2 New sig test 3 Your note on IP page 4 Experimental Edits 5 USRD Newsletter - Issue 3 5.1 Active user verification 6 Re: Harry Potter fandom 7 Heterodontosauridae 8 Rainham, London 9 Reply 10 Re: User MVP5 is back at his old tricks 11 Assessing article on Leonard Orban 12 Gwoyeu Romatzyh 13 Fair use rationale for images in "Leonard Orban" 14 Taiwanese aborigines 15 GA for East Carolina University 16 American Civil Liberties Union 17 "Leonard Orban" renominated for GA 18 USRD Newsletter - Issue 4 19 New article on Steve Omohundro 20 RIAA 21 Biased biography 22 regarding your comments made on FLC 23 Ronda Storms 24 TQ for your kind protection 25 George Albu 26 Hermann Eckstein 27 Top Gear good article status 28 talk page comments 29 I agree

[edit] User Talk

Mind telling me why I will be blocked? I still haven't seen any rule that states blanking my own page is a crime, it seems rather that arbitrary decisions are made by those in power who abuse their authority. It's my page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.137.175.59 (talk • contribs).

The article that you linked to deals with ownership of articles not userpages. The userpages are very different wiki articles, the user pages and discussions are used to identify a particular user, so in the case of Usertalk:209.137.175.59 page this is not a wikpedia article hence does not fall under the "rules of ownership" page.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Socko123 (talk • contribs).

This debate only comes to an end because people refuse to address it. I've asked for it to be addressed quite a few times and it never has. --Socko123 06:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New sig test

--Jayron32talk|contribs 06:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your note on IP page

With reference to this edit, I think the {{repeat vandal}} banner covers the issue. Regards --Golden Wattle ^talk 00:38, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

While we have a tendency to post warnings at the bottom of the page, I think the warnings are hard to find for the intended reader if the page gets too lengthy, this is depsite the use of headings - more than a screen's length and expecting someone to navigate down to the bottom of the page is not reader friendly. Some IP addresses are used by many individuals. By their nature they are not experienced wikipedians. We need to make the warnings clear for the person to whom they are addressed. "Other users and admins" are secondary readers only. If they are in the warnings sphere and are interested in the extent of damage a vandal has been doing, I would expect them to be familiar with the banner and /or use of the history tab plus of course looking at the IPs contributions. My two cents Regards--Golden Wattle ^talk 00:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Your experience of vandalism may vary from mine. You said: Again, if the IP is used by many people, then it is unlikely that the same vandal will use the same IP over and over. Messages left will not reach more than a page long; if they are more than a page long, it is evidence of a single-user IP, and should be treated accordingly.

School children and perhaps other students, for example at college, would seem to not fit your model. I have met plenty of pages with messages more than a page long and would not assume a single user, but there may indeed be among the users returning vandals. For example a page I have done a fair bit of reversion on is Ned Kelly (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs); it was the one the IP address whose talk page you annoated as referenced above had vandalised: 203.144.20.142 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) - as I read the Whois info for that the IP address is associated with Bond University. For an example of a talk page of another recently reverted Ned Kelly editor there see 203.208.66.79 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log). I would make no assumption that it is one user - IP addresses by Telstra are not usually assigned that way over time as I understand it. For an example of one of the many IP addresses of schools that has vandalised Ned Kelly see 203.208.91.217 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) Regards --Golden Wattle ^talk 20:43, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Experimental Edits

Thanks for editing my edits, JJJJJJAAAAAAAAAYAYYYYYAYAYYYYYYRRORRRRRRRRROOOOOOOON!NNNNNN!!!!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.6.228.24 (talk • contribs).

[edit] USRD Newsletter - Issue 3

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 3	10 March 2007	About the Newsletter
Departments: Features: Project news Inactivity? Deletion debates Article Improvement Drive Featured subproject Good and Featured Articles Featured member From the editors
Archives  |  Newsroom   Shortcut : WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here.

[edit] Active user verification

Hello, Jayron32. Due to the high number of inactive users at WP:USRD, we are asking that you verify that you are still an active contributor of the project. To do so, please add an asterisk (*) after your name on Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Newsletter/List. Users without one by the next issue in 2 weeks will be removed off the list and off the respective road projects as well. If you have any questions, please contact me on my talk page. Thanks. Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:20, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Harry Potter fandom

Jayron, thanks so much for your kind words in passing the article as a GA. Yes, I have a feeling there may be some deep "cruft" opposers at FAC, but I'm hoping to aim there soon -- but possibly waiting until after the release of the seventh book. Anyway, thanks again! --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Heterodontosauridae

Thank you for reviewing Heterodontosauridae! They say that good articles don't just pop up out of nowhere anymore, but I found that one after a WP:DINO review of article size. All I really had to do was a copyedit, add a couple of references, and make reference formatting changes. J. Spencer 05:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rainham, London

I know you said that the only thing stopping Rainham from becoming a good article was the fact that the history section is totally unreferenced, however I used the only source available to me, the book ‘Bygone Dagenham and Rainham’ which is actually listed in the references section. How do I reference one source for an entire section? It’s not like there are loads of sources out there with info one Rainham. Could you give me some advice? Max Naylor 18:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Cheers for the advice dude ;). Max Naylor 19:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

I see your point, if they get reported one more time, I 'm sure someone will block them for an extended period of time (I will if I handle it). It's important to try and use warnings everytime because vandals often stop after seeing a final. John Reaves (talk) 05:37, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: User MVP5 is back at his old tricks

Feel free to go through the whole set of warnings (minus one if it becomes severe) and list on AIV/block as necessary. I don't hold back when someone I unblock comes back for more. Zsinj^Talk 11:52, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assessing article on Leonard Orban

You have assessed the article on Leonard Orban as not meeting the GA criteria because it has "Non-free images without fair-use rationale". If this is the only problem of the article, I believe I can fix it in a couple of days and provide a fair use rationale. Is it possible to change your assessment and put ii "on hold" for a few days? The whole process of GA nomination takes a lot of time and a lot of waiting and maybe it can be made shorter, if the fair-use rationale is the only problem in the article. BTW, is there any other similar cases of fair-use images for a politician I could consult? Many thanks in advance, --Michkalas 15:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gwoyeu Romatzyh

Can you assess this article for GA? You assessed Romanization of Chinese, and this article is similar (although in my opinion it is of much higher quality). User:Ndsg has spent 252 edits improving it, and I suspect it is close to passing FA, let alone GA. I would appreciate your input. Thanks. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 12:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for images in "Leonard Orban"

Thanks for your help! I think I have fixed the problems with the fair use rationale and I have left relevant comments at Talk:Leonard Orban. Some elaboration may be needed, so let me know if there is any problem. --Michkalas 13:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Taiwanese aborigines

Hi, thanks for the GA review. I have listed Taiwanese aborigines at WP:GA/R for review of the Failed Ga. Thanks again! --Ling.Nut 23:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi---

• Errm? Eh? Ug! I could swear I saw that GA review on my watch list just this evening! But it is from days ago. I dunno how I confused myself...
• Yes I am editing at the moment, but am quitting again in ten minutes or so. I was editing again for Spring Break, which ended today. :-)
• Thanks! --Ling.Nut 01:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

• Hi again; last message, I promise. :-) It's completely up to you: You can review Taiwanese aborigines if you like, or don't review it if you don't. :-) I actually left a note on Homestarmy's talk a while back asking him to review it. He hasn't replied yet. That may perhaps be because at the time I wrote the note, the article wasn't even WP:GAC. Or it may be because he's too busy, I dunno. I'm sure he wouldn't mind if you reviewed it... it would save him the trouble. :-) All in all, I have been more than a little confused about what was done where :-) But I am done now. Need to study. Please feel free to review the article if it pleases you to do so, but don't feel obligated. Thanks! --Ling.Nut 01:47, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

• • Aha! User:Jerrypp772000 put the failed GA on the talk page today. That was what I saw. No drugs involved. --Ling.Nut 05:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA for East Carolina University

Would the best thing to do is rewrite the whole page? Is there specific subheadings that need addressed? I am the majority writer and everything looks fine to me, but thats because I wrote it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PGPirate (talk • contribs) 04:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] American Civil Liberties Union

Thank you for the review. I've just fixed some links to citations, and moved the controversial stance section next to position section. However, the huge amount of references take a lot of time to fix. I'll probably do it later gradually. You may fail it as you wish, but I might renominate it after the fixing is done. Wooyi 04:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Leonard Orban" renominated for GA

I have just renominated "Leonard Orban" for GA. Please check with my comments above and at the article's talk page and notify me if there are any problems with the current fair use rationale (or anything else). Many thanks in advance. --Michkalas 20:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] USRD Newsletter - Issue 4

The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter
Volume 1, Issue 4	24 March 2007	About the Newsletter
Departments: Features: Project news March 16 IRC Meeting Deletion debates Kentucky and Utah projects demoted Featured subproject A quick look at the structural integrity of state highway WikiProjects Featured member From the editors
Archives  |  Newsroom   Shortcut : WP:USRD/NEWS

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. — --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 22:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New article on Steve Omohundro

I found some new information on Steve Omohundro that was not brough up in the original AFD discussion - 17 publications and a US patent - and thought this significant enough to warrant restoring the article. After restoring it, I made enough edits that I feel it's a new article rather than a restoration (it would have been easier to start from scratch than to restore), so I have removed the CFD tag. However, I wanted to invite you to take a look at the article as you participated in the original AFD discussion. --Zippy 00:11, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RIAA

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Recording_Industry_Association_of_America&diff=117602726&oldid=117562188

Learn to see who did what vandalism is moron. This IP vandalized the page once fricking idiot. --209.137.175.59 18:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biased biography

Why is the criticism of the Finkelstein bio much larger and more detailed than the praises?

I have read his books and they are all well documented with loads of footnotes to back up his conclusions. Of course there are going to be more criticisms than praise because he is taking a position that isn't politically correct. But that doesn't mean its not justified. Please make both the praise and criticism sections equal in length. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.239.138.147 (talk) 04:59, 26 March 2007 (UTC).

• Removing large chunks of the text without explanation is not the way to address this. You have already been reported to WP:AIV for vandalism. Can you please bring this to the article's talk page and discuss these concerns with the other editors there. Thus, you all can work together to achieve consensus - Alison^☺ 05:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] regarding your comments made on FLC

Hi, I just read your comments on this FLC, and I've made some edits to the image caption and the DPRK note. Is this what you wanted me to fix?--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 22:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I ended up putting up that image for CSD I3. The UN Photo Library hasn't responded. :( Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 18:52, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ronda Storms

Everything is now done. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 22:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TQ for your kind protection

Revision as of 04:49, 1 March 2007 (edit) 124.107.2.74 (Talk) (←Blanked the page) ← Older edit Revision as of 04:56, 1 March 2007 (edit) (undo) Jayron32 (Talk | contribs) (rv blanking) darzkkg 03:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] George Albu

Dear Jayron32, Thank you for your comments on Albu. However, I must express surprise that you feel removing 2 images from the page (repeatedly) and rearranging the rest, does not constitute vandalism. If Berks had discussed the issue before his summary edits, which are simply labelled "not necessary", there might be some justification for his actions. See Lady Phillips and Lionel Phillips for similar behaviour. Unfortunately Berks has decided to target me and will carry on with his harassment until he is stopped or grows bored. Paul venter 05:22, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hermann Eckstein

This is getting too much - Berks ignored a tag on the above article which I started this morning, leading to an edit conflict which caused a loss of about an hour's work. Get him off my back or you will lose my contributions permanently. Paul venter 13:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Well I apologise for that. Firstly, your work shouldnt have been lost, it should have been in a section on the bottom half of the page, which you then could have restored to the top part of the page and saved. Secondly, it is because you have over used these templates that I assumed you weren't editing it. --Berks105 13:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Top Gear good article status

Yes Jay, I have to agree with your comments on this, the referencing thing is a major problem on these Top Gear related pages, I had to go through and add the unreferenced bar to at least half a dozen pages today within this section, although strangely not Top Gear Dog, which although fully referenced was vandalised by our friend User:DrFrench. The referencing added today to the Jon_Bentley_(TV_presenter) page is pathetic and is just a blatant excuse to avoid it being AfD'd. At that rate, there's no wonder this article failed the good article criteria especially when some of the best parts of the Top Gear section are unnecessarily vandalised, aka deleted by biased admin. Davesmith33 21:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] talk page comments

hey jayron, i was just removing personal attacks (people calling me a troll, discussing plans to revert me, etc). its not vandalism to remove those is it?

thanks 71.112.7.212 19:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

This User has again reverted discussion page on Afro, has engaged in repeated disruptive editing, was already the topic of an Administrator block for suspected sockpuppetry (and disruptive editing), refuses to not sign their comments despite repeated Bot requests telling her to do so, has offended or upset virtually every person she has come in contact with, and shows absolutely no ability to "grow" and improve their behavior on this site. A casual review of their Talk page history, where she removes virtually every warning and request to stop as a "personal attack." Few, if any, constructive edits. --David Shankbone 20:11, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I agree

Those were my last comments, and I made them in good faith. I suppose I naively hope they will actually make a difference. After I wrote those, I took the User off my watch list. Thanks for your advice and assistance. --David Shankbone 02:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)