User talk:JSpung/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Vandals

With regards to your anti-vandal warning: My IP address is for Office Depot. I am not a vandal. --205.157.110.11 20:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

205.157.110.11: As stated in my warning: if this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings. JSpung 12:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing the Marilyn article--I was about to fix it as I saw your change!--TravelinSista (talk) 15:12, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem, just doing my part to clean up Wikipedia. JSpung (talk) 15:27, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

User talk:65.199.190.254

I just reverted vandalism by User talk:65.199.190.254; you were the last one to issue her a warning. I don't know much about the blocking process - could you take matters further? Cheers, samwaltz 18:28, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I have reported the user to administration. In the future, feel free to do this via WP:AIV. Thanks for the help! JSpung 01:12, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Revert to Heroin

I un-did your revert to Heroin. The user had correctly fixed the date. --NERIC-Security (talk) 14:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Oops. It's easy to jump to conclusions after monitoring recent changes for a while. Thanks for catching my mistake. JSpung (talk) 14:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem. Many eyes make all bugs shallow --NERIC-Security (talk) 15:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I am not a vandal!

I thought we were allowed to edit? Why do you get to decide what truth is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.58.242.51 (talk) 19:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, on Wikipedia, anyone can edit any page. However, if new information is added, it must be neutral and verifiable. Your edits introduced information that was neither neutral nor verifiable, therefore the changes you made were marked as vandalism. JSpung (talk) 21:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Your VandalProof Application

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, JSpung. As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank again for your interest in VandalProof. β^_command 04:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for watching my talk page for vandalism. =D the_ed17 15:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Certainly! It was only after I reverted the vandalism that I noticed that it was a talk page. I was going to undo my reversion, but I figured that you'd want it removed anyway. My apologies if you didn't. JSpung (talk) 16:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Juan Castillo

Revert on more version please. Two Ip vandalism instead of one. Matthew_hk tc 06:48, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Will do, thanks for catching that. JSpung (talk) 13:40, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Father's Rights Movement

The father's Rights Movement webpage that I edited had important changes. You undid them. Should you wish to become informed about the changes, I suggest that you visit the discussion webpage rather than judge works for which you aren't familiar.

One of the leaders of the Masculist movement in Canada —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.24.230 (talk) 15:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

My mistake. I have removed my warning. JSpung (talk) 16:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Matt Sanchez

The last edit I made was substantiated by a reliable source. There's some edit warring going on and Aleta has shown enormous bias. I've submitted an edit and sourced it properly. Would you like to review some of the edits?Brianlandeche (talk) 16:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

JSpung, you might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement#Bluemarine and consider re-reverting yourself. This editor is proxy-editing for a banned user, and has been blocked as a consequence. Horologium (talk) 16:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, and it's been taken care of by Aleta. JSpung (talk) 17:01, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your awesome anti-vandalism work, I really feel you deserve one! Keep up the great work. Puchiko (Talk-email) 16:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Since you beat me to the revert button so many times, I think you really should get one :) We need more contributors like you. --Puchiko (Talk-email) 16:16, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! JSpung (talk) 17:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Japanese American redress and court cases warning error

As you say that I have vandalized an article. This would be ridiculous since i have never view that article and the ip address has 2 computers. So may you correct your errors —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.41.101.21 (talk) 00:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

The article was vandalized as shown here by your IP address. If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings. JSpung (talk) 03:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Edit war at KFC

Hi JSpung

Thanks for your intervention. The edit war at Kingstonian F.C. has been going on some little time now, with one particular user repeatedly seeking to add a disparaging item about our little football club. I have tried to point out to him that the point he is making is non-NPOV and out of all proportion to the entry about the Club. (You can see some of the exchanges on my disucssion page.)

I have undone your reverts for the reasons above and wanted to explain my actions.

I would also welcome your neutral adjudication on the dispute.

Prince Philip of Greece (talk) 18:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

All involved parties: please see my full evaluation on this issue, available on the article discussion page. JSpung (talk) 15:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

All power to yer elbow!! Many thanks. Prince Philip of Greece (talk) 18:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

With regards the Kingstonian thing I am curious as to why an official statement from the club on the clubs website is deemed "unverifiable"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopandjump (talk • contribs) 11:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

As I said on the discussion page, the reliable source guideline states that "articles should be based on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." The Kingstonian team website is not a third-party source, nor has it been proven reliable. In addition, the club website statement is self-published, and per the self-published source policy, "newsletters, personal websites... and similar sources are largely not acceptable." JSpung (talk) 13:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Our problem has returned. Perhaps you could help us keep an eye on the persistent vandalism? Could you also advise me what action I can take to protect my own profile page against vandalism? Many thanks. Prince_Philip_of_Greece (talk) 10:10, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Richard, it is hardly vandalism publishing factual events. You can run and tell tales all you like. I will publish the truth and seek out verifiable facts. Hoppytroffy (talk) 20:12, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Incorrectly Reverted Vandalism

Um? -- Mentisock 16:52, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Reverted. Apologies. JSpung (talk) 16:57, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Somewhat similar

Not vandalism, but cutting helpful information. Nyttend (talk) 01:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. Not exactly sure what I was thinking here, especially considering that I didn't include an edit summary. Weird. Thanks for pointing it out. JSpung (talk)

Science Showdown

I was just trying to get that article deleted, as it seems to have no real signifigance.YukariTakeba (talk) 17:11, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I appreciate your boldness in cleaning up Wikipedia. However, the proper way to do that is to either tag it for speedy deletion or discuss the article on its discussion page. Deleting all of the information given and replacing it with "Please, Delete this stupid, crappy article" is a good way to get yourself blocked. JSpung (talk)

Revertion

The edit I made was very constructive on the Lloyd Kaufman page. The page looked awful with that. MagicBullet5 (talk) 16:05, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. I have reverted my edit and your warning. Apologies. JSpung (talk) 16:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletions

Just so you know, you have tagged several pages with {{db-g7}} that should have been tagged as {{db-A7}}. G7 is "Author requested deletion". A7 is "Article does not indicate importance". J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

You tagged The Belcoo Experiment as G7. I couldn't find any evidence in the contribution history of the creator to suggest that he requested deletion. Could you point out where he made this request? Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 16:51, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

As far as The Belcoo Experiment, that was an error. However, several ([1],[2]) of the G7 tags were in response to the author blanking the page. This legitimately falls under G7; "If the author blanks the page, this can be taken as a deletion request." Regardless, I will be more aware of the specific tag I use in the future. JSpung (talk) 17:36, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I was just refering to The Belcoo Experiment though. That's the only one I saw, and the reason I left you this note. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 17:39, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

latest message

i'm sorry about that sir. but as i left the room for the bathroom. one of my fellow classmates used my computer to do this. sorry for the inconvinience. i will yell at him for you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.163.216.2 (talk) 00:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

You do that. JSpung (talk) 14:29, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Last Edit

Not only is that edit constructive, the player mentioned was on the Tampa Bay Buccaneers super bowl champion team. The info stated is correct, and I am not just going to add something like that for no reason. Please revert the page back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhosford11 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

You deleted my facts that I added to the page while deleting undrafted sportspersons who are obviously on the page as a joke???? I cleaned this page up and added a player who can be backed up anywhere on google. You thought that two OBVIOUS high school kids added on to the page with jokes in the edit were more pertinent than my edit? I hope there is a way to report you for this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhosford11 (talk • contribs) 17:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

You were correct in deleting the two fake players. I did some research and found that the player you added was legit. However, just as I was getting ready to take you seriously, I noticed the last line you added: "Now runs successful Emu farm outside of Plant City, FL." Whether that's vandalism, a joke, or something that only you know about, it does not belong on Wikipedia. My reverts will remain as they are. JSpung (talk) 13:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

I was just experimenting to see if it really worked like my friends said it would —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.68.112 (talk) 14:17, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

In the future, feel free to use the sandbox to experiment. Please do not experiment on articles again. JSpung (talk) 14:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

The Legendary Danny O'Doul is a respected entertainer, masterchef and metallurgist who lives in Woodmere, NY (Wemphis Enclave).

Please stop removing any additions to the Woodmere page, as Mr. O'Doul is a legitimate hometown hero, whose copious, bountiful talents as an entertainer and legendary singer are regularly used for the greater good of the people of the Five Towns, as The Legendary Danny O'Doul performs at numerous charity benefit concerts in the Five Towns and on the South Shore of Long Island. Besides performing gratis, Mr. O'Doul is also a generous philanthropist and humanitarian in the community and participates in the region's meals on wheels program.

You should stop removing referrences to this fine American Patriot, and recognize his widespread influence and respect in the community for which this reference was included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.226.152 (talk) 21:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll keep that in mind. JSpung (talk) 13:48, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

AVUS

Re this reversion – you reverted two edits that actually were valid: one was including a link to the Autobahn's entry, and the other a grammatical correct. Less of the trigger happy reversion please, even if I am editing from an IP. (I have 7000+ edits on an account, but edit on an IP at work for privacy reasons). 194.73.174.10 (talk) 17:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Apologies. JSpung (talk) 13:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Rock music WikiProject

I'd like to invite you to join the newly-formed Rock music WikiProject. There's alot of Rock-related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few Rock music pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks! --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 10:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

you suck

why cant you just let wikipedia do what it was made to do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.72.200.10 (talk) 20:55, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia was made to provide neutral, notable, and verifiable information to the masses. The information you added was not notable enough to warrant inclusion. However, don't be discouraged from contributing valuable information in the future. JSpung (talk) 21:03, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

yea, about this, well, ur sending me warnings when i havent done anything so plz fix that k thx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ymp11 (talk • contribs) 23:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Really? What do you call this and this? I call that vandalism, which is not tolerated on Wikipedia. JSpung (talk) 23:31, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Injustice

Hi, did you mean to revert Talk:Injustice, it is a talk page :). Cheers - Kingpin13 (talk) 18:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

No, it was a mistake. I undid my reversion. Thank you. JSpung (talk) 18:48, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

n/p at all. Keep up the good work :). - Kingpin13 (talk) 18:52, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting my edit, I think I reversed the wrong one accidentally. Xamkou (talk) 20:19, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Your revision of "escort agency" entry to remove a newly added section

Hi,

You blanked a whole section on "escort agency scams" from the "escort agency" entry for reasons unknown. Wikipedia users have a right to know about the scams operated by fake escort agencies just as much as they do about the normal activities of escort agencies. These fake escort agencies are not just a big problem for the numerous innocent individuals who are defrauded by them but also for genuine escort agencies who are tarred with the same brush. You are welcome to make revisions to improve this section but unless you have an intimate knowledge of the industry (like myself) you are probably not qualified to do this. The section on the escort agency scams that you blanked out is probably more useful and will do more good than any other part of this section because it provides information that people interested in this subject can actually take action on. I did expect the section I added to be vandalised but I thought it would be by somebody benefitting from this information not being made public, i.e. somebody actually involved with the scams. It would appear that you don't fall into this category so I would appreciate it if you would not repeat your action and allow Wikipedia users to make their own mind up about the usefulness or otherwise of the section that I have added.

Many thanks and regards,

Hagis69 (talk) 03:50, 3 May 2009 (UTC)Hagis69

Look at the revision history again. As shown in the revision comparison , I did not "blank a whole section." I removed a link to an escort agency, which was clearly advertising. As stated in WP:NOT, "Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising. This applies to articles, categories, templates, talk page discussions, and user pages" (emphasis mine). I appreciate that you are concerned with improving the content of Wikipedia. In the future, please do some research before making accusations. JSpung (talk) 02:32, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

User talk:65.173.192.254

This guy is back to doing vandalism again, so could you please block him? If there is an easy way to report this please post a comment to my talk page (it'll be easy for me to find again in case of future need). Thank you!! Spidey104 (talk) 20:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Apollo 13

Hi,

What's the problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.138.172.76 (talk) 19:33, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I took another look, and although some of the changes you made appeared questionable, it looks like your edits were fine, my apologies. Many rapid edits from an anonymous user sends up red flags. In addition, your IP address has a history of vandalism warnings. If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices. Happy editing! JSpung (talk) 19:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi,

No need to apologise.

I have had this IP address only since recently. I can't comment on who my ISP had this allocated to before I am afraid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.138.172.76 (talk) 19:59, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi again,

Are you going to unrevent your reverts? The Apollo 13 page has been blocked from editing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.138.172.76 (talk) 20:01, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I have undid the reversion. Again, I would recommend making an account. JSpung (talk) 20:09, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi again,

Thank you. However your revert has been unreverted by someone who doesn't seem to allow edits on their talk page. C'est la vie.

All the best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.138.172.76 (talk) 20:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments on User 204.16.229.245

You reverted edits I had done under that IP (before I had realized I had not signed in). The deletion was not of the page--I removed the section that was discussing what COULD happen once the match was played. As has happened with all other groups throughout the world cup, once the matches are played there is no need for a table of "what ifs" detailing what would happen if certain teams would win by how much--the results are already known. Therefore, this deletion was proper (and has been done to all other World Cup Groups). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kargie (talk • contribs) 20:31, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Specifically, which page was this? JSpung (talk) 20:38, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

The world cup group H page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kargie (talk • contribs) 21:05, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Your agenda

This article, and all the other criticisms about Wikipedia now make sense. Block me, who cares. My input is blocked anyway. Let your misinformed and agenda-laden "experts" write your site. http://www.lilith-ezine.com/articles/technology/Wikipedia-is-Crap.html

All my previous correct information has been "vandalised" as you put it, yet I am now the "vandal." Interesting. Thank you for some TRUE information at last. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.70.225 (talk) 21:01, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I promise you that I don't have an agenda besides keeping Wikipedia free of vandalism, including removal of comments such as "There is absolutely no point in correcting or adding anything here, everything is deleted and edited to someones's spiteful agenda" from the main article page. Use the article's talk page if you have concerns about neutrality, don't comment in the middle of the article. JSpung (talk) 21:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Reverted edits by 209.30.241.88 (talk) to last revision by Tbhotch

why did you change my edit. the change in wording I made reflects reality not what was there before. The gusher or "blow out" caused the explosion not vice versa.

Reverted edits by 209.30.241.88 (talk) to last revision by Tbhotch

my edit is correct - think about it before you change it.

I want to know why you are writing about naturopathy in India from CCRYN. This is very wrong. Please recall that India is the country- introduces Yog and Naturopathy worldwide and more then centuries the naturopathy hospitals are funtioning in Prayag, Gorakhpur, Haridwar etc. even in delhi the oldest is Akhil Bhartiya Prakritik Chikitsa Parishad and Moraji desai Institute of Yog and Naturropathy. Perhaps you know Dirender Brahmachari and Chandrashekar. As well Swami Vivekanand. So you please do not remove their name. In Naturopathy an importent way of healing is yog which you say YOGA. Actually the Naturoapthy comprises of Five Mahabhoot (Matter) treatment. hey are Fire, Soil, Air, Water and Akash(Sky). Yog - via its different component including Asans and Pranayam is actually a healling process for the Akash Tatva Chikitsa. - Dr Atul Kr - dratulkr@gmail.com 164.100.97.2 (talk) 07:09, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

what is wrong with the recent edits on the Little Richard article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.11.75.237 (talk) 06:31, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Nothing, that was a mistake and I undid it moments later. Sorry 'bout that. JSpung (talk) 06:36, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

naturopathy in india

Strange . I did not understand you do not recognized Mahatma Gandhi creator of modern India and do recognized CCRYN - an NGO registered under Union act1860 of india. Naturoapthy first hospital in India is established at Urllikanchan (Puna)1946. This you are omitted. and despite my regular tries you are not adding this information. Does your site add with taking bribes as the CCRYN advocacy means that you are getting some fund because this division is only to advertise and give grants to the institutions promoting Naturaopathy. And to do so DG Chidanadmurti is taking 30% commission for each amount to pass. That is the reason he is having a Bunglow of 60 crore today where as just few years back he was not even a Bicycle. Interestingly the 5and half year program which you are informing is basically started just few uear back and has a stenth of around mere 200 students. Where as Akhil Bhartiya Prakritik Chikitsa Parishad estb in 1946 by saint Vinobaji Bhawe brother Balkobaji Bhave and since then has over 74000 students enroll so far. At present each year about 5000 students are being taught in Naturopathy.

Please clear your views and update the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.100.97.2 (talk) 08:10, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Archive 1

Archive 2