User talk:Jamedeus

Welcome!

Hello, Jamedeus! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages.

Getting Started
Introduction • Contributing to Wikipedia • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Get help at the Teahouse Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions Department directory Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Verifiability • No original research Reliable sources • Citing sources • Content guidelines What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sockpuppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)
Things to do
Task Center • Be bold in editing Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Copy editing • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguation • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Happy editing! Peaceray (talk) 14:05, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sharon Meieran

The article Sharon Meieran has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Her position as county commissioner on a county is not inherently notable per WP:NPOL, no significant coverage about her, she didn't pass the notability bar. Thank you.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 15:27, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's ridiculous to delete her or any of the county commissioners. We're here for information no? It's very bad for historical documentation when we do that. Sharon, Pederson etc. Should stay. GrandPeople44 (talk) 14:56, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Archiving refs

Hi, Jamedeus. Question: What program do you use to do the ref saving/archiving? I see your gnomish work about, and would like that ability for certain articles I come across. Please, let me know. Thanks and Regards, GenQuest ^"scribble" 07:00, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey GenQuest, it's called InternetArchiveBot [1]. I actually found it the same way after seeing another editor use it. Just a heads up: the interface is a bit finicky and sometimes freezes, but it still finishes in the background without submitting the link again. Enjoy! Jamedeus (talk) 07:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@GenQuest: Please note that mass additions with InternetArchiveBot are controversial, see Wikipedia_talk:Link_rot#Mass_additions_of_archive_links_for_live_sites. —Dexxor (talk) 14:02, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dexxor; Noted. Thanks, Jamedeus. GenQuest ^"scribble" 15:02, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, I wasn't aware Wikipedia automatically archives new links. Thanks for posting this. Jamedeus (talk) 18:49, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your reversion makes no sense at all

This edit of yours makes no sense at all. I did the edits that you reverted.:

You found <math>\Theta(n_1 + \cdots + n_K)</math> to <math>\Theta(n_1</math>·...·<math>n_K)</math>. How does that make any sense? The system of math notation used here is deliberately designed to be in most respects the same as LaTeX, which is obviously supposed to accomodate the sort of notation used in this expression, yet whoever put that latter expression there left math mode and put in an ellipsis that is not in math mode. That is very far from proper usage.

In several instances, you changed \cdots to ..., whose effect in LaTeX would be to prevent proper spacing between dots and prevent proper centering.

There are good reasons why \sum rather than \Sigma is used.

I have reverted your reversion.

Someone with as little understanding of LaTeX as you appear to have should probably leave that to others. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:06, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for notifying me - this was a major screw up on my part that I wouldn't have caught otherwise.

I don't pretend to understand latex and usually wouldn't revert this unless the issue was extremely obvious. My recollection is that it came up on my recent changes filter, I saw a broken ref tag and other formatting issues, and I reverted it. Looking back at the diffs this clearly isn't the case, even in the intermediate diffs. I honestly don't know what happened - my best guess is that I opened history in a new tab and then switched back to the wrong tab, which is embarrassing. I'll try to slow down since I'm new to recent changes.

Apologies for the mix up, and thanks again for letting me know! Jamedeus (talk) 02:29, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rai Shab

I want to know king mayyur belongs to which caste and does he belongs to Baghochia Dynasty — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rai Shab (talk • contribs) 12:49, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard of King Mayyur or the Baghochia Dynasty, so I can't really help. Also, please post talk discussions at the bottom of the page. See WP:TALKNEW for details. Jamedeus (talk) 00:16, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Want to collaborate?

I'm very frustrated by the lack of local coverage everywhere and I focus extensively on Portland. Because I'm quite active. I'd like to work with you to create new standards on listing endorsements for such local races because I want the information of the why, what happened and who to be preserved, and local media is struggling and doesn't cover enough to be used as a source. Ballotpedia is too slow and restrictive. So you interested? GrandPeople44 (talk) 00:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey sorry for the late response, busy week. This is an interesting idea, more endorsement coverage definitely seems useful for non-partisan local races where a candidate's ideology is less obvious. I almost always look at the lists on candidate sites when I'm filling out my ballot to get an idea of which coalition they would join.

I can see some difficulty implementing this though. As you note local media doesn't cover many endorsements, and WP:ENDORSE specifically says sources have to be independent (so no candidate websites or endorser tweets). That doesn't seem to leave many options, unless you have ideas I'm not thinking of. Personally I'd be fine sourcing local endorsements to a tweet (keeping the notability requirement), but WP:LOCALCONSENSUS says we can't override a community-wide consensus (and the endorsement guidelines came from a community-wide RfC).

What were your ideas for the new standards? Jamedeus (talk) 08:57, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you heard of Rose City Reform? They have a candidate tracker. GrandPeople44 (talk) 18:58, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't but I'll be following it now, seems like a good source! As far as using it on wikipedia, it's unfortunate that everything is on substack as this will likely be considered user-generated. I searched on WP:RSN and this seems to be consensus. She seems credible given the journalist background, sitting on local boards etc, but I still wouldn't be surprised if it was challenged.

It's worth noting we're still very early in the election, so there will probably be more endorsement coverage in a few months. Local papers don't really run headlines about endorsements but they usually at least mention the big ones in the late-cycle coverage. Jamedeus (talk) 07:19, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

Hi there. I notice you recently made a change to WEX Inc. (which is protected) Do you think you could look into adding the template mentioned in the talk page? Many thanks, 92.71.60.61 (talk) 12:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like somebody beat me to it! Sorry I missed your request - when I click on them from the list it scrolls to the bottom of the talk page, so I didn't see yours. If you need any other edits made you can use the edit request wizard to add them to the list, or feel free to ask me here! Jamedeus (talk) 23:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's great. Thanks anyway! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.71.60.61 (talk) 09:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYi

About this, the user already tried to push same sources in the discussion I see they even tried using the same blog which was already mentioned to them is unacceptable [2], including in the first comment. I think it's wrong that the user has requested an extended confirmed edit with same sources that don't mention Georgian origin and which were discussed already while there are users actively opposing them in the discussion, the user doesn't even mention the discussion in their edit request. Just wanted to provide additional context. Cheers! Vanezi (talk) 03:52, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up! I'm not particularly familiar with this topic but from this history and discussion it definitely looks like an attempt to circumvent consensus. Jamedeus (talk) 20:02, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2016 United States presidential election

Faithless elector Bill Greene voted Ron Paul for president instead of Donald Trump, but still voted Mike Pence for vice president as he was pledged to. Thus, Pence received one more electoral vote than Trump. There is no mention of Mike Pence receiving 304 electoral votes in any of the "citations" you refer to. This is because he received 305, and Trump received 304. My edit was correct and did not need to be reverted. Alistair McBuffio (talk) 18:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alistair McBuffio you're correct, my mistake - I restored your edit and removed the talk page template.

It looks like the whole vice presidential column is essentially uncited, since the citation only deals with presidential electoral votes and doesn't verify any of the information. I'm looking through other pages for a citation to replace it and can't find anything. Do you know of any reliable sources with a summary of the vice presidential electoral votes that we could use? Jamedeus (talk) 19:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit vanniyar page

all information in vanniyar page are wrong book mentioned for edits has no source please delete word low caste all source provided is not official source 2409:4072:883:FB59:0:0:26EE:40B0 (talk) 09:16, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Citation Barnstar
	Prompt and beautiful! Nice one. jp×g 🗯️ 08:32, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wow thanks! Always wanted to get one of these :) Jamedeus (talk) 09:58, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]