User talk:Jayjg/Archive 34

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Jayjg. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 30

←

Archive 32

→

Tamina

I would like to know, when your going to allow someone to make the Tamina wiki page, she is currently aligned with one of WWEs biggest stars Santino, and is wrestling and managing on a regular basis on Tapings, Live Events, and FCW, so i believe she should be allowed a wiki page created. However, you continue to delete them, howcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.167.151.152 (talk) 03:47, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Melissadu, as I've explained to you many times, the solution here is to take your arguments to WP:DRV. The solution is not to do as you have done; that is, continually create sockpuppets, and use them to recreate the same article eleven times now. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:30, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

South Park (season 13)

Hey. You had weighed in at the first FAC for South Park (season 13), which got hung up largely because of the image. Now there is a second FAC discussion ongoing, where once again the image is dominating the conversation. At the FA delegate's suggestion, I am asking everyone who participated in the first FAC to weigh in once again, if it's not too much trouble, but please comment on the full set of FA criteria rather than just the image fair use rationale, so we can work toward a consensus on the overall FAC. Thanks! — Hun ter Ka hn 17:49, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, I will take a look. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:31, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Jewish American entertainers

You knew about this? I wasn't aware we could get decisions overturned by making private deals with the closing admins. Bulldog123 00:53, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Sigh. I suppose you could take it to DRV, but the same people will show up to make the same arguments. Unfortunately, several of the people who claimed they were concerned about WP:BLP when the issue was entries on the List of Jewish Nobel laureates have been completely absent from the discussions of other similar lists. As I stated then, it is quite clear that their issues had nothing to do with WP:BLP in general, but rather with the extremely narrow "issue" of having one or two names appear on a list they didn't want to see it on. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:35, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I really don't want to take it to DRV. I just don't like how "casually" the list was overturned - everything very back-door. And yes, I saw you were trying to convince AndyTheGrump and BetsyTheDivine to voice their opinion on the other AfDs. I don't think it's that they "don't care" as much as they "don't want to get involved." Participating in these debates immediately brands a user as either agenda-driven (if it's an Irish list or Italian list) or antisemitic (if it's a Jewish list). You'll notice how all that talk about "improving the article(s)" was bullshit. Not a single relevant change has been made to List of Irish American actors, List of Italian American actors, or List of Jewish actors. Bulldog123 04:33, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Four Award

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Temple Israel (Memphis, Tennessee).

Great work! Little Mountain 5 23:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! Jayjg ^(talk) 18:55, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

User:Robotpotato --> User:Gameboypocket

Looks like he decided to just start over again. I mention it to you in case you want to handle it in some fashion before the opening of an SSI case. JohnInDC (talk) 12:06, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to respond. It's obvious it's Robotpotato avoiding scrutiny, but I think you should write up an SSI case just to be sure. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:18, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Robotpotato. JohnInDC (talk) 01:46, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

This editor looks very similar, although with an Australian twist. I've started cleaning up some of the unsourced insertions, but it's going to be a lot of work. Jayjg ^(talk) 18:55, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Mike Lester

I apologize for the revert, I was unaware that the citation was not valid anymore. Spin off 22:34, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

That's fine, but please keep in mind that even if the citation had been valid, the insertion was not appropriate. A three sentence bio cannot have as one of its sentences a statement that the subject was arrested for something (not even convicted). Jayjg ^(talk) 19:14, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

MJ

Hey Jay - just a quick thank you for your last edit to Messianic Judaism. It was right on & much appreciated. Best, A Sniper (talk) 22:38, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for saying so! There's much more to be done on it, as the article in general is a mess; at least half of the material in there is uncited/improperly cited/cited to unreliable sources, and the citations are impossibly formatted. When you add the constant and apparently deliberate misrepresentation of sources, cleaning it up seems a sisyphean task, so your encouragement to keep trying is encouraging. Jayjg ^(talk) 19:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...

Hi, I just want to thank you for catching this. I missed it and I shouldn't have. Thanks for picking up on my error. --CrohnieGal^Talk 18:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

It's easy to miss these things, and thank you for your thanks. :-) Jayjg ^(talk) 19:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes it is and your welcome. I always like to thank people when they deserve it which you did. Have a wonderful happy, healthy New Year, --CrohnieGal^Talk 23:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Hogmanay greeting

Thank you very much for working with me in 2010 to make the encyclopedia a better place. Regardless of any disagreements we may have had, I want to wish you all the very best for 2011. I look forward to working with you, and I hope for health and happiness to you and your family in the year to come. I therefore send you this glass of the cratur, so you can celebrate, whether it is Hogmanay or New Year's Day where you are. Warmest regards, --John (talk) 04:58, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, and the same to you! Jayjg ^(talk) 04:15, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back

Your appeal is about to be approved. I have confidence that the committee is right; you have done exactly what you was requested and required. My reservation was based on gut, not fact, and was probably unwarranted. Good luck. I look forward to more contributions, FA, GA, and elsewhere. Jd2718 (talk) 16:37, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate your saying that. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:33, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Userfy request

Jayjg, could you userfy Sarona Reiher to me, please? When I evaluated it before it was deleted, it appeared to be a substantial improvement over the version previously considered for deletion. If G5 is the only bar to it, I'd like to look it over to see if it can be salvaged. --Bsherr (talk) 01:39, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Really? In what way did it "appeared to be a substantial improvement over the version previously considered for deletion"? Jayjg ^(talk) 01:44, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

The previous AfD was decided 17 March 2010. On 24 May 2010, Sarona Reiher first appeared in a recurring role on the television show "WWE Raw".[1] The article competently covered this development. I presume that this rendered the article no longer a "sufficiently identical and unimproved copy" of the one considered in the AfD. I also presume that this would require a new consideration of the notability of the subject. But, if G5 is a bar, I'd like to determine whether the article is otherwise able to be redeemed. --Bsherr (talk) 01:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

You mean this article? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:02, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

No, the article here looked different. --Bsherr (talk) 02:03, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

The article here was word-for-word identical with that one, including the citations. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:08, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Can you userfy it for me? --Bsherr (talk) 02:09, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand what for; you can determine from that other version "whether the article is otherwise able to be redeemed". Jayjg ^(talk) 02:11, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, and it appears to be redeemable. I'd like to add additional references, for example, and then eventually move it back to the main space. --Bsherr (talk) 02:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Before moving it back to the main space, would you be willing to take it to DRV to confirm that it belongs in main space? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

If I did, what would I be seeking a review of, the March AfD, or your recent speedy deletion? --Bsherr (talk) 02:18, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, what I mean is, once you've improved the article and you're ready to put the article back into main space, would you be willing to take it to DRV, to see if it has sufficiently overcome the AfD original issues? You see, once a deleted article is recreated a dozen times by half as many sockpuppets, one gets wary of recreating it yet again. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I understand that. Deletion review wouldn't be the correct venue. Once the article is moved back, I wouldn't object (nor could I) to an AfD discussion of it. If the subject still fails notability despite the recent developments, it ought to be deleted, of course. I can certainly agree to notify you when I move it back so you can consider whether you'll nominate it. --Bsherr (talk) 02:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

That's fair. It's in your user space now, at User:Bsherr/Sarona Reiher. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. --Bsherr (talk) 02:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/West Bank - Judea and Samaria

At Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment, the Arbitration Committee reviewed a request by User:Jayjg to remove editing restrictions placed on him in the abovementioned case. By a vote of 12-0, the Committee passed the following motion:

In view of his compliance with Remedy 11 of the West Bank - Judea and Samaria case, the editing restrictions placed on Jayjg (talk · contribs) in that same case are lifted effective at the passage of this motion. Jayjg is reminded that articles in the area of conflict, which is identical to the area of conflict as defined by the Palestine-Israel articles case, remain the subject of discretionary sanctions; should he edit within this topic area, those discretionary sanctions continue to apply.

For the Arbitration Committee,
NW (Talk) 18:49, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Discuss this

Welcome back to the Israel-Palestine mess

Mazel tov on the lifting of your topic ban. Welcome back. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 19:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Ditto from me. ← ZScarpia 12:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you both! Jayjg ^(talk) 00:08, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Collaboration

Hi Jayjg! I am glad to see that your restrictions have been lifted. I have been planning to collaborate with you on improving Israel-related articles, but your restrictions were preventing me from making any requests. I heard that I am not the only one. I apologize in advance for asking you for help immediately without having given anything in return.

In any case, you are "notorious" for being able to improve obscure articles to GA or FA status. I therefore ask that you take a look at some obscure Israel-related articles and see if you can help improve them to that level! In particular, I believe that the article Jaffa–Jerusalem railway has a lot of potential. Can you please take a look and let me know if you are willing to help me with it? Cheers, Ynhockey ^(Talk) 19:05, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I'd be happy to help you with that article. I'm still trying to help with Al Azhar Mosque, which I must get back to doing, but as long as there's no deadline here, I can work on both. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:56, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

RSN stats

How did you figure out you were the fourth highest contributor? I'm curious as to where I stand. Is there a tool or something that lets us look at these stats? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:07, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Nevermind. I figured it out.[2] A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:10, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Karl Sheppard

Why did you delete this page? There are more than enough links to prove his worth and it is a different article that you unnecessarily deleted the last time.

Is it your goal to delete all LOI players?

Restore this page please. Rovers Forever (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:01, 11 January 2011 (UTC).

I deleted it because that was the consensus of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ger Hanley (footballer), which took place only a month ago. If you think the deletion was in error, please make that argument at WP:DRV. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:10, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

But this page has more information. I dont have the patience to be discussing this ad nauseum so is there any chance you could just restore? Rovers Forever (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:14, 11 January 2011 (UTC).

You'd like the "pedant" to restore it? Jayjg ^(talk) 23:46, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not bothered who restores it. I'll resubmit it again if necessary. Sheppard is a professional footbaler. So again is it your goal to delete all LOI players? Rovers Forever (talk) 16:21, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Jennifer Connelly

I've added an other source now, like I told you, the information is sourced and wasn't added by me, I only reverted the person who removed it, since for some reason, the claim dissapeared from the source. The source had a date, though, and you could've looked in the archives. Now I've put a recent source of this claim, and I think this source is pretty reliable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.92.187.100 (talk) 20:42, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

You're still using unreliable sources, and making claims not found in the sources. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:10, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I honestly think you are wrong and did not read the source with attention. Actually, the source I puted in the article after was : http://www.starlounge.com/tags/Jennifer_Connelly . First, this source seems pretty reliable to me, if it's not, please tell me why instead of blocking me. (I think we could qualify this block as an abuse and a lack of patience) Second, did you say that I make claims that can not be found in the source? If you read it properly, you could've seen at the beggining of the 3rd paragraph : "In an interview with the Daily Mirror last year, Connelly – who suffers from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder – spoke of the important changes that parenthood has made to her life.". The claim is present and the source is reliable. And by the way, if it's not enough, it has also been a MSN news. http://celebrity.za.msn.com/index.cfm?objectid=101913

So, I think that the claim should stay in the article, now that it has been sourced again (like I told you before, it was already sourced; I did not add this information, I only reacted to the person who removed it because it used to be sourced). If I'm mistaken, could you please next time answer me here with calm and respect instead of blocking me? Thank you.

someonepc1

WP:BLP is quite clear; if material is poorly sourced, it stays out. When you re-added the material you became responsible for it. Also, you continued to add claims that were not found even in the new sources. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:50, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

How to title an article

In order to address the argument that without specific naming conventions article titling would be chaotic and unpredictable, I've attempted to describe the process of determining a title that clearly shows that usually specific naming conventions are not needed. I'm asking a few select individuals to look at it before I open it for general review at WT:TITLE.

If you could take a few minutes to review it and let me know what you think, I would really appreciate it. Do you think we could incorporate this or something like it into WP:TITLE? Thanks. Here is the link: User:Born2cycle/how2title. Please leave your comments on the talk page of that subpage, User talk:Born2cycle/how2title. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

That seems very mechanistic; I think it's very unlikely people would want to include this algorithm in a guideline. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:41, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Good point, but I was hoping it would at least serve to illustrate how most titles could be deterministically determined if certain principles and priorities are followed. More determinism means less arguing and more stability... a good thing. --Born2cycle (talk) 04:36, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Nailed it

You nailed it here and so made it on my favorite quotations... --Born2cycle (talk) 05:47, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

After posting this I took a look at your user page and saw that not only are you an admin but that you've also been on the arbitration committee. I was wondering if you could give me some advice on what to do about the situation at WT:NCGN. There is more support to keep the current United States comma convention wording the way it is than there is support for removing the requirement for unnecessary disambiguation contrary to WP:TITLE/WP:PRECISION, but it does not look like a consensus. However, those who support the convention are of course protective of the status quo and not motivated to work on compromise wording that has consensus support. We've done an RFC and a survey (well, they're in progress, but it looks like a stalemate). Moderation has been suggested but the status quo supporters are not interested. Do you think a good case could be made for ArbCom? Is this something they would be likely to address? Can you/would you help? Thanks. --Born2cycle (talk) 05:56, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment. I don't think it's likely Arbcom would address this; where exactly is the disruptive behavior? Jayjg ^(talk) 03:38, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Does ArbCom only look at cases in which disruptive behavior is involved? --Born2cycle (talk) 04:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

In theory Arbcom is not supposed to rule on content, only behavior. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:25, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Mentoring?

I saw you just came off a subject area ban, but I was wondering if you may be interested in mentoring me without getting into editing as such. I can do with more experience in Wikipedianship than anything else Koakhtzvigad (talk) 12:16, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Koakhtzvigad. Did you have something specific in mind? Was there an issue that you want to address? Jayjg ^(talk) 23:04, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I may have changed my mind after last night's editing Israel and the apartheid analogy‎ (please don't get involved). I thought I needed help, but in fat I now realise that its Wikipedia that needs help. Sorry to have bothered you. Best wishes Koakhtzvigad (talk) 02:41, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Maybe I need a hand after all if you don't mind.

The very first reference used in the Palestine article does not support what it says in the article. How do I tag it?Koakhtzvigad (talk) 06:37, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Is the problem that it is an unreliable source, or that the material cited to it isn't found in the source? If the latter, you can use {{Failed verification}} beside the material. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:43, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I didn't have the intention to get into Arab-Israeli subject are editing, but now I am. I find that almost every article I look at the references are fudged, i.e. they ere ether not saying what they are supposed to say to confirm article text, or they are coming from less-than adequate sources, or they are plain wrong in themselves. Koakhtzvigad (talk) 08:08, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I am not at all surprised. One of the worst problems on those articles is the liberal use of sources that are not adequately reliable for the claims made for them. For example, people will support highly contentious claims based on the writings of activists, or use general purpose media sources as "definitive" opinions on broad and complex legal claims, using Wikipedia's voice to state these views a fact (a direct contravention of WP:NPOV). Jayjg ^(talk) 00:33, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Beth Israel Congregation (Washington, Pennsylvania)

On 15 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Beth Israel Congregation (Washington, Pennsylvania), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the first rabbi of Beth Israel Congregation of Washington, Pennsylvania served for 50 years? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the update Mr. DYK project. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Notable author?

I see that we disagree about the notability of John Gorenfeld. You are welcome to write an article on him. Borock (talk) 02:37, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, perhaps, though I generally avoid writing biographies of living people. Please feel free to raise this issue on the article talk page, I'm sure we can work out some compromise. Jayjg ^(talk) 07:49, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Borock (talk) 08:42, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

odd RM decision

Is it just me, or does this decision seem unfounded to you too? Talk:Carmel-by-the-Sea, California#Move_Request. Thanks, Born2cycle (talk) 05:33, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but it's a symptom of an issue that would be better solved in a systemic way. Jayjg ^(talk) 07:49, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Bonsoir - Good evening -ערב טוב

Shalom Jayjg, I noticed yours excellents articles on several synagogues. I work on a page on Reconstructionist Synagogue of Montreal, in Montreal, Canada. Can you could be read this page User:Genevieve2/sandbox07 , give me your opinion and advices to improve my work. thank you - merci - תודה --Geneviève (talk) 00:23, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I'd be happy to look. Would you like me to edit it, or just comment on it? Jayjg ^(talk) 03:23, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. You can edit, put comments. Because it is only a draft for making a page on this Synagogue. It misses the photos. I am going to take photos of the arch, the stained glasses, the door... Merci beaucoup, thank you ,תודה --Geneviève (talk) 10:14, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, will do so in the next few days. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:25, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

All right, I've started on it, and done a fair bit of work in the first few paragraphs, but there's a lot to do still. I've also moved it, including its history, to User:Genevieve2/Dorshei Emet. When you're ready, we can move it into the mainspace from there. Please don't move it yet though, I want to spend a few more days on it first. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Shalom Jayig I thank you so much for all your work. I know that you are a person experimented. Your work is going to improve the presentation of this page. I am enchanted with your changes and corrections. Merci beaucoup de votre travail. תודה רבה מהעבודה שלך --Geneviève (talk) 02:16, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, it's an interesting topic and a good start, a few more days and it should be ready for mainspace. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:26, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Shalom I have a very sad new: The synagogue Dorshei Emet, has be vandalism in exterior sunday january 17 2011. Also two Orthodoxe Synagogues and a jewish school were vandalized : reference

--Geneviève (talk) 11:46, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy 10th

File:Verre de whisky.jpg

Happy 10th anniversary of Wikipedia!

Hey Bzuk (contribs) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

What goes around, comes around. Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{subst:User:HJ Mitchell/WikiScotch}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Bzuk (talk) 14:54, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, same to you! :-) Jayjg ^(talk) 00:34, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Happy 10th dear Jayjg תודה רבה --Geneviève (talk) 02:36, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you, I'm happy to help. :-) Jayjg ^(talk) 01:20, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Can you look into this?

Jayjg, I just found this hit piece directed against me in which you are also mentioned. This needs to stop. I will be away from active editing for a week or two recovering from a medical setback. I hope this matter can be cleared up before I return. Cheers. Ovadyah (talk) 23:25, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

I'll ask John Carter if he would mind removing it for now. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:56, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

I am frankly astounded by what seems to me the obvious hypocrisy of Ovadyah criticizing my beginning to keep such information, when he has been keeping a similar page directed at me, despire my similar objections, for some time now. Right now, using the machine I am using, I am less able to copy the links into the section, but, if there is no action on the mediation front, I do intend to file a COIN based on the information I have found which I believe relevant. Unfortunately, the computer here at work doesn't allow me to copy in the links to the material I will be referencing, and my own computer is down, but I do intend to file a COIN based on the information I have found if it seems mediation does not begin soon. Of course, it is interesting that Ovadyah has a medical setback right around the same time Michael has the flu as an excuse for his actions, something else that they seem to reflect each other on, but I do believe that, probably by the end of next week, the evidence for a COIN section will be in place. John Carter (talk) 15:53, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

John, what similar page directed at you has Ovadyah been keeping? Jayjg ^(talk) 04:05, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Ovadyah/Archive 2#User conduct RFC, which has existed for some time now, and to which he has been adding for a substantial amount of time. Please note, in contrast, that the material regarding Ovadyah was only added by me to the page he criticized in the last few edits, shortly before, in fact, he filed his complaint here. Of course the insinuation that it has existed for some time in his statement, of course, cannot be supported by any evidence. In fact, it was only my thinking the mediation would be even longer to reach conclusion that I first decided to consider a COIN. John Carter (talk) 23:07, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

That does appear to be a long-term on-going user conduct page, rather than a legitimate archive. I'll bring it to his attention. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:36, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Jayjg, I have responded to your request on my talk page. Cheers. Ovadyah (talk) 04:53, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

John Carter, why do you find my 'flu espisode "interesting"? Please quit with the veiled insinuations and be explicit - we would like to hear your reasoning. -- cheers, Michael C. Price ^talk 10:07, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Like I said above, Michael, I intend to file the COIN in a few days, circumstances permitting. You will know then. And I think we would all like to know how it is that you and Ovadyah have decided that the two of you are in a position to say that WP:FRINGE doesn't apply to the article, as you have both indicated on the mediation talk page. I think everybody would be interested to know why the two of you believe that your opinion, which so far as I remember has received no other support on the talk page, is so important that it overrides guidelines. John Carter (talk) 23:07, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I see John Carter is begging the question as usual. BTW I would like to see how John Carter's attempt to recruit Ovadyah into a tag-team with the explicit purpose of getting me perma-banned is compatible with his admin status. -- cheers, Michael C. Price ^talk 06:38, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I have given John Carter a second talk page warning regarding his user conduct here. Ovadyah (talk) 05:39, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

And such a fascinating warning it is. First, he did so despite my repeated requests that he cease posting on that page. Then he makes insinuations that I am in any way intending to out him as per WP:OUT. Actually, my complaint is going to be based exclusively on his edits and comments here, and I don't think I ever implied anything different. And, of course, the legal threat he makes if I do file a COI against him is itself at least potentially very problematic. I have to say that I am finding Ovadyah's edits, including similar completely unsupported jumps to conclusions regarding my adding the "weasel words" template to the Ebionite article, increasingly irrational, incendiary, and counterproductive. The implicit legal threat should his actions be criticized is though probably the most significant item. And, FWIW, given the fact that I had some involvement in the local MLK day celebration on Monday, and a few weather problems locally, I haven't yet gotten together all the diffs and other evidence for the COI filing. I believe that they should be able to proceed by Monday at the latest though. John Carter (talk) 16:51, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

It is appropriate and necessary to place user conduct warnings on a violator's talk page prior to a user conduct RfC. And I am not making legal threats against anybody. I am insisting that you stop spreading lies about me all over Wikipedia. Now that I have explicitly informed you that your statements about me are untrue, there can be no more excuses for your inappropriate behavior. I'll see you in COI where I intend to present my own counter-evidence. Ovadyah (talk) 22:10, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Jewish refugees

Hi Jay,

would you mind taking a look at this revert [3]? I'm not sure if the line in the lede is best as I had it, or something in between, but I would be interested in your comments. Jd2718 (talk) 06:05, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

The whole paragraph is problematic (in either version), as the lead should summarize the contents of the article, and I see nothing in the article about it. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:17, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Tha whole article is problematic, and needs to be rewritten.--Galassi (talk) 03:42, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletion completely to ref. of Shlomo Sand - edit war

Hi Jayyig. Thanks for your notification regrading editing wars. I'm relatively new to this. I made a bit of a hash of my entry yesterday due to incorrectly inserting 'end code' for references and due to not not using the 'preview' option. Thus My triple edits in one 24 hour period. I explain all this in order to avoid being blocked and to ask for leniency. I've got the hang of it now. I have also started a discussion with the other editor with whom the disagreement exists, which you can see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Thirteenth_Tribe#Deletion_completely_to_ref._of__Shlomo_Sand.3F — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mystichumwipe (talk • contribs) 08:05, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

That's a good idea. It's probably a good idea to find out why the other editors object to this material; they're both administrators and very experienced, so they probably have a good explanation. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:08, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

No replies nor explanations forthcoming so far, yet regretably undos are still being made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mystichumwipe (talk • contribs) 07:38, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I see a number of replies and explanations, and the "undos" aren't just "being made", you're actively reverting. Please discuss rather than reverting. Jayjg ^(talk) 07:44, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jayyig. Er... I'm actively reverting!? :-o Hmmm. OK. Yeah. Sure, but... I thought I made a contribution. Which was undone without any discussion, just a short 'edit description' saying didn't fit the title 'genetics'. I moved it under the heading 'controversy' and attempted to start a discussion. No response, but another undo/deletion with short edit description. I undo that 'undo' and try to get a discussion, and on and on we go. I then modified my addition to attempt to reach consensus and explained why. But still no discussion of MY points. Which are not new but have been raised before by others before me. I've received one reply to my first two posts on the discussion board which I didn't feel dealt with my issues (and I expressed that). I answered that 'reply' point-by-point but have had no response to that. Apart from one other message (a question of whether an edit was intentional) I've now received your reply today (after we began discussing here) that raises a new objection to my addition but does not address ANY of my points. It also demonstrates to my mind a possible inconsistent application of wiki 'neutrality' policy, (which I have detailed elsewhere) So... I make that two replies, the last very brief. Sooooo, sorry to be contrary but that hardly seems to me a "number of replies" and hardly a discussion :-(Mystichumwipe (talk) 22:38, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Sarona Reiher

Jayjg, my purpose is not to make a featured article, and it need not be. Your concerns are reasonable, and are reasons to apply cleanup templates to the article, but they are not reasons to prevent the creation of the article, and they are particularly neither justification for impermissibly obstructing my submission to AfC, nor for your failure to assume good faith. If you believe the article should be deleted, nominate it for deletion, we'll have a discussion, and I'll accept the properly-decided result. If you believe there is a copyright problem, tag it for a copyright problems discussion. But userfying a page to me without my consent is not an option available to you: it's an out-of process deletion. The article is not a copy of the article discussed in 2008, and is improved from the 2008 article; as such, it is not eligible for G4 speedy deletion. --Bsherr (talk) 22:32, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

You've misunderstood; nothing has apparently changed regarding the article since it was first deleted at AfD, and you don't just restore and "tag" BLP issues, you delete them immediately. Adding unsourced or poorly sourced material to an article doesn't improve it in any way, nor do your <20 minutes of minor copyedting. I feel I am quite justified in stating that you have abused my good faith here. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:55, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

The synagogue project

Shalom Jayjg, for Congregation Dorshei Emet's page, today I took 4 photos of synagogue. Choose the best for you. This evening, I read the new text and I changed a little the text. Also I see on your Synagogue project, Beth Israel Congregation (Kingston, Ontario) in Canada, maybe this text help you for more informations: Kingston: First Minyan and Synagogue , and Beth Israel merci , thanks, תודה --Geneviève (talk) 02:48, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Jayjg ^(talk) 05:08, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Another

Emailed you. Dougweller (talk) 17:03, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

new editor assistance request

Hi jayjg, please be aware that there is now a new Editor Assistance request open regarding the redirect of Hebrew Christian. Zad68 (talk) 23:22, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

A special Thanking

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

For your work and for your collaboration to write the page Congregation Dorshei Emet , friendship and respect --Geneviève (talk) 01:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! I've submitted it to WP:DYK now too, so with any luck it should be on the Main Page in a week or two. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:11, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Kutch Gurjar Kashtriya contributions to Indian railways

Hi

To be honest I cannot believe that you said it was unsourced and was OR - it had a bibliography of a number of books which were used as sources. Also you said that my comments didn't relate to policy? My whole point was that it was sourced but merely lacked the inline tags which needed specific page numbers - How is that not related to policy ?

Can you please userify it for me to User:Chaosdruid/sandbox1

thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 02:46, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

What do you plan to do with the article? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

To set the background - I removed the material from another article as it was clearly too long and off topic and created a new page for it.

Discussions followed about the action I had taken and what should be done Talk:Kutch_Gurjar_Kashtriya, User_talk:Jethwarp#Kutch_Gurjar_Kashtriya_contributions_to_Indian_railways and User_talk:Hardyraj

After further discussion I think I had made the main editors understand that sourcing is the most important part of an article and that Jethwarp, who has the majority of the books in question, would be sourcing the page numbers upon his return from hospital.

So what I propose is to continue with the sourcing on a "minimum of one ref per para" and removing extraneous material until the article is up to scratch, or failing that reducing it to a much smaller article to include only that which can be sourced from english only sources.

If you would like to see a previous example of my work on deleted articles -> accepted I can provide you with one or two if you like :¬)

Chaosdruid (talk) 03:34, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I've restored it to User:Chaosdruid/Kutch Gurjar Kashtriya contributions to Indian railways. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:16, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks - I'll no wiki it and try and get the mess sorted out :¬) (nb) Does simply hiding the Cats do the same as No Wiki? Chaosdruid (talk) 06:23, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, commenting them out does the same as nowiki. Jayjg ^(talk) 15:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Article Re-Creation

Hi Jayg,

I think that an article I contributed to was deleted again because it did not go through the proper voting process for re-creation. I would be very grateful if you could guide me towards the proper channels to initiate a request/voting process for a previously deleted article to be re-created!

Thanks so much, Indiey 93.1.140.78 (talk) 23:26, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Indiey (talk • contribs) 18:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

To which article are you referring? Jayjg ^(talk) 01:11, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Woops, sorry for not clarifying. I was involved in the creation of the Jeremy Soul article. It had been deleted previously (in 2009 I think) but this time to my knowledge, it had all the proper sources and citations.

Thanks in advance for the help! indieyIndiey (talk) 16:01, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

You can always take the article to WP:DRV. The instructions are on that page. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:45, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jay,

It says I should talk to the deleting admin first, and on the article page, it says the reason it was deleted once again is given in a prior discussion (which I read). The previously deleted article may have had grounds for being removed, but what was the reason for the deletion of this completely new, re-written one? I ask because I was involved in its creation and know that special care was taken to have enough notability, sources etc. as well as format and everything.

If there's any changes you'd like me to put into the article, I can do that in a jiffy as well - do you think we could just solve the problem here instead of it having to go through a deletion review?

Thanks again, indiey Indiey (talk) 20:08, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, this is the only new, reliable source that discusses him in any way. Do you have any links to other sources that would overcome the issues raised a WP:DRV? Jayjg ^(talk) 20:15, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on January 29, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 29, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 05:49, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Temple Israel is a Reform Jewish congregation in Memphis, Tennessee. It is the only Reform synagogue in Memphis, the oldest and largest Jewish congregation in Tennessee, and one of the largest Reform congregations in the United States. It was founded in 1853 by mostly German Jews as Congregation B'nai Israel. Led initially by cantors, in 1858 it hired its first rabbi, Jacob Peres, and leased its first building, which it renovated and eventually purchased. The synagogue was one of the founding members of the Union for Reform Judaism. The synagogue experienced difficulty during the Great Depression—membership dropped, the congregational school was closed, and staff had their salaries reduced—but conditions had improved by the late 1930s. In 1943 the synagogue changed its name to Temple Israel, and by the late 1940s membership had almost doubled from its low point in the 1930s. Ettelson retired in 1954, and was succeeded by Jimmy Wax. Wax became known for his activism during the Civil Rights era. In 1976 the congregation constructed its current building, closer to where most members lived. Wax retired in 1978, and was succeeded by Harry Danziger, who brought traditional practices back to the congregation. He retired in 2000, and was succeeded by Micah Greenstein. As of 2010^[update], Temple Israel has almost 1,600 member families. Greenstein is the senior rabbi, and the cantor is John Kaplan. (more...)

Thank you for letting me know! Jayjg ^(talk) 18:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Congregation Dorshei Emet

On 28 January 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Congregation Dorshei Emet, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Congregation Dorshei Emet is the first synagogue in Canada and the third in the world to receive a Torah scroll handwritten by a woman? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:04, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Jayjg ^(talk) 19:15, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Herzl Diary

You are quick. I just went to walk the dog in between editing--he won't take wait for an answer. Whereas I agree with the importance of no original research based on primary sources, I do think that there are times when a reference to a primary source might be called for. This is probably true particularly for diaries, memoires,and reports etc. For me the main reason for removing the section Earliest Use was that it is irrelevant to the article. When I first saw it my reaction was to revert immediately. However after wondering if I would be accused of suppressing information, I planned to check the reference to see about my next step. You beat me to it (I was on a long trip and was waiting for a reply from an expert on the issue.) I concluded to modify it an leave the reference since there was no explicit attempt to link it to Himmler and Göering which would have been the usual obscene anti-semitism, and that anyone reading it could see for themselves what Herzl meant when he used the term. Anyway, I am happy with where we are. Keep up the good work.Joel Mc (talk) 22:33, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK!

Hi Jayjg! I noticed you hit the 25 DYK milestone. Congratulations. Here's a medal :D

		The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
		I, Ynhockey, hereby award you with the 25-DYK medal for... getting 25 DYKs! Your synagogue-related articles are as good as ever, so keep up the good work and don't forget to write about a synagogue in Israel once in a while ;)

Thank you! Jayjg ^(talk) 00:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Question about the derivation of Quq

Jay, I have a question about the derivation of the name Quq.

First some background information: I'm doing some research on the Quqeans, a supposedly Jewish-Christian group that seem more closely related to the Samaritans in their beliefs and practices. They resided near Edessa in the 2nd century CE. Ephraim the Syrian identifies their founder as Quq (a typical practice of identifying every heresy with a founder by that name) and belittles the name as meaning "cup" in Syriac. That made me wonder if Quq is a transliteration for a word in Hebrew. I did some more research and realized there is a Kfar Quq in the Bekaa Valley of Lebanon in what used to be the northern-most region of Bashan.

Now for the question: Do you think there is any relation between Quq and the Hebrew Koch or between Kfar Quq and Kokhaba? Do both names essentially mean "Starville"? Ovadyah (talk) 00:20, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Ovadyah, my opinions don't really matter here; if I were you I'd just look for reliable secondary sources discussing the matter. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to take up your time. I was hoping you could point me to a source or another editor that might know of one. Thanks anyway. Ovadyah (talk) 04:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Jeremy Soul at DRV

Just letting you know about this DRV, since you don't seem to have been notified yet. Cheers. lifebaka++ 00:47, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:07, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Congregation Dorshei Emet

Hi. We have a mutual friend in User:Genevieve2. I was very impressed that she earned her first Did You Know so quickly. It took me a year before I earned a DYK. She advised me that you helped her and I just wanted to congratulate you on all your hard work. Maple Leaf (talk) 16:58, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, she deserved it. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

3RR

Hey, I stepped in to help mediate this case. I'm not big on blocking people; after all, we're grownups, we can figure it out. Here's my opinion; input is appreciated. Cheers! m.o.p 02:42, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I've commented there. Jayjg ^(talk) 07:20, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Seljuq dynasty and User:95.14.213.95

This user[4] has continued to change referenced information and change quotes from references to reflect his/her POV. When warned, he/she responded with, "shut the fuck up and mind your own business like go edit mcdonalds or california gold rush topics idiot american".[5] Can you deal with this editor? Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:03, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

There seem to be several IPs involved, so I've semi-protected for a week, in the hopes that they'll try to work this out on the article Talk: page. Jayjg ^(talk) 07:19, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Gas van

You blocked 81.178.168.129 a while ago. This is the same one .Slight Smile 21:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for keeping an eye out on the Jews and the slave trade article. Your edits are most welcome. --GHcool (talk) 00:34, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for doing the same, your edits are also most welcome. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:41, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Ghetto Litzmannstadt#Requested move

Hi. Please elaborate on whether you support Łódź Ghetto or Lodz Ghetto. Thanks, --brew crewer (yada, yada) 19:31, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Help with copy editing

Hi Jayjg, may I please ask you to copy-edit this article? Thank you for your time.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:26, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

It was done already. Cheers.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:17, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't edit for a little while. I've made a few small copyedits to it. Congratulations on the new article! Jayjg ^(talk) 02:27, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

If you get a chance, can you check out the reference format? I tried to change it but I think I made a mistake somewhere: if you click on the "Alwishah & Sanson 2009" reference it doesn't go to the Bibliography entry for some reason. Qrsdogg (talk) 04:44, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

I've fixed them. In general I recommend avoiding the templates; they're a complex language that makes referencing much harder than it needs to be - witness your own difficulties trying to make them work. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:05, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks for the help and advice. Qrsdogg (talk) 05:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

And thanks from me too.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:13, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Request for Opinion on Redirect/Renaming of (Fire)Bombing of Tokyo

I would be interested in your opinion in these matters if you cared to look into them or if you have background which you might bring to bear.

Tokyo was firebombed, not simply bombed, which is to say that it was bombed with the prior knowledge that the bombs would ignite buildings - civilian buildings - which were not directly in the blast zone per se. I am currently conducting an interview series with an eighty year old survivor of that bombing and in the course of background research noted that wikipedia has a series of articles entitled "The Bombing of xxxxxx". There is an article on the Bombing of Tokyo. IMHO, based on my current understanding of the underlying history, it may be preferable that a redirect exist between the two entries

Firebombing of Tokyo

and

Bombing of Tokyo

at risk of collaborating in something suggestive of coverup or denial or historical revisionism.

Secondly IMHO the main article should be the shorter title with the caveat that many if not most of the bombings, excluding Hiroshima and Nagasaki, were firebombings, but that they are covered in the Bombing-of article solely to avoid the necessity of debating which bombings were and were not "firebombings." This caveat could appear as a footnote, a subordinated section, a side bar of some kind, or even on the talk page.

My concern is that the status quo on wikipedia erases from history the salient fact that Tokyo was firebombed, civilian homes burned in what was probably the most disastrous two days of bombing in world history, and that we attentuate the awareness of that fact in future generations if we do not at the very least create a page to that effect.

I maybe should submit this request to the history project as well, but I will solicit your feedback as well. Thank you for your kind consideration of this request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikidgood (talk • contribs) 03:05, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

What do reliable sources typically call it? WP:COMMONNAME is generally what is used to make these decisions. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:46, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Kaveh Farrokh

Hi, There is a BLP issue and an RFC in here about Kaveh Farrokh. Regards, *** in fact *** ( contact ) 07:39, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Buzzsaw (Transformers)

The article Buzzsaw (Transformers) was deleted by you for lacking reliable sources. I've been working on it on my userspace. User:Mathewignash/Buzzsaw (Transformers) Let me know what you think. Thanks! Mathewignash (talk) 01:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The youtube link definitely isn't reliable. Do you think http://www.bwtf.com/ , http://www.toplessrobot.com/ or http://www.mania.com/ are? If so, why? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:22, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I removed the youtube link. It must have been leftover from the original article. BWTF.com has been checked and has been found reliable, as it's the personal review site of Benson Yee, an industry expert who has been interviewed by newspapers been called an authority on DVD commentaries. If Benson Yee talks about toys, it's like a professional film critic talking about a film. Mania.com was checked on the reliable source noticeboard and I was told it was reliable. toplessrobots.com is run by by a paid editor, and is owned byVillage Voice Media. Mathewignash (talk) 20:47, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you show me the RS/N discussions in which bwtf.com and mania.com were found to be reliable? Also, who is the paid editor who runs toplessrobots.com, and what is the editorial oversight? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:14, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Mania.com - Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_88#mania.com_a_reliable_third_party_source_for_reviews.2Fcommentary.3F Topless Robots - Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Topless_Robots_site_a_reliable_source.3F I can't find the talk we had on Benson Yee, but I can link you to several articles where he was used as a source for Transformers info, and he was on the DVD commentary for the Beast Machines TV series, where he was called an authority on the subject by the DVD box. http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-166084754.html http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1A2-6a2b77bb-d43e-4e6f-93e1-581afffcfb0d.html http://www.thetransformers.net/category/transformers-news/madman-entertainment/page/2 Mathewignash (talk) 08:40, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

There's an unanswered question at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_88#mania.com_a_reliable_third_party_source_for_reviews.2Fcommentary.3F and Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Topless_Robots_site_a_reliable_source.3F isn't finished as a discussion. Why don't you take bwtf.com to RS/N too? Jayjg ^(talk) 00:46, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I didn't see the unanswered answer for Mania.com until after the talk was archived. Can i answer a question on an archive page? I will take BWTF.com to the RS/N. Mathewignash (talk) 19:34, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Don't answer an archive - why don't you also create a new RS/N thread about mania.com, and clear this all up? Jayjg ^(talk) 17:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dreamscape (2007 film)

While I do appreciate the close, and do not expect it to be returned to AFD or be taken to DRV... do you really think "no consensus" was the right close? No matter the strength of the two delete arguments, they were both speaking toward the original version and not the improved version... and as the six keep votes were ones toward the improved version, would uou not think a straight and simple "result was keep of improved version" would have been more accurate? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 08:06, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I looked at that new sources, and they didn't seem amazingly strong. I also had to weigh the quality of the changes made against the arguments made in their favor. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:32, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Reasonable enough... as even if notability is minimal, it's still better than no notability at all (chuckle). A non-consensus keep is still a keep. Thanks much for clarifying. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Source reliability

Hi Jayjg. I noticed that you are an administrator and often post on RS/N, so I was wondering if you could perhaps help clarify an issue involving one particular source that an editor I’m presently having a discussion with believes to be unreliable. The matter involves the Al-Shabaab group of Islamist militants that the UN reported some time ago as being linked to one man named Mohamed Said Atom (who is on both UN & US security watchlists and variously described as a "warlord" or "terrorist"). Recent reports from the International Strategic Studies Association have linked Al-Shabaab with the administration of the secessionist Somaliland region in northwestern Somalia, and the neighboring autonomous Puntland region has also formally accused the Somaliland authorities of providing Atom with a safe haven in their region.

The present wiki content dispute involves a separate special report prepared by the Garowe Online news organization that also suggests that Atom and his militiamen are hiding out in the Somaliland region. Note that it does not claim as Puntland does that the Somaliland authorities themselves have actively provided a safe haven to the man and his followers, but only that they fled to the region. The other editor I am discussing this issue with, however, insists that Garowe Online is not a reliable source even for this relatively benign statement do to the fact that the paper is based in the Puntland region. I have tried explaining to him that it is an independent news organization with a reliable publication record (even the UN references it [6]), and that the Somaliland region itself is the only territory in Somalia that does not allow independent press ([7]). The paper also regularly publishes op-ed pieces from supporters of Somaliland's secession (e.g. [8]), so it cannot be accused of bias.

Given the forgoing and your experience in these matters, I would therefore like to know whether or not the Garowe Online special report in question qualifies as a reliable source and is thus usable for Wikipedia’s purposes.

Thank you for your time and consideration. Best regards, Middayexpress (talk) 21:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

If it's not asking too much, could you also help clarify whether or not material from the International Strategic Studies Association would be considered reliable for Wikipedia’s purposes? Specifically, these two papers ([9], [10]) that were republished on the oilprice website, among others? The editor is now questioning the reliability of the organization's publications (although ironically he himself first added a reference from one of those papers to the article). Best, Middayexpress (talk) 20:14, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Middayexpress. Are these sources you have already brought to RS/N, or did you want to discuss them before bringing them there? Jayjg ^(talk) 21:41, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me. I elected at the last minute not to bring the material to RS/N because of the nature of the dispute. There are several accounts on Wikipedia that are quite ardent supporters of the Somaliland region's secession, and they have demonstrated an uncanny ability to show up en masse wherever issues surrounding the territory are being publicly discussed. I wanted to avoid the filibustering that would invariably ensue by posting directly to one of the RS/N administrators' talk pages. I apologize if I have come at a bad time, but I figured you'd probably be able to offer a good answer to the questions. Best, Middayexpress (talk) 18:44, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Questions about a deleted page

Hello. I wish to create a page on the Italian physicist Lorenzo Iorio, active in the field of gravitational field. I noticed that you deleted it last year. I read carefully the discussion, and I am convinced that I can do a much better job than before, avoiding many of the errors made. Please, note that, likely, most of the previous controversy was because such a scientist seems to have a lingering conflict of interest with another one, active in the same field. This fact surely had an influence in the previous debate. Moreover, I looked at other scientists active nearly in the same field with a comparable scientific record, and I, actually, found them here in Wikipedia. Thus, it would be unjustified leaving them without having the possibility of including Iorio as well. Please, notice also that, according to the well known NASA ADS database, the h-index of L. Iorio is now 20, which is higher than that of some of the scientists listed here in Wikipedia. I made this remark since the h-index was an issue of some of the past opponents in the deletion discussion. Can I proceed? Thank you. Michoball (talk) 17:51, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

You seem very familiar with Wikipedia for a new editor. Are you related in any way to the person responsible for the sockpuppets listed here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Gravitom/Archive? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:17, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I am aware of that issue, I read that page, but I have nothing to do with it. As I explained to you, it is likely that all that stuff, absent in other pages of different scientists, was due to that controversy opposing those two Italian scientists. My idea is to make a new page close resembling, in the style and the architecture, some pages I've seen here on researchers working in related fields. Let's see what happens, ok?Michoball (talk) 08:05, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Jay - see my talk page for more on this. This user says you're ok with a recreation, which seems incorrect. I asked him to go to DRV. -- Y not? 00:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Jay. Actually, I did not say that you authorized me. Simply, I said that you did not tell me: "no, do not recreate it", but that you asked me if I was involved in that sockpuppetry issue. Anyway, the new administrator canceled my new page just for a copyright issue, not for other reasons. If you check the page I created, you see that it was certainly OK. Anyway, what is that issue of DRV? Michoball (talk) 00:49, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Looking over your recreated article, it doesn't appear to have addressed any of the issues raised in the AfD. This unfortunately appears to be the same kind of activity that went on at AfD itself. It's nice that Iorio has (a) loyal fan(s), but that doesn't make him meet the requirements of WP:PROF or WP:BIO. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:37, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Jay, I am sorry but you did not make the case. Could you, please, explain me why there are so many other pages dedicated to researchers in the same field here in Wikipedia which have less academic scores like, e.g., similar and/or smaller h-index and less public appearences? Why nobody never tried to remove them? These are facts, not speculations. Please, give me a substantial explanation, without hiding behind this or that more or less artificial Wiki clause. In any case, I want to appeal against your decision. Michoball (talk) 08:28, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for Lorenzo Iorio

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Lorenzo Iorio. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Michoball (talk) 09:09, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

On the Deletion Review of the page about Lorenzo Iorio

Ok, Jay. I've rewrote it as suggested by the other admins. Please, take a look and send me your comments. Thank you Michoball (talk) 21:10, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I've commented there; unfortunately, there are still significant issues with the article. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:06, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Who's who?

Hi Jayjg, I'm sure you remember me. We had correspondence a few months ago regarding supplying information and verifiable references regarding certain personalities' ethnicity, particularly their Jewishness. I think you were successful in frightening me in not doing anything more in this area, as I couldnt bring myself to delete all of the attributions of Jewish heritage from so many peoples biographies, as you told me so to do, where there was no reliable source. But now I have a question... I have seen information in articles which cites a reference for information to á book called "Who's Who". As it stands, I would reckon this a reliable source as it is a well-respected publication of biographies. The trouble is that the Who's Who website is one that requires a subscription and a password. So my question is - Does this site still constitute a certfiable source even if it is not GENERALLY available.Barmispain (talk) 21:17, 12 February 2011 (UTC) Barmispain

To be honest, I didn't remember you. Who's who publications vary quite widely in reliability; to which website are you referring? Jayjg ^(talk) 17:36, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello Jayjg, So you don't remember our corrspondence? No matter. Hope you don't mind me asking you a few questions and generally being a nudnik. Well, the Who's Who in question is the UK's version which should be fairly reliable. The problem is you have to subscribe to view it, so it's not generally available. That's the point. http://www.ukwhoswho.com/public/home.html?url=%2Fapp%3Fservice%3Dexternalpagemethod%26page%3DIndex%26method%3Dview%26&failReason= is the web address. The person in question is Luciana Berger, the UK Member of Parliament (Jewish, by the way!). So, the question to you remains - Does this site still constitute a certfiable source even if it is not GENERALLY available?Barmispain (talk) 18:07, 20 February 2011 (UTC) Barmispain.

The Reliable Sources Noticeboard says it can be used for non-contentious biographical statements. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:23, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Question

So, User:Wikidgood has created User:WikidIKibitzShield as a second account from which he is also editing from, and seems to be under the impression that if he causes problems with his second account and gets blocked that he will still be able to edit from his first account without consequences. Is this true? because if it is not true someone should probably warn him. Passionless -Talk 01:27, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

That's a really strange thing to do, and I don't even understand the user page. If an editor is blocked, it's the editor that's blocked, not the specific account. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Jay, I think you are both forgetting WP:GOODFAITH.

I am not under that kind of impression suggested by Passionless. I can understand why he might think that, and, having been himself blocked, might want to spare me the inconvenience, but I don't know why he might care very much one way or another, or why he asked you, rather than me, but I am not so sure anyone should care very much one way or another, nor should I care if you find it a really "strange" thing to do.

FYI I hope to aggregate all of my edits pertaining to Israel-Palestine so that I myself and Israel-Palestine specialists can review my edits in one location, without having to scroll through tons of unrelated edits. If there is a way that wiki software can do this by filtering please inform me. There are other reasons, but this is a holiday weekend and as you know users are not required to justify new accounts, only to disclose them, which I did do. Hint: I also thought it would be a nice touch to have a User Page with an appropriate theme. I suppose that makes me a bit idealistic, perhaps even childish, but a famous rabbi did once say "become like children to enter the Kingdom of Heaven". Shalom.Wikidgood (talk) 01:57, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

It's not a legitimate use of an alternate account. Also, I don't know why you'd bring up Jesus' sayings with me, much less refer to him as "a famous rabbi". "Rabbi" was a specific title that Jesus certainly did not hold, and Jesus disparaged it; see Matthew 23:7-8. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:11, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The Deputy

Jayjg,

I don't know if you want to take a look at Rychlak's 2010 book, Hitler, the War and the Pope, in your reworking of the article. The matter that you consider to be from a self published source (an assertion I do not grant) is found in that book. It is covered in an entire chapter beginning at p. 275. If not, I will edit accordingly after your edits. But it might be better if you have a shot at it first, hopefully to avoid any contentiousness. Cheers. Mamalujo (talk) 19:47, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Rychlak isn't a good source to use, for the reasons I've already outlined. He's a lawyer, devout Catholic, and adviser to the Holy See, writing a defense of a Pope, published by Our Sunday Visitor, a Catholic press. It's best to stick to more neutral and expert sources (e.g. historians) published by presses with a less overt agenda. He'd be a much better source for an article about law. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:16, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ayin (Kabbalah)

On 20 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ayin (Kabbalah), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that kabbalists believed that those who think of themselves as Ayin, a mystical symbol of Kabbalah, will ascend to a spiritual world where everything, including life and death, is equal? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:03, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I didn't realize I'd been included in that DYK. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:17, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Update

Hi Jayjg. So I finally took the issue over to RS/N as you recommended, and indeed the material was deemed reliable. However, the editor is now claiming that it is really an issue of relevance and length rather than reliability. An admin on the board suggested that he might be referring to WP:UNDUE issues, but I'm not certain if there's a board that covers this. What do you propose? Best, Middayexpress (talk) 23:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, at least he's not claiming it's unreliable any more, so that's one hurdle you've cleared. If you still can't come to an agreement about whether or not material is WP:UNDUE, you could always try WP:NPOV/N for additional opinions. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:13, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

It unfortunately doesn't appear as though we can come to an agreement. He seems pretty convinced that policy supports his edits (although he has never bothered quoting the exact passages that allegedly do). Looks like I'll have to take you up on your suggestion. Cheers, Middayexpress (talk) 21:02, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

new article

Hello, may I please ask you, when and if you have a time to copy-edit new article? If you have no time, that's OK. Eventually somebody would do it. Best.--Mbz1 (talk) 04:07, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

I can take a look, but it looks like it's at AfD now. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:30, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Interested?

I saw your work with synagogue articles and I don't know if you would be interested in making an article on Temple Beth Sholom that is in Chula Vista. Here is there website for more information, [11]. According to my knowledge it's the only synagogue in the city. It's ok if your not interested. Spongie555 (talk) 07:37, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for asking. Unfortunately, real-life has kept me very busy recently, and I haven't had much time to do more than minor editing on Wikipedia. I have a couple of other commitments I'd like to get to first, particularly an article on a mosque I'd like to help get to FA. However, I will keep it in mind. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:36, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

שלום ,Bonjour

Hello dear Jayjg, I hope that you are well and that your health is good. I have just ended a new page on Pauline Bebe , the first woman ordained rabbi in France. How made one to ask for one DYK (Did you know ?). I does not indeed understand the explanations in English language given in the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know. Thanks for your help. Merci de votre aide et de vos conseils. I wish you a good Shabbat for you and your family. Shabbat Shalom, --Geneviève (talk) 10:58, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I did some copy edits on Pauline Bebe, and would appreciate it if you would back me up and make sure that I got it right. Particularly the lead paragraph. Happy weekend. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:01, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Shalom, maybe Pauline Bebe is a good DYK for International Women's Day (March 8 2011) ? --Geneviève (talk) 02:28, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Geneviève. Thanks for writing this article. I've done some copyediting on it, and submitted it to DYK in your name. You should try to improve some of the sourcing if you can, particularly the material that relies on blogs. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:02, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, and I've requested that it appear on March 8. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:21, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Merci, תודה --Geneviève (talk) 11:36, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I was happy to. Regarding the sourcing, you should in particular replace all the citations to Sonia Sarah Lipsyc's blog. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:51, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Replace all the citations to Sonia Sarah Lipsyc's blog ??? why ??? Thanks though I disagree with your opinion. I believe Sonia Sarah Lipsyc is credible serieus person in Jewish community of Montreal. She is director of Aleph CSUQ . Thanks , merci --Geneviève (talk) 21:05, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

You should replace them because WP:BLPSPS forbids using them. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:04, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Thankyou, I never would have thought of that. If two references of Sonia Sarah Lipsyc's blog are forbidden on English Wikipedia (what is very different from the French wikipedia --see the article in French language http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Bebe ) then my decision is removed the article for DYK. Thankyou, that seems to be all. --Geneviève (talk) 22:24, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Why remove it from DYK? I'm sure other sources have equally good material. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:32, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Shalom Jayjg, we will talk again later. Thanks, let's leave it up to other editors now. --Geneviève (talk) 22:45, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Page numbers in citations

In your reversion of an edit on Cape Coloureds you make the assertion that page numbers are 'required.' This is not so; Wikipedia policy lists page numbers as 'typically included' and 'when appropriate.'

By the way, I have no problem with your reversion as such. I don't have a dog in that particular fight. pietopper (talk) 15:21, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Request for input to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests#Ebionites_2

A request for arbitration on the Ebionites article has recently been filed. Please feel free to add any comments you believe appropriate. Ovadyah (talk) 18:06, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Stormfront

I would find it interesting if you blocked me since I could then seek removal of your tools as you are an involved editor. Sicne you are smart enough to not do such a thing, please comment on how you think we should address the POV check tag. It has not been checked for POV but it should be. Maybe I am wrong and it is neutral but so far we have IPs and random editors saying it is POV and only a couple saying it isn't. Those agreeing with you are longer serving so they stick around more. Maybe that says something. I'm not sure but I still think more eyes are needed. That is what is good about the POV CHECK tag. Of course, I could open an RFC or you could reword it to not be a WP:LABEL. Thoughts?Cptnono (talk) 07:39, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

What an odd way to start your comment. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:28, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Articles on Harry Halpern, and East Midwood Jewish Section

Shavua Tov,Jayjg! I've been an admirer of your wikipedia efforts for some time! I wanted you to know that I just replaced the "redirect" page with a full page for Harry Halpern, which I hope you'll like. It's a work in progress like all pages, of course, but I think it's a good start. I also added two old photos (ground breaking and cornerstone laying) to the page for the EMJC, and emailed the synagogue to alert its leaders that copyright permission is required -- which I'm hoping will be no problem. (The photos are from the emjc.org website.) I also did a slight bit of rearranging of the text on the page -- incorporating some info into the history section and some into a new leadership section. Hope you think the improvements look good. Best wishes - NearTheZoo (talk) 00:25, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much for you kind comments, and that's a good article you've written! Have you considered nominating it for a DYK? If not, or if you don't know how, I can do that for you. Also, thanks for reminding me about the article itself - I've needed to beef up the lede, and finish the architecture section, for some time now, so I'll work on that over the next few days. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:24, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Jayjg, Thank YOU for the good words about the new article! It was a labor of love, because Rabbi Halpern seems like the right combination of passion and civility: fighting for what he believes in, but with respect, whenever possible. (An almost-lost art today, unfortunately.) I have never nominated an article for DYK, so if you could do it, I would appreciate it - and I'll learn from how you do it. I also see how the EMJC article has already improved--and look forward to seeing what else you'll do with it. Many thanks! NearTheZoo (talk) 02:30, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I've nominated the article for DYK - good luck! Jayjg ^(talk) 02:52, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks, Jayjg! NearTheZoo (talk) 02:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Iranium

Jayjg, Wrote you a note about East Midwood Jewish Center and Harry Halpern, above - and I see you've been improving the EMJC article. Thanks! Now I want to ask a question about Iranium. I don't know if you want to get involved, but if you take a look at the revision history, you'll see that reverts are being reverted and then reverted again - and civility is a lost cause, with each person making a revision accusing the others of being terrorists or bigots. I don't know if there is a way to freeze or protect the page for awhile -- while editors are reminded about civility, and tempers cool. The conduct there seems to be the antithesis of what I would hope to find on wikipedia. NearTheZoo (talk) 02:21, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I've semi-protected the article for a week, in the hopes that some fruitful discussion will take the place of edit-warring. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:52, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!! If ever editors needed a time-out (not to mention some adult supervision) this group does. Every edit seems to include an attack. I very much appreciate your help! NearTheZoo (talk) 02:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Copy edit?

Hi, do you have a time to help me with copy-editing of this article Monty the meerkat. It's of course OK, if you do not. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:00, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Another interesting article! I'll try to do some copy-editing tomorrow. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:36, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

recreated "Jeremy Soul" article

hi, I just created this article and noticed it had been previously created (by someone else) and deleted. The discussion cites insufficient independent references. Hopefully I've included enough in my article to justify keeping it. thanks! Gil carv (talk) 00:46, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Unfortunately, your article didn't overcome the issues raised at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Soul. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:20, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

ok. I included several independent references about the subject of the article, I thought this was the critical issue (?). If I increase the number of references (which I can easily do), will it be satisfactory then? thanks! Gil carv (talk) 05:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC) just wanted to add that, unlike the previous article, ALL my references are in English and heavily reference the subject (in fact most are articles ABOUT him or his work). it is likely that most of these references were not available when the first article was written, so surely this version is much more reliable/relevant? anyway, I welcome any suggestions on how to make it kosher. thanks. Gil carv (talk) 06:01, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

No, it didn't solve the issues with the previous article. By the way, are you related to User:Bossanueva? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:27, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

And, unsurprisingly, the answer is yes. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bossanueva Jayjg ^(talk) 20:26, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Philip R. Alstat

Jagjg, Sorry to "bombard" you with notes, but I just wanted to share one more article with you that I created some time ago: Philip R. Alstat. If you enjoyed reading the article on Harry Halpern, I think you might enjoy this one, if you have the time. Both of these rabbis were giants from another generation, who spoke out with the courage of prophets -- but each with the character and sensitivity that truly made him a mensch... Best wishes, and thanks again for the DYK nomination! By tracking down your nomination, I learned how that is done! I enjoy learning the ropes! NearTheZoo (talk) 12:31, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Interesting article, and it explained a lot, including your interest in the Arnold Resnicoff article. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:52, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes--and I very much appreciate your taking the time to read it! NearTheZoo (talk) 21:48, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

First-generation American

Dear Jayjg, Well...still one more note to you! Hope this is ok.

I see you changed a line in the article Arnold Resnicoff from "first-generation American" to "second-generation American," saying he is second-generation because his parents came to America. However, here is the definition from the wikipedia article, "Immigrant generations": (1) An immigrant to a country, possibly with the caveat that they must be naturalized to receive this title. (2) The children of immigrant parents, first in a family line to be born in the new country. The article adds the note: "As with most terms about human identity, it is difficult to find clear consensus on this meaning of the term. Many users do not recognize ambiguity in the term, however, due to their own disposition or an unambiguous familial or colloquial use for it."

The subject of this article is referred to in numerous referenced sources as "first-generation American," based on the widely accepted definition of "first in a family line to be born in the new country," and uses the term that way in references to himself in the sources. Going with the sources, and his self-identificaton, could I ask you to reconsider, and consider a self-reversion? Best wishes -- again! NearTheZoo (talk) 13:34, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

His father emigrated to America when he was 3, and lived essentially his whole life in the U.S. Arnold is obviously 2nd generation. That said, the descriptor adds nothing anyway, so I removed it. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:20, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Good compromise! Thanks!! NearTheZoo (talk) 20:33, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Moses Cordovero

The article Moses Cordovero has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The subject of this article does not appear to meet the general notability guideline. Source in article does not mention person by name. I am unable to find significant coverage of this person in third party sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Onthegogo (talk) 23:15, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Harry Halpern

Hello! Your submission of Harry Halpern at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Dravecky (talk) 22:42, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Pauline Bebe

On 8 March 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pauline Bebe, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Pauline Bebe was France's first female rabbi? If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:05, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Copyright violations

Jayjg, the copyright violations may be back on John Carter's user page with links to the Ebionites article talk page here. I pointed out on the talk page that he has already been warned twice by an admin. This content should at least be checked over for possible violations. Do you want to handle this yourself or would you prefer that it be handled by ANI? Ovadyah (talk) 21:17, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I'd prefer to focus on the mediation here, and leave the administrative actions to others. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:12, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

FYI

Hi, today a user, and IP edited archived palestinerembered's thread that you started. I am not sure editing archives is allowed that why I decided to notify you. Regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:19, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Mordecai Tendler vandalism

Hi Jay, when you get a chance can you take a look at the Mordecai Tendler article, it is presently undergoing some vandalism and may need some semi-protection. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 21:06, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Looks like Avi dealt with it. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:38, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

BLP, ethnicity, gender

Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons#Include "ethnicity, gender," to match all other guidelines

Trying to remove an end-around of WP:EGRS that's being exploited. You've expressed interest in the past. Already 4 days into the certification poll.
--William Allen Simpson (talk) 05:16, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:39, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Cage of Eden

Recently, I thought about creating a page concerning the manga "Cage of Eden" (Eden no Ori). Upon looking into the reasons for the previous page for "Cage of Eden", I noticed that the reasons for its deletion were that it had no sources that were verifiable and/or reliable. I have found sources to negate those reasons. However, I was wondering if you could give me some more explanation regarding its lack of notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dem1995 (talk • contribs) 01:30, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

This was the AfD discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cage of Eden. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:56, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

S-Preme

Hello sir! I'm messaging you to see if we can bring back that S-Preme wiki page? We had coverage from MTV back in November. I was going to wait for another source, but figured I hit you up and see if this is sufficient enough to bring it back? (Rhymestyle (talk) 15:02, 3 March 2011 (UTC))

What do you mean by "coverage from MTV"? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:27, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

MTV did a full interview with him and did a week of promo (Starting with monday, and ending on Friday) which consisted of a write up, a phone interview, and featured music on their site. Is that sufficient enough info to keep the page up? (98.223.177.254 (talk) 02:48, 6 March 2011 (UTC))

Is there any sort of link to that interview, or other sources about it? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:55, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes sir! Here's the MTV write up and interview: http://blog.mtvmusic.com/2010/11/16/needle-in-the-haystack-presents-s-preme/, the follow up phone interview: http://www.ourstage.com/blog/2010/11/19/needle-in-the-haystack-follow-up-s-preme, They also did a tweet-and-A on their twitter. Then the other part of the week of promo was featured music on their site. (Rhymestyle (talk) 03:15, 6 March 2011 (UTC))

WP:BAND requires "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself." Do you have other such sources besides this one? Jayjg ^(talk) 04:57, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure, but others are mostly from top hip hop sites such as DJBooth.net and the NMC. Overall his accolades include the MTV coverage, the WWE placement (he recorded an entrance theme song for Ted Dibiase Jr which is played every week on live tv, and he toured with Lupe Fiasco. This is basically what last year consisted of. Also just a heads up, in case you don't know what the NMC consist of, these are sites that are part of the Complex Media Network, aka Complex_(magazine). When it comes to NMC, we've had countless coverage from these sites. (Rhymestyle (talk) 05:41, 6 March 2011 (UTC))

Please review WP:BAND; so far you haven't explained S-Preme meets those requirements. As far as I can tell, only the MTV write-up qualifies, but you need multiple such sources. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:42, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

What about the Complex_(magazine) Media Network sites? Also one more, the song he did for Ted Dibiase Jr was on the top 200 iTunes charts for two weeks (it went up to 121 before slowing exiting the charts). (Rhymestyle (talk) 05:44, 6 March 2011 (UTC))

Can you give me your two best links besides MTV? Jayjg ^(talk) 17:31, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Here's two links from the top Complex_(magazine) Media Sites: 2dopeboyz: http://www.djbooth.net/index/general/search/f447a1bf51f5b628889a4e5152d03fad/ and Djbooth: http://www.djbooth.net/index/general/search/f447a1bf51f5b628889a4e5152d03fad/. These links are tags too, so these will link you to all the S-Preme coverage these two sites posted. Also here is the iTunes chart info too: http://www.music-chart.info/song/571694/WWE--I-Come-From-Money-(Ted-DiBiase)-[feat--S-Preme] Does that work? (Rhymestyle (talk) 17:43, 6 March 2011 (UTC))

What's the word sir? (Rhymestyle (talk) 07:38, 12 March 2011 (UTC))

Sorry, I thought I had responded, but see I didn't. Neither of those links worked for me, are you sure they're right? Jayjg ^(talk) 02:25, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Oops, I sent you the wrong links, sorry! Here they are again: DJBooth - http://www.djbooth.net/index/general/search/314c74184c20a11dcf0723c29dfb3425/ and 2Dopeboyz - http://www.2dopeboyz.com/?s=s-preme. Here's the chart one again too: http://www.music-chart.info/song/571694/WWE--I-Come-From-Money-(Ted-DiBiase)-[feat--S-Preme] Let me know if these work. (Rhymestyle (talk) 02:32, 13 March 2011 (UTC))

I don't see how either site satisfies WP:RS, particularly when it comes to individuals. They both appear to be the more-or-less blogs of a couple of guys. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:01, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

But these sites are under the Complex_(magazine) Media Network, see look here: http://www.complexmedianetwork.com/publishers/sites/Music. Also what about the other guideline that said to have a song on national charts? If you click the third link I sent you, we had a song in the charts in multiple nations. (Rhymestyle (talk) 03:04, 13 March 2011 (UTC))

The Complex website has over 30 "Media Partner Sites", which appear to be more "recommended links" than anything else. There's no indication Complex has any sort of editorial control or oversight over them. The song itself wasn't performed by S-Preme, and the website with the listings is just some guy's website. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:31, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

No the song is S-Preme's, Jim Johnston is the producer, but from start to end, its S-Preme's song. And those aren't "recommended links", Complex owns all of those sites, and they do have some kind of oversight over each one of them. Either way though, S-Preme still has a song that was on the charts in multiple countries.(Rhymestyle (talk) 03:36, 13 March 2011 (UTC))

Do you have any evidence that Complex exercises editorial control over those other websites/blogs? Jayjg ^(talk) 03:49, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Here's even a video of s-preme performing the song at a show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5Xz7t7HvI0 (Rhymestyle (talk) 03:44, 13 March 2011 (UTC))

Which version hit the charts, one performed by S-Preme? Jayjg ^(talk) 03:49, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

There is only one version of it, its just when the WWE put the song up, they listed it as Jim Johnston (composer) feat. S-Preme, but Jim is just the producer. (Rhymestyle (talk) 03:51, 13 March 2011 (UTC))

Are there any reliable sources that indicate it charted? Jayjg ^(talk) 04:10, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I gave you the link that showed you the charts info, here it is again: http://www.music-chart.info/song/571694/WWE--I-Come-From-Money-(Ted-DiBiase)-[feat--S-Preme]. If you want the actual soundscan numbers then you'd have to me a soundscan member to see those. (Rhymestyle (talk) 04:16, 13 March 2011 (UTC))

Here is all the complex information: http://www.complexmedianetwork.com/index, what Complex_(magazine) does is, they sign these websites to their company and then make sure they stay up to par with what's acceptable in today's music. Each one of these sites listed gets around a million unique sites per month. When it comes to music, the complex sites are at the top of the chain, so they're not just "some guy's website". (Rhymestyle (talk) 04:00, 13 March 2011 (UTC))

I've already looked at the website, and seen no indication that these websites are anything more than "Recommended links". That's why I asked you "Do you have any evidence that Complex exercises editorial control over those other websites/blogs?" Jayjg ^(talk) 04:10, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Only evidence I can provide is this: http://www.complexmedianetwork.com/publishers/sites. Here's an article that tells you about complex adding the sites to their network: http://www.mediabistro.com/webnewser/complex-media-network-adds-21-sites-to-ad-network_b9184. If this isn't "evidence" for you, then you will just have to call their offices up yourself and ask them, and they will tell you exactly what I just did, 1.917.262.3147. (Rhymestyle (talk) 04:16, 13 March 2011 (UTC))

The first is the same as before, it says nothing about editorial oversight. The second indicates that they're tied together to generate ad revenues and target specific demographics, not that they have any sort of editorial or content oversight over them. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:59, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Well either way, he still has a charting song. (Rhymestyle (talk) 20:52, 13 March 2011 (UTC))

Possibly, but it's not documented by any reliable source. The source you provided is just some guy's website. He's quite clear that it's a personal effort on his part. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:02, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Well those are the actual stats of the song, the only other way I can prove them is if A) you're a member of Soundscan, in which case you can look the stats up yourself or B) I have a screenshot from iTunes http://twitpic.com/3dpkyq, but this only shows the song being #146 on the top 200 chart in the US. Your only other option to confirm that those numbers are true is if you call up the WWE yourself. (Rhymestyle (talk) 06:43, 14 March 2011 (UTC))

I'm sorry, I'm just not seeing it as overcoming the AfD objections. You can always take it to WP:DRV. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:08, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I just took it over to WP:DRV. Thanks for all your help. (Rhymestyle (talk) 04:21, 15 March 2011 (UTC))

DYK for Harry Halpern

On 14 March 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Harry Halpern, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Harry Halpern was a prominent Conservative rabbi who served for almost 49 years at the East Midwood Jewish Center in Brooklyn, New York? If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 16:04, 14 March 2011 (UTC)