User talk:Jj137/Archive 7
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Jj137. 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 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Page protection
Thanks for the page protection at Landmark Education. Might be better to use the regular {{protect}} template, instead of the "small" parameter, so that edit-warring users know this is a time to resolve disputes on the talk page. Cirt (talk) 21:42, 24 December 2007 (UTC).
- OK, I changed it to {{protect}}. jj137 ♠ 21:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. And thanks for the quick response! Nice work. Cirt (talk) 21:44, 24 December 2007 (UTC).
Thanks for your assistance
Just a quick thanks for your speedy action on my request for protection of Plymouth Valiant. I've just entered a similar request for Dodge Lancer — the two cars are closely related, and the same individual's been similarly disruptive to both articles. I really feel this individual will make a good editor once shown how much easier and more enjoyable it is to coöperate rather than fight. Happy holidays! --Scheinwerfermann (talk) 21:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not a problem, and I was just reading over that request now! (I'm going to protect it, if you were wondering.) jj137 ♠ 21:57, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Annnd...thanks again! I am pretty sure that once frustrated in attempts to edit the Valiant and Lancer articles, s/he will likely turn to Dodge Dart, the third vehicle in this particular trinity. I'll keep an eye on it. --Scheinwerfermann (talk) 22:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'll keep an eye on it as well. jj137 ♠ 22:09, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Wanna make it a [threefer]?Never mind, it's taken care of. --Scheinwerfermann (talk) 00:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'll keep an eye on it as well. jj137 ♠ 22:09, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Annnd...thanks again! I am pretty sure that once frustrated in attempts to edit the Valiant and Lancer articles, s/he will likely turn to Dodge Dart, the third vehicle in this particular trinity. I'll keep an eye on it. --Scheinwerfermann (talk) 22:07, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
South Asian Bar Association
Hi, I just put the article up about the South Asian Bar Association that was deleted. It is a specialty bar association representing South Asian attorneys. I see that you have asked for its notability, but though it has been featured in ethnic press, I don't have any links because ethnic press is rarely archived in the same manner as most other mainstream media. What can I do to prove its notability beyond linking to its official website and perhaps show its link to the American Bar Association? Vidontap (talk) 22:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- I guess the notability could be questionable. If you want, I can restore the article for you to work on it some more (although, you should place {{underconstruction}} at the top and no guarantees it won't be deleted by someone else). jj137 ♠ 22:43, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Please do restore it, and I will add the under construction tab as you suggested. Hopefully I can add enough to show its notability. Thanks! Vidontap (talk) 22:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- I restored it and added {{underconstruction}} in place of where the speedy tag was. Hope that helps. jj137 ♠ 23:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! Let me know if there is anything further that you think I can add so that it passes muster. Vidontap (talk) 00:23, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think it looks very good so far. Well referenced and well written overall. Nice job. jj137 ♠ 00:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! Let me know if there is anything further that you think I can add so that it passes muster. Vidontap (talk) 00:23, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- I restored it and added {{underconstruction}} in place of where the speedy tag was. Hope that helps. jj137 ♠ 23:13, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Please do restore it, and I will add the under construction tab as you suggested. Hopefully I can add enough to show its notability. Thanks! Vidontap (talk) 22:47, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Could you undue this please? The level of vandalism that page was experiencing was, unfortunately, the normal level it has seen for the past year or so. Thanks.--Rise Above The Vile 00:36, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, unfortunately that article gets way too much vandalism, and I was just trying to hold it off for a short while (plus, someone requested it at WP:RPP). Either way, I changed it back down to [edit=autoconfirmed: move=sysop]. jj137 ♠ 00:50, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- And of course, less than an hour after I asked you to remove the protection it was vandalized again. :( Hopefully, once he is out of office the vandals will leave the page alone. Thanks anyways.--Rise Above The Vile 03:47, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hopefully once he is out of office, they will leave his page alone. Actually, they will probably just move on to the next president. jj137 ♠ 03:49, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- And of course, less than an hour after I asked you to remove the protection it was vandalized again. :( Hopefully, once he is out of office the vandals will leave the page alone. Thanks anyways.--Rise Above The Vile 03:47, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
vandalism
I did not vandalize the fur page, but I moved the anti-fur section upward to warn people of the cruelty used in making fur clothing. Is that vandalism? ~>dollhime [sorry if I put my message in the wrong place, but I don't know how to send messages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dollhime (talk • contribs) 03:13, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oops, I think I made a mistake there. Because you made a copy and paste move in two separate edits I mistook it for vandalism. No, sorry, you didn't do anything wrong. jj137 ♠ 03:16, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
you deleted ===survival boys===
survival boys is an english band.survival was the first album
Over my head in an edit war ;(
I apologize for the mess I made trying to post an edit not realizing there was a short on the top of my lap top. I am typing away and it is saving my changes before I am even ready. I already have to check everything in a sandbox 3 times before editing. Worse yet there is a huge disagreement regarding content on the page and I was hoping a neutral tone biography with source and reference, which seems to be the issue would fix it once and for all. The only issue seems to be the "gentleman" who edits under two different IP addresses and hacks everything to bits. His history shows he has been blocked for vandalism and edit warring several times. I am certain after today that will seem to be the case with myself. I assure you however, it is not. In his last discussion with someone else he threatened rfc? I am wondering if this is such a bad idea? In any case, any advice to get this article to be of some true value would be appreciated as having an article that is constantly under attack is doing a disservice to all. I understand that there will be those with an agenda, however there has to be a meeting of the minds one way or another. It is important for me to keep in keeping with the standards and policies and that has been made difficult with each new interpretation on the discussion page. I may have made an error as well as far as where I posted my comment. I placed it at the bottom of the discussion page and wondered if it should have gone on my talk page after I "actually" finished my edit? Sincerely hoping for assistance, 72.193.68.183 03:54, 25 December 2007 (UTC) Sorry logged in....Jilliana27 (talk) 04:02, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I don't have much knowledge of this article, but I reverted myself, so feel free to get back to work on the article (and/or talk page comments) and let me know if there are any problems. jj137 ♠ 04:09, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- ==
- Right - this is a minefield. I had suggested that Migueldos reintroduce his Oct 28 biographically comments, which I felt were valuable and had been arbitrarily deleted. He did so by reverting to Oct 28, which did no harm in itself (I had already effectively stubbed the article), but it reintroduced the Serbian stuff which is POV polemic - he misunderstood (and I misexplained); I didn't mean a complete revert. Jilliana27 had a set of edits pre-prepared which are, I believe, NPOV, verifiable and not OR (I don't have the understanding to verify the NPOV bit.) The 'political writings' section is still OR and makes unverifiable assertions about Parenti's views, so my understanding is that it should be deleted immediately, but this is part of an open discussion with the anonymous contributor in question (who may be operating a sockpuppet, but that's not proved either.) Jbowler (talk) 06:26, 25 December 2007 (UTC) John Bowler
- I should add that I for one welcome contributions by people who do not know details of the subjects work - the issues boil down to simple meta-issues of what is appropriate within a biograpahy, no understanding of anything which Parenti writes or talks about is required! Jbowler (talk) 06:30, 25 December 2007 (UTC) John Bowler
- Duh, wrong again. Migueldos did not do that, I should have realised that the 'revert instead of restore' error was malicious - I said, "why not restore the background", the anonymous No.91 reverted the whole article and reintroduced his unverifiable POV stuff, so much for WP:AGF. Jbowler (talk) 06:56, 25 December 2007 (UTC) John Bowler
- Err, I know you personally (Jj137) aren't particularly interested in this whole issue and won't even read this to the end, but I really can't tolerate this nonsense being written here. I don't know what Jilliana27 means by saying that I edit under 2 IP addresses or that I have "hacked everything to pieces" (I haven't even edited the article since s/he started editing it, and I had also refrained from the edit war by letting User:Jbowler's version stand during the whole dicussion), or that my "history" shows I have been blocked for vandalism and edit warring several times - I wonder if s/he believes that admins are too lazy to verify her accusations and will just block me on the spot. I also don't know why User:Jbowler thinks that my only edit since the start of the discussion, an attempt to make a compromise version, is something I had no right to do and evidence of bad faith. Seriously, I think there should be a mechanism for people to be blocked for lying, although fortunately in this case they just don't seem to know how to do any real harm by this.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 15:48, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, I did read that entire thing, although... I'm a bit confused with all of that. Later, I will read over the article (and edits) and see what exactly is going on. jj137 ♠ 16:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Err, I know you personally (Jj137) aren't particularly interested in this whole issue and won't even read this to the end, but I really can't tolerate this nonsense being written here. I don't know what Jilliana27 means by saying that I edit under 2 IP addresses or that I have "hacked everything to pieces" (I haven't even edited the article since s/he started editing it, and I had also refrained from the edit war by letting User:Jbowler's version stand during the whole dicussion), or that my "history" shows I have been blocked for vandalism and edit warring several times - I wonder if s/he believes that admins are too lazy to verify her accusations and will just block me on the spot. I also don't know why User:Jbowler thinks that my only edit since the start of the discussion, an attempt to make a compromise version, is something I had no right to do and evidence of bad faith. Seriously, I think there should be a mechanism for people to be blocked for lying, although fortunately in this case they just don't seem to know how to do any real harm by this.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 15:48, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for Deleting Decline of Hohenstaufens!
Hello Jj137, I created the article, and then I ended up merging it and then later putting the deletion tag on it. Thanks for deleting it! --Ohmpandya (talk) 04:22, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: Socks
You might be curious to see this. It doesn't look good. jj137 ♠ 03:25, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oh my... New England? STORMTRACKER 94 13:44, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, and User:Sasha Callahan is one of the socks. jj137 ♠ 16:11, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Merry Christmas!
Take a couple of days off. Relax. You deserve it. MERRY CHRISTMAS!
If I had one of those box like things with a Christmas tree on it, I'd use that, but I don't know how to make it. Once again, Merry Christmas. --HPJoker (talk) 16:56, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, and Merry Christmas to you too!
- Yes, I am going to try to stay as far away as possible from my computer today (although that may be hard). I don't know how to make one of those Christmas cards either. jj137 ♠ 18:22, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Just wandering. What did you get? --HPJoker (talk) 02:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- All kinds of stuff. jj137 ♠ 02:10, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Just wandering. What did you get? --HPJoker (talk) 02:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Can you name something? --HPJoker (talk) 02:18, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Lady Bird Johnson Semi-Protection Request Follow-up
Thank you for responding to my request to semi-protect the Lady Bird Johnson article. One of the anoymous users (User:90.198.115.14) re-added his nonsense after I originally reverted it, with an insulting edit summary, which I also reverted. --TommyBoy (talk) 19:30, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome, and if you didn't notice, I gave the IP a 31 hour block as well, so there shouldn't be any more nonsense added for now. jj137 ♠ 19:47, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Allegations of Israeli apartheid
A couple reverts by one editor do not an edit war make, especially not on that article. -- Kendrick7talk 21:29, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- I changed it down to expire at the start of the New Year, but I am keeping protected. I originally got a request for it at WP:RPP. jj137 ♠ 21:46, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Thanks for the reply. -- Kendrick7talk 21:51, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for semi-protecting United Baltic Duchy. Could you also semi-protect Duke Magnus of Holstein and Kingdom of Livonia, we are getting anonymous IP vandalism on these too. Martintg (talk) 00:04, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Done, I semi-protected both of those articles. jj137 ♠ 01:05, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Welcome to VandalProof!
Dear Jj137,
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, post a message on the discussion page or join our IRC channel #vandalproof.
Snowolf How can I help? 02:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the help! It works now. jj137 ♠ 03:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
RfA thanks
|
Great success! Thank you for supporting my RfA, which passed with a final tally of 53-3-2. Special thanks goes to Shalom for both the suggestion and the nomination. I'm honored by the trust that the community has shown in me, and will do my very best as an administrator. Thanks again! faithless (speak) 08:31, 26 December 2007 (UTC) |
|
Is this a problem?
Might want to check 'this' out. Is that considered vandalism if you take off the heading? --HPJoker (talk) 03:57, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- I would consider that vandalism if it says to leave that alone. I warned the user, and if he does anything bad again, let me know and I'll give him an indef-block (for vandalism-only account). jj137 ♠ 04:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- You must be a Wikiholic. Thanks. --HPJoker (talk) 04:09, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hehe, you could say that :) jj137 ♠ 04:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- You must be a Wikiholic. Thanks. --HPJoker (talk) 04:09, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- Can I leave spammers those warnings? I keep finding them. --HPJoker Leave me a message
Advertising
If I went on a message board (red sox.com) and advertised our newsletter and asked for ideas (NOT WRITERS, IDEAS. 'these' are writers). Is that ok? --HPJoker (talk) 04:48, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think that sounds like a good idea (although, make sure nobody gets mad there, because well that wouldn't be good, and I'm not familiar with the message boards there). I think I will go have a look around at these boards-- just because I've never seen them. jj137 ♠ 05:17, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- 'Here' --HPJoker (talk) 05:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- OK, and good luck with it. jj137 ♠ 16:18, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- 'Here' --HPJoker (talk) 05:24, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- There it is. Thanx. --HPJoker (talk) 19:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sure there are plenty of Sox fans who will help us out. jj137 ♠ 19:48, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- There it is. Thanx. --HPJoker (talk) 19:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- Wrong. Only 63 views and 1 post from someone other than me. --HPJoker (talk) 23:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- That's not good. Well, we still have a couple more days to wait and see. Tomorrow I am going to work on the newsletter some. jj137 ♠ 05:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Wrong. Only 63 views and 1 post from someone other than me. --HPJoker (talk) 23:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- What are you going to write about? I'm feeling bad since I haven't wrote anything in the pass two weeks. --HPJoker (talk) 06:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- I saw there was another reply this morning; someone mentioned Buchholz visiting Beckett's house. If we looked into that some more I think we could have an article about that. jj137 ♠ 16:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- What are you going to write about? I'm feeling bad since I haven't wrote anything in the pass two weeks. --HPJoker (talk) 06:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- I wonder where he heard that. Nothing on ESPN.com, MLB.com, or RedSox.com. Does Clay or Josh have a blog that they posted it on? Did NESN report it? --HPJoker (talk) 19:34, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- (adding next comment to bottom)
Signpost updated for December 26th, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 52 | 26 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 13:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Mercedes Homes
An article that you have been involved in editing, Mercedes Homes, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mercedes Homes. Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 15:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello
Would you mind un-protecting my monobook page? It was supposed to be un-protected at 15:12 on 12/26, obviously a computer goof has prevented that. Can you help me out? Take Care...NeutralHomer T:C 18:02, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- I unprotected your monobook (and removed the {{helpme}}). jj137 ♠ 18:04, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! :) Take Care....NeutralHomer T:C 18:05, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Strider Phoenix
You may want to close the AfD for the Strider Phoenix page you deleted, as it is now irrelevant. Improbcat (talk) 18:21, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it seems Addhoc closed it one minute after you left that message. jj137 ♠ 19:05, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
An Administrator is I!
.svg)
Adventurer! The Council has identified a number of strange occurrences (such as "vandals" and "articles for deletion") in the surrounding wilderness. The Council would check it out, but they have important Councily-type things. But never fear: brave adventurers known as "sysops" roam the lands!
Thank you for your support in my quest to become a sysop. Although I am now wielding the keys to my very own Bitchin' Meatcar, I promise to uphold the laws of the land, martini in hand, in a way that would make Saint Sneaky Pete proud. I will do my best to be a Jack of Several Trades (although I may be a Master of Nuns). I promise to Heart Canadia. And I will make it my goal to Make War, Not ... er, Wait, Never Mind.
I am glad to serve my guild, the League of Wikipedians. If I can be of any assistance, or you have any questions, suggestions, or criticisms in the future, please let me know. And if you are at a loss for what any of the above actually means, see this website.
Thanks again.
An Encyclopedia is We! - Revolving Bugbear 22:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi Jj137,
I just got a message from an IP claiming to be User:B. Johnston. It appears you created this account for him a couple of days ago (I assume at WP:ACC), but since the WP:ACC page has since been deleted and restored, I can't tell if this is the same IP that requested the account or not. My response to him will be slightly different depending on if this is the same IP that requested the name; can you look at the deleted page and see for me?
I assume that the password you chose for him was random, and you can't email it to him again yourself. I'll give him the usual recommedation about checking his spam filter, but assuming that doesn't work, he's either out of luck, or in theory I'm fairly sure a 'crat could make the account available again. If you have an opinion on whether I should bug a 'crat about this, I'd be happy to hear it; technically if their email service is acting up, it's not Wikipedia's problem, but I'd still like to help the guy out if it's relatively painless. --barneca (talk) 23:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
- Saw your reply, thanks! --barneca (talk) 13:09, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for supporting my candidateship
Hi. I would like to thank you for supporting my Requests for adminship/Magioladitis. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
RfA thanks
Dear Jj137, here is a little note to say thank you for your kind support on my request for adminship which succeeded with a final result of (72/19/6).
Now that I am a sysop, do not hesitate to contact me with any queries you have. I would be glad to help you along with the other group of kind and helpful administrators.
Thank you again and I look forward to editing alongside you in the future. — E talk 12:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Dear Jj137, I'm sorry but I have to again protest the wording of the external link on Bobby Farrell. IMO this is clearly in violation of WP:RSUE: "In principle, readers should have the opportunity to verify for themselves what the original material actually said, that it was published by a credible source, and that it was translated correctly. Where sources are directly quoted, published translations are generally preferred over editors performing their own translations directly. Where editors use their own English translation of a non-English source as a quote in an article, there should be clear citation of the foreign-language original, so that readers can check what the original source said and the accuracy of the translation." Best regards, Jvhertum (talk) 13:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- I removed the external link altogether and alerted USRepublican we couldn't use it. Hopefully this is all settled now. -- jj137 ♠ 16:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Let's hope so :) Jvhertum (talk) 19:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Newsletter
That sounds like a pretty good idea. STORMTRACKER 94 13:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with StormTracker. That is a good idea. Would we be doing this during the regular season? --HPJoker (talk) 19:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. During the regular season, it would obviously be much easier to find stuff to write about; we could probably have an article each week about the Red Sox games they played that week. jj137 ♠ 20:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- I found a blog for Clay Buchholz here, but there's nothing there about it. You could write something about Josh Beckett winning the This Year in Baseball Starter of the Year Award; it happened December 10, but if we need a story I don't see anything wrong with writing about it. (We haven't written about it yet.) jj137 ♠ 21:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. During the regular season, it would obviously be much easier to find stuff to write about; we could probably have an article each week about the Red Sox games they played that week. jj137 ♠ 20:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with StormTracker. That is a good idea. Would we be doing this during the regular season? --HPJoker (talk) 19:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Better than anything else I've heard today. Is there anything else? --HPJoker (talk) 21:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- For now, no. Right now I'm in the middle of writing an article on George Murray, so that can count as one of the three new articles. jj137 ♠ 21:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Better than anything else I've heard today. Is there anything else? --HPJoker (talk) 21:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hey! May 1st is my B-Day! Why did you wikify the US Dollar? Other than that it's good. --HPJoker (talk) 21:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- I added a link to the U.S. dollar because some people may not be familiar with the dollar sign. For example, I probably couldn't recognize the sign for the rupee, and if I saw it I wouldn't know what it was. jj137 ♠ 21:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hey! May 1st is my B-Day! Why did you wikify the US Dollar? Other than that it's good. --HPJoker (talk) 21:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
- Intresting. Would this be ok? Mark Loretta as a featured article next week? --HPJoker Leave me a message
- Sure, and cool new signature. jj137 ♠ 02:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Intresting. Would this be ok? Mark Loretta as a featured article next week? --HPJoker Leave me a message
RE: Spammers
That was great. I've been watching the Sandbox all day long (I was bored) and some bot came along and either added spam to the page or replaced the whole entire page with something and left. Would copying and pasting a whole entire page be a level 3? I'm trying to get a perspective.
Also, how can I make sig be my timestamp, so I can just click on that thing and have that appear? Is that possible? Thanx. --HPJoker Leave me a message
- I'm not sure what you mean by "copy and pasting an entire page". As in, replicating the page, or blanking it? As for what level warning to give, you can just use your own self judgement on that; if it is just replacing a word with "poop" (or something along those lines) you could just use level 1 or 2, because it isn't that bad. Also, in the sandbox, you don't have to revert vandalism there; that is where most people work with editing (Obviously, if it is bad, you can remove it). You can try going to recent changes and looking for vandalism there. For your signature, you can add the signature code to your preferences so that all you have to put is ~~~~ each time you add a comment. jj137 ♠ 02:51, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- I just removed that sup thing from the end and your text is all small. Odd. HPJoker Leave me a message
- Actually, if you are using any browser except Internet Explorer, you can install Twinkle, a vandalism-reverting tool. It really helps. jj137 ♠ 03:04, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- I just removed that sup thing from the end and your text is all small. Odd. HPJoker Leave me a message
- Neat. --[[User:HPJoker|<font color="red">HP<font color="tan">Jo<font color="blue">ker]]''' <sup>[[User talk:HPJoker|Leave me a message]] (talk) 03:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, that sig is screwed up. What did I do wrong? I copied and pasted it into the my preferences thing.
- Invalid raw signature; check HTML tags.
- I've tried removing them both, keeping them both, and removing the one at the beginning. Test didn't work. HPJoker Leave me a message.
- I copied and pasted that. How did you do it?
- Test Test --HPJoker Leave me a message 04:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- This apparently doesn't work. --HPJoker Leave me a message 04:11, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, I did the quick sig there. The Timestamp. >>> is a timestamp sig. --HPJoker Leave me a message 04:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. This is my gift to you (if you like classic rock)! --HPJoker Leave me a message 04:23, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I realize you placed a 31 hour block on him for my report of his vandalism; there is one other thing I've just discovered, based on his pattern and prior abuse under the separate IPs: he's a sock of User:Jamesinc14. Yanking him entirely would probably be a better course of action. (and thanks!) --Mhking (talk) 04:25, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Unfortunately we can't indef-block IPs unless they are open proxys. I kept his block for vandalism, though. jj137 ♠ 04:35, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Fryderik Frontier
Thanks, mate; always nice when someone edits an article I've created and it wasn't to flag it for speedy deletion. :)
I appreciate the redirect fix (for capitalizing Fryderik Frontier's last name). MJustice (talk) 05:31, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: ClueBot U1
This time, I used a batch deletion script located here. east.718 at 05:41, December 29, 2007
RE: Sandbox
[1]. That is why I wanted a perspective. I'm glad I learned something bymyself through. --HPJoker Leave me a message 06:05, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Is putting up links to Google vandalism? --HPJoker Leave me a message 00:11, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- I was just looking at the mass edits (are those mass edits?) made at the Sandbox. This is an example. I'm wandering if saying something like "Please refrain from saying that we suck as you did here. Thank you. (sig)" would be ok? I have to go for the next 40 minutes because I have to write a quick summary before the Pats Giants game. See ya! --HPJoker Leave me a message 00:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- I guess so. I think something like that could be considered vandalism. jj137 ♠ 00:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- I was just looking at the mass edits (are those mass edits?) made at the Sandbox. This is an example. I'm wandering if saying something like "Please refrain from saying that we suck as you did here. Thank you. (sig)" would be ok? I have to go for the next 40 minutes because I have to write a quick summary before the Pats Giants game. See ya! --HPJoker Leave me a message 00:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your support in my successful RFA. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 07:20, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Same stuff,new day.......
Thank you for your assist on the Michael Parenti page. There is currently much pressure from the two IP, (one)person editor to get the references up. I understand the importance, however it is a Holiday and I am a student and work at University. My parents visit comes first.
Thank you for template for citation. If I am unable to make it work correctly in sandbox, who do I ask for assist?
Last Question......Is there anything I can do to bring anonymous IP ( history of edit war, vandalism) to accountability. I really want this to be better article, not agendas.
Thank You again, JJilliana27 (talk) 17:01, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it doesn't look like there's enough vandalism to have the article semi-protected right now. jj137 ♠ 17:29, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for restoring my userpage, Nick Martin (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:13, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, although I don't know what context it is used in. jj137 ♠ 00:29, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Al-Ahbash - Protection
Thanks for your quick reaction. The pity is, you did not protect the "clean" version. Now we have to stay just with that agressive Anti-Habash text, we wanted to keep from beeing inserted over and over again :-( --89.56.167.80 (talk) 22:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- I recommend a revert to this version - AloknaBot 05:34, 18 November 2007, as it has been used for several reverts in the near past - adding the changes, that were made by PixelBot 13:50, 28 December 2007 --89.56.167.80 (talk) 01:11, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- I reverted to that version. jj137 ♠ 01:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Hm. Did you mean to block that user per {{UsernameBlock}}? I don't see what's wrong with the account name. — Coren (talk) 00:06, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- I blocked it because it is similar to User:Claxson, a sock master, and may cause confusion (or it may just be a sock of that person). jj137 ♠ 00:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
1288 ---> 1286
Hey JJ137,
Did you know that you went from #1288 most active contributor to #1286 on this list? I changed that on your userpage. Nice job with over 14,000 contributions!!! --Ohmpandya (talk) 00:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! Well, I updated just a day or two after the updated list came out, and it went up a couple places because of people removing themselves from the list. jj137 ♠ 00:25, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: Bot
Sounds good. The newsletter also looks good this week. STORMTRACKER 94 01:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- I just wrote the final seciton in it. --HPJoker Leave me a message 02:31, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks! :) Take Care...NeutralHomer T:C 01:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not a problem. I would have given him an indef-block for vandalism only account, but it seems he did have some good faith edits. jj137 ♠ 01:38, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, some of his edits weren't bad. I think he was just a newbie that didn't know his way around Wikipedia yet. Take Care...NeutralHomer T:C 01:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- That's what it seems. He probably just got aggrevated that people were warning him not to vandalize. I guess he can use the 24 hours as a cool down period. jj137 ♠ 01:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- We probably could still use one more article, if we can find something to write about in time. jj137 ♠ 01:44, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- I saw your RFPP; I don't think there's much need to protect the article now that Ad84 is blocked. When his block is over, we may need to. I'll keep it watchlisted. jj137 ♠ 01:53, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- (Re: RFPP) - I requested the RPP before I put him on AIV. The RFPP can probably be cancelled for the time being and if need be, like you said, I can re-request. - NeutralHomer T:C 01:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- You can remove it if you like. You shouldn't have to re-request it tommorow, as since I have it watchlisted I should be able to see if Ad84 is back at it again. Of course, if I am not getting around to it you should re-request it. jj137 ♠ 01:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- I wasn't sure if I could...didn't want to get in trouble. I did withdrawn/delete it just a moment ago though. Thanks for your help. Take Care...NeutralHomer T:C 02:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- You can remove it if you like. You shouldn't have to re-request it tommorow, as since I have it watchlisted I should be able to see if Ad84 is back at it again. Of course, if I am not getting around to it you should re-request it. jj137 ♠ 01:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- (Re: RFPP) - I requested the RPP before I put him on AIV. The RFPP can probably be cancelled for the time being and if need be, like you said, I can re-request. - NeutralHomer T:C 01:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- I saw your RFPP; I don't think there's much need to protect the article now that Ad84 is blocked. When his block is over, we may need to. I'll keep it watchlisted. jj137 ♠ 01:53, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- We probably could still use one more article, if we can find something to write about in time. jj137 ♠ 01:44, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- That's what it seems. He probably just got aggrevated that people were warning him not to vandalize. I guess he can use the 24 hours as a cool down period. jj137 ♠ 01:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, some of his edits weren't bad. I think he was just a newbie that didn't know his way around Wikipedia yet. Take Care...NeutralHomer T:C 01:41, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
Thank you for blocking the spam only account. He was definitely frustrating me. Carl.bunderson (talk) 01:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
2007 New England Patriots
At the time the edits were made the game was not over. RC-0722 (talk) 04:26, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Are we talking whn the pats were assured a win or when the game clock read 00:00? RC-0722 (talk) 04:30, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, then it was my fault . I've been fighting vandals since the game began so I must have gone overboard with the undo button and I apologize. RC-0722 (talk) 04:34, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Newsletter
It was meant to be funny. Multiply my writing effort by 5, and I would be on Page 2 on espn.com
PATRIOTS GO 16-0! WOO! --HPJoker Leave me a message 04:35, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Image Removed?
Hi, why did you removed the image of lizzy Caplan? Did I set up the templates wrong or something because if I did, tell me how to fix it :) Beachdude0213 (talk) 05:23, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Boston Red Sox newsletter updated for December 30, 2007.
|
|
|
| The Boston Red Sox WikiProject Newsletter | ||
| Volume 1, Issue 3 • December 30, 2007 • About the Newsletter | ||
Project and team news: |
Featured Red Sox articles of the week: |
New Boston Red Sox related articles: |
| Archives • Newsroom | ||
You are receiving this newsletter because you are a member of WikiProject Boston Red Sox. If you would not like to receive this newsletter, please add your name here. JJBot (talk) 05:30, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Afghanistan protection
Hello, you recently unprotected Afghanistan, stating as your reason that there had only been vandalism from IPs. However, the main problem on that article is not so much the vandalism but the sockpuppeting. I don't mind having it unprotected, but can I ask you to help watching it while it's being edited? Every new account that turns up on that or any related article continuing the old ethnic disputes between Pashtuns and Tajiks and about the demonym "Afghan" and "Afghanistani" is a sock. Since your unprotection, there have been at least two new ones, including lots of edit-warring, at least one bogus 3RR report by a banned sock against a legitimate user, and so on so forth. Thanks, Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:11, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sure, I can help keep an eye on it. Do you think it should be reprotected to any level? jj137 ♠ 16:45, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for help with the anon IP userspace vandalism and personal attacks.
Appreciate the quick turnaround. There are several registered users who I'm sure were getting tired of the attacks. I had e-mailed User:Húsönd on two occassions to make sure I was doing the right thing here. Thanks again. --CobraGeek (talk) 17:22, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not a problem. You might want to read this: [2]. jj137 ♠ 01:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's pretty pathetic, do you think he knew he was addressing an admin? This IP vandalized my userspace multiple times, then when Aitias corrected the vandalism, he continuously reverted. Does 3RR apply to reverting to vandalism you have 'contributed' on a user page? :)--CobraGeek (talk) 02:32, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, 3RR doesn't apply to reverting vandalism. Actually, I was just about to offer semi-protecting your userpage, but I see that's already done. :) jj137 ♠ 02:37, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's pretty pathetic, do you think he knew he was addressing an admin? This IP vandalized my userspace multiple times, then when Aitias corrected the vandalism, he continuously reverted. Does 3RR apply to reverting to vandalism you have 'contributed' on a user page? :)--CobraGeek (talk) 02:32, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Congrats on a job well done!
I got the newsletter. The bot seems to be working fine. Our only problem is that we didn't get three articles. No deal through. It's hard to create three new articles of old Red Sox players. Ever thought of doing only one? --HPJoker Leave me a message 18:32, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean by "thought of doing just one", I mean, that's what happened this week. jj137 ♠ 01:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Protected Nintendo GameCube
I just wanted to let you know that only one person, User:Mega Man 5 and his sockpuppet, User:142.59.1.45 support having the section in question the way it currently is, and everyone else who has commented (including myself) support the other way. (please see Talk:Nintendo GameCube#Section: "Marketing Share" tense for discussion on this.) This problem has been ongoing for some time, and I would like to request that you block Mega Man 5 and his sock and unblock Nintendo GameCube because this is a case of WP:OWN by Mega Man 5. Thank you for your help. Thingg (talk) 20:50, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm. I'm not an expert on this situation, but I actually think Mega Man 5 has a somewhat good point here. If the GameCube is failing, you can't put failed. That's what's happening, right? jj137 ♠ 01:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- I see what you're saying, but I think it is kind of ludicrous to say the GameCube is "failing to regain market share" when the GameCube/Xbox/PS2 era is all but over and, as I already demonstrated, it would take the GameCube more than 86 years to sell as many units as the market leader, the PS2. Either way, I really don't care (I just want this months-long edit war to end), but I do think it would make more sense to use the past tense. Thingg (talk) 02:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- You do have a very good point. If you would like to keep it your way, that's fine, because I think Mega Man has been going crazy to get it his way. Not everything here can be perfect. -- jj137 ♠ 02:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- I see what you're saying, but I think it is kind of ludicrous to say the GameCube is "failing to regain market share" when the GameCube/Xbox/PS2 era is all but over and, as I already demonstrated, it would take the GameCube more than 86 years to sell as many units as the market leader, the PS2. Either way, I really don't care (I just want this months-long edit war to end), but I do think it would make more sense to use the past tense. Thingg (talk) 02:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Username
This guy is asking for unblock. What's the issue with his username? He also thinks he's blocked for vandalism. See User_talk:Repeal_16-17#Username. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- got it, declined him on activist username. The vandalism doesn't help his case either. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:28, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
3RR user that you banned changed IPs and reverted your changes (re-inserted vandalism)
The artical is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Carolina-Clemson_brawl and here is his change: User:69.60.114.58 contributions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/69.60.114.58 . This guy just keeps trolling and adding POV material that he can't produce a citation for. Is there any way we can lock that article down for like a month or something? Reverseknarf (talk) 03:46, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- That IP is obviously the same person with a very frequently changing IP address; I semi-protected the article for a month. jj137 ♠ 03:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
You want citations? Fine...
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=1929371 http://www.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/stories/101906abn.html
There's two that both cite the ASSOCIATED PRESS story about the brawl. I should think that would be good enough for Wiki.
Please restore the FACT-BASED version of the article or unlock it so that I may do so, with the addition of the reference. Thank you.
Here's yet another reference, from another source.
http://www.bonesville.net/Articles/OtherArticles/Bonesville/NN/2005/11/111605_NN.htm
Note that this reporter didn't use the word "appeared" in their account. I'm not going to argue semantics with you. The simple fact is, this is a widely supported summation of a factual occurence. Does it make any sense that a simple tackle instigated a brawl between two football teams, or would it make more sense that there might have been a little "extra-curricular activity" on the play that sparked such a melee?
Thank you for seeing reason. Good day.
I know it's not always fun, but you're doing a great job!
|
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| Thanks for all the help with the stampede of anon IP vandalism and userspace attacks (both finding, fixing, and blocking. Your work is not going unnoticed!!).--CobraGeek (talk) 04:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC) |
Happy New Year!
 |
Happy New Year, Jj137/Archive 7. |
Vandalism on the Landmark Education page
User User:Spacefarer is hacking/vandalising the page to bits with no use of the discussion page. Suggesting revert to page before his chooping occurred and freezing it. Apparently there is an LE convention (Global Transformation 2020) very soon, hence the rapid edits. --Pax Arcane 16:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello Jj137,
I believe you should go ahead and delete Copious free time, as stated it should be by everyone here|[3]. Please go ahead and delete it if it has not been deleted by the time you see this message. Your an admin so... Thanks! Ohmpandya (Talk) 17:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- There you go. jj137 ♠ 17:16, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! Babies in Toyland has 6 delete tags and 1 weak keep, please go ahead and delete that. Sorry if I'm bothering you... Ohmpandya (Talk) 17:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Sock Puppets
Sorry to bother you again... Your are just about the only admin I know...so...
I believe you should check this out:
- Ohmy
- Ohmy!
- Ohmy12
Would you consider these sock puppets?
Thanks,
Ohmpandya (Talk) 18:24, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- I closed that AfD as well and deleted the article. Don't worry, you're not bothering me :) Also, I'm not sure what the problem with those users are, because they are all accounts created at completely separate times with very few or no edits. jj137 ♠ 18:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Admin Coaching:
Yes, that would be great! I really look forward o becoming an Admin.
David antunez has 2 strong deletes 2 speedy deletes and 1 regular delete. You should go ahead and delete that. Ohmpandya (Talk) 18:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Robot (t.A.T.u. song) could use a deletion. 5 delete's.
...And 1 redirect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohmpandya (talk • contribs) 18:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, the page sounds good, I created it. What next?Ohmpandya (Talk) 19:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Since you deleted "Robot", could you go ahead and delete all of the other listed songs in the AfD discussion? Corvus cornixtalk 19:07, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Done jj137 ♠ 19:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- thank you. :) Corvus cornixtalk 19:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- You deleted these under CSD A7, yet A7 does not cover songs. RMHED (talk) 19:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Oops, I think I meant to say A1 there. jj137 ♠ 20:09, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Questions
Please look at what I wrote on "The Page" Ohmpandya (Talk) 19:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Added something to the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohmpandya (talk • contribs) 00:41, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Updated the page Ohmpandya (Talk) 01:04, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Updated Page...Ohmpandya (Talk) 03:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC) Once again...Ohmpandya (Talk) 03:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- and again Ohmpandya (Talk) 03:51, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
.....again.....Ohmpandya (Talk) 03:55, 1 January 2008 (UTC) again!Ohmpandya (Talk) 04:04, 1 January 2008 (UTC) UPDATED Ohmpandya (Talk) 04:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes it says AWBUpdaterOhmpandya (Talk) 04:12, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- You think right!! It Worked!!!!Ohmpandya (Talk) 04:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Ok thanks, once again. What do I do on the AWB to make what I want to do work? I'm currently reading the manual. Ohmpandya (Talk) 04:26, 1 January 2008 (UTC) It's on wikipedia. If you search: "List of cities and towns in (state) wikipedia" on google, it will come up.Ohmpandya (Talk) 04:31, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- And i could use some help on that yes... (Thanks!)Ohmpandya (Talk) 04:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ok thanks for all the help yesterday. I got all the list of cities/towns in California, and they are now on AWB. I checked "Skep existing pages" I don't understand what to do after this. Please explain it to me. Ohmpandya (Talk) 16:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Actually I got it to work...somehow. Thanks again!! However, there is a problem. If you go to my contributions, you will see that the edit summary says that I:{Redirected Page, added wikify tag, added deadend tag, added orphan tag using [[Project:Aut) Nothing is true except that I redirected the page. How do i fix this?Ohmpandya (Talk) 18:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Got this to work to. I'm going to try to finish California today. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohmpandya (talk • contribs) 18:38, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes I did that, thanks for your help. What would you like to do next? And... oh yeah, my RFA is definitely not passing. Is there any way I can just remove it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohmpandya (talk • contribs) 18:41, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Deleting
You are doing a great job of deleting lots of articles, please do keep it up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chump Manbear (talk • contribs) 20:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: AutoWikiBrowser
Oh, that was fast. Thanks. ~ twsX · TC · Typo-Warning! ~ 21:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Deletion of Demi Evans
- You have Speedy deleted an article about an artist who has issued an album [4] and is heavily advertised in a small country known as France. I am ok with an Afd, but this does not warrant a speedy, I am sorry, please reconsider. I put a {{hangon}} and you didn t even take that into account. Hektor (talk) 23:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- For instance she is today the main guest of the December 31 evening show of the main French television channel TF1
- I restored the article. jj137 ♠ 23:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
musick
I am waiting for a phone call from don c musick III to confirm... he said that it was OK Previously —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaylak07 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 1 January 2008 (UTC)