User talk:Jmugge

Hello Jmugge! Welcome to English Wikipedia
Thanks you for your participation in this project. We hope that you will stay and contribute, and that you will find the experience enjoyable. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that started in 2001, it is free for all to use and anyone may edit it. There are certain guidelines and principles that all users are expected to follow. These principles and guidelines are listed below—click on a link for more information.
	The five pillars of Wikipedia The fundamental principles of the project	Help Wikipedia's help section
	Tutorial This tutorial is a basic guide to editing	Your user pages and your sandbox How to experiment and edit in your user space
	Mentoring program Ask an experienced editor to be your mentor	How to start a page Help on creating your first article
	Things to avoid How to avoid common errors and mistakes	Style Guide How to write in an acceptable style
	Main policies of Wikipedia An introduction to Wikipedia's main policies and guidelines	Frequently asked questions Some common questions and their answers
	Help Desk Here you can ask other editors for assistance	Quick reference A handy quick reference guide for editing Wiki
This page is your Talk page. Here you can receive messages from other Wikipedians and discuss things with them. At the end of your messages you should put your signature, by signing with four ~~~~ or by pressing the button in the editor bar—shown here in the picture. Do not sign in the articles themselves. See When signatures should and should not be used for more information. Can't see this message properly? Click here for a simpler version.

--SPhilbrick T 00:16, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Jmugge. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback/2011_August_12#Jamie_Comstock.
Message added SPhilbrick T 00:17, 14 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

January 2012

Your recent editing history shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. Calabe 1992 15:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note / warning

On Wikipedia, revert warring like you just doing normally leads to blocks for everybody involved, regardless of who is "right". I did not block either of you since I am not certain if either of you knew about the three revert rule. Please discuss your changes on the talk page of the article rather than reverting, which accomplishes nothing. Additionally, if you are concerned that material being added to a biography of a living person (commonly abbreviated as "BLP" on Wikipedia) is inappropriate, you may wish to request help on the biographies of living persons noticeboard or via other methods of dispute resolution. Thank you. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:35, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest - Jamie Comstock

As you are on Dr. Comstock's staff, you have a very clear conflict of interest in editing her article. Please read the guidelines Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and WP:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest. In brief, you should not make directly any but the most trivial and uncontentious edits on any matter with which you have a COI; otherwise, you should propose on the article talk page changes that you would like to see, declaring your interest, and allow uninvolved editors to decide. ("Editor" means the same as "user" - there is no separate class of "editors.")

The way Wikipedia should work is described at WP:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle - if a change you make is reverted, do not simply make it again, which (as you have seen) leads to WP:Edit warring, but discuss it on the article talk page and endeavour to reach WP:Consensus with other users. If you cannot reach consensus, there are WP:Dispute resolution procedures. For articles concerned with living persons, there is a policy at WP:Biographies of living persons, advice at WP:BLP/H, and a notice-board at WP:BLP/N to invite intervention from uninvolved users.

I have protected the article for a week and posted at WP:BLP/N#Jamie Comstock to invite help. You are welcome to join in the discussion on the article talk page. Please declare your interest and observe Wikipedia's policy of WP:No personal attacks - comment on content, not on contributors.

I am sorry that things have gone so far before anyone has explained all this to you. JohnCD (talk) 18:14, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jamie Comstock for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jamie Comstock is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamie Comstock until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Geoff ^{Who, me?} 00:09, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]