Jump to content

User talk:Jusdafax/Archive 14

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15

Abdul Hamid 2

There was no source for that in the first place, 4 died in hospital, so that makes it 30. It says at least, so that is proper description, it's also on encyclopediasupreme.org/abdulhamid2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.120.131.3 (talk) 01:37, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Hasty Much

I'm just adding the citation now. Relax. sheesh you people get so self righteous "or you will be blocked" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.69.174.194 (talk) 04:26, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

  • First off, it would help if you referred to the article Free love which I reverted you on, as well as signing your Talk page posts. As to the article, which you first edited without an edit summary, you added a substantial quote to the article lead section. The quote is not found in the article below, as far as I can tell, but even if it was, it is still a contradiction of Wikipedia’s encyclopedic style per WP:MOS, which makes it clear that the lead section is for summarizing the article, not inserting details. I see that since I reverted you, you have re-inserted the quote into the lede. I would recommend putting the quote, with a reliable source per WP:RS, in the article itself, probably in the “Recent” section. If you do that, using an edit summary, your edit will most likely last. Your subsequent edit summary taunt regarding an “edit war” is certainly of interest, and falls into WP:BATTLE territory. As to the templated warning you got on your Talk page, its tone is reflective of the fact that other editors have seen fit to issue you previous warnings. A brief look at your edit history indicates, as I see it, that you should familiarize yourself with Wikipedia policy, starting with WP:NPOV. “Self-righteous?” Most Wikipedians would do exactly the same as I did, but few have the time and patience to explain it as I have. I suggest you consider this carefully. I will likely look at this further at a later date. Good luck to you. Jusdafax (talk) 05:07, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Abboud

Hi, for the Michel Abboud page, it is still in the works. I am cleaning up the citations. Please leave as is for the next hour or two while I bring it together! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cordobabelot (talk • contribs) 03:19, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

OK. Jusdafax (talk) 03:22, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Moorjani

I'm working on the Anita Moorjani page. It's still in the works. I'm addressing two banners at the top of the page. Please leave it as it is so I can complete. Thank you. Kellymalone1 (talk) 22:41, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

All right. Please use reliable sources per WP:RS as the article, as you note, is disputed. Otherwise, the additions will be deleted. Thanks. Jusdafax (talk) 22:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm not sure what sources you're looking for. I'm deleting disputable content and added these sections: Bibliogrpahy, Film, and Audio Recordings. If I need to do something differently, could you please tell me now, so my content doesn't go away. I'm doing this for Anita Moorjani who requested the edits. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kellymalone1 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Ok, that’s a problem, since you have a close connection to the article’s subject and are a new editor unfamiliar with the many Wikipedia policies. Since, as you say, you are editing at the subject’s request, the situation becomes a conflict of interest, covered under WP:COI. That means your edits will be scrutinized carefully. I’d suggest you familiarize yourself with WP:CITE and WP:RS for starters. The larger picture is at Help: Wikipedia: The Missing Manual. Learning all this is a time-intensive process. Study how references are formatted, and which are considered reliable, in order to be able to add information. Best wishes! Jusdafax (talk) 23:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank you so much. I'll follow this guidelines--stating my COI and suggesting the edits rather than making them directly. I've been studying quite a few of the guidelines but did not see WP:COI, so again, thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kellymalone1 (talk • contribs) 02:43, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I was able to work with an editor to make some of the changes needed for flow and updating (see Anita Moorjani's talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Anita_Moorjani for thread). However, too much was deleted from one section before I could add references. I've requested proposed changes--stating my COI--but have not received a response. Since you were so helpful last time, I'm hoping you can advise. Thank you! Kellymalone1 (talk) 20:33, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

  • If you add the deleted material back in nearly a week after making the request having had no reply, AND the material is properly sourced, and you note your actions on the article Talk page, then in my view it should stand. However you should note that my opinion might not count for a lot, not being an administrator and not having much experience writing in this controversial field. The problem with citing books is of course that it is difficult to verify statements without having access to the book. Since you are, in my view, clearly making good faith attempts to edit the article, for what it’s worth, you have my blessing. Cheers! Jusdafax (talk) 20:59, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll give it a couple more days then add it back with an explanation. I so appreciate your help!

Kellymalone1 (talk) 22:58, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Amendment to Wikipedia page.

Hi, You recently removed information i added to the Graeme Koehne Wikipedia page. I do not have a citation as the information was provided by Graeme Koehne himself, to me as his media manager. I work for both him and his wife and therefore have access to both the marriage and birth certificate as authentication. This IP address can also be linked back to the office of both Melinda and Graeme. If you could please change the information back or approve the changes made. King Regards, Gigi Koehne — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.103.135 (talk) 04:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Please see the above post, as it covers most if not all of your request. I see you are a new editor who has only edited the Graeme Koehne article. I also see you reinstated the paragraph in question, were reverted again, and then included it again, which falls under WP:3RR. Please read and understand this important policy. I am reverting again, and strongly suggest you stop that. To properly include such information, you need to source the material with references from the news media or other publications deemed reliable. This policy has been put in place by Wikipedia, not by me, a volunteer editor. Birth certificates and other documents don’t fall under the requirements of WP:RS. Also, please read the requirements for paid editing under WP:COI. It takes time to learn the various rules of Wikipedia. For more information, please refer to Help: Wikipedia: The Missing Manual. I wish you good fortune. Jusdafax (talk) 09:26, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

verified page

Hi there, can you give some insight on how to get a wiki page verified? Helplessrecords (talk) 15:54, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Given that I have just reverted you for unexplained vandalism to a living person’s Wikipedia page, I am going to suggest you make some valid edits, for starters. Jusdafax (talk) 16:01, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Jasenovac concentration camp edit

Hi,

you undid my edit on "Jasenovac concentration camp edit" article. While I, indeed, have never edited Wikipedia articles before, if you take one look at the deleted content you will understand why I deleted it.

1. the sentence "under influence of reborn neo-fascism in Croatia according to Deutsche Welle" is completely out of the context, since the DW article states NOWHERE that the change in Museums attitude is due to the rise of neofascist tendencies in Croatia. Furthermore, it says nothing of the Museum at all, so this sentence can only be seen as the editors viewpoint, or ideological tendencies.

2. the sentence "Ethnic cleansing in Croatia, specifically focused against Serbs, does not stop until today" is plainly FALSE. If there was any ethnic cleansing in Crotia TODAY, I would expect a reaction from NATO, EU, or any other relevant body of authority to react. Of course, the editor - again - provides no source for this very, very, very strong claim.

3. furthermore, "when over 300 000 Serbs had to fled their homeland forced by Croatian government" is grammatically and factually incorrect, and there is no source provided (aside from a Vice article, that by the way uses the Jasenovac numbers highly disputed, and even ridiculed at this point, in academic circles, which is also elaborated on in the article).

The last sentence I deleted by accident.

Really deeply sorry for the trouble, just hate seeing the facts twisted.

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.129.52.216 (talk) 12:34, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Very well, and since you have an explanation I will not revert again, while making no judgement on the content. In the future, please use edit summaries when editing, thanks, by filling in the provided edit summary box on the edit screen. Also please sign your Talk page posts. Thanks again. Jusdafax (talk) 12:44, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

List of sex symbols 2010s ABC

Hi, those 2A03:2267:* IPs change too fast to make sense, please check Talk:List of sex symbols#2010s_clean-up ABC: JFG suggested a possible rule for Y2K and later in Talk:List_of_sex_symbols#Sourcing two years ago, and that's still the only game in town, cf. Talk:List_of_sex_symbols#Suggestion_about_sources. –84.46.53.155 (talk) 23:59, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Minor edits

Would you mind not tagging your reverts as minor other than when you're reverting blatant vandalism? R2 (bleep) 21:46, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

  • I have noticed that Huggle is labeling my reverts as minor, and will check my settings. If it’s not me, I’ll look into it at the Huggle page as see if others are experiencing this issue. Jusdafax (talk) 21:56, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

DJ Hurricane edit

I made an addendum to the Wikipedia entry for DJ Hurricane, and you asked for a reliable source for my addition. I added to the discography for Hurricane his appearance on Davy D's 1987 album Davy's Ride. I do not have the basic album control number in front of me, but I am looking at the cassette tape, issued by Def Jam/Columbia in 1987. Not only does Hurricane rap on the vocal cuts on the album, he is pictured on the album cover next to Davy DMX himself. As there is no other special documentation listed for Hurricane's work with the Beastie Boys, I see no reason why it would be needed for his work with Davy DMX. Padeitsch69 (talk) 14:48, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

I would be happy to add track listings for the album if that would lend more authority.

  • Sorry about not replying earlier. It all comes back to WP:RS, and though I’ll not revert you, the material is subject to challenge and removal per WP:BLP. Perhaps AllMusic? I believe that’s a Reliable Source on Wikipedia, last I checked. Good fortunes to you. Jusdafax (talk) 06:56, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Wyss Foundation

Hello! I'm not sure if you saw my note here or not (I know not all editors receive "ping" notifications), but I'm hoping to find an editor willing to review my request at Talk:Wyss Foundation regarding removal of text about the ongoing Wyss Campaign for Nature. I've tried to get feedback from multiple editors, and so far no one has replied to my request for help at WikiProject Environment. The campaign is ongoing and has received significant coverage, so I'm wondering how the Wyss Campaign for Nature might be covered in the Wyss Foundation article. Thanks. Inkian Jason (talk) 15:23, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

  • I’ve briefly reviewed the deletion of your section. My recommendation is to try to establish a discussion at the deleting editor’s Talk page, since your good faith attempt to discuss the deletion at the article Talk page has not been replied to, and if there is still no reply, then restore your version. Hopefully that editor will in fact discuss the deletion at this time, but if you restore the material, include more of the references in the coverage you refer to, as your section appears to be referenced to one journal. Make sure additional refs comply with WP:RS, of course. Best wishes! Jusdafax (talk) 06:45, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

IRIB

That Piece I Put Was A Fact Many Opponents And Reformists Inside and outside iran Think the IRIB Is a propaganda machine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.50.105.130 (talk) 06:19, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Hello

I removed this paragraph....

"Rafael Trujillo, the dictator of the Dominican Republic, strove to improve "La Raza" during the 1960's. He brought Europeans to the Dominican Republic to marry Dominicans, and he ordered between twenty and thirty thousand Haitians killed in 1937 and demanded that no more Haitians enter the Dominican Republic."

...because it has no relevance to the topic of Dominicans in the United States. Trujillo's attempts to better "la raza" with Europeans (which occurred in the 1940s, not the 1960s when he was assassinated), and the 1937 Parsley Massacre was not a reason for Dominicans to emigrate to the United States. Poverty and political strife after Trujillo was assassinated by his own people in 1961 (decades after these atrocities where committed) where the motivations for Dominicans to leave their country. Your paragraph better suited for pages discussing Rafael Trujillo's foreign policy, the Haitian diaspora in the Dominican Republic and the long complicated history between the Republic of Haiti and it's neighbor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.69.240.64 (talk) 03:59, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Fair enough. In the future, please use edit summaries when making substantial changes to an article. The edit summary box is located under the editing field, as you can see. Also, please sign your posts to Talk pages by clicking on the icon just above the edit summary box. Thanks. Jusdafax (talk) 04:11, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Duly Noted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.69.240.64 (talk) 04:25, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit on Fayetteville-Manlius High School tennis team

I replaced outdated information with the latest scoop as I am a student at the school. Unfortunately our school does not get any media converage so I do not have a source to provide other than being a student at the school itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragonslayer826 (talk • contribs) 23:50, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Labelling Edit as Disruptive

I disagree that the edit I made to Zermatt is disruptive. The term "summit" is more neutral than "conquest", is used widely within the mountaineering community (to show respect for the mountain), and is used multiple times in other articles like eight-thousander. The term "ascent" is used in Mount Everest, but not "conquest" either.

If you want to revert this edit, then I suggest to change all other instances in other articles as well for consistency. Above all, I understand your zeal in combating vandalism, but this is not a disruptive edit. --219.75.113.186 (talk) 15:40, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Gutseriyev

Hello, I have included source. I know them personally, but I included what I could find. He was married twice prior, but has no contact with mother. Also, I will be sure to include source in future.

Thanks. хорошего дня — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vlad.sirin (talk • contribs) 22:15, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Vandalism Message

Hello, You sent me a message regarding vandalism of a Toy Story Character List Page. I have never even looked at the Toy Story pages and would never vandalize a Wiki article. I'm not sure what is being referred to but I wanted to assure you I am not the culprit and to please regard any future edits with suspicion as I rarely edit. I'm mostly here to learn. Apologies for any inconvenience caused, I just wanted to plead my case and be removed from any list or unwarranted disciplinary action as I am a huge supporter of Wikipedia and always make sure to donate generously. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.231.85 (talk) 04:00, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Actually this diff shows that your IP number was used in an episode of minor vandalism... back in 2016. I’ll assume good faith and ask if someone else has access to your computer or device, or did three years ago. Anyway, it’s no big deal at this point and you are not on a list as far as I know, and are in good standing barring further obvious vandalism. I’d suggest creating an account which reduces the chance of such events in the future. Kind of a fresh start, if you will. Cheers! Jusdafax (talk) 07:59, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

I need help

Hello, I am new here on Wikipedia so I don't really know how to edit articles. On the list of twins article I wanted to add two Bavarian princesses from the 19th century who were twins. Can you plese help me? Kind regards, Lupko1994 Lupko1994 (talk) 22:43, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Ni-Vanuatu vs Vanuatuan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ni-Vanuatu

I made a correction to the demonym listed on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ham_Lin%CC%84i

From Vanuatuan (which is incorrect) to Ni-Vanuatu (which is correct).

It would be good to check whether an edit is correct or not before you remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.75.20.94 (talk) 22:21, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

  • OK, am unfamiliar with that prefix which appears at first glance to be vandalism. In turn, it would be good if you learned to use edit summaries as clearly requested on the edit screen. Had you done so, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Jusdafax (talk) 22:32, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

I wrote "correcting demonym". The fact that you don't know that word is not my fault? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.75.20.94 (talk) 22:35, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

  • Here’s your edit. There is no edit summary. In your four edits to date, you have yet to “briefly describe your changes” as requested. Nor have you signed your posts, also as requested. Now, you are a new user, so I will assume good faith despite your unpleasant manner. Clearly I was wrong about your edit, and I will remove the warning on your Talk page in an attempt to get back on the right foot here. But I again ask you to use edit summaries in the future, because had you done so, I would not have reverted you. Please understand this very simple fact, and act on it. Thanks, Jusdafax (talk) 22:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks and best wishes to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.75.20.94 (talk) 23:18, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Edit to Narinder Kumar Gupta's page

Hi Jusdafax, thank you for your message. I removed the reference/citation to that pdf because the link wasn't working. Instead i added a citation for a wikipedia page that lists the award recipients by decade. I'm new to wikipedia so apologize if i'm not doing things right. Thanks for your feedback and help in ensuring accuracy of information on wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.0.82.105 (talk) 02:27, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

It’s a good idea to use edit summaries for all additions and deletions to articles. Thank you, and cheers! Jusdafax (talk) 02:31, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Deleted content regarding Gordon Walker, Piper

Good morning, you have deleted content which I added to this page. The content was factual and correct and I do not understand why it was deleted. Thank you. M155AWW (talk) 09:20, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

  • The notice I left on your Talk page is clearly written. If you haven’t read it, please do so. In brief: You have added material to a biography of a living person that is unsourced, and subject to immediate deletion per WP:BLP. Please do not restore the material without reliable sourcing per WP:RS, thanks. Jusdafax (talk) 09:26, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

I didn’t realise I had a “talk page” so will of course read that. I presume that I can resubmit my information to the page as long as I can provide links to prove the validity- I will await the court publication of the outcome of the trial and I would assume then that this would be acceptable as a reliable source to link to? I am guessing that press coverage of a trial/outcome does not meet the standards required to count as a valid source? Regards, M155AWW (talk) 09:50, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

  • It depends on the news source. The Times of London would be considered reliable, a tabloid paper, not so. I believe court transcripts are accepted but given the nature of the crime you wish to add to Walker’s Wikipedia article, secondary sources are important. Another link to study is the important policy WP:V which will help you to further understand sourcing requirements. I also suggest study of similar articles with proper references to understand the coding, though you can easily start by clicking the link on the edit screen to the right of the phrase “Cite your sources” with the ref and /ref in “carrots” which will print locate that where your cursor is. Just put the article link in between the ref and /ref. With study and patience you can add sourced material to the article. There are numerous other requirements but this is the place to start. Best wishes! Jusdafax (talk) 10:06, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. This is important information to be in the public domain so I will persevere. M155AWW (talk) 10:27, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Factual errors on Dick Enthoven page

I have corrected factual errors on the wiki page for Richard "Dick" Enthoven and my edits are automatically rolled back to their incorrect state. How do I get these errors corrected?

ie: 1. Dick is the BROTHER of Patrick, not the SON. 2. Dick is the SON of Robert, not the Grandson. 3. Dick has 5 children, not 3.

With Kindest regards Peter Butler Johannesburg, South Africa Buttle007 (talk) 05:48, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

  • Information added to Wikipedia articles, especially to those of living persons, are subject to sourcing requirements per WP:V and WP:RS. Also, please read WP:BLP. Since the subject of the article is quite prominent, you should look for reliable sources, and include them as references, to confirm your edit. I looked at the reference that was already provided, but only three children are mentioned. Thanks, Jusdafax (talk) 05:55, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Project Environment

Greetings, I'm a longtime climate editor where there is currently talk about at least renewing an inactive Project:Environment task force and the currently more popular idea is to just convert it to a standalone project in its own right. Since none of us have much experience approaching wikiwork through task forces and projects, one of the advantages to remaining a task force (I thought) was to take advantage of the mentoring help available from the plethora of active and experienced project:Environment members. Oops! Today I saw your 2018 post asking if there was anyone else in the room over there. I'm sorry you didn't get a better response. FYI, if you'd like to join the subset of climate eds toying with project work, there is stuff happening in that area. All the links and a more detailed summary can be found here.NewsAndEventsGuy (talk)

Thanks, I'm playing catch up and will reply, if needed, at the project proposal page. Enjoy! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 14:33, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Where there is smoke, there is fire

I just discovered eight months after the fact, yesterday, that Jytdog had been banned as of last December over some incident that I was unaware of, and not involved in. I see that during that process you made a comment about going back to see what other damage he'd done. Nobody did that. But I'm here to let you know that he indeed did do some. A few months before, he completely blocked my edit note to include the effectiveness of the drug tafamidis for a particular type of amyloid cardiomyopathy, reported in a very large (and very dificult to repeat) New England Journal of Medicine study, which had appeared in August, 2018. I found I couldn't insert it, even as an experimental trial, because Jytdog insisted (with not really a very good rationale in WP:MEDRS it could not go in, as a "primary source." (Now, sometimes later, I'm going to go see if I can do that again, or if somebody has beaten me to it). My compaint at the time (which you can read) that no further studies were going to get done before the FDA approved it, went nowhere. He then dragged me into a WP:AN3 fight which did nobody any good, particularly since he had by far the worst record of wikilawyering there (which I detailed, to the disinterest of everybody). Then, a month ago in May, the FDA DID approve the drug (on the basis of that one previous human study-- no more relevent information). You can see the details here. My question of what to do about this kind of editor, and this system, remains unanswered. I am simply writing to say that you are perhaps the only person in this whole drama (in September OR in December) who sensed there was something rotten, and to thank you belatedly for your perspicacity in that. But the system remains broken. SBHarris 04:01, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

  • Thanks for your note. I appreciate your kind words. I continue to feel that under the circumstances a thorough examination and analysis of the editor’s years of Wikipedia work is warranted, but I am too involved to do so, or even actively advocate for such at this time. I will take your statement under advisement however. Thanks again. Jusdafax (talk) 22:36, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

12 years of editing

Hey, Jusdafax. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Chris Troutman (talk) 13:46, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

talkheader?

Why do you add the template to pages where no controversies require that users are told about manners? I believe it's clutter on others, and am not the only one. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:07, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you iam first time edit and i didnt know Khaled1oo8 (talk) 23:29, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

Box office gross for The Angry Birds Movie 2

Well, I was checking the Box Office Mojo page of The Angry Birds Movie 2 and here's the worldwide gross that I saw: $145,031,755

It's just that I was updating the gross that came from overseas and worldwide. Is it still okay?

  • Yes. Your IP edit was closely followed by IP vandalism, and I mistakenly assumed that your update was related to the vandal. I have removed the vandalism template from your talk page. I will restore your edit if you wish, or you can do it yourself. Sorry about the confusion, and thanks for editing. Cheers! Jusdafax (talk) 23:34, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

"Months rather than weeks?"

Reading an old talk page archive from June 2010, I see that you said you were thinking of undergoing an RfA "one of these months". Looking further, I saw that 3 months later you said you would consider it "in the coming weeks and months". It's been quite a few weeks and months now... JBW (talk) Formerly JamesBWatson 11:00, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Thanks for your kindly observation! Indeed, we go back a ways, and the place has changed quite a bit in the last decade.
Looking at your userpage, I am struck by this part of your statement: “As time passed I gradually found that problems I found led me into other areas, including reverting vandalism, discussions on policy and administrative issues. Eventually there came a time when vandalism fighting was the main focus of my work. I was then asked by an administrator who had seen my anti-vandalism work to consider becoming an administrator myself, so that I could deal directly with vandals, instead of reporting them for someone else to follow up.”
Like you, vandalism fighting comprises the majority of my time here, and the admin tools would be handy in the ongoing effort. However, as I have mentioned to the last well-wisher who suggested I request the mop, I tend to edit in streaks with substantial gaps in between. Those gaps, as I see it, could be problematic, especially should I venture into some of the more controversial areas of the ‘pedia as an admin, where nasty behavior abounds.
I could write a book about my years here, including my first major edits to the project over a decade ago, the steep learning curve I went through, my “apprenticeship” at the Wikimedia Foundation in San Francisco as an intern working with Cary Bass and Mike Godwin, and my eventual decision to table a run for adminship. I dare say if there was a fervent outpouring of, say, dozens of suggestions that I run, I’d probably reconsider, though that seems unlikely at this time.
Thanks again JB, and cheers! Jusdafax (talk) 06:30, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
Yes. I didn't really expect that you would now decide to run. It was more that when I saw that old message from so long ago it seemed a little amusing, and my message here was more tongue in cheek than anything else. I think you would have made a good administrator, but you have done other work which is just as good, just in different ways, and I see no reason why you should be an admin if you don't want to.
I too could write a book about my time here, and the learning process, as no doubt could many editors of similar vintage as you and me. Looking back at old talk page posts from my early days editing Wikipedia is quite strange, because it reminds me what a very different perspective I had of things in those days. Some of the really early ones show what now seems an astonishing ignorance of how Wikipedia works; for example at least once I wrote comments about what changes I thought should be made to an article, and posted those comments in the article itself. By the time of your message that I mentioned above, I was long past that stage, but much of what I wrote shows a different outlook than I have now. Perhaps the most striking thing is that back in those days I was much better than now at being friendly and helpful to new editors who didn't know what was what. I tend to think I am doing that now, but when I look back at my editing from a decade or so ago I realise that I did a far better job in that respect than I do now. Sadly, I suppose years of dealing with vandals, spammers, and so on, have worn the edge off my early enthusiasm in that area.
Incidentally, you mention my user page. It is substantially the same as it was many years ago, with just a few minor changes, and if I were to rewrite it now it would be quite different, in several ways. Sometimes I think of rewriting it, but I always finish up thinking that what one's user page says isn't really important enough to be worth bothering about, so I leave it as it is. JBW (talk) Formerly JamesBWatson 15:10, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Frederick Raynal's page modifications

Hi Jusdafax, I'm Frederick Raynal, I just wanted to update my situation and fix some small errors. How can I do this ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LudoidFred (talk • contribs) 11:18, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Greetings. I reverted 3 edits to the Frédérick Raynal page. Two were unsourced additions, and one was a change to the subject’s first name, adding the final k in Frederick. I have just now fixed my revert there. The other two edits need references, and to add the material you should supply them per WP:RS. I should note that editing one’s own Wikipedia article is frowned on here. Jusdafax (talk) 18:11, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

about the vandal on Henry Tang page

I see you have reverted some of the many vandalising edits by 194.151.221.82 on the Henry Tang page (and perhaps elsewhere?). He's been at it for months, eg changing Tang's wife's name, and especially damaging, Tang's own name (his false change to 'Henry Tang Ying-nien' is widely quoted in recent media). Do you know how to go about shutting him down? I've left a comment on this on the talk page. Onanoff (talk) 17:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

  • You are quite correct that editor IP 194 is a single-purpose account WP:SPA devoted to vandalism at Tang’s page. Since there is no current vandalism, the last attack being a number of weeks ago, it probably would not do to report this at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism at this time. I will watchlist the page and try to keep an eye on it, but am away from Wikipedia at times. If you notice this IP vandalism again, and it is current, report it to that link, or to me, and it may be possible to temporarily block the IP. Let me add that I am not an administrator, and that you may want to take this issue to one, who may suggest a course of action that I am not coming up with here. The key Wikipedia policy in this case is WP:NOTHERE, as I see it. Best wishes! Jusdafax (talk) 18:26, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

You Reverted...

You Reverted my addition to the West Campus (University of Texas) murders. TDCJ Offender Search verifies that Gifford is located there, as does his pen pal ad on Write a Prisoner. His parents Facebook pages (Sally Gifford) discuss how "blessed " they are, that Sam is in the seminary program. And, I'm The one that heard her say his codefendant wanted to get into the seminary, and that she wasn't going to "let " that happen. I see them every weekend, at Darrington visitation. Factual. ----

Archive 10←Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jusdafax/Archive_14&oldid=962577368"