User talk:Smalljim/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

→

Archive 10

Nina Jiang deleted page

Hello, I'm working on updating U.S. Figure Skating pages, and I noticed that your 2008 delete of Nina Jiang's page should now be reverted. As of 2013, she is competing at the "highest level" of the sport in the U.S., and internationally as well. http://www.isuresults.com/bios/isufs00012614.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by JGates1 (talk • contribs) 05:17, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Note - I've replied on the user's talk page and copied the content of the prodded page to his userspace.  —SMALLJIM  09:57, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Cornwall etc

Thanks btw for getting stuck into some of this recently. It's something I've pottered around occasionally for a while now and it's long been a mess, with all sorts of content scattered across a wide range of pages that seems to have more to do with often quite obscurantist modern-day politics than it does with trying to explain what is known about the history – or, more often, not known – with any certainty. N-HH talk/edits 10:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

And thanks for your subsequent improvements. After browsing through your talk pages – which are easily as interesting as many of our articles^ – I feel sure that this is an area in which you'd feel right at home (insert smiley here). I see the predictable backlash has just started, so you can take over when I've got bored and moved on to something else (one of those surprised-looking smileys).

^ I was particularly amused by the lack of appreciation of your wry humour.

 —SMALLJIM  00:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Gunnies, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stull (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:04, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gunnies

Great job on the article. I don't think that it has any chance being deleted now that it was changed from basically a definition to a nice detailed article. SL93 (talk) 02:14, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

The threat of deletion can be mighty powerful! I reckon it could go up for DYK too, so thanks for prompting me into action.  —SMALLJIM  11:16, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:2746big.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:2746big.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:09, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes it was test and you've seen it quite quickly I shall say. Really good, I can see you're doing your homework, good boy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JHAGTER (talk • contribs) 16:19, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Note

Could you also block Joehoward63 (talk · contribs)? It is a suspected sock of Jowhoward63 (talk · contribs). Regards, Eyesnore (pending changes) 16:23, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, done per duck test.  —SMALLJIM  16:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Odd edit

Hope you don't mind me mentioning it, but your last edit on User:80.0.62.177's talk page looked a bit strange. Deb (talk) 18:17, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

This edit, I presume. If you mean the wording:

"...I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made to this edit to Princes in the Tower, because...",

I agree it could read better. It's the standard Template:Huggle/warn-1 message, but it was changed by User:Eyesnore on 16 Feb. I'll ask him if he can edit it to something like:

"...I undid your recent edit to Princes in the Tower, because..."

which would be an improvement. I'd rather not try to do it myself because conditional template editing is a bit fiddly!  —SMALLJIM  20:20, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I assumed the template was at fault, but I didn't know who had changed it. Deb (talk) 11:32, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Gunnies

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:04, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

WP:AIV

Hi Smalljim, could you please take a look at WP:AIV? Includes an interesting vandal who makes PA and also intimidates the community to block him. Cheers! Arctic Kangaroo 16:40, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

You caught me just before logging off. I've blocked him for a while. Will re-check later.  —SMALLJIM  16:47, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Cornwall guidelines

Hello, These guidelines include this: "These headings are, however, plastic and in a state of flux and although we welcome suggestions or improvements, we would appreciate discussion before any major changes to the layout yourself." Perhaps the wording here could be updated if the headings have stabilised.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 17:18, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Felix. You must be referring to the content of Template:WikiProject Cornwall/guide. I can't even find the "standard set of headings" that it mentions. But it's not really worth tweaking such minor elements is it? The whole wikiproject needs updating if it's to regain its usefulness, and that would need someone prepared to take the initiative and enough interested editors to commit to helping. Moribund wikiprojects have become a common feature in recent years.  —SMALLJIM  11:49, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

It must have been written a long time ago when there were more editors willing to get things done than there are now. From what I can see only a few are still making any frequent contributions and some of those have work to do for other wikiprojects. The "standard set of headings" may be to do with the best way of organising an article on a settlement. In the case of Cornish settlements they are rather assorted. Most settlements (though not all the smallest hamlets) now have articles but most of them need more input from local people interested in the histories of those places. I have seen some wikiprojects tagged as "semi-active" but do not know how this is assessed.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 09:54, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you. WP has moved on from being a site where anyone can just add some stuff that they know. When it was in that phase, it attracted a lot more people to edit than it does now. I'd say we're now in phase two of WP's life: a lot of rewriting and addition of content is still necessary, but the work is now somewhat harder - everything should be referenced, and the writing needs to be of a higher standard. While this inevitably attracts fewer people willing to expend the necessary effort, I still have hope that WP will start to attract more editors of a better calibre as word gradually gets round that it's a more valuable resource than most people think, and that contributing to it is a worthwhile use of one's time. I've thought for a while that editing Wikipedia is an ideal hobby for silver surfers, and that more effort should be put into recruiting older people who can have accumulated a lot of knowledge (and books!) and are less prone to youth's fanaticism. Incidentally, Wikipedia's third phase—a long time in the future, when all articles are of featured standard(!)—will be pure maintenance: updates and addition of new material only.

Where was I? Ah - regarding that "standard set of headings", yes, it sounds like it was meant to refer to a customised version of WP:UKCITIES that never got written. Because that template is used on over 4,000 talk pages, I've amended it to point to the standard UKCITIES guideline. Re tagging projects as "semi-active", well it'll be a matter of consensus like everything else - if someone tags it thus and no-one undoes it, that's it! —SMALLJIM  12:33, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for improving the text of the guide. You make some interesting observations; from where I am it is hard to get any idea of how things are going in Wikipedia as a whole. Going much further with adding Cornish settlements means getting very small hamlets past the notability test when the only fact may be that it can be found on a 1:50 000 Ordnance Survey map. The greatest deficiencies in coverage of Cornwall I would say are (1) more detail on fishing needed (2) a general article on the history of tourism (3) history of Methodism (4) bringing the weaker medium and large settlement articles up to a better quality. These are not easy tasks so we may have to wait a long time.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 20:59, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the belated response. Regarding small settlements, WP:UKCITIES suggests that unless they have their own real notability, smaller places should be included in the parent article (e.g. parish), and I think that's a better solution instead of having a proliferation of unexpandable stubs. Are you following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barwick, Devon, where this is being discussed? Regarding the deficiencies, the first three of those topics at least sound quite tedious to me! Why don't you add a note to the project talk page and see if anyone replies- unlikely, but you never know...  —SMALLJIM  20:02, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment

Hey Smalljim; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:42, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit to Vanbrugh College

Of course it was constructive and useful. Wentworth E is a part of Vanbrugh College and therefore people need to know that it exists? It is an insult to anybody that is currently a part of Wentworth E that it is not included on this page. I can write a more boring entry if you would prefer/so that it stays up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.158.96.18 (talk) 12:57, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I've added a useful welcome message to your talk page - it's probably a good idea to read it before making any further edits. Hope this helps.  —SMALLJIM  13:03, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

you just made a change

Hi Samlljim. I happen to notice that the first paragraph of the article has no citation backup. Arunachal_Pradesh is a disputed area - both China and India claims ownership of the area. Btw, if you take a look at the natives - they resembles Tibetans. No Indian I met has that look. Anyway, both of us are not on neutral ground. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivanzhourocks (talk • contribs) 03:34, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

You must be referring to this one revert that I made in the midst of several hundred other Huggle edits yesterday. I have no interest in Arunachal Pradesh, but after looking at what happened to that article yesterday I would suggest that you change your tactics from trying to impose a change on the article – which won't work – to the only method that will, which is to discuss proposed changes with other interested editors on the article's talk page. This should result in an article that neutrally describes the situation, based on reliable sources. Our guidance on consensus, and the Bold, revert, discuss cycle are important pages to read. Hope this helps,  —SMALLJIM  16:47, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for deleting that article, I was trying to find a way to remove it.

How did u do it (talk) 11:48, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I've put a list of helpful guidance pages onto your talk page. Hope you can find something useful to contribute to Wikipedia!  —SMALLJIM  11:54, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Another one for you

Time for another block? 94.172.109.108 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). --Bob Re-born (talk) 21:32, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

OK. I've blocked the IP again, but have left a note regarding the WikiProject Cornwall/Guideline, to which I've just added a new section. I'd welcome your comments on that addition.  —SMALLJIM  12:33, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Copyeditor's Barnstar

You may be right that it's a breach of etiquette, but this is a wiki, isn't it? Anyone is free to edit articles I've worked on, be it 1 or 2 edits, or a 150. I really do appreciate the hard work you've put in on Doom Bar, especially since you have a much stronger geographical knowledge than me. I'm sure I said I owed you a pint last time we bumped into each other - well, now I owe you at least a couple! WormTT(talk) 07:40, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

You're very kind. Especially as I've almost certainly stymied any chance of the article getting FA in this round. The referencing is inconsistent now that I've started changing it to Refs and Sources format: I'll do my best to fix that, but I'll have to leave you to provide page refs for the multiply-cited books, French (2007) and Tregarthen (1906) at least. —SMALLJIM  11:36, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

If it's not up to spec, it's not up to spec - it's been an experience for me at any rate. I'll have a little time to look at the article this evening at least so should be able to get the books done. Worm^TT(talk) 12:39, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

An experience? - me too! It's been some time since an article has consumed my interest as much as this.  —SMALLJIM  13:10, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

To my amazement, it's been promoted - and it's in no small part due to your efforts. I do hope you will consider this a featured article you helped to create! Worm^TT(talk) 10:13, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations! Yes, I'm happy to think that my extensive reworking of the article in the last five days helped get it there and I'm particularly pleased (since no-one else was checking the sources) that my correction of at least five fairly significant factual errors has avoided a lot of potential future embarrassment to all concerned ;-)  —SMALLJIM  16:32, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Jerk councillor in Wadebridge

I just reverted the revert of your removal of the addition of the jerk councillor in Wadebridge. I suspect it may come back and I'm not going to go 3RR, but I do feel strongly that the idiot doesn't need the oxygen of publicity on Wikipedia. --Bob Re-born (talk) 10:13, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, now on my watchlist. There doesn't appear to be any link between his views and the fact that he represents part of Wadebridge – the story would be the same if he was in Bognor – so if they persist in adding him we can argue that as a non-notable person (WP:BLP1E applies) he's not within the article's scope. Reconsideration would be appropriate if further events make him notable enough for his own article, or if reliable sources write specifically about "the current state of Wadebridge, its inhabitants and politics" (to quote this edit summary). —SMALLJIM  15:21, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I'm awarding you this for your hard work in keeping the numbskulls unconstructive editors at bay in general, and specifically for your reversion which I noticed at Fingle Bridge. Baldy Bill (sharpen the razor|see my reflection) 06:49, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, BB. That's very kind of you. I'll see if there's an appropriate one to award you for your good road works (if you see what I mean).  —SMALLJIM  22:37, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Economy of Cornwall

Hello again, After there was an edit to Cornwall#Economy the present text has been queried. There is however a larger problem with the main article Economy of Cornwall which has been tagged as outdated for a while and is probably even further behind now that the china clay pits are, according to the article on the multinational company Imerys, no longer needed. This came up in editing I did within the last fortnight; I am going to take a break from the Wikipedia contribution effort soon.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 08:27, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Felix. Our earlier discussion is relevant to the problem of articles becoming outdated: fewer people are now prepared to make significant edits. Now while it's no doubt true that Economy of Cornwall is not bang up to date, unless you want to undertake the necessary research and update it yourself, it isn't worth worrying about: see WP:NOTDONE for some calming balm. And don't forget that the extensive historical detail remains accurate, so at least the article doesn't suffer from the major problem of recentism! If you're particularly concerned about statements that appear to reflect the current position but don't, then adding some {{as of}} templates where appropriate would be a simple means of improvement.

For what it's worth, I worry about all the vandalism that sneaks in while I'm not patrolling it, especially when Cluebot NG isn't running. Everyone should take a wikibreak now and then :)  —SMALLJIM  22:45, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thanks for fully undoing all the vandalism to Penair School. Edwardx (talk) 19:58, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! I just fired up WP and the activity on that article demanded a look. I've blocked the main perpetrators, but will keep an eye on the situation for a while in case they pop up in another guise.  —SMALLJIM  20:09, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Manorial descents

Please contribute to the discussion "Manorial histories" of today's date I have initiated on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 10:53, 12 June 2013 (UTC))

Now that the guidelines in this area are under discussion and awaiting consensus, I would ask you not to "hive off" any of the other articles I have contributed to until such consensus has been reached. Thanks. (Lobsterthermidor (talk) 18:45, 12 June 2013 (UTC))

@User:Lobsterthermidor. There are more?! But of course. Though equally I trust that you won't add any more such disputed content for the same period.  —SMALLJIM  20:01, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

about delete my contribution to the secret book

dear sir u have done a mistake i have study this book so i made this editing & also wanna make some other editings in this article so i hope u will confirm it as early as possible so that i can make some other editiong to improve this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jatin injoy (talk • contribs) 13:06, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment about your edit to The Secret (book). Please read the article carefully before you consider adding any content to it. It is quite a well-developed article, and already contains discussion of the significant aspects of the book. You are welcome to add to the article to clarify any points or if there is any aspect that has not already been well covered. You must, though, ensure that everything you write is in accordance with our main policies, especially Neutral point of view and Verifiability, and also as far as possible, with our Manual of style. Hope this helps,  —SMALLJIM  14:03, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Next steps?

I'm doing some minor edits/clean-up on Petrockstowe. Do you know some other articles that could benefit by having a bit of clean-up?--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:29, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if it's what you're after, but at the bottom of every editor's User contributions page, there's a link that will show all the articles they have created. Hope this helps, but if not, give me a few more details of the sort of articles you're looking for.  —SMALLJIM  21:53, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

That's helpful, thanks!--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Smalljim. You have new messages at Talk:Petrockstowe.
Message added 00:00, 28 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

You're help would be greatly appreciated! CaroleHenson (talk) 00:00, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Devon articles

	Devon editor award
	You're doing an incredible job on copyediting the articles we've been working on. I feel so much better knowing that someone "in the know" is making sure the content is crisp and correct! CaroleHenson (talk) 16:21, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I've been working on Petrockstowe, but will be back after taking a bit of a break to work on something for the VisualEditor release.--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:23, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, that's very kind. I'll have a look at P. in due course. I've sort of committed to do some other work too...  —SMALLJIM  17:18, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely. Was just giving you a heads-up, I had no expectations.--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:38, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Smalljim. You have new messages at DamianZaremba's talk page.
Message added 11:58, 3 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:58, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot

Thanks for helping me with RYK article.Devanshi1208 (talk) 07:00, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

No problem. Good luck with it.  —SMALLJIM  11:14, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 5

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Molland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Overlord (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:49, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Wild territorial males

Just had to record this somewhere – from Fancy mouse: "They do have a greater likelihood of biting unfamiliar people, especially males who are wild and territorial."  —SMALLJIM  13:34, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Smalljim. You have new messages at Talk:The Secrets of Angling.
Message added 17:52, 11 July 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I have been bold in editing The Secrets of Angling article (that I split off from John Dennys) according to several guidelines - detail, balance, potential original research, etc. - and would be interested in your input about whether there is some information that you think should be included in the article. CaroleHenson (talk) 17:52, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for delay, Carole. In the limited time I have available at present I'm still considering Manor of Molland (please don't try to deal with all those tags, they're there to provide evidence). I'll see if I can help with the fishy book in a while.  —SMALLJIM  09:03, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Not a problem at all. I'm not working on Manor of Molland - I'm going through his oldest articles first and working forward - so I'll leave you to that. I think the fishy book article is fine and more inline with content in other books articles, and if you later find that some of the info should be returned I can work on it then.--CaroleHenson (talk) 15:53, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I've left a brief comment on the article talk page.  —SMALLJIM  22:22, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Claire Bloom

Dear Smalljim

Thanks for your message. We represent the actress Claire Bloom and I have just managed to delete a photo in her infobox which she does not like. More by trial and error than anything else.

I want to upload an approved photo so am just in the process of signing up to the site as I gather that I need to be signed in in order to do this. Fingers crossed I can figure out how to do this!

Are you able to help me to delete the photo she dislikes from her gallery so that it is not put up again. We managed to remove it a few years ago, but someone (I think it may be the person who took the photo at an event she attended) uploaded it again. Thank you once again.

Liz Nelson Conway van Gelder Grant Ltd 8-12 Broadwick Street London W1F 8HW liz@conwayvg.co.uk www.conwayvangeldergrant.com 164.40.211.206 (talk) 14:16, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Image licensing etc is not my field of expertise, I'm afraid. I've added a helpme message to your talk page in the hope that someone can provide you with a quicker reply than I could do.  —SMALLJIM  14:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Harangue from an IP

Mate, you are a moron. You cannot delete factual information just because it is not sighted or referenced. Information and facts exist without any recording of them having been made. The article you have for Big Ant Studio's and ESPECIALLY the information on cricket 14 I was happy to provide is there for anyone to see at their forum and all over the internet. You have an issue then, as one is innocent until proven guilty and there is freedom of expression under the bill of rights, you will NEED to prove it is untrue. There are no other references for any information in the current article, yet it exists, so how is it that my added information is removed due to not having a reference?? It is fact.

I am not offering an opinion or point of view. If the information casts a negative light on Big Ant or the forum specifically, I can do nothing about this. But to delete someone's provided factual information, not in dispute with anyone or brought to your attention but rather meddled with as you need to justify receiving a salary for completely superfluous work when you should be behind the counter of a fast food restaurant. My comments are 100% constructive. They are however not blindly kiss ass as I must adhere to facts... if by 'not constructive' or 'opinion' you mean that I have presented facts and common sense comments but they don't all lick the gamemaker's arsehol or advertise the game despite it potentially having no virtues and hitherto being unreleased. Well, that is hypocrisy and you are violating my right to freedom of expression if factual. Stop wasting my time and if you want to go to court to discuss what exactly it is you think I am putting forth as opinion and / or have got wrong... I would be most happy to do that, to set precedent, and to bury your Nazi practice of deleting something factual just because it is not sighted. Like I used to say at University, I did not us ea foot note or reference that idea, because it was MINE. If it existed with someone else first, I didn't know that.... it was an original idea in the sense that a tree fell in the forest and I was not there to see it. My intelligence is not earned off their backs, nor are my ideas a hodge podge of all that ahs come before. I AM an historian. I AM a researcher. I do not need to sight people less resourceful, less intelligent and less learned than myself jerk-off.

Some princess

Hi you recently deleted by contribution to the Lady Louise page. I added the title of Princess Louise. This is correct as it was confirmed that on her birth certificate her title is a princes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.140.60 (talk) 21:59, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Have you read the article's talk page? There seems to have already been quite a lot of discussion about her title there.  —SMALLJIM  22:04, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Fix your last edit at That '70s Show

Fix last edit

Done - caused by an edit conflict with Huggle I think... I've semi-protected the page, so it should go quiet now.  —SMALLJIM  11:56, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

That was quite a flurry of vandalism. If it hasn't been done already, I think an immediate block of any user responsible for any unconstructive edit made today on that page would be warranted. Except accidental ones of course. :) --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 12:01, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Quite :) I've already blocked the main ones and will watch the others for a while.  —SMALLJIM  12:05, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Duvet

You ought to protect the page for a little bit; the user is continuously switching his IP to vandalise the page. Insulam Simia (talk) 20:35, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but it's OK - I know what's happening. WP:BEANS applies ;-)  —SMALLJIM  20:38, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

dot-111 tank car

Thanks for your helpful suggestion on the DOT-111 tank car article.

I have resubmitted 9 Aug 2013 a sentence that is referenced and should be neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.51.53.80 (talk) 14:39, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Glad to help. Our Verifiability Policy does require that everything added to our articles is based on a reliable source. I've added a general welcome message to your talk page listing some of our more important rules :)  —SMALLJIM  14:46, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Oren Laurent page

Hi Smalljim,

I have finished uploading information to Oren Laurent's personal page, and I was wondering if you could give me any feedback on the content which I have written. Just so that you understand where I have retrieved all of this information, I am working on a paper about Binary Options trading and how I believe that it will effect the future world economy. Due to the amount of research that I have had to perform over the last year, I have amassed a substantial repository of information concerning Binary Options, and I would like to share this information to the world.

Thank you for your input.

=HT=Chief (talk) 21:53, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I think my latest edits to the article provide the feedback you need. Do you think you might have a conflict of interest here?  —SMALLJIM  22:15, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Stocks

It's a valid edit. The stocks were wrongly removed from use and should be brought back soas to provide a method of deterrent for criminal activity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.87.250.74 (talk) 15:06, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Note: I left a Template:Welcomeunsourced on IPs talk page.  —SMALLJIM  15:25, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Optimal IdM

Hi, our organization is in the process of updating as required our page attempting to followin the guidelines you outlined for us. Can you please remove the nomination for deletion while this is in progress? Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.99.144.120 (talk) 11:33, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't work like that. You need to read our rules that are linked in the tags at the top of the article page: Optimal IdM. Especially conflict of interest. Then, if you still think Wikipedia should have an article on your company, you should add your reasons at the article for deletion page.  —SMALLJIM  19:42, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		for rescuing Dartmouth Friary from deletion. The Whispering Wind (talk) 21:06, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

That's very kind of you, The Whispering Wind – thanks! I keep an eye on Devon-related changes and based on a quick Google, I was prepared to !vote delete in this AfD until JASpencer expanded it a bit which prompted me to look further. So he deserves some of the credit, as does Jjgull who did the latest academic research. Unfortunately there are another 100-odd similar stubs that were created by Starzynka back in August 2010 and I don't think many of them have been expanded yet, still WP is never finished...  —SMALLJIM  13:25, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Double standards

Re: Arthur Loves Plastic edit warring. Why has 114.145.146.143 blocked and Mephisto not blocked. Mephisto broke the 3rr rule first and broke it spectacularly. Mephisto is making false accusations of vandalism. Mephisto is adding linkspam. Mephisto is removing maintenance tags without addressing the issues. A block for the ip for edit warring (not vandalism) is right but it shouldn't be one sided. duffbeerforme (talk) 00:51, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

You had the advantage of knowing about the situation beforehand. What I saw - via Huggle - was an IP rapidly removing content from a series of articles, which is often an indicator of vandalism. I noted that he'd already been warned twice but rapidly gained the impression that there was more to it, so I gave him one more chance [1] and started looking into the background. The IP didn't stop as requested, so I was pretty much compelled to block him. I agree in retrospect that "edit warring" would have been better grounds for the block, but the IP seems to have accepted it in good grace and has explained the reason for his actions - which, as you point out, Memphisto has ignored. I was hoping that between us we could persuade Memphisto that most of the ALP album articles are not viable as they stand, but you've gone the official route and AfD'ed them, so we'll see what results from that. Hopefully there'll be more participation than in the previous two AfDs.  —SMALLJIM  09:48, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. duffbeerforme (talk) 14:28, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:32, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Cornwall Page Vandalism and Locking

Dear Smalljim, I note that you have locked the Cornwall page (presumably after a request from Ghmyrtle, N-HH or AndytheGrump). Please would you unlock this.

I do not understand why you have apparently agreed with these three individuals when they had completely backed out a very reasonable set of edits. The nature of these reversals is unacceptable, and I'm surprised that you locked the page without consulting more widely.

Thank you. Ajaxverifier (talk) 21:57, 17 November 2013 (UTC)Ajaxverifier

Ajaxverifier, while we assume good faith – yes, even of new users! – we do also expect them to abide by our rules. The best thing you can do is to discuss your requested changes on the talk page, which is what our rules say should happen after other editors have disagreed with them (see WP:BRD). I temporarily protected the page because you were not doing that. Oh, and just in case it's relevant, you should only use one account.  —SMALLJIM  22:10, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

Dear Smalljim. Thank you for your clarification. However, on your watch Ghmyrtle, N-HH, AndyTheGrump (and previously) others too, have reversed a significant number of good faith edits. Admittedly before you came on the scene the worst happened, but collectively they are responsible for 144 of the 368 reversions and undos in a four year period. They have never properly discussed their points with the people concerned.

As I am sure you are aware, there is a pattern to this editing: Any time the words Duchy, Celtic on Nation are written they are immediately reversed, even when supported by good evidence and strong references (the pretext that something is not 'generally' agreed is a nonsense and a travesty of Wiki's rules and I am amazed that it is trotted out - what matters is if something is attested - not what a particular 'believes' might be 'agreed', generally or otherwise). I have been back through the history in detail and invite you to do the same if you doubt this.

There has been a huge amount of discussion in the Talk page over the years, but rather than to create a consensus the Talk page now seems to be used to reject out of hand any suggested amendments and quite often to become abusive. I am not the only person that holds this view.

Finally you suggest that I am a sock puppet (apparently repeating AndyTheGrump's allegation). As a matter of fact, you are quite wrong and I invite you to engage with each of us as matters unfold: We have decades of experience and knowledge between us.

I am assuming good faith on your part too to stop the usual suspects from reverting, and, frankly, bullying others. Let's see where we go and review matters in a few days. I hope that you will not see fit to lock this page again, even if Ghmyrtle, N-HH, AndyTheGrump do request that you do. Thank you again. 80.41.120.193 (talk) 18:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

OK I'm listening, just. But you're making allegations about several established editors, so you'll need to provide some really strong evidence: show me a few diffs where they have rejected your valid edits and, most importantly, explain clearly for each edit why it shouldn't have been rejected.  —SMALLJIM  20:48, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Introduction to Tibetan Buddhism

Greetings from Australia. I see you didn't like my work on the Tibetan Buddhism article and undid it, but you haven't said anything about why you did that. I've restored the work.

Please, before acting further would you take the time to check the Talk:Tibetan Buddhism page under "No such thing as Tibetan Buddhism?" and put down your questions and comments there. It already has the details about why the changes have been made. We other editors need to know what your problems are.

Thanks for your interest in the Tibetan Buddhism article. Moonsell (talk) 19:34, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Moonsell, if you look at the article history from my point of view, you'll see that all I did was revert one apparently unhelpful edit by an IP to your last version. It was done as part of a long session of vandal-fighting. Sorry, but I'm really not interested in the topic.  —SMALLJIM  20:07, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Smalljim. You have new messages at DamianZaremba's talk page.
Message added 14:10, 8 December 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- Damian Zaremba ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:10, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Re Plymouth's History

Hello Smalljim, The reason I changed the section heading on the Plymouth page was because the author led readers to think that the Naval power of that period was part of Plymouth's naval power of that period. It wasn't. They were two separate towns, and the naval power, then, belonged to the town of Devonport, not the town of Plymouth. Many people make that same error, unfortunately. I admit I replaced your section heading with a not-very-good heading, but to be honest I was in a bit of a hurry at the time, and thought I'd come back later and write a more decent heading. I agree that in several places throughout the Plymouth page, mention was made that Devonport was a different town to Plymouth, but the point wasn't made sufficiently strong enough. Thus, overall, the reader would be left with the impression that several features and achievements of Devonport was part of Plymouth's history - and they were not. To be factual, any article on Plymouth that mentions Devonport should only absorb, or take ownership of, the Devonport features from 1914 onwards, that being the date of amalgamation as you know. But any historical feature prior to that date (including the naval power you mention in that section heading) rightly belongs to the town of Devonport, not the town of Plymouth. I'm sure you will agree to that fact. I'm sorry the heading wasn't very good. Perhaps you could insert a better one. kind Regards, Kerrigan

Welcome to Wikipedia, Kerrigan! You must be talking about this edit by 86.145.10.51 that I reverted earlier today. Yes, you do raise a valid point about Devonport (known as "Dock" until 1824, of course) and I agree that we should put a bit more emphasis on its earlier independence from Plymouth. The same applies to History of Plymouth as well. I'll go through both articles and make some changes – your comments would be welcome.

By the way, I've removed your comment on DamianZaremba's talk page - he has nothing to do with this: he merely left a Talkback template on my talk page to alert me that he'd replied to my earlier message to him - just like the one I'm putting on your talk page. Don't worry, just read a few of our help pages – Wikipedia:New contributors' help page is a good starting point – and it'll soon start to make sense. I've added a standard welcome message to your talk page which includes some other useful pages, too.  —SMALLJIM  20:31, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello again, I find the instructions confusing, so I may not be answering this in the correct manner. But will give it a try..... Just wanted to say I'd prefer communications to be via email. This is not a straightforward system for me, I'm struggling with it. Regards, Kerrigan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kerrigan003 (talk • contribs) 01:35, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, Wikipedia is primarily a collaborative project, so we tend not to use email unless the matter is private. Again, don't worry if you're having problems with our admittedly rather arcane discussion system. For now, just leave a blank line, type what you want to say and at the end type four tildes: ~~~~ which will automatically sign and timestamp your message.

If you want more extended help with getting to know Wikipedia, there are editors who specialise in this: have a look at the Teahouse or Adopt-a-user, or if you prefer to work on your own, you could work through the Wikipedia:Tutorial. Hope this helps, but I'm happy to answer any individual questions you may have, of course. What did you think of my edit to Plymouth, by the way?  —SMALLJIM  10:44, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello again. Thanks for your message, and the explanation about replying - appreciated. I've read your revision to the Plymouth page and agree that your changes now make things clear to readers - about what is Plymouth's history and what is Devonport's history. Many authors tend to present the situation erroneously; they have done since 1692 when Devonport (Dock) was born. Thank you for making the effort. Best Regards, Kerrigan 86.145.10.51 (talk) 18:28, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

No problem - thanks for pointing out the shortcoming. Hope to see you editing and improving our articles soon!  —SMALLJIM  21:19, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Also Plympton and Plymstock are separate towns but come under Plymouth City Council Unitary Authority. And Topsham is not part of Exeter it is a separate town of its own right and Exeter covers EX1-EX4 apart from a small part of EX3 which is Topsham, EX5-EX6 are part of Teignbridge and not Exeter and the M5 starts from the town of Exminster (Teignbridge) and not Exeter of which many people make that same mistake. Kind Regards StatoatTBC (Torbay Borough Council)StatoatTBC (talk) 12:27, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:41, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

TOR

Latest revision as of 16:37, 5 December 2013 (edit) (undo) (thank)

Smalljim (talk | contribs) m (Undid revision 584706896 by Stargzer (talk). It's already here, second in the list.)

DOH! I know I read through several times to make sure it wasn't already there. I guess that line was using TOR to disguise itself! A new experience: my first undone edit!

Regards//Stargzer (talk) 21:15, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations! You've now got your first barnstar too.  —SMALLJIM  22:22, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

SMALLJIM: Thank you, kind sir! It's been a while since I checked my own page, and I am more than flattered to be recognized for my humble contributions. I see from the WikiGnome page that one of the ways to self-identify is to use a picture of a mushroom, which I'll have to give great consideration to doing. In bureaucracies on the West side of the Big Pond, being a mushroom sometimes means they keep you in the dark and feed you bull-"stuff." After 39 years working for Uncle Sam, I've been in the dark an awful lot! Thanks again!

Regards//Stargzer (talk) 20:07, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Glad you like it.  —SMALLJIM  21:05, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Esther Benjamins Trust Page

Hi, you made some comments on the closeness of a contributor to the subject on the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther_Benjamins_Trust I've changed it a lot over the last week or so, can you initiate the process to remove the warning? I also declare that many years ago I worked for the organisation, but think it is objective now. Ninnep (talk) 18:58, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on the article: it certainly looks better than the previous version. There's no process as such for removing tags like these - you could have removed the tag if you were happy that you'd improved the article enough (if anyone watching the article disagreed, they'd have put it back or done something else about it). Anyway I've cleaned up the article a bit further by tightening up the writing, removing some of the flowery language such as "grim prisons" etc. I've also requested a few citations for what seems to be important points.  —SMALLJIM  10:42, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

"Your test worked!"

Hello, I enjoyed your 11 January 2014, comment to User talk:76.90.217.78 regarding his so-called 'test edit' of the Martin Clunes article. "Your test worked!". Amusing. By the way, I admire the amount of work you do for Wikipedia. Cheers. Melbourne3163 (talk) 17:22, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

You're very kind, thanks! I can't clam any originality for that test edit message, though: it's just one of the standard warnings in Huggle.  —SMALLJIM  09:58, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Another HG3 problem?

It issued a L2 warning at User talk:97.77.37.189 after a L3 had been issued. Best,  —SMALLJIM  21:22, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

I think it is - there is an open report regarding an "Two editors warn at once" issue, but i believe that this issue is different. Thanks for mentioning it - i've just reported it on the feedback page. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 21:42, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

When you have a minute, I'd be interested to know your thoughts on HG3. I've tried it a couple of times and it seems faster than HG2 (as one would expect), but for me the absence of the History and Contribs graphical interface cripples it too much.  —SMALLJIM  21:59, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Personally i prefer Huggle 3 over Huggle 2 by a sizable margin. Huggle 3 is simply an order of magnitude faster for me - both in actual performance and in perceived performance. Ofttimes i would run into a situation in Huggle 2 where it was preloading 5 diffs only to time out downloading the diff it should display next (While newer reviews were already loaded). At other times it seemed that i could review edits faster than Huggle 2 could load diffs, which constantly caused small waits and pauses that were quite annoying for me. Since Huggle 3 preloads everything before placing it in the queue the perceived speed is a LOT better and that is definitely a huge plus as far as i am concerned.

As for the graphical interface: I barely even notice it is not present anymore. The page history tab displays the information i need: Previous edits, editor names, comments and size changes. On the other hand the User Info tab displays the previous edits of the user; The only thing it does not seem to display is the current warning level for the user though i suspect this is a bug rather than a missing feature. I am a bit curious though - what's lacking in Huggle3 as of current according to you? Or is the issue that the tabular presentation is less practical compared to Huggle2's interface? Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 22:57, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Minor wording feedback

«your contributions are not appropriate here» seems VERY confrontational, especially as the reader may easily interpret it with emphasis on your. (I might perhaps word things less ambiguously, eg «...your contributions appear to have been inappropriate so far», to stress that this can change if he likes.) --Gryllida (talk) 14:48, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Gryllida, thanks for the feedback. I don't see that interpretation myself, and it certainly wasn't intended. In view of his later responses I've also revoked his talk page access. However, since you clearly think he may be able to help the project, I'll drop the block to one day reinstate his talk page acccess and let's see if he can contribute usefully when he's cooled down a bit.  —SMALLJIM  15:02, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. It appears that the 24 minutes while his talk page was blocked were enough for something... for him to give up, or to register under another name; hopefully we didn't lose him. (The return of access to the talk page seemed harmless, either way.) --Gryllida (talk) 23:53, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I must admit to being more ambivalent over losing him: not everyone has the right temperament to successfully edit here, and it's certainly the case that some people see WP as nothing more than another avenue to advertise their business (i.e. make money). Maybe I'm just an old cynic, but I am rather opposed to that.  —SMALLJIM  00:19, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

HG3 warnings again

Hi! Are you using the latest release of HG3? It's still issuing warnings wrongly: e.g. [2]. Best  —SMALLJIM  20:51, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Yep, i'm using the latest compiled version (Build 860). The incorrect warning level issue has not been marked as fixed / resolved though. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:54, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Torquay Unknown but True Facts

Hi I noticed that you thought Torbay was twinnned with Hamelin and Hellevoetsluis it is actually Torquay and also the Kingskerswell area of Torquay is twinned with Lonsee because there is no such town called Torbay it is a unitary authority and before that it was its own county between 1968-1974 with Torquay being the county town (obviously) as Torre itself is an area inside of Torquay the reason I put the stats are for the whole of Torquay is because parts of Torquay come under South Hams and Teignbridge district councils such as Compton (South Hams) [TQ3], Abbotskerswell, Coffinswell, Combeinteignhead, Ipplepen, Netherton, Stokeinteignhead, Stoneycombe and even part of Kingskerswell, etc. [all TQ12] comes under Teignbridge. The reason I know these facts are because I work for Torbay Borough Council and have access to all Torbay Council's archives especially the history & information of Torbay and Devon itself and I work in Torquay Town Hall a.k.a. Torbay County Hall ca.1911. Also the reason I've not added other citations is because they are already put there so there is no need to put the same citation as before also Stantor Lane in Shiphay, Torquay is under TQ3. And Re: DJ Scorpio is the world no.2 Hardcore-Techno DJ and is a real dj not like these fake one's on Radio like Dave Lee Travis, Tim Westwood, etc, who just play one record after another instead of actually mixing them in and he is a fans favourite in the Dance Music (Underground not commercial) scene and has played at all the major dance organisations such as the world reknowned Helter Skelter, Dance Planet, Dreamscape, Obsession, Slammin' Vinyl, North Radical Technology, Bionic Westfest, etc, since at least 1990 and also plays back to back with the world no.1 Hardcore-Techno DJ Producer a.k.a. Luke McMillan and in a recent survey of 3,000 people between 16-50 yrs old Scorpio came 3rd in most notable people born in Torquay behind 1st placed Agatha Christie (Crime Writer), and just less than 50 people behind 2nd placed Peter Cook (comedian), 4th was Lauren Pope (Page 3 model, not known for Dj'ing) and 5th Miranda Hart (Actress who hardly anyone has heard of), there is plenty of website articles on DJ Scorpio aswell as pictures and he has made various tracks under Semtex Records(Torquay) now defunct and Deathchant Records (owned by Hellfish a.k.a. J.Cobb) usually with Wargroover (D. Parkinson) as don't forget most dj's don't use their real names asking who Scorpio is, is like asking who Judge Jules is they use there handle names and not there real ones.<ref>Torbay Council archives</ref> Yours respectfully StatoatTBC (Torbay Borough Council)StatoatTBC (talk) 12:15, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

StatoatTBC, I've copied your post to Talk:Torquay#Torquay Unknown but True Facts since it seems to be a reply to the points Ianmcm and I raised there. I'll reply in due course - please continue discussion on that page.  —SMALLJIM  17:14, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

On the Torquay stats and part of Paignton you'll notice that Brixham now operates under South Hams so the stats at that time only show the Torquay and part of Paignton even though Brixham is part of Torbay but has its own independent council and is still governed by Torbay Council176.248.214.87 (talk) 13:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, but I'm not going to reply here nor am I going to continue to copy responses where they belong. Please discuss this topic at Talk:Torquay.  —SMALLJIM  14:54, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Heatherington is irish and Scottish surname

Who do you think you are, telling me to stop doing what am doing. mate, listen i'm fed up about folk in Wikipedia telling me all this rubbish and lying information about heatherington no being Scottish and irish surname. listen my family were discriminated and persuaded by the English cause they were Irish catholic during the irish war of independence. My family immgrited to Glasgow from all that. we don't hate the English but if you say or anyone says its not Scottish or irish its actually an offensive towards my family, so plz its not vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.123.208 (talk) 23:00, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Please read what I wrote on your user talk page. You can't override reliable sources with what you believe to be true. Wikipedia just doesn't work like that. You need to find some sources that back up what you say before you make any further changes to the article. If you want some further help, try the Teahouse.  —SMALLJIM  23:08, 31 January 2014 (UTC).

1100 Architect

Sorry, I didn't check history Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:07, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

No problem. S'pose I've got some more work to do now :)  —SMALLJIM  17:11, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

Driscoll's

Did you mean to revert the way I rewrote the history paragraph like that?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:30, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I was just about to remove the copyvio reintroduction when we ec'ed again. Sorry. I'll let you finish!  —SMALLJIM  22:34, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

No, no, you go ahead. I'm done for now. Too much promotionalism to think about. You're doing good work!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:35, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

OK. Glad you spotted that copyvio! I'll just do a bit more cleanup then. Best,  —SMALLJIM  22:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, I think we done cleaned that sucker right up!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 00:30, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Yup. Good follow-up. Probably need to keep an eye on it, though. G'night.  —SMALLJIM  00:45, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Bog myrtle and cahoonas beard oil

Bog myrtle and cahoonas beard oil

Hi Smalljim I note your comments that my attempt to place an outside link in with the others to the bog myrtle links list has been removed Al I am trying to do is ad a product which uses the ingredient in the same way as 'stop bite' has done. You seem to be perfectly ok with links to soap and other products so I can only assume that a link to a beard oil is somehow problematic I would appreciate a reasonable explanation why obviously it is ok for the other links and not the one to chinsporran which uses bog myrtle for its anti midge qualities.

Sorry for any inconvonience I am not a wizz at HTML so my attempts at placing may have been ircsome I do appologise and thanks for listening. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.64.253.5 (talk) 18:07, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Well, the explanation is that I didn't fully read the whole article (Myrica gale) and so didn't spot the other advert links. I've now rewritten it to cover the information with more general references. Thanks for your understanding – although such things creep in over time, we really don't do advertising!  —SMALLJIM  22:12, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

David Joyner Bio

The information on his wikipedia page currently is inaccurate. I am personally connected to him and the information from gopsusports.com is the accurate bio. Please remove the current information and remit the changes I made. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.227.64.152 (talk) 17:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Lots of problems with that, I'm afraid. Basically the existing info in David Joyner is pretty well referenced to independent reliable sources which take precedence over one short bio on one website. Also we have rules on copyright violation which means that you can't just copy content from another source into Wikipedia. And if you know the person the article is about, we also have to consider conflict of interest. I've put a welcome message on your talk page that should explain how Wikipedia works, but based on what you've told me, it's probably best that you edit some other unrelated articles, if you want to contribute here. Hope this helps.  —SMALLJIM  17:29, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Let me start by saying that I can reference out specifically the ill referenced articles and where they are completely false and full of lies. The media is not accurate. And I am Dave Joyner's Daughter so maybe that is a conflict of interest, hence the reason I did not type anything biased, just the facts. The news articles posted are not factual. They are skewed and false. As we all know, this happens. If you would like me to take this a step further, I would be happy to do so. Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.227.64.152 (talk) 17:42, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

OK. The biographies of living people is an area of Wikipedia that we try to take great care over, for obvious reasons. We have a whole policy on it - WP:BLP (I suggest you read it). This isn't, however, an area in which I tend to work. May I suggest that your best route, if you want to pursue the matter, is to post a clear statement of the problem to the BLP Noticeboard. You should get a pretty quick response there. Hope this helps,  —SMALLJIM  17:57, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Engie Benjy

Hi Smalljim. Thanks for tidying up Engie Benjy. Some of the information you removed was added by User:2.27.145.75 who was subsequently blocked for persistent vandalism. If you are knowledgeable about this subject, could I impose upon you to check User:2.27.145.75's edits to Justin Fletcher, Percy the Small Engine, Kevin Duala and Peter Kay? Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 06:34, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

I've tidied up a bit further.  —SMALLJIM  23:46, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. DH85868993 (talk) 05:14, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Free Beer and Hot Wings edit

The change to move WKZQ-FM 96.1 KZQ from current affiliates to past affiliates is correct. They were replaced by Mike and Mike. My description might have been bitter, but the change was accurate.

Sources:

http://www.wkzq.net/page.php?page_id=131 http://www.allaccess.com/net-news/archive/story/117789/mike-mike-back-in-myrtle-beach-on-wkzq-wrnn-a-flip

66.56.153.132 (talk) 11:02, 4 March 2014 (UTC)thisisaggravating

My objection was to "Because we can't have anything good in this shitty city." If you want to make any useful changes, please do so.  —SMALLJIM  11:08, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Good work as RCP... Herald talk with me 11:50, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very kind of you, thanks! You're doing great work yourself.  —SMALLJIM  11:59, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

User:SpongebobLawyerPants

Not sure which of several vectors you just encountered this user from, but there's an ANI open about them; they're a possibly-trolling SPA who went from trollish WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and personal attacks into full-on slash-and-burn deleting of AfD templates and blanking the AfD as "discussion is over". Having the ban outlast the AfD might save everyone some hassle. --McGeddon (talk) 17:45, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I've replied at the ANI and will put a reminder about that discussion on his talk page.  —SMALLJIM  17:55, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Rangeblock

Thanks for the rangeblock of Special:Contributions/166.137.12.0/24, they went at it while I was in the shower and didn't realize it was part of a pattern. —Soap— 16:17, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

I caught him at it last night too. He's been using 166.170.2* as well.  —SMALLJIM  16:21, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

ASSERT

Thanks for your comments on the ASSERT text - I thought they were very helpful. I've updated the suggested language to reflect those points. I was wondering if you could take a moment to review it again. Thanks Morphh ^(talk) 22:19, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for delay. Rather involved with other stuff. Will have a look asap.  —SMALLJIM  00:50, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments - I've included a new concise version, which I think is an improvement, but figured it might have more opposition since it's a larger change. If you have another moment, take a look and let me know which you prefer or if you have any final thoughts. You're the only one commenting. At some point soon, I'll probably just be bold and change it, which may spark further discussion. Morphh ^(talk) 16:40, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Replied over there.  —SMALLJIM  20:05, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Andy Afford

Hi, I just want to clarify that I reverted the previous edit because it was done by a banned editor. I agree that the statement should be removed but not by him, so I'm happy with your edit. Thanks for your help. --HCCC14 (talk) 15:56, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

whats up, fam?

y u dlt my post? we no friend? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgep93 (talk • contribs) 17:45, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Please read the message on your talk page. Wikipedia is no place for hoaxes.  —SMALLJIM  17:47, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

A Dog for you!!!!

	Happy Attack Dog`s Wikipedia Guard dog award
	Thanks for taking care of TurtlesRock, saved me a lot of time at SPI. Keep up the good work!!!! Happy Attack Dog (you rang?) 20:51, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

You must mean my blocks of users Turtlesrock1234567890 and Turtlesrock12345-09876543 a few days ago. No problem!  —SMALLJIM  23:54, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

50.240.235.141

Hi Smalljim, you recently blocked IP 50.240.235.141 as the result of an ANI report (click fast before it gets archived!) Anyhow, they're back at it, adding POV/synthesis here and here and non-existent categories here again. I've tried the communicative route, but no dice. They've got an agenda. Any way to do a range block? This kid has been hopping IPs for a few months. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:48, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll have a look, but it may take a while. Fortunately he's stopped for now. I see you've reverted some of his edits - is the rest OK?  —SMALLJIM  18:24, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

I haven't checked all of them. I figured I'd wait until some action was taken against him. I'll give 'em a look. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:34, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Still slowly poking through (I've got other stuff going on). here's an example of adding a category that doesn't have any context in the article, contravening WP:CAT#Articles. I'll keep adding here as I spot other stuff. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:44, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for tidying up. Complex isn't it – easy to vandalise, hard to verify. I must be feeling generous today because I've invited him to talk to us instead of blocking straight away. Will be keeping an eye out: I'm interested to see what he does next.  —SMALLJIM  22:23, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

1684 Moon Theory

Now that was a speedy deletion! Cheers, Altamel (talk) 23:54, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Heh! I must have spotted it at the same time you did and remembered it from last time. Keep up the good work!  —SMALLJIM  00:08, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

About warning

Why do you say this to me as i edit a wrong article or info or another cause please say page or article is violet the the wiki privacy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woliul (talk • contribs) 10:15, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Woliul: the warning was about our edit warring policy, which you need to read and understand. I must also say, based on your comment above, that your understanding of English does not appear to be of a very high standard. While the community is happy to help its editors, you should probably limit your contributions here to edits which do not require writing in English which is beyond your capabilities. Have you considered editing the Wikipedia in your own language?  —SMALLJIM  10:43, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.

Yeah I do it also. Recently I update some category for Bangladesh portal but some one revert it that's why the problem creat as you see. Thanks for the suggestion, defiantly I want to try this. Thanks again. Woliul (talk) 10:48, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Good luck.  —SMALLJIM  10:52, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello there

Hello there. I'd like to apologise for the abuse you suffered the other day when I let my nephew use my computer...sorry about that. I hope he didn't upset you too much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.1.93.26 (talk) 18:38, 31 March 2014 (UTC)