Open main menu
Please note the following guidelines for my talkpage:
DO watch or pay attention to my talk page. If contacted here, I will reply here to avoid a divided conversation. Likewise, if I start a conversation on your talk page, and you attempt to divide it, I will cross-post my original statement here and reply here.
DO sign your posts with ~~~~ - it makes it far easier to determine who added a comment and when.
DO respect the banner below and do not ask for aid in those topic areas.
DO NOT discuss FlaggedRevs at all. I will delete all such messages on sight. This includes discussion of Reviewer-related topics. (See the banner beneath, too.)
DO NOT ask me to review administrator actions - As of July 11, 2010 I do not have that power.
DO NOT nominate me for adminship - I will automatically reject all such requests. Likewise, DO NOT give me reviewer rights. Drink the beer you yourself brewed.
DO NOT post here if Grawp is attacking a Wikipedia page. Instead, contact an administrator privately.
DO NOT, if you are an administrator, protect this talk page. We have an abuse filter for a reason. Use it.
DO NOT use any slurs whatsoever - I will delete the comment and all further ones from you off of my talk page.
This user will not work in any of the following areas of Wikipedia:
-Any article under any iteration of FlaggedRevisions (Category:Wikipedia pending changes protected pages)
-Any area directly connected to a real-world ethno-political conflict (e.g. Arab-Israeli conflict, Tibetan independence movement)
-Religion (including atheism-related pages)
-Politics (especially as concerns the United States)
-Topic areas that are or have been at some point under ArbCom sanctions (e.g. Homeopathy, Bogdanov Affair)
Any requests for aid in these areas will be deleted on sight.



Jeske, the link to your essay in your answer to question 2 on the RfA is showing as a redlink. Is there a typo or something? I ask because I'd very much like to read the essay, not only regarding the RfA. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 12:21, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Odds are it is; let me look at my watchlist and I'll fix the link. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 12:22, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Fixed; missed a capital letter. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 12:24, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


Endless games of protect and unprotect are productive then? I am trying to suggest a way around that. LadyofShalott 02:05, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Speaking from experience, it's the only practical alternative. He's attempting to keep legitimate IPs or other users from contacting us by forcing us to semiprot and/or spam death threats he's too cowardly to make himself. (FYI, the subpage option doesn't work. I've tried it.) —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 02:07, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
The parenthetical part of your response above was the information I needed. It would have been more helpful (and frankly much less aggravating) if you had said that from the start - even in the edit summary where you removed my first post. LadyofShalott 02:11, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

User talk:BreeBaby2282Edit

I declined the speedy deletion nomination on User talk:BreeBaby2282. personal attacks, by definition, need to be directed at someone. That was just a random vandalizing message, not a personal attack, and, as such, doesn't justify speedy deletion. Blanking the content and warning the user is sufficient. If the comment was on someone's else's talk page, it might possibly qualify for RevDel, although that would be a discretionary issue. Qwyrxian (talk) 06:40, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

(through forced smile) Thank you, I will keep that in mind. —Jeremy (v^_^v Contributions) 06:41, 25 August 2011 (UTC)


Hello, Jéské Couriano. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship.
Message added 11:08, 26 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

For your informationEdit

We've had a username pop up on WP:UAA that might interest you: Jeskenazi (talk · contribs). So far, no indication of bad faith, but I saw the name and figured I'd let you know. Cheers, m.o.p 17:42, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Whack it. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 19:15, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Done. m.o.p 20:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


That MfD !vote was awesome. Raymie (tc) 04:05, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Request for action at Talk:Anderson CooperEdit

You now seem to be in a dialogue with this editor. Is action still required? Could you indicate at WP:RFPP. Ta --Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Arbitration reportEdit

Hullo Jéské. The regular writer of the Signpost's Arbitration report stepped down last week and I was wondering, seeing as you are listed as a backup writer, whether you might be able to fill in? It would be much appreciated, as we are rather understaffed at the moment. Regards, Skomorokh 23:31, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Jéské, can you let me know if you're still willing to serve as a writer for the Arb report? Skomorokh 21:29, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

At present, no. I've been fighting almost-persistent migraines for the past couple months and have not been keeping up with events. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 21:32, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Talkpage stalker here. Sympathy with the migraines. Not going to offer a cure - you've probably tried them all by now except the Ancient Egyptian one of applying a live Nile catfish (the electric Nar fish) to your temples. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:10, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
I was worried you were going to suggest that other Ancient Egyptian cure, extracting the offending grey matter through the nasal passage. No worries Jéské, hope you get well soon and can enjoy your holidays. Skomorokh 22:12, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
I'm right now using loratadine as a prophylactic; it's working. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 00:20, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
That might work. And be more pleasant than an electric catfish. I get terrible migraines sometimes, so I do sympathise.Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:33, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Secure pollEdit

Hi: '...the 2010 Oversight/Checkuser elections, and it wound up, rather infamously,' Can you give me a link to any discussions surrounding this? I'm curious to know what happened. Thanks. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:06, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight/May 2010 election is the main page, and after the announcement of the poll results at the ArbCom noticeboard, an RfC was opened. The general consensus there was that SecurePoll was the direct cause or a cofactor of Amalthea (and nobody else) receiving CU or OS rights. —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 21:17, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

All that twitters is not boldEdit

An excellent edit summary! - Sitush (talk) 19:37, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

I would like to thank my good friend Warriv for that. :3 —Jeremy v^_^v Components:V S M 19:53, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Bling blingEdit

  The Guidance Barnstar
Thanks for your continuous efforts to help guide new users (and old admin). Keep up the good work.  7  00:46, 13 January 2012 (UTC)


Thanks for your note. I agree that the proposed username isn't good either, but so long as he wants to pursue a name change then he can work out the best alternative. If he starts editing with the old account we can block it again.   Will Beback  talk  20:34, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Jennifer HuttEdit

In regards to your denial of undeletion of the page for Jennifer Hutt.

You say "you may contact the administrator who closed the discussion". On the page "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jennifer Hutt", I do not see the word 'Closed' anywhere. How do I know which administrator did the closing?

There is this "The result was delete. Courcelles 23:47, 16 August 2011 (UTC)". But on that admin's page, this is posted... "Courcelles is taking a short wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia soon."

What do you recommend as a next step if I wish to pursue this further?

Should I proceed to Deletion Review?

I apologize if this is counter to established Wiki protocol. This is all new to me.

gopackjo Gopackjo (talk) 15:31, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

First, I did not formally deny the undeletion request. However, an admin will do so if they have not already. You have two options from here: Recreate the article in your userspace, paying attention to our sourcing and notability policies, or take it up to WP:Deletion review. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:22, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply and the suggestions. If I was to recreate the article in my userspace, would I be able to access the original article? The archived copy that I found was an older, poor sister to the one that was deleted. gopackjo Gopackjo (talk) 19:40, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
Ask an admin to email you the contents. Do bear in mind that since the article was deleted at AfD, you won't be able to use the exact same contents, except as a base - see WP:CSD#G4. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:56, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


I see that at User talk: you wrote "The block was issued in February, and an autoblock only lasts 24h. Thus, there is no autoblock to overturn." You may be interested to learn that, if a blocked editor tries to edit, the autoblock is reactivated for another 24 hours. In a case like this one, where an IP that has never edited before, but tries to edit at a time very close to when the blocked user tries to edit and reactivates the autoblock, it is a pretty safe bet that it is the same person trying to evade the block. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:23, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

I was actually not aware of this; thanks, James. :) —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:28, 14 April 2012 (UTC)


It is also a deleted local copy of File:Subway restaurant.svg, according to the image description, especially when a mouse indicates a link in a browser's status bar. --George Ho (talk) 19:38, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Your request for arbitrationEdit

Your request for arbitration has been declined. The voting arbitrators indicated that the request was outside the remit of the committee. For the Arbitration Committee --Alexandr Dmitri (talk) 18:37, 8 July 2012 (UTC)


--Mjs1991 (talk) 23:29, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Jumped the gun, didja? —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 03:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Hantavirus Risk in YosemiteEdit

Hi, I noticed you have contributed to the discussion of User:'s block because of reasons that I cannot see. However, I assume it has something to do with his involvement with Yosemite National Park's Talk Page. Recently, I have also tried to add a section acknowledging its the Hantavirus Risk in Yosemite National Park, but my edit was similarly dismissed by User:Jojhutton. If the mention of deaths is the issue, then I believe we can include the information without directly mentioning the deaths.

I have written a new draft of this edit in one of my subpages: User:Airelor/Yosemite_National_Park.

Please take a look and suggest any other edits or make any changes as you see fit before I try to add it to the main Yosemite_National_Park page. I am very new here and while I don't think this is related to the topic of FlaggedRevisions or Troubles or anything that you have notified as areas you will not work in, I deeply apologize if this is the case. If you know of any administrators or Wikipedia Users you can refer this draft (or me) specifically to for advice about this matter, that would be very appreciated too. Thank you. Airelor (talk) 21:39, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

I invite you to reread my comment on August 18th on that page. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 03:58, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Who, me?Edit

Hey. Were you replying to me just now? I'm afraid I've lost my way in a mess of indentations. Rivertorch (talk) 19:53, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I was just speaking en generale; there just happened to be the best place to put it. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:34, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Notice of changeEdit

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you. MBisanz talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

MBisanz, I couldn't request the tools back even if I had wanted to. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 04:18, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
My apologies. I tried to screen the notification list to prevent notifying people who were ineligible. I've very sorry for leaving you the inapplicable note. MBisanz talk 16:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Weeaboo listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Weeaboo. Since you had some involvement with the Weeaboo redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 02:44, 5 December 2012 (UTC)


Hello, Jéské Couriano. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Reporting_User_Hari7478.
Message added Hari7478 (talk) 12:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

That pointed box.Edit

It's back. Just thought you'd like to know. ViperSnake151  Talk  20:32, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I had the AN/I thread ready to go. I had a feeling he would reinstate it given his devil-may-care attitude towards authority and possible sanction on WP. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC)


May I inquire as to what a "chummer" might be?

Eblem (talk) 00:06, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Friend. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 02:14, 5 April 2013 (UTC)


Thank you.—Ryulong (琉竜) 03:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Don't thank me; I just self-reverted and invited him to email oversight. I'm going to err on the side of caution since there appears to be an off-wiki harassment campaign against him. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 05:21, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
Yes I've been emailed concerning this as well but it still does not solve things.—Ryulong (琉竜) 06:58, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
He emailed me instead; I've revdel'd the affected edits (and emailed Nihonjoe to fill him in). Given the specific circumstances I don't think oversight is necessary, although Hitomaro's free to contact them if he wishes (and may already have done so). No blame attached either of you guys; it's just an unfortunate situation all round (of which I'm sure you're both already aware). Ryulong, please do carry on with the debate regarding MOS-JA (the macron debate really needs to be resolved sometime this century...) but do take care not to make that connection again; there are potential real-life consequences for the editor involved. Cheers, Yunshui  07:19, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Watch your edit summariesEdit

I don't need to look at the edit summary and need to see someone saying "Shut up, McBride" any more than you need an ANI notice. Watch your language, please. μηδείς (talk) 01:39, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't need to read a condescending message from someone who assumes that just because they have no VE edits means they have nothing to contribute to the conversation. Besides, last I checked, "shut up" isn't a profanity. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 08:27, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

VOSS SolutionsEdit

Hi Jéské Couriano, Please remove protection from VOSS Solutions, I have a new content for it. I made same request to Nyttend and Phantomsteve. Thank you. —JOHNMOORofMOORLAND (talk) 02:01, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Did you even read the userboxes at the top of the page? —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 02:06, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
I came here to ask your input, and only after reading this message did I even notice the userboxes. At least on my browser, they're exceedingly small; I can't read anything in the left box without a lot of effort. Nyttend (talk) 02:11, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
No, you asked me to remove protection from an article, and even absent the userboxes there's a section further up where it's made explicit that I don't have the tools. Given that I have not had the tools for three years I can't review, much less undo, my own admin actions. I'm sorry, but I have little tolerance for those who blindly ask the impossible of someone.
That said, I will not object if someone were to remove the protection provided that the same issues that got the article salted (repeated re-creation as either a copyright violation or a blatant advertisement) do not reoccur. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 02:16, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
My comment goes far beyond the admin tools bit — I'm trying to suggest that you expand the boxes if you want anyone to read anything that you've said in them. Look at my talk page; perhaps you could try a big horizontal banner? Nyttend (talk) 02:51, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
My technical (read:coding) skill is virtually nonexistent, Nyttend. I used infoboxen because I knew how to do those easily enough. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 03:07, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
You seem to think that I have coding skill. Wrong :-) I just copy/paste code and adapt it. I've taken the code from my page and put your message into it, producing this result; what do you think? Nyttend (talk) 03:22, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
I like it; I've modified it with linebreaks so that it reads cleanly. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 03:26, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Change of usernameEdit

Noting your comments under the request for undeletion as pertaining to Erick Kaffka. I am not a company although I worked for one listed many years ago. I have requested a name change and so far have been unsuccessful. I do not represent a company. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paraisoevents (talkcontribs) 18:12, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Did you request it at WP:Changing username/Simple and make sure the name wasn't taken? —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:12, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Pending changes 2014 RfC Proposal 12Edit

  Hello! As a result of discussion with other editors regarding Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2014, I have made a slight change to Proposal 12 to remove the so-called "exclusivity clause". For the change, see this diff. I am posting this notice on your talk page because you have already inserted comments on the original proposal, and I want to make sure you are aware of the change so that you may revise your comments if you wish to do so.

I apologize for the confusion. If you wish, you may slap me. Ivanvector (talk) 03:10, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Your proposal change means nothing to me. Read the fucking note. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 05:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
No, I didn't expect that it would. Just letting you everyone know. Ivanvector (talk) 06:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Edway GroupEdit

This is a poorly written article, but not spam, and has at least one reliable source. Please take the issue to WP:AfD if, after reviewing all the sources, you still think it ought to be deleted. Bearian (talk) 20:14, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

help requestEdit

hey how are you ?

you mentioned in a post that a number of my sources where unusable, having read through i whittled down my list to the following,

and i wanted to know if any of the sources i have included there do not qualify ?

thanks again

Wikispott (talk) 21:03, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

The ones that don't pass WP:RS in the list above have been struck through. The rest have enough coverage about the guy to be used to help establish his notability. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:41, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Hey i would love your advice on - having collected a rich vein of advice from a number of editors i realise that there is a bit of conflicting information on which sources in that list are usable so i was hoping that you could peek a look and set things straight, it may only take your experienced self a few minutes and yes i probably went overboard (including Social Media - but only on points without controversy) i am aware but i am just so scared when i see some articles with barely no sources yet surviving (i know that X does not mean Y) i am somehow just looking for mentorship, i am a quick learner though, sometimes i am stubborn but all in good faith i promise - feel free to deliver edits or whatever in any direction you see fit. honestly i trust that yours will be a better hand than mine. Wikispott (talk) 16:59, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Unblock request commentsEdit

Hey, there's no particular need to point out to people blocked by a checkuser that most admins can't deal with the unblock; there are several checkusers who monitor the unblock queue (stack? heap?) and who can deal with such requests -- it's why we're there. It's not a problem that you do this, but it does seem like something of a waste of typing. --jpgordon::==( o ) 22:54, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!Edit

Hello! Jéské Couriano, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! JustBerry (talk) 05:33, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Civility Barnstar
Great job on IRC. JustBerry (talk) 05:34, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


Thanks for all the productive discussion on PC2, and best of luck for the next round. - Dank (push to talk) 22:08, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

The Tone of your edit summary...Edit

here was unacceptable. REFUND is a place where many inexperienced users post. When they ask for explanations of our byzantine rules and policies they do no deserve sarcasm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spartaz (talkcontribs) 06:44, 25 June 2014‎ (UTC)


I hope that you feel better soon. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:57, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Rainathon (July 12)Edit

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!
MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:32, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I submitted it on behalf of another user, who'd posted it in mainspace first. You want to put this on User talk:Hebbarg88, not here; I have no dog in this fight. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:37, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

WPI:ANI nonsenseEdit

I gave the editor of this goofiness a level4 warning. Figured at least one shot at getting him to read and change his ways or else go away on his own. Maybe my recent vacation has over-re-calibrated by AGF-o-meter... DMacks (talk) 21:00, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm pretty certain given the template and AfC he's only here to play. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:12, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

When/why did you lose your administrator status? (talk) 07:14, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

2010, and it was because of something I refuse to discuss on this page. That is all I need to or will say. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:41, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Poorya NazariEdit

Sorry i did not specify, please userfy the talk page and article I've been editing Wikipedia for over eight years which I why I generally go to the deleting admin instead of refund. I remember there been retainable content with additional sources required I'll take care of it i just need to see the condition of the article. Valoem talk contrib 09:08, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm not an admin, and had you specified I would not have left the note. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 11:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)


I was just checking to see whether you did unblock him or not. I assume so, but it wasn't clear from your note. And it's been so long since I've tried to left an autoblock that I don't recall how to do it or what to look for. I'm sure it's much easier now than back in the dark ages, of course. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:55, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

I suggest you read the notes at the top of this page before you ask another stupid question like that. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:16, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Huh. You're not an admin? Sorry about that. And no, I never read boilerplate that's more than a few points long. Anyway, thanks. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:28, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Regarding Indraprastha Institut für Informationstechnologie - DelhiEdit

I just saw what happened. You were not supposed to receive the CSD notice. That was not supposed to happen. Sorry for the message. Either way, since the article has been deleted from German Wikipedia, there are no more grounds for speedy deletion by A2 so I removed the tag. Optakeover(Talk) 19:06, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Content BoxEdit

  Content Box
Hey Jéské Couriano,

I need some help with the contents box. its not showing up automatically. Can you please help me?


From Micahmpj (talk) 21:32, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

You need four headered sections for a table of contents to automatically be created. Failing that, write {{toc}} at the top of the page to force the creation of one. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 00:29, 17 April 2015 (UTC)


Hey Jeske, just wanted to say thank you for trying to undo the IP user's inappropriate edits on my talk page despite their edit warring them back in. I appreciate your trying :) TylerDurden8823 (talk) 02:10, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jeske, so, I saw that you said it's possible for an admin to block not just the specific IP but the recurring numbers if I understood that correctly. How is this accomplished? It seems like our friend 5 is ignoring his various (I believe he's up to three) blocks. TylerDurden8823 (talk) 23:55, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
What happens is the admin blocks the IP range that includes all IPs used thus far. There are some limits to this ability: Ranges larger than a /16 (~65.5K addresses) cannot be blocked, and innocent IPs caught in the crossfire cannot be unblocked independent of the rangeblock itself. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 02:46, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Request for undeletionEdit

Hi Jeske, Request for undeletion for proposed article of Beverly Hills Sports Council was denied. Would like to make revisions and add additional sources. Can you help? Thank you. Nyfan2007 (talk) 22:53, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

I cannot, as I am not an admin (And having seen it twice in the past two weeks, it was denied because you did not reply to the REFUND threads; the draft's already been deleted twice). —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 05:45, 25 April 2015 (UTC)


Thanks for telling me I needed start speaking better English but I need help with something so would u like to help? Valleryking (talk) 04:29, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

VTR full IP range blockEdit

I appreciate your contribution on the talk page for the full VTR IP range block but I am not satisfied with the archaic nature of the admins decision making which is more like 16th century township than modern liberal democracy.

I beleive the block on the full VTR IP range is pure stupidity. Anyone who wants to act with ill intent can anonymise their IP. The admins are castigating 1.2 million internet users for the erros of 1 individual. That is idiocy. I want to be understanding and respectful but the admins are not being understanding or respectful of my rights as a wikipedia community member. I deserve access regardless of the fact that 1 user from 1.2 million users was blamed for something that I still have not been provided evidence for.

An Ip range block should be applied for something incredibly serious especially when the ISP hosts 1.2 million users. The admins are not understanding the unfairness of banning a whole ISP for the actions of 1 individual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:17, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not an exercise in any governmental system, let alone democracy or anarchy. And, again, if the abuse is severe enough or sustained enough and whac-a-mole is the only other option, admins will opt for the rangeblock as opposed to just waiting to see what IP he hops to next. That said, larger rangeblocks generally must have the blessing of a Checkuser to make sure collateral damage is minimal. (Checkusers will usually tell an admin seeking to do a rangeblock if there's enough activity on the range other than the vandal that collateral damage would be unacceptable.) I will note that Mmbabies' actions (i.e. IP-hopping and celebrity death threats) have caused much of Houston to be unable to edit Wikipedia anonymously, to give you an idea of the sort of misdeeds that are necessary to make collateral damage irrelevant. I am given to understand that in this case, there was minimal collateral damage caused from blocking this range.
Evidence-wise, we don't overtly call out links for the reason that this (a) makes future vandalism by that vandal harder to detect and (b) only encourages the vandal. Long-term abusers are generally the exception; they're usually motivated by ideology or shock value more than entertainment.
Now, onto your argument that anyone wanting to cause ill intent can use anonymisers. We block all anonymising services, TOR exit nodes, and open/compromised proxy servers upon discovery, and many of our most virulent vandals (such as JarlaxleArtemis) use them almost exclusively because their primary IPs/ranges have been blocked or because they want to hide where they're editing from. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 05:13, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate you taking the time to write such a thorough feedback. (talk) 04:31, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. Apologies if it doesn't answer your questions. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 05:04, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

calling for discussionEdit

I voiced concerns over what seemed to me to be the punitive nature of comments you used from User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/G11. Do you still believe policy requires rewriting from scratch all articles that lapsed from WP:CSD#G11? I counted on {{ping}} informing you of that discussion.

User:Amatulic userified the article for me to User:Geo Swan/Daphne Lee Martin. It did require more work than I expected, but not because it was promotional, rather because I didn't think the original references measured up.

I tried contacting the subject at her twitter handle, asking for clarification on some dates, and album names. I haven't received any reply. Sorry, but I think the most likely cause is she still hasn't recovered from the punitive tone of your comment. Geo Swan (talk) 16:53, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

It's actually not all that uncommon for subjects who request their articles for undeletion to not reply on-Wiki. Theyt assume it will be done via email or some other off-wiki means instead (indeed, there was one case the other day where a requestor, editing as an IP, left his email address on the request, and I've in the past removed a phone number from REFUND).
As for the contact via Twitter, it might also be that she is busy with other things. RL takes precedence over online presence, for the most part. Don't assume disillusionment when neglect is equally likely an option. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:12, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

A modest requestEdit

Dear Wikipedia editor,

Thank you for your comment on my talk page. I am requesting your assistance. One month ago a user with the username Bangabandhu began editing the wikpiedia entry of my wife, melissa chiu, adding entirely negative commentary. I sought to try to balance that commentary which i believed was false and misleading and i was blocked from doing so by this individual and another one with the username Justlettersandnumber. They claimed a conflict of interest and that is true- i am related to the subject. We complained to wikpiedia about their behavior and requested the page be kept under watch and in the long term hope it can be balanced out.

I understand wikipedia has rules about individuals editing pages relating to family or friends and that is fine, i respect that. I would have left the matter at that but one week ago the same individuals, using the same usernames, have started to edit my own personal wikipedia page!! is this purely a coincidence that the same individuals are editing the pages negatively of a husband and wife?

i don't mind people editing the page, but in this case they have added factorial errors. Here is the log record from my personal wikipedia page: benjamin genocchio You can cross reference it against the page for Melissa Chu,

(cur | prev) 14:22, 6 September 2015‎ Bangabandhu (talk | contribs)‎ . . (6,512 bytes) (+593)‎ . . (undo | thank) (cur | prev) 14:11, 6 September 2015‎ Bangabandhu (talk | contribs)‎ . . (5,919 bytes) (+21)‎ . . (→‎Italian government lawsuit) (undo | thank) (cur | prev) 14:09, 6 September 2015‎ Bangabandhu (talk | contribs)‎ . . (5,898 bytes) (-2)‎ . . (→‎Italian government lawsuit) (undo | thank) (cur | prev) 14:08, 6 September 2015‎ Bangabandhu (talk | contribs)‎ . . (5,900 bytes) (-31)‎ . . (readability) (undo | thank) (cur | prev) 14:07, 6 September 2015‎ Justlettersandnumbers (talk | contribs)‎ . . (5,931 bytes) (-29)‎ . . (add 2 refs, some ce, add two versions of his departure from Blouin) (undo | thank) (cur | prev) 13:40, 6 September 2015‎ Castlemate (talk | contribs)‎ . . (5,960 bytes) (+28)‎ . . (Ad education) (undo | thank) (cur | prev) 12:37, 6 September 2015‎ Justlettersandnumbers (talk | contribs)‎ . . (5,932 bytes) (-335)‎ . . (some ce, needs a LOT more) (undo | thank) (cur | prev) 12:28, 6 September 2015‎ Justlettersandnumbers (talk | contribs)‎ . . (6,267 bytes) (-669)‎ . . (rm unreferenced content - Wikipedia is built on independent reliable sources, and this is a WP:BLP) (undo | thank)

They have added a statement that my previous employer claims they fired me, with a link, but if you read the link you see in a following paragraph beyond the claim that the article states clearly that i provided an email resignation letter to the reporter that contradicts the claim-- i provided physical, written evidence that contradicted an assertion. This is printed in the story that is being used as a citation to make a claim that is in direct contrast to the printed facts. Look it up.

I am not going to go in and correct this as i will be accused of a conflict of interest again but surely there has to be a level of impartially and fact-checking here? Can an individual or individuals really just take an assertion that is contradicted by facts in an article and put it in a wikipedia entry? And especially individuals that have a track record of antagonistic statements? There must be some check and balance here or wikipedia becomes a site for personal vendettas.

I am not familiar with wikipedia rules but clearly in this instance should not something be done to correct the false and misleading statement?

I would request please that all recent changes by these two unscrupulous wikipedia entries be reviewed and or removed from my personal account and they be blocked from editing my or melissa chiu's account going forward just as i am blocked from editing them. surely wikipedia is not to be used for personal vendettas against an individual or family. i invite you to review the records of both accounts.

Benjamin Genocchio — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bgenocchio (talkcontribs) 02:06, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

First things first: You should have taken it to Talk:Benjamin Genocchio and Talk:Melissa Chiu first. Talk pages exist for a reason, and I wish they were a lot more visible. (Note that due to the way watchlists work, watching a page automatically watchlists the corresponding talk page, and vice-versa, so they would have seen any reply on the talk page.) I am tempted to crosspost this to the talk page and link you to it, if for no other reason than to force a discussion.
Second: There's nothing really actionable in any of those edits you list above as far as I can see. What edits weren't minor copyediting were either addition of material with sources to back them up or removal of material that isn't sourced. Do you have a specific diff on hand?
Third: The sentence in question says, and I quote, "(Gennochio) said he had resigned, but Louise Blouin said that he had been fired." The New York Post essentially corroborates this passage as writ, as it says both that you claimed you had tendered your resignation and later down the page includes the passage, "But in the next breath (Blouin) added, “Benjamin was fired. You want it. You got it.”" This is essentially a he-said-she-said situation here; WP:Neutral point of view bars us from taking one side over the other, and we cannot budge on that, fullstop. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 08:30, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello Jéské!Edit

Thanks for letting me know. I updated my page and made a few more edits. If you do delete my article, let me know right away, as I suggest you as well as the other users think about your decision. I'm trying to do all I can to keep the article from being deleted. If SlingshotVenus is deleted for any reason, that's perfectly fine with me. I just reviewed the guidelines on deletion policy and notability.

Warm Regards, ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guitarherofan (talkcontribs) 22:07, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I am not an administrator and cannot delete pages. Second, note that traditionally indenting a paragraph activated Wikipedia's "code" function for that line; indents on Wikipedia are done using colons ( : ), which will indent the paragraph as a whole. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 00:42, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Dungeon Hunter 5Edit

Hey just asking why did you delete this information about the game? This is an ENCYCLOPEDIA, isn't it supposed to give *some* information about the topic?DhVsir (talk) 20:41, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

See WP:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. A plot synopsis and brief gameplay overview is okay; information about items not so much. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 02:28, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
  Just asking why? It wasn't even as much detail as I could have gone into...DhVsir (talk) 20:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!Edit

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)


I understand your comments here detailing your current lack of interest in assuming the admin role. But that being so, it is not appropriate to give definitive advice which give the impression that you have admin authority. Advice, yes, but not advice which pre-empts that of an admin.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 11:34, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Better I tell him and he gets an opportunity to change the proposed name before the unblock gets reviewed than it gets rejected for the username and he has to file a new request. An ounce of prevention... —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 19:46, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

The Kittura thingEdit

Hi Jeremy, regarding the Kittura indef, this article says a lot to me. The bulk of the non-regulars who have edited that article over the years are blocked, with very few edits coming from other interested editors. If you follow some of those blocked editors' edits you'll notice the intersections, like at Faisal Saif and Main Hoon Part-Time Killer. (NuclearWarfare's "mark blocked" script helps here—just toss it into your common.js file) Also, see the intersection report between Vaalee and Kittura. And why didn't Kittura disclose that he was a publicist? Tsk tsk tsk. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:42, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

I was asking if it was a CU-based block because it wasn't marked as such and didn't have an associated SPI. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 05:52, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

time wastingEdit

Why are you wasting your time and others with useless postings such as this? It's not at all helpful to the blocked user, who has no way of making an unblock request targeted specifically toward checkusers; admins who can act upon unblock requests generally know full well that they shouldn't unblock in the case of checkuser blocks; this is not a "checkuser block" anyway, because by definition a checkuser block says "this is a checkuser block"; there are not rules restricting regular admins from unblocking otherwise; and even if I'm the only checkuser patrolling CAT:RFU, which I don't think is the case, your comments of this sort neither accelerate nor delay the process of reviewing these requests. What is the user supposed to do in response? --jpgordon::==( o ) 18:18, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

沙盒 listed at Redirects for discussionEdit

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 沙盒. Since you had some involvement with the 沙盒 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix (talk) 06:58, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Your sigEdit

fyi: Because of the linking in your sig, use of the font tag outside the link won't work and will be just a blue link:

Jeremy v^_^v Bori! (The color works on this, your talk page, because only on this page is your talk-page link replaced by a bold non-link.)

If instead you use the font tag inside the link, then it will produce the color you want on all pages:

Jeremy v^_^v Bori!

Happy holidays! Paine  22:48, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Ah, thank you; I didn't do that originally because I was concerned about character limits for the sig. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 22:51, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Pleasure! Paine  

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Special Barnstar
For defending us editors with Asperger's at AN/I. You speak on behalf of all of us with a diagnosis who know that having one does not give you carte blanche to be a vandal, or a disruptive editor in general. Thank you. Ches (talk) 17:58, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Time wastingEdit

I see that you have chosen to ignore the question posed a few comments above this one. I recognize that at one time you were an admin, and I am reasonably certain that you could be so again if you chose to apply. As you have said, categorically, that you do not wish to be an admin at this time or in the forseeable future, could I please ask you to stop making functionless posts in response to block messages received by other editors. These messages help them not at all, nor are they useful to reviewing admins.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 19:46, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

WP:PROD reasonEdit

Please provide a reason when using WP:PROD such as with Philippe Dajoux. ~Kvng (talk) 17:55, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

I did. Check the history; an IP removed the rationale. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:20, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Also, if anyone actually gave a damn about these articles they'd've found non-IMDb sources by now. Those pages have been tagged for a fair while. The people who're watching them either need to fish up sources or cut their bait. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:22, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Sorry I missed that. You do need to provide a valid reason for deletion. Unsourced is not a valid reason. Editors not giving a damn is also not a valid reason. ~Kvng (talk) 21:30, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
A biography with sourcing the project generally agrees is not up to snuff tagged for the better part of a year is not a valid reason for deletion? We'll see about that. Rescinding PRODs for AfD on most of them. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:34, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
I am not actually disagreeing with you on this article. I was just requesting that you provide a valid reason when you propose deletion and consider alternatives to deletion WP:BEFORE proposing deletion. Valid reason for this case, for instance, may be WP:DEL8 or WP:DEL9. ~Kvng (talk) 23:28, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

The Church of Christ with the Elijah MessageEdit

What do you expect to do with the answer to [1] this question, should the editor make one? If you think that an admin would need to know, why can you not let an admin ask the question?--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 18:57, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Because an admin is more apt to read that as an admission of paid editing right off the bat. Having him clarify makes it easier on himself and his chances to be unblocked. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 05:56, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
It is not for you to decide what an admin should think or do. Please do your recreational editing somewhere else. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 09:33, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


Why do you want to know the answer to [2] this question? I have said before, if you want to be re-instated as an admin, apply. If you do not, please leave this type of edit to those of us who are admins. Your interventions serve no purpose.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 09:42, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

You are pissing people off totally unnecessarily, with no advantage whatsoever to the users whatsoever. It's at best a waste of your time, and it's bordering on disruptive, if by "disruptive" one means "wasting the time of other volunteers for no reason whatsoever". --jpgordon::==( o ) 16:33, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Anthony, you mention you've told me this before, but this is the first time I've ever heard from you. I'm not looking for reinstatement as an admin, as I am not and never was one. I'm not sure which page the block is referencing, nor what edits have apparently offended people. I read through Wikipedia's "examples of disruptive editing," and I haven't done anything on that list. I always make sure what I post is as unbiased as possible, has sources cited when possible, and is constructive to other editors. And I'm not sure how anything I've done would amount to "block evasion." Thanks for the insight.DylanJC88 (talk) 18:25, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
@DylanJC88:My comment was addressed to the owner of the page on which I posted it. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 21:29, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!Edit

  The Helping Hand Barnstar
Thanks for your help on IRC and over-all on Wikipedia. Tito Dutta (talk) 20:01, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

A kitten for you!Edit

CoolCanuck eh? 23:44, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Your Revert of My RecevertEdit

Thanks for catching that, I must have clicked revert on accident while looking a Diff's much appreciated! --Cameron11598 (Talk) 23:28, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

No worries. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 23:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 9)Edit

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by David.moreno72 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
David.moreno72 08:05, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft piece for Tech WritingEdit

User Jeske Couriano I am the same user(Mstamendez23) from the Wikipedia-en-help website. I would like for my article to please be resubmitted for review as I have added more references. Thank You

You can submit it for review yourself by putting {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 04:45, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Your signatureEdit

Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated <font> tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

You are encouraged to change

—[[User:Jéské Couriano|<font color="228B22">''Jeremy''</font>]] [[User talk:Jéské Couriano|<font color="228B22">v^_^v</font>]] <sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/Jéské Couriano|Bori!]]</small></sup> : —Jeremy v^_^v Bori!


—[[User:Jéské Couriano|<i style="color: #228B22;">Jeremy</i>]] [[User talk:Jéské Couriano|<span style="color: #228B22">v^_^v</span>]] <sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/Jéské Couriano|Bori!]]</small></sup> : —Jeremy v^_^v Bori!

Anomalocaris (talk) 05:56, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, will change that now. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 10:53, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Jeremy v^_^v Bori!

Thank you for updating your signature! —Anomalocaris (talk) 22:02, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Not a problem. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 23:02, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

thank youEdit

megamediamissus (talk) 05:56, 23 April 2018 (UTC) I noted your restrictions but I felt you reached to help me. I felt the massive walls of text were necessary but if this upset you, I am sorry again. I also have very little understanding of this and my mission was never to "achieve anything" in a targeted and strategic business sense, but to improve, or I don't imagine I'd have asked for help. I thank you for another lesson. I am literally afraid to use this community now as I can't learn all norms in a day and it feels like an expectation at times, but thank you for assuring that for me, and I do hope my previous "admin directed" thanks reached its target. Thank you for clarifying, that is appreciated. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori!Megamediamissus (talk) 07:57, 23 April 2018 (UTC)megamediamissussMegamediamissus (talk) 07:57, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

You're welcome. Wikipedia is, to be fair, a rather daunting place to those not familiar with how it operates, and especially so where deletion is involved. Just take your time, and try to be more concise with your arguments - the more to-the-point and short an argument is, the more likely it is someone will read it (this is true for the Internet in general; walls of text are fairly easy to lose your place in). —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 08:28, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes indeed, a poor habit (and sadly, one I bring into speech too, despite truly trying to change). I feel shitty for it, and will increase my efforts. Again, thanks. We humans are not logical very often;) the help was appreciated, and so was the friendly intervene. :) There is a unique sense of vulnerability I found shocking by this experience - I had not experienced in in any press or youtube comment...but it is emotional, and I suppose much of the conflict you may deal with stems from it. Regardless, you are appreciated by me, very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Megamediamissus (talkcontribs) 10:56, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

== sharing nature and positivity ==Edit

my pet cat.
The Magic the cat award
I love to use my own images. ^^ just part of learning =^.^= and i love to make it as fun as I can. She is brain damaged but lovely - screws up a lot but eventually learns ;)Have a perfect day! Megamediamissus (talk) 10:58, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Confusing us.Edit

Hi Jéské Couriano,

This user make us confuse with his/her edit summary to revert his edit with Rollback. But not vandalized in any article. So its better to report at AIV. Thank you, Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 04:58, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

He is a banned user and if you haven't been paying attention to his edit summaries and the rest of his edits, lemme get you up to Speed. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 05:02, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

User talk:Iggy the SwanEdit

Thanks for this, you've discovered an LTA who wouldn't stop vandalising my talk page. Iggy (Swan) 07:40, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

It's actually a separate persistent IP vandal that normally blanks out articles related to Fire Emblem with a random string of numbers and exclamation points, or at least that's what I generally recognise him as, especially since a few other IPs in that range were doing just that, and immediately after that talk page message and that specific IP getting blocked. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 08:05, 16 May 2018 (UTC)


I have read (again) the highlighted section at the top of this page, and intend to respect it. If I may, I would like to ask a question, and hope (and intend) to do so without giving offence.

Obviously a considerable number of your edits here are in what one must call, for want of a better definition, admin-related activity. I understand your forceful rejection of any suggestion that you should be nominated as an admin. Could I please know why? ----Anthony Bradbury"talk" 22:08, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

CRASH membership. As the tools are part and parcel, and I want no part of Flagged Revisions or its bastard understudy, I will not try for adminship again. If they were to somehow be removed from en.wp I would consider it, but as I view the likelihood of that as zero at best... —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 04:44, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Clarifying ANEdit

In this case it was Google's algorithmically decided occupation it was never pulling data from Wiki in the first place. I happen to know that Google semi-seriously cares about knowledge panel feedback so pinging them up with errors is going to be effective for many where it's Google's fault not ours. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:00, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

The thing is that most of the users who ask about that sort of thing are not technologically-savvy, and things we generally know about tend to be black boxen to them. Pinging Google is good, but I'm doubtful any of the helpees are actually arsed to do so. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 01:24, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
Ok fair enough but if they come and it's not based on Wikipedia content refreshing the cache isn't going to do anything for them either. I think we're better off distancing ourselves from Google's efforts where it's appropriate to do so. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 05:01, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
No, you misunderstand. I don't tell them to bypass/purge their cache; I'm telling them to wait until Google refreshes theirs. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 05:30, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!Edit

  Thanks for removing the frivolous report over on WP:AIV, which was done seconds after I reported User:Kate2020! IanDBeacon (talk) 03:25, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
It would have been seconds before but we edit-conflicted. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 10:08, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

A beer for you!Edit

  Your edit summary warmed my heart. :-) Have a beer on me. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 15:56, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
No thanks. Got any tea? —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 18:28, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!Edit

  Here you go. —CYBERPOWER (Chat) 23:29, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:IRCEdit

I am perfectly willing to have a discussion with you here to hash some things out regarding my proposal on Wikipedia talk:IRC. I can do this over the next week. Please ping me if you respond back on this page. Thanks. Seahawk01 (talk) 02:47, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

There's nothing to discuss. Your suggestions are made from a position of ignorance and are geared not towards others, but towards satisfaction on your behalf to try and compel a specific channel and the experienced users helping in that channel, myself included, to bend a knee. I've no interest in debating IRC policy with someone who doesn't bother to care to educate himself about it and who's got a specific outcome in mind. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 03:03, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I just noticed this. I find your reaction too severe and I disagree. I think I have something to add to the discussion. And, really, I don't want to add so much. Just a few things. I think IRC is really being reactionary here...I would suggest it feels like a mob mentality. You guys could tone things down a bit too. Also, ping me or I'll never reply because I don't track other users pages. Seahawk01 (talk) 02:42, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

WP:REFUND G11 refusal templateEdit

Is the text you added here (for example) an existing template or just something you paste in? It's considerably more useful than what {{UND|g11}} spits out. —Cryptic 02:34, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

It's actually a user subpage set up to work as a template message, User:Jéské Couriano/REFUND/Ineligible speedy/G11. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 02:51, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

not trying to cause problems by changing venueEdit

Hi Jéské Couriano, I'm not trying to cause problems by changing venue to Wikipedia talk:IRC/wikipedia-en-help. I just feel the discussion is specifically related to wikipedia-en-help. Another user had combined the pages before and I didn't notice what article the discussion was happening under at first. I think WP:IRC is too broad and WP:IRC/wikipedia-en-help is the appropriate place.

Please ping me if you reply back here. Thanks Seahawk01 (talk) 02:39, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Also, why not just place all discussions in Wikipedia talk:IRC/wikipedia-en-help/Archive 2...if they are stale, they should be archived. Then, we can return after New Years with a clean slate. I'm not going to do it, but it is a suggestion and you can act on it, if you want. Seahawk01 (talk) 02:52, 20 December 2018 (UTC)


Yes. I thought that the username might be from the Bible, and looked it up, and it wasn't what I expected, because it is an "easy living" Bible verse. There are a lot of verses in the Gospels that could more readily be misinterpreted to support being a nuisance. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:00, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Attempted partial outingEdit

Thank you for putting a halt to the nonsense on Nik Richie. Do you have the ability to remove the attempted partial outing of me (initialism) by User: DS Cable in his most recent edit? Damon Killian (talk) 02:20, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

I personally don't, but I can get in touch with someone who can. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 02:24, 12 March 2019 (UTC)


Much obliged for bringing this to ANI; that was one fast indef. I was working myself around to that for the last two AfD nominations, thanks for doing the work. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:39, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

The guy asked for two of his pieces to be REFUNDed, so I decided to do a bit of investigating, which led to the AN/I report. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 20:41, 8 April 2019 (UTC)


My advice is let the thread die. If the user continues to misbehave it only adds further fuel to the fire that EN.WP should not be the ones dealing with it and we can Revert on sight. Hasteur (talk) 22:12, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

The thing is, ja.wp has handled it by semi-protecting both his target and their non-Japanese noticeboard for a month - that's the entire reason he's forum-shopping here and at -en-help. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 22:15, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

Blanking user pagesEdit

On English Wikipedia users are allowed to blank their userpages, with very limited exceptions. Active block notices are not one of the exceptions. Please don't undo such blanking as you did on Zlowry21. See WP:BLANKING Meters (talk) 22:16, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

I have no intention of doing so, and I will concede that was a mistake on my part. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 22:22, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
A common mistake, particularly since some Wikipedia version don't allow it. Meters (talk) 22:31, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
en.wp is my home wiki. I just made a mistake. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 22:48, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Recent changeEdit

This is a problematic change, because the source is WP:PRIMARY, meaning the figures are said by the producer himself, which our community do not accept. That source you added clearly depicts the Facebook post of the film's director with a promotional poster claiming that hyperbolic figure, also shares another link to the producer's post. Indian film producers are known for inflating figures, so we do not accept their figures. Both the talk pages Talk:List of highest-grossing Indian films and Talk:Madhura Raja and are currently semi-protected because of the mass sock/meatpuppetry going on to add this promotional claim. Also see WP:ICTFFAQ. Thank you. Continental Rift (talk) 19:25, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome, thanks for letting me know, and apologies. It was literally the only source provided to me that I could read that wasn't Facebook itself - the other two sources provided that could potentially be useful were in Malayalam, and my experience with South and East Asian languages in automated online translators is that they generally return "blind idiot" translations and/or gibberish. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 19:29, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
And self-reverted. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 19:33, 1 June 2019 (UTC)


Thanks for the reference in regards to afd Michael Z. Williamson. As you can see im new to all this and tried to be clear i was expressing an opinion and concern as an out sider. Based on the behaviours going on and how that reflected on Wikipedia rather then wether or not the article in question was valid.

So again thank you for the ref i will read into it.

More so i had no problem with the afd in and of itself or the process of editing in general. But rather that certain people where anonymously slagging out the subject on purely moral grounds whilst cutting down his lifes work with no real recourse for rebuttals. Or in one case purging whole swaths of the article with little or no explanation at all, culminating in Several edits with no justification at all other then derisive comments about the subject and his life works. My point was how distressing this was to a complete outsider where the WP editing process was concerned.

Sorry that went on a bit more then intended but i cant see any thing to retract.

I hope this is in the right place for this. WardedOne (talk) 12:52, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

It is. I don't mind clarifying or defending my arguments on my user talk page, and the same is true for every other regular. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 20:07, 24 July 2019 (UTC)


  Hey, Jéské Couriano. Just stopping by to wish you a Happy Birthday from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day!
Mjs1991 (talk) 05:48, 6 August 2019 (UTC)


Did you perhaps mean to close this sub-section to include the containing section here? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 04:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

No; I specifically meant to close the subsection. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 04:53, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Your support for my banEdit

Hi, you have supported my ban however would we be able to discuss your reasonings and both sides on here so we can see each other’s sides in a civil way thanks.

Wiki Facts fixer (talk) 20:00, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Considering the obvious selective illiteracy at Jayjg's talk page I am not going to waste my breath here on the grounds that you're just looking for an argument. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Bori! 00:20, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Jéské Couriano".