User talk:Jezhotwells/Archive 4
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
circumsision in UK law
regarding your constant changing of my contribution to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_and_law#England_and_Wales
1)
In 2005 a Muslim man had his son circumcised against the wishes of the child's mother who was the custodial parent. He was found not guilty of assault occasioning actual bodily harm by a majority verdict of the jury.[1]
that whole paragraph should not be there because the source link is broken and it talks about the findings of a jury. In the Uk juries decide matters of fact and never matters of law, the page is about law.
2) I moved the content regarding the human rights act to its own paragraph this is a subsection of the article in its own right and does not belong in the middle of a paragraph about a different issue.
could you explain the reasons for constantly changing my work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.163.100 (talk) 21:33, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- I haven't changed anything. I have never edited that article. I have just reported you for edit warring. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 21:35, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Alejo Carpentier renomination
Hi Jezhotwells! Thank-you for reviewing the Alejo Carpentier article for GA status. We have gone through all your suggestions, as well of those of our copy-editor, and made the appropriate changes. I have resubmitted the article for GA status alphabetically under the 'Writers, Publishers, and Critics' section of Language and Literature.....is this the right place to resubmit? Please let me know if it is incorrect. Otherwise, thank-you for all your help! Katie322 (talk) 21:12, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I fixed the nomination, you put it at WP:GA, rather than WP:GAN. No worries, I have sorted it out, I am away for a few days, but someone wil be along to look at it soon, I am sure. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 21:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 April 2010
- News and notes: Berlin WikiConference, Brooklyn Museum & Google.org collaborations, review backlog removed, 1 billion edits
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Environment
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Support
I see you supported this user, are you available for the discussion? Off2riorob (talk) 22:20, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Which user, where? –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Also , hi, it has been a while since we met on the great Mafia discussion. Off2riorob (talk) 22:23, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- But please remember that that person (forgot the name) was apparently not a member of the Cosa Nostra! :-) –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yes you are correct according to policy. Off2riorob (talk) 22:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- This issue is tedious in comparison to that issue, a user assets that the claims rifkind for his wifes expenses is worth inclusion, as yet no citation to support that has been offered, it is enough to get me on my knee and hand folded and staring at the sky, you have encouraged him so I offer him to you to discuss the issue, thank you. I am removing the whole worthless imo issue from my watchlist, best regards. Off2riorob (talk) 22:33, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- I have put the sources into the talk page at Talk:Malcolm Rifkind, sorry that you don't have time to read them.. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yes I have had a look , only the bloomberg ones are really relevent and they do nothing to assert that any of it is worthwhile content for the article, the issue is that he did not break any guidelines and was not reprimanded so a list of his expense claims is undue weight in such a situation and even if it was worth adding we would have to balance it to remove the weight that it was being added to appear as if he did something wrong, tedious, feel free to present something for inclusion, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 23:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- As you can see in the article, this is balanced by the supported statement that he was not the highest claimer, and that he had decided not to carry on claiming. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Yes I have had a look , only the bloomberg ones are really relevent and they do nothing to assert that any of it is worthwhile content for the article, the issue is that he did not break any guidelines and was not reprimanded so a list of his expense claims is undue weight in such a situation and even if it was worth adding we would have to balance it to remove the weight that it was being added to appear as if he did something wrong, tedious, feel free to present something for inclusion, regards. Off2riorob (talk) 23:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- But please remember that that person (forgot the name) was apparently not a member of the Cosa Nostra! :-) –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Hi Jezza. If you have time it would be appreciated if you take another look at rifkind. The demands of Kitty re. refs explaining why MPs spouses travel expenses were controversial and one specific one relating to Rifkind himself were produced. Kitty then changed her mind and said it still wasn't good enough and unilaterally removed the whole expenses section. By only including "good things" in the article it does not present NPOV so I am reinstating the section. Not enough people are having an input to avoid bias. Thanks --SteamedTreacle (talk) 16:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oh btw, the new cites were as follows:-
- "Politicians shovelled nearly £8million of taxpayers' money to their families last year, it was revealed last night.
- MPs employed their relatives or paid for their road, rail and air travel using their generous Commons expenses.
- One was criticised for claiming £500 for his wife to make three trips to Westminster - even though his West London constituency is just three miles away.
- Sir Malcolm Rifkind claimed £500 for his wife's trips to London, despite living only three miles away"
- "MPs charged the taxpayer £461,000 for their wives and children's travel costs, newly-published figures show."
Thank you for your GA review and approval of Don Marostica, and especially for your helpful comments and suggestions, which significantly improved the article. Much obliged! -- Sethant (talk) 21:31, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
GAN backlog elimination drive - 1 week to go
| First off, on behalf of myself and my co-coordinator Wizardman, I would like to thank you for the efforts that you have made so far in this GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a success, and that is thanks to you. See this Signpost article about what this drive has achieved so far.
We're currently heading into the final week of the drive. At this time, if you have any GANs on review or on hold, you should be finishing off those reviews. Right now, we have more GANs on review or on hold than we do unreviewed. If you're going to start a GA review, please do so now so you can complete it by the end of the month and so that the nominator has a full 7-day window to address any concerns. See you at the finish! |
 |
Santa Claus Lane
You might be interested in this. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 04:04, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
UNIVERSES Theater Company, Inc. Draft to Live
Yes, I would love it if you could rework my draft into a more encyclopedic format ... Will that make it visible to the public on wikipedia.com? ... Thank you soooo much for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mredruiz (talk • contribs) 12:27, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
they're there
If I may, there are many people who use there's in place of there are.( Martin | talk • contribs 20:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC))
- Well that would be wrong, because there's is a contraction of there is, not there are. But more pertinently, Wikipedia:Mos#Contractions says don't use such contractions. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 21:45, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Re Universes II
Is this a test? As an editor with 29K edits, does the article meet WP guidelines and policies? You don't need my permission to move it to the mainspace. On the surface it looks fine. Is there something I'm missing here or did you just query me because I deleted the CSD:G7 request on the previously blanked article Universe?--Mike Cline (talk) 00:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- No, just a matter of courtesy as you had deleted. I am sorry, I had not noticed it was a G7 request. The version I started with for the original editor was definitely promotional. Sorry to have troubled you. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:01, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Hazel Miner
I don't agree with some of the issues you've raised here. The folk ballad and news articles that describe her as a "national heroine" were mentioned in the body of the article as well as in the lead. Most of the information about this particular person is in material that is not online and the details in the article are taken from the news articles, ballad, etc. As for it being hagiographical, well, she has been cast as a kind of saint in the coverage of her. She died to save her brother and sister. This article passed muster as a Good Article in this format before hand. The quotes ARE all cited and I fixed what the previous reviewer had said needed to be fixed. A coulee is a body of water. It's a common term that will be understood by people in the United States. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 03:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
All The South Party
Thanks for your message. The sources which you have provided clearly show that the party exists, but three of them (the register of political parties, notice of poll and a letter written by the leader of the party) don't provide any evidence of notability - they can exist for any UK party which stands in an election, regardless of whether or not it is notable. The fourth, a brief profile of the party from the Bath Chronicle, provides some evidence that someone has taken notice of its existence, but such small parties with similarly little evidence of notability have typically been deleted at AfD. The best way to establish the party's notability would be to find additional newspaper articles which cover the party in depth. If these don't exist, it may well be that the party doesn't meet the required level of notability to justify an article on Wikipedia. Warofdreams talk 12:10, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- You are probably right, I created it as a stub as the candidate is not strictly speaking an Independent. I will check for further sourcing as the campaign progresses. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:12, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Say what?
Only a right-wing political person would consider that to be vandalism.--Master of cheese and crackers (talk) 00:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Inherit the Wind (play)
I read your note in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Theatre. However the last editor was trying to get rid of vandalism and your change reintroduced some (e.g. "everyone removes their underwear"). I've gone back to a 22 March version which might be OK. This will go on and on, unfortunately. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 07:29, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- OOOPs! –– Jezhotwells (talk) 09:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi Jezhotwells, this review is On Hold for tweaking. I've now only got another 34 reviews to do & finish before Friday to catch up with you on the drive. Pyrotec (talk) 10:09, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Re:Edit war
I am in no way engaged in an edit war with you at all. You specifically said I could revert your edits if I gave a reason on the talk page. Now that I do, you are telling me I'm edit warring with you. I fail to see the logic in this argument. The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 01:15, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- OK, you need to sort out the problems with the article then. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:17, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- As we speak I am responding to your concerns with the usage of sources. This specific article I do no have a strong urge to keep, just general responsibility. It is moreso the Phineas and Ferb episode I have a strong desire for to keep as I dubiously believe it meets notability even more than this one. The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 01:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- So is there any particular reason why you decided to just ignore my comment entirely, leave no rebuttal, and just revert my perfectly justified edits for the umpteseventh time and call them vandalism? The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 18:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Also, I apologize if my comments seem...uncivil, it is just that this topic has been going nowhere since it began and actions that take part in it are beginning to become upsetting. The Flash I am Jack's complete lack of surprise 23:19, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
-Apology accepted. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Your comments on my editing of "South Beach"
Thank you for your comments and suggestions. However, I am very offended that you say Wikipedia only accepts "reliable, verifiable" sources. This begs me to ask why, then Wikipedia allows an article which is clearly an "opinion" piece from a not very reliable local newsrag as a major entry about "South Beach." This writer based her "opinion" on what have been cited as incorrect FACTS about hate crimes reported in Miami and Ft. Lauderdale. The very large gay community, of which I am a member, is outraged by this report and questions whether it is motivated by a degree of homophobia. I ask that this be removed from your South Beach entry. Otherwise, Wikipedia is not a very reliable source at all! MiamiBeachFrank (talk) 17:24, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
- it is not my article, it is everyone's. You asked for comments at WP:EAR and you got them. I am sorry that you are offended by Wikipedia policies and guidelines. You can tag the passages you think are dubiously referenced with the {{dubious}} template. There are other such templates at Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup. I suggest that you spend some time reading up on Wikipedia policies, the links are on your talk page. Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Try reading the reliable sources page, it syas "Wikipedia articles are tertiary sources and should not be used as sources within articles, nor should any mirrors or forks of such articles be accepted as reliable sources for any purpose." Don't expect to understand how it all works immediately, it will likely take a few months to get the hang of things. Wikipedia relies on editors cleaning up and improving artciles. theer is no magic police force which goes around sorting things out. You are an ediotr, just like me. Cheers. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 18:21, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Barnstar
Thanks!! I've been editing here for four-and-a-half years, and have never been given one of those before...... --RFBailey (talk) 22:26, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
thanks
Thanks for letting me know. Traditional African Medicine was created by a student of mine for a class assignment. She's diligent so I expect she'll take your suggestions to heart and work on improving the article. I appreciate your diligence. Auntieruth55 (talk) 23:24, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Lauren Ebsary
Hi, I've got a GAN that looks pretty good. I and User:Torchiest both think it is ready to pass, but we'd like an opinion from someone who knows cricket better than we do (which is to say someone who knows anything about it at all). Lauren Ebsary. Thanks! ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 05:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
GA review for Penelope Cruz
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Crystal Clear x3 20:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Feel like getting onto a review left by it's previous reviewer?
hi Jezhotwells. Three articles that me and White Shadows have worked on, SMS Babenberg, SMS Habsburg and SMS Arpad are at GANM< but the original reviwer, Sturmvogel 66, has not responded to two comments I have left on his page to reasses it (I know he has writer's cramp). I believe that the problems in the articles were fixed, so can you check them over and/or promote them?
Universes Theater
Hi, I want to thank you soooo much for helping me with this. It's amazing. I don't understand what the problem with the image is. It belongs to me. I will try to contact the link to give the permission but don't know what that entails. Is it ok for me to add links etc, to the UNIVERSES page, or will it be a problem?
Thanks again, we are very excited that more communities will have easier access to our Theatrical History and impact.
Always looking forward,
Mredruiz
- Hi, you need to forward evidence that H.N. Hershey (who owns the copyright) has released the image File:Universes in Boston.jpeg under a suitable licence, e.g. {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} as per the notice on the image: Please provide evidence of permission by either providing a link to a site with an explicit grant of permission that complies with the licensing policy or by forwarding email communication granting permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. The fact that you own the photograph is immaterial, the photographer owns the copyright. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 21:09, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the note and sorry for the false edit. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 21:23, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Clemuel Ricketts Mansion
Thanks for your thorough and quick GA review of Clemuel Ricketts Mansion. I have made the requested change and replied on the article's talk page. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:21, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Terri Schiavo, GA sweeps
I just noticed your message. I think that the topic is important and that Wikipedia is important, so I do think it would be good for someone (me?) to try to address the issues that you are identifying. Whether this can be done at all in an article of this nature is not clear to me. If I do start, shall (or may) I contact you? ( Martin | talk • contribs 17:50, 21 April 2010 (UTC))
- If you get it into a worthy state then re-nominate at WP:GAN and someone will review it. I have no particlular interest in the article, myself. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 07:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- OK. I don't think I am up to it, or particularly well placed. Possibly I will look at and address the specific issues you raised, since you took the time, but as far as re-nomination, I wouldn't presume to do that.( Martin | talk • contribs 20:21, 23 April 2010 (UTC))
- By the way, I did look at the Terri Sciavo page, and started to modified it. I certainly agree with your assessment that, while it may be a relatively comprehensive and neutral article about a controversial subject, it stood in need of editing. ( Martin | talk • contribs 03:26, 30 April 2010 (UTC))
Earl Strom
I won't get to it for another couple days; this week's been hell and I haven't been able to keep up. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 06:00, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- OK, –– Jezhotwells (talk) 07:47, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:All The South Party 2.gif
Thanks for uploading File:All The South Party 2.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
PLEASE NOTE:
- I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
- I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
- If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
- To opt out of these bot messages, add
{{bots|deny=DASHBot}}to your talk page. - If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.
Question about guidelines
Hello, I am new to Wikipedia (as someone who is attempting to add information). In March 2010 I added a page to Wikipedia (Deena Larsen) and, after adding inline citations, footnotes, references from reliable third-party publications, and a list of other references to Deena's works the alerts at the top of the page still persist. Also, when I checked the page today a new alert had been added stating the page was going to be deleted. After going to the link provided to see why it was going to be deleted, I am still confused. Deena Larsen is a living person, but there is nothing derogatory in the material I added. She is also well-known in her field -- actually a pioneer in the field of Electronic Literature. My response to the "general notability guideline" is: Deena Larsen has published numerous works in Electronic Literature and is well known both in the field as well as outside the field by helping to raise awareness of Electronic Literature through presentations at conferences and leading workshops. Her work has been published in online journals such as the Iowa Review Web, Cauldron and Net, frAme, inFLECT, and Blue Moon Review and she was a recent artist in residency at the Tristram Shandy Hall. She has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in the field of Electronic Literature: The Deena Larsen Collection of early electronic literature is currently housed at the Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities. In addition, she/her work has been referenced in secondary sources such as Narrative Beginnings: Theories and Practices (2008) and Media Communities (2006) which are reliable and intellectually independent. Unfortunately, the majority of this information is already included on the page.
Please, could you let me know what else can I do to improve this article?
I realize you must be very busy and sincerely thank you, in advance, for any information you're able to provide.
Imstudying (talk) 02:08, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- I have responded at Talk:Deena Larsen. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 06:05, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
GA review for Penelope Cruz
User:Diannaa has completed her copy-edit on the article. Crystal Clear x3 05:37, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Universes (poetic theatre ensemble)
 | On May 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Universes (poetic theatre ensemble), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
CASBAA (2nd review)
Hi Jezhotwells, thanks for checking Cable & Satellite Broadcasting Association of Asia, I have now added some 3rd party references and wikilinks from and to the article. You may consider to take a second review? Best, Mentalmoses (talk) 16:36, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Done. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately couldn't find a barnstar for very quick reponse... as soon as I find one, I'll let you have it! Mentalmoses (talk) 16:58, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your participation in the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive
  GAN backlog elimination drives chart up to 1 May On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, I'd like to especially thank you for your efforts over this past month's GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a complete success, which hopefully results in more expedient good article reviews, increasing users' confidence in the good article nomination processes. Even if you made just a small contribution, it still helped contribute to the success of this drive. Here is what we have accomplished this last month in this drive.
For those who have accomplished certain objectives in the drive, awards will be coming shortly. Again, thank you for your help in the drive, and I hope you continue to help review GA nominations and overall improve the quality of articles here on Wikipedia. |
|
:: Questions about Guidelines
Hello again,
I have made the changes/improvements you've suggested to Deena Larsen's page. Do I just wait now until someone reviews it again to see if I need to make any further revisions/additions?
Thank you so much for your assistance.
Imstudying (talk) 21:04, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Questions about Guidelines
- Thanks so much for your help. I have removed all the html hyperlinks within the body and added references where appropriate.
Imstudying (talk) 22:22, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Baseball articles marked for deletion
While I appreciate your interest in Canadian sport articles, I would ask that you not mark articles such as Baseball_New_Brunswick for deletion. These are not as you claim "non notable amateur leagues" but rather provinicial governing bodies for sport. They will be improved as part of WP:CSPORT, you are welcome to come help us out. HalifaxRage (talk) 22:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- You need to start finding third party WP:RS then. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:46, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi Jez, this EP cover is up for deletion. I would appreciate it if you take a look to see if I've made a mistake in my initial uploading. The photo is currently being used for Adge Cutler, The Wurzels and Scrumpy and Western. Many thanks Colin Cogoal (talk) 16:31, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- I have added a rationale for disputing the tag, however I note that the use of album covers is generally only for article about the albums themselves. You may need to find other images. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:44, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Your own comment in this section is the reason — of course nonfree images can sometimes be used in articles about dead individuals, but as far as I know, album covers aren't really acceptable options. I don't see its use at Scrumpy and Western as appropriate; it seems to me that it was being used in a decorative fashion, not transformatively. Nyttend (talk) 13:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- OK, fair enough. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:11, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Your own comment in this section is the reason — of course nonfree images can sometimes be used in articles about dead individuals, but as far as I know, album covers aren't really acceptable options. I don't see its use at Scrumpy and Western as appropriate; it seems to me that it was being used in a decorative fashion, not transformatively. Nyttend (talk) 13:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
PROD of Here We Go Magic
I'm a bit mystified by your PROD on this one. The article already cited two Pitchfork Media pages as sources, which would probably not be enough alone, but further coverage was extremely easy to find. Hardly "uncontestably deletable" as required by WP:PROD.--Michig (talk) 08:56, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
- Fine, I see that further sources have been provided which is good. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:09, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Hazel Miner
I continue to disagree with the comments you've made on this article and will not be changing it. So be it. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 16:10, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Speedy deletion declined: Operations Of Nature
Hello Jezhotwells. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Operations Of Nature, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The artist Akon does have an article, so A9 does not apply. This is unsourced and probably doesn't meet WP:NSONGS; consider AfD. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 17:37, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Elfy Food Deprod
I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Elfy Food, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Smallman12q (talk) 23:30, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Eugster/Frismag Deprod
I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Eugster/Frismag, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Smallman12q (talk) 01:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
GA review of Last Night in Twisted River
Message added 05:55, 3 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Removal of PROD from Anita Endrezze
Hello Jezhotwells, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Anita Endrezze has been removed. It was removed by DGG with the following edit summary '(many refs easy to find to her publications, should not have been nom,. for deletion. by blp prod, but sourced.)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with DGG before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 09:44, 3 May 2010 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 09:44, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
BLP prod is for unreferenced new articles; External links can be references
I disagree with your tagging an article with unreferenced and putting it up for BLP PROD deletion, in these edits. The article, about an athlete, has several external links to profiles about the player, which serve as general references. --doncram (talk) 02:46, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Ditto for your BLP PROD in this edit on Bill A. Jones, an article with IMDB and another source. --doncram (talk) 15:07, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Fair enough, point taken . –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:28, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks on deletion of Seth Frantzman
I wanted to thank you for deleting the wikipedia entry that someone had created about me (i.e not my User page but an actual entry), it caused me alot of headaches with all the negative material people added to it,
cheers and keep up the good work. Seth J. Frantzman (talk) 20:40, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
GA stats
I've updated the GA stats for April now (using Gimmebot's numbers), if you want to update the charts. There'll be some dramatic movements, I'm sure. Lampman (talk) 22:58, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, new charts uploaded. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:34, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Maths rating
You added the "maths rating" template to Talk:Mean signed difference today. The math project, unlike some other projects, has a complete list of mathematics articles at List of mathematics articles that is generated without the use of talk page tags. So our talk page tag is only used for holding assessment information; there is no reason to add our tag just to note that a page is related to mathematics. — Carl (CBM · talk) 00:19, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I was just following the rubric at the Maths project page. How does the list get generated, without a tag? I tried adding the Maths project banner and was instructed by the resulting text to add the rating template. Previously, there was no banner (or talk page) at all. I found the artcile whilst on new article patrol. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:23, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
- I know the math project is somewhat idiosyncratic. The list is made using article categories (List of mathematics categories). Actually, the article was already included on our list as of 22:00UTC on May 2, just because you marked it as a math stub. In practice, adding any math-related stub tag or any math-related category is enough to get us to notice an article. The work of new page patrol in filling in those stub tags and categories is greatly appreciated.
- If you'd like to add the "maths rating" tag to the talk page, we would be glad, but it isn't necessary. If you do add the talk page tag, it's preferable to fill in the assessment data at that time as documented at Template:maths rating. However, if you are uncomfortable doing that, it's OK – we don't need every math article to have a talk page tag, because our system does not depend on it.
The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010
- Book review: Review of The World and Wikipedia
- News and notes: iPhone app update, Vector rollout for May 13, brief news
- In the news: Government promotes Tamil Wikipedia, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject U.S. Roads
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
You posted on the talk page of the Ruby McCollum article that it was a mess. If you consider yourself an impartial editor, not related to anyone in the story and having no vested interest, why not clean it up? Wouldn't this be a constructive contribution? Artellis1000 (talk) 01:13, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Ruby McCollum article
You posted, "this article is a mess" on the above-referenced article. Why not assist in cleaning it up if you are a capable and dis-interested party? Wouldn't that be a better contribution?
Thanks Artellis1000 (talk) 01:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
GAN backlog elimination drive award
|
The Content Review Medal of Merit | |
| For reviewing the most good article nominations during the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive, 91, I hereby present you The Content Review Medal of Merit. Congratulations! Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:07, 5 May 2010 (UTC) |
|
The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia | |
| For the same as above. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:08, 5 May 2010 (UTC) |
Thank you very much. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 07:15, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Tony Benn promoted
You nominated Tony Benn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) as a good article. I'm pleased to say that this morning I promoted it to GA status. Good work! AGK 11:23, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I have notified the main editor of this review, as I don't think he knows. I feel guilty about not addressing all the problems in my GA review of Dubai. I concentrated on the references, their formatting and accuracy. Some f the prose problems you mentioned, I have already addressed. I am unsure how to address such issues as the dichotomy between the standards Dubai professes in some media on the one hand, and the reality of a very free and open place in reality. Perhaps you could advise. I know little about Dubai, except what I read in reviewing this artice. Regards, Xtzou (Talk) 21:33, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
- I have notified the major contributors, it is up to them to fix things. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 21:35, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi there. I've created the above article and just nominated it at WP:GAN. I thought I'd let you know, because he actually has a Bristol connection, so you might be interested. If you do review it, then 'go hard' - i want to take it to FAC, so the more of it gets sorted out now the better. Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 05:44, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
- I'm off on holiday soon, so not taking on any more reviews at present. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:10, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Ashton Court Festival/GA1
I apologise for not notifying you of this, I will make sure I do in the future. Adabow (talk) 06:43, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
I have tagged your recent edit for citation, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof Fasach Nua (talk) 01:07, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- I haven't made any recent edits to that page. Your incorrect edit was reverted by another editor. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:09, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- Just noticed that someone else made that change Fasach Nua (talk) 01:10, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Cat:UK MPs 2010-
Yes, sorry, that was the result of (literally) an oversight. I see the same issue affected Des Turner, which I have now fixed (though his page still needs updating - will try to get round to that later), but I don't think there are any others. - Jarry1250 [Humorous? Discuss.] 16:38, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Earl Strom
I should've mentioned this before, but given that the deadlink is impossible to recover and is often used, it'll take me a while to replace all of those refs. That combined with the other issues says to me that it should be failed, so you don't need to leave it on hold any longer. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 18:38, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- OK, will fail it for now. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 21:45, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
removal of "unconstructive" edits to Inherit the Wind (play)
Any editing I performed to the existing article was merely to remove and correct vandalised writing. At the time I read the article, it contained some phrases which were relating to an individual's experience of performing the play, not the play itself. For example, It referred to Reverand Brown several times as a man who tried to "hit on" the girls playing the townspeople, and even referred to the fact that he showed up late to rehearsals. It even said the curtains kept malfunctioning. I was merely removing those references and replacing them with accurate descriptions of the plot, as per my actual copy of the script from this year's production I starred in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.176.218 (talk) 21:25, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I neglected to sign the above post with tildes. 99.241.176.218 (talk) 21:26, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
- I may have confused you with the vandal, the page had got into quite a mess. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 17:00, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Architecture of Klis Fortress
Hi Jezhotwells! As you may recall, you were recently involved in the article Klis Fortress as a GA Reviewer. Architecture section is now expended, since it was relatively brief compared to the history section. I was wondering if you could take a qiuck look, and maybe copyedited it a bit if necessary. Especially since you proven to be very useful last time. Thanks. Kebeta (talk) 16:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I am taking a Wikibreak very soon. Check out the WP:Guild of copyeditors. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:59, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Guardians of GaHoole Book 15 AFD
In your AFD proposal for this book you cited WP:BOOK. Did you perhaps mean to refer to WP:NBOOK instead? Ohiostandard (talk) 07:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
- Ta! Fixed that now, thanks. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:30, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 10 May 2010
- From the editor: Reviewers and reporters wanted
- Commons deletions: Porn madness
- Wikipedia books launched: Wikipedia books launched worldwide
- News and notes: Public Policy and Books for All
- In the news: Commons pornography purge, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Birds
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Bercow and the BBC
Presumably if they e-mailed me they also e-mailed you... but if not, I got a reply from the BBC about the Speaker's party. They directed me to the FAQ (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8655330.stm#speaker), and basically said that's the way they've always done it. How helpful. Wereon (talk) 21:03, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello, these parties don't exist in Italy, but only on english wikipedia. You should check on Italian Wikipedia, Italian Newspapers and on the website of Italian Minister of the Interior and you will find nothing about them. Because these pages have been written someone who want to promote himself. The only true party that exist in the reality is the Northern League alias Lega Nord of Umberto Bossi. That's all. I suggest you to check all the information and then delete those pages. I'm trying to clear those page removing the false informations. Bye —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.33.134.65 (talk) 16:01, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- another page that is suspect is Front Lombardy: this party exist but never ran to elections (local and general). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.33.134.65 (talk) 16:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- What has this got to do with me? –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:26, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- another page that is suspect is Front Lombardy: this party exist but never ran to elections (local and general). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.33.134.65 (talk) 16:04, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Meeting in Bristol this weekend?
Hi this is Steve Virgin from Wikimedia UK. I am a fellow Bristolian and we have a Wikimedia Conference in town this weekend.
We are getting some of the Bristol Wikipedians together at the Watershed on Saturday night for a Wiki Meet at around 6.30pm. This is a good opportunity to meet people from the national chapter, the Wikimedia Foundation and chapters around the world. Bristol City Council has kindly offered a bar tab to help proceedings and we would be very keen to see you there.
Please let me know if you are able to come and feel free to invite any other local Wikipedians in Bristol.
Steve virgin (talk) 18:56, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- See Wikimedia Fundraising Summit, Bristol, May 14.— Rod talk 20:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- Ah! Rather strange that User:AndrewRT has signe four invites as User:Steve virgin though. [1], [2], [3], [4]. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 20:56, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi Guys - AndrewRT and I'd be grateful if you can come to the 'meet' - we'd like to find out ways to help make the great work you are all doing on the Bristol Project work even better.
Steve virgin (talk) 21:12, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
We've put the event up on Wikimedia UK now - and I am who I claim I am and would be delighted to see you, buy you a drink and explain everything Steve virgin (talk) 22:37, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry for the confusion - Steve asked me to copy his message to some other people's talk pages to make it easier for him - in retrospect I should have made it clear I was doing it on his behalf and signed it from me. AndrewRT(Talk) 22:40, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- As, I have already said on Steve's page, I won't be in Bristol on Saturday. You shoudl probably have put a notice about this on WikiProject Bristol and WikiProject Somerset a month or more ago. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 08:19, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 17 May 2010
- News and notes: Backstage at the British Museum
- In the news: In the news
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Essays
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Clemuel thanks you
|
<font=3> Thanks again for your helpful GA review. Clemuel Ricketts Mansion is now a featured article! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:06, 24 May 2010 (UTC) | 
|
|---|
Chelo61 RfC
Hello, this note is just to tell you that an RfC has begun regarding User:Chelo61. Since you may have been involved with this user, your input is appreciated. Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Chelo61. Thank you. Phearson (talk) 19:23, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 24 May 2010
- News and notes: New puzzle globe, feature for admins, Israel's "Wikipedia Bill", unsourced bios declining
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Saints
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Help me decide what to do next
I know you have had issues with Ajuk in the past. Take a look at User_talk:Ajuk#Stop_with_the_apostrophes and advise me where to go next and whether you would support me in making a complaint about his/her behaviour. I'm getting sick of the apostrophe pedantry - the latest example of which is moving St Pauls Carnival to St Paul's Carnival. --Simple Bob (talk) 20:26, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 31 May 2010
- Photography: Making money with free photos
- News and notes: Wikimedians at Maker Faire, brief news
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Zoo
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
River Parrett at FAC
Thanks for your previous help with River Parrett. I thought I'd let you know it is now up at FAC.— Rod talk 20:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the review of Matt Striker. I've responded to your concerns. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 19:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Your Abuse Response Filing
Greetings! Thank you for filing an Abuse Report for abusive behavior originating from [[Wikipedia:Abuse response/208.34.235.254
|208.34.235.254]].
- We wanted to let you know that the case for the report you filed for 208.34.235.254 has been closed. Thank you again for filing and alerting us of this IP's abusive behavior.
The Wikipedia Signpost: 7 June 2010
- From the team: Changes to the Signpost
- News and notes: "Pending changes" trial, Chief hires, British Museum prizes, Interwiki debate, and more
- Free Travel-Shirts: "Free Travel-Shirts" signed by Jimmy Wales and others purchasable
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Comedy
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Wikipedia Signpost: 14 June 2010
- News and notes: Pending changes goes live, first state-funded Wikipedia project concludes, brief news
- In the news: Hoaxes in France and at university, Wikipedia used in Indian court, Is Wikipedia a cult?, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
You are now a Reviewer
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 04:27, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 June 2010
- Sister projects: Picture of the Year results declared on Wikimedia Commons
- News and notes: Collaboration with the British Museum and in Serbia, Interaction with researchers, and more
- WikiProject report: WikiProject U2
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Re: Matt Striker
Not at all. I can understand that - I just finished exams today myself so I can empathise with having no time. I hope nothing is seriously wrong, and thanks for beginninig the review in the first place. People don't seem to like reviewing pro wrestling articles at GAN, so I receive any review with great pleasure. Thanks, ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 15:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Image
The image I was referring to was that of Martial, which had the correct link, but was pipelined with a Spanish. The other I removed because it was 1) not so useful here (you can see his image by linking on his article); 2) placed on the left and thus hindering a bit the format of the bulleted list. Nothing so wrong, anyway. PS: I notice here articles about Spanish cities (but I work also on artistical sights) are often in dismaying state. I mean: many are written in Anglo-Spanish, others are lacking history, main sights, etc., many many others miss the infobox etc. Are you interested in helping? Let me know and good work! --'''Attilios''' (talk) 17:05, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Anne Hathway (editor assistance needed)
Hi, I have a problem with a reversion made by a more experienced editor to changes I made to the Hathaway article. The dispute starts here and then bounces back and forth between Wildhartlivie's (WHL) talk page and mine. I've had some minor "disputes" with other editors, but they've all been amicable. This particular one rankles, mainly because I found some of WHL's comments offensive (particularly the "dumbing down" comments). I also thought WHL shouldn't have done a complete reversion just because WHL disagreed with some of my edits. They should be evaluated one by one. The end result has also left a few parts of the article begging for attention, and yet I'm reluctant to make even some of the earlier changes for fear WHL will simply revert them.
Other than the changes I made to the Follieri section, the edits were all minor, i.e., word choice, grammar, clarity, etc. Some of them I wouldn't have made standing alone, but because I was already in there, I made them. For example, I wouldn't have changed titular to title as a single change, even though I think title is clearer and more commonly used, and the use of titular in this context is a bit pompous.
Anyway, rather than explain to you the justifications for each of my changes (and each does have a different basis), if you wouldn't mind taking a look and telling me what you think, I'd appreciate it.
Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:22, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
- WP:EAR is the place for this. And don't edit other editor's talk pages. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:33, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
- I got your name as an editor who offered assistance. That page says to make the request "by posting on their talk page." I'm sorry I asked, but maybe you should remove yourself from the list. In the unlikely case you have a change of heart, I don't need assistance anymore. Although the situation has not been completely resolved to my satisfaction, it's enough better that I'm willing to drop it.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:37, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
- Ah, they have changed that page, I generally help out at WP:EAR. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 17:29, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
- I got your name as an editor who offered assistance. That page says to make the request "by posting on their talk page." I'm sorry I asked, but maybe you should remove yourself from the list. In the unlikely case you have a change of heart, I don't need assistance anymore. Although the situation has not been completely resolved to my satisfaction, it's enough better that I'm willing to drop it.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:37, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
polite request
I trust you had a good holiday last month.
I had hoped that, since you have returned, you would have given a few moments to respond to my points regarding edits on the George Muller article.
You said on 28 May 2010 “Please stop asserting ownership of this article.”. At NO point have I ever claimed that the work belongs to me. Your accusation is groundless and quite unnecessary.
At the top of the Talk page it says:
· Be polite · Assume good faith · Avoid personal attacks · Be welcoming
You accused me of starting an editing war. This is completely unfair, as previously stated, and quite hurtful. I reverted the “demands for citation” twice - with reasons - before Rantir opened a discussion on it to see how we could resolve the issue. Only then did you step in with your regrettable remarks. I justified my actions on two occasions (“Be helpful: explain your changes. When you edit an article, the more radical or controversial the change, the greater the need to explain it. Be sure to leave a comment about why you made the change”). That you will not accept my reasoning is irrelevant – that fact that I did give an explanation demonstrates that I made the reversions in good faith. Had I not given an explanation, then you would have had a point of contention.
The article on "tendentious editing" explains very simply that the reason citations are needed is because, if someone comes along afterwards and reads the reference, but cannot find it, they may assume that the statement is false – therefore page numbers should be given - "You say the quote you want to incorporate can be found in this 300 page pdf, but I've looked and I can't find it. Exactly what page is it on?". Had you taken me quietly to one side and explained this at the time, there would have been no problem, I would have understood. Instead, you came in with an aggressive attitude, with threats of blocking and implying that I had done these reversions in bad faith. (“Making accusations of bad faith can be inflammatory and hence these accusations may not be helpful in a dispute. It can be seen as a personal attack if bad faith motives are alleged without clear evidence that the others' action is actually in bad faith and harassment if done repeatedly. The result is often accusations of bad faith on your part, which tends to create a nasty cycle.“)
I note that “Administrators, like all editors, are not perfect beings. However, in general, they are expected to act as role models within the community, and a good general standard of civility, fairness, and general conduct both to editors and in content matters, is expected. When acting as administrators, they are also expected to be fair, exercise good judgment, and give explanations and be communicative as necessary.” I do feel you could have handled this situation in a better manner.
I have tried hard to be courteous and polite, and to avoid personal attacks in my responses to you.
I should be grateful if you would please retract your unfortunate comments.
Kind regards Silver Shiney (talk) 12:49, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
- I am not an admin, you are welcome to your misinformed opinion. I just care about accurate citing to reliable sources. You appear to care about pushing a religious POV on this article. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 08:07, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Whether or not you are an administrator or a reviewer, you are not exempt the rules of common courtesy Silver Shiney (talk) 11:53, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
- You don't appear able to accept that others have different opinions about what constitutes good encyclopaedic writing,
rather than god-bothering promotion.Get used to it. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:00, 23 June 2010 (UTC) struck through. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 11:10, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
- You don't appear able to accept that others have different opinions about what constitutes good encyclopaedic writing,
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:Jezhotwells Silver Shiney (talk) 10:29, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Castilian in Aragon
About your changes in Aragon, I think that you should consider this: First of all, Castilian is a translation of castellano, which in Spanish is simply another name for Spanish itself. Second, there is a great amount of dialectal variation in the area you mention, and in fact the dialects of Extremadura, Madrid or southern Castile are close to those in Andalusia. Third, the very misleading expression Castilian Spanish is used by some English speakers mainly to refer to a certain formal type of Spanish, and not for any everyday variety. For all these reasons, I think that the word Castilian should be avoided at all costs when refering to languages or dialects. Regards. --Jotamar (talk) 01:21, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 June 2010
- Objectionable material: Board resolution on offensive content
- In the news: Wikipedia controlled by pedophiles, left-wing trolls, Islamofascists and Communist commandos?
- Public Policy Initiative: Introducing the Public Policy Initiative
- WikiProject report: Talking with WikiProject Ships
- Features and admins: Approved this week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
GA Review
Hiya Jezhotwells, I responded at Talk:TM and Cult Mania/GA1. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 23:24, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Problems fixed. Thanks for the review. --Grimhelm (talk) 00:52, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Editorial Assistance
- From reading the talk page, I don't think you are understanding why your proposed edits are not acceptable. If you wish to invite further comment please phrase a simple neutral request at requests for comment. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:50, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Firstly, I wanted to thank you for making the comment, and for providing your assistance with editing. UGAcodon (talk) 10:16, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Thank you
Thanks for fixing my inadvertent blanking at User talk:174.117.59.119. I still don't understand how I managed to do that with Huggle, but I shall try to look out for it in future. Grafen (talk) 07:50, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
- Something weird was happening last night, it occurred on another page as well, with another editor. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:04, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
GA review Old Rouen Tramway
Thanks for that, I'll try to address the concerns there. The main troubles are with mangled grammar which for me always comes around after translating (the English grammar tends to give way to the original's), some POV statements (French WP in general does seem more laissez-faire about minor POV "asides" with things like loaded adjectives or adverbs) and the translated quotation being unattributed (there's really no guidance there I can find in WP:MOS, but maybe it is worth cutting entirely). Thanks, I'll address the points now. Si Trew (talk) 16:19, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
Dialogic cards
Hi Jeshotwells! I was looking through the AfDs today and noticed the one on dialogic cards. These are actually pretty common among voice answering systems around the world and I've added external links, refs, etc. to make some improvements. Take a look at it now. When you nommed it, it certainly deserved it. But we probably should keep this one after all. Nineteen Nightmares (talk) 22:30, 3 July 2010 (UTC)Nineteen Nightmares
Talkback
Message added 13:44, 4 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
It was good to see you add a source to Jaime Chávarri. Would it really have taken that much effort just to do this in the first place, rather than proposing the article for deletion? Can I respectfully suggest that in future you're a bit less deletion-happy? If all the articles on Wikipedia that started as stubs had been deleted at that stage, we wouldn't have much of an encyclopaedia now. --Nick Boalch\talk 20:13, 4 July 2010 (UTC) Good to see you add a source here too. Much better. If everybody chips in in such a way the problem will be eliminated within a few months. Dr. Blofeld White cat 11:27, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Re: Oyasato-yakata
Thank you for handling my GA review. If you don't mind, I have a few questions at Talk:Oyasato-yakata/GA1. Shii (tock) 04:14, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
Re: prodding of Antonio Sampietro
I have no idea who this person is, nor why you told me about it - I presume you called me in as an admin to check whether this prod should proceed (though that's an unusual procedure). I took less than 10 seconds to verify the information we had from a reliable reference to him online. As such, the prod is declined. Grutness...wha? 12:45, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- I am going through unreferenced Spain BLPs, prodding where no attempt has been made to reference. You created the artcile in question, see [5], which is why you were notified. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 12:47, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- (after ec)I just realised that the article is probably one of the couple of thousands of stubs I've created/dealt with over the past five years, which will be why you told me about it. I was working with another editor - I was creating them, he was verifying and referencing (a good way of making sure the facts are accurate). He must've missed that one. Hopefully he got any other Ceuta/Melilla ones that were done at the same time (most of wwhich can be referenced from the same source). Grutness...wha? 12:50, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Its irritating the way in which you do it. If you are so darn concerned about BLPs the time ir take it takes you to slap tags on it and send out warnings you could easily add a reference to the articles. The way you do it makes it look as if you want these articles deleted rather than improved. You are quite happy to delete articles about Spanish heads of parliaments etc.. Sigh sigh.. Dr. Blofeld White cat 15:08, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- It may be irritating to you, but why are you creating articles without references? Currently there are 265 such with the Spain project tag on. Next year they will just be deleted, so you need to make sure you reference articles that you create. You have already received notification about this from Dashbot on 8 January [6]. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:19, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Don't lecture me about references. They were created long before I even knew what a BLP was. I thought the past proposal to nuke all of the BLPs was rejected. Why then are continuing with this unneccessary course of action and proposing to delete often half dcent articles which just need a source or two? Dr. Blofeld White cat 16:20, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- So source them. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:25, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Your mindless prodding of unsourced BLPs for no other reason than their lack of references is disruptive. There is an ongoing effort to source articles in the backlog, which is precisely on target for its goals. Please stop this. I am removing all such prods, so it is really just a waste of time to add them in the first place. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:27, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- There's an ANI thread about this. Jezhotwells, forcing others to do all the work on clearing up the backlog by misusing PROD is not a good approach. PROD is only for uncontroversial deletions, for the backlog it is not like STICKYPROD. If you honestly think these articles should be deleted due to a lack of notability, then send them to AfD if borderline or prod if it is really obvious, but please don't abuse deletion processes to force other editors to do cleanup while you do nothing to source the content yourself. Fences&Windows 16:53, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Your AFD nominations claiming "no assertion of notability" looks almost embarrassingly false for a number of articles you'd nominated when a lot of them even state awards won and things like that. Stop wasting everybody's time and centre the efforts on sourcing these BLPs. The correct approach would have been to kindly remind me and others of outstanding unreferenced articlws which will need attending to rather than your approach. Dr. Blofeld White cat 17:08, 4 July 2010 (UTC)#
- You have already been reminded - on 8 January by Dashbot. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 17:20, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Jezhowells, please. I told you it would be easy to simply cut and paste the references from Antonio Sampietro to any other articles missed. It would have taken you five seconds, as it did me. How much longer did it take you to add a prod notice to Ignacio Velázquez Rivera, tell me about it, and then have me do exactly that? You are making far more work for yourself and for other editors, as is clear from this thread and from AN/I. Are you deliberately trying to be disruptive? Grutness...wha? 23:56, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- I couldn't find any RS. I am not sure that the incorrectly formatted reference to {http://www.worldstatesmen.org/} is a to a reliable source. Looks like a personal web page to me. If you want me to add references to your unsourced articles, then I would ask you, why should I? especially when they can't be found readily. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:13, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Before you nominate anything else for deletion...
- I suggest you read WP:BEFORE. Erpert (let's talk about it) 04:16, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
- OK, point taken. Thanks. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 July 2010
- Wikimania preview: Gearing up for Wikimania in Gdańsk
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Children's Literature
- Features and admins: This week's highlights
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Award
|
The Original Barnstar | |
I noticed that in the last day or two you are now taking the time to assess articles and either referencing notable BLPs or AFDing the ones which are of dubious notability or unverifable most of which I have supported your deletion proposals. Good call. Please keep this procedure up and make wikipedia a better place. Dr. Blofeld White cat 21:24, 6 July 2010 (UTC)}
|
Thanks for Assistance
Thank you for your assistance in resolving my issues with RHaworth over Taguzgalpa. I have been working on improving or incorporating the Caribbean side of Central American countries into their general histories, as I see these are greatly neglected. I ended up spending a great deal of time over what struck me as an overreaction to what I was doing. While I am not exactly a newbie to Wikipedia (I started making edits in 2007) there is much that I have not yet mastered on the technical side. I am glad that there are so many others willing to help and work with me rather than put me down or work against me. I also seem to have placed my comments inside your award notice and am unable to extract it. Sorry! Beepsie (talk) 22:08, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- thanks, I can't see how to format it either, never mind! –– Jezhotwells (talk) 22:23, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Inline References
Hey if possible can you add an inline citationto articles as opposed to a footer ref. Its just in my experience even articles which have a reference at the bottom are tagged as BLP vios because claims within the text are not supported. If you can add a reference to a claim in the article as opposed to such listing it at the bottom this would be great! Thanks! Dr. Blofeld White cat 09:39, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
- Actually I am only adding a reference if it is half decent and gives some sort of biography. I have no particular interest in going through the article working out which bit fits where. If someone else chooses to delete because there are no in-line cites (which are not required by Wikipedia) then that is their concern. the primary responsibility for sourcing articles are the article creators. if they have disappeared then someone may straighten out the article, but I do not see it as my role to repair every broken article in this encyclopaedia. There are at least two million articles on non-notable porn stars, obscure children's books, third rate wrestlers, individual episodes of TV cartoons which should probably deleted instantly on notability grounds alone. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 10:32, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
OK. Does Jermaine Wallace meet WP:Athlete in your view? I can't find anything on it...Curtis McKenzie is another of those which should probably be deleted... Dr. Blofeld White cat 11:16, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
- What is this - 20 questions? Is there a prize? I am working through the Unreferenced Spain BLPs at the moment. You can read up the notability guidelines for Basketball yourself, I guess. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 12:00, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I merely asked for your advice. Dr. Blofeld White cat 12:41, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
- OK, the article claims that Wallace played for an ABA team so WP:NSPORT#Bastketball would say he is notable enough. But to make that stick need to find evidence that he did in fact play games in the ABA. McKenzie has achieved "sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office" WP:POLITICIAN, so just needs evidence that that is correct. All of these guidelines are linked from WP:BIO. Hope that helps. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 13:15, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I wrote that article as a direct translation of the article in the Spanish Wikipedia, before the source citation policy existed. Thanks for adding an English-language reference. Isomorphic (talk) 02:47, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Prod Deletion
Eduardo Iturralde González was created from the Articles for Creation project, I'm not the original author of it. I approved it based on the notion that it would improve over time. It hasn't. No contest on the prod.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 11:09, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- I actually take that back. I did a quick google search on the name of the BLP subject and it cameup with several mentions and pictures. I'm not qualified as an expert in the sport or an expert on his area of the sport, so I can't accurately decide what is a primary source in this instance, but after my search I have found many possible references. The article itself asserts notability, so I'm contesting the prod and adding a clean up tag to the page. If there's an issue it can be brought to AFD.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 11:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
- Lol, I guess I'm really groggy. Sorry! I just noticed that the prod had already been removed and replaced as I has suggested. --Torchwood Who? (talk) 11:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
RE:Sherlock Holmes Baffled GA Review
Thanks very much! Will endeavour to add those ISBNs - might try putting the refs in template format as well. Bob talk 20:14, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Old Rouen Tramway
Thank you for your help and time reviewing this article for GA. Si Trew (talk) 22:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
You might want to go to this page. I've got a very rude administrator that I'm dealing with. Maybe you can help me with him. But, look at the rude comment he left. You're just trying to help. Maybe you can help me deal with him. (JoeCool950 (talk) 01:06, 12 July 2010 (UTC))
- I think you'd probably be justified in reporting him at WP:WQA. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 19:53, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
May I recommend you withdraw this nomination? Dr. Blofeld White cat 09:17, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
- Done. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
First Light (Novel)
 | This user's page has been touched by a WikiFairy. |
I just wanted to say thanks for taking the time to add info to First Light (novel). I like seeing WP grow and I don't want any articles to die out. It's one thing to be an editor who goes in and deconstructs what others have written (kinda like myself) - it's quite another to be an editor who works to build articles, do the research, add the information. Well done on the speedy work! ocrasaroon| blah blah blah
- Thank you. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 19:52, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
free use
hi thanks for your thoughs here[7]. can you please explain to me what a suitable free use rationale is? i know i copied mine from another photo but that seems to not be enough. Aisha9152 (talk) 18:47, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
- It is actually non-free use rationale. Check out Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline. Remember you need to spell out in detail why it is not possible to obtain free image. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:22, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 July 2010
- UK COI edits: British politicians accused of WP cover-ups
- News and notes: Board changes, Wikimania, Public Policy Initiative
- Discussion report: Article ownership, WikiProjects vs. Manual of Style, Unverifiable village
- WikiProject report: WikiProject Apple Inc.
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Roger Miller
All done, pardon this coffin. --Lost Fugitive (talk) 19:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks buddy. We all know on wikipedia: Dad blame anything, A Man Can't Quit.--Lost Fugitive (talk) 00:17, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Kripalu Center
Hi. A long time ago you participated briefly in discussion about Kripalu Center. The article has some of the same issues now that it had in March 2009. I got involved after the article's name appeared on a couple of noticeboards and a user talk page that I had watchlisted. I don't have the time or inclination to address everything about the article, and I think that multiple sets of eyes would be helpful there. Could you please resume watching/participating there? --Orlady (talk) 20:38, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, I am bit busy with real life issues at the moment. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 20:46, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm curious as to how you ran across this one and why you felt my warning was insufficient. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 07:29, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
- Contentious editing on Various Big Brother articles, English and French. How did you get the impression that I thought your warning was insufficient? I warned regarding edits made to a user draft, you warned regarding edits to a user talk page. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 16:26, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
- No, my warning was about editing any of BigOz22's user pages. BigOz22 specifically asked for my help in dealing with SecretStoryStyle's edits to his userspace draft. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 16:58, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 July 2010
- News and notes: Politician defends editing own article, Google translation, Row about a small Wikipedia
- WikiProject report: Up close with WikiProject Animals
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Arbitration report: ArbCom to appoint CU/OS positions after dumping election results
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
EAR
Hi Jez. Do you think it would be a good idea if I were to lend a hand and tag some of thedone requests and do some archiving?--Kudpung (talk) 07:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
- Yep no problem, I am liable to be away a bit during the next few weeks. Templates at {http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Ear/doc}. PLease notem that for straightforward answers leave it 5 days before tagging. Page deletions and gross vanadalism maybe less. I have started a new archive when the existing one has reached 100K
Oops...
...sorry about that! I tend to remove content by blocked users due to the possibility of vandalism. Didn't mean to remove anything valid. Thanks for letting me know. PMDrive1061 (talk) 23:01, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
- Fine, I am pretty confident that the list is correct, will look further at this article as it deserves more work. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 23:16, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 July 2010
- News and notes: New interwiki project improves biographies, and other news
- In the news: Wikipedia leads in customer satisfaction, Google Translate and India, Citizendium transition, Jimbo's media accolade
- WikiProject report: These Are the Voyages of WikiProject Star Trek
- Features and admins: The best of the week
- Discussion report: Controversial e-mail proposal, Invalid AfD
- Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
- Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News