User talk:JodyB/Archive 16

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anabel Barnston

Thank you for closing the deletion discussion but when content is merged the original page should not be deleted as the edit history of the merged information has to be retained for attribution purposes per the terms of the GFDL license under which the content was released. Apologies if you did some kind of history merge, regards Guest9999 (talk) 18:20, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah, you are quite correct and the error has been corrected. Thank you for reminding me! JodyB _talk 23:42, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Biwi No.1

Hi please see the situation with this article. I've warned the IP to lay off editing it but he has continued to do so. PLease take the neccesary course of action. I'd probably place a semi protection on the article if it continued. Note though that Shshshsh is an established editor who does a lot of work protecting Indian cinema articles so shouldn't be affected. I noticed you already warned the IP about a talk page edit. Thanks Dr. Blofeld (talk) 12:23, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Well I have no reason to be affected. This guy who has multiple IP addresses kept adding info using IMDb, which is not a WP:RS in this case. He used rude edit summaries and attacked me personally. I once warned him, and then tried to talk to him and explain delicately how it works on here (Diff). After that, I even added a reliable source myself (Diff), but he took one step further and started moving the note of it being a remake to the top, to emphasise his thruth. Not only was it against MOS:FILM guidelines, it can be easily considered sneaky vandalism per WP:VANDAL because he deviously tries to make the film look bad and emphasise something. I was reverting him. Shshshsh2 (talk) 12:47, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for stopping by. Please see my comments at the article talk page. JodyB _talk 15:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

De Soto

Per your IRC question, I believe it's "De Soto" when just using his last name. I can't recall the MOS page that states this, but I'm pretty sure this is the case (and I believe that's how newspapers refer to people with articles as part of their names as well). howcheng {chat} 22:38, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Cariddi vs Caridi

Hi, some time ago you have deleted the page 'Caridi' as follows:

21:55, 6 August 2007 JodyB (Talk | contribs) deleted "Caridi" ‎ (unsourced; not notable)

Since the page Cariddi (two d) already exists, and this refers also to the name Caridi (one d), is it possible to redirect one page to the other, without having to re-create the page Caridi? Many thanks for your help.Mazkyri (talk) 14:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Done! JodyB _talk 15:13, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Liu Wai Hung

I would like to remind you Mr. Liu is a famous artist in Hong Kong and Mainland China. I usually noticed some of the administrators or editors like to request deletions of the passages in which they only do not know. If the article can be deleted successfully, it is only because the western people don't know the people stated in the article, not because it is not important.Ricky@36 (talk) 04:10, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

No, I beg to differ. This article has languished here and was never fully sourced or cited. If Liu is notable then bring the sources to the table and put them in the article. I see that Eastmain has done that. While we are talking, why did it take over a year for the article to be sourced? The deletion process runs for five days and gives time to find the reliable third party published sources that are required by WP:V. JodyB _talk 09:13, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Maybe I was too sensitive to your action. I faced many proposed deletions of the articles before, saying that the people/company stated are "unknown" and requesting deletion. Liu is a Chinese actor, so it was difficult to find sources for it in English articles and hope you to accept this kind of difficulties. Ricky@36 (talk) 14:19, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Deleting content

You can, Jody, expand articles yourself rather than consistently placing articles up for deletion. Many articles you tag are often notable and potentially could eventually become good articles. They just need expansion. If you are concerned about lack of content in many cases, why not help expand them eh? Count Blofeld 17:14, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

My dearest Count, I do expand, create and source the article that I work on. However when someone throws some words on a page and months pass with additional improvement what I am to think? It seems some people are happy to have others do their work. Which is better, a person with a knowledge in and awareness of a subject to source it or someone who knows very little about the subject who must work doubly hard to find the proper sourcing. If wikipedia is going to grow even more and become more respectable we must all work together and do our jobs right? I can assure you that if I know something of an article I will work on it and flesh it out. If you look at my contributions you will find that I am more than happy to withdraw and nom when the article is fixed and I am happy to close one as a keep when the work has been done. I do appreciate your work and hope you will continue doing the fine job that you do. Regards, JodyB _talk 17:46, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I know I agree. I just noticed that you were involved in a lot of deletions, some of them I think are potentially viable to remain on the wiki, just need a great deal of work. DOn't get me wrong probably a large proportion you put up is absolute trash and completely unencyclopedic and I'd fully support nuking them but some of our stubs do have potential. Probably the best thing to do is as you did to the Danish architect I stubbed, and place a PROD on it for the ones which are potentially encyclopedic but don't claim any notabilty/seriously lacking in content. Half the things I write about I've never heard of, this is why wikipedia is so beneficial in that it is often a good way of learning in finding sources and expanding articles you originally know little about to make wikipedia all that more resourceful. In fact I blatantly attempt to edit many articles on countries I know little about using sources to improve our understanding of it. I'll trust your judgement on articles for deletion but help is needed by all in expanding them however unfamiliar you are!!. Sometimes I think it might be a good idea doing a filtering run and deleting some of our "perma stubs" but then I stop and think, it might just be possible to expand most of them if people do the research. Regards. Count Blofeld 19:01, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Blake (broadcaster)

Much kudos to you, not least for use of the word "eschew". A perfectly-argued close, IMHO. Regards, --Rodhullandemu 23:04, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Cool word huh? I think it was on my Word of the Day calendar! Thanks. JodyB _talk 23:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

House of Diabolique

Please explain your deletion of the House of Diabolique page. Perhaps you are not familiar with ball culture, but the House of Diabolique is well known within that subculture. Wikipedia's own ball culture entry refers to the House of Diabolique. There is an off Broadway play inspired by the House of Diabolique. The NY Times and Village Voice mention this. For what reason was the page deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.38.252.226 (talk) 11:17, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your question. I deleted the page because, after 4 years, it remained unsourced and thus not verifiable. The Diabolique web site cannot serve as a reliable source and the other possible sources mentioned at the AFD were never added. Please remember that our policy at WP:V states that an article must be verified through non-trival, reliable, published sources. This is vital to the success of Wikipedia as it prevents someone from just writing a bunch of words which may or may not be true.

Now, if you wish, I can userfy the article to your space and allow you to add those necessary sources. Then, when you are done I will be happy to move the new article back into the main space for you. This is the fastest way to get the article back into Wikipedia. Just let me know what you desire and I will help. Please, in the future, sign your comments when you visit. JodyB _talk 12:26, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

I just created an account for Wikipedia and would like to proceed as you suggested. Thank you so much and I look forward to making this entry as Wikipedia-friendly as possible. One question - there is some information that I have in an issue of Genre magazine that could serve as a verifiable source for the article, but Genre magazine doesn't keep it's back issues online. Do sources need to be only online sources? Hope Im signing this correctly.. Camoprint —Preceding undated comment was added at 04:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC).

No not at all. Online sources are a convenience but are not required. An article from the New York Times, New York Post, Village Voice or other local papers would be very helpful too if you can find them. A quick trip to the library would help or even call Diabolique and ask for news coverage received. You might have a look at the two pages I mentioned above, WP:RS and WP:V. They will help you understand what is needed.

As promised, I have restored the article and moved it out of the mainspace and into your userspace. That means you can work on it but it is not part of encyclopedia at present. Once it is fixed up we can move it back into the mainspace. Let me know and I will be glad to help at any stage. You can find the article here at User:Camoprint/House of Diabolique. I will be out of town for part of the week so go ahead and get to work and I will check in when I can, Thursday at the latest.

The easy way to sign a post on a talk page is to add four tildes (~) at the end. The system will handle the rest. Cheers! JodyB _talk 10:58, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Chuck Berry & Cub Koda

Jody, I've undone your reversion at Chuck Berry, and added a comment at User talk:202.155.148.28. --Zigger «º» 11:58, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

CSD of The falling Kingdom

Yo Jody, can you have another look at the last version of The falling Kingdom and confirm it's a copyvio? I thought I had re-written the offending text, but perhaps it didn't save. Thanks, the skomorokh 14:43, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

It was word for word from the website. You may recreate it if you wish but you absolutely, positively must not take the text verbatim from the website. JodyB _talk 14:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

No, that's okay, I couldn't verify the references in any case. Regards, the skomorokh 14:53, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Sudan

Thanks for your note. I couldn't see what was inflammatory about my changes; can you elucidate? Was it perhaps my comment about the maladministration of the Sudan under the Khedive,and the corruption and incompetence of the Khedivial officials? This is detailed by W.S.Churchill in The River War, and was directly responsible for the Sudanese rebellion. The tendency of Egypt to exploit Sudan is one reason why the British administrators did NOT reinstate the anglo-Egyptian control. The other was that Egypt was struggling under the burden of the mixed tribunals, etc, and endless international interference which they did not want to see introduced to the Sudan. Likewise Gordon was not there as a British general, but as governor, and an employee of the Khedive. So my changes were to reflect this. Since the material I altered was not referenced either, it seems very hard to just revert my changes, tho! :) Demonteddybear (talk) 08:10, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I reverted your addition because it was not, at that time, verified by any source at all. Please do re-add the material and this time make sure you add the source. The article in general has not been verified by reliable, third party sources. As you know this is very important. The Sudan article must be very solid with citations. It seems clear to me that you know the material well so please go back and add the material and include the reference you mentioned. Help us improve this article. If I were to remove all unreferenced material at once the article would be nothing but a stub. So I started somewhere. In any case, I wasn't trying to attack or pick on you just to improve the article. JodyB _talk 12:15, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Old AfD tags

Hi. :) I noticed that on the article Roy Assaf, you placed the "old AfD" tag on the article page. This may have been an oversight and I've already moved this one, but in case not I just wanted to point out for future use that these go on the talk, as set out Wikipedia:Deletion_process#Articles for deletion page. (I've been asked to look at the article for copyright concerns. Thought I would stop and point this out on the way. :)) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:22, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Just to update you, it does contain substantial infringement. I've tagged it & am listing at CP. Hopefully one of the regular contributors to the article (insofar as there are any) will revise it so that I don't have to at the end of the week. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:30, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Not sure why I put the oldafd on the article page - never done that before. The copyright issue is clear but never came up at afd that I saw. JodyB _talk 13:54, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I figured it might be a one-off. They happen. :) Those copyright issues can go unaddressed for some time, unfortunately. Yesterday I processed one that had been around since 2005. Ah, well. We get them when we find out about them. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:57, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Good work! JodyB _talk 13:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Bogle Vineyards Deletion

I was wondering if you could explain the deletion of Bogle Vineyards page. While I hadn't managed to add a whole lot of information as of yet, it's a vineyard in California with significant coverage, and I'd included at least a few sources so far (I don't remember exactly what I'd done, I'm not on Wikipedia all that often anymore).Drhamad (talk) 01:47, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I try not to be too quick on deletions but this one had been around for a month and the only reference was to the company website. As I am sure you know, that is not an acceptable reliable source. I would be happy to move the deleted article to your userspace where you can work on it and add the needed sources. At that point I would happily move it out into the mainspace for you. Please let me know if that is something you are interested in doing. Thanks. JodyB _talk 04:23, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Jody: That'd be fine. I thought I had used more references than that, I apologize. It was an off-the-cuff article for me, as I was surprised no one else had created it. I was hoping others would pitch in. If they haven't, just move it to my userspace and I'll add more to it before requesting it be moved back to its own page. Thanks! Drhamad (talk) 20:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Done! You will find it at User:Drhamad/Bogle Vineyards. JodyB _talk 21:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cold fusion

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cold fusion/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cold fusion/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tznkai (talk) 16:06, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

My user talk

Hey thanks for watching my talk as I vandal-patrolled!--otherlleft (talk) 00:25, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Concerning removal of post from John McCain talk page

JodyB, I recently posted a suggestion on the talk page of the John McCain article, raising an idea for the conclusion of semi-protection. Why did you remove it? Terrakyte (talk) 00:50, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Thanks for restoring the comment. Terrakyte (talk) 00:54, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Hot damn!

Sign up here! Mike H. Fierce! 02:39, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

barnstar'd

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page! FlyingToaster 01:05, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Jvolkblum CU

Yes, I'm finished with that request. I didn't plan on commenting on the IPs listed in the request. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 17:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to WP:MILHIST!

Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including {{WPMILHIST Announcements}} there.
• Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, article logistics, and other tasks.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• We've developed a style guide that covers article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
• If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts and copy-editing alerts.
• The project has a stress hotline available for your use.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 17:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

{{Baldwin County, Alabama}}

Thanks for the note! I didn't create the template; it was done by VerruckteDan. I don't know where the names came from originally, but I'm sure that Dan put them on because they were already listed on the article. Proof:

• Original form of template, from 17:12 on 23 September 2007
• Diff for the article's last form before the template was made, from 17:10 on 23 September

As far as the unincorporated communities: this section is specifically meant to list communities that the Census Bureau doesn't track, so I'd be rather surprised if you could find anything there. The place you want to list is the GNIS search page, which you can find here. As for Park City: it has an entry, which you can find [here: but when you look at Google Maps, it's plain that it's a northern neighborhood of Daphne. I've removed it accordingly, as the standard practice with these county templates is not to list communities that are within other municipalities. Good guess :-) Nyttend (talk) 03:38, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

hey

Good to see you pop up on my watchlist again, glad you're well! Keeper ǀ 76 03:59, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Good to be back. I think I came back about the time you took a little break. Hope all is well. Thanks for the note! JodyB _talk 04:00, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm really not here much anymore. When I content edit, I do so as an IP, I only log on to chatter and reply on my talk for the most part. I haven't used an admin button in a while, not planning on it anytime soon, I got tired of the drama of it all. (actually, now that I think about it, I think you forewarned me about that :-). I'm enjoying quietly going about my former gnoming, I've even made a couple of nice looking articles as an IP, got a DYK on the mainpage, something I've never done with my username :-). Too fun. See you around! Keeper ǀ 76 04:06, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I know what you mean. Some people seem to live for the drama. I enjoy doing some plain article work from time to time. I'm working on creating articles for several unincorporated areas in my county. The sources are few and far between but they are present if you look. Many of this areas have some interesting history too. Congrats on the DYK. How about a GA or FA??? It's funny to me that one of the biggest drama personalities here is also one of the biggest GA/FA contributors. Anyway, have fun and let me know if you need anything. JodyB _talk 12:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I do commit

Hey JodyB, this is User:Ad.sell and yes, i WILL stop doing everythin i am doing :The fact that you could post here is evidence that your block has expired or been lifted. JodyB _talk 02:43, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Ah! Silly JodyB! He posted from an IP address. JodyB _talk 03:28, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Message from alygx026

Sir, Please tell me how fair this process is, when I am not allowed to present a more accurate picture of Mr. Bennett Lebow. I believe that if you read the contributions and talk pages of Simpson, Kansas, and 79.xxx..., it is extremely likely that they are all one sock puppet, who I will refer simply to as Kansas. Further, when you note the other contributions that each of these people have made, their motivation for attempting to present Mr. Lebow in the most favorable light possible is quite obvious. Other PARTISAN people have reverted to my original information at least two times. All of my information is accurately sourced by Kansas' own admission.

The purpose of this project is to present a means for people to collaboratively produce a fact neutral database of knowledge, not use it as a means for public relations puffery. I think I have been more than fair here. I have asked Kansas to provide reasons for deleting my material, and all he/she said, on one occasion, was it was read out of context and irrelevant. Even you, as a presumably neutral mediator, have to admit that it is unfair for me, after detailing many reasons to an arbitration panel to resolve this, should allow my changes to be continually deleted by Kansas7474 without any explanation why they are doing so, and ultimately frozen in his/her favor. I believe what is happening here is completely contrary to Wikipedia's goal of dispersing accurate knowledge in a neutral manner. My changes present a more honest and ultimately neutral portrayal of Mr. Lebow. What Kansas is doing is making a joke out of Wikipedia.

Please tell me if this case is being sent to arbitration, or what will happen next. Given Kansas' apparent motivation for doing this and their past actions, it is fair to say that no amount of mediation can resolve our differences, and I request that if you have the ability, that you suggest the case be sent to arbitration. As I said before, I am willing to rewrite this article into one unified whole, subject to input from Kansas, and Wikipedias final say, if necessary, but I will not do so if it only means Kansas will ruthlessly delete everything I have added, as he/she did today.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alygx026 (talk • contribs) 02:10, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

We have a content dispute at the article. Both of you are on the verge of edit warring over the issue. There is no discussion on the article discussion page even though I offered to assist. Other admins would likely have blocked you both for edit warring. To me, page protection is the best option.

Arbitration is not for editing conflicts. You are welcome to file the case yourself but I am confident it would be rejected at this point.

If you believe your opponents are all the same person then I suggest you file the appropriate report at Suspected sockpuppets or at Checkuser. You might also have a look at the various dispute resolution options. If you think your opponents have a conflict of interest then I would suggest you document your concerns at the conflict of interest board.

In the meantime, I am going to look closely at their edits and attempt to discuss with them. However edit warring is very serious and I don't want someone blocked over it. JodyB _talk 02:42, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Alygx026

Thank you. That is helpful. But note that I did offer to mediate with Kansas before arbitration, or reposting. Of course, they did not respond. Why should they? This is all just a media/public relations project to them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.174.227.125 (talk) 03:18, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I don't see that offer on the talk page of the article. In any case, I have filed a checkuser request and we will wait and see what happens. Something should be known soon. JodyB _talk 03:25, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

My request to mediate is listed in Kansas' page. Kansas did not respond. I have been more than reasonable here.

Note to JodyB

JodyB, please note that Kansas7474 is, for some unknown reason, now blanking his/her talk page. I have notified him/her of the reports that I have filed, in accordance with the Wikipedia rules.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Alygx026 (talk • contribs) 03:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

See the LeBow talk page. As to Kansas blanking his page: He is free to do that. JodyB _talk 22:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Reports filed against 71.190.203.37, Kansas7474, and Simpsonj3

Suspected conflict of interest and sockpuppet reports have been filed agains the above user(s). I do not see why this case cannot proceed to arbitration. I have reqested mediation, and the above user(s) have not responded, and people have been attempting to revert to my edits. Since the page is locked now, people cannot do this, which is ashame, because it is the equivalent of trying to form a consensus. In view of the behavior exhibited by the above users, I request that, until the dispute is resolved, at least my changes to the Lebow page be reverted and locked.

alygx026.

JODYB!

I wasnt loged on —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.155.212.135 (talk) 00:57, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi.

I am James Plaskett and am wondering why what I wrote on Susan Sarandon´s page about her having been involved with Rupert Everett constituted "vandalism"¿? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.14.53.185 (talk) 18:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

You added unsourced material which could be seen as a BLP violation. JodyB _talk 17:44, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

alygx026

My SSP report was not properly saved (it is a little cumbersome process the first time you do it) which is why it did not show up yesterday, but I have attempted to save it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alygx026 (talk • contribs) 20:53, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

99.155.212.135

Hey JodyB, this is Ad.sell, how do I change my account name 99.155.212.135 (talk) 13:11, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

JodyB, Ad.sell has been blocked indefinitely for abuse of blocking templates and now for vandalism and block evasion. Mr. Darcy talk 14:54, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Darcy. Prior to the block he had ask about changing his name, in fact that is how I first came in contact with him. However I have been following his dramatics as well. He was told time and again what to do but declined. He created the predicament. Ad.sell, creating a new account is not acceptable at this point as it would be block evasion. Suggest you take a break and come back after the New Year and let's talk. But no chance with me at this point. JodyB _talk 16:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

RFCU

You seem to have processed the Kansas7474 case. Can you put a clerk note on it and move it to the completed section? Thanks. There are also some other cases that need processing if you care to. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:06, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

We gave 'em hell!

Oh, this edit by me just puts the cherry on top of that fantastic year! Mike H. Fierce! 00:08, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

A great game indeed -- at least for some! JodyB _talk 00:29, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Sources

• Sandeep Unnikrishnan (AfD discussion)

After much prodding and pushing, people have finally started citing sources. Please revisit the discussion and read and evaluate the sources. Show the single-purpose accounts and novice editors how established Wikipedia editors will have a proper AFD discussion, focussed upon looking for, citing, reading, and evaluating sources. You'll have to navigate a lot of irrelevant chatter to find the citations, and the actual discussions thereof, but I've tried to make them prominent. Uncle G (talk) 00:49, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

help

this user continues to not listen to any body and do what he wants. can you talk to User:Wrestlinglover and tell him to use the talk pages.CMJMEM (talk) 03:09, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I really have no idea what you are talking about. I you would supply an explanation and provide diffs of the problems I will take a look but I just don't have the time to go through each of his contributions to see if it is offensive to someone. JodyB _talk 11:03, 30 November 2008 (UTC)