User talk:Ohnoitsjamie/archive25

Jamie would you please review the recent edits to the Carlin Romano page. There is a single-purpose user who is intent on putting only good public relations info and deleting all other material from the subject. As the subject makes his reputation on controversy and being pro-first-Amendment, this is a difficult editing stance to compromise with. Thank you.

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Natore District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Abdul Hamid (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:26, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Removing External Link in for [Application Server] and mentioning Wikipedia is not a directory, how you dare! Wikipedia just got 15M euros from donations as it mainly serves to make an apology for large corporations, probably those that contribute to these donations — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.99.34.136 (talk) 21:55, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

You're not making much sense. In any case, we already have [article] which is about notable app servers. If you continue to add links that violate WP:EL and WP:NOT, you will be blocked. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:58, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

You removed my anchor link to an advice portal related to the Wiki Content of Debt Consolidation and gave me a final warning. Either you allow this site or I simply spam it with a bot and a proxy as it is a valid website and has every right to remain here.

You can contact me via Skype: gdfgdfglkjdf

You have 24 hours to respond. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.209.62 (talk) 12:09, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Reverting of edits with reliable sources

Please, could you explain why you are reverting my edit at Windows Phone with a reliable source citing it is a non-reliable source?

The actual website itself is OK; the "discontent" part of the statement is not. User comments/forums, etc are not reliable sources. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:04, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

POV tagging

Hi Jamie, regarding your recent POV tag applied to MONU, it would be great if you could provide an explanation on the article's talk page. The article in question has been edited I presume by a good faith newby, and is important to clearly explain which parts are problematic and what is expected. Cheers, --Elekhh (talk) 00:36, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of new content for MONU - magazine on urbanism

Dear Jamie,

I am hoping to restore the content that I wrote for MONU magazine. I am new to Wikipedia, and have read over the neutrality statement, which seems very reasonable. However, I do not feel that applies to me. I am not affiliated with MONU in any way--I am not an editor, nor am I on the editorial board, nor have I ever published in the magazine. It just happens to be a publication that I really like, and I didn't feel the brief entry on Wikipedia did it credit. Could you recommend particular changes that would strengthen it, as I'd very much like to restore what I have written (I spent a godawful amount of time on it!)

Thanks, Joseph Heathcott — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joseph Heathcott (talk • contribs) 16:51, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

The content had several problems, namely (1) incorrectly formatted citations and (2) non-neutral statements that were not supported by WP:Reliable sources. I already placed policy links on your talk page regarding the citation formatting and NPOV. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:25, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Could you please give one or two examples (quotes) of what you found as being non-neutral? I think it would be really helpful, and would be much appreciated. --Elekhh (talk) 23:59, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

The referencing was such a mess that I didn't try to match links with statements. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of new content on PitBull wiki page

I see I need to do more work to cite my references and not tp perform original research; thank you for the pointers. I am having difficulty including the references but will keep learning. I do notice that the first line is "Pit-Bulls are one of many breeds" is not accurate and has no reference to support it. I had decided to perform the edits based on the false information it currently contains. Is the current wiki being allowed to stand without reference because you personaly believe it to be accurate and require no reference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwfredette (talk • contribs) 21:03, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

If you take the time to read the talk pages for Pit bull and American Pit Bull Terrier, you will see that there is a longstanding agreement as to why there are two separate articles. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:39, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Block of User:Nickk.writer

Since you have just blocked, you may want to see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Sharma.ind. - Sitush (talk) 18:25, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Great minds think alike. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:27, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

:) I am not sure if Sharma.ind is the master. And I think upending the drawer might be useful. - Sitush (talk) 18:31, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

George Lilanga

Hi Ohnoitsjamie, I see you're quite a crusader against Wikipedia content that demonstrates a conflict of interest. In that case you may want to check the article on George Lilanga, a Tanzanian artist. This article refers to a Hamburg art gallery that promotes the sale of Lilanga's works. It already starts in the first sentence (Hamburg Mawingu Collection, HMC), first ref, and then at least two of the external links. Among the external links there are several links to other art galleries also selling Lilanga's work. HMC is also the one who initiated the article; user goes by the name of Makond. If you clean this up, please do it for the german version as well. Loranchet (talk) 20:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll look at it here, but I don't have admin rights on de Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Anyone can add or delete anything at any of the Wiki's, isn't it? I regularly edit within several language Wiki's. Loranchet (talk) 22:13, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

True, but my written German comprehension is extremely rusty. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:18, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

EHR warrior

Oh, no, they're _over_ 3RR at this point, with that IP they used to edit as. :-) Reported at the EWN.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:30, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Got it. I hadn't counted, but knew they were close, if not over. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:32, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Examples

Hi Jamie

I made a minor edit to Forex fixing, as you know, because immediately thereon you deleted an external link that had been in the article for over a year already! This leads me to think that you are the exact person to whom I should posit my current dilemma, which is this:

I am working on a page in my user space Cneeds/Showcase website that describes a type of website that I believe is missing in Wikipedia. I am also of the opinion that the article will benefit from real-life examples of the four types of showcase website that I have so far classified (a picture is worth a thousand words). You will see from the article's talk page that I have already tried several ways of including these examples and now the article contains my latest rendition which is to make reference to the relevant example websites.

I would appreciate your view as to:

1. Is the classification of "showcase website" notable?
2. What is the best way to provide examples?
3. Ultimately I will write an article on each site as I believe they are all notable in their own right (if not, I will find ones that are!). If I do that will the external links be more tolerable to WP or is there another (better) way to "display" the example websites?

Cneeds (talk) 02:45, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm on my way out the door, but I can get you started; first read general notability guidelines, which will help you determine if Showcase website is a concept that has received significant third-party, reliable-source coverage. I've never heard of it myself, but I'm not a marketer, and I'm sure there are some notable marketing terms/concepts that I haven't heard of. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Tvind entry needs some more attention

Hi Jamie,

When you have time, I'd like you to take another look at the Tvind entry [1].

Another editor (Wawelength) has been contributing a great deal of material, some of which appears to be mere opinion without references.

In addition, there appears to be some incorrect reference formatting, such as the section titled "Tvindkraft World’s biggest windmill," in which all of the references are placed at the very beginning of the text.

See my latest comments on Wawelength's talk page for details. Thank you. Saskehavis (talk) 22:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Basel III

Hi Jamie,

Please could you have another look at The Banker article deleted from Basel III. When originally removed the comment by 78.41.128.14 on 30 July 2011 stated "The problem with The Banker article is that it is not for free. It asks readers to register onthe web-site or pay a subsribtion. This could be seen as an advertisement, rather than information. Unfortunatelly, because The Banker is respected." As I mentioned in the post, this paywall has been changed to allow Wikipedia users access to the content with no commercial block. It is a neutral piece from a respected source and is highly relevant to visitors of this page. I've previously declared an interest in The Banker but I think the content and accessibility of this article clearly show it is not spam or commercially driven. I'd appreciate if you could get a second opinion or let me know the exact point of the COI so that I don't make a similar mistake in the future.

Thanks for your time - I appreciate the help AJonWiki —Preceding undated comment added 16:42, 30 January 2012 (UTC).

Sorry, but no, per WP:COI and WP:ADVERTISING. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:44, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to be a pain but it would be a great help to clarify which part of the COI is the main problem so I know not to continue falling foul of the regulations. In this case is it the actual article or the person posting that is the main issue? Assuming it is me posting it, within "citing yourself" it says it "is allowed within reason, but only if it is relevant and conforms to the content policies". I'm not the author but I think the article meets those qualifiers. If it is the "Self-promotion" section - it is linking through to a Financial Times Ltd. webiste, certainly not an obscure personal page, with a highly relevant article for the subject of the Wiki page. If it is just due to working for the organisation, I thought that the validity of the post was based on the merit of the content, which is the point of declaring an interest. I didn't see anything in the advertising link that obviously applied though I've probably just missed it among the long page. I'm really just trying to understand exactly what I can post as there is often the contradiction on the policy pages that if the content is good enough, is neutral and adds value to the page then this over-rules a potential COI. Thanks again and sorry for the long reply! AJonWiki —Preceding undated comment added 17:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC).

The WP:EL and WP:COI pages exist so that we don't have to explain the same thing over and over again. We don't allow single purpose accounts to use Wikiedia as a promotional vehicle, period. There's nothing else to say about it. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:48, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Cheers - that page was helpful. Unfortunately the long pages with hundreds of links are not always the easiest to follow when you are still relatively new. Anyway, thanks for your time. AJonWiki —Preceding undated comment added 18:22, 30 January 2012 (UTC).

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Ragging, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Imtiaz Ali (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Joyce Carol Oates

Hi Jamie. Wondering why you deleted the info I added re JCO's 2011 teaching experience at San Quentin State Prison. Seems like relevant information to me, and the link was good. Arlohaskell (talk) 17:23, 31 January 2012 (UTC) While it's true I'm affiliated w/ the website linked to, said site is run by a nonprofit organization. Our mission is to promote understanding/discussion of literary works and their authors. Audio recordings such as the one I linked to are intended for educational use. I was surprised the JCO wiki did not include information about her experience teaching in prisons, which is particularly relevant in light of its immediate influence on her work, and the light it casts on her life-long creative engagement with the 'other' Arlohaskell (talk) 17:32, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

See WP:COI, WP:EL, and single purpose account. We don't permit this sort of spamming regardless of the link. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:39, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Mbhiii is back using a couple of socks

User:Mbhiii is back edit warring at a couple of articles as User:Trift, User:Attleboro, User:Somedifferentstuff, and under a number of his usual IP ranges and sometimes his work IP of User talk:12.7.202.2. He's posting the same edits as he did as the already blocked User talk:Welhaven, User talk:Ritterhude, and others. He's also edited other people's comments like he has done before. 108.123.115.232 (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Please keep my page up

Hi, recently you have been deleting my page "Jabez Harris Denman" it is a birthday present for my 83 year old grandfather. Can you please at least keep it up for 5 more days so i can show it to him. Thanks so mush, wwefan12ify Wwefan12ify (talk) 00:37, 2 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwefan12ify (talk • contribs) 00:28, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

The subject does not meet WP:BIO notability guidelines. Wikipedia is not free genealogy hosting. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:50, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Kirk (given name)

Hi, you just deleted a whole lot of names from Kirk (given name) and didn't explain in an edit summary. Are these hoaxes, or what is going on? When you do something as pro-active as that, you really do need to explain on the talk page. Perhaps, rather than answering me here, you could put a short comment on Talk:Kirk (given name) now? --Doric Loon (talk) 07:30, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Deleting redlinked names which have no reliable sources indicating notability is routine. I wrote "nn" for non-notable in the summary. If you'd like to re-add the names, find sources that show their notability. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:24, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Puzzled

Hi Jamie, you are obviously an editor of high standing, been around a long time and an admin. I'm puzzled about a few of your edits in relation to William Orange and User:Bridgetfox. This edit, I can only assume, was done to restore an orphan tag (Bridgetfox had introduced wikilinks in other articles so that the orphan tag was no longer needed) in in reverting Bridgetfox, you removed a category, restored a link that points to the wrong article (Tyndale House) and removed the dab for the Christchurch suburb of Sumner. You then reverted Bridgetfox with this edit to Sumner, New Zealand and this edit to Woolston, New Zealand. All those edits of Bridgetfox seem most appropriate to me (apart from missing references). So this is a courtesy note that I am reverting your reverts to the Christchurch suburb articles. The edits to William Orange have already been taken care of; I've just expanded that article and fixed those things before I discovered the above in the edit history. Any thoughts? Schwede66 18:18, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

The user had been involved in a spamming campaign for days, and it was taking me awhile to clean it up. It was unintentional to remove good content; I was simply focused on undoing the spam links she was adding. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:27, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I had just spotted it on her talk page. It would appear that you have reverted quite a bit of good work, though. Is it a fair suggestion that you go through your reverts and undo those edits of yours that were not justified? Schwede66 18:32, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Lock Valentines?

Just reverted unreferenced material on Valentines Day. Notice you patrol the article. With the day approaching it is probably a good idea its locked for a few weeks?Shearlined (talk) 07:55, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Pending changes

Hey, I saw that you recently applied pending changes protection to AMP v. Persons Unknown. Pending changes was deployed only during a brief trial period last year, and its usage was eventually discontinued as a result of a recent RFC. It is not intended to be used on any articles at the present time. Can you please remove pending changes from this article at your earliest opportunity? Thank you. --Bongwarrior (talk) 20:49, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

That was an unintentional mistake on my part. Thanks for catching it. It's now fixed. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:04, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Another user had spotted it - I was just following up. --Bongwarrior (talk) 21:27, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Rene Russo, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Cosmopolitan, Vogue and Mademoiselle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Delete Links

Hey Ohnoitsjamie, I understand that Wikipedia is not a collection of links, fair enough. But how can you explain that you delete external links on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_carbon_accounting_software#Carbon_accounting_software or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_for_the_Environment where others post their links on commercial websites as well? It would be nice if you could explain your procedure! JH_mueller — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jh mueller (talk • contribs) 16:13, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

If you see other commercial links that violate WP:EL, please feel free to remove those as well. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:35, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Donkey punch

This is just a courtesy note to let you know that I have mentioned you on Jimbo's talk. Cheers, --JN466 01:09, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, forget consensus and go straight to The Man. Good times. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:36, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

tahitiheritage.pf

https://toolserver.org/~erwin85/xwiki.php?report=User:COIBot/XWiki/tahitiheritage.pf&forcelive=1

You were doing a cleanup there yesterday, and wasn't sure whether you wanted to have a peek at the remainder. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:12, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Chris (talk) 00:13, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Peer-to-peer search engines

Hi, I am a newbie to wikipedia contribution and want to contribute. I added Faroo peer-to-peer search to the list of p2p search engines as I found it to be one which currently claims to be the most popular. But, I found that you have later deleted the edit [2]. Can you please clarify on the reason? -- Harisankar H

I deleted it because it didn't appear to meet WP:GNG requirements. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:00, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I will go through the guidelines. -- Harisankar H

Scale Model changes

Hi, today I made changes to the Wikipedia Page "Scale Model" and added an external link to the website www.frogpenguin.com. I received notification from you this is not corresponding to the rules of Wikipedia. I assume this is because you think it is a commercial website. It is not. In fact: the same website is mentioned on other Wikipedia pages like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frog_%28models%29 - at the bottom of the page you will find "The frogpenguin website", which has the same url. Or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1:72_scale (at the bottom of the page "A short history of Recognition Models". Or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plastic_model, bottom of the page. And finally here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skybirds, bottom of page. It is my own website: it is a non-commercial website providing information about a certain company that made plastic model kits between 1936-50, the main company went bankrupt in 1976 and does not exist anymore. It provides information for collectors, museums, auction houses, etc. Have no idea why a link now is suddenly refused....Therefore the request to re-install my link. Kind regards, Peter van Lune - The Netherlands — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petervanlune (talk • contribs) 22:10, 14 February 2012 (UTC) Later addition: I checked the page "Scale Model" again and noticed that all my changes were deleted. The paragraph "Origins of the plastic model kit" on your page has historical errors, the information in the paragraph is definately incorrect. If the contents remain as they are right now they are conflicting with the Wiki-pages named above (also correted by me, because they contained historical errors), the page gives incorrect information to your readers. Kind regards, Peter van Lune - The Netherlands Petervanlune (talk) 22:16, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

You write not to be insulting and be nice in comments to you. But I dont think its nice of you either, to remove changes I made, like described above, and then not react to my objections to this.Petervanlune (talk) 21:30, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Golden Valley High School (Bakersfield), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cross Country (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for removing the bold type in Chardon High School shooting. I could not find the exact rule about it. I am questioning the wisdom (mine) of starting that article because there are a lot of inexperienced editors working on it now. They have actually put in the death of a person who has not died. Anyway, thanks--Ishtar456 (talk) 14:50, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

It's inevitable that a lot of newbies want to get in on "breaking news" articles. It's not a bad thing; just requires a lot more cooperative tweaking and teaching. It's also important to try to ensure that all information that's added is properly sourced, so thanks for catching that mistake about the second death (well, either a mistake, or a not officially/reliably confirmed item). OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:58, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

actually, I wasn't even talking about the second death. This morning the article had a third person dead. It was corrected before I had a chance, so someone else was watching.--Ishtar456 (talk) 16:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Why was the reference link deleted?

I have posted some value able data about mail order bride and it was removed.. The content was not there on the page and it was value able information

Half part of the content was taken and rest half was deleted... What the point of doing this? Just to remove the link pointing to website which provides information about mail order brides?

This is the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail-order_bride

This part was removed

statistics show that marriages arranged through a mail order system are can last 80 percent longer than marriages between people who met and got married on US soil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infinityhustler (talk • contribs) 19:18, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Read the blurb at the top of the page regarding spam. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:11, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

possible artist spam

maybe keep an eye on Johannes_Grenzfurthner which seems to be autobiographic artist spam. cheers.Cramyourspam (talk) 17:13, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree that there may be some COI editing going on; however, my initial glance at the sources suggests that the article (and related articles) might survive and AfD. I'll take a closer look later. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:16, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Chronic spammer

Hi Jamie, I noticed your warnings on this talk page and thought I'd let you know that he is still active and inserting the same basic spam links. I left a Level 4 warning although you have already given him notice...I wasn't sure how you wanted to handle the situation. Cheers,
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 16:51, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

stop signing your name on your contributions

Hi Jamie, this is in reference to your message i just found. I am really very sorry as I was in an expression that I have to sign wherever I make any change. It was a mistake done unknowingly & its really embarrassing for me. I will make sure this won't happen again in future.

But Jamie I saw all my work what I did on "Shudra - The Rising" article (as was suggested on the page to "edit" & "wikify" it) has also been made undone.. why so... I did whatever was suggested to me at the page. Really it took a long time to make all the editing & wikifying the matter... now all my efforts gone waste... I am very disappointed.. Can you help me out & undo the change delete on "Shudra - The Rising" article ??!!! Deepak 13:52, 14 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdeepak scor (talk • contribs)

I partially restored some of your edits minus the signature and a few other things: (1) We don't need to bold names; Wikilinks or no formatting is better. See WP:MOS for more info. (2) Please don't wikilink trivial words like written; this is call overlinking. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:48, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Jamie, I saw your comments on my talk. You deleted relevant content from one of the most reliable sources in the industry obviously without being terribly knowledgeable in the field and based on your limited knowledge. Island Ink-Jet has indeed refuted HP's self-promoting study and given their undeniable status as the leading refilling company in North America, it is unfortunate that you choose to allow one company's (HP) statistics who make claims against competitors (refillers) without allowing the leading competitor's claims to be represented - this is certainly not a service to the public. Please exercise more caution before deleting material. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goatberg (talk • contribs) 20:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

If you continue to add promotional material to Wikipedia, you will be blocked without further discussion. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:08, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Tinga Tinga Tales

I'm guessing you meant to remove both of the IP's edits, and subsequently I've reverted further. The bot edited in between them, and therefore halted your rollback at that. Calabe1992 22:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for catching that! OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Commercial Links on 'Real Estate'

I've added some information about real estate in thailand as there is confusion over the law regarding foreign ownership - I linked to my reference source who is an estate agent. You deleted this link citing it as a link to a commercial site. My reference has basically got to come from an experienced estate agent - who else would know more about the subject? The link is to a page that contains purely information. The link below mine was clearly a commercial link and even named the company (which I did not)but you didn't delete that.

I have removed the link after re-edit but I would like to reference my contribution - this is what I have done since university and I assumed wikipedia approved.

Regards, Rob Holmes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robholmes1 (talk • contribs) 09:06, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Read WP:EL and the blurb at the top of this talk page. Commercial links are not valid references. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:29, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok Jamie that's ok - Trust you will remove the true commercial links. My last contribution was redirected as I didn't include a reference! This is why I've just stopped contributing to wikipedantic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robholmes1 (talk • contribs) 09:45, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Citations vs. External Links - Use of Blogs

Responding to your Talk comment directing me to stop using blogs. You cited WP:EL. From that reference, "This guideline concerns external links that are not citations to sources supporting article content." My citation of a blog was as a reference, to points made in the article, and is one that I recognize as a reliable authority on Italian cuisne (it's well reasearched information). As such it's use is entirely consistent with Wikipedia:Citing sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability. What's the problem ? --TXEB (talk) 15:44, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Unless you can provide evidence that the author of that blog is a "recognized authority," the links are not appropriate. Winning a "Italian Food Blogger" award doesn't cut it. If you continue to add links that violate EL guidelines, you will be blocked. Further discussion belongs on the article's talk page or the Wikipedia:External_links/Noticeboard. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:03, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

I still don't get the EL reference, but it doesn't matter. Since you are an admistrative authority I have little choice but to accept your decision. With that I will end my effort to improve the Pasta article - the effort is hardly worth it.--TXEB (talk) 16:34, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

No worries here. We have plenty of editors who are happy to edit articles while still observing WP:Reliable sources and WP:EL guidelines. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Actually the corresponding guideline for citations is Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources#Self-published sources (online and paper) and the above cited policy Wikipedia:Verifiability. Both make it clear that the blog in question cannot be used as citation. ;) TMCk (talk) 16:21, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
If in doubt, it can be brought up at wp:RSN.TMCk (talk) 16:27, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Not sure why this was removed?

Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia and still trying to figure things out. Yesterday you removed several of my additions, but not sure why. I had previously been directed to the citation page and then cited by reference exactly from the template in the citation page. So i'm not sure what i'm doing wrong?

Here is one of my additions that you reomoved, as it was written exactly:

Livestock has also been identified as a primary contributor of the greenhouse gas, methane, which has 21 times the global warming potential as carbon dioxide.

MacDonald, Mia; Iyer, Sangamithra (December 2011). "Brighter Green Veg or Nonveg: India at the Crossroads" (PDF). Brighter Green. Retrieved March 27, 2012.

thanks for your help!Jlanea4 (talk) 19:09, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

We don't permit single purpose conflict of interest accounts to canvas links to sites, regardless of the site. If you continue to do this, you will be blocked. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:36, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay. Obviously my intention is not to work against Wikipedia's guidelines and like I said I am new to Wikipedia and still attempting to learn all of this and would prefer to not be blocked simply because I haven't learned all the guidelines yet. Perhaps you could offer some help? I am assuming that I have been flagged as a single-purpose account because I have only yet cited from one article? However, this article is a credible published policy paper and I am attempting to offer this information to the public. I am only contributing facts and have remained neutral. Is it not possible for me to cite from this article? If it is not possible, how would I best go about offering information to Wikipedia?Jlanea4 (talk) 22:26, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Should I cite it w/o linking to the website?Jlanea4 (talk) 03:18, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

You should find another reliable sources to use that you are not affiliated with. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:19, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

This is an independent analysis public policy paper. And I would like to offer the independent analysis and conclusion offered in this paper to the public. I am not able to offer the specific information from this independent analysis via other sources. I am not the author of the paper, so I am no more affiliated with this source any more than any other source. An administrator from Vegetarianism by Country stated the source is acceptable, so I am getting mixed messages and am not sure how to proceed. In a nutshell, this is credible, published, independent scientific public policy paper. And I want to offer the information to Wikipedia. Why is not being allowed on Wikipedia and how can I offer the information from this paper to Wikipedia?Jlanea4 (talk) 18:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

When a new editor keeps adding links to the same site, it nearly always suggests a WP:COI. You said you aren't the author, but you never said you weren't affiliated with the non-profit. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:28, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Allowed patents vs. unallowed patents?

Hi Jamie. I'm unclear on why some parent references are permitted, and others are not permitted. I started a talk subject on the Ajax programming page, and rather than explaining or discussion, my revert was simply deleted.

I can understand if the rule is that there needs to be a third party published reference of whether "Patent X means phrase "a b c.'" Although that is frequently unlikely. But in this case, I'm unclear on why one patent (Microsoft 2000) does not need to meet this rule, and others do. Please advise here on perhaps on the subject Talk page. Using this criteria, the reference to the MSFT patent should be removed (it's just a link to the patent and not a discussion of whether it relates at all to Ajax).

There are a number of inaccurate and unreferenced opinions on the page which are probably not worth addressing at the risk of a flame war. But the patent issue seems to be pretty clear. Either no patents, or all patents. But not a selection.

Mpeachey (talk) 03:54, 29 March 2012 (UTC) Michael

Sorry

OK, I am sorry for trouting you, but I just wanted to be able to help Wikipedia by removing dead links. I guess I should leave the dead links to the administrators. Please accept my apology. Luvrboy1 (talk) 19:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)Jared

Thanks. I don't mind being trouted; I do mind being called an "idiot." I apologize for misconstruing your intentions; in the future, if you use an edit summary like "removing dead links" when you make edits like that will help everyone understand what you're doing. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:29, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, I will use an edit summary from now on when I do an edit. Luvrboy1 (talk) 19:47, 29 March 2012 (UTC)Jared

About "List of Hardcore Bands"

Hey man, yeah a while back you deleted the edits I made to an article on a list of hardcore bands. I live in Boston and go to these shows around Massachusetts, which gives me a little bit of validity to what I had tried to add to the page previously. Some of the newer bands do not have pages yet, because none of us, or them really know how the hell to do it hahaha. But it would be greatly appreciated if I could make some changes to at least the List of Boston Hardcore Bands article. Thanks.

- Zac

We only allow bands to be listed that meet WP:MUSIC notability criteria. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:22, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

Hi. When you recently edited List of drummers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Damned (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:29, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Blocking Taiwan

I'd like to request that you revert "Taiwan" to the original text, "Republic of China" until the dispute can be settled. What you've done is taken a position on the matter especially since you were one of the people who changed it to "Taiwan" after I changed it back to the original "Republic of China." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.53.46.140 (talk) 16:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

No. That can be settled after a consensus is reached. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:05, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Are your anti-Sockpuppet tools ready?

Hi. I need you to check the user Cyrrk and its supposed "soul mate" 174.48.32.232 for sockpuppetry, for what they seem to be the same person.

Originally, I wanted to report this on an open-court forum like Sockpuppet investigations one, but it repelled me with its confusing bureaucratic-like overcomplicated fill forms and tutorials, I mean do we really need to take it to WP:SPI when considering one user?

To keep it really simple, just take a look at this and that and examine the same summary reason, which is "unexplained revert". Let me also remind you that Cyrrk suddenly appeared on the disputed article his/her supposed IP warred over. Lovely coincidence, don't you think? ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 20:34, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Do you use WP:Twinkle? That makes opening SPIs very easy. Regardless, Checkuser typically won't publicly connect accounts to IPs. Calabe1992 20:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Either way, account is blocked; the quack was loud enough for me. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:38, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Andy Dingley

Can you please caution this editor about making personal comments? My edits have nothing to do with him, beyond an overlap in our areas of interest, yet he insists upon making personal comments about my edits and my relationship with Wikipedia, including repeated accusations of ownership. Frankly, I have tired of it. I make edits that I believe are appropriate, as I did today when I removed a category from the article about the film The City of Lost Children because there was no support in the body of the article for said category. Along comes Andy with his accusations and personal comments. This needs to stop. Thanks. ---RepublicanJacobite_TheFortyFive 23:32, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is user:RepublicanJacobite.2C_Steampunk.2C_WP:OWN_and_forum_shopping. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:00, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Woodleigh School, North Yorkshire#Request for comment

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Woodleigh School, North Yorkshire#Request for comment. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:31, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Deleted Vandalism

Hello, OhNoItsJamie. I would just like to inform you that I deleted some vandalism on the page "Conservation Status" that was put there by someone using the IP 38.116.202.49 to edit Wikipedia. Please investigate this. Thank you. Luvrboy1 (talk) 16:30, 20 April 2012 (UTC)Jared

Unprotecting Taiwan

Hello. Could you please unprotect Taiwan seeing as it has largely stabilised? Specifically:

• "Taiwan evolved into a multi-party democracy" seems to have stuck, with no further debate after 12 April.
• How Taiwan is described in the lead—"sovereign state", "state" etc.—is a point of contention, but it is being debated on the talk page, and there hasn't been edit-warring on the actual article.

Could we give it a try and see if IP editors would stick to making uncontroversial changes and engaging on the talk page? Thanks. wctaiwan (talk) 03:59, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Do you particularly object? If not but you'd rather not do it yourself for some reason, I'll probably be taking this to RFP soon... wctaiwan (talk) 14:12, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

It expires in 10 days. If IP editors have proposals in the mean time, they can make them on the talk page. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:14, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. It's just that on principle I disagree with semi-protecting a page when there's a legitimate dispute and no active edit war, since gives registered editors who have the page watchlisted a significant edge. I also mistook the indef move protection to be an indef semi-protection. Sorry about that. wctaiwan (talk) 14:34, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Not sure why this was removed?

HI there, I had added ss427impala.com links to chevrolet impala page (see my talk page), but they were deleted twice. The links are referred to in article body and are information only, with no commercial value or intent. It is an information site, not owned by me, but has the most information regarding a specific model of chevrolet. I would like to re add it to the page please.

Thanks 68427capriceatyahoo (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68427capriceatyahoo (talk • contribs) 11:41, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

No thanks. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:55, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Phoneix Jones image

Would you mind furnishing a policy or guideline for your pronouncement "we don't do comic illustrations of real people; not a superhero" when you wiped out the picture, or reverting yourself on that one? Colton Cosmic (talk) 21:25, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Problem solved; found a properly licensed real photo. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:37, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't actually show Wikipedia readers the masked "vigilante" that is Phoenix Jones, leaving that aside, it would be useful to know if you actually had policy or guideline behind your comment; I'd really like to look at it. Colton Cosmic (talk) 21:55, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't know of an actual policy link, but you'd be hard pressed to find comic-book style illustrations of any other living subject. It's a moot point, as a photo would obviously be preferable to a crude drawing. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:45, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

This is a picture of Ben Fodor not Phoenix Jones, this picture should be removed it's not in context. This picture would belong on a page for Ben Fodor the MMA fighter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlieMuk (talk • contribs) 14:48, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

No. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:58, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Whoa! You as an admin, locked a page, because of a dispute that you yourself precipitated and are deeply involved in?! And this is how you address those who disagree with you?! Colton Cosmic (talk) 17:34, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

AGF

I'm puzzled why you blocked User:CharlieMuk for, what as far as I can tell are a good-faith addition of links to information about Phoenix Jones. You started with an unsourced3 for a link to youtube video about Jones. I'm agree that a video with 668 views isn't notable, but there's a reason that there are levels of warnings; what's the justification for starting with 3? If this is a serious dispute, could you take it to the Talk:Phoenix Jones? Bennetto (talk) 15:52, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

He ignored warnings and he was blocked for it. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:54, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Let me chime in for the record that Ohnoitsjamie himself is deeply involved in the dispute he blocked CharlieMuk for, and in fact I state that Ohnoitsjamie precipitated the dispute. I don't pretend to be knowledgeable on what guidelines inform the behavior of admins, but I think I recall from somewhere he should have involved in another admin to decide the matter. Colton Cosmic (talk) 17:38, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

His blog was upheld by another admin and extended to indef for socking. I don't have to discuss removing material that is not properly sourced. Please stop posting on my talk page. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 17:39, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

help --aelita andre / vanity gallery edit war

you might be able to assist. the prima example of using a Vanity gallery to buy an art career is the case of Aelita Andre (the toddler whose parents bought her exhibits at pay-to-play venue Agora gallery in new york city). a user who created the aelita andre article within 48hours of its first news appearance (i strongly suspect AUTO but don't know how to prove) keeps reverting my connecting the two concepts: this artist's shows and vanity gallery. we're surely at the edit war stage by now --not even including past tussles with the same user. any way to bring your judgement and superpowers to bear please? see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vanity_gallery&action=history etc. cheers. Cramyourspam (talk) 02:34, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

also might want to see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aelita_Andre&action=history

thanks again Cramyourspam (talk) 02:36, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, if you're interested in the history of this issue, you can find it on Talk:Aelita Andre. There's a new thread about it on Talk:Vanity gallery, too. Thanks, Armadillopteryx^talk 02:51, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

^there's the user and s/he seems to be checking my contribs faster than i can get back over here to say: lookie also on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Vanity_gallery#Aelita_Andre cheers again. Cramyourspam (talk) 03:04, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Craig Davies (entrepreneur, racing driver) speedy delection

Hi, I recently uploaded an amended version of a page I'm trying to upload - Craig Davies (entrepreneur, racing driver). However, it was deleted immediately. Are you able to confirm as to whether it's a formtting/links issue, or the general notability of the subject. If it's a notability issue, and I have no chance of ever getting it accepted, I'd rather know and not waste my/your time.

Thanks, Mattb84 - 14/5/2012 14:15 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattb84 (talk • contribs) 13:16, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:BIO notability was the issue. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated Search engine optimization for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Dana boomer (talk) 18:27, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:BITE

C'mon Jamie, you've been around here forever it seems like. You know any good faith attempt to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:16, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

I didn't think that it was vandalism, I was just using the {{uw-unsor4}} template, which is the level 4 warning for posting unsourced content. I'm glad that he finally gets that he need to use sources. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:22, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

I see. Markup says you used Template:uw-vandalism4 but {{uw-unsor4}} redirects to that. There is no Uw-unsourced4. Strange. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Huh, I've never noticed that. In my opinion unsor4 shouldn't say anything about vandalism, as I agree with you that it's a completely different issue ("disruptive," perhaps). I may have to rethink using it or finding a better one. Thanks for pointing that out. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:39, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. I was pretty surprised to see that coming from you as you're always on the ball. The other editor emailed me, befuddled as to how to add a ref. I've asked him to put it on the talk page if he can't figure it out and I'll add it for him. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:46, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Ok, this is too funny. I just handed out a uw-tpv4 (refactoring talk pages) and you know what it redirected to? Uw-vandalism4. Sigh... --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:10, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Ha! I just "fixed" that one too (which I can't imagine being a controversial change). (BTW, I retracted to warning from EODoctor's page). Cheers, OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:35, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Spam links all over wiki, but you don't care !

So before i will make my actions, can you PLEASE response in an offical wiki way, WHY YOU REMOVE SOME LINKS AND THOSE LIKE :livescience.com which are MORE than 500 you don't do anything ???? Or soooo many have pages which even don't exist ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=livescience.com&redirs=1&profile=default

I'm waiting a professional answer from your side before you will erase again this toic

Unlike your dime-a-dozen news aggregator site, livescience is notable enough to have it's own article, and furthermore qualifies as a reliable source. If I see your site pop up again I will add it to the spam blacklist. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:26, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

If you are a carnivore or an omnivore, please enjoy this yummy food. Ledheadtilldeath (talk) 03:23, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Oregon

Remind me that I was supposed to talk to you about the flag of Oregon. Legolover26 (talk) 14:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Too boku
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Ok. I remembered. Is it this and this Legolover26 (talk) 14:43, 29 May 2012 (UTC) Or is it this? File:Oregonian New Flag Contest Winner.svg Legolover26 (talk) 14:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

From what I can tell, it is the first two based on Oregon's state website. I guess they haven't officially adopted the "new" flag yet. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:26, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

The 'new' flag "Oregonian New Flag Contest Winner" was the result of a newspaper contest, it was never meant to be a real flag, it was never official in any way, shape, or form. The only confusion is due to the fact that the newspaper is named "The Oregonian", so the title of that picture can be confusing. The contest never had any official affiliation with the state government, and was never meant to actually change the flag. I removed the picture of it from the Flag of Oregon article, as irrelevant. (Would the fact that the NY Post held a "redesign the New York state flag" contest be noteworthy? No.) Ehurtley (talk) 18:11, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar

Thank you for the message. I'm not sure what I did wrong. The links I posted were to material I thought would be useful to people doing research on the particular subject. I saw TRU-TV had links to their page and I figure I could put links to the video of the NBC News stories. The compilations reels are part of the NBC News Archives and they contain material that could be useful for people. They can only be added as links because they are hour long video files which NBC News owns the copyright to and since we get people reaching out to us from Wikipedia searches we thought it would be best to post those links there for people to be able to see the videos online even before contacting us for them.Lariston (talk) 12:47, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Read the blurb at the top of the page, as well as WP:COI. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:09, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

A beer for you!

good work your doing well JT12 O2 (talk) 20:53, 31 May 2012 (UTC)