User talk:-jmac-

October 13
Thank you for experimenting with the page Alex Clarke on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. --Onorem 11:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

DHO
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your contributions to the DHO article, but we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing!

In addition to the copyright issues, the article looks like pure advertising, which is inappropriate for Wikipedia. Fan-1967 15:17, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The main thing is to write a fresh article, rather than just copying a website. Wikipedia is not a bulletin board to repost material from elsewhere. Fan-1967 15:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


 * And by this we mean start from fresh - don't paste in the violating text and then change it to something different - that makes your new version a derivative work of the original, so it's still a copyright violation. I've re-deleted DHO for this reason. If you write an article for Wikipedia, make sure that every word of the article is your own work and your own words, right from the get-go.  Thanks. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 15:46, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm quite happy the edit wasn't intended as vandalism. I'll therefore remove this warning. Best wishes. AA Milne 19:26, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Reverting Edits
Please see here. Most of the reverts that you see are made with VandalProof. You may request permission to download this software after your 250th mainspace edit. I would suggest spending more time making regular edits before concentrating on reversing vandalism. Here is a good place to get started. Also see here. Try looking at articles which interest you. Remember, its not a race, and making tons of useless edits is not helping anything. Just relax and have fun. shoeofdeath 20:20, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. In that case you should just delete the link, since the archive version provides no useable info. shoeofdeath 21:30, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for reverting you edit to nun. The vandal whose work you partially fixed had deleted all the material about Catholic nuns in a previous edit and the easiest way to fix it all was to go back to an earlier edit. --Simon Speed 18:35, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Your nomination for deletion Rip-off Report page
-jmac-, while agreeing there needs work to be done on this page, I strongly disagree with deleting it. Both supposed advantages and critisism of ROR are present. Over all neutrality in tone of voice is moving in the right direction. Who is biased here? I can't help noticing, you did not even remove the blatant vandalism. SooperJoo 20:12, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * jmac, thanks for your answer on my talk page. Feel free to help me out working on the Background section. I am not a native writer, costs me lots of effort to formulate correctly. SooperJoo 20:43, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * If you're happy to rewrite the 'background' section, please be my guest. I feel I can learn more in the use of English from you than the other way around :) I can help check out later, if there are any fact errors. SooperJoo 21:13, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Tonbridge School
Please have your network administrator contact me regarding ongoing abuse problems originating from your school network. My contact information is located on my user page. Thank you, Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 19:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

NPWatcher
I have not added you to the list for this program, you have too few edits as of now for me to figure gauge your contributions. Feel free to ask when you get up to about 300 or so. Regards —— Eagle 101  Need help? 21:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

My Reverts
Yes, I use something to do all my edits, it's a simple edit in your monobook.js file by Lupin called "Anti-Vandal Tool" Just follow the instructions left by Lupin for installation. (Also: Remember to sign posts on talk pages, ;))``BGOATDoughnut 22:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Forgot to add; the only drawback to it is that sometimes it will revert to an already vandalized edit, just by a different person. ``BGOATDoughnut 22:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If you mean as in not hitting the "Show Details" button first, then no. IP Address edits can be valuable edits, but by members that don't want to be weighed down by a username.``BGOATDoughnut 22:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Maurice Papon
Actually, yes, I do. The question of "chain of responsibility" was already resolved thirty years later during the trial of Eichmann, so that was not the most important point. If you read French accounts of the trial, as well as the account, in English, in "external links", you will see that if Papon could have the arrogance to compare him to Dreyfus and the trial to the Moscow Trials, this was because, putting it in the words of far-right leader Jean-Marie Le Pen, he considered him as a "scapegoat". Although this is clearly a negationism stance, which ignores the fact that he was condemned only for 8 trains, in which his direct responsibility was clearly proved and demonstrated, it also points to the real issues of the trial, concerning France's confrontation towards its past, and in particular regarding the French state recognition of its responsibility for the Collaboration during Vichy. This was admitted by Chirac in 1998 for the first time; but the French state has yet to admit completely his historical responsibility in the execution of the Holocaust in regard to the eager collaboration of the French police. This is why police archives remain classified; this is also why the Jewish files made by André Tulard were dissimulated to public knowledge until the 1990s (see the article cited on Tulard's article, in the Lignes review). But, this won't surprise you, this trial wasn't exclusively about Papon's responsibilities, which are avered (?, that is, demonstrated), but also about the responsibilities of the French state and the French people. Most of the articles which source Papon's articles back up what I'm saying, but if you want, I can look for one in particular to put the ref after this statement. Regards, Tazmaniacs


 * Cheers! some subjects deserve special attention, and it is a good thing to see interest in those ones... I'll complete your barnstar with a well-deserved beer to change a bit my mind! Thanks :) Tazmaniacs 20:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Your VandalProof Application
Dear -jmac-,

Thank you for applying for VandalProof! (VP). As you may know, VP is a very powerful program, and in fact the just released 1.3 version has even more power. Because of this we must uphold strict protocols before approving a new applicant. Regretfully, I have chosen to decline your application at this time. The reason for this is that. Please note it is nothing personal by any means, and we certainly welcome you to apply again soon. Thank you for your interest in VandalProof.  Daniel.Bryant  02:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

revert
Why this revert? The removal of "lame duck" was unexplained and by an editor that had done nothing but vandalize articles today up to that point. And "lame duck" seems like it is an accurate description. *Mishatx* - In \ Out   22:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank You, good user!
Hey -jmac-, thank you so very much for reverting the vandalism to my user page, I really appreciate it :) .. Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 22:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:20, 23 November 2015 (UTC)