User talk:Doc Jimmy 187

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Shimeru 05:53, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Advice Please
{helpme}

There is a wiki-policy that basically says "just because you think the topic is nonsense doesn't make it so, and more importantly you can't support an AFD just because you don;t like the topic in your opinin" - I though that was wp:npov but when I read it it wasn;t what I was looking for.

What is the actual policy?


 * Hi there. I think you may be referring to the essay Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, and more specifically the WP:ILIKEIT / WP:IDONTLIKEIT part there. --KFP (talk | contribs) 00:11, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Gladys
Thanks for your note You are very welcome. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  15:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks and you are welcome. Nice job on the rewrite Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  15:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I've replied to your message on my talk page. Shimeru 20:48, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Nice going with the improvements to the article! Welcome. --Oakshade 02:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow (2 nomination)
Hi. As you were the creator of the Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow article, this is a courtesy notice that this article is up for deletion again. --Oakshade 06:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Coming on the heels of the previousone, it seems awful soon unless it went to Deletion Review and it got sent back. I'll have another look. Cheers, :) MikeReichold 20:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Orphan articles
Hi James You mention something about not knowing the problem with orphan articles. It is percieved that if articles don't interlink with other articles then perhaps the topic isn't worth including in the encylopedia?

As an example I wrote an article on Blacktown Road, Sydney. For a while - that article linked to quite a few others but nothing linked back to Blacktown Road, Sydney. Which implies, Blacktown Road is not really all that important in the scheme of things.

Now, this cow... apparently it's a sculpture. It's located in some university campus. That campus must be in some town and that town is in some state. That state probably has an article about "the arts" in that state. So there are a few articles you could look at linking back to the article you have created.

ie, it's no good linking to cow from your article, unless cow links to your article then your article is still an orphan - all you've done is go one step further to stopping cow from being an orphan.

Hope this helps... Keep contributing and try to work on things which you aren't so directly associated with. When you build up a network of co-contributors you will probably be able to get articles written about subjects you are personally involved in through raising awareness of the topic, among other contributors.Garrie 00:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

How does the actual vote tally on an AFD work?
helpme Please!

My contribution is in AFD status, with multiple opinions on either side.

In the end - how is the outcome settled and by whom


 * Usually an uninvolved person will come by and weight the different arguments. It's not truly a vote, but a discussion of what to do. If one side has a vastly stronger argument then sometimes it doesnt matter if they have less "votes."  However, in the past, if one side has vastest more support then that is the side that usually gets their way. ---J.S  (T/C) 15:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) The result of an AfD is decided by an administrator when the time period for the AfD (5 days from the nomination) has ended. The administrator will try to judge the balance of validity of the arguments, to decide whether the arguments given for keeping or deleting are stronger; therefore, arguments based on policies and guidelines tend to have the most influence on the final decision. The administrator can close the discussion as keep or delete if they think the balance of arguments is clear; there is also a range of compromise solutions that are sometimes adopted (including merge, for instance; this combines the article with another one), and the administrator can also decide that there was no consensus, in which case the article will be kept. You may find Deletion process helpful further reading. --ais523 15:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Dosn't need to be an admin to close an AFD. :) ---J.S (T/C) 16:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You do to close any AfD but an uncontroversial keep or procedural close (and non-admins can't close as delete for technical reasons, anyway). --ais523 16:15, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, most of the answer to your question can be read in Deletion policy. To put it short (in my understanding), an admin can settle an AfD after 5 days have passed. AfD are not a vote. I mean that they are looking for a consensus among editors. a 60%/40% vote will be settled as "no consensus" for example. In some cases (if there is a clear consensus since the start, the discussion may be closed early (see WP:SNOW). Keep in mind that even if an article is deleted, an editor can request the deletion to be reviewed and the article to be put back if necessary. I hope I answered your questions :) -- lucasbfr talk 15:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
 * In this particular case I suspect the article will be kept or at worst reach no consensus. ---J.S (T/C) 16:02, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

My 2cents after edit conflict

 * AfD is a discussion that hopefully leads to a consensus. The discussion usually runs five days but can be extended to better develop consensus. An admin will look at the arguments for keep and delete (and other choices if offered) and weigh their relative strengths.


 * Generally, if 2/3 or more opinios are "delete," the article is deleted. If less that a 2/3  of the opinions are "delete" the article stays as "no consensus". If more than 2/3 are "keep," the article stays with a consensus of "keep." But AfD is not a vote. The admin can discount not-votes that lack merit, are clearly not founded in policy, or are otherwise faulty.


 * The major arguments posed for deletion have been conflict of interest-- you are putatively promoting something to which you have a connection and you stand to benefit in some way-- and lack of notability. I believe Gladys has sufficient local notability for WP:LOCAL to apply. Also, Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, so it can include subjects that a paper encyclopedia would not have room for.


 * Hope this helps. Regardless of Gladys's fate, I hope you continue to contribute to Wikipedia. You are a good editor.  Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  16:04, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd love to learn how to easily create the wiki-links that everyone uses everywhere. I see the *nowikilink*nowiki syntax, but don't know how to create the link on the fly, or to validate what I am linking to. e.g. I know that typing the characters *nowiki wp:coi *nowiki withe brackets around it will get the link going, but that means I have to memorize the text and link - I know there is a better way - grateful for any education! Also - why didn't my *nowiki tag work to disply the characters instead of the link?????. --James.lebinski 15:10, 4 December 2006 (UTC)


 * It should be   around the item not to be wikid... does that make sense? Hope this helps. :) Bubba hotep 15:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There's various advice for linking at Help:Link, including unusual linking techniques. Using the 'show preview' button is a good way to check that you've got your link right. --ais523 15:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Gladys AFD
Unfortunately refers to my inability to determine any kind of consensus after reading the AFD several times and getting a couple of opinions about it. It probably shouldn't have been there, since I was thinking it and ended up typing it out. Don't worry about it. --Core desat  17:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

holiday greeting
You are welcome. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  02:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

My very best wishes to you for the "festive" season, and thank you for the cow -- Simon Cursitor 08:07, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Part 1 article.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Part 1 article.jpg. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 01:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Gladys and sophie front page.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Gladys and sophie front page.jpg. 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 01:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow
I have nominated Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Bongo matic  13:45, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Change user name to an alias
I'd appreciate some advice - I'd like to change my login id to an alias and retroactively update my posts with that alias - can some wiki-wiz admin type help me with such a task? James.lebinski (talk) 19:29, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Make your request at Changing username by following the instructions there. Please let me know if there are any more questions.  Thanks!  --Mysdaao talk 14:25, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Bongo matic  23:29, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

advertising in article on Business Technology Management?
Hello Mr. Lebinski

I assume I am speaking with the same individual that authored the Wikipedia page on "business technology management" which appears to be a coin termed in a book that you contributed to. A term that relates closely to a business that you are an executive in. I have questioned, in the talk page on that article, whether the article is itself a form of advertising. I'd like you to take a little time to respond to the notion.

It is clear that there is a conflict of interest in you writing the article. On that basis alone, I could RfD the article. However, I'd like to assume that I'm wrong and that the "field" of BTM was not, in fact, invented soley so that you could make money from the concept. (the idea appears to be a complete rip-off of enterprise architecture but I cannot tell for certain.

I would appreciate some enlightenment on the issue. Nickmalik (talk) 10:10, 19 October 2012 (UTC)