User talk:Jæs/Archives/2010/March

Move discussion
My apologies - I did not notice that your reversion was not just a reversion, and that you had added a statement in there. Pdfpdf (talk) 17:34, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * P.S. I enjoyed reading your User page. I think we both consider ourselves to be reasonable rational people. I'm forced to wonder why we're arguing with each other. I can only conclude that we are both being neither reasonable nor rational. OK, I can change that. What do you think? Pdfpdf (talk) 18:52, 5 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I appreciate that you'd like someone to share the blame with you, but I'm afraid the lack of reason and rationality was solely your own. You do not own section headers, and making that segment a standalone section does not alter the intent, no matter how much you'd like to stomp your feet and jump up and down and say it does.  Any other editor here will tell you my refactoring that segment was perfectly reasonable and rational.  We now have people commenting after your section, which was previously a subsection, just as I suspected we would.  As to why you reacted the way you did?  I have no idea, but I suspect it goes back to your confessed lack of reason and rationality, and I suspect it has to do with the fact that you're a little too personally invested in this discussion.  Best of luck.  jæs (talk)  19:09, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Biggs
I can't find copies of those articles you used as citations at the Barbara Biggs article. Would you mind providing a qote that verifies she was staff or links if they are available?Cptnono (talk) 00:08, 14 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I was able to access them, behind a paywall at my city's library. The articles themselves don't have any relevant content, just the bylines of both, which referred to her as a "staff writer."  Given the bylines, spanning two years (and there were others, but I thought those two were sufficient), I believe it's safe to say she was, at least for that period of time, a staff journalist with the Herald Sun.  jæs (talk)  03:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Bylines spelling it out are good enough for me. Thanks.Cptnono (talk) 04:25, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Sylvia Hopelwhatsit
Hi Jæs, I've created Sockpuppet investigations/Jerrysanders2009, if you have anything to add. Thanks for the help. --Floquenbeam (talk) 14:26, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It looks like you covered all the bases. I'm not sure whether to be thankful that the investigation didn't find any others, or worry that there may just be more stale ones out there that he can resort to using.  I may just be doing random searches for Hopelwhatever from time to time to be sure.  In the meantime, I hope to get to reviewing more of the contribution history later today.  Thanks for dealing with all this, there ought to be a barnstar for diligence for you.  jæs (talk)  08:55, 28 March 2010 (UTC)