User talk:JBW/Archive 8

Paul Samuel Browand
Thanks for the help there. I know 3RR doesn't usually apply in speedy cases, but I still feel a bit guilty about crashing through it like that. :-) -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 21:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it: what you did was obviously the right thing. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:47, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

A B O'NEILL
I'm not sure why this is an invalid article please inform me kind regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinemar (talk • contribs) 18:49, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It is a question of providing evidence that the subject of the article satisfies Wikipedia's notability criteria. The general notability guideline is at Notability, with additional information at Notability (people). To establish that such notability exists it is necessary to provide reliable sources, as defined at Identifying reliable sources. At present no sources are provided at all except for the subject's own MySpace page, which is neither a reliable source (because anyone can post anything to Myspace) nor independent of the subject. Has A B O'Neill received significant coverage in third party reliable sources? If so then please give these sources in the article, and that will be fine. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:23, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies)
You have recently participated in discussion at an AFD for a broadcast station. I have recently posted the above topic on the talk page of the notability guideline for organizations and companies, to see if there is interest in adding language related to the notability of radio and TV broadcast stations to that guideline. Your input would be most welcome. Thanks. Edison (talk) 01:55, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Parth Agrawal Parth081224 Omnitech INfosolution page update
Hi James appreciate ur concerns but I hold the right to material I have copied, and have sent the mail regarding the same to the address given.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Parth081224 (talk • contribs) 04:27, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It actually took me a while to work out what this meant, but after searching for some time through edit histories I eventually realised it was because I put a note on your user page explaining that you should not have removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you created yourself. This still applies: even if you are 100% certain that the speedy deletion should not go ahead you should add a "hangon" to the article and explain your reason on the article's talk page. If your reason is a good one then the speedy deletion tag will be removed by someone else who has checked your reason. The reason behind this (perhaps apparently meaningless) process is quite simple: even if you are acting perfectly correctly, unfortunately many people who edit Wikipedia aren't, and it is better to have a check from an independent person. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:43, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Sentry Gun
I've semi-protected the article, which should quiet the IP down for a while. TN  X   Man  20:14, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Hurr
You silly goose. ;) Fixed now I think.  urban f o x  13:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes. Clicked wrong button in Huggle. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:42, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's no problem. I did wonder why the vandalism came back though..!  urban f o x  13:50, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

removing sourced material from Amity High School
you asked for a source... I gave you a source, what is your problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.37.189.209 (talk • contribs) 13:45, 13 April 2010


 * Yes, I see now you did. Apologies. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:50, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Blocking publicly shared IP adresses

 * kindly do not block public library IPs. 24.105.152.130 (talk) 19:39, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Firstly, I am not an administrator, so I cannot block anyone. Secondly, we are well aware of the disadvantages of blocking shared IP addresses, and because of these disadvantages we do not usually block them for more than a short period unless there are persistent problems. However, the idea that publicly shared IP addresses should never be blocked is unworkable: it would give carte blanche for vandals to do as much vandalism as they wanted, simply by using a publicly shared computer. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:50, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

April 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Sasuke (TV series), did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Adrenalin 150% (talk) 08:16, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Note From your talk page, you don't look like a vandal. Did you make a mistake or something?Adrenalin 150% (talk) 08:16, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, I did make a mistake, confused by a string of edits some of which were vandalism and some not. I realised my mistake and was just trying to sort it out when it was corrected by Deagle AP (which appears to be you: your signature is confusing). I am just wondering if this is the first time I've had a vandalism template on my talk page: as far as I remember it is. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:21, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Don't worry then. Should I remove it? Adrenalin 150% (talk) 08:25, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, in a way I am rather amused, after the amount of vandalism patrolling that I have done, to have one of these of my own, so leave it. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:28, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


 * As a final note, I changed my signature. I guess it really must have been confusing. Thanks for raising the issue. Deagle_AP (talk) 11:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


 * You're such a vandal! Thanks for the eyes on my talkpage! ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 12:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, would you like to put this on your user page? It's a personal project of mine. Deagle_AP (talk) 13:57, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Thaksin Shinawatra
Hi, "Worlds 10 most wanted" link in the Thaksin Shinawatra article is not an offical law enforcement "wanted" list, it is published by Forbes. He's not on any Interpol list either. There is no need for "1st warnings" on simple typo mistakes, so please be civil WP:CIVIL with your use of warnings, Regards Surfing bird (talk) 14:00, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The edit you seem to be referring to was the restoring of a correct link (to The World's 10 Most Wanted) which you had replaced by an incorrect one ( to Forbes.com - The World's 10 Most Wanted). The reason for the change is that one link correctly links to the relevant article, and the other one doesn't: whether the list is official or not has nothing to do with it. As for the warning, I accidentally clicked on the wrong button. I corrected my error immediately: the initial edit is logged in the edit history at 13:44, and my correction is also logged at 13:44. Consequently, if we are to be civil about "simple typo mistakes" I should think this may well be a case in point. I apologise for the offense which the existence of this warning message for a few seconds seems to have caused. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:02, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Message from vandal
Whatever. Just stop messaging me.

--71.71.124.11 (talk) 19:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)MarilynManson4Ever--71.71.124.11 (talk) 19:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * if you stop vandalising then I am sure both I and other vandalism patrollers will stop sending you messages about vandalism. Otherwise not. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Immunize (talk) 14:33, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Deep Purple sock
ANI report here FYI. He's reverting everyone instantly. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:39, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but in fact I already know. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry for any problems I may have created. 72.234.222.77 (talk) 09:32, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Pallar
How can you say that the article pallar has no notablity and unsourced.We have provided the references please go through them.The references may contain text in Tamil language which you may not understand.But dont say that it is unsourced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamil1988 (talk • contribs) 07:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I did not say that the article was unsourced, or that its subject was not notable. I said that one section of it was unsourced, and that there was no evidence of notability of its content. That section did not contain a single reference, citation or link to any other information. Nor did it contain any text in Tamil, so that is irrelevant. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

can you please say me which section of the article did not cantain any references.I will try to provide the references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tamil1988 (talk • contribs) 08:15, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The section was the one I edited in the edit for which my edit summary said there were no sources. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:19, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Errm... I don't see any messages for me there. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:32, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, jeeze, I'm sorry, that was an old message from my first, and admittedly, rightfully deleted attempt at making this entry. I feel like a moron. Thanks for your response. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Terry.booth (talk • contribs) 19:39, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * No need to feel like a moron - I have made far sillier mistakes than that. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

oops
I'm sorry, I'm new at creating pages for Wikipedia and I'll make a better attempt at citing my sources. I'm trying to follow the guides that are provided and will do a better job of making my information follow the correct protocol. I hope you'll give me a day to ensure that my sources are properly written. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhino83166 (talk • contribs) 02:11, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

intelligence quotient link
hello and many thanks for your message:

April 2010

''"Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Intelligence quotient has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)" ''

I'm new to wiki and assumed that since intelligence tests and IQ are both discussed in and linked to the intelligence quotient article from the greatness article that it would be appropriate to make a reciprocal link (under 'see also') in the reverse direction, ie from the intelligence quotient article to the 'greatness' article

I read the link you provided to 'intro to editing', but still have no idea re why the above link from 'intelligence quotient' to 'greatness' is considered to be an 'unconstructive' edit.

again thanks for taking the time to let me know re the edit had been reverted.

AgRince (talk) 10:08, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I have looked back at your edit and decided it was OK, so I have restored it, and removed the warning from your talk page. The edit looked very much like other edits which were vandalism. Unfortunately in the course of vandalism patrolling I find it is often necessary to deal with a lot of edits in a short time, which occasionally results in mistakes. Sorry about this, and thank you for bringing it to my attention so I could correct it. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:17, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

many thanks.

AgRince (talk) 10:23, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Jaydiem's baby rabbits (of all things!)
Just placing a Talkback tag here as requested at the top of this page.

A tag has been placed on Holographic Metaphoric Math, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself.

If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Int21hexster (talk) 22:13, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello JamesBWatson, the reason I was so quick to publish the entry is substantiation of claim. I understand that normally one would go through the sandbox process, but I think the situation merits an exception. I'm not here to bark and soapbox, I want to have as many eyeballs on the page as possible. I know it sounds crazy to say you invented a hyper dimensional mathematic system that is recursively defined by it's existence and then having it map back to a 5 dimensional manifold space. I've been working since 3.15.2010 to come up with formal proofs, applications, and concrete definitions. I'm trying to provide a QED by application to Einstein's field equations. I will work on cleaning up what's on the page over the weekend as well as add more reference material and applications. For example the system of equations that involves the Delta change for the cosmological constant should work as a compound pulley. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Int21hexster (talk • contribs) 22:13, 23 April 2010


 * There are several problems here. One of them is that Wikipedia is not a medium for original research, as you will see from the policy documents linked here, and in more detail here. Even if you can rewrite your article so that it looks like mathematics and appears to make sense, and is fully substantiated by rigorous proofs, if it has not already received significant attention in reliable sources it will not be acceptable for Wikipedia. Another problem is that it is quite clear from what you write above that your intention in publishing this on Wikipedia is to get attention for your work: "I want to have as many eyeballs on the page as possible". Wikipedia is not a medium for publicity or promotion of work. There are plenty of free web hosts, social networking sites, etc etc where you can post your material, but unfortunately Wikipedia is not one of them. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Vallavilai
Hello James

I have seen the edits that you have made on the Vallavilai link of Wiki. I do see the external links that I have added are not complying with the policies and terms.

I wanted to tell you.. that Vallavilai.com is the actual website of the people of Vallavilai. That is in active state since 2005. Vallavilai.org has been made online by some individual and I do find he has linked Vallavilai.org as the official website of Vallavilai.

I wanted to provide you the platform to verify. Hence I added the external links. There you can see Vallavilai.com is the official website of that village people. I wanted to provide the users of Wiki the correct information.

Thanks Wills en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vallavilai —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaming.wills (talk • contribs) 10:19, 24 April 2010


 * I have looked at both the web sites. I have no way of knowing who made either of them, and whether either or neither of them has any claim to be "official". However, I shall ask the user who made the change you refer to what reason they have for preferring vallavilai.org and see where we go from there. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:41, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 16:07, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

BeCogent Group
The link to 'JD Williams' dircts to an actor/person called J.D. Williams, not the actual catalogue company that the page suggests. I will get around to shortly gathering information and creating a page on JD williams Group PLC using information gathered from the 'About us' page on the JD Williams website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.39.83 (talk • contribs) 20:21, 25 April 2010
 * OK, thanks for the explanation. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:23, 25 April 2010 (UTC)