User talk:JD

et9
hey mate. your bio of et9 is acurate enough. feel free to use my own b/w photos of et9.

-karla

yep, those are the photos. =)

-karla

WikiProject Germany Invitation
--Zeitgespenst (talk) 19:07, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

renaming account
I'll see what I can do. I'm kind of attached to the name. However, I don't see a reason not to change the username. Let me do some thinking on it. I'll get back to you sometime soon. If it's a problem, let me know, I'll check a little more frequently than in the past. JD (talk) 05:41, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * thanks for reply. i'm waiting eagerly for your decision. ;-)
 * i wish you happy holidays, --JD de {æ} 19:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

English, please
I noticed that you have posted comments in a language other than English. When on the English-language Wikipedia, please always use English, no matter to whom you address your comments. This is so that comments may be comprehensible to the community at large. If the use of another language is unavoidable, please provide a translation of the comments. For more details, see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. ''Please ensure talkpage discussions and edit summaries on the English Wikipedia are in English. Although multiple languages are appreciated, English Wikipedia users need to understand changes and discussions. Thanks!'' ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 23:52, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Edit war
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. McJeff (talk) 06:09, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * i am sure you could take some time to check all the contributions in the article, then realise that both IP and user:buchweizen are contributers straight from eilfeld's official fan bulletin board (see www.annemarie-eilfeld.de/forum/) and that i personally am only having a look here on this lemma because i already had to intervene at de.wikipedia before as long-time admin there.
 * moreover, a look at this edit should ultimatively make clear that i am not vandalising there or want to carry any edit-war out. i suggested semi-protection two days ago, too. --JD {æ} 12:53, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I read the entire situation. It appears to be a content dispute to me. You were also blanket reverting, and exceeded 3RR at least once.


 * If, as you claim, these editors have come here from the German Wikipedia via an Annemarie Eilfeld fansite, then it would be best for you to provide some sort of proof for these claims. Otherwise, it's an unsubstantiated personal attack.


 * And as an administrator, you should know better than engaging in a revert war. The proper thing to do would have been to post to WP:AIN, or WP:BLPN as I did.  McJeff (talk) 21:41, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * "It appears to be a content dispute to me." - so it has to be discussed (again! - see my other statements; see de.wp) if external links like, for example this one (german tabloid, completely out of the question), that (another online store of her music group) or an interview that is already linked as a reference are capable from the perspective of WP:EL?! sorry, i got some other things to do in life, too.
 * "exceeded 3RR at least once" - different other users; all with the same goal (see next point); same problem before on de.wp until semi-protection; no discussion when their stuff is in the article already. and i know reverting is not fun.
 * "If ... these editors have come here ... via an Annemarie Eilfeld fansite, then it would be best for you to provide some sort of proof for these claims. Otherwise ..." - i already linked to the specific thread in the bulletin board in my statement before. one can follow every single step of their attempt to get the article in a way they want it to look like.
 * i contacted en.admin DerHexer the day before yesterday, i commented on your notice, i contacted other admins today and - believe it or not - i am an admin @de.wp and not that much active on en.wp; i have never before contacted any official site here concerning vandalism and had to do pretty some search work before being able to do so. --JD {æ} 22:08, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * JD, you should know that the only valid reason to break the 3 revert rule on en.Wikipedia is to combat actual vandalism. It may be tough to prove that fancruft is vandalism. ( talk→   BWilkins   ←track ) 17:01, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * FYI : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Complaint_Against_User:JD_because_of_vandalism_in_Annemarie_Eilfeld 79.194.84.244 (talk) 14:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

request to use your namespace for some redirects,
Hello,

I'm a law student in New York, and as you may be aware, "JD" among lawyers is the acronym for "juris doctorate," which is the degree we get -- hence my user name, JD Caselaw (talk).

I'm using my namespace as a study guide for students in my law school classes -- For example, for our Constitutional Law study group, I currently have a redirect at User:JD Caselaw/Conlaw

But what I'd like is a redirect at User:JD/Conlaw, since it's less effort :)

Would it be appropriate for me to do that, here and in a few related instances? It would help me and also a lot of my classmates.

Thanks. JD Caselaw (talk) 19:25, 19 July 2009 (UTC)


 * hi, there.
 * i've never heard of this acronym before, thanks for bringing that to my attention. ;-)
 * i'm cool with some redirects in my user namespace as long as there aren't countless of them. please inform me here at my talk page about these redirects so i can keep an overview in this matter.
 * regards, --JD {æ} 12:17, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)