User talk:JGXenite/Archive/2009

= January 2009 =

Did you say I made an unconstructive edit?
Hi, I got a message on my user page supposedly from you, saying I'd edited some page for "Call the Shots."

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:220.235.41.122&redirect=no

That's pretty weird, since I've never edited that page or, to be honest, heard of either the group or the song.

Weird... I don't know what caused this. The message seems quite old. And I'm not logged in. Maybe I've just ended up on the same ISP number as some who did edit it, long ago. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.235.41.122 (talk) 11:53, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I think that is what happened. Someone else on your ISP was allocated this IP back in October 2007, and they made an unconstructive edit to that page. As such, I warned them. I shouldn't worry about it - it wasn't aimed at you personally.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 12:10, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: January 2009
My bad. I make that mistake a lot of times, because I mark the minor edit button before I make the contribution based on what I'm planning to do. In this case, I had only intended to format the dates, but ended up re-writing the plot (which I had noticed mid-edit was pretty sloppy). I marked the icon beforehand, not after I was done editing, so it was not intentional, and you can rest assured that it is a bad habit I developed in my early months here, that I'm having a hard time breaking. It won't happen intentionally, ever. -- The Guy complain edits 12:18, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops... I just did it again on the same article... *facepalm* -- The Guy complain edits 12:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks for letting me know re: minor edits.
 * However, I'm going to revert your changes of the dates and American spellings. The Tomb Raider "franchise" (if it could be called that) is primarily British-based, and that means that we should really use British dates and British spellings (artefact instead of artifact). If you want to contest this, please bring it up on the talk page.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 12:27, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, but I would like to keep in my other edit if at all possible (the re-vamp of the plot section). I saw a lot wrong with it, and I wanted to change it.  See, I just bought the game today and finished it about an hour ago; it's still fresh in my mind.  A lot of the things that were in that plot section were oddly phrased.  I would appreciate if we could keep my version of the plot up there (you can tweak it, too, if you don't approve) with the "artefact" spelling and all. -- The Guy  complain edits 12:34, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * That was a pointless reply of mine; I see you kept my summary already. It was a pleasure working with you (I don't say that to a lot of Wiki editors).  Thanks for being kind. -- The Guy  complain edits 12:36, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, just went away for a bit. I didn't intend on removed your plot changes - although I haven't look over them yet, I'm sure they'll be fine. I just made changes to the latest version. Thanks for the compliment too - it's not very often I get them!  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 13:39, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Greenhead College
Hi, you may of noticed that I am working on Greenhead College, and I have seen you working on it too and I was wondering if you would like to try and get it to GA status, I am certainly trying! :) Andy (talk) 22:10, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I had noticed :). I tend to do more in the way of maintenance and removal of junk, but I suppose I could give it a go. Not really sure what the GA rules are though - have to have a look over them.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 00:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Take a look here. At the moment, I getting an image and a logo and now most of the sections are finshed, I am trying to expand it. Regards. Andy (talk) 18:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

re Safe Trip Home
Hi, i have put appropriate sources to the Billboard charts, so don't delete them. User StephenN17 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 23:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC).

Punctuation before the ref
Whoops, my bad, I don't know why I switched it-- I'm always changing it to punct before the ref, brain fart. Thanks for catching it 217.166.94.1 (talk) 09:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Brain fart 2, missed the new sections tab : (
 * Lol, no worries :).  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 09:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Please be nice to the newbies
User talk:75.128.8.215 comes across as way too harsh for someone making their first edit. Most yanks probably don't recognize civilisation as a British spelling, it just looks wrong to us. The user didn't convert the article to US English -- harbour, honour, savoury all still have the British spellings. Obviously you were correct in reverting the change, but a gentle explanation would have been better. Thanks! Gerardw (talk) 11:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I just used the standard notice for users changing British to American (I'd assume the same would be used for American to British). I guess I could have written a less "formal" note explaining why I reverted their edit. I'll keep this in mind for future.
 * (PS: If you think the message doesn't AGF, it is probably something that should be mentioned to the WikiProject looking at messages...)  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 11:38, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Good idea: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_user_warnings. Thanks! Gerardw (talk) 12:16, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Certifications
''Hi. When adding the "certifications" table (where has this come from by the way? is there a standard for these tables?), please don't add a sales column unless you have a source for the sales. "Guestimate" sales aren't really acceptable. [ジャム] [ t -  c  ] 13:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)''

Hi, with the ARIA charts, an album or single is only certified when they have sold that amnount, and on the links I provided it sources this. Gold is 35,000 minium, and Platinum is 70,000 minimum. We don't need a link for sales in Australia, when something is certified it has sold that amount. Billy4kate (talk) 21:05, 11 January 2009 (UTC)


 * However, that still leaves a 35,000 unit gap between gold and platinum, meaning the sales are somewhere between that. I don't think it is very accurate to say "well, it has sold somewhere between 35,000 and 70,000 units". The same with platinum. Personally, I'd prefer a more or less accurate sales figure, rather than the guestimate. I'm not sure what WP:WPMU has to say about it...  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 21:56, 11 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The WP:WPMU states, that the single has sold whatever amount if that's what the official chart has stated, and since the ARIA chart has stated it certifiying Gold, it has sold minimum 35,000, so theres some info for you :). Billy4kate (talk) 06:35, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Proxying over?
In the last half hour, my normal IP address has turned up at Wikipedia. If you have access to TalkTalk, please could you check to see if the same is happening for you? If the proxying is over, it will be a mystery, since the IWF denied that it was involved.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 16:19, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I won't have access to my home computer until Monday, but I'll check as soon as I get home. I know that it was still being proxied around 1pm, but haven't tried it since then.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 19:30, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Just to respond to your initial request - yes, TalkTalk is no longer proxying Wikipedia.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 16:05, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

This is reliable
Hi, my sources about Duffy (singer) are reliable, and the site has a filmed interview with her about this subject, as do many other websites. This is the third time you have deleted this and maybe you should take a look at this website before deleting my sources. I think you are being completely unfair as it is your fault that I am now on my last warning of quoting (ahem) unreliable sources before I get blocked from editing. You are being totally unreasonable. Please get back to me as I would absolutely love to hear what you think of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duncan John Murray (talk • contribs) 16:39, 12 January 2009


 * Well, if you had taken this issue to the talk page instead of continuing to revert my edits without discussion, you wouldn't be on your final warning about blocking. In general, YouTube videos are not considered a reliable source. If you could provide a reliable text-based source, then we could go about resolving this issue.
 * I should point out that I'm not the only editor to take issue with your YouTube source - Rodhullandemu also removed another video "source" you provided from the John Lydon page (diff).  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 16:57, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, so why aren't they considered a reliable source then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duncan John Murray (talk • contribs) 18:38, 12 January 2009


 * Reliable source examples  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 20:10, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Get back on topic. You still haven't answered my question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duncan John Murray (talk • contribs) 21:02, 12 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I posted you an example from the guideline which states that YouTube isn't generally considered a reliable source, hence why I and another user (an admin no less) removed the links.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 21:05, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Tomb Raider Level Editor (TRLE)
I removed the WP:PROD from this, because redirects aren't eligible for PROD, per Deletion_policy. It needs to be listed at Redirects_for_discussion instead. Raven1977 Talk to me My edits 23:07, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks for the FYI. I don't think it is that important so I'll probably submit it at some time in the future.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 23:08, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Spellcheck
''Hi Edkollin. Just an FYI - I don't want this to sound really bad, but some of your recent contributions to the Duffy (singer) page had spelling and grammar mistakes, which I've gone and fixed. If your browser has a spelling checking facility, it might be helpful to enable it so that it can help you find misspelt words (note that American dictionaries might flag British spellings as incorrect - in the case of the Duffy page, they are most likely to be correct so it is best not to correct those spellings).

Similarly with grammar - a number of sentences that were added were missing commas to help break up the sentence. If you need any help with that, give me a shout and I can try and help you. Hope you don't think I'm getting at you - I'm just trying to help you improve your contributions (which are much appreciated anyway!)  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 09:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)''

I use Firefox which has a spellchecker. But it occasionally turns off and I do not know why it does that. Sometimes I do not realize it has happened before I Save Page. Anybody know what causes this? Edkollin (talk) 21:57, 14 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I used to have a problem that when I updated Firefox, it would lose the British English dictionary (and not reverted to the American English one). I don't know why it would randomly turn itself off though. Are you using the latest version of Firefox?  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 22:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes. Note I always have it on the American dictionary Edkollin (talk) 06:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeh, I'd gathered that. I was just explaining when mine gets disabled. Have you tried Googling or submitting a bug to Mozilla?  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 08:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

The Loving Kind
Honestly, I'm not that passionate about the website, but I think The One Blog is a great music source, and its reviews are written in a casual and extremely knowledgable way. If you actually visit the website, you will realise this. I don't understand what you think is wrong with a free web hosting service - if the website is informative and keeps me checking back for more, does it matter who hosts it? I would appreciate it if you stopped reverting my edits on this article, because I strongly feel that this website - whether hosted by a Freewebs or not - is a reliable music source which has every right to appear on this article. Thank you. --TheStephenator (talk) 23:07, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


 * It doesn't matter what I think - I don't believe it conforms with the reliable sources guidelines. A self-written blog isn't a reliable source - if it was, I could go write a blog slagging off some artist and then write about it on Wikipedia. As it is, that isn't acceptable and so neither is that blog. Sorry if you feel strongly for the website, but it isn't appropriate.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 23:48, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Why didn't you revert "aren't" to "are not"? What's wrong with "aren't"? 87.36.25.36 (talk) 14:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Is it an un-encyclopedic word? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.36.25.36 (talk) 14:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Are you still here?  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 15:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Please Dont Leave Me
Please Dont Leave Me has been confirmed as third single in Austalia so odnt delete it plz. (Hence31 (talk) 06:44, 17 January 2009 (UTC))


 * You have provided no sources to say that this is the next single. Airplay is not a criteria for indicating new singles.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 10:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Edit to Pink; Jew and catholic
Regarding your edit summary, I believe it would be perfectly possible to be both Jewish and Catholic; one could be an ethnic Jew, brought up to be religiously Catholic, or converted to Catholicism. However as the Catholic categories are nonexistent, I believe the point is moot.

Cheers, Rogerb67 (talk) 21:14, 19 January 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks for the FYI. I'm sure it is possible but it just seemed to be added with no explanation at all, hence my revert of it.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 23:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar of Diligence

 * Wow, many thanks! :)  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 11:06, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

= February 2009 =

First Leicester
it is confusing when you read it in the sections for two services together! first leicester the 38/38A services are easy to read but the 14/14A & 88/88A are hard to read because they are joined up if you get what i mean thanks ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.127.20 (talk) 20:42, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Perhaps you'd like to discuss your edits - you've made a number of controversial changes that have been reverted (both on your IP and on your username). Please discuss any further edits you want to make on the talk page beforehand.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 21:11, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Your comments...
If you read carefully, I was trying to give a polite warning to the other user - it was not an attack on either user, but as I had been on the receiving end of what I felt was a harsh attack, wanted to help and advise a fellow user. I was concerned that he/she might get banned or whatever for carrying on the discussion...No attack intended, trying to help avoid conflict Professor J Lawrence (talk) 22:36, 24 February 2009 (UTC)


 * It looked like an attack to me, and it could have been understood by others as being that way. The best way to avoid conflict is not to make remarks like that behind other editor's backs, even if you thought it was a polite warning. Yes, Rodhullandemu can be a bit harsh at times, but he would not block anyway (as far as I'm aware anyway) for carrying on an innocent discussion. That is why I removed your comment and good faith warned you.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 22:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm....So why, on my first "mistake" do I get a vandalism charge for something that is beyond dispute (Victoria Beckham's implants)- unless you think she suddenly grew three cup sizes? Anyway, the crime has been reduced to a good faith error after A LOT of grovelling on my part. If you do not take my or rodhull's part, but just look at the effect on the poster, my comment may have helped keep him out of trouble. My feelings and rodhull's are immaterial - the end result (or hoped-for result - a minor editor not getting in hot water) - is a greater good, which is what I was hoping for Professor J Lawrence (talk) 21:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * When you've been in this business as long as Rodhullandemu has been (and to a certain extent, myself), you tend to jump on people quickly without assuming good faith. You would probably have to take the broader view to understand why it happened - if you were the third or so person to add that information without sourcing it, I can understand why he would slap you with a vandalism warning. He shouldn't have, but I can understand his perspective.
 * While I know that your comment was in good faith, I did still consider it somewhat disparaging towards Rodhullandemu. However, I hope you understand why what happened happened.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 22:45, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

= March 2009 =

Ting Tings article
A minor point (and a little miffed to be flagged up as vandal, but is not so important), but the ref gives De Martino's age as 34, and the article is dated Oct 2008, and from that I deduced a date of birth of 1974. The article is currently the (seemingly accepted) ref for Katie White's date of birth (which again isn't mentioned directly in the article, but her age is), so why is it an ok reference for her age, but not his age? thanks. Khcf6971 (talk) 20:44, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "And White's driving licence – which she has to produce when a Seattle barman asks for proof of her age – shows that she was indeed born in 1983." That is why we can use it to reference White's year of birth. However, deducing De Martino's as being 1974 from that article is original research.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 21:18, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I appreciate that (and thank you for replying), but the relevant section on the original research is probably Routine calculations : "This policy does not forbid routine calculations, such as adding numbers, converting units, or calculating a person's age, provided editors agree that the arithmetic and its application are correct." You don't think this applies here, or is it only allowed to be in one direction  - ie age from dob, rather than dob from age?  Khcf6971 (talk) 21:28, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, considering we have scripts to convert date of births to ages, I'd say that DOB to age is OK (especially as it is explicitly mentioned). However, I'm still sceptical about the age to DOB. While it says that that article was writing at a certain time, how are we to know it isn't a copy of an earlier article or written at another time? I'm probably being pedantic, but they are valid concerns.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 21:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well fair enough, thanks for the chat - "vandalism" still seems a little strong, though. Khcf6971 (talk) 22:07, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, that's the content of the warning message I used, not something that I have much control over. The "welcome" warning message wouldn't have been appropriate (which probably doesn't say it is vandalism).  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 22:24, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Loretta in Hollyoaks
Hi, I noticed that you keep un-doing my edit about Hollyoaks character, Loretta Jones. Why is this? ---Elliethomson (talk) 11:20, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * As I sourced, the Hollyoaks page says her name is Loretta, not Loretta Jones. Do you have a source to show her name is actually Loretta Jones?  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 10:14, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I do not have a source sorry but in one of this weeks episodes she handed a flyer to another character with her name, Loretta Jones, on it. Hollyoaks are usually late in updating their website and this may be the reason why it does not give her full name. ---Elliethomson (talk) 11:20, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I now have a source - http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/tv/soaps/article2170685.ece ---Elliethomson (talk) 11:20, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I consider the Sun a pretty dubious source, and would prefer that you stuck to the name provided by Channel 4. Yes, they may be slow at updating their site, but it is a primary source.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 11:44, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Breaking into someone else's discussion, but is IMDB also regarded as dubious? http://us.vdc.imdb.com/name/nm3027039/ Khcf6971 (talk) 13:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd think so, especially since she is credited as "Lorraine" in one entry!  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 14:12, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes perhaps but it is the same with character "Harry Hutchinson", who appeared last week, he was credited as "Harry". Besides I think Loretta's name on Hollyoaks being shown as Loretta Jones is a primary source aswell.---Elliethomson (talk) 22:26, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Where has it been shown on Hollyoaks that her name is Loretta Jones?  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 22:48, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

In an episode shown last week, Loretta handed another character a flyer promoting her lap-dancing, this had the name "Loretta Jones" on it.--Elliethomson (talk) 21:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Springwatch
Yes, it was announced that blah blah blah. But you know what? I'm sick and tired of trying to help and having people like you remove perfectly good information. So screw it. --79.79.250.197 (talk) 11:05, 19 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, your information wasn't sourced, so I removed it. See WP:NOR for details.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 16:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Hollyoaks
''Hi. I felt that your edits to Hollyoaks were unconstructive, and didn't warrant the removal of the copyedit tag. As such, I've reverted them and restored the tag. [ジャム] [ t -  c  ] 17:02, 20 March 2009 (UTC)''

Removing a tag is not vandalism, nor was there anything vandalistic about my rather trivial edits. You really should choose your words more carefully as an accusation of vandalism is not a trivial thing. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 18:40, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Vandalism was probably too strong a term, but your edits were still unconstructive - there is no need to unnecessarily split up sentences.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 18:56, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Locations in Tomb Raider: Underworld
Hello James, I recently noticed that in the Tomb Raider: Underworld article, there isn't a listing of the different locations Lara goes to. Someone wanting to find out this information has to read the plot which could spoil details about the game. Therefore, I have been creating a work-in-progress location section on my sandbox. I want you to take a look and see if you think it would fit the article? Neutralle 13:17, 21 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey Neutralle. I've had a quick look at the page you linked me to, and it looks to be coming along well. Since it is considered that WP will contain spoilers details, that probably explains why no-one has got around to creating an (effectively) spoiler-less levels section. I think once you've completed that page, it should be fine to slot it into the article.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 14:47, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

XLinkBot RevertList
Actually, fundable.com was there originally before you overwrote it in this edit:. No big deal about the order though! --AbsolutDan (talk) 23:45, 22 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, bugger! Sorry about that...  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 07:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * No worries at all! Cheers --AbsolutDan (talk) 11:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Sure Radio
Mate, I appreciate your continued interest in the Sure Radio page.

However, we cannot improve it if you keep on undoing any changes we make to it. We are also unable to reference any new material we put in because by the time we get round to referencing it, you've already undone our revisions.

Please stop doing this.

You may consider what we do to the page as "vandalism", but the feeling is more than reciprocated towards you. The thing which stands us in a better position than yourself is that we are the management of the station, whereas to my knowledge you are not. If you feel the need to query this in any way (should you deem this unfair), feel free to come down to the Media Hub in the Students' Union at any time and we will be more than happy to discuss this with you.

Thanks,

Ben —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cockerney (talk • contribs) 22:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your message. However, whether you are the management of the station or not, any edits you make should be referenced at the point you add them - see WP:NOR and WP:RS. You should probably read WP:FIVE too. I'm not against constructive edits being made to the page, but unreferenced and incomplete information isn't really constructive, and doesn't help to make Wikipedia better.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 22:57, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

James,

Some of the information in that table recently added is found within the main article, yet you see it fit not to delete that. Again, I invite you down to the Media Hub to have a talk about this.

For the time being, I would appreciate it if you could leave the Sure Radio page alone as no-one else seems to have a problem with it whilst we're developing the content. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cockerney (talk • contribs) 22:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


 * If you wish to develop the page, the best place to do that is in your sandbox. Then, when the article is ready to be updated, and meets all the relevant guidelines (as I pointed out above), you can merge or replace the content as necessary.
 * Please also remember that you don't own the Sure Radio page - if the content doesn't meet our guidelines, editors are welcome to remove it. This isn't my guideline, but the guideline of Wikipedia. I have (in the past) tagged the page as lacking sources, but never got around to removing the unsourced material. If you wish to source it, be my guest.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 23:21, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

reply to warning
This site id useless, you true to post true information and you keep removing and no help in how I can keep it up there!!!!!!!!! This site is more than happy to keep false information though!!!!!!

Great this site is really helpful!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Didismithjones (talk • contribs) 12:28, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * You have to cite a reliable source. Citing "Fascination Records" isn't valid, because we can't all ring up or email Fascination to confirm this. Unless you have a proper source, it will have to stay as it is.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 12:30, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Holly har
A warning you left for another user is being discussed here. --Onorem♠Dil 13:30, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I've made my comments regarding this here.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 16:15, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Please be aware that the edits made by this user in no way come close to meeting the definition of vandalism on Wikipedia. Leaving a vandalism warning in such a situation, especially one that immediately jumps to a threat of blocking, is wholly inappropriate. Furthermore, it's not exactly helpful to make accusations of edit warring when your own edits on The Ting Tings would also constitute edit warring. You're supposed to discuss these things in a sane and rational way, not throw out accusations and threats. DreamGuy (talk) 13:34, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll agree that I jumped the gun, but as I said, that user must have seen our (not just mine) comments regarding why this image was inappropriate, and only decided to act after being warned and reverting four times.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 16:15, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

= April 2009 =

Looks and Smiles (the movie)
You may have forgotten the existence of the Ken Loach movie (from the novel by Barry Hines). I've created a page for it. WDH59510 (talk) 21:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I knew nothing about this film, and there was nothing on the linked page, which is why I removed it.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 21:39, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

pidgen edit
I did provide a reason for the edit, and it was done for a good reason, please read it again —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.11.74.112 (talk) 22:19, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, but your reason was invalid - it isn't an April Fool's joke. That is why I've re-instated the information.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 23:04, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Lara Croft References
Thanks for satisfying my idea about making that list collapsible. --TudorTulok (talk) 19:27, 9 April 2009 (UTC)


 * No worries - as I said, it makes sense due to the number of references.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 19:38, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Assassin's Creed 2
Dude, you vandalized what I wrote ! The only "speculative" part of what I wrote is that the drawings "seem to confirm the location and era" for the sequel. The rest is not speculation ! If I were as fluent in Wikipedia as you are, I would revert your edit and label it as "vandalism". Please consult the reference, and see for yourself that my edit is not speculation. For the sake of the guidelines, however, I will not include "seem to confirm the location and era" this time. Thank you, and please discuss before vandalizing and reverting edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marc-Olivier Pagé (talk • contribs) 20:09, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Do you dispute the fact that this is a flash animation, and not a trailer per se ? And do you dispute the fact about the mirror-imaged words at the end ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marc-Olivier Pagé (talk • contribs) 20:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

There, I have removed all which could be considered speculation from my post, including the date on which the teaser was put up. Please discuss before reverting. Much appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marc-Olivier Pagé (talk • contribs) 20:15, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

And in the future, rather than reverting an entire post, why don't you try to improve the post, by removing the speculative parts yourself ? That would be much more constructive than to simply revert the entire post. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marc-Olivier Pagé (talk • contribs) 20:29, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * There was nothing about my edit that was vandalism. Teaser trailer is more appropriate than flash animation because, for the most part, it is a trailer video. I reverted your edit because "this seems" isn't really appropriate language, and speculation about the Game Informer reference (until confirmed) isn't appropriate either (see WP:CRYSTAL).  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 21:36, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm just saying that deleting an entire post rather than improving it is vandalizing my effort. My addition was in good will. I feel as though you are on a powertrip because you are so fluent and experienced in Wikipedia, and so you revert my entire post, as if what I wrote was nonsensical and utterly useless. I agree that "this seems" is not appropriate language for Wikipedia, and I agree with you that speculation about the Game Informer reference (until confirmed) isn't appropriate either. Please consider the latest version of my post, which only states facts. If you did look at the teaser in its entirety, you will see that it is not "for the most part" a video, but merely a static image which the camera slowly glides over. It certainly doesn't follow the format of a trailer. Perhaps we can compromise and simply call it a teaser ? We don't have to specify whether it's a trailer or a flash animation (and perhaps we will never agree about the difference between trailer and flash animation).--Marc-Olivier Pagé (talk) 22:04, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The current edit seems OK. I've added "In April 2009", with a fact tag, because it makes it sounds better, although I'd prefer that to be sourced (it could have been there since February, we don't know...) This is probably original research, but the main content of the teaser is actually a movie file (link), so I don't think it really qualifies as a Flash animation.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 22:24, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Excellent. I agree with you that adding April 2009 makes it more credible and relevant. And you're totally right that it may have been there since February and we just didn't know. Actually, I searched the Ubisoft website and the Assassin's Creed website, and nowhere could I find a link to the AC2 teaser section ! I'm just gonna change the uppercase "A" to a lowercase now, after the "In April 2009,". Thanks for discussing this with me. Oh, I also have a question, which I'm sure you'll be able to answer : When I make an edit to a page, how do I add a comment in parentheses to explain the edit, which will only show up on the edit history tab of the page ? Thanks !


 * That capital A is probably my mistake from when I added the April bit. I didn't intend to get at you when you added that section, just that it didn't seem appropriate to me which is why I reverted it. I'm glad we've managed to work it out.
 * Regarding the edit history "comments", they are what is called an edit summary. If you fill in the box at the bottom of the editing window (the bit marked "edit summary"), it will add that to the history so that other editors will know what you did in more detail.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 23:03, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks man !--Marc-Olivier Pagé (talk) 23:19, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

I can see how that is a flawed voting system. How's THIS for a unanimous and fair vote? (8-0 and counting). Do you know how to appeal my case to un-protect the AC2 page? Thanks, GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 03:52, 14 April 2009 (UTC)


 * As I've already said, voting should not really be used when discussing articles (see WP:VOTE). I have nothing against splitting the article as long as there is enough information to support it. Also, as I've now said three times, take it to DRV.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 08:12, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Canvassing AC2
Thank you for directing me to CANVAS. I had no idea what I was doing was against WP policy. I appreciate your help and will correct my behavior acoordingly. Thank you, GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 01:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Not a problem - please remember it in future if you decide to try and build consensus around an issue. The number of people shouting won't do anything if they've all been canvassed beforehand to shout a certain way.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 09:11, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
I was about to address all the pointy, inappropriate edits made by Antiedman when I saw you'd beat me to it. Thanks so much. Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:09, 17 April 2009 (UTC)


 * No worries. I saw their strikeout of their userpage and then the Angelina talk page, so decided to go ahead and revert their dicky edits.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 09:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Out of Control setlist
''Hi. I removed your addition of the set list to the Out of Control Tour page because Twitter is not a reliable source. Once a newspaper prints the set list, then it can be added to the page. [ジャム] [ t -  c  ] 21:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)''

Hi. I see what you mean about Twitter not being a reliable source, but in this situation it is quite obvious that someone is at the concert (an enthusiastic fan) who is just telling other fans about the setlist. I am taking this information and putting in the article, as it is quite clearly correct. It smarts a bit of a busybody-ness in deleting the setlist purely because of a concrete "Twitter is not reliable" rule. Every situation should be looked at individually.--Speedway (talk) 21:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but until the set list is reliably published, it can't go in the article. We also have no way of knowing it is "quite clearly correct" - I could join Twitter now and post a completely different set list - which would you choose then? Fan published sources aren't reliable, especially where we have no accurate point of reference.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 21:40, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I feel quite sorry for you.--Speedway (talk) 21:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, and why is that?  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 21:44, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I feel sorry for any busybody. Clearly something is missing in your fulfilment of life to be concentrating energy on really, quite minor details like this in an internet encyclopaedia. I hope you find your path one day!--Speedway (talk) 21:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, thanks for the advice but I think I'm doing fine. Perhaps you'd like to concentrate on finding proper sources for things you add to this encyclopaedia?  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 21:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I went to the Out of Control Tour concert tonight (sorry, no way of proving this, I've got my Ticketmaster booking reference though?) and I made some changes to the running order of the setlist, which the Sun incorrectly provided - they provided the right songs, but in the wrong order. Is that okay?Speedway (talk) 00:13, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but personal experience isn't a valid source either. Someone else made some changes, but I've reverted them to the one the Sun provided. Unless someone else provides a more correct set list (one that satisfies WP:RS) it needs to stay with the list as provided by the Sun.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 13:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Toby Gard
Hello, I removed the link to Mobygames as it provided no additional information that wasn't already better represented on IMDB. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.21.34 (talk) 09:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Underworld extended ending
Hey. I noticed your recent revert on |this edit. Not sure how it can be sourced, but here is a video to prove it exists: Youtube video  Neu  tralle  21:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for somewhat clarifying that. However, we'd need a proper source to confirm this. While I don't doubt it's genuine (although it's the first I've heard of it), YouTube isn't a reliable source.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 23:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

User:Talk pages
That user is one of the endless socks of the banned User:Ron liebman. I'll post it at AIV unless someone else zaps it first. :) Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 23:20, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, thanks for that. I thought there was something odd about their behaviour.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 23:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Admin got him. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 23:35, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I just noticed when I thought I'd check their other contributions.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 23:42, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

= May 2009 =

Linking tour dates
Don't take the links of of the tour dates. I link them because it allows the wiki system to switch them around when necessary. IHelpWhenICan (talk) 23:32, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Per MOS:UNLINKDATES, dates shouldn't be linked unless the linked article actually serves some purpose to the article. In these cases, the only reason you are linking them is to provide autoformatting, which is now deprecated (and, as far as I'm aware, will disappear at some point in the future). Please don't re-link the dates.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 08:33, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that. Read an old guide. Someone needs to change it... IHelpWhenICan (talk) 20:13, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, for the most part, it isn't an official standard. There are likely to be guidelines floating around that say it is OK to link dates. The official guidance at the moment (as far as I'm aware) is that you shouldn't link them if they aren't already (or unlink them if they are).  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 20:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I found the info in the Wiki MOS. IHelpWhenICan (talk) 21:02, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright information
Re File:Pidgin screenshot.png please see the reply I left, Lotus Dev. Corp. v. Borland Int'l, Inc., and Look and feel. Tothwolf (talk) 09:16, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Talkpage
Hey. I was wondering if I could essentially 'borrow' the tags you have at the top of this page? I would of course change them somewhat. I feel I need to notices to direct people that visit my talk page, and I like the look of these. Thanks :)  Neu  tralle  09:58, 9 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Feel free to. Obviously you're allowed to borrow whatever you want from my page (GFDL and all that) but I appreciate you asking beforehand :).  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 10:05, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Revert on Wine (software)
Regarding this edit: the edit you reverted did contain some nonsense (presumably pasted accidentally), but also contained a significant improvement to the article (changing an unsourced accusation into a more neutral, sourced statement). Please be careful not to completely revert partially-good edits that are somewhat broken (like including a line of nonsense). Thanks. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 12:23, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks for the heads-up. I'll be more careful in future.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 13:17, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Twitter-tweetup revision from May 6
I realize that many changes on Wikipedia article are subjective, I politely disagree with your removing of Tweetups on the Twitter article (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Twitter&oldid=288229294). Yes, real-world, face to face meetings are not notable. However, it is still unusual when online tools like Twitter that tend to keep people at their computers create a way to get users to really be social -- in real life. I would argue that tweetups are notable. Are ther Facebook meetups? or Blog meetups? or Wiki-meetups? Conferences yes. Meetups? Not so much. --Glasscity09 (talk) 12:53, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * You need to find sources that back up your assertion that tweetups are notable, and as I said on the talk page, that section is far too small to exist on its own. If it was properly sourced, it could be integrated into a relevant section in the article.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 19:24, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life
That wasn't a test edit, I moved the picture down so that there wouldn't be a massive white space before the text started. Did you even look at the edit before reverting? --Tainted Conformity (talk) 19:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I did look and to me it made no difference. Appending an image to the end of a sentence isn't really appropriate, and neither is placing it in the middle of a section. That's why I thought it was a test edit and reverted it.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 19:34, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, just out of curiosity, do you not see the white space on your monitor? The only reason it was stuck to the end of the sentence is because if it was on it's own line, the code would have changed the spacing on the list, making it look off.  Honestly, a small bit of messy code is worth making the part users see more presentable.  --Tainted Conformity (talk) 19:42, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * It looks absolutely fine to me, so I suspect it must be a browser rendering issue (I'm using Firefox 3). I don't think there are any guidelines about where images should be placed within a section, although it seems the general consensus is to place them at the start of sections or paragraphs. To me, placing it at the end of a line of text doesn't make sense.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 00:07, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * That explains it. I Wiki from work, so I'm stuck using Explorer.  Thanks for the information, I'll have to keep it in mind for future edits.   --Tainted Conformity (talk) 19:01, 29 May 2009 (UTC)


 * No worries. It wouldn't surprise me if it is an IE problem, and there isn't a lot we can do to fix that (well, not use IE, but if you're accessing WP from work, I guess you're stuck with it).  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 19:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

= June 2009 =

Mr. And Mrs.
I was just on a couple of pages on Wikipedia and noticed on the page for Mr. and Mrs. that a user called Darkness2005 has erased a lot off the page in the space of one day. I know he has seperated the show by country of origin but he has not put back all the information that was on the original page. I have also noticed that he has a lot of warnings on his talk page. Can you look into this? I am not sure how to proceed. Thanks!70.31.220.28 (talk) 07:36, 2 June 2009 (UTC) samusek2


 * Thanks for your message. I don't think there was any point splitting the article, because there isn't enough content regarding the Canadian version to make it stand alone like that. I've reverted the changes and notified Darkness2005.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 08:30, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Re: False positives Editnotice
Reply to: ''Hi Hersfold. Just wondering if you could make a slight edit to this. Basically, could you ask people not to sign on their username? I've seen quite a lot of reports to the false positives page where people break the template because they've signed their username. [ジャム] [ t -  c  ] 08:19, 6 May 2009 (UTC)''


 * Done. Took me a while to find the edit notice, though - apparently they've moved some things around in the past month. Sorry this took so long to handle, I've been out for a while. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 16:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * No worries, thanks for updating it.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 18:15, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

openid and facebook
hello, i noticed you removed my edits about openid and facebook today, but the truth is, only google and certain openid providers will work. yahoo will not work. openid 1.1 will not work.

please try it yourself to verify. if you agree, please undo your change. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.176.222.86 (talk) 00:23, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't have a Yahoo or OpenID 1.1 provider to try, and personal experience isn't a reliable source. Unless you can find a source that explicitly says it doesn't work, it should really stay as it is.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 08:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Lara Croft Deletion
I did not get Lara's Early Life from the web. That was my own words. Please undo the correction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SolidSnake85 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but that early life section reads very much like a copied but re-worded version of her pre-Legend biography.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 08:19, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Anyway, that part of her life is detailed in the 1996-1999 section of the article - it doesn't need its own section.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 08:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Guy Burnet
Hi there,

I realised that twice when i have attempted to remove a piece of my information from my page you re-instated it.?

If you dont mind I would prefer to leave that particular section edited in the way I have.

Thank you Guy b —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.133.127.151 (talk) 02:57, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but you don't own the article. It is a well-sourced piece of text, and there is no particular reason why it shouldn't be there. If you feel so strong about it, you can start a discussion on the article talk page and attempt to gain consensus for it being removed. If, however, you continue to remove it without explanation, you'll be blocked for disruptive editing.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 07:13, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Are you for real? Im the person! its about me; i gave the interview for that article and its incorrect. Now, why does my life bother you in such a way?? I dont know what 'article talk page' is and i dont wish to gain any momentum for a consensus because i dont have the time. If you could kindly adhere to my small edit within the page then i would greatly appreciate it. regards GUY BURNET —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.133.127.151 (talk) 07:28, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * If you are, as you claim, Guy Burnet, then you have a conflict of interest and you shouldn't really be editing the page anyway. I'm merely trying to maintain the article, and your edits (until you started discussing it) were disruptive.
 * As I'm not quite sure where to go with this personally, I'm going to refer it to the BLP noticeboard and ask them for advice. Until then, please refrain from removing the content on the article.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 07:40, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

edit
What did you mean exactly? All the info in Scimitar game engine was also in Anvil game engine. Anvil had more info right? Mallerd (talk) 19:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, it might have had, but Anvil was a copy-paste version of the Scimitar page. At the time, I was getting the Anvil page removed so I could move over the Scimitar page and preserve the history.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 21:33, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank You
I just wanted to let you know I gave you a branstar award on your userpage for your help on Assassin's Creed II. I appreciate you teaching me more about Wikipedia. Thanks again. GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 05:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much. I'm glad I could help :).  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 07:23, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

= July 2009 =

Chincilla
Hi, as you are one of the main editors of Chinchilla I thought you'd be interested in knowing that has nominated it at FAC. FuzzyPandaBear does not seem to have had any direct input into the article, so I am concerned about the user's ability to address concerns raised in the FAC and about the article's readiness. Happy editing, Nev1 (talk) 10:27, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi. Thanks for the notification. I had seen the FA nomination briefly during my evening/early morning trawls of vandalism etc. etc. As Juliancotton put it, it certainly looks like a "drive-by nomination", which means it is more than likely to fail. At this present moment, I can't really expend much energy on editing articles up to GA/FA, but I'll help with little bits where I can.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 20:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, as FuzzyPandaBear didn't seem to have edited the article, "drive-by nomination" seems to fit perfectly. I thought that at least the most frequent editors would like to be notified. I'll be honest though, I can't see it passing this time round as there are too many issues (with formatting and comprehensiveness), and Sandy or Karanacs will probably archive the nomination next time they run through FAC. Nev1 (talk) 20:27, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I suppose it is the thought that counts (obviously they think it's a good article), but it seems a bit of a waste of time if the article is never going to pass the FA criteria. I appreciate you letting me know anyway.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 21:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Editing Timur Kuran's page
Dear Sir/Madam,

I have been told that I need to exercise caution over updating Professor Kuran's webpage because of a conflict of interest arising from the fact that I work for him. I am not seeking to promote a particular viewpoint, nor do I enter into any controversies, I am simply giving an impartial account of Professor Kuran's ideas and a list of his publications. Please allow my edits to stand and remove the previous profile.

Yours Sincerely

Charles A Miller —Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlesArthurMiller (talk • contribs) 21:50, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Sexy! No no no...
Aah, okay. I figured it would be more accurate and therefore more widely accepted as an article name. If you wish to revert it, I'll trust you know what you're talking about, as I've not even heard the song and was just trying to improve the wiki. Mnmazur (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:13, 8 July 2009.

Map Images
''Why have you just tagged a load of self-made images for deletion? Specifically, the area maps for South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire? I can see no logical reason for it and so have reverted your edits to these pages and images. [ジャム] [ t -  c  ] 05:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC)''

Images were seemingly unsourced- If they were from a Commons image or from the uploader concerned, please indicate this.

If removing unsourced images is no longer policy then please point me to the relevant discussion Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:45, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * As far as I know, the images were created by the uploader. As the uploader hasn't be on Wikipedia for a time, it will be difficult to know where they got them from unless something has been said before. The images have now been transferred to Commons anyway.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 11:46, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * OK I'll de-tag these pending more information being added, can you consider moving the other map digrams/images of the user concerned?

Note: ideally this should be converted over to SVG. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:48, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

=August 2009=

Edits to Supertram (Sheffield)
I apologise - I misunderstood what edit you had made as it was almost simultaneously edited by another person (Keith D). I wrote a reply to you here that was in effect a reply to Keith D. I have now removed my message to you from here - you can discard this

andy

andy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andy422001 (talk • contribs) 11:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Haylie Ecker
Dear JGXenite,

I notice that you have edited my wikipedia entry and then re-edited the corrections I have made. Please can you explain to me why you are doing this?

I look forward to hearing from you,

Haylie Ecker

haylie_ecker@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haylieecker (talk • contribs) 22:12, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * As I mentioned on your talk page, I believe you have a conflict of interest so shouldn't really be editing the page. The edits also appeared to introduce unnecessary detail that doesn't really need to be in that page. That is why I reverted your edits.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 22:28, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Invite
Hey, myself and User:Raintheone have decided to consider a creation of a Wikiproject for Hollyoaks, mainly to improve articles to a higher standard. I just thought I would ask if you would consider joining, if you don't that's fine but I just thought I would ask. If you do decide to, then please add your username to the 'support' section on WikiProject Council/Proposals/Hollyoaks. Thanks :)  Who niverse 93  talk?  14:57, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey, thanks for the invite. At present, I'm editing on a very reduced basis, mostly because I'm working during the week. I've also fallen a bit out of touch with Hollyoaks (I'm about two weeks behind at present, although I'm catching up!) If you fancy having someone as an advisor, maybe part-time editor, then I'd consider joining although I can't commit to patrolling articles all the time :).  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 17:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh yeah that would be fine. It's just trying to get as much support for it as possible and hopefully Hollyoaks will get the project. Thanks  Who niverse 93  talk?  20:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I've put my name forward - good luck with the proposal!  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 22:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah thanks :)  Who niverse 93  talk?  22:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Out of Control Tour
Do not say that I am vandalising that page.

The set list is incorrect and I provided 2 sources to prove this, both of which you said were unreliable. "Broken Strings" is performed on the B-Stage after "Untouchable" and before "Love is Pain". This can be seen in numerous videos on YouTube, the Girls Aloud: Out of Control TV special on Sky1 and on various set list websites and fan forums. The one forum page I used as a reference is just one of these. Every other forum page says exactly the same.

Furthermore, I saw the show twice when it was in Glasgow and "Broken Strings" is performed on the B-Stage.

Therefore, do not threaten me with a ban from editing. I am a reliable editor as my history will prove and doing so is a pathetic, immature way of dealing with you not being right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuart1000 (talk • contribs) 12:26, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I know that the set list is incorrect, but the MEN article is the only reliable source. Forums are not reliable and set list websites are not reliable (fan contributed). It is possible that the Sky1 programme could be used as a reliable source if sourced correctly. Otherwise it must stay as it is, as infuriating as it is.


 * I would not have had to resort to using a level 3 template if you had not reverted my edits without discussion first. I'm sorry it took such a warning to get you to discuss the issue with me.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 17:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Surely it is better to have unsourced correct information than to have sourced information that is incorrect?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuart1000 (talk • contribs) 08:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)


 * You would think so, but I can't find anything that advocates that position. Everything must be sourced and verifiable (WP:RS and WP:V) and personal experience (which is what you and everyone else who changes it without a source is "citing") is not allowed (WP:NOR).  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 18:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

John Paul McQueen and Craig Dean
I noticed you stayed out of recent talk page discussion about this article, as well as its deletion debate, probably because it was no big deal. I want to state that I do appreciate you watching this article, though, as well as other related articles...and your fighting vandalism on Wikipedia in general. Flyer22 (talk) 00:04, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Coming back to say I just read what you stated right above this section about being on a reduced editing basis and such. Flyer22 (talk) 00:07, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hey, thanks for your message - your comments are much appreciated. Yeah, I'm on a reduced editing basis at present. I had seen the deletion debate, but hadn't had chance to respond initially, and then saw that you lot had it under control.  [ジャム] [ t  -  c  ] 17:50, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. Just thanks for having helped out as much as you have. Flyer22 (talk) 19:31, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

=September 2009=

The Graham Norton Show
Hi JGXenite,

A very belated reply to your earlier dispute and revert:

We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to The Graham Norton Show, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses novel, unpublished syntheses of previously published material. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your information. Thank you. [Jam] [talk] 09:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I believe some facts are self-evident. Furthermore, applying the same policy, many more paragraphs of the article lack references. I do not want to start a flame or perhaps a discussion that has already been done in great lengths earlier and elsewhere, but I do feel your your comment was random. --Martixer (talk) 05:22, 24 October 2009 (UTC)