User talk:Jared/archive1

What do you think?
What do you think of my page(s)?

Please write some quick feedback!

Thanks! JP06035 20:35, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I thought twice about it when I did it
''I don't think linking to a half-baked (quarter-baked?) list like that improves this article in any way. ''

I think that was a pretty rude thing to say considering I wasn't even the one who made the page. I thought a nice link to the page that I restored would be nice because I thought cleaning up the page and giving it a nice place in Wikipedia was the thing to do. Whether "half-baked" or not, something someone else worked hard on doing does not deserve to be just left out, especially by someone as trustworthy as a Wikipedia Administrator. After all, isn't that what Wikipedia is all about; its just a bunch of amateurs building upon the work of another amateur. In the future, don't go shunning the bad pages, rather fix them up like a true administrator should. &mdash;the preceding unsigned comment is by JP06035 (talk &bull; contribs) 22:02, January 29, 2006 (UTC)
 * This was in reference to this edit of mine, removing a newly-inserted link to List of famous people who died of pneumonia from Pneumonia, a Featured Article. I don't mind saying that the list, as it now stands, is a terrible article. I'm glad you are trying to improve it! It isn't rude to call a bad article a bad article. (The saying at WIkipedia is comment on the edit, not the editor.) But until it's a lot better than it is now, it hurts a good article like Pneumonia to have a prominent link to it.


 * By the way, you should sign talk page posts by typing four tildes ( ~ )


 * Still, I am sorry if my terse edit summary caused hurt feelings. Like I said, I'm glad you're working to improve Wikipedia. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:13, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Article tags
I'm not aware of a single page which lists every possible tag, but you may find the template useful. Warofdreams talk 20:05, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Gillette_stadium.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Gillette_stadium.JPG. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. -- Carnildo 09:57, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Naevus/ Birthmark
Sorry for reverting Birthmark. I can see that you put lots of effort into the formatting and merge. I agree that it was a horrible article as it stood. You seem to have got round to fixing the mess from the unmerge before I did. Thanks. Sorry for not getting to it faster. --Mike C | talk 02:08, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

One Away
Of course the Barker's Beauties were never men; of course, that has nothing to do with what was being discussed. The "ladies," or in the past, the "gentlemen" that the contestant asks for horns are the people in the show's sound effects booth. The line never had anything whatsoever to do with the models. 71.31.67.115 03:51, 4 February 2006 (UTC) (Steve Gavazzi)

vandalism
Please stop removing content from Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.

You have vandalised a wiki policy process.  

--CyclePat 17:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

You have vandlised the same article again. I understand it looks like awfull with all those labels. I can empathise that you are working on the article. But it is wiki procedure to keep them. The article you are working on will not be delete just like that it must go through the entire deletion process. I would say you have at least one week. If you look at the list they have to go through it may be 2 to 4 weeks before it gets reviewd for deletion. This is wiki process and I'm asking you to please respect it. --CyclePat 17:24, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Why don't you put the WP:CITE references/citations in the template instead of on the 50 odd pages. It seems like you may have found an interesting source that covers all of them. --CyclePat 17:37, 12 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Well... if you have a reference for all of these statistic from one source. Instead of just one source per page per fact. (ie.: adding this source to the article of 1924 http://www.olympic.org/uk/athletes/results/search_r_uk.asp )Then perhaps it may be time saving to simple incorperate the reference into the template that already happens to be on the 50 odd pages. ie.: Put you bibliorgraphy into Template:Olympic games medal count. sort of like what I did by adding the reference required, NPOV, delete, etc.
 * Secondly I would like to remove those anoying boxes but it goes against the principal of wikipolicy. People will give their opinion. I've seen occasions where similar information has been moved to wikisource. --CyclePat 17:49, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the AfD notice and other nonsense from the template. Since the accurate listings are usually available on the IOC website after the event I think calling WP:CITE is pointless at this stage. But Wikipedia is not designed to cover current events (Wikinews is that way >). Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] 19:28, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Olympic Citations
Hey please help me out, I've got the citation for the olympic metal pages, all you do is change the year in the URL.

Total Olympics medal count
Hey Jared, there is a bit of debate on the talk page concerning the Soviet Bloc states and their medal tallies. Feel free to verse your opinion on the subject. I felt that we should continue to count Russia and the USSR as separate entities as well as with East and West Germany since they each participated separately. Another user was claiming that the list was biased toward the US, so I was just trying to explain why that isn't so. Thanks for all your assistance in helping to keep the page from deletion! --Caponer 21:17, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure...I'll "be right there" haha. -- Jared  [T]/[C]\[P: O]/[@]\[+ ] 21:24, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I totally agree that there should be a universal convention on how to list the medal tables...or else anyone can dispute the counts and risk losing the tables altogether. One convention would squelch all of these separate debates and it would be nice to make the tables more uniform. --Caponer 21:59, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

My vote in The host nation should be highlighted in a different color. poll on Olympic conventions
Why do you keep changing my vote from support to neutral? Am I not allowed to vote in this poll?--Josilot 23:18, 20 February 2006 (UTC)