User talk:JayJasper/Archive 4

Charlie Chaplin GA Review
You are getting this notice as you are a significant contributor to Charlie Chaplin. The WP:Good Article Review of Charlie Chaplin has been put on hold for seven days to allow time for the article to be sourced. Reference sources can be found on the "Find sources" notice on the talkpage. Further comments can be found at Talk:Charlie Chaplin/GA1. Any questions please ping my talkpage.  SilkTork  *YES! 02:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Progressive think tanks based in the United States
I have nominated progressive think tanks based in the united states for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Rd232 talk 10:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
 * 1) Proposal to Close This RfC
 * 2) Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip  02:20, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Excellent editor
JayJasper, you are an excellent editor. Do you have any desire to be an administrator? --William S. Saturn (talk) 23:19, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I greatly appreciate the compliment, but have no desire to be an administrator at this point. Thank you for asking, though. BTW, you are a rather damn good editor yourself!--JayJasper (talk) 18:39, 21 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks Jay. --William S. Saturn (talk) 19:04, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Opinion needed!
As a frequent editor of American politics, I would appreciate if you put your two cents into the debate over the conservative support for President Obama in Talk:Public image of Barack Obama. Thanks.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 22:44, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Peer review/Bob Barr presidential campaign, 2008/archive1
Bob Barr presidential campaign, 2008 is currently under peer review. As a frequent editor of the page, comments would be appreciated. Thanks. --William S. Saturn (talk) 23:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Planning Discussions Now Underway Regarding DC Meetup #10

 * You are receiving this message either because you received a similar one before and didn't object, or you requested to receive a similar one in the future. If you don't wish to receive this message again, then please let me know either on my talk page or here.
 * Please be advised that planning is now underway (see here) for DC Meetup #10. --NBahn (talk) 15:20, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

United States third party and independent presidential candidates, 2008
Would you mind if I made a few stylistic changes to United States third party and independent presidential candidates, 2008, in preparation for a possible FL nomination? --William S. Saturn (talk) 18:14, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Not at all. By all means, proceed.--JayJasper (talk) 18:17, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Input requested
Your input is requested at Talk:Bob Barr presidential campaign, 2008. Thank you.--William S. Saturn (talk) 22:39, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Notification
As an editor of Ross Perot presidential campaign, 1992, you may be interested to know that the article is currently a Featured article candidate at Featured article candidates/Ross Perot presidential campaign, 1992/archive1.--William S. Saturn (talk) 20:54, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Happy JayJasper's Day!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk  • 00:09, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I never saw this coming!--JayJasper (talk) 16:54, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Good job on reverting the ad tag on Thomas Sowell.
I just saw that you removed an erroneously placed advert tag from the Thomas Sowell article. Good job. Some editors appear to be displeased that the article includes much favorable information about Sowell. Their job, if that is what they feel, is to find reliable sources suitable for the biography of a living person to add to the article. It's great if the article fully reflects published, edited sources about Sowell's life and work. But you were quite right to remove a tag that seems to reflect the unsourced opinion of just one I.P. editor who didn't choose the most fitting article tag. Keep up the good work. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 21:47, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.--JayJasper (talk) 21:55, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Meetup/DC 11
Hey, just in case you missed it, there is an oppurtunity to get a free dinner this Tuesday August 11 and a chance to meet and hang out talk about WikiProject United States Public Policy and WP:GLAM/SI. Sorry that this is so late in the game, I was hoping the e-mail would be a better form of contact for active members (if you want to get on the e-mail list send me an User e-mail ). Hope that you can attend, User:Sadads (talk)11:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Bob Barr presidential campaign, 2008
I'm thinking about undergoing another FAC for Bob Barr presidential campaign, 2008. Would you be interested in co-nominating? --William S. Saturn (talk) 00:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I'd be glad to do that if you direct me to the link for the FAC. BTW, you've done excellent work on that article. Kudos!--JayJasper (talk) 18:49, 28 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Here is the link. --William S. Saturn (talk) 20:22, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thank you!--JayJasper (talk) 15:20, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

DC Meetup #12
An off-wiki discussion is taking place concerning DC Meetup #12. Watch this page for announcements.

—NBahn (talk) 04:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

P.S. You are receiving this message either because you received a similar one before and didn't object, or you requested to receive a similar one in the future. If you don't wish to receive this message again, then please let me know either on my talk page or here.

the Public Policy Initiative Assessment Team wants You!
Hi JayJasper,

I saw some of your contributions on several articles that fall within the scope of Wikiproject: United States Public Policy, your expertise in public policy and history would be valuable to the project, and I was hoping you would be interested in assessing articles with the | Public Policy Initiative. There is more info about assessment on the 9/13/2010 Signpost. If you're interested or just curious you can sign up on the project page or just contact me. Thanks! ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 23:36, 15 September 2010 (UTC) Sounds very interesting. Thanks for the invite.--JayJasper (talk) 16:32, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * JayJasper, welcome to the Public Policy Initiative Assessment Team. I am excited to get started, the discussion of project details will be on the | WP:USPP/Assessment Talk page. ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 22:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the link. I look forward to helping out with the project.--JayJasper (talk) 19:04, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for joining the PPI Assessment Team. There is a request for you to review some articles and a description of assessment logistics on the WP:USPP Assessment Page. ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 16:29, 23 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi JayJasper, recently you signed up to help with assessment on Wikiproject: United States Public Policy. This project is probably different than other assessment drives you have worked on, it involves more assessment of lower ranked articles, it has input and staff from the foundation, and specific goals to improve and measure content of public policy articles. It also involves collaboration from some university classes, we are using an experimental assessment rubric, and most articles will be assessed by multiple reviewers to get a range of scores for each article. It's a lot to digest, and totally understandable if it's not what signed up for. However, there are also some exciting perks to this project: 1) your assessments are part of research that is attempting to increase credibility of Wikipedia in academic circles, 2) there is a great group of assessors involved in discussion of what is article quality and how to measure it, 3) WP:USPP is also piloting the Article Feedback tool, so those involved in assessment on the project will be asked to help improve and rate this tool as well, 4) subject matter experts are assessing articles alongside Wikipedians and comparisons of results will provide some insight as to the rigor of Wikipedia quality rating, and 5) other interesting benefits you will find with participation.


 * The first group of articles requesting your assessment has been posted. I was hoping to do a preliminary comparison of the data on 8 October 2010. The second assessment request, which is part of the same comparison, will go out about the same time. To help with organization, if you haven't posted any assessment scores on your assessment page by 8 October 2010, I will delete your assessment request and you will not receive further requests. I hope the unusualness of this assessment research does not discourage your participation; if you are not interested working in the research I hope you will continue to assess articles within the project. If possible let me know on my talk page if you don't wish to be a part of the research, or perhaps if there was some confusion or bad communication; what the public policy team, and I, in particular, can do to make it more positive for volunteers. Remember, I am new to Wikipedia and trying to learn the best way to research this project, to hopefully integrate the amazing resource that is Wikipedia onto more university campuses and classrooms. Thanks, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 22:35, 4 October 2010 (UTC)


 * WP:USPP thanks you! And hopes you come back! hi JayJasper, thanks for contributing to article assessment in WP:USPP. Your continued involvement would be very appreciated. There is a second assessment request posted. There will be weekly updates about the research for this project posted here, look for the first one tomorrow. The next assessment request will come in early November. There is a lot of expertise and discussion about article quality happening in the project, so if you have any thoughts on the metric, or any ideas keeping project research exciting please let me know. ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 22:39, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi -- Amy Roth is now out on maternity leave (she had a healthy baby girl this weekend!) so I'll be filling in for a couple of months. (I'm LiAnna Davis, the Public Policy Initiative's communications associate.) I'd like to get the second assessment done this week if possible -- I've made some edits to give you direct links to the versions we'd like you to assess. Your page is here. Please let me know if you can't finish it by this weekend! Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks again for all your help! --Ldavis (Public Policy) (talk) 22:46, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the direct links, LiAnna. I look forward to working with you.--JayJasper (talk) 15:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi ! Since Amy's out on maternity leave, I'm pushing out the next round of assessments she needs. This time, we're comparing your assessment to readers' assessments. And instead of us assigning your articles, we're letting you pick! The full list of topics is on a subpage of the Assessment tab on our WikiProject. Please choose 10 of the articles to assess. Use the link in the section title to go to the appropriate version of the article.

Also, as a thank you for all your help, I'd like to send you a small package of Wikipedia swag. Please email me your address.

Please let me know if you have any questions! --Ldavis (Public Policy) (talk) 21:43, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the info.--JayJasper (talk) 18:04, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia DC Meetup, October 23
You are invited to Wikipedia DC Meetup #12 on Saturday, October 23, 6pm at Bertucci's in Foggy Bottom. Special guests at this meetup will include Wikimedia CTO Danese Cooper, other Wikimedia technical staff and volunteer developers who will be in DC for Hack-A-Ton DC. Please RSVP on the meetup page.

You can remove your name from the Washington DC Meetups invite list at Meetup/DC/Invite/List.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:05, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Philip Wylie article
Almost none of these books have isbn numbers. I don't see any purpose in the isbn tag and I am going to delete it. GroveGuy (talk) 21:08, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay.--JayJasper (talk) 21:10, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Federal Gun Law
Jay, your contribution regarding the carry laws in each State is valuable. However, the article you keep adding it to is a page dealing specifically with Federal Laws. Would a link to the State law page not suffice? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MoonOwl2010 (talk • contribs) 07:05, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Point taken & noted. A link to the State page law would indeed suffice.--JayJasper (talk) 15:29, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Question
A question sir.

My name is Ian McKendrick, Campiagn Manager for the Greenspon 2012 Presidential Committee. I am curious as to why Mr. Greenspon's information is not able to be inputed into the 2012 Presidential Contenders listing.

We ARE reegistered with the Federal Election Commission, and Mr. Greenspon is presently going to several states for campaign purposes.

Ian McKendrick, Campaign Manager Greenspon 2012 Presidential Committee campaign@greenspon.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.45.101.210 (talk) 18:20, 28 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello Mr. McKendrick. Don't mean to be a thorn in your side by reverting your good faith edits, but the United States presidential election, 2012 page has standards set by a consensus of editors for inclusion of candidates. In the case of declared candidates like Mr. Greenspon, at least one reliable secondary source (as opposed to a primary source) is needed. If you are able to locate such a citation, then please feel free to add Mr. Greenspon's entry to the article. If you wish to discuss the criteria for inclusion with the page's editors, please do so on the article's talk page. I hope this has been helpful.--JayJasper (talk) 18:38, 28 October 2010 (UTC)


 * UPDATE:Mr. McKendrick, I'm pleased to inform you that I found this article from a Canadian newspaper that appears to meet Wikipedia's Reliable sources criteria, and have added Mr. Greenspon to 2012 election article as well as to the Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2012 page.--JayJasper (talk) 19:53, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of United States House of Representatives elections, 2012 for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article United States House of Representatives elections, 2012, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/United States House of Representatives elections, 2012 until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:39, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia DC Meetup 13
You are invited to Wikipedia DC Meetup #13 on Wednesday, November 17, from 7 to 9 pm, location to be determined (but near a Metro station in DC).

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can join the mailing list.

You can remove your name from future notifications of Washington DC Meetups by editing this page: Meetup/DC/Invite/List. BrownBot (talk) 13:42, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Third WP:USPP Assessment
Hi ! Thanks so much for your help on the Public Policy Initiative assessments. I really appreciate all your help -- we'll be in great shape when Amy gets back, thanks to all of your efforts! The next round of assessments is ready for you to review. Like the previous round, please pick 10 of the articles to review from the list, and it's especially critical that you use the version I've linked to for these.

This round measures the baseline quality of articles before our students started working on them. Many of these articles have undergone drastic revision already, so it may not be useful to leave comments about them on the talk pages. We'll be asking you to review the same set of articles once students have finished them too, so please be sure you're using the links provided so you're getting the versions immediately prior to when the students made their first edits. Ideally, these assessments should be completed by December 1.

I anticipate this taking a lot less time than previous rounds, as many of these articles are quite short. If you have extra time and want to help, please go back to round two and do a few more assessments -- especially on any articles that have only one or two assessments completed. I need a minimum of three assessments for each article, and some of the articles farther down the list still need attention.

Once again, thanks so much for your help and let me know if I can clarify anything at all! --Ldavis (Public Policy) (talk) 18:28, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!
I enjoy contributing to the project, and am happy to help. Much appreciation for the barnstar.--JayJasper (talk) 18:52, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

happy holidays from PPI
Thanks JayJasper, for all your work assessing articles with WP:USPP over the past few months. I will have some results to report to the assessment team in January. The next semester should be pretty exciting there are over 25 university classes signed up with the project. Your input is helping to gauge how successful the project is, not just at improving the quality of public policy articles, but at incorporating Wikipedia as a teaching tool and recruiting and retaining college students as editors. we still need you in 2011, but it will mostly be assessments of student articles. Currently, there is another round of assessments to look at the improvements students made to their articles. If possible please assess by 5 January 2011; these results will be presented at an international conference later in January! Have a wonderful holiday season, all the best, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 02:21, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the Holiday greeting. May you have a wonderful holiday season as well. I am happy to contribute to the project and hope it has much continued success.--JayJasper (talk) 02:29, 23 December 2010 (UTC)