User talk:JayJay/Archive 3

Disney Channel (Kazakhstan)
About Disney Channel (Kazakhstan), before there was no sources, now there is, the speedy deletion might be may by a bot.

Also I've added good sources.--TBrandley (talk) 23:59, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay please do not remove the speedy delete tag though, instead write why you think the article should not be deleted on the talk page of the article, also you will need more sources.  Jay Jay Talk to me 00:04, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Declined speedy deletion of Aaron Homoki
Hi, I just wanted to drop a note on your talk page to let you know that I declined your speedy deletion nomination of Aaron Homoki. While I do agree with you that the article does not belong on Wikipedia, the article does not qualify for deletion under criterion A7 because the article does make an assertion of the subject's importance. As such, this should go through Articles for Deletion. — Preceding signed comment added by Cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 17:44, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Welcome!
-- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 16:12, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

ILGLaw
Hi, you voted at Articles for deletion/International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender &. We looked for sources and I posted a review of each of the sources which were found. The sources do not seem to be enough to pass GNG. Would you care to comment or to change your vote? Dingo1729 (talk) 06:00, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Request for comments
Hello, you are welcome to contribute to the following page.

WP:Requests for comment/TBrandley

Thanks.

Logical Cowboy (talk) 05:58, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I have tried many times to delete his articles he has made, but I don't now if that makes me trying to solve the dispute. Is putting I endorse your statements fine?  Jay Jay Talk to me 15:00, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

You have made extensive comments on the editor's talk page, including a plate of cookies and repeated links to WP policies. I warmly encourage to put yourself down as a certifier--just include links to at least two edits you have made on the editor's talk page. Note that without at least two certifiers, the case will be deleted. Thanks. Logical Cowboy (talk) 15:41, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay I put myself down as a certifier, did I do everything right?  Jay Jay Talk to me 16:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

That's awesome, thanks. Logical Cowboy (talk) 16:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject The Scoialist and anarchist critisims section is at least 50% wrong
I remember writing that. I didn't realize I created a new page and/or project. Sorry about that. :( --Sabre ball t c 12:51, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Jingshi Expressway
Hiya. I guess you were on change patrol when you reverted my edit. It wasn't a mistake. I explained it in the talk page. I mearged the relevent info into the article with the correct name, deleted everything on the old page and redirected it to the newer page. I'm going to do this again unless you have another reason. ShakyIsles (talk) 00:30, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry it was a mistake that I reverted it, so I reverted again. I apologize again.  Jay Jay Talk to me 00:36, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Sweet as. Good to see somebody is cheaking up on me. Keep up the good work. ShakyIsles (talk) 00:46, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Peter Laugesen
Excuse me but I dion't know what your playing at with your speedy deletion of the prominent Danish poet. mI would be grateful if you would be kind enough to explain your actions. I was busy working on that page, but now I must take a break because you have upset me so much that i do not want to lapse into incivility in response to this disruption,Leutha (talk) 20:42, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Jay Jay!


 * When you are addressing unfamiliar writers, please welcome them and offer to help.
 * You might have suggested moving the article to user-space until the translation was completed, and noted the BLP requirement that there be a reference, of course.


 * However, I would suggest your not nominating for speedy deletion newborn articles (especially not one minute after they are created), unless you first read them (for example, using Google translate). In this case, you could have easily found that 3 other Wikipedias have articles about an apparently nationally prominent writer who has been translated into English.


 * We all make mistakes. What is most troubling is that even in responding to an upset unfamiliar editor your tone was extremely rude. Making a self-centered demand ("prove to me") in broken English was worse than simply providing a gentle explanation of WP rules (English please, and new BLPs need one reliable source).
 * Please write the editor at her user page and if possible e-mail, and make amends. We don't want to lose good editors who have contributed to literary topics, an area where Wikipedia is very weak.
 * Thanks for your attention.
 * Sincerely, Kiefer .Wolfowitz 14:43, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I left this note on the talk page of the editor: Kiefer .Wolfowitz 14:54, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Jay Jay!
 * Please review the speedy deletions guidelines, which you again mis-cited, despite previous friendly notes from respected editors like Elen of the Roads and Chase me ladies that a brush up was in order.
 * The article did state that he was a member of the Danish Academy before you nominated it for speedy deletion. Your nomination came one minute after the article was created, which suggests that you did not even bother reading it. Moreover, the deletion-nomination was particularly bad because the article was obviously being translated into English.
 * Sincerely,  Kiefer .Wolfowitz 14:54, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay I'm sorry, clearly I make alot of mistakes that you like to point out. Although I don't get why you are bringing these issues several days later. I don't know what else to say because I don't want to rude.  Jay Jay Talk to me 21:28, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi JayJay!
 * I saw this exchange just today. (I read Danish (and Norwegian) so I try pay homage to the spirit of the Kalmar Union and help out other Scandinavians!) :)
 * Please just write a nice note that makes the editor feel good about editing. The editor understands that you probably were working late, and had just saved Wikipedia from a lot of BLP violations, for which you deserve high praise. It's just that editors get protective of their children articles, and some of us are sensitive.
 * Dealing with me is good practice for when you have a high-maintenance coworker! ;)
 * Cheers, Kiefer .Wolfowitz 21:34, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey JayJay!
I just came across you comment regarding the deletion of the iCarly Season 6 page. Well, you also had some confusion regarding the season labels because of what TV Guide has it listed, but I just wanted to clear something you with you. The show's seasons are a complicated one because they're labeled different from Season 3 and onward in it's airing-cycle apart from it's production cycle. You see, the production cycle of Season 2 had 45 episodes filmed however the network split this and aired 25 of them as Season 2 but the other half as "Season 3". So the real Season 3 ended up airing as Season 4, the real Season 4 airing as Season 5, and so on. That's why the number coding don't match up with the season number starting from Season 3. So the DVD season releases and the episode listing on TV Guide all follow the show's production cycle. That's why the upcoming season is listed on TV Guide as "Season 5" but it would technically be airing as Season 6 as numerous web sources have it listed as such. Here's all the evidence supporting the fact that the show's second season of 45 episodes were split into two airing seasons.


 * Nathan's interview: (August 2009)
 * Dan's blog: (September 2009)
 * Here's something from the official iCarly Facebook page that was written back on September 12, 2009 before "iThink They Kissed" aired, indicating the episode was the season premiere (September 2009)
 * Another Dan's blog where he indicates that "iThink They Kissed" was the airing S3 premiere: (October 2009)
 * This is something I recently came across. This is one Nathan video where he talks about the difference between the two cycles: . *Here he tells the interviewer that they were taking a hiatus from shooting new episodes (after spending time filming episodes from April 2008 to August 2009), but within a few months time were going to do their third season of filming, which was going to be their fourth season in airing. He says all of this around the 2:00 minute mark. (October 2009)
 * Another Nathan video interview where the interviewer call the upcoming Season 4 (2010-11) as such and Nathan doesn't correct him if there wasn't a split: (April 2010)
 * Another Nathan video interview where the interviewers call Season 5 (2011-12 ) as such and Nathan doesn't correct them if they were wrong: (May 2011)
 * A Nick press release listing all 2xx coded episodes from the iLove Carly Collection being from Season 2 and Season 3: (May 2011)
 * A third Dan blog where he states that each time there's a new season there's a new opening credits. Since he stated in the first blog that the network was calling the remaining Season 2 production episodes the show's "third season" he made a new opening for those episodes: (August 2011)
 * Miranda Cosgrove calling it Season 6 on two occasions on Twitter and Formsprings.com: and  (January 2012)
 * A tweet from Spin and Bin Music on One Direction guest-appearing on iCarly Season 6: (January 2012)
 * And most importantly sites from big cooperations that list the shows' seasons on behalf of the broadcast airing cycle like Amazon, iTunes , and CastTV.com.

This has been discussed on the episode list's talk page because we had people assuming this wasn't the case of the upcoming season being labeled as "Season 5" when Nick renewed it back in April 2011 to be made and aired this year and how TV Guide has it listed. But understanding all of this, Nick renewed a "fifth season" of the show to be made but would air as the sixth season as a result of the split up of Season 2. Feel free to give me your feedback if you wish. Are you still having confusion or concerns or is everything cleared with you now? - Jabrona - 17:13, - 19 March 2012

DNTTR
Re : please see WP:DNTTR William M. Connolley (talk) 22:07, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Hehe woops.  Jay Jay Talk to me 22:10, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem, I wrote a pithy response - but hit an edit conflict ... and it was gone. Thanks for your efforts around here and you may "template" my talk anytime :) Did you notify the anon on that page or the editor, who from edit summary style, may be the same? And thanks WMC for noting it. Vsmith (talk) 22:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I did wonder if it would be amusing to have a template to warn people about templating... William M. Connolley (talk) 22:33, 25 March 2012 (UTC)