User talk:Jeepday/Archive 2

Re stubsensor related
Fair call. I did not take in the aspects of an article being more full than it possibly can be (as with the example you provided)... i must have been going on the 'if there aint a large chunk of text, then its a stub' mindset so please forgive me. Your advice was good though and I will apply it for the future. As for the reverting the decision without notifying, its stupid but i thought i didnt need to bother you, (or waste ur time so to speak) but again i am wrong and should bring things up with editors in future when editing wiki articles in such situations (or similar). Keep up the good work :).petze 14:21, 5 August 2007 (UTC)


 * No problem, and I agree with your reversal of my stub removal on Triglav Trophy, which you did correctly. I don't think there is need to contact an editor for single reversal, we all make mistakes.  But when you look for and find what you believe is a pattern then drop the editor a note :) Jeepday (talk) 14:29, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Will do mate :). Cya later.petze 14:34, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Late reply
Hi, Jeepday. I was away for a while, could not reply on time to your message on this. Please let me know if i could anything to do. Kind regards. E104421 22:36, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No problem Jeepday (talk) 02:26, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Triddle/stubsensor/20070716
Just wanted to let you know that I left a message at the above. I don't have a problem with the edit but am curious to see if lists should count in the article and yours was the first I saw. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 17:45, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
 * response at same Jeepday (talk) 02:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Dailies
Hi, are you sure you never heard of "Dailies" before (because you did this edit )? It's a very, very common term in film. Just search in something like this book and you'll find many occurences. Cheers, Peter S. 04:03, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Most all the hits I found are for Dally News Papers, If you think there are hits out there that qualify as references please add them. You might want to look at No_original_research for the rationale on why references are required even if someone has "heard of it". Jeepday (talk) 04:11, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I agree that the article is unfinished and a whole section on sources is missing. I'll try to add some sources when I come accross them. Cheers, Peter S. 04:26, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * There you go. I feel ambivalent about this whole procedure though. On one hand it's kind of nice that you press forward on bad articles. On the other hand, the article is pretty good - should an article automatically be deleted if just 4 lines are missing? Is it ok to set a fixed timeframe until deletion if we all know that every article here is constantly under construction? We know that Wikipedia currently has more articles than people devoted to them - is that reason enough to delete valuable information? Peter S. 05:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for fixing that, I am glad you found references :) To answer your questions, I came across this particular article while working the project Unreferenced articles, the goal is to ensure that articles meet at least the barest minimum of verifiability, by including at least one reliable published (online or offline) reference. We do that by starting with articles that have had unreferenced the longest and addressing them. No article is "Automatically deleted", rather a good faith attempt to reference the neglected article is made and based on those results the editor moves forward to improve Wikipedia usually this involves adding the reference(s) found, occasionally this means nominating the article for deletion, the Wikipedia community then decides if the article should be deleted.  It is good that you beleive that the article Dailies contains valuable information.  It appears that you are interested and knowledgeable about the subject, I am neither interested or knowledgeable about the subject so they only way I can judge if the article contains valuable information is to compare it to the available references.  Jeepday (talk) 13:22, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Film dailies and Video dailies (aka. Dailies)
I will try to add citations for Film dailies and Video dailies and DVD-Video dailies and Raw dailies on the page called Dailies.

However, I am still uncomfortable with the coding required for citations so please correct any mistakes I make.

I see the required coding of:


 * 1) Place a &lt;ref> ... &lt;/ref> where you want a footnote reference number to appear in an article—type the text of the note between the ref tags.


 * 1) Place the '''  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you endorse deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add db-author to the top of the page.  - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 16:10, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Please check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Whatlinkshere/President_of_Earth, this article has been through AfD twice (Articles for deletion/President of Earth & Articles for deletion/President of Earth (2nd nomination)), Prod is not appropriate. It failed the second prod for a complete lack of reference, it now has 5 and more are available. Jeepday (talk) 16:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * This does not make the concept any more notable. Since you have disputed the prod, I have nominated it yet again for AfD. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 16:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Yep you did right over the top of the original Articles for deletion/President of Earth (2nd nomination) Diff. I see that you have asked for admin help to clean up your mess, You can do it your self by undioing all your edits on Articles for deletion/President of Earth (2nd nomination) then start and link to a new AFD Articles for deletion/President of Earth (3rd nomination). Jeepday (talk) 16:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of President of Earth
President of Earth, an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that President of Earth satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/President of Earth& and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of President of Earth during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 16:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Fossil fuel
In the reference, primary sources of energy: paragraph 4 petroleum 36.8%, paragraph 5 coal 26.6%, paragraph 6 natural gas 22.9% for a tolat of approximately 86%.Silverchemist (talk) 04:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Arbcom Nomination
Hi, I noticed you seemed to have accidentally posted you statement in the main namespace instead of the Wikipedia namespace. I have moved it to the Wikipedia namespace, your statement can now be found here. I have not completed the nomination for you which can be found here VivioFa teFan   (Talk, Sandbox) 03:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I attempted to do the transclude Diff But seem to have made a technical error. Not sure what the error is, can you help or provided guidance? Jeepday (talk) 04:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * It posted now Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Candidate statements, must have been a server or catch glitch. Jeepday (talk) 04:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * No glitch, you spelled your name with a lowercase j. I moved it for you. &rArr;   SWAT Jester    Son of the Defender  04:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) Jeepday (talk) 04:08, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom
Hi Jeepday:

I saw your candidate notice and went to ask a question. I put the question at:

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Candidate statements/Jeepday/Questions for the candidate

and it saved okay.

However, the link to that page from your candidate statement is showing up as red. I don't know why this. Sorry if I have messed anything up.

Wanderer57 (talk) 04:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Problem is solved. Wanderer57 (talk) 04:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom questions
Hi. I'm Ral315, editor of the Wikipedia Signpost. We're interviewing all ArbCom candidates for an article next week, and your response is requested.


 * 1) What positions do you hold (adminship, arbitration, mediation, etc.)?
 * I am an editor currently not holding any advanced positions, but I am a founding member of the Wikiproject Unreferenced articles, the goal of this project is to ensure that articles meet at least the barest minimum of verifiability, by including at least one reliable published (online or offline) reference.
 * 1) Why are you running for the Arbitration Committee?
 * First: because there was an add posted asking for self nomination and the field for 5 positions was fairly small. Second: I think I have a lot of problem solving skills and experience to bring to the position.
 * 1) Have you been involved in any arbitration cases?  In what capacity?
 * I read about them in the Wikipedia Signpost and sometimes take a closer look.
 * 1) In the past year, are there any cases that you think the Arbitration Committee handled exceptionally well?  Any you think they handled poorly?
 * I have no opinion on past arbitration cases. I did not follow any close enough to feel that I have all the facts available.  Neither did I fully research all the appropriate references and policy as they stood when any specific arbitration was active.
 * 1) Why do you think users should vote for you?
 * I have a long history on Wikipedia of reading policy, being active, and wadding into discuss about it; starting with conversations that can been seen here Talk:Off-road vehicle/Archive 1 in "Edward Abbey qoute" a learning experience when I was new (two weeks) and in "Build a criticism section" an application of joint venture involving differing perspectives months later. From some of the questions I am getting here and in my Questions for the candidate I am guessing that there is some strife in the community about arbitration committee actions, I did not nominate myself to swing that strife in one direction or the other.  I am asking users to vote for me because I want to help Wikipedians who bring a problem to the committee to find solutions that are within the bounds of Wikipedia policy.

Posting here and your talk page Jeepday (talk) 03:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Please respond on my talk page. We've already gone to press for this week's issue, but responses will be added as they're submitted. Thanks, Ral315 » 15:27, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandal
I am not a vandal i am a good boy! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.218.41.236 (talk • contribs)

Edit summary
Regarding this edit, a cursory reading of the preceding and subsequent verses makes it quite clear that the Bible explicitly forbids those species with one characteristic and not the other. How else does one explain the fact that Jews eat beef etc?

That said, I apologise for a lack of assumption of good faith in the edit summary when I corrected your edit. JFW | T@lk  09:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * No apology should be required (but if it is, considered apology accepted) It is only lack of assumption of good faith if you assumed I was not acting in good faith. "Well-meaning persons make mistakes, and you should correct them when they do." Your rewording is very clear and an improvement on what was there before I edited the page "Only mammals that chew their cud (ruminate) and have cloven hooves are kosher."Diff  I was actually planning on looking for a non-biblical references for this interpretation for the articles Unclean animals and Cloven hoof, today. If you have anything good that is available online please point me to it.  If I find anything I will place the reference on Kashrut as well. Jeepday (talk) 15:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't think any further references are necessary on kashrut. The Bible is pretty clear about the requirement, and if you want I will happily add a reference citing the section of the Talmud where these concepts are developed into practical law. Your choice of sources on cloven hoof and unclean animals is of course entirely up to you, but I think directly quoting the Bible is less confusing than referring to a book called "Jewish Laws and Customs: Some of the Laws and Usages of the Children of the Ghetto" published in 1900. JFW | T@lk  20:09, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The Talmud reference sound like they would be most appropriate. Jeepday (talk) 20:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not actually sure if the Talmudic source adds much. There are numerous statements in the Talmud that have been reinterpreted in subsequent works. Given that Orthodox Jews regard the Shulchan Aruch as binding by definition, that is probably the most useful source. JFW | T@lk  21:56, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I was hoping to find something at Shulchan Aruch/Yoreh Deah but it's not all translated there yet. Interpretation can be a funny thing especially when applied to biblical works so I like to find something that is not a direct biblical quote when available.  The call is yours, what every you think is best.  If you find anything better then I have please let me know, I would like to use it in my other works.  My edit to kashrut was a passing edit done while searching for reference to use on Cloven hoof so I don't have an invested feeling in kashrut. Jeepday (talk) 22:11, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Dude, you need to chill
Take a pill, my friend, and go easy on the trigger finger. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.100.80.248 (talk) 04:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Why are you vandalizing my page?
That's not really very nice, is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.100.80.248 (talk) 04:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Can we be friends?
Please, find Jesus through me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.100.80.248 (talk) 04:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Right To Vanish
Sorry but i believe i have a right to vanish i was formerly user:[Catalyst in Society] edited re username change. Coppertwig (talk) 03:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Removing content from Wikipedia is considered vandalism, there is nothing linking User:121.216.52.193 and User:Catalyst in Society edited re username change. Coppertwig (talk) 03:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC) claiming to be the other user does not give the right to edit their or delete the other editors work or words. Jeepday (talk) 05:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

My God its true, do an IP check, its my bloody account. I want to delete evrything from it. Come on now, y would i waste my time deleting irrelevant posts by another user from over a year ago - come on now!


 * All contributions to Wikipedia are subject to Text of the GNU Free Documentation License. Deleting content will only get your IP blocked, if you have a problem bring it up  in the proper context.  Jeepday (talk) 05:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Y cant u take a chill pill- i want to have no connectiion with wikipedia but if u type in my name into yahoo the first thing that comes up is this wikipedia account taht i want to leave!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH the reason im not logging in to my account is because when i leave a comment and sign it it links to my user page and therefors comes first on the list on Yahoo.


 * Take a look at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Right_to_vanish there is some direction and comments. Life is calling so I will check with you later. Jeepday (talk) 05:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom table with portfolio links
Hello! As we did for last year's election, we are again compiling a Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Summary table. This table contains a column "Portfolio" for links that display candidates' pertinent skills. I will be going through each candidate's statements and gradually populate the column, but this may take some time. Please feel free to add some links in the form [link|c] if you feel it shows conflict resolution skills, or [link|o] otherwise. It would also be helpful if you can check if the information about you is correct. I'm sorry that this message is so late; I wasn't aware about your nomination when I sent out these messages.

My motivation is that as a voter, I don't want to just rely on a candidate's words, but also see actions. Moreover, I believe a portfolio of "model cases" to remember in difficult situations can be useful for each candidate, as well. I believe that conflict resolution skills are most pertinent to the position, but if you want to highlight other skills, please feel free to use a new letter and add it to Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Summary table.

I used the template Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Summary table/cand to make it easier to enter the values in the table. I'm sorry that I didn't get around to entering all values, I will do that in about 21 hours if you don't get around to it. &mdash; Sebastian 09:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I have mentioned several of the topics you mention here in my statements related to this vote here and at Wikipedia Signpost. I have also been fairly active and vocal at Template talk:Unreferenced  I would prefer to rely on your judgment of what is most appropriate to link to in your matrix.  If you have questions or if I can direct you to specifics please let me know. Jeepday (talk) 04:13, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your reply. What skills do the links show? I'm sorry, I can not judge your evidence without knowing what you are trying to show. "Active and vocal" isn't really what I'm looking for. Personally, I am mostly looking for conflict resolution skills. Do you have any evidence for that? Please look at the page to see what categories are available. Also, please be specific: General links like the one to Signpost are not helpful, because they do not exhibit anything you did. I would prefer if you could enter them yourself, like most other candidates, but if you need my help, let me know. &mdash; Sebastian 08:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * If you don't "want to just rely on a candidate's words", it would probably be a poor choice to rely on a candidates research about their position. WP:COI and WP:PRIMARY provided guidance for obtaining unbiased references. Jeepday (talk) 16:19, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I see your concern; the page was indeed unclear about that. I think this has been addressed now. Please check out the project and talk pages and let us know on the talk page if there's still something unclear. &mdash; Sebastian 03:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The conversation continued on Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2007/Summary table. &mdash; Sebastian 18:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

vandalism by admins?!
why the hell the article Lapa Church was deleted?! -Pedro (talk) 00:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Please don't take the removal of the article personal. I placed a prod Template on the article after a good faith effort to find references had failed to find significant coverage in reliable sources in order to comply with notability and verifiability requirements.  After five days of being reviewed by other editors (and several make a habit of checking each article with a prod) no one stepped forward to save it, and it was deleted as no hope of bringing the article to expectations could be found. Jeepday (talk) 02:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Now you delete articles because there's no reference saying that it exists, this is getting crazy. I don't take it personally, but honestly I think it is insane. IMO this is just vandalism, I know wikipedia's ways pretty well, vandalism or really lame administration. Sorry for that. --Pedro (talk) 01:35, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it. Jeepday (talk) 02:40, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

RINGS
FYI, when you see mentions on MMA pages about "RINGS" or "Rings", especially in the context of "he fought for Rings" or the "Rings King of Kings Tournament," those are not references to a boxing ring. They're actually talking about RINGS, an old Japanese pro wrestling/MMA organization. I've corrected the links I noticed. Tuckdogg (talk) 17:30, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * cool, thanks I have only made a couple of those changes and they were all today, I will go check to make sure you caught them all. Jeepday (talk) 17:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Abt Guthi
Thanks for the interest in Guthi. I had searched for verifiable information about guthi in English. However, there are none online. Of the few that are present in publications, they present a very "foreign" view of guthi. So, I have included a Nepali publication as a reference. I will add more to article after I am done with a few articles in Nepal Bhasa wikipedia. Thanks again.--Eukesh (talk) 16:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Disambig
Hi, thanks for the help with the disambig pages, we'll take all we can get! I'm a regular visitor to Category:Disambiguation pages in need of cleanup, which is how I first heard about the Ring article. I'm not sure what you mean about having concerns about some of the pipes? You can either try to explain, or, just edit the page and then I'll see what you mean that way. :) --Elonka 18:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see what you're talking about now. Well, generally the rule on that kind of syntax is to put an album name in italics, but individual song names in quotes.  See WP:MOSMUSIC. If that particular song is more of an album though (I'm  not personally familiar with it), then either method may be fine. Do what you think is best! :) --Elonka 19:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Please use some common sense
I've reverted this edit. Ring (disambiguation) is a redirect page. It redirects to ring, which is (as you should expect) a disambiguation page. Michael Hardy (talk) 20:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for bringing your concerns to my talk page. Per Disambiguation it is correct to link to Ring (disambiguation) rather then Ring as the intended destination is the disambiguation page.  This clarifies that link to Ring is by intent because it is a disambiguation page and not an accident that should be researched and corrected by a casual editor some one working on the project Disambiguation pages with links.  I will add the category template R to disambiguation page to clarify any further misunderstandings. Jeepday (talk) 23:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually I believe on second thought that the R to disambiguation page should only be used on full redirect pages not behind links, so I did not use it. Jeepday (talk) 23:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC)