User talk:Jersyko/archive7

Enamel
With a ref now, a bit more legit. I thought of a place I can check to see if I have another source to the same material. When I have time, I'll give it a look. - Dozenist talk  20:42, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

new user...
Haha, yeah, I just started actually poking around sites I previously noticed were blocked, and they're not anymore. Thanks! Whirlingdervish 05:37, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
For clearing my user page, they've been at it all night. Cheers.  Canadian - Bacon  t  c 00:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

User:70.110.206.68
Weird vandal... I see he blanked your talkpage too.. Do we have an article in common? --Deenoe 02:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Opus Dei
Thank you so much for your comments and help defending the article! It looks like Wikipedia really really works, and I'm positively giddy about that. :) Thank you! --Alecmconroy 15:15, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for you help out lately on that.  It seems like there's a pretty strong consensus that the rewrite is an improvement (11 our of 11 outside views), so, hopefully that's settled.  There's a slightly different debate ongoing right now about whether or not the improvement introduced NPOV problem.  If you have a second, could you look it over and offer your opinion on whether that's the case?  --Alecmconroy 15:30, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Opus Dei: a section title and balance
Jersyko-- thank you so much for helping out before by lending your eyes to Opus Dei. This is an issue that attracts lots of passionate people on all sides, so true outsider eyeballs are greatly prized by all. :) If you have a second, could you look things over and give us some feedback?

Here's the latest on Talk:Opus Dei. One issue is on whether it's acceptable to have section entitled "Criticism and 'cult' allegations". It's undisputed that notable cult allegations are being made and are they are the #1 criticism of the organization. However, one school of thought holds that referring to the "cult allegations" in the section titles is so prejudicial that we shouldn't cut it from the header. I say that if the allegations are notable enough to have section, they're notable enough to have a title that reflects their mention-- but there are some good editors who have made points in opposition.

A second question going on is whether the article complies with NPOV. Are the "criticisms" and the "support" section 'balanced', or are we giving undue weight to one side or the other. I think we're doing pretty good on that at the moment, but there are a lot of different ideas all over the spectrum on what those sections should look like, so anything you can do to help us strike the right balance and get to FAC would be much appreciated!

Thanks for all your advice and help. --Alecmconroy 20:09, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

List
I finished Hawaii, so now we have an model. All the citations are a pain to get, but absolutely worth it. -- Zantastik  talk  08:03, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Verification process
I need a way to defend my posts. Today my update to the Wiki was removed and I was (lightly) scolded because what I wrote wasn't verifiable. Yet my post is verifiable by what I would presume to be excellent sources (New York Times, The Washington Post, etc.). I attempted to use the on my user page as instructed, but viewing in Firefox Browser, if there is any place to put it, it wasn't readily apparent.

I understand that everyone here has their own lives and that we all contribute the spare time we can make for this project. Yet I would like the ability to show my sources whenever I make additions or corrections to the project, instead of being dismissed out of hand.

Thanks!

FeoAmante 07:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The best way to ensure that others know material you add is true is to provide a reference within the article. Including the link in the edit summary is also helpful, but sources should be referenced primarily within the article.  SWAdair 07:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Gore picture
The Gore picture was pulled from Yahoo photos I am pretty sure. It is a media photo from Reuters or the AP. So how would that be classified? CJ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ChrisDJackson (talk • contribs) 08:47, 15 December 2006 (UTC).

anonymous IP tag
Hi. I noticed the shared IP tag you placed on User talk:64.228.248.64 in addition to the usual vandalism warning tag. Most effective. Is this something I should be using whenever I place a vandalism warning on a Talk page for an anonymous IP user? Shawn in Montreal 18:15, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I should probably stay away from using it, because I don't (at least yet) have the know-how to do that kind of evaluation. Just one more question, though. I noticed you placed the shared IP tag with using "subst:" in the parentheses. I tried it on the sandbox the tag does seem to work with or without "subst:". We are supposed to use it, right, in case the templates are changed at a later date? Many thanks, Shawn in Montreal 18:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Deleted Links?
Hi! I love the site, and I thank you for the warm welcome. However, regarding the links I have posted, it is true that they are to articles on my site. But they are always relevant to the theme of the subject. Why do they keep getting deleted, and what can I do to change that?

Thanks, Holyrollerjim 04:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)HolyRollerJim

Democrat Party
Jersey, help me out at the Democrat Party article, would you? I'm arguing with a bunch of people who seem to think that the phrase is quite all right and is not disrespectful. Griot 18:12, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Obama edit
hi - JUst wanted to say that I completely agree with your TNR edit - it was way out of proportion before your change. Tvoz 07:57, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I have been trying to make an edit to the Obama page on abortion. It got taken down because the only reference to back it up was a news story on Human Events, a conservative news source. I want to put that Obama voted against the Induced Infant Liability Act. I noticed in the edit you made you said a search for the title of that bill yields no results. That was the state bill. He voted against it in committee, which may be why you did not find it.What is the proper way to document this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DCjeangrey (talk • contribs).

Jersyko, a note to wish you a Happy New Year and also to say I've appreciated and admired your constant gardening of the Barack Obama article. I think we've got a useful article and despite the inevitable hiccup now and then, a supportive and growing community of serious contributors. Looking forward to even bigger things in 2007. --HailFire 18:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

sproc
hi - Don't know about you, but I'm pretty much ready for semi-protection again (long term I hope) on Obama - the last straw for me is being accused of being un-American by an IP'er because I deleted a wiki link to USA! Seems to me we're back up with too many of these edits and it's only going to get worse, despite what the optimists say. What do you think? Tvoz | talk 05:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

talk page
how do I post stuff on my own talk page? are we even capable of doing so? Peridotprincess 14:45, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

thanks I found out how to do so xP Peridotprincess 17:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Stuffies
Guys, if anyone would like to post cool but NOT perverted stuff on my talk page you are welcome to do so. Enjoy but be aware that highly inappropriate stuff may be removed... xP Peridotprincess 22:51, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

More Questions... =P from Peridotprincess
Can I create a How To page or is it a bad idea kind of article? I am good at that kind of stuff but I'd like to know before I write the whole thing and it is deleted... xP Peridotprincess 22:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

What is a sock puppet? Peridotprincess 23:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

What are all the archives about is it just a continuation? If so, which page is the most recent? =P Sorry if I use these =P a lot but I happen to take a liking to them. xP Peridotprincess 23:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

How do you add pictures to a page and not just text? Peridotprincess 23:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if I ask a lot of questions and am annoying but I am kind of new. xP Peridotprincess 23:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Publishers
If anyone knows about a publisher who is willing to publish a book for an author that is as new to the book-writing world as a flower bud on the first day of spring (sorry for the corny stuff =P) then please let me know by posting the name, number and/or e-mail address on my talk page...please NO pranks...I am serious. Thank You! Peridotprincess 23:40, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry! I got confused, I should have warned the IP but somehow my eyes were misfunctioning. Carpet9 04:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Also Sorry
FOr the Bitchy remark about the highway bill. Haj is always a stressful time. Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa Mea Maxima Culpa. Paul, in Saudi 16:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Congressional Userboxes
How do you update the Congressional Userboxes like ? In addition, I am editing Julia Allison, and am wondering if her relationship with former Congressman Harold Ford should be incorporated into the article since her relationship was used as an attack ad by the GOP. Also, is http://www.fancyford.com mentioned in the article as well?  Bearly 541  04:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:Robert Tilton.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Robert Tilton.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. - crz crztalk 18:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Adminship
Are you interested in standing for adminship? Experienced users like you are needed to help clear the backlogs and ensure that the site runs smoothly. I would love to nominate you. Regards, - crz crztalk 18:59, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Replied by email. - crz crztalk 19:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

 crzrussian would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact crzrussian to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Requests for adminship/. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so. When you've filled out the answers, please accept, adjust the timestamp, and transclude the subpage to the top of WP:RFA. Good luck! - crz crztalk 19:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Content Dispute, please respond on my talk page.
Hi, Jerseyko. I am currently editing Julia Allison, and the person who the article is about herself has removed time and time again references which pose her in a negative light. She has also left this message on my talk page: Hi - this is Julia Allison. I have no idea why you keep editing my wikipedia page, but please, before you add in facts that are absolutely untrue, check with the actual source. I'm happy to speak with you, but this is ridiculous. What's going on?? - please email me at julia@juliaallison.com thanks.

I know that what she is doing is against wiki policy, but I have been here since July, and don't know the exact policy. I think it's NPOV. Could you please provide a third opinion? Thanks.  Bearly 541  21:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it's WP:AUTO. I will add back all the edits that she removed. Because of Wikipedia being a tool that sometimes could be edited by users with autobiographies, I am going to make a template to post on the talk page in order to avoid content disputes in the future.  Plus, I voted support for you on your RfA!  Bearly  541  21:59, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Jersey, can you please e-mail me. I need to forward you something that someone has written relating to this situation.  Bearly  541  23:47, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Jersy, I couldn't sleep last night...it had to do with the Julia Allison article. I had to ask third opinions listed here. Also, where did you go to college for undergrad and law school?  Bearly 541  12:01, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Problematic emails
Feel free to forward them to me. JoshuaZ 04:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

RFC - Breast
Thank you. Atom 02:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh well, thanks for trying, anyhow. Atom 04:21, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

This may sound odd, but please block my user privilages
Please permanently block the user privilages on Wikipedia for this IP address. It is a vastly shared school-owned computer and subject to user abuse. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.81.155.149 (talk) 21:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

Your RFA
Anytime, I'm just glad I caught it before it closed. I'd have hated to miss my chance! -- Vary | Talk 18:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

RfA result
I am pleased to let you know that, consensus reached, you are now an Administrator. You should find the following forums useful:
 * Administrators' reading list
 * Administrators' how-to guide
 * Administrators' Noticeboard
 * Administrators' Noticeboard for Incidents
 * Administrators' Noticeboard for Three-revert rule violations

Congratulations on your promotion and the best of luck with your new charge! Redux 21:21, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Well done! 99% support is excellent!  If you have any questions about your shiny new tools then please don't hesitate to ask, I'll do my best to answer! (aeropagitica) 21:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Yay! Congrats! - Dozenist talk  22:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * "Under attack by Pirates" Heh, yeah, thanks for that, by the way. -- Vary | Talk 22:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Congrats! - crz crztalk 01:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for blocking the ip that vandalised Tony Alamo. Also, congrats on adminship. Is this your first block as an admin? Mega lodon 99     ( Talk ) 22:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You beat me to that block. Congrats! alphachimp  22:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Coincidentally, a bot automatically removes entries from AIV after you block them, so you probably don't have to remove them yourself. alphachimp  22:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Law/Bar
I have questions, if you don't mind asking. What specialty of law are you in? How can you be so involved with your law career and have the time to edit/be an administrator/ on Wikipedia? And, finally, if a person graduates from law school, and has not passed his or her bar exam, does that make a person a lawyer or an attorney? It's like saying...if I have a degree, in this case, Juris Doctorate, and I have not passed my bar exam, does that make me a lawyer? Thank you for your participation and please respond on my talk page rather than e-mail because I am not checking my e-mail. And, sorry, I voted against you because I personally felt that you weren't qualified for the job. Congratulations for being an administrator, and I hope that you prove me and others wrong..while juggling your law career.  Bearly 541  23:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I responded on your talk page. And for the record, I passed the bar. · j e r s y k o talk · 23:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This is the internet. You can make up a name of a person and claim it as your own. It's called, idenity theft. Common sense tells people that lawyers are busy all of the time reading and writing litigations for cases. The stress is stemming from what your 'alter egos' gave to me. Nice try.  I don't want to hear from you anymore. You got your mop, etc. Live with it, and leave me alone.  Bearly  541  01:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


 * What the . . . ?? · j e r s y k o talk · 01:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * OK. Bearly needs some prozac, everyone else pay no heed. - crz crztalk 01:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Unsolicited sysop tip #1
When deleting attack pages, make sure the deletion summary does not contain the disparaging information such as here. Deletion logs are viewable to all, last forever, and cannot even be removed by oversight. FYI. - crz crztalk 01:43, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Jersyko, congratulations on the successful RfA.
 * Although it's done only when really necessary, someone with Oversight access can ask a Developer to remove an entry like this. That's probably worth doing in this instance. Regards, Newyorkbrad 02:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Article Deletion
Question: Why was the tony Crowley article deleted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Superandrew7272 (talk • contribs).

External Links keep being removed!
Hi Jersyko!

I just got your message about reposting that pic of Tony Alamo. I will do that today. Thanks!

I have a question about the External Links. It seems that anyone can add or delete external links to the Tony Alamo page. There are several links that should be included, to be fair to both sides. Currently, the links are all PRO Alamo. Is there a way to lock links that have been approved by wikipedia so that they can not be removed so easily?

Thanks for your help! InSearchOfTheTruth

External Links part2
Thanks for your response, Jersyko.

I read through the guidelines and #11 Links to blogs and personal webpages, except those written by a recognized authority is the only one that I think applies to the external links that were removed.

On all of Alamo's tracts he puts "This Literature Carries The Only Plan Of Salvation, Do Not Throw It Away, Pass It On To Another". One tract, in particular, should be included. Alamo has 3 children by 3 women who happen to reside in the same house with him and he wrote an interesting piece of literature titled "The Polygamists", while he was doing time in prison, to justify his intentions to begin practicing polygamy himself - and prepare his congregation. The piece was not well received by the general population that it was forced upon and so Alamo stopped circulating it (but not before he accumulated half a dozen underage wives.) I think the world should read this interesting piece of literature that Pastor Alamo wants to forget he wrote. It is posted on a blog site word-for-word as it is in Pastor Alamo's literature at.

I would also like to understand what is meant by a "recognized authority" in the #11 guideline. The other links removed were websites that had factual information about Alamo. Do they need to reveal their sources on these websites? I am referring to and.

I am just trying to understand what about these sites are preventing them from being included. Thanks again. ISOTT

congrats!
Didn't know you were up for admin - I would have put in a good word in your RfA! Best wishes Tvoz | talk 05:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Ever hear the expression "trial by fire"? Well... Tvoz | talk 22:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I understand their point, but honestly from a strictly utilitarian perspective (i.e., not the perspective of Obama's campaign or Hillary's campaign, or anyone's), I don't think sprot here does anything other than enable us to make a better article.  I just haven't seen any argument to convince me otherwise. I would probably vote for no IP edits anywhere in fact - just like 99% of the bulletin boards and fora and community spaces etc etc etc that I've been on in my over twenty years online.  But, we'll see what happens.  Tvoz | talk 23:02, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

My addition
was factual. did you bother to check it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Megavolt120 (talk • contribs) 03:36, 19 January 2007 (UTC).

My Photo
See my talk for the response to your question.

-BMcCJ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.82.9.56 (talk) 06:13, 19 January 2007 (UTC).

chill
chill chill dude. internet fights are dope. but chill--Hollerbackgril 21:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * dude chill chill cihll. your'e a bit strung up. take a break.--Hollerbackgril 21:51, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * and block me while you're at it too. personal attack removed leave me alone.--Hollerbackgril 21:54, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * dude LEAVE ME ALONE. pull another admin to referee this if you cant deal with it. LEAVE ME ALONE. i'm not bothering you. OK? --Hollerbackgril 21:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Is this appropriate for a user page on wikipedia?
Or is it allowed? I loathe to bring it up with the user.

?Jasper23 22:44, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I might eventually post on the admin board. As for now its not a big deal. Jasper23 00:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad's RfA
This is to thank you for your early support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 17:32, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

edit warrior yourself
pot kettle black it seems, to me. 206.255.19.118 05:04, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Barack Obama
FYI. --HailFire 18:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

More FYI. --HailFire 15:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm quite sure he's messing with the wrong guy. More later... --HailFire 16:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Question?
Are users that have received a community ban still allowed to add information to articles. Could you point me towards the rule book on this one or check out my talk page towards the very bottom. I would appreciate it. Jasper23 01:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Here ya go :) Blocking_policy. · j e r s y k o talk · 01:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * . . . and if it's really a ban and not a block, then this is what you're looking for: WP:BAN · j e r s y k o</b> <i style="color:#007BA7; font-size:x-small;">talk</i> · 02:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help. See you around. Jasper23 16:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

moving/redirects
Please finish what you started and fix the (now) improperly linked pages -- Whatlinkshere/Steven Cohen. Thank you. // Laughing Man 21:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Errm, thanks for the reminder. I'll take care of it.  I only created the dab a couple hours ago or so, then got bogged down with work . . . don't worry, we'll get there eventually ;) · <b style="color:#709070;">j e r s y k o</b> <i style="color:#007BA7; font-size:x-small;">talk</i> · 21:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, most of those were improperly linked even before the dab. Working on it now :) · <b style="color:#709070;">j e r s y k o</b> <i style="color:#007BA7; font-size:x-small;">talk</i> · 21:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Your fast ;)  Thanks. // Laughing Man 21:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

E. Edwards
Thanks for cleaning up the Edwards information. I have spoken to the AP in Raleigh and they have issued a correction for the profile as of Jan 23, 2006. I have written to the Boston Globe Ombudsman to see if they will be running a retraction. Fstutzman 15:31, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Administrator leave
I appreciated your help, btw.

Do I need to wait for an administrator to give me leave to edit an article, or should I dive right into those articles needing correction? -EarthRise33 19:58, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Certain parts of an article aren't showing up universally
Apparently, the "Aquifer" section of the "Memphis, Tennessee" article isn't showing up on other computers. Is this normal? Is there a turnaround time for new additions, or is this a problem with the other location? -EarthRise33 05:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks much. -EarthRise33 14:00, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Puppop
Why did you block him? Zbl 23:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC) He had done no vandalism since his last warning, and he was in the middle of being accused of being a sockpuppet.

Elkwjdvc
Again, why did you block this user? Only one edit. It was a vandal, but after one edit, the user was blocked. Zbl 23:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I needed Elk unblocked as falsely accused, but I believe Puppop is a legit sock. The case wouldn't go on until Puppop was unblocked. Zbl 02:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)