User talk:Jim1138/Archive 10

Nabu-kudurri-usur I/Nebuchadnezzar I
How long does the request take (already started). Unfortunately another editor is trying to change to tone of the article and make it "Biblical". As it was a carefully positioned neutral article about a Babylonian king who preceded the Biblical age, this is a problem and your reversion of my renaming has prevented my reverting his edit. I suspect an edit war may commence as this "editor" is very determined.BigEars42 (talk) 05:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Your erroneous comment; plese retract and revert
You recently undid a justified and discussed (on Talk) edit of mine that had a clear edit summary "Text directly describes what the sources say, and sources agreed on through back and forth with another editor" on the basis that it had no edit summary, and posted a strange and erroneous notice on my Talk page. Looking at you contribs, noticed that you use automation a lot, and assume in good faith that your bot is just not working. Please correct both the comment and the revert.--Anonymous209.6 (talk) 08:55, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You removed a number of references. That is why I reverted you. Jim1138 (talk) 08:57, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Did nothing of the sort; the references are there, but with summary of WHAT they said, as per the edit summary. You specifically reverted due to lack of edit summary, which is false.--Anonymous209.6 (talk) 09:38, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, your comment: "Her speech attracted considerable criticism, as an example of the Democrats' desire to avoid focus on the economy, and cater to its base," is not wp:npov, is unsourced, and appears to be wp:or. Jim1138 (talk)
 * Which is what the reference cited, an opinion piece discussed on Talk, says.--Anonymous209.6 (talk) 09:38, 14 September 2012 (UTC)In other words, the POV (if you feel it exists) that you refer to is that of the SOURCE, an opinion piece, in a section on CRITICISM of the topic. My words are summaries of what is in the SOURCES, as is clear. How you get that a description of a source with the reference following is unsourced is beyond me.--Anonymous209.6 (talk) 18:49, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Your response (and lack of proper response; reversion) makes my assumption that you acted in good faith appear to be misplaced, and thus considered a WP:NPA. --Anonymous209.6 (talk) 15:38, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Finnegans Wake Lexicons
I am trying to add a very useful research resource to the FW page: the Lexicons which are based on the work of reputed Joyce scholars such as Clive Hart, Helmut Bonheim, James S Atherton, Dounia Bunis Christiani, and many more. Yo keep deleting it and I do not really know what I do wrong. Could you explain, please? Universitate ub (talk) 18:43, 14 September 2012 (UTC) Universitate UB
 * You are putting way too many links on a page that already has too many links. You might be able to add one link to editura.mttlc.ro. I would not undo that, but others might. Is there a page on editura.mttlc.ro that lists all of those links? Also, you deleted the template; be careful not to accidently remove other material from pages. It does seem to happen frequently by new editors. If you feel that these links are very useful, I would suggest creating a new section in talk:Finnegans Wake, add the links and invite others, especially those who removed your content to discuss them. Put    at the bottom of their talk pages. That will generate a notification similar to the one I will leave on your talk page. Also, you can add a "request for comment" see wp:rfc However, I have not had much luck with RFC. Likely the subject matter needs to be very interesting. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 20:30, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks like the RFC has been started. Good luck! Jim1138 (talk) 20:32, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Nabu-kudurri-usur I/Nebuchadnezzar I
How long does the request take (already started). Unfortunately another editor is trying to change to tone of the article and make it "Biblical". As it was a carefully positioned neutral article about a Babylonian king who preceded the Biblical age, this is a problem and your reversion of my renaming has prevented my reverting his edit. I suspect an edit war may commence as this "editor" is very determined.BigEars42 (talk) 05:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Why have you removed my text on the Weetabix page
Moved to (talk) woaoaoaaoaoaoaoaoaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaooooooooooooooooooooooooooo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.221.16.117 (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Cram Schools
Hi Jim, I have problem with mentioning of Good Coaching Institutes under "Cram Schools" Categroy. As the institutes are doing a good job by providing quality education to poor and needy students. Still these institutes have faced the wrath of govt and this issue is more political. The term "Cram Schools" is not the one used in India, Instead "Coaching Institutes" is used. Adding a world like "Cram" to respected Institutes is anyway not right. So please look into the matter. Rajatkalia (talk) 09:34, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
 * May I suggest reading Edit warring. The three revert limit is a "bright line" limit. You have exceeded that. You should discuss the issue rather than continually reverting. You will likely be blocked (not by me). Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 09:38, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
Thegreatgrabber (talk) 22:06, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

W3leaf
Hi! I noticed you replaced the CSD-G4 on W3leaf. Although the article W3leaf.com was taken to AfD at Articles_for_deletion/W3leaf.com, it ended up being speedied as G11. Technically, CSD-G4 doesn't apply given that the AfD was not taken to close. Given the creator's persistence, it probably needs to go the full cycle at AfD or be speedied as G11 again. Cheers! --Tgeairn (talk) 04:15, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note - I have reported the editor at ANEW. Cheers! --Tgeairn (talk) 08:05, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Link
Hi I noticed you posted a link on my talk page. Sorry but I do not know what you meant by the link. Kindly clarify what were you referring to. Have a nice day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adityasaxena.corp (talk • contribs) 07:14, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Jim, I am not working on Moon articles in details as I am not a specialist on Lunar Science. However thanks for the link. I will see and put it to use. Thanks and Regards --Aditya Saxena (talk) 08:07, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

NAMRIA external link
Hi jim, regarding the Luzon Sea, kindly read the articles and maps inside the NAMRIA government site. This is a verifiable source based on the standards of wikipedia encyclopedic contents. Hence, it's not a spamlink as what you have insinuated. Thank You

--FTSantos ©Bot 09:30, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't see the .gov, but still, the link does not support the text is apparently cites. Unless you can direct it to a page to support the text, it should not be there. BTW: your "signature" FTSantos Bot does not allow anyone to see who you are without digging through page history. Please use a proper signature. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 09:40, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Regarding David Tillinghast
Thanks for you message Jim. The edit was intentional. Part of the mystique of Tillinghast's art on Clemson's campus is that it is meant to be a puzzle to solve. Finding the Silo, which has the call number in it for a specific book in the Cooper library is sort of an initiation treasure hunt, if you will, on the Clemson campus. By just putting the call number and a picture of the book (which is titled by the call number) on Wiki, the whole purpose of the piece goes out the window, as does a really great part of Clemson urban legend...it'd be nice to be able to continue to preserve that tradition, and not have anyone who can Google the book find it without trying at all. If that seems like a valid enough argument, a number of us wonder if we could get the picture and call number removed?

Thanks for keeping Wiki safe tho :) -JCor — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:2479:F239:6C88:A8A4:DD10:4A32 (talk) 03:35, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Changes to the ahihud incident
im working on sources at these moments, im a bit confused as to how it's done.. User:the truth is around here —Preceding undated comment added 05:06, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

G4 tag on W3LEAF
Hi there, Could you please let me know why do you think w3leaf.com and W3LEAF are identical? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lv210408 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Same topic. "substantially" Jim1138 (talk) 07:52, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * But the content is different. Could you please move it for delete discussion? --Lv210408 (talk) 07:56, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Already discussed. It is not notable. Please stop recreating it. Jim1138 (talk) 07:57, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

September 2012
Hi this is Alyanna Marie Mckellar fan of hers actually, the reason why I undid those stuff from User Leyna Mallette because that is also my account. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alyanna "Leyna" Mallette (talk • contribs) 06:46, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
this is so cute for all my user mates

Alyanna &#34;Leyna&#34; Mallette (talk) 06:47, 20 September 2012 (UTC) 

Kuznets and Marshall
I'm not really concerned with Policy and Verifiability.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.199.111.101 (talk) 09:14, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Slow Down Cowboy, it may be unsourced, whatever that means, but it's not False. I could've used a lot of technical terminology and made it look legitimate, but then no one would get anything.

If you're American, sympathies, but Game Theory is just not it. I'll give you Gibbs, Thermodynamics.

If you're not American, I don't know what's bothering you. Don't tell me you're here to protect the Truth.

I can answer questions regarding the theory, if you take an easier stand, but if you're going to go all hysterical..then block away...block away...:))) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.199.111.101 (talk) 09:31, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Changes to San Diego Gulls page
Hi Jim,

It looks like you undid the changes I made to the San Diego Gulls page because they "seemed less than neutral" to you. I made those changes based on information provided by the owner of the team. Admittedly, I have never made changes to content on Wikipedia and am unfamiliar with the intricacies, but my changes were not bias in any way.

Can you please re-implement my changes? While you are at it, the owner (Bruce Miller) asked that the "(Jr. A)" be removed from the title of the page.

Thank you for your help, Michael — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.46.118.42 (talk) 20:15, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, I checked the website and it supports your change. I did remove "proud" as that is not an encyclopedic term (see: wp:puffery). As to the name change, San Diego Gulls is taken as a wp:disambiguation page. Suggest another? Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 20:22, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Historiador Mexica
Jim: As for my edits to the page "Norman invasion of Ireland", I find what you did to be highly objectionable. One thing is to edit a page, another thing is to delete another person's hard work. I did the former, not the latter, you did the latter, not the former. It is wrong and unfair to delete all of another person's work and this is why I was very angry. I still haven't figured out how to add citations, I am working on that. But all of my information came from primary sources, namely the Annals of the Four Masters, the Annals of Ulster and Gerald de Barry's Expugnatio Hibernica. You can look these sources up yourself. They can be found on the University of Cork's online database of manuscripts, often acronymed as "CELT" (Corpus of Electronic Texts), translated to English as well as the original Gaelic. This is a valid and legitimate source. As for my challenge, if you did not like that, I would not have minded if you deleted the challenge, I understand that it is unpleasant and some people in our modern era would find it "inappropriate", but I think it is fair and a good way of solving a dispute, namely, single combat; especially when one person has insulted another in such an outrageous way as to delete all of their hard work. I can agree to abstain from this aggressive behavior in the future, but my demand that my work on this page remain undeleted stands, and I will not accept anything else. If you wish to add to it, improve my citations and all, that is fine, but do not delete the entire page, for that is unfair and downright wrong; have I done such a thing to you? Also, if you wish to edit it, all I ask is that you be fair to both parties... what I mean is that the reason I edited it and added so much information is because the article was EXTREMELY BIASED, making the invasion seem like a "piece of cake" and as if the native Irish had been helplessly swept aside by the almighty Normans with a few barely difficult strokes. This was not the case at all, as you can see from my edits, which are reliable. Moreover, it was overly simplified and did not contain much information at all, which I thought I could remedy quite well. It presented the Normans in a very positive light, and the Irish in a negative one... I on the other hand prefer to present both parties with their accomplishments, failures and crimes, revealing all of the truth. Please do not delete all of my work again, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HistoriadorMexica (talk • contribs) 01:22, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Norman Invasion of Ireland
I understand that you want me to cite sources... I am working on that... I will add citations, in fact I intended to do that all along, there is no need for you to request that. However, I need some time to figure out how... moreover right now I don't have time. In the meantime, make it easier for me by NOT deleting my work and when I have figured out and have time, I will add citations, thank you... — Preceding unsigned comment added by HistoriadorMexica (talk • contribs) 01:59, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

The Beowulf Poem, from Beowulf Wiki
Moved to User talk:Sophiejensen for continuity. Jim1138 (talk) 00:03, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

210.89.228.55
Hello. 210.89.228.55 let Vandalism reopen. Such as the reports to the place reporting Vandalism please can deal?--125.205.77.232 (talk) 23:52, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the revert. Danger! High voltage! 00:29, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
AniMate 00:49, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation newsletter
Hey. I'm dropping you a note because you used to (or still do!) patrol new pages. This is just to let you know that we've deployed and developed Page Curation, which augments and supersedes Special:NewPages - there are a lot of interesting new features :). There's some help documentation here if you want to familiarise yourself with the system and start using it. If you find any bugs or have requests for new features, let us know here. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 12:40, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

QMobile
Thanks for telling. This is my first article and Ben Ben is spamming it since I have written it approx. an hour ago. I am not a machine, I need time to expand and elaborate it with wiki standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pmsamee (talk • contribs) 22:14, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

My edit to the article about Mame Faye
You told me that the edit I made to the article about Troy, New York (my hometown), madam Mame Faye was an edit to an article about a living person. If you go back and read the article about more carefully, you will plainly see that Mame Faye was born in 1866 and died in 1943! She will be dead 70 years next year! Thus, this is not an article about a living person. --71.191.208.143 (talk) 07:08, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

My edit to the article about Mame Faye (continued)
I am not sure if this is the right way to reply to your reply to me, but it is the only way I know how to do it. Your reply to me was:

Sorry, please add a source for your information. See reliable sources and citing sources. Significant edits to Wikipedia need to be verifiable "Rumor" needs to be sourced. Thank you

I somehow have the feeling that you are not actually familiar with Mame Faye? For us Trojans, she's a legend of sorts. In my edit, I said that it has always been rumored that Thomas Myers was not Mame Faye's nephew, but rather, her son by a liaison with a Troy police officer. Nobody knows for sure. It has simply always been rumored. There is no other way I could have worded that. If it could be documented, I of course would not have said that it has always been rumored. The comment that I included relating to my edit, which I assume you also read, was that the information was supplied by an elderly resident of Troy, New York. In 2008, a short film was made about Mame Faye. The film was called "Sittin' on a Million", and of course everybody in Troy was talking about it. I then asked an old family friend (born 1913, sadly passed away last January) what she knew about Mame Faye, and this story about Thomas Myers is one of the things she told me. She was my source! And that's exactly the same way the two filmmakers, Penny Lane and Annmarie Lanesey, gathered the information for their film -- by talking with elderly Troy residents who were around in Mame Faye's day, just as I talked with our old family friend. That was the only way they were able to gather information about Mame Faye, because there are no sources such as you refer to about Mame Faye. If you go back to the article, the last sentence reads: "In 2008, a documentary film was made about Mame Faye." If you click on the link ("a documentary film" appears in that sentence as a hyperlink) and go to the website and simply read what the two filmmakers say on the home page, you might understand my edit a bit better. I have to say I was somewhat surprised when you wrote referring specifically to my edit that "rumor needs to be sourced", "significant edits to Wikipedia need to be verifiable", when this is Mame Faye we're talking about! --71.191.208.143 (talk) 08:34, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You are correct, I am unfamiliar with Mame Faye. If a person who is considered an expert on Mame Faye has written a book which has information on this rumor, you can add your own words to that effect and cite the history book. If, however, you have gathered that information on your own, then that would constitute "original research" (see wp:or re policy). Original research is not accepted as a reliable source as the information has not been published and/or not verified (i.e. peer reviewed) and is therefore questionable. So, if the rumor is common knowledge and of importance, someone probably has done research on the subject and documented the rumor. Please find a source before restoring the rumor to the article. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 08:52, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

The Truth
It takes two to speak the truth: one to speak, and another to hear. Henry David Thoreau

Apparently you are hard of hearing or am I not speaking LOUDLY enough for your liking? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.234.136.9 (talk) 21:06, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi, thanks for reverting the vandalism from my user page.--Ben Ben (talk) 23:00, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

The Feast of Saints Cosmas and Damian - inappropriate revert
Hi Jim, this revert was inappropriate since the editor was clearly trying to remove copyvio content from the article they created and should not have been reverted. LegoKontribsTalkM 01:33, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Puppet
Hi, please see Sockpuppet_investigations/Lung_salad. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 21:06, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia not a Forum
Have you seen the Talk page for Jesus. It's a Forum Hibnip (talk) 21:08, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Boris Berezovsky (businessman)
Hi Jim. I explained why in the "new edits" section of the talk section of the article. Feel free to critique my action, but im 99% sure the previous version was libel. -Update: remade edit with edit summary — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.165.169.43 (talk • contribs)
 * "Unsourced" is a very good reason. Can you libel a dead person? Make sure to put new talk on the bottom of the talk page. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 04:01, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Stalker comment - the removed source does note concerns about a strain of anti-semitism in his reporting (which was what the article said, and was removed). I'm not feeling up to wading into a content dispute, but from a quick review it does look like the sources supported the statement. Cheers! --Tgeairn (talk) 04:06, 2 October 2012 (UTC)


 * It is possible to libel the dead (although it is important to note the legal constraints associated with libel only apply to the dead in 10 US states).
 * I believe certain Moscow journalists did allege Klebnikov committed anti-semitic libel (according to the Guardian). It is important to note Berezovsky is, in part, a media mogul. I see multiple sources claiming that allegations were made by Russians that say he accuse him of being anti-semetic, but I have yet to find a primary source. Knowing the elementary school he attended (in a very jewish-accepting part of New York City), his family, and their acceptance of Jews, I suggest that the unsourced defamation be put on hold until a primary source is found. If a source is found, it is important to state the source in the article and its connection with Berezovsky's media outlets (if one exists). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.165.169.43 (talk) 05:13, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Tutankhamun
Hey I added an edit summary but I'm not too sure if it's suppose to show anywhere, thanks Theatenist (talk) 06:57, 2 October 2012 (UTC)Theatenist
 * The content you removed was reliably sourced by peer reviewed journals. You should discuss your proposed changes in talk:Tutankhamun before removal of such content. Backup your points with reliable sources Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 07:15, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

okay thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theatenist (talk • contribs) 07:43, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Unexplained removel
It was explained. WP:BADCHARTS. Websites to avoid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.86.208.50 (talk) 08:02, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Greetings
Greets, apolgies about the vandalism. This IP is of a school's and while most of the edits such as the ones done on 'Disappearance of Megan Stammers' (Look through our log) are done by myself we unfortunately have students who think vandalism is a fun idea. A problem I have no pleasure in fixing so that healthy contributions can be put forward. We do however have a system in place so that unhealthy contributions are traced to the computer they were done from and who was using it in that lesson punished so no action is eneded from yourselves. Again my apologies for the vandalism of my fellow students, they will come to see their mistakes (hopefully). M. 82.33.215.26 (talk) 08:56, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Moonrise Kingdom
Hi Jim, thanks for taking the time to talk. Ihave no idea what the guidelines are or who to format things, I am simply interested in making the page as accurate as possible. The three links comprised two from shops, and one from someother source which as far as I know isn't commercial.

The DVD & Blu-Ray version of this film are already on sale here. Thanks for your effort! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.96.101.201 (talk • contribs)

Thanks for your kind patience, it is appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.96.101.201 (talk) 23:24, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Longest Film Rating
The source provided for the Longest Film is the one from which I got my information. The information that was previously on the page is incorrect and doesn't correspond to the article cited, which lists the name of the film as "Modern Times Forever." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.106.15.154 (talk) 01:59, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

True Jesus Church in Malaysia
Dear Jim, The page change and information is correct. Please do not remove it. Should you have any enquiries, please do not hesitate to contact me at isaiah.chang@tjc.org.my — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.126.94.134 (talk) 07:09, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Your edits were unsourced. You removed sourced content. Unsourced edits of that extent will be removed. Jim1138 (talk) 07:11, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

The Schlechtst of Knorkator
Hello. Today I tried to improve the article about the music album "The Schlechtst of Knorkator" by replacing a nonsensical literal translation of a song title by a meaningful and correct one. After a bot reverted the change, I reported a false vandalism positive and did the edit again as I was advised. I also explained my edit, saying that the title uses a common colloquial expression ("geht überhaupt nicht"/"geht gar nicht") for being bad or unacceptable, that has nothing to do with walking whatsoever. The lyrics of the song in question prove my point. Run them through google translate. http://www.metrolyrics.com/inc-geh-sowas-von-tiberhaupt-nicht-lyrics-knorkator.html

I'm not sure what you mean by saying I should cite sources. This is about a translation. I am German and able to understand a German song that is not very complicated. I pointed to the lyrics as evidence. I could provide links to pages that use the expression "überhaupt nicht gehen" in the meaning I'm referring to. Would that help? Can you read German? And if you want sources - where are the sources for the current version? I made an argument for the change. Where is the counter argument?

By the way, the current translation isn't even literally correct. "Überhaupt nicht" doesn't mean "anyway", but rather "not at all". (SOURCE: http://translate.google.de/?hl=de&tab=wT#de/en/%C3%BCberhaupt%20nicht). "Sowas von" is another reinforcement, so the literal translation would be something like "I am walking so totally not at all". While, again, the lyrics have nothing to do with walking. Does that make sense to you? Now, if I'm telling you that it's a metaphorical expression that gives a perfectly intelligible meaning to the title that is totally absent in the literal translation, can you really not imagine that I might have a point?

Yes, "gehen" means to walk. And a lot of other things: http://dict.leo.org/ende?lp=ende&lang=de&searchLoc=0&cmpType=relaxed&sectHdr=on&spellToler=&search=gehen

In the list you'll find "Das geht klar" for "that's okay". "Ich geh (überhaupt) nicht" in this sense means "I'm not okay (at all)". I amplified this to "utterly unacceptable" because "überhaupt" and "sowas von" both are reinforcers that humorously take the not-being-ok to the extreme.

Sorry for the long text. I still hope wikipedia is open to reason, and I considered helping to extend the stub article, but if you were in my shoes, would you do so when even a tiny correction like this gets tossed out for no reason at all? 178.203.29.154 (talk) 16:26, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Re: 108.25.109.107
Hello, just letting you know that the IP removed his previous warning from just an hour or so ago for another unconstructive edit so Huggle gave him the wrong warning. SassyLilNugget (talk) 20:41, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 5
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited INTI College Sarawak, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DBA (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:09, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Edits by Sockpuppet relating to historic county
Hi Jim, Like me you will have been iritated by the continual disruptivre editing by an editor using a series of IP addresses which has just started to reoccur following a period when articles such as Edmonton, London, Slough, Abingdon-on-Thames, Great Coxwell and Little Coxwell had come of protected article status. I have just posted a report on the Sockpuppetry Investigation Page see here. If you feel able to contribute to the report it would be much appreciated. Thanks. Tmol42 (talk) 15:11, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

changes
hello, the changes in the articles you corrected were bases on real facts, however, now I do not have the sources, I will search them later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.149.129.146 (talk) 03:05, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I only want to meet to Joseph Gordon-Levitt. It's a favor, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.195.26.98 (talk) 05:35, 9 October 2012 (UTC)