User talk:Jmjanssen/Archives

June, 2007
Hey,

Can you please explain how my two latest posts are spam? I'm really trying to comply with Wikipedia rules and I feel that the two additions I made are valid. Can you please tell me how YOU would have written what I wrote? Mnpfp 01:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey,

Well, first of all my intent was to write as non-biased as possible. If another user feels it is biased, then they could change words around to make it neutral. Primate research at the U of M isn't a small issue. There have been many groups and many articles written about it. In fact, the campaign has gotten so controversial that there has been significant coverage in some non-biased books about it. For example, The Scalpel and the Butterfly.

I do agree with you thought that compared to other people, I do have a bias. So then, instead of deleting the whole entry, you should edit it and take out what you think is biased. It almost seems to me that you don't want any mention of it, period, and in fact you are biased also. If you weren’t, you would have edited it to make it not biased. Also, the reason I included the links is so that people could see that I didn’t just make all this up. If someone has other information from another perspective that I failed to add, then they definitely should add it and cite it with links. It seems that is what Wikipedia is about. I intended my entry as just a start, not the final thing. In your response, could you please reword how I should have written it so it would have complied because I feel that, in fact I know that, primate research is a big deal because I live in Minnesota and I have read lots of coverage about it. If you would like me to send you articles I could probably flood your email with them. Mnpfp 18:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey,

You say” There are amynt hings going on at the U that we could talk about such as the lack of funding, elimination of GC, etc. but they are not necessarily encyclopedic." I disagree. I think they very well may be minor things but if you REALLY want to have a COMPLETE encyclopedia, then you really should have all of that stuff. I do agree that there are more important sub topics that could be talked about first but that doesn't mean minor issues can't be added.

You also say that "... but Wikipedia is not a debate forum or a blog, it is an encyclopedia." I totally agree, that is why people can edit other people's entries. Like I said before, if someone felt my entry was biased or not totally complete, they could edit it by either adding more information or changing my words around.

It seems that so far, your the only one who has had a problem with my entry. Is there anyway to have other people take a look at it and decide by consensus rather than this just being between you and me?

This is totally irrelevant to the conversation but your first name doesn't happen to be Joe is it?Mnpfp 22:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey,

One more thing. Can you please how my entry in Mahtomedi was spam? Also, I'm just curious, how do you decide the level of importance for an entry? How would I know that what I added to the U of M page is to minor to be an entry? Thanks for the help!Mnpfp 02:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

August, 2007
No I'm not. I'm involved in the Minnesota Primate Freedom Project but am not the same person. I know the person who was going by the username MNPFP. I use wikipedia a lot more than him so I said I would try designing the page. Carniv 02:12, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

From TheGabberJihad
Why did you delete my page?

It says something about being "notable" and the lack of that quality as far as I go. I believe that I am pretty notable, considering the amount of quality tracks I have released in such a short amount of time. I've done a lot more than some of the people that have Wikipedia articles, I think you just have some bias against me.

Also, who are you? I hope I don't know you in real life and you are just being a dick or something like that, because I put an hours worth of work into the page you deleted.

TheGabberJihad 21:29, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I did not delete your page, an administrator did. Nothing was mentioned about a lack of quality on your part.  What was mentioned was notability and conflict of interest.  I suggest you read the Wikipedia guidlines on Notability and COI.  I would also appreciate you addressing your concerns in a civil manner.  Wikipedia has guidlines on civility also.


 * As for who I am, that is irrelevant. Mahtomedi was on my watchlist and the trail lead back to that article.  I don't know you or have any sort of bias against you, the article simply did not meet the criteria necessary for a Wikipedia article so I tagged it.  It is an administrators decision then whether or not to delete it. Jmjanssen 05:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

RE:Regarding your edits to Ivy (Soul Calibur)
Well then upload the damn image then, seeing as how I dont want to make a account and you seem so protective of the Ivy page. I'm mean what you did nothing after someone removed the image?--67.67.222.114 16:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

November, 2007
Zodiac.

Why do i have to stop?I got just the same right as you do.I'm not adding lies,big articles.I am adding one line,that is very important.Not for me,but for people who was working on this case.You don't know the case better than them.If you like to,add something what is better,but stay true to the facts,that they NEVER FOUND any evidence that he isn't the Zodiac.I'm tired of this anti Graysmith thing.He was the first one to write bout Zodiac and you should be thankfull.Greets and wait for my next edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.142.72.129 (talk) 13:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Wiki-Winos invitation
Greetings! I'd like to invite you to participate in our Wiki-Winos segment upcoming addition of  Wine Project Newsletter. If you are interested please look over our interview questions, answering any that you would like with the replies posted to the answer page. If you have any questions feel free to drop me a note on my talk page. Thanks for you time and all your contributions to the Wine Project! AgneCheese/Wine 07:46, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: Benefactors
Alright. I just saw the conversation -- thanks. Question to you, though: if I added a verified list of episodes in which Peter meets said benefactors, would it be okay? It looks like no consensus has been reached on that. Marsofel (talk) 00:38, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * That is a very tricky question. I would say no, given that it isn't clear exactly how Peter gets his powers.  For example, we do not know if the power needs to be used around him or if he'll absorb it no matter what.  Assuming the latter was true, then we have no idea of knowing how many people he'd been around that had the powers he has displayed and he therefore could have absorbed the powers from them. If the former was true, we still do not know if he has been around other people displaying powers off-screen. Jmjanssen (talk) 06:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Important Wine Project discussion needs input!
Hello, the Wine Project is currently in the process of hammering out a proposed policy relating to Notability (wine topics). As Wikipedia and its wine coverage continues to grow, the need for a clear, concise guideline on how Wikipedia's notability policies such as WP:CORP, WP:SIGCOV and WP:NOTE relate to wine articles has emerged. Please review the proposed policy and take part in the talk page discussion Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(wine_topics). All input and view points are welcomed. AgneCheese/Wine 21:45, 1 January 2010 (UTC)