User talk:Jprg1966/Archive 5

Please Be More Careful with RS Edits
I saw that you recently removed a citation attributed to a forum. It was actually from a major newspaper. Please be more careful in the future. DemocraticLuntz (talk) 00:38, 4 September 2012 (UTC )
 * Nothing to see here, folks. -- Jprg1966  (talk)  00:40, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Really Should Be More Careful with UNDO
I noticed that you quickly deemed a valid edit "unconstructive." Wikipedia appreciates your efforts, but you should really be more careful when carelessly editing a constructive addition to a page. --unsigned comment by at 02:38, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Trolls will be ignored in the order in which they troll. -- Jprg1966  (talk)  02:42, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

-Agree with the above. You edited my fan page: Claydad without blinking an eye, when I left a notice that says to leave it as a discussion after I discovered it. I am Claydad, and a fan made the page/user for me. Thanks for looking out on the wikis. <3 -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.203.235.104 (talk)
 * The user above was a troll. In any case, I'm sorry -- I did not see you left your user page as a sandbox. I will let people edit as they please. (However, I did not edit "without blinking an eye" -- I noticed several edits before I reverted.) -- Jprg1966  (talk)  06:39, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I get what you said. Logged in to prove I'm here. <3

For your information
Nobody seems to have brought your attention to this thread where your contribution is being discussed in relation to an open letter by Philip Roth about Wikipedia.--Peter cohen (talk) 23:57, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Edit Warring at Jimbo's page
Please be aware that edit warring, even one edit, can be a violation of Wikipedia policies. There's no obvious need for the comment to be removed, so unless you can provide an overriding justification for the removal, please leave it be. Thanks. -- Avanu (talk) 01:27, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * This user was just blocked indefinitely for disruption and is a suspected sockpuppet. I would not have removed it otherwise. -- Jprg1966  (talk)  01:28, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Please learn the definition of attack
before slinging around accusations. Thanks. 24.136.136.42 (talk) 05:41, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * From WP:NPA: "Insulting or disparaging an editor is a personal attack regardless of the manner in which it is done. When in doubt, comment on the article's content without referring to its contributor at all." -- Jprg1966  (talk)  05:45, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The IP's comments did not contribute to article enhancement and would likely be taken as offensive to many. I did retain the comment. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 05:49, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Citing a definition does not indicate comprehension, bro 24.136.136.42 (talk) 05:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Articles
Can you please tell me what the hell your problem is?

There's nothing wrong with my edits. They're correct points and I'm provided citations. I'm strengthening the article and not messing up anyone's points. Can you please tell me your problem instead of continuously undoing my edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pc1985 (talk • contribs) 05:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I will gladly tell you what my problem is. You are evading a block and edit warring. That means, regardless of the merit of your edits, they can and should be reverted. -- Jprg1966  (talk)  05:45, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect Revert?
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Taco+Bueno&diff=511646441&oldid=511646422

Seems like a legitimate good-faith edit to me with no reason to warn and revert that I can see. You might benefit from slowing down a bit when reverting - especially when there is very little vandalism occuring. If you agree that this was an incorrect revert, please undo the revert (be aware that the editor has made multiple edits since) and remove the warning. Regards. --Slazenger  (Contact Me) 05:52, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, geez I completely misread the edit. I thought it said owls, not bowls. That makes a lot more sense. I will strike out my warning. -- Jprg1966  (talk)  05:54, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Happens. I figured it was just an oversight.  Appreciate you undoing it.  Happy editing.  --Slazenger  (Contact Me) 05:57, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Roth
His representative thought they'd been blocked for their edit and appealed via UTRS. I can find no evidence of that and I think it must have been a range block that mistakenly blocked logged in users. Will it happen again? I'm sure. Everyone needs to beck up their edits - saying you know the subject doesn't give you the right to add/delete material without providing sources. We get lower profile examples of this all the time. Secretlondon (talk) 14:49, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

RE: Barnstar
THX. Was wondring why no one created it, but better late than never ;) Coming along well now.Lihaas (talk) 20:14, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback
--   Luke      (Talk)   21:04, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Darwin National Airport
If you wish to know, I live in Darwin and know all that information from experience --  Anonymous      (Talk)   13:58, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

The Beatles poll
Hello &mdash; this message is to inform you that there is currently a public poll to determine whether to capitalize the definite article ("the") when mentioning the band " THE BEATLES " mid-sentence. As you've previously participated either here, here, or here, your input would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. Jburlinson (talk) 03:19, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Shared IP
Thank you for the reversion of the unexplained deletion to Pedro Guerrero performed by this IP. This is a shared IP, and on behalf of the constructive editors using shared IPs, I apologize for the nonconstructive edits made by other editors using the same IPs. Peace. 12.153.112.21 (talk) 14:54, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Excuse me
But the page is posting false information as it clearly states on Taylor Swift.com that the a new song not a single and that We Are Never Getting Back Together is still a brand new single and this person is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Afireinside27 edit warring not me cause I am correcting and removing false information and he keeps posting it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.58.11.202 (talk) 19:30, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * No, you are both edit warring, which is why I also notified Afireinside27. Being "right" is not an excuse for edit warring. Content disputes must be resolved through the article talk page or on user talk pages. Continually reverting between reversions will almost certainly lead to blocks. -- Jprg1966  (talk)  19:33, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Then block us both cause he keeps reverting me and I keep putting it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.58.11.202 (talk) 19:35, 25 September 2012 (UTC) Taylorswift.com does not state that the song will be released to radio as her website still advertises WANEGBT as a "Brand New Single" and advertises Begin Again as a new song. She has not stated if this will be released to radio or not and anything that states it is is not true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.58.11.202 (talk) 19:39, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not here to resolve this content dispute. I'm trying to stop the revert war. I have filed a report here: -- Jprg1966   (talk)  19:43, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

New Editor
Thanks for the comment you left me after editing the narcolepsy article on Sept. 14th. The omission of the revision comment was unintentional; I'm new to this process and forgot to add it in before submitting. 24.196.27.208 (talk) 23:20, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 * No problem, thanks for editing! -- Jprg1966  (talk)  02:00, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Links
I think this is how Im suppose to message you. I'm not affiliated with either link just thought that 2 domain appraisal sites who are competitors would give a fair example of the article. What is the external links for? Perhaps I am misunderstanding :/ Devanhcrow2013 (talk) 16:31, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey, I appreciate the clarification. I was perhaps being overly cautious of spam-related promotion on your edit. I was reacting to the fact that it was your first edit since joining, which made me suspicious. Your explanation satisfies me that your motives are pure. I'm not sure whether listing two specific companies would be fair, as opposed to listing others, but I will not remove the links if you choose to re-add them. Thanks again for your note. -- Jprg1966  (talk)  16:38, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

So.. I readded it an someone else is saying I cant now.. (bottom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Devanhcrow2013) A bit confusing here. You are saying I can now and someone else says I can't. I just wanted to give some examples not make an argument out of this from everyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devanhcrow2013 (talk • contribs) 17:13, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I've removed the links again. Regardless of the user's motives, the links still fail inclusion criteria of WP:EL. Wikipedia is not an internet directory for businesses to be listed. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:18, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Right, I was counting on that process to work itself out. I was removing them on the grounds that I was not sure if the user was being promotional. I guess I wasn't being very bold by leaving them the second time, but I didn't want to seem like I was out to berate this user. -- Jprg1966  (talk)  17:27, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I meant to mention in my initial reply ... a more appropriate location for the links would be on a site which is designed to be an internet directory, such as dmoz.org. The article already links over to that site per the suggested usage listed on our external link guideline. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:30, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

(comment without section)
Is anybody here?

Helo, is anybody here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.81.132.245 (talk)
 * Can I help you? -- Jprg1966  (talk)  02:09, 27 September 2012 (UTC)