User talk:Jreferee/Archive 12

Re: Image:Udlogo.gif
If an image has an inadequate use rationale, I will most commonly re-tag with a new dfu explaining the new problem. IfD would also probably be a good forum if it's a situation requiring more discussion of the issue, since dfu just leads to a single reviewer. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Overall, it looks like you're doing a pretty good job. Keep it up! (ESkog)(Talk) 19:33, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

The bottom of the template has the text "Nominator: Please notify the uploader..." - just copy and paste the template code there to the bottom of the uploader's talk page. (ESkog)(Talk) 05:53, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Udpcongresso.jpg
I noticed you've deleted some pictures i've uploaded. Its customary to notify the uploader if an image is threatened with deletion. --Soman 17:11, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I restored the image since there was no notification. I appologize for the mistake. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 17:18, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Soman 17:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:23, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Ideas for presenting notability
The article about jsatr pending release is tagged for notability and I'm wondering if you can direct me where good information about its content or ? might be found. Does it make sense to pull some from the main bio as the massive cult following by definition ascribes it being "eagerly anticipated?" I know that sounds vague but you seem miles ahead of me in researching and WP. Any ideas? Benjiboi 21:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Al Borges
Thanks for the kind words regarding Al Borges. His article had been on my mental to do list for a while and I finally took the time to do the research for sources and write it up. It's certainly not finished as there are some things to expand (Auburn and UCLA sections) but I got to a point where I just needed to stop for a bit and I think it is a good overview to start with. Although I've been editing here for quite some time, I've never submitted a DYK before (or made a push for a GA or FA either, though I have some targets); do you think I should submit as is or edit a bit more? AU Tiger » talk 18:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Never mind; went ahead and submitted as is.AU Tiger » talk 19:17, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Bernard d'Abrera
Thanks for your kind work about my recently finished article. I tried to nominate my recently created article Bernard d'Abrera at Did You Know but I was unable to make the wikilink work properly: --Filll 17:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * False alarm. It is fixed now. Thanks.--Filll 20:20, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

DYK Gibraltar Constitution
Thanks for your suggestion, I was actually about to add it as a candidate when I saw your message. Chris Buttigieg 19:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Poe literary influences
Thanks for the info, but all I did was split off the article, nothing more. & I'm quite hazy on anything besides editing and such and I don't really know about the 'did you know' stuff.  Zchris87v  19:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Cleeves Cove Cave
Thanks for the positive feedback and the clear instructions. I have self nom'd as you suggested. Rosser 20:19, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Joseph Kellman
Thanks for the great feedback! I will consider your suggestion. AndersH 21:27, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Strategic Air Command in the United Kingdom
Thank you for your kind words about this article.

However, I'm still working on it with additional information being added, as well as going to go though it for a spelling/grammer :) check along with a review for clarity and clean up disjointed thoughts.

Bwmoll3 01:02, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Larry Stewart (singer)
I'm just curious, what fact in this article is worth Did You Know? status? Ten Pound Hammer • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?) 01:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Nominated. Ten Pound Hammer  • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?) 03:36, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Straight pride Article
Perhaps that page did need the touch of an administrator. I commend you for the work that you put into the article. Before I realised that you were an admin I did remove the external link to the "Straight Pride Wear" website however. Should it be re added I only believe it fair to add the two other major Straight Pride T-Shirt companies that are on the web as well, they also have a site with political contributions to the movement....although that is what I was trying to avoid...more retail sites. I have made just a few alterations mostly for clarity and added a couple of Citations needed tags to the opening. Over all the work is embarrassingly good. I only wish I had time to get my version up which was actually kinda similar. User:Amadscientist/Straight pride 2 I didn't finish it of course and hadn't added citations. I'll leave it up for a while, and may add parts of it in the near future. Thank you again for the wonderful work on the page. If it is to stay I hope it remains at its heart what you have done there.--Amadscientist 06:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I kept straightpride.com only because I like to include an external link section in each article so that others know that they can include external links. Feel free to delete it. Also, please feel free to edit the article. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 07:10, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Just as a heads-up about an image you added to Straight pride, there's almost no possible fair-use rationale for an AP photo. Indeed, the AP has specifically asked that we not use their images without securing specific permission, something that we can only ever practically do for iconic images like the raising of the US flag over Iwo Jima and such. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:06, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Website Pros
Re: primarysources. I answered on the talk page.--Peter Eisenburger 06:57, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Answer on the talk page.--Peter Eisenburger 08:26, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: Deleted image
I'm not specifically familiar with our policies or practices regarding AP photos. I know that there is an argument that they cannot qualify for fair use, since the AP is still actively trying to profit from these photos and we dilute that copyright through our use. You might ask A Man in Black to clarify his reasoning. (ESkog)(Talk) 14:57, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

William Bostock
Thanks for your compliment and the DYK suggestion. I'm always happy to throw something in but note that for me the most interesting fact is the major feud he had during World War II with George Jones after the pair had been the best of friends for 20 years. However when I nominated this exact same fact a couple of weeks ago in relation to the George Jones article, which I also created, it was discarded as "not particularly interesting"...! So let me know if you think that would get up this time or if there's something else that would. Cheers, Ian Rose 13:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Happy Jreferee's Day!
Dear J, I had been planning to make this modest gift to you for quite some time now - and I'm happy I waited, if it has indeed arrived at a moment when you needed a smile. What else might I add to the words I told you a few weeks ago, other than your friendly name means kindness, brightness and thoughtfulness to me. I truly consider you to be one of our best, and it's with that admiration, and the warmth that a newfound bond of friendship gifts us that I'm joyed to see you again, with this humble present just for you. So please, enjoy this, your own special Day, my friend! You deserve this and so much more :) Love,  P h a e d r i e l  - 06:22, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * A good day to you, Jreferee. :) Acalamari 16:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello
Hello Jreferee. How are you? I am RS2007. I am a new Wikipedian. I became a part of the Wikipedia community on July 15, 2007. I have a problem. I looked at Elonka's request for adminship. Can I comment? How many votes are needed for adminship? Please reply on my talk page. Thank you. RS2007 08:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Any Wikipedian with an account is welcome to comment in an Request for Adminship (RfA Support), Oppose and Neutral sections, usually with a short explanation of their reasoning and sometimes with supporting evidence. At the end of the RfA, a bureaucrat will review the discussion to see whether there is a consensus for promotion. Usually, less than 70% !vote means an unsuccessful effort and more than 85% !vote means a successful effort, but consensus is the basis for promotion. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 15:08, 3 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the reply. RS2007 05:22, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 00:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Biography
Hello Jreferee. I am recently joined Wikipedia and I have created 9 biographies. I have also improved the biographies of several noted individuals. Can I join WikiProject Biography? What should I do to join WikiProject Biography? Thank you. RS2007 11:18, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Your note at AN/I
Jreferee, you are an administrator. I'm curious why you didn't just fix it yourself. Anyway, its fixed now. &mdash;Moondyne 15:29, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Enterprise 2.0
I restored the redirect to Enterprise social software as the history of the term your wrote seemed to be fatally flawed. You mistakenly assumed that many 2.0 versions of software products that by chance happened to end with the word enterprise as a reference to enterprise 2.0. Secondly, as Wikipedia is not a dictionary, articles should focus on the concept and not the term. Enterprise social software does a much better job at this. —Ruud 01:00, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Something beautiful
 Here is a userbox for you. Spread the love, and give it to another user, especially one who is on the down and outs, so that they, too will feel that it is a beautiful day.

Have a beautiful day! Love, Neranei

Requests for adminship/Elonka 2
Thank you for your support in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project, and I'll try again in a few months! If you ever have any questions or suggestions for me, please don't hesitate to contact me. Best wishes, --Elonka 03:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Merge proposal
A proposal has been made to merge Replacement I-35W Mississippi River bridge into I-35W Mississippi River bridge. The matter is being discussed at Talk:Replacement I-35W Mississippi River bridge. Please feel free to comment. Thank you. Kablammo 18:29, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

copyvio?
You put a copyvio on [[Captive's library in Guantanamo]. Is it safe for me to assume you have continued to monitor Talk:Captive's library in Guantanamo?

I wrote to the author of the article in question. My comments on his reply here.

If it was Andy Worthington's copyright you were concerned we were violating I believe the procedure allows you to simply withdraw your nomination.

Cheers! Geo Swan 22:24, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Bod_douglas_warner.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Bod_douglas_warner.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 fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 11:08, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Mercy news article
If you have a copy, I'd really like to know more about what the Merc said about the square root of 5 in music. If it's as nonsensical as it sounds from the short quote, maybe we should just leave it out? Dicklyon 23:06, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

EuMAS
Em... I AFD'd it - I think you want somebody else... --Fredrick day 17:23, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

AfD notification
I'll take a careful look at what you've been doing. The question for a bot is how to sort out "major", & this is the of sort of distinction classically more suited to humans than computers. Probably evolutionary AI techniques could do it, but bots here arent at that stage yet. Personally I'm very amenable to anything based on MSWord, but I think that may be a peculiarity of the two of us. :) DGG (talk) 19:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Conversation moved
FYI, this conversation has moved to User:Sidatio/Conversations/On list guidelines. I look forward to your continued input in order to reach a consensus on the issue! Sidatio 00:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

INA stub
Hi Jref, wonder if you can help. I created a stub for articles to with Azad Hind and Indian National Army, and it has just been nominated deletion on what I thought were more to with MoS grounds rather than substance and importance of the content. I don't know wether you know anything about this at all, but if you do (or if you have any comments), could you please have a look here. Cheers.Rueben lys 12:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your comments, they were very helpful. I also noticed from your comments you may have assumed I was trying to canvass for support. Just to clarify, I am not canvassing, nor asking for a positive or supportive vote. I merely asked for your opinion on the issue because we have corresponded in the past, and I also thought a second opinion on wether it is MoS or not would have helped, which you have actually. Nevertheless, thanks very much for contributing to the discussion. CheersRueben lys 14:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Your message "Box.net AfD nomination"
I've appropriately moved them to the AfD page. --J. Atkins (talk | contribs) 19:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry for posting on your talk page; I couldn't really decide whether or not I thought for deletion or not so I though I'd tell you what I thought.

QuakeSim AfD
Do you mean to say that you are nominating this for a 2nd AfD - the 1st only closed just this week. Rklawton 19:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * My courtesy notification of another's listing the article for AfD#1 was posted just this week as well, so your post is not making any sense. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 19:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Your deletion of my post on another's talk page was inappropriate. --  Jreferee  (Talk)
 * Posting an AfD notification today when the AfD closed yesterday is not appropriate. The article is no longer up for AfD.  Didn't you check?  If not, please do so now. Rklawton 20:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

We've got a new user who has already been put through the ringer. If you'll only take a look at his talk page, you'll see he's already been notified that his article was AfD'd. You'll see that he was also notified that the AfD was closed.  Your insistance on posting an AfD notification will only cause him confusion - heck - even I thought you were nominating his article a 2nd time (see above). Please STOP per WP:BITE! The least you can do is discuss the matter here. Rklawton 20:27, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I appreciate you clarification. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 20:34, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, replied here. → AA (talk) — 21:39, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I just ask that when a fellow admin tells you there's a problem you stop and check your actions rather than repeatedly revert. My days do not normally go like this.  In fact, this is the first time I've encountered an admin who behaved as you did when warned by another admin.  Admins in my experience assume good faith and double check their work when advised of a problem.  Rklawton 23:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 20:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Use of template:Maintained
Hi, I hope it didn't seem to hostile to revert about a dozen of your recent edits, but you were adding the above template to several articles, "per stats at http://vs.aka-online.de/wppagehiststat". I have grave misgivings about this activity, related to our Ownership of articles (WP:OWN) guideline. I feel that, if at all, that template should only ever be applied with great care, and certainly not applied simply because certain editors tend to make lots of edits to an article, according to an automatic counting tool. So could we discuss this before doing it, please? --Tony Sidaway 05:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know about you reverting my posts and your reasons for doing so. I agree with your take on things and appreciate your being kind about it. Thanks again. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 05:42, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

possible sockpuppet ?
Unfortunately, I won't be able to hang around too long here, but wanted to say that the IP comment on AfD Spacepol looks like a sock puppet for the first commentator (peltti) on that page. It seem to lack a user as well. Also I note that users from Finland are mounting a campaign now about the page and have alerted other users in Fi:wikipedia on that section's infamous "debate" page. Have to catch you later... BTW; do you think I should at this point go ahead and alert the company's and people concerned as to the fact that there are articles about them in Wikipedia and the situation as of late? --88.114.56.7 09:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Single-purpose accounts usually do not have much influence in English Wikipedia AfDs. There doesn't seem to be a reason to alert the company's and people concerned. English Wikipedia goes through so many AfDs that the process usually works out for the best in the end. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 14:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Good enough. I just wanted to alert you that representatives of fi:wikipedia are also carrying out similar "projects" on the various Canadian and Jewish lists where this person is listed. Don't know the policy on this, but would assume that's a Canadian; not a Finnish affair. Hope it all works out.--88.114.56.7 15:09, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of BJAODN page
Would you mind not adding to an issue that is being discussed on ArbCom while ArbCom is about to start a case on it? While you may have had sound reasons for your deletion, it was a bit inappropriate to do it when you did, given the ArbCom case that is pending. I considered it wheel-warring because it appeared to me to be a re-deletion. &mdash; Rickyrab | Talk 15:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Mirandapublicity.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Mirandapublicity.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 08:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/BJAODN
Hello,

An Arbitration case has been opened at Requests for arbitration/BJAODN. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/BJAODN/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/BJAODN/Workshop.

Please note that you are not named as a party in this case, but your name has been mentioned in some editors' comments, so I thought you should be notified. Newyorkbrad 17:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Bad Jokes...
Excellent job on the DRV closure and MfD nomination. I think the thoroughness of the latter may actually result in an overwhelming consensus this time. You've done a great service to Wikipedia. :) Best wishes, Xoloz 02:47, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your info
... on adding a bio page. Would this be such as the page that Desiree Summers has done? Thanks, Dale Fletcher 19:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It would be a little more detailed than the Desiree Summers page, which could be improved following the steps I listed on your talk page. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 20:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Bio
I am trying to spread the word... get out ifo on the faith and health connection...... wondering if it might be helpful to have a page on Wiki like Desire Summers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desiree_Summers is that not appropriate? I can see that someone created her bio to share with others who she is and what she does. Thanks, Dale Fletcher 20:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Or is it approapriate to ask someone else to create it? Dale Fletcher 20:29, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Appeal for a second opinion on Sakina
Hi,

I began the wikipedia sakina entry, which you recently did a minor edit to. Since you edited this page without considering the "sakina and takiya" section inappropriate and have a good reputation, I would appreciate you having a look at the page and reviewing a major deletion of this entry and an overarching claims about the remainder of the entry.

Another party user:Itaqallah has deleted half of the entry (the section on sakina and takiyah) and claims a conflict of interest. I consider this a form of censorship and that it is a misuse of the openness of wikipedia to suppress criticism of Islam and to maintain a type of orthodoxy about Islam on Wikipedia which is not a reflection of its aims and basis.

user:Itaqallah is an active deletionist with an interest primarily in Islam. He claims I have a conflict of interest and that this section is original research. I don't believe this is true and see him as having a conflict of interest in deleting entries critical of his own strategic area of interest and misusing the principles of wikipedia to achieve this end. I see this as a testing area for the principles of Wikipedia in the face of the sort of conflicts religious agendas have, concerning the rewriting of history to their own advantage. This borders on criticisms of the CIA and Vatican editing pages they regard as sensitive and tests the whole issue of the ability of deletionists to censor Wikipedia of all issues they regard sensitive to their cause.

Wikipedia needs to develop a strategy for dealing with the situation of a strategic consensus aimed at such censorship, or it will find its noble ethics being taken advantage of by such vested interests particularly religious utopian interests.

I am currently assessing the options, including a reedit of the deleted materail to present the essentials in a more compactified form, appealing to other second opinions and requesting mediation to protect the right of critics of major institiutional interests from being disabled from presenting the dissonant information which people need to understand the whole picture and assess the vested strategies of such interests. Dhushara 03:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Jreferee, you may wish to consider the report here, which served as the basis for the COI tag on Sakina. for the record, the material i had "censored" does not possess any sort of verification or backing in academic sources. it consists mainly of theories marketed on the user's own website. regards,  ITAQALLAH   03:22, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Please continue the discussion at Talk:Sakina --  Jreferee  (Talk) 03:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

On the lolcode DRV
Would you please restore LOLCODE and Talk:LOLCODE as well/instead? The article that was recreated shortly before/during the DRV was much closer to the mark than the one that was deleted initially. It featured a number of the new sources and was correctly named. The other did not reflect the language dev's naming at his site. Would be great to have a sandboxed copy of lolcode to work with too, however. MrZaius talk  07:03, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Query
Does it strike you as ironic to "snowball" close a DRV early with the comment that the AFD should not have been closed early? Or to send it back to AFD with the comment that it shuld have been sent to DRV?  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  07:10, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Super Mario Bros. Technicals
Hi Jreferee -- agree with AfD Nomination: Super Mario Bros. Technicals (and discussion at Articles for deletion/Super Mario Bros. Technicals); content is more "gaming guide" (and while the details seem part of general culture from my experience, they certainly aren't at the encyclopedic level of say, the Konami Code). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nbarth (talk • contribs).

Lolcode
Thanks for closing the DRV, but could you restore the article? -- lucid 13:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * And, again, the LOLCODE one as well? We've got two rather different articles to merge together, and valuable notes in the talk pages of both. MrZaius  talk  14:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! If we could also get a copy of the old article at, say, Talk:LOLCODE/sandbox or something, that'd be great. Not sure if there was anything in the AfD'd version that's releveant and missing, but it'd be nice to be able to double check. MrZaius  talk  16:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Got it - Thanks again, MrZaius  talk  17:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks from myself too -- lucid 18:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 20th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

feel free to move this to userspace

 * You're welcome! VanTucky  (talk) 05:42, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Template: Did You Know?
Just wondering, I've spent a bunch of time on an article called 1965 Records, was wondering, can i nominate a page which started today (22nd)? There doesn't seem to be a heading for today. --SteelersFan UK06 06:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Happyslip
hi Jreferee! We've crossed paths a number of times at DYK as I occasionally try to help out with AlexNewArtBot. I know you're a reasonable guy and so I wondered if you'd reconsider the case at Articles_for_deletion/Happyslip. Several of us have dug up a good handful of reliable sources on the topic that should establish notability. If you'd give it another glance I'd appreciate it. Cheers! --JayHenry 20:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind message about Happyslip on DYK! I'm new here, but eager to learn ;) -- Out span  [ talk • contribs ] 22:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thumbs up
Wow. Nice referencing on Aswamedham. :) Here's hoping the article is not overwritten again. --Moonriddengirl 00:18, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
 * The India stuff is easy to reference. They don't seem big on copyright and place everything on the Internet. Keep up the good work. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 00:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

comment request
Hi there, would you be so kind as to provide an indepenant neutral opinion of the image Image:Construccionkaiserrich.jpg at the section of the same name on the talk page of Richmond Medical Center here please? Thank you very much as this may help to alleviate a current debate over its inclusion.CholgatalK! 01:19, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

John Kilduff
Hi Jreferee,

I could restore the John Kilduff article, and will, if you like, but I doubt it would las long in the state that it was in. The entire text was "John Kilduff is an artist who hosts a public access television show called Let's Paint TV in Los Angeles, California, USA. He has appeared on the Tyra Banks show and even painted her portrait." Any other admin will also speedy it for failing to meet CSD A7. The best course would be to rewrite the article from scratch using the sources you have found. Having an article speedy deleted does not prejudice the recreation of the article, or the writing of a new article on the same topic, although if it is recreated exactly as it was it will probably be re-speedied. Dsmdgold 01:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK history tool
Hi - I'm still working on this. It's taking significantly longer than I expected. I'm currently obtaining the complete history of T:TDYK (did you know this page has a total of over 33,000 edits and is currently running at over 2000 edits a month?). Once I have this history, I'll be able to make a pretty good guess at who nominated each DYK article (I'm expecting the tool to be right at least 90% of the time, maybe higher). When I have a complete history table or two, produced by the tool, I'll let you know. -- Rick Block (talk) 04:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thank you - I am very flattered!! :) &mdash; QuantumEleven 08:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Copyright tag question
Thanks for looking at my photo copyright tag. I finally figured out what "name of the tag" means. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaun Lovell (talk • contribs) 18:20, August 24, 2007 (UTC)

Copyright tag question
Thanks for looking at my photo copyright tag. I finally figured out what "name of the tag" means.

...and now I'll sign it

Shaun Lovell 18:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Shaun Lovell

Tireless contributors and such
Thank you very much! I hardly deserve it. Most of the questions on that page could be answered with a template. The only real skill is in explaining the same thing repeatedly without sinking one's teeth into the newbies inadvertently. TCC (talk) (contribs) 00:02, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar
Hey, I just saw this. It's extremely kind of you, and has cheered me up a lot in what has so far not been a brilliant day. I really do appreciate it very much. SlimVirgin (talk) (contribs) 01:13, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I am very amazed that you have time to keep up with all the heavy duty policies on top of everything else you do. And I'm glad it cheered you up. Keep up the good work. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 01:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks mate for the heads up about that second section they had started. I was on ANI but I actually hadn't noticed they had branched out into a new section. Is it me, or are lots of people acting really whacked at the moment? I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone or something! ;-D Cheers, Sarah 14:36, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, mate, I'm checking it all out now, but it is after 3:00 AM here in my corner of Australia, and my brain is in slo mo so I might take a bit longer. Cheers, Sarah 18:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree in principle, but, is there consensus to delink the URL in the Michael Moore article particularly? I haven't followed the discussions fully but it seems like there isn't a consensus to delink and I don't want to go bumbling in while people seem to be still debating this particular case and trigger an edit war or a fight. See, the difference between this case and the Perverted-Justice case is PJ's website was identifying all our traffic and redirecting it to a special page for the "Wikipedia visitor" which discussed Wikipedia and what they allege is our approach to dealing with pedophiles and then that page linked to a page on their wiki site which discussed various Wikipedians who PJ alleges are pedophiles. The only traffic which went to the "Hello Wikipedia Visitor" page was Wikipedia.org's outbound referral traffic, i.e. people clicking on active links on Wikipedia. So by delinking the URLs, it forced people who want to follow up those references to copy and paste the addresses into their browser's web address field, which then bypassed PJ's redirect because they are no longer identified as being referred by us and they then go straight to the page the reference link was intending to send them to. Does any of that make sense? It's very late here and I'm very tired and not sure if I'm actually coherent or not. :) In this case with Michael Moore, I can't really see the benefit in delinking. It seems to me that we either accept it as an appropriate link or we consider it an inappropriate link and simply remove it or comment it out until they remove their section on THF (I just checked their site and their notice about THF has been shrinking considerably and is now a few sentences and much smaller image, beneath that large blue box is was originally in). I'm just not seeing any real benefit in delinking and it seems that the only people who would be affected by us doing so are our readers who want to follow up a reference or visit the site for their own reasons and are forced to copy and paste the URL rather than having the convenience of simply clicking on the link. What is your opinion? If you think it is appropriate to delink all mm.com links, can you explain explain why? Cheers, Sarah 19:29, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Following
Hi, It's a long story. Basicly, my wife also had an account with Wikipedia. UpDown complained about that. Wikipedia accepted that it was my wife and labelled it as a "meatpuppet" not a "sockpuppet". During that case, he would follow both of us around Wikipedia. Wikipedia will have a record if you want to look. As for today's farrago, you can go to Arnold Schwarzenegger and see that I removed and  as they are FU violations against WP:FU and WP:NFCC. UpDown followed me to the site, if you look at the history tab, you will see he followed after just 7 minutes and restored the photos claiming that they were Public Domain photos ! Just look at the photos and you will that there are no Public Domain licences, they are FU screenshots. If he turns up on your talk page as well then that is one more proof he follows me. Tovojolo 15:00, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for your message. Could you just explain what you mean by a "diff" ? --Tovojolo 16:14, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * A diff is the difference ("diff") between two versions of a page. This diff shows the difference between two versions of my talk page and is obtainable through the page history. If I wanted to state "Tovojolo posted a request on my talk page" and prove it, I would post "Tovojolo posted a request on my talk page." Note how the diff follows the statement so that anyone wanting to verify it can. Below is your original post above. I indicated where diffs were needed and add two I found. Please feel free to add the approproate diffs. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 16:27, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, It's a long story. Basicly, my wife also had an account with Wikipedia.(diff) UpDown complained about that.(diff) Wikipedia accepted that it was my wife and labelled it as a "meatpuppet" not a "sockpuppet".(diff) During that case,(diff) he would follow both of us around Wikipedia. Wikipedia will have a record if you want to look.(diff) As for today's farrago, you can go to Arnold Schwarzenegger and see that I removed Image:Schwarzenegger.jpg and Image:T-800.jpg as they are FU violations against WP:FU and WP:NFCC. UpDown followed me to the site, if you look at the history tab, you will see he followed after just 7 minutes and restored the photos claiming that they were Public Domain photos! Just look at the photos and you will that there are no Public Domain licences, they are FU screenshots. If he turns up on your talk page as well then that is one more proof he follows me.

Thanks for the information.



Tovojolo 16:41, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The fact that he deleted your edit gives you some idea of just how disruptive he is. Don't be surprised if he deletes it again.

Tovojolo 08:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

He's deleted your edit again. He is seriously disruptive.

Tovojolo 10:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I told you he'd turn up on your Talk Page.

Tovojolo 10:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Geraldine Newman
Hello. I'm sorry that you have had to get involved in this stupid argument. Tovojolo takes things very personally, and seems to believe that he should be able to work alone and in private with no touching his edits. But regardless, regarding Newman's page. IMDb is not considered a "reliable source", as anyone can contribute to it. This is widely know. Therefore you cannot reference to it, it would be like referencing to a blog or to another Wikipedia page. Yes, these credits came from there, but that is why I have out the "unref" tag at the top - so we can get reliable references for these. I'm sure they exist, and to be honest if Tovojolo spent his time looking for them instead of his attempt to get me banned then all this would not have happended, and we'd have a better article.--UpDown 10:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry you have come to the conclusion I was acting in bad faith, because thats far from the truth. I quote from WP:STALK "The term "wiki-stalking" has been coined to describe following a contributor around the wiki, editing the same articles as the target, with the intent of causing annoyance or distress to another contributor. This does not include checking up on an editor to fix errors or violations of Wikipedia policy, nor does it mean reading a user's contribution log; those logs are public for good reason. Using the edit history of users to correct related problems on multiple articles is part of the recommended practices both for Recent changes patrol (RCP) and WikiProject Spam. The important part is the disruption - disruption is considered harmful. Wikistalking is the act of following another user around in order to harass them.". "This does not include checking up on an editor to fix errors or violations of Wikipedia policy". This is what I have been doing with Tovojolo. It has never ever been my intention to harass him. I look at some of his edits, mainly the ones that are on articles on my Watchlist anyway (ie Joanna Lumley, Penelope Keith). You will note I have never touched most of his edits (ie all his James Bond work, and US actors/actresses). I only edit articles of interest to me, ie British actors and actress. If he feels I'm harassing him, then I apologise. But frankly he has always been very, very hostile to me and does seems to think he should be allowed to edit with anyone disagreeing. Regardless, I thank you for your invention. --UpDown 18:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Hornetman16 MFD
you stated that the subpages should be kept like the userpage but the only reason the userpage is there is to state he is blocked. The subpages I believe are basically useless -- there is almost  no chance he will be unblocked considering he tried to skip over the block with socks. Thank you and cheers!  SLSB  talk  •  contrib   15:20, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

IMDB
Hi,

I think Wikipedia's attitude to IMDB can be summed up as :

1) The biographies, quotations and trivia on IMDB are not referenced or sourced, as for instance on the IMDB page on Marilyn Monroe . It is for that reason that referencing from IMDB for biographical sources is not encouraged.

2) Filmographies - IMDB is the premier source and that use is valid on Wikipedia, for instance, the Template:Infobox Film specifically references the IMDB.

There are literally thousands of filmographies on Wikipedia sourced from the IMDB and it is a valid reference.

Tovojolo 15:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

DYK history tool
Hi - I've parsed the nom histories (from T:DYKT) with code that (mostly) works for the formatting used during most of this year and can generate history tables from the archive files, like this one. The nominations before October 2004 used a different format (and/or different mechanism) and between then until about October 2006 weren't consistently signed (with unsigned noms parsing the nominator from the history takes an entirely different method than what I've been using). I have the DYK date and can get the creator and creation date for any article, but the nominators will take more work. If you'd like I could post history tables (which aren't quite complete, but fairly close) like the one above from the archives starting around October 2006. If we want to maintain some sort of tool based approach to this going forward, I think we should create a DYK nomination template rather than rely on parsing free format nominations. There could actually be two forms of the template, one for the nomination page (for which a comment and nominator field would display) and another for the DYK and DYK archive pages (which would display only the DYK text). Let me know how you'd like to proceed. -- Rick Block (talk) 22:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I checked the output on those ones and there is an issue since expansions are counted for articles on DYK. As a result, I am listed as the nominator but not writer in all of those articles in the sample even though I did the 5X expansions for them. The first edit was in 2004 and the expansions were in June 2007.  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 01:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, this will be true if the creation date and the DYK date are more than 5 days apart. How this is likely to work in practice is the table for each archive will be autogenerated once, with some errors - missing entries, creator rather than article expander listed in the "creator" column, etc.  Then, just like the FA by year tables (e.g. Featured articles nominated in 2007), the tables could be edited by hand to correct any problems.  There are about 10,000 DYK blurbs that don't have easily accessible "credit" histories.  We could do them by hand, but I think starting with something that's even as low as 70% accurate is likely to be a big help.  Jreferee's volunteered to proof the output after it is created.  I could have the tool notate a greater than 5 day difference between the creation date and the DYK date (make the background yellow or something), if that would help.  Once the tables are stable, then it would be easy to write a tool to sum up the stats.  -- Rick Block (talk) 01:45, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It will all have to be manually proofed. Let's take it one page at a time, but it is likely you will have to modify your tool to assist in my manual proof. Let's work with Recent additions 146 as it is as good as place to start as any. Could you add a "Info verified" column to the table and fill them with the word "no". Thanks. Also, the accuracy of T:DYKT depends on people archiving the information. The only true record of DYK is T:DYK. If we base everything off of T:DYKT, we may need to run a check against T:DYK in the future to ensure that we have all DYK posts. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 19:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I've posted the output from the latest version of the tool at Recent additions 146/history. I think this does pretty much everything you want except highlight the creators (or creation date) if it's more than 5 days from the nom date.  The entries with blanks for the nom (and nom date, etc.) are ones that the tool couldn't resolve to an addition to T:TDYK (of the 9000 or so entries I'm currently working with there are about 1000 of these).  I can add the highlighting (just haven't gotten around to it yet).  Does this look roughly right? -- Rick Block (talk) 04:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * You might want to change the cutoff to seven days because sometimes we are late and put 7 day old stuff on there.  Blnguyen  ( bananabucket ) 08:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Not sure you noticed - but I've posted output from the most recent version of the tool (see comments on my talk). Regarding your comments above, I have the history of T:DYK and have parsed out all additions (with the dates the items were added, likely including any vandalism additions).  What the tool does is parse article names from a given version of WP:DYKA and generate a table entry from preparsed histories of T:DYK and T:TDYK, which contain the nominator, nom date, rev id of T:TDYK with the first mention of the article (all from T:TDYK) and the DYK date (from T:DYK).  It looks up the article creator and create date for each article in the table as it runs.  If the archive pages are sensibly organized (specifically, contain all the entries from a set of consecutive dates) the tool could check to make sure there aren't any missing entries (and could conceivably even generate entries in the table for any missing entries).  Reparsing the histories of T:DYK and T:TDYK is feasible (I recently completely redid the T:TDYK parsing to get the revid and avoid relying on signed suggestions), but doing this takes a fair amount of effort (the T:TDYK history is huge).  I haven't connected this to my bot yet, and haven't even really given bot-ifying it much thought.  I suspect I've implemented most of the basic parsing mechanisms, and doing incremental updates since a previous update won't be too difficult (the FA-related updates work this way).  It's possible for the bot to update the archive files - not sure if you want to consider this.  -- Rick Block (talk) 04:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your intervention
Thanks for your intervention.

Hopefully, his following me will now cease.

I take full notice of your comments and will not respond to UpDown in any way in the future.

I assure you of my full co-operation.

Thanks,



Tovojolo 18:23, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Would you do me a favor. Please stop putting returns after each sentence in your post. You have been here long enough to have recognized that just about all users keep their post together. Without extra returns after each sentence in your post above, the post would have looked like:"Thanks for your intervention. Hopefully, his following me will now cease. I take full notice of your comments and will not respond to UpDown in any way in the future. I assure you of my full co-operation. Thanks, [[Image:Smile-tpvgames.gif]] Tovojolo 18:23, 27 August 2007 (UTC)" Keeping your post together makes it much easier to read and makes it clear as to who posted the text. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 18:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Will do. , Tovojolo 20:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Gonzales edit
Thanks for the kudos. Was this the article you saw on Google news? (Link: http://www.jossip.com/cnn/gonzales-resigns-possibly-due-to-early-onset-alzheimers-20070827/

Yeah, I saw it on NYTimes.com three minutes after Gonzo's resignation was posted. And then I put it on Wikipedia. I then turned on the TV to CNN and Fox. But they did not have Gonzo's resignation for several minutes after I turned the TV on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlippman (talk • contribs) 19:59, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 27th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Final Word
Just to respond to what has been said about me so that you do not get the wrong impression about me. I am not difficult to work with, nor am I hostile to others, nor do I like to work alone. If you look at my User Page, you will see that I am a member of 10 Wikipedia Projects and I have won an award for my Project work. That is proof enough of my willingness to collaborate and that I am amenable to others.

Tovojolo 08:25, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

UAA
That's got to be some kind of record for a WP:UAA submission, lol. Interesting issues, though, even if not really UAA concerns. Good job handling that! Ariel ♥ Gold 16:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. As I followed it up, it seemed to grow. UAA seemed as good as place as any to initially address the issues. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 19:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Laurel School
Laurel School is one of 13 independent schools in the Greater Cleveland metropolitan area. If you take a look at the Wikipedia entries for these other schools -- Hathaway Brown, University School and others -- you'll see entries very similar to Laurel's. The majority of the information contained in our entry is verifiable as "copyrighted" material. Especially notable as sources are: "Meeting at the Crossroads," "How Girls Thrive" and "Educating the Independent Mind."

Individuals continue to vandalize our site, posting links, for example, to a Laurel alumna who killed herself. This is not noteworthy information about a school that has educated thousands of girls over a period of 112 years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sarahfarley (talk • contribs) 18:42, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

1request for comment
would you mind commenting here please? CholgatalK! 02:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The Real World
Hello I put in for a request for | The Real World Wiki yesterday and today I felt curious so I put in the adress and the Real World Wiki was there!My question is:Am I the Founder?If so how to I put up the Logo and I created an account and under the user list I am not listed.A little help?Just reply here 16:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.132.170.180 (talk)
 * I don't know much about that site. You might get a better answer if you post at Talk:The Real World. Also, Nightscream seems to have made many posts at The Real World, so you might try his talk page. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 20:38, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Reality film
Hey Jreferee -if you get a chance, tell me how you think this article is looking. I found quite a few sources--Christian Science Monitor interviewing a media prof about the genre, Variety Magazine, The Times of London, et. al.--that talk about it as a "phenomenon" and genre. If you get a moment, take a look and give me any suggestions or problems you might see. -- David  Shankbone  22:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Would you also close the DRV per WP:SNOW? -- David  Shankbone  00:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar - thanks!
I'm surprised I'm still top dog in that count. I haven't updated that page in ages and I suspected someone else to commit enough time to overtake my edit count. Anyway, thanks for the star. - Mgm|(talk) 11:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

New version of DYK history tool
Just a ping - output at Recent additions 146/history. I might try to figure out what's up with more of the entries that are missing DYK dates. If you notice anything that looks like the tool should have caught, let me know. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Other anomalies:
 * Sports in Karnataka - nominator used "_" rather than " " (sigh). I guess I can normalize to spaces but I'm not sure how often this might come up.  Original nom by Amarrg, see.
 * Bombings of Switzerland in World War II - nominated as "Bombing of Zurich in World War II" and the rename never seems to have appeared in T:TDYK. Nom'd by Ekem, see.


 * --Rick Block (talk) 21:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm reasonably happy with the tools at this point (they can whip out the tables WAY faster than it's possible to verify them). Unless you have other suggestions  it might be time to start thinking about how to get analogous data from before October 2004. -- Rick Block (talk) 03:33, 1 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I've changed the tool to always display the DYK date from the history of T:DYK, and if the date is before 2004-10-01 to list whoever added the entry to T:DYK as the nominator (and, in this case, the nom link is to the T:DYK edit, not to a T:TDYK edit). I've posted output from the new version at Recent additions 1/History.  There are a couple of minor anomalies I'm chasing down, but I think this version is at least close.  -- Rick Block (talk) 18:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)


 * No real hurry, but I am interested in what you think about listing the T:DYK editor as the nom for DYKs that appeared before Oct 2004 (as is now done at Recent additions 1/History). -- Rick Block (talk) 17:37, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I answered on your talk page. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 14:38, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Im a reliable source!
Well I'm sorry, I'll link that page prominently from the image description page. Nikola 20:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Nothing to be sorry about. It is good news that someone thinks enough of your efforts to quote you as a reliable source. Congrats! --  Jreferee  (Talk) 01:06, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Re : Albert Reed
No objections to a significantly improved article. :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 10:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Dino Dini
Hello. I am looking for your advice/mediation on the article Dino Dini. It is essentially a very poor article, and is currently being edited by its own subject, despite multiple warnings about why this can't be done. He is unfortunately censoring information in the article, and using it to portray an image that he would want to be true, rather than the truth itself. Blanaaaaaa 18:52, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

WP:USER
Could you tell me what the span formatting is for? It doesn't seem to make a visible difference. Ta. Tyrenius 00:22, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Do you disagree with my adding span to that page? --  Jreferee  (Talk) 06:24, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

List of Akatsuki members
The List of Akatsuki members AfD you participated in has been brought to deletion review here. Please take a look if you're interested. — xDanielx T/C 19:54, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

WritersUA entry deletion appeal
This is in response to your request for reliable sources for the WritersUA entry. The following testimonials are from respected and well-published members of the technical communication and user assistance communities. If the content of the original entry was not suitable for Wikipedia, I believe it would be more appropriate to allow for a rewrite rather than a deletion. Additional references and testimonials can be provided if necessary. Joe Welinske 21:36, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

=
=== Testimonials for WritersUA

From William Horton: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Horton)

WritersUA is an educational institution in the 21st Century meaning of that word. It provides a community, information, and education in a field of endeavor that is more practical than scholastic. It is a shame that such organizations are not recognized for the essential professional service they provide.

William Horton President, William Horton Consulting, Inc. Fellow, Society for Technical Communication Winner of the ACM Rigo Award for contributions to software documentation Winner of the IEEE Goldsmith Award for professional communication Author of 10 books on technical communication and e-learning

- From Professor David Farkas:

WritersUA, previously called WinWriters, occupies an important place in the history of software user assistance (aka computer documentation). Joe Welinske, who owns WritersUA, has played and continues to play a key role in professionalizing the field of software user assistance.

Since its beginnings in 1989, WritersUA has conducted over 100 instructional seminars worldwide,. These range from small classes within an individual corporation to international conferences with well over 1000 attendees. WritersUA published a serious print professional journal on (Windows) user assistance for about 5 years. The WritersUA website continues the role of the journal to this day. Far more than a promotional website for WritersUA, it is a major source of information in the field of software user assistance. The articles published on the website include original research on online help.

I myself am a Professor in the Department of Technical Communication (College of Engineering) at the University of Washington. Over a period of 20 years, software user assistance has been my primary academic interest. (My professional website is http://faculty.washington.edu/farkas) I believe strongly that I am providing you with an expert assessment of the importance of WritersUA in the field of software user assistance.

David K. Farkas, Professor Department of Technical Communication University of Washington

- From Professor Ping Duan:

WritersUA is a popular company that provides quality training and publications for the community of user assistance professionals. The webpage of the company is well designed and provides the audience with valuable information in technical writing. My colleagues and I visit the web page of WritersUA regularly and benefit a lot in our career of technical communication. I sincerely hope the company and its web page can be supported so that they can play an important role in promoting technical communication throughout the world.

sincerely,

Ping Duan Professor of Applied Linguistics, Capital Medical University, Beijing Member of Society of Technical Communication Member of Asian Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language Director of Beijing College English Research Association

- From John Hedtke:

I am writing in support of the inclusion of WritersUA on Wikipedia.

WritersUA has been a respected event for technical communicators, online help developers, and academics for many years. It is one of the premiere events for anyone interested in developing online help and promoting new technologies for technical communications. There are attendees and speakers from all over the world. WritersUA has also been a strong supporter of technical writing and help technology through donations to and support of the Society for Technical Communication (www.stc.org), both regionally and globally. As a Fellow of the Society for Technical Communication, an author of 25 books, close to 200 magazine articles, and hundreds of manuals, I recommend them for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Yours truly,

John Hedtke Author/Consultant/Contract Writer www.hedtke.com <-- website 541-685-5000 (office landline) 541-554-2189 (cell) john@hedtke.com (primary email) johnhedtke@aol.com (secondary email)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter
Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

Re: Improper modification of post
See here. Again, sorry, I edited your post by mistake.  Melsaran  (talk) 19:59, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up on deletion review
Thanks for notifying me of your new comments. I noticed you didn't comment on the two keep !votes by people who believed use of the template in articles violated WP:CENSOR. I'd be curious if you had anything to add on that point. LyrlTalk C 00:36, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

re:Subpages
No I hadn't seen those. User:Analogdemon/Shitty article candidates/Analogdemon, User:Analogdemon/Support of SPUI, and User:Analogdemon/Beach Boys Albums seem a little over the top. Most stuff under User:Analogdemon/Drafts is fine, I think. I'll mention this over at the MFD. — M o e   ε  06:11, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I added a note to the bottom of the MFD to let everyone know I added to the nomination later than the original. Seperate MFD's for multiple pages of the same user would just be unproductive. I think the closing administrator will be able to tell and make an accurate judgement based on the comments left, and there appears to be a few days left on the nomination, so more comments could always discuss the usefulness of it. — M o e   ε  06:19, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Aiken
As you were involved in an earlier discussion regarding whether certain material is appropriate to the Clay Aiken page, I'd appreciate it if you'd take a look at the discussion going on there today on the talk page here and here  and express an opinion if you have one. Thanks. -Jmh123 00:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. R Delivery Bot 03:47, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Image:Image-UN_Swords_into_Plowshares_Statue.JPG
Hi Jreferee: Can you comment on this? Sometime ago you requested me to move this image to commons, but now it was deleted there and here of course. Thanks. - Dragonbite 07:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

See discussion below:

''Hello there. I just want to know why you deleted this image which is my own work. I photographed it myself, therefore I am the copyrightholder and contributor of this image. I would like you to undelete it. If you can't, kindly let me know on my talk page so I could upload it from my camera again. I was even requested by an editor at Wikipedia to move this image to commons. I believe deletion was unnecessary. Thank you. - Dragonbite 06:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * And please note that this image is definitely NOT A DERIVATIVE WORK. I took the image myself! - Dragonbite 06:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * But you didn't create the statue by yourself, which seems to not fall under Freedom_of_panorama. See Derivative works --Flominator 07:10, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
 * So there are different policies at Commons and Wikipedia? - Dragonbite 07:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)''
 * Freedom_of_panorama only applies to "publication of an image of a copyrighted artwork". It doesn't say "publication of an image that also include a copyrighted artwork." Derivative works only applies to a picture of a sculpture. That photo is a panorama image that includes much more than the copyrighted artwork statute. It is much more than a picture of a sculpture. I don't think delete is appropriate, at least not without discussion and consensus. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 18:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for restoring the image under its original image name. I have taken note of your comments/input/advise especially the fair use rationales. Best regards. - Dragonbite 09:25, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Madeleine L'Engle
Thanks for the heads up on Madeleine L'Engle. It looks as though people have done a good job of updating to reflect her death and haven't introduced any surviving vandalism that I saw. I tweaked a few things and made one correction. Regards... -- Karen | Talk | contribs 02:06, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Ashley Massaro
I looked over Ashley Massaro's article and fixed all the vandalism. Thanks for protecting it. Nikki311 02:50, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Vanessa Hudgens
Is there something specific? The section about the recent "controversy" doesn't look too bad or lengthy. Since the article is protected fully now (which is too bad) nothing more can be added... :-) Mad Jack 17:28, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Jacksonville, Florida
Sure thing, I'll take a look.--Cúchullain t/ c 19:11, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Linkin Park
Why did you full-protect Linkin Park? Your edit summary stated there was an edit war. No, it was blatant and persistant vandalism, both on the article, and on the talk page, two other editors and myself continually reverted. The vandal in question is a "friend" of mine who feels the need to continually undo edits I make, and uses dynamic IPs to evade blocks. There's no reason to full-protect the article; semi-protection will do just fine. Parsecboy 19:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

3RR
Hi,

I just saw your post on Talk:Linkin Park; I have to say that I think you've completely overreacted. Blocking multiple well-intentioned editors for 3RR when they were trying to deal with persistent vandalism from multiple IPs is significantly overstepping the mark, in my opinion. All of the anonymous IPs were blocked for vandalism, why do you feel you need to "punish" the good-faith edits of User:Parsecboy and User:Oysterguitarist who were merely rectifying the issue?

Also, applying full page protection to Linkin Park is unnecessary; the page has already been semi-protected to deal with the main problem; namely the persistent vandalism from IP accounts.

Regards, Oli Filth 20:37, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I have to say I tend to agree that you may have overreacted in blocking the two established editors. Parsecboy has made an unblock request indicating that they believed they were reverting vandalism. do you feel strongly about the block? Spartaz Humbug! 20:45, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Genre Disputes have been going on a long time in that article. Archive 2 even is entitled "Earlier Genre Disputes" at Talk:Linkin_Park. The revert war was over the sentence "Linkin Park is recognized for adapting the nu metal and homocore genres" vs. "Linkin Park is recognized for adapting the nu metal genre." The 3RR vandalism exception applies only to the most simple and obvious vandalism. the kind that is immediately apparent to anyone reviewing the last edit. The addition of homocore genre is not the most simple and obvious vandalism and does not even appear to be vandalism. It seems more like a disagreement over what genre this band fits into, which is one of an ongoing disagreement over the genre issue. Parsecboy made at least 11 reverts within 24 hours. The revert war seem to me to be an WP:OWN effort through reverts. A cool down period seems appropriate. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 20:57, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, I got asked to look at the unblock request, and considering the comment the IP was leaving to the talk page, I personally wouldn't have blocked (but left a warning to tell him to at least have left the message on the talk page), per WP:BLP concerns, the claims being unsourced. But I don't wish to overturn your block. -- lucasbfr talk 21:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Had Parsecboy not immediatedly reverted that talk page post and allowed the issue to be discussed, things may not have gotten out of hand. --  Jreferee  (Talk) 21:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Excuse me for piping in here. I noticed the next edit made by that same IP address, and it seems very unlikely that the talk page comment was a legitimate attempt to start a discussion.  I totally understand where you are coming from here, and agree that your actions were within policy.  However, it seems pretty clear that the editors were acting in good faith and reverting what they believed to be vandalism.-- Kubigula (talk) 21:34, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Strike that - different IP address from the one that initially added the message. Still, I have to admit that I probably would have considered the attempt to add the homocore genre as vandalism.  But, I see your point too.-- Kubigula (talk) 21:53, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I have declined the unblock. I also think the block was marginal but your reasoning is sound and within policy. Spartaz Humbug! 21:08, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I urge you to reconsider this block. Parsecboy has been shockingly harassed as of late by the apparent reappearance of Labyrinth13, an editor that was indefinitely blocked in June for a situation in which Parsecboy was involved. Said editor has been subsequently blocked on no less than 10 IPs and gone unblocked on over 30 other IPs for persistent reversion without explanation to edits made by Parsecboy. This editor has an as yet unexplained ability to access IPs in such a wide range that he has been effectively unstoppable, indiscriminately reverting hundreds of edits to numerous articles merely because Parsecboy had edited them, necessitating immense efforts on the behalf of many editors, including Parsecboy, to restore articles to their intended state. These are not reversions on articles where the editor and Parsecboy had differences of opinion on content - these are articles never previously touched by the editor, reverted only because Parsecboy had touched them. A glance at Parsecboy's contributions from September 1 to September 3 will demonstrate the amount of vandalism with which he has had to cope.


 * I previously discussed this situation with an admin, who felt that the breadth of IPs involved indicated this could really only be investigated as possible open proxies, as sock puppets, and reported through abuse reports. IP blocks have been ineffective as the editor has the ability to change IPs in moments. On his advice, I compiled a list of the involved IPs and blocks - and before I could report it, I read of this block. All four of the IPs involved in the 'edit war' at Linkin Park fall within the IP ranges used in previous attacks and are single purpose accounts used only in that edit war. Please reconsider the block in light of this information. In addition, I would be glad to have your advice on how best to report this extremely frustrating vandalism situation. Maralia 04:07, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello, Jreferee. Needless to say, I wasn't very pleased with how you handled that situation. I feel you completely misread the events, and overreacted. Perhaps next time you should delve a little bit deeper before blocking editors with no history of disruptive editing. Really, I would've liked an opportunity to defend myself before being blocked. That said, I appreciate that you did not object to the blocks being lifted early. Water under the bridge and all that. Parsecboy 16:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Impressed by the quality of your comments
I just wanted to say that I am impressed by the quality of your comments at deletion review. Andries 08:41, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Econobiglogo.gif)
Thanks for uploading Image:Econobiglogo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 13:36, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Henry VII of England
No problem. I've run through the recent edits and as far as I can tell all the vandalism has been removed. Regards. SteveO 14:16, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Oysterguitarist unblock request
Jreferee,

User:Oysterguitarist has posted an unblock request pursuant to the Linkin Park situation yesterday. As I suggested above, I think the edits he and User:Parsecboy were reverting were vandalism. However, I conceded that there can be a difference of opinion whether it was obvious vandalism or not. In any event, I believe the cool down has been achieved and I don't think there is any benefit to Wikipedia to continue the blocks. My inclination is to unblock, but I wanted to see if you object or have further thoughts. Thanks -- Kubigula (talk) 15:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Just stopping by to say the same. The edits look like obvious vandalism to me, but since you also protected the page, I'm uncertain what purpose these blocks serve. If a block is to prevent further disruption, and you've protected the page so that nobody may edit it, what disruption are these blocks preventing? Anyway, I agree with Kubigula and support the lifting of these blocks. Thanks, - auburn pilot   talk  16:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response.-- Kubigula (talk) 16:19, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

dharmic religions
I will admit that the existence of an article describing an obscure neologism does not hurt Wikipedia so much, though it will be clear that I think it should be deleted. But there is big problem when 1. {[fact}} tags in dharmic religion get repeatedly deleted without sources provided. 2. The obscure neologism is used throughout many Wikipedia articles though far more common terms such as Indian religions and dharma are readily available Andries 16:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Ben Heine
Thanks for letting me know about all that :-) -- Karl Meier 19:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

HSM 3 Protection
Hi, I was just wondering, should the other sources straight from the Vanessa page, about Disney backing her, be added to the HSM 3 page? If so, because you have blocked it, I cannot add these links. So, if you feel they should be added, please add them. JpGrB 23:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Mark Warner (Canadian politician)
An article that you have been involved in commenting on in a speedy deletion process, Mark Warner (Canadian politician), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you. --Canam1 11:14, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Re:Barnstar
Hello Jreferee.. Thanks much for the barnstar! I am not very active these days though I hope to be someday soon... Just curious to know what tool you used to make out the top contributors to WP:NUH — Lost (talk) 16:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

about added reference
You had added a reference here  quoting "U.S. v. Pryba (April 9, 1990) 900 F.2d 748 (4th Cir. (Virginia))).", regarding article shemale. I searched for text but couldnt find, could you give some clue how to dig into this? Also are reference.com and dictionary.com considered WP:RS, as they refer back to wikipedia. Thanks. Lara_bran 16:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * preferably a web link regarding that source. Lara_bran 16:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
Hey thanks for caring, but I'm just not feeling the wikilove. I can't stand that someone would just delete the page about Wikirage. If you want you can read more of my feeling here Don't Panic. w3ace 17:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Two Million
Was there a discussion that I missed? I have already made several postings in response to postings at the Signpost Suggestions page. Zzxc 18:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Where was I uncivil?
You wrote that I was uncivil. I do not recogineze this aspect of my editing behavior. Where was I uncivil? Andries 19:04, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

My RFA
Was that a support !vote, because if so, it was in the wrong place. -- Thε Rαnδom Eδιτor  ( tαlk ) 23:07, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Woops! Thanks. I probably need to take a break from editing for a few hours. ; ) --  Jreferee  (Talk) 23:15, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Politics rule/U.S Senators
Hello. THank you for your imput on this Deletion. However, I am confused. You say both Delete, and Keep. I am a little perplexed. What do you mean? Thanks,  Pat Politics rule!  23:34, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks.  Pat Politics rule!  00:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination
Thank you. I accept, and I appreciate your kind words. :) I have filled out my responses and posted the RFA. --Moonriddengirl 00:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)