User talk:Jujutacular/Archive 2

To our newest Rollbacker
I have just granted you rollback rights because I believe you to be trustworthy, and because you have a history of reverting vandalism and have given in the past or are trusted in the future to give appropriate warnings. Please have a read over WP:ROLLBACK and remember that rollback is only for use against obvious vandalism. Please use it that way (it can be taken away by any admin at a moment's notice). You may want to consider adding Rollback and User rollback to your userpage. Any questions, please drop me a line. Best of luck and thanks for volunteering!  upstate NYer  21:53, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
MuZemike 23:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Replied there. Jujutacular talkcontribs 23:14, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Question
Why would you try to format and add a construction template to an article that is blatant vandalism ? &lt;&gt;Multi-Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 23:31, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I converted the user's comment "This page is under construction" to the template, because the user was probably unfamiliar with it. Just trying to assume good faith. I watchlisted the page, and would've come back to add a WP:CSD template if nothing was done.  JUJUTACULAR  23:41, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * [[Image:718smiley.svg|20px]] &lt;&gt;Multi-Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 03:51, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Reply
I just gave everyone from the previous discussion and editors the same template not releasing it was the one for editors. I thought it was just going to alert you.--Fire 55 (talk) 21:20, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I see. You nominated the article for deletion again, and thought I should take part. Sorry, I was confused at first. Anyway, I will probably not being taking part in the discussion, as I feel my opinion was stated clearly in the first AfD, and I see no substantial change in the article. Rest assured, other editors more intelligent than myself will discuss the article and come to a conclusion. You may want to read WP:VOTE. Trying to get as much of the people on your side to come to the AfD may be viewed by some as canvassing, and will not invite good will on their part. If there is good argument to delete, it will be deleted.  JUJUTACULAR  | TALK 21:43, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Question at Pr3st0n's RfA
Just wanted to reply to your question, specifically "Part of an administrator's job is to close AFD discussions" -- administrators are volunteers just like the rest of us. They do not have to close AfD discussions as you so imply. Thanks, — neuro  (talk)  12:15, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I did not mean to imply that it is any one administrator's job to close any AfD discussions. It is the job of the administrative group as a whole to close most AFDs (see WP:NAC). You are right, my word choice was not the best. I probably should've worded it: "One responsibility of the administrative group is to close AFD discussions..." Thank you for the correction, I will try to be more clear in the future.  JUJUTACULAR  | TALK 13:49, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It's not really a responsibility, either. They can sit about and twiddle their thumbs all day if they like -- administrators may have the right to do things, but it doesn't mean that they have to do them, or have a responsibility to do them. — neuro  (talk)  14:14, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Forgive me once more. I should've said "One aspect of being an administrator is closing AFD discussions..." Would this suffice?  JUJUTACULAR  | TALK 20:23, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Forgive me -- I'm not trying to be picky, I just thought it was wrong on first sight. I still think the current version is wrong, but either way, I get what you mean now, and that is correct. :) — neuro  (talk)  22:33, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm confuzzled :-S here have a cookie between you both Pr3st0n (talk) 22:36, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi (again)
I wasn't intending on leaving anyway - just needed to make it clear that I was wanting a specific user to back off and give me a break. And the more I requested, the more they continued to post a comment - quite noticeable the user was ignoring my request to leave me alone. At least now I can continue with my work, and seek advice when I need it from a user I can trust, one who I know won't be on my case 24/7. Thank you Jujutacular for your kind friendly support. Gareth aka Pr3st0n (talk) 04:20, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Good to hear. Let me know if you need anything. I'd like to think that I am trustworthy :)  JUJUTACULAR  | TALK 22:14, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Overturn Deletion of MMA HEAT
I do not believe the article MMA HEAT should have been deleted. It provided information about a valid news source within the mixed martial arts (MMA) community. Everything within the article could be confirmed on the company's official website, http://www.MMAheat.com, as well as their Facebook fan page, http://www.facebook.com/MMAheat. If this article was not worthy of Wikipedia inclusion than UFC, Sherdog and many other articles should be deleted as well. MMA H.E.A.T. has been making notable contributions to the MMA community since 2007. Most recently, they were the only news organization to be filming Chuck Liddell's UFC 100 Tao Beach Party in Las Vegas on 7/10, Fedor Emelianenko's press conference discussing his agreement with EA Sports on 7/29 and Cris Cyborg's body slam of Tito Ortiz at Cleber Jiu Jitsu at the beginning of last month. Eckinc (talk) 09:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Consensus was delete. Also, the discussion you started at DRV is the correct place for such additional discussion.  JUJUTACULAR  | TALK 05:22, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

reporting vs discussing usernames
I wonder if I could ask you not to attempt to discuss usernames with users at the same time you are asking for them to be blocked. This puts admins who patrol WP:UAA in an awkward position. If you are already discussing a username change with the user, then it is not really appropriate to block them even if there name is a blatant violation like the law firm you reported today. I had already blocked them when I saw your note on the talk page, so in this case I removed your notice and replaced it with a block notice. If it's a name you feel warrants a block, simply report it at UAA, if it's not so bad that an instant block is needed, then discussion on the user page is appropriate. Thanks Beeblebrox (talk) 19:00, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I haven't done a ton at UAA and I wasn't entirely sure of the correct process and should have been more cautious before I took action. Sorry to put you in that position. I will keep your recommendation in mind in the future.  JUJUTACULAR  | TALK 20:58, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your understanding. If you ever have any questions about usernames, there always discussion going on at Wikipedia talk:Username policy. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:11, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Featured sounds
By the way, just to note, we tend to have spurts of voting there. If things seem a little slow, just keep patient, keep nominating, and they'll clear out in the end. =) Will have a look at your new one once my speakers are working again (I'm rewiring them to replace a broken jack) Shoemaker's Holiday Over 210 FCs served 01:52, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That's fine with me, I'm in no rush :) Thanks for the encouragement.  JUJUTACULAR  | TALK 02:00, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Fernando Sor's Op. 31, No. 1
Now that they're getting promoted, I should ask: How do you want credited on the Featured Sounds page? Shoemaker's Holiday Over 213 FCs served 05:34, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * What you have written looks great to me - "Recording by Wikipedian Jujutacular". Thank you very much Face-grin.svg  JUJUTACULAR  | TALK 15:29, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

You might consider correcting the Opus number to 31 not 30. RichardJ Christie (talk) 10:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the correction.  JUJUTACULAR  | TALK 14:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Sor
There's ways to have the file moved at commons, so no need to reupload. Poke me about it tomorrow and I'll work on it. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 213 FCs served 17:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

It may take a day to percolate through, but it's being fixed. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 213 FCs served 13:56, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I believe it's all taken care of. Many thanks for the help!  JUJUTACULAR  | TALK 17:31, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

HornFans
OK, I give up, why did you add the AfD for a closed discussion to the article?  ttonyb (talk) 01:53, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Sorry, I was completing the nomination for User:Hell in a Bucket, and made a mistake.  JUJUTACULAR  | TALK 05:47, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Cool...  ttonyb (talk) 05:50, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

About "Texas Oil Boom"
I reverted your redirect on "Texas Oil Boom" and wanted to explain why.

In the context of this article, Texas Oil Boom is a proper noun, in the same way that Industrial Revolution and Middle Ages are proper nouns. Granted the term could be used in a non-proper way as well. For example,
 * The Oil Boom was an age that transformed the state.
 * The state had several oil booms though the period in the early 1900s was the most transformative.

In the same way,
 * The Industrial Revolution began in Britain in the 18th century.
 * Each nation in the world has had its own industrial revolution.

In the context of the article we are speaking about the major boom of the early 20th century as a historical period, not just generically about periods that could be characterized as booms.

--Mcorazao (talk) 20:39, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that thorough explanation. I looked at the section in WP:MOS, saw examples such as Pennsylvanian oil rush and Mexican oil boom, and decided it should be lowercase. On seeing your explanation and more closely examining the sources provided, I believe you are correct. Perhaps those other examples should also be capitalized, but who knows. Happy editing!  Jujutacular  T · C 22:30, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Featured sound
Below is how it appears on WP:FS

Feel free to improve. I wikilinked it, in the full knowledge that noone would ever remember to link it later if we do get the article. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 213 FCs served 00:18, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think that looks great, thank you!  Jujutacular  T · C 18:59, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Marie Foster
Thank you very much for creating the Marie Foster page, her getting a page was long overdue. I did a few tweaks, and added the Temple 'African American Civil Rights Movement' (plus added her to the template). Perhaps the only other major '60s CRM leader not to have a page is Dorothy Cotton (and Kale Williams and David Jehnsen from the Chicago Movement). Nice work. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:05, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I was just looking through the "Encyclopedia of World Biography" source I have for people without articles, and found Marie. Very interesting case. Anyway, thanks for the encouragement and the fixes. Feel free to make more changes or expand the article. You might be interested to know it will hopefully be up on DYK sometime soon (it was the first nomination on Oct. 20).  Jujutacular  T · C 17:27, 25 October 2009 (UTC)