User talk:Master Jay/Archives May 2007 - July 2010

Image:1915 Dance by Rodchenko.jpg
Hello, Master Jay. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:1915 Dance by Rodchenko.jpg) was found at the following location: User talk:Master Jay/Archives Apr-May 2006. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or    media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 01:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

195.188.50.200
Hi,

After reading this users page could you please block this fool again because recently he has taken to large levels of vandalism against the Southport wiki and having seen in the past you have blocked him i thought it may be best to ask you.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Themainman88 (talk • contribs)
 * Will look into it. Jay( Talk ) 22:12, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:1915 Dance by Rodchenko.jpg
Hello Master Jay, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:1915 Dance by Rodchenko.jpg) was found at the following location: User talk:Master Jay/Archives Apr-May 2006. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 09:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:1915 Dance by Rodchenko.jpg
Hello Master Jay, an automated process has found an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, such as fair use. The image (Image:1915 Dance by Rodchenko.jpg) was found at the following location: User talk:Master Jay/Archives Apr-May 2006. This image or media will be removed per statement number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media will be replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg, so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. The image that was replaced will not be automatically deleted, but it could be deleted at a later date. Articles using the same image should not be affected by my edits. I ask you to please not re-add the image to your userpage and could consider finding a replacement image licensed under either the Creative Commons or GFDL license or released to the public domain. Please note that it is possible that the image on your page is included vie a template or usebox. In that case, please find a free image for the template or userbox. Thanks for your attention and cooperation. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 09:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Benjamin_Grosvenor&action=edit
Could you tell me why this was deleted? and how i can get it undeleted?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgrosvenor (talk • contribs)
 * The article was copied from another site. Feel free to re-create the article using original content. Jay( Talk ) 01:49, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

"Cafe Kichijoji de"
The title to this article is mispelled, and is evidenced clearly by the title printed on the cover of the manga featured on the page itself. In my attempt to correct it, I was informed that I was defacing the page. If I am not permitted to fix it, please make sure that someone DOES.

Thank you

French userbox
Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but in your French-language userbox, don't you mean to say "Cet utilisateur parle", "This user speaks", rather than the plural "Ces utilisateurs parlent"? -- Thesocialistesq/M.Lesocialiste 01:55, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing it out. Jay( Talk ) 21:22, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:114 hundals.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:114 hundals.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 any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast 21:10, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

SBC
Hi. I still feel that there is a need for an SBC Communications article, primarily for clarity purposes. Yes, SBC has changed its name to AT&T Inc, but we have to put this in a full, historical context.

I was thinking of having a series on this - starting with AT&T 1885 - 1984, The break-up, the Baby Bells/ AT&T long lines (the primary unit from 1984-2005) and then the most recent article would be AT&T Inc. - each should be edited to flow well and maintain clarity. (New) AT&T Inc should lead with an overview of services without getting into the history details - the history should start with how SBC acquired AT&T (with a See Also, SBC Communications at the top), a paragraph on how this is significant (subsidiary eventually buying its parent) and then the diagram and so forth. The founding/expansion should be kept at the SBC Comm. article.

If you think about it, SBC was a successor of AT&T, and now AT&T is a successor of SBC, meaning AT&T is a direct descendant of AT&T. A quick redirect just doesn't do the trick.

I would appreciate your input on this.

--Jay( Talk ) 22:18, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


 * AT&T (1885-1984) is pretty much covered in the Bell System and American Telephone & Telegraph articles. AT&T covers SBC Communications because SBC did not reincorporate itself when it bought AT&T, hence the reason that SBC should not be a separate page from AT&T. The new AT&T (f/k/a SBC) is an entirely separate entity from American Telephone & Telegraph. Even though it does now own the company, SBC did not undergo a change of management in its own structure when it acquired AT&T. The true confusion with this also lies in the fact that many believe that AT&T bought SBC, which is absolutely not true. Having the SBC page separate from AT&T creates the impression that AT&T is an entirely new company, founded in 2005, which actually is not the case. The disclaimer at the top of the page can redirect users to American Telephone & Telegraph if they are looking for the original AT&T. Another disclaimer in the infobox easily explains the incorporation date of the current AT&T (f/k/a SBC), in case confusion exists at seeing 1983.


 * Recently, an IP user frequently vandalized the AT&T page (and will occasionally go to American Telephone & Telegraph and do the same) to create the impression that AT&T truly did reincorporate itself in 2005 as a "new" company, which is not the case. AT&T, today, might consist of a lot of the same divisions held by the original AT&T in 1983, but how it came to do this should be included in the same article - why SBC should stay in the AT&T article. A lot of business practices that SBC did were not changed after it bought AT&T.


 * Similar situations in which a company acquired a well-known company and changed its own name as a result exist with Sprint Nextel and Verizon. In both situations the history of the buying company (with the new name) is included in the article, because the company did not reincorporate itself.


 * I am opposed to keeping SBC Communications separate from the AT&T article. KansasCity 13:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Block of user
Thank you for blocking User:Kyleellis2011. Is it okay if I add Indefblockeduser to this user's page, even though I didn't block him/her? Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 21:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Sure --<b style="background:black; color:white">Jay</b><b style="background:red">( Talk )</b> 21:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

the reference to the lost Norwegian land Is paret of Norways Histoty and do Not need to Be veryfied. Bohuslen,Herjedalen and Hemtland is the Lost parts Given to Sweden,The isle in the Atantic,north and west of Scootland,was given to United Kingdom,Ferøene,Island and Greenland,was kept by the Danish king at the time,it all comme about because Denmark Sided with Napolion.

vikigs
the term vikings comes from viken (the lands bordering Oslofjorden) Viken is the old name for the Oslofjorden.Danes is from Danmark.Norman is from Norway.Norman is stil used as "jeg er Normann" am Norwegian.TheProvinceses in Sweden "Båhuslen,Hemtland,Herjedalen.was part of Norway.And i think you wil find King William av England was Born in Bergen,Norway from Jan

Fair use rationale for Image:Buddy-Rich2.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Buddy-Rich2.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Garion96 (talk) 16:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Taken care of. Thanks --<b style="background:black; color:white">Jay</b><b style="background:red">( Talk )</b> 18:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Mountain View
I am not sure who started this renaming of Mountain View, California → Mountain View, California (city) and back again. All I know is that WP:NC:CITY says:

"'The canonical form for cities in the United States is City, State (the 'comma convention'). Those cities that need additional disambiguation include their county or parish (for example Elgin, Lancaster County, South Carolina and Elgin, Kershaw County, South Carolina)'."

Therefore I reverted your moves of Mountain View, Contra Costa County, California and Mountain View, Natrona County, Wyoming. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Hmm ... Cholga ... I have interacted with him before so it is not a surprise. But forgive me because one of the moves I mentioned were attributed to you. But I see now that Cholga is credited with the other one. Sorry. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Unhelpful edits to Bill Gates
Hi Master Jay, I'm retired, but regarding your comment on Gazpacho's talk page, I'm just dropping by to apologize for my unhelpful edits to the Bill Gates page. I now know that my edits were not in a neutral tone. They were also not helpful(such as October 28 being a day). Please accept my apologies.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 01:09, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
 * On a totaly illrevelvant note, I would like to say that I really like your username! Master Jay.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 01:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Teklogs at Wikia
Teklogs at Wikia is starting to pick up again. You founded that wiki, but later abandoned it. You are inactive on Wikia, but I see that you are active here on Wikipedia (and an admin too). I was wondering if you were interested in returning to Teklogs, are you? Please reply on my Teklogs talk page (it would be helpful if you could give me any extra information about Teklogs and tell me why you gave up on it). Thank you! Tcrow777Talk 01:52, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

What did I do, I didn't leave anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.237.31.20 (talk) 19:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Bombardier1.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Bombardier1.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. BJBot (talk) 20:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bramalea citycentre logo.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Bramalea citycentre logo.png. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Baseball Newsletter
--  jj137   ( talk )  03:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Ebuyer article
re: Ebuyer I think the article is not well constructed about lots of uncited references. the talk page is even more POV. I dont know enough about the company even though I use them as a customer in order to write a new article. Ive ordered lots of things from them in the past and recently without one serious problem. Id be interested on your view on this article and its negative POV. --  RND    T    C   21:44, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

October Baseball WikiProject Newsletter
--  jj137   ( talk )  00:20, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

this is a reader
buddy rich is the greatest modern drummer in the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.27.183.141 (talk) 22:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Image permission problem with Image:BT GMDD T6H-5307N .jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:BT GMDD T6H-5307N .jpg I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the image (or other media file) agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org], stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the image to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the image has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org permissions-en@wikimedia.org].

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the image's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Images lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jappalang (talk) 02:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protection for Black or White article
Hi Master Jay, I am Alexanderfriend (the main author of Black or White article) and I waste my time to revert vandalism by many IPs and it is a great problem. Black or White article needs semi-protection, because many IP and some users are doing vandalism. See: Revision history of Black or White

Thanks --Alexanderfriend (talk) 02:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi there.


 * I'm hoping I can get you to reconsider the page protection on Black or White. From what I've seen, there is not really a vandalism problem there, but rather a problem with edit-warring involving the above user, who appears to be trying to get a leg up in that war. The article contains numerous unsourced, unverifiable and POV claims, which various users and IPs have been appropriately taking out, only to see their edits restored by Alexanderfriend and tagged as vandalism. For more on this, you can take a look at the edit-war warning I posted to his talk page or the resulting sockpuppet investigation that I had to file shortly thereafter.


 * On the other hand, there may be actual vandalism going on, but I haven't noticed anything out of the ordinary for Wikipedia, and certainly not any that would warrant a two-year long semi-protection. I'm hoping you can take a look and re-open the page for universal editing. Thanks. — Bdb484 (talk) 04:12, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Air photo
I don't understand. There are two pictures. One that is clear, one that is foggy. And you say that the clear photo was when the air was bad? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BeijingSmogComparison-Aug2005a.gif --<b style="background:black; color:white">Jay</b><b style="background:red">( Talk )</b> 20:51, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the delay, I was out of the country for a few weeks. In response to your question here, the "foggy" photo was a sunny day (no natural clouds) with smog; the clear photo with high cloud cover (blocking the sun) was after a rain.  --Bobak (talk) 05:52, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I would think that after a rain shower the air would be fresh and clean. And this wasn't the case? I find this to be quite fascinating. --<b style="background:black; color:white">Jay</b><b style="background:red">( Talk )</b> 16:56, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to be clear, the one on the left was after rain showers (and is thus cleaner), and the one on the right was on the sunny but polluted day. --Bobak (talk) 20:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries. My confusion stems from the way you described it. You used the terms first visit and second visit, so when you later said that the second photo was on the day the air was poor, I assumed you meant second visit, which you described as the rainy day. See where I am coming from? --<b style="background:black; color:white">Jay</b><b style="background:red">( Talk )</b> 16:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)