User talk:Ohnoitsjamie/archive17

Spam whitelist
Did you mean to add this to the blacklist, rather than the whitelist? Stifle (talk) 10:33, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Not positive that I did it right (I haven't used the whitelist that much), but my intention was to keep the subject and his minions from spamming other articles with links to his site and blog, but allow the article on the subject to retain the links. I also added both links to the blacklist. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 13:34, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, seems to be in order. Stifle (talk) 08:53, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

User talk:65.240.149.74
Hello, the User talk:65.240.149.74 keeps trying to put phrases that violate NPOV on the Taiwan article, and keep reverting to his version. As you have already left messages on his talk, maybe you can keep an eye on this? Thanks. T-1000 (talk) 01:38, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, User talk:74.243.221.59 seems to be one of his alternate accounts. You might want to keep an eye on it as well. T-1000 (talk) 05:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Removal of External Links - 7teven
Noted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 7teven (talk • contribs) 05:26, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

ani
There is something about you on ANI....[] Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:31, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. OhNo itsJamie Talk 18:12, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Pan's Labrinyth
Great movie! (as per your user page) Tdinatale (talk) 19:50, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

IP 85.139.225.163
Hello. I am wondering if you would be so kind as to block 85.139.225.163. He/she keeps blanking an image added/kept based upon consensus. He/she also saw fit to engage in a personal attack on my talk page. Your help would be great. Thank you. Surv1v4l1st (Talk 17:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for wrangling the IP. BTW, we have another one - 94.173.0.101 -  doing the same thing.  In fact, the rationale is the same, so might be same.   Just a heads up and thanks again. Surv1v4l1st (Talk 21:09, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Just a note of thanks for your help. :) Surv1v4l1st (Talk 21:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. They've been given a final warning and will be blocked if they do it again. OhNo itsJamie Talk 21:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Possible IP glitch or something
Hey, I was browsing Wikipedia and received a link telling me that my test had been reverted or something. Thing is, there's nothing telling me exactly what happened, and I don't recall doing any tests. I sometimes correct typos and ask questions on the discussion pages, but I'm not sure exactly what I did that needed reversion. Either there's some obscure editing rule that I broke (that I'd like to know to avoid the issue in the future), or something happened that mixed up my IP with someone else's. Below is the message transcript, which directed me to your talk page.

User talk:71.178.152.14 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Difference between revisions) Ohnoitsjamie (talk | contribs) (test 1) Current revision as of 16:50, 19 June 2007

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

So could you clear this up for me? Thanks. TVTMaster (talk) 16:21, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Several years ago, someone made a silly edit from your IP, that's all. IP addresses are sometimes shared or transferred.  Nothing for you to worry about, as long as you log into your named account (TVTMaster), you won't be blamed for the misdeeds of others that might use that IP. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 16:49, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Tao Lin spammer
i feel like something should be done administratively at this point. this person has made enough attempts to promote/spam, with edit warring included. on another note, when there is a lot of spam for something, there is often the lack of notability. i am not sure if this is the case here, exactly. do you think any of the articles involved in Tao Lin could be afd'd? e.g. Eeeee_Eee_Eeee Theserialcomma (talk) 02:32, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I think a strong argument could be made that his books don't need separate articles; they could easily be covered in the Tao Lin article and aren't particular notable by themselves. As for the promotional campaign, I'll just keep blocking them as I see them. OhNo itsJamie Talk 14:36, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * they are back, evading the block.[] also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive-Behavioral_Therapy_%28book%29 was supposed to be merged a year ago, but it never happened. i am not sure how to do it. is that an administrative function? can we be bold and just merge all the obvious candidates from this point forward? Theserialcomma (talk) 22:29, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Definition Links
You have asked me not to leave external links to dictionary definitions, even though Wiki has 1000's. I am well aware of all Wiki policies. A dictionary definition obviously adds to'enhances any article, especially for non-native speakers of English that may have an idea of what the subject is about but would undoubtably appreciate a link to the definition. Obviously there would be no point in linking to a untrustworthy definition agregator, so the best thing is a completely free dictionary of note. It is just the two particular subjects you mentioned that you have the problem with? Shane rae (talk) 15:33, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The links are unnecessary. They don't add anything to the articles in question. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 15:42, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Jamie. I think I have clarity here. You are saying to stay away from Google and MTV with dictionary definitions. Message received. Shane rae (talk) 15:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Edits
I wasn't finished editing the Attack Attack! page, yet you removed my edit 10 seconds after I posted it. The information entered was accurate. 205.133.193.182 (talk) 21:13, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Add it again (or anything else about "crabcore") and you will be blocked. OhNo itsJamie Talk 21:13, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Why? The lead singer says that he is pioneering the genre... It is completely relavent and 100% in accordance with wikipedia's policies. Give a legitament reason to remove the content, or I will contest your removal of the information as biased on your part. 205.133.193.182 (talk) 21:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * He didn't say he was pioneering a genre. It's clear that they are simply embracing the joke. OhNo itsJamie Talk 21:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

It is not "clear" that it's a joke as you say. It is a distinctive style that the band has adopted from an original joke. The singer even says they are making shirts. How more clear can you get? Here is another interview for your reading pleasure, where all of the band was interviewed: http://www.drivenfaroff.com/2009/07/09/attack-attack-interview/ 205.133.193.182 (talk) 02:00, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That interview makes it even more clear that it's a joke. It's not a musical genre. It's simply a mockery of their stage antics which they've chosen to embrace rather than get defensive about. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 02:11, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

You're interpreting it to fit your opinion. If you walked up to this band and asked if they were crabcore, they would undoubtedly say they are, and that is all that matters. The public decides what genre a band fits into in the end, but in this case both the public and the band support their label as crabcore. If you really wanted to do constructive editing you would tell whoever is putting they are a Christian band in the genre section to stop, because they clearly are not Christian. 205.133.193.182 (talk) 02:23, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The "Christian" revert was a mistake on my part. I read the diff wrong (I thought I was removing the label). As far as "crabcore" goes,  there is no such genre as crabcore. It's a joke. The page is on my watchlist because I watched the funny mock videos of it like everyone else. Popular Internet memes invariably result in people trying to add crap about the meme/joke to Wikipedia.  If you or others continue to do this on the article, you'll be blocked. Period. Nothing further to say. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 02:54, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh well, maybe in a year or two things will change. Thanks anyways. 205.133.193.182 (talk) 02:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

WizFolio
Hi Jamie, I am resurrecting this deleted page Wizfolio. Previously you suggested that the page be deleted. I have updated the page to provide a neutral point of view with additional references from external sources and would like to invite your second opinion. Thank you Kendric Apple (talk) 07:45, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

PROD
Re this prod, I pretty much agree the article doesn't belong but alas, there is precedent for it to remain. For example List of Catholic authors, List of Protestant authors, List of Jewish authors, List of Jewish actors, List of Muslim Actors, List of Buddhist writers, List of Christian mystics, List of Jains ...the list of lists goes on... Frank |  talk  00:42, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I see your point....so I'd probably have to nominate all of them for afd. Well, you could argue a difference between authors and actors, in that faith is more likely to impact a writer's craft than an actor's craft.  I'll have to mull that one over. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 00:45, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh goodness, there are too many of them to nominate. Frank  |  talk  01:09, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Chula Vista
Good job removing the trivia from Chula Vista, California. These smallish city articles frequently have (well meaning) amateurs adding trivia. --71.111.194.50 (talk) 02:47, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Defrain77 Link Deletion
You deleted my links. I'm not spamming/promoting only providing links to articles/interviews in which the selected people are featured. Please stop deleting them they are very relevant and helpful. Thanks Defrain77 (talk) 21:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are spamming. See also our policy on WP:COI. If new accounts continue to canvas this link, I'm afraid I'll have to blacklist the link. I don't think your producers would appreciate that. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 22:29, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I understand your point of view but how else would some body legitimately find out about interviews conducted. I'm just trying to provide information. and we are a non profit anyways we really don't have any interest except for providing information to the public.

Defrain77 (talk) 22:37, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * We don't allow link canvassing, regardless of the content. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 23:00, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

So if i were to have someone not associated with the show who has no vested interest in the show post the links would that be allowed.

Defrain77 (talk) 23:03, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * ...and they were not a single purpose account who's primary purpose was to canvass the links. I.e., such links are fine if they are added by established editors for a source. It's not OK to mass-canvass links as part of a promotional campaign.  OhNo itsJamie  Talk 23:21, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

How could i get in contact with an established editor to do this for me.

Defrain77 (talk) 23:33, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * You don't seem to get it; that's not how it works. I mean established editors adding one more link in the course of regular editing, not going on some kind of campaign to add as many links as possible. We don't allow link canvassing, period. I don't know how many others ways there are to explain that. OhNo itsJamie Talk 23:35, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you have to explain this i don't have quite the knowledge you do. sorry for taking up your time. if you do ever have some time maybe you should look into adding some of these links because they are quite informative.

Removal of PROD from List of Catholic Actors/Actresses
Hello Ohnoitsjamie, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to List of Catholic Actors/Actresses has been removed. It was removed by DGG with the following edit summary ' (Deprodded: Categories and lists are complementary, and there is no reason not to have both.) '. Please consider discussing your concerns with DGG before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to take part in the article's current AfD. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Zelda Wiki.org
As an admin on another wiki I'll say that there was no grounds for speedy deletion of that article it had one third party source from a publication. And an award from a site listed. That made it ineligible for the grounds upon which it was deleted. And from my understanding it could only have been deleted from a normal deletion process. Yes I know where I come from and I warned them of this. But I looked up the reasons specified in the deletion log and they are not even valid in that case. I long have viewed speed deleting without really looking at the page as bad.Matt (talk) 03:39, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't see any notable third-party sites, including the site giving the award. Take it to deletion review if you'd like. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 06:01, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Girlofsummer edits
Hi - just a suggestion, (and without trying to second guess you). If it does come to blocking girlofsummer, can I suggest a fairly short block? I get the feeling she genuinely doesn't understand how things work, and a temporary block might actually make her start looking at the messages she's getting. The material she's putting in, although unsourced and POVish, is hardly inflammatory, which makes me think she simply doesn't know how things work here. Her other edits are similar - no ill intent seems to be there.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 14:52, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. Twenty-four hours would seem appropriate to me. OhNo itsJamie Talk 16:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Halloween
You seem to spend a goodly amount of time keeping various Halloween articles free of, erm, spurious content. Ever think about WP:BOO?--otherlleft 04:00, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll look into it! OhNo itsJamie Talk 13:53, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Warn differences
Heya, I was wondering what the difference is between using "bv" and "uw-vandalism#"? When certain reverting and reporting tools such as Huggle see a "bv", how do they treat it in the subsequent warnings? A "bv" template seems to be more strongly worded and better suited for blaitant vandalism, and I think I may start using it myself. Just curious if it would be beneficial or detrimental to those that warned the same user with a tool/add-on. Thanks Gpia7r (talk) 18:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Off the top of my head, I'm not sure about how Huggle and bots handle it; I'd have to look into it. It's not listed in warning templates page, so it may not be understood by bots or Huggle. (I believe uw-vand4im could be used in a similar fashion, and that one is listed on the aforementioned guide).  Though the wording of the template has changed over time, it's usually pretty similar to uw-vand3.  I use it to nip obvious vandals in the bud faster....no need to go through 4 warning levels when someone is clearly "on a roll."  I also use it for sneaky vandalism (misleading edit summaries and whatnot).   OhNo itsJamie  Talk 18:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

AFD: post-war Sri Lanka
Hi, it seems that you have added an AfD for the aforementioned article; I do agree that it is a PoV fork; but where is the poll? I can't find any in AfD for Sept 30 or 29. Did you miss something in the AfD procedure?

Thanks, Greenleaf (talk) 04:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't use AFD; I simply added a WP:PROD tag. OhNo itsJamie Talk 13:53, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Arm Elf
I had just indef blocked as vandal only, and they had already got an V4 so I removed your additional notice

Thanks --BozMo talk 13:59, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

User:74.243.218.94
Hello, the User:74.243.218.94 is trying again to insert stuff that violates NPOV into the Taiwan article. It is the exact the same thing as before, probably one person using different IPs. If you could take care of this it would be great. T-1000 (talk) 23:39, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Vitamin GAR notice
Vitamin has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:37, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 17:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Areapal
Hi, Suggest me one valid reason why areapal should not be listed as article in wikipedia.Many other social networking sites are having an article and areapal is a platform for knowledge sharing among people from various universities across India. Vatsan34 (talk) 05:02, 4 October 2009 (UTC)Vatsan34
 * Sure. WP:WEB. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 15:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

"The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. This criterion includes reliable published works in all forms, such as newspaper and magazine articles, books, television documentaries, websites, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations"..

I have video of television documentary covering the website which benefits for students from India...Shall i start writing the article again?? .. But that video is hosted in youtube... Vatsan34 (talk) 05:27, 5 October 2009 (UTC)Vatsan34
 * If you do, it will be sent to WP:AFD, where you will have to convince others that it is notable. OhNo itsJamie Talk 13:04, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Steve Chappell
I am just looking for some more information as to why the article, steve chappell, has been deleted. I feel like the issues raised with the article had been addressed in large part. 1. This is a different steve chappell than previous deleted articles. 2. He is notable in his field, maybe in the top 3, highly respected, and 3. the copywrighted material was cited purely as a link to a book he had written, Also it was removed upon concern being raised. An elaboration of your reasoning would be nice. What can be done to reverse this decision? Mortyten (talk) 02:09, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't see any third-paty reliable sources supporting notability claims. Feel free to file something in deletion review. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 03:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Speedy work on the speedies!
Wow, that's some fast cleanup on the speedy deletion queue. I'm impressed! WWGB (talk) 13:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! The queue has been rather large lately, just trying to keep it under control. Most of the tags were spot on, which always helps. OhNo itsJamie Talk 13:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of my entry to the Gold page
Hello, I don't understand why you think my "Investing in Gold" entry on the Gold page was a conflict of interest. I gave a historical time line of the gold bull markets and was going to continue with a paragraph or two on how the current recession has impacted the price of gold. I do not own a mining company nor do I work for one; nor am I an equity analyst or a stock broker. Where is the conflict of interest? Please answer me at your earliest convenience. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TWST48 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Your username suggests you are affiliated with The Wall Street Transcript. That's the WP:COI. Adding material using the same links over and over again is still spamming. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 15:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I am not an employee of The Wall Street Transcript, sorry for the confusion. I add material from the same links because the sourced material in that paragraph comes from the same published interview. Should I just cite at the end of a paragraph rather at the end of each sentence? I am not trying to spam, just cite properly in order to ensure my entries are not deleted (ironically). Please advise. TWST48 (talk) 18:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This appears to be a single-purpose account based on edit patterns (all edits are concerning a single publication). We don't allow link canvassing. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 18:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Deetion of Michael LaFido
Why did you delete this page. This man is an accomplished author among many other things. This proves he is notable enough. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.131.129.184 (talk) 11:38, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Launch Dynamic Media page
Hey Jamie -

Launch Dynamic Media is a very small digital studio, but the services are the same as those offered by the very largest agencies, which have Wikipedia pages. For example - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razorfish_(company) is one of countless like agencies that have pages. Launch built the first digital wayfinding system of its kind for the Smithsonian which, in my estimation, makes it a notable organization. It simply seems wrong that the largest agencies can have a presence on Wikipedia while the very smallest can not. I would appreciate any additional input you may have.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billcombs (talk • contribs) 13:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No, it's not wrong. It's a part of our WP:CORP notability policy. Wikipedia is not a free directory. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 14:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of External Link
Hey Jamie -

EnchantingGoa.com contains Recipes from the State of Goa and I think therefore belongs in External Links under Goan Cuisine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goan_Catholic_cuisine

These are traditinal recipes not found on any other sites. Thank you. (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kothrit (talk • contribs)
 * Wikipedia is not a recipe book. If you continue to add it, you'll be blocked. OhNo itsJamie Talk 16:12, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit conflict
Sorry we just had an edit conflict on User talk:MessiniaGreece (had taken me quite a while to compose my message), and when I saw your unblock decline I chose to leave in my version rather than yours, just in the interest of being a bit less bitey. I don't know what problem that user thought he had, but I don't think they were deliberately misusing the request. Hope you don't mind. :-) Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:16, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. It was a bit bitey, but then again, the user ignored a previous request to not misuse unblock. OhNo itsJamie Talk 18:25, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Clayster
Dear Jamie, I don't understand why banned my Article about Clayster?

If you read about for example Google Android or Skype do their articles contain the same content/inforation as I wrote in ours.

I believe it's impossible to write something about a company with promoting it, since explaining what we does in is kind of promotion.

Not even the when I toke away everything beside what Clayster is (Clayster - Interactive Service Delivery Platform) were it OK?

ex from Google Android. Android is a mobile operating system running on the Linux kernel. It allows developers to write managed code in the Java language, controlling the device via Google-developed Java libraries.

Regards Rikard

Rikard.strid (talk) 17:42, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * There was no evidence that it was notable in any way. (I.e., third-party reliable sources giving non-trivial coverage on a subject). OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:46, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

OhNo itsJamie Talk Since I'm the CEO and Fonder do I see my self as the must reliable source on mother earth. :) Anyway how to show that the source is the real source then a third-part? Rikard.strid (talk)
 * See WP:COI and WP:Reliable sources. OhNo itsJamie Talk 19:33, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

deletion of post war sri lanka page
I was editing the page, it has been deleted. But I was talking to you on this. I did not get a reply from you since Sep 30 on this. Could you please revise the page and let me know the exact reasons or please explain my questions. Thanks. Kavi100 (talk) 07:15, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Kystien
Please unprotect user talk:Kystien; it was only a 24 hour block, and is expired now. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 12:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Will do, though had I noticed it was only a 24 hour at the time I would've extended based on the user's post-block behavior. OhNo itsJamie Talk 12:50, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

User talk:boogaloodoo
I don't know how to use this system properly yet. pls edit as needed.

user boogaloodoo - citing external resources. so i would have to get my own experience written up in official document form before i can add it into wiki ? Boogaloodoo (talk) 04:17, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Your edits were reverted for numerous reasons, most obviously because the added text was grammatically a mess and lacking reliable sources to support it's inclusion. OhNo itsJamie Talk 14:02, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

User talk:wwesmudge
Why did you delete my clients (Josh Dyer) wikipedia page, you described it as having little importance, but could it be that you just haven't heard of him, because around Taunton & Somerset he is making quite a name, and has hinted at a national tour, how does that not have importance, i know alot of people angry of the page being deleted, because they wanted to know more about him, just because you don't know him should not give you the right to deprive other people of information. Everything written was honest, true facts & plenty of references to back up evidence. Next time you delete a page, think, just because you don't like it, or don't understand it doesn't mean everybody feels the same as you, so stop restricting people for no good reason! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwesmudge (talk • contribs) 08:30, 9 October 2009 (UTC)


 * See WP:BIO, the link that was provided to you earlier in the speedy deletion notification. OhNo itsJamie Talk 14:00, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Julian_Grainger
Hi I was correcting an incorrect category 'companies disestablished' at the bottom of the PhotoBox page and introducing links as advised by the message at the top of the page (it is an orphan). These have been removed. - Photobox is very much in existence and is not disestablished as you contend. You will see the website is very much up and running. - It is Europe's main photo gifts etailer hence the category. - They are a leading photo sharing brand here as important as flickr in the UK hence the reference. I had assumed wiki was an international site not just US focused? Given everyone else is in Photo_sharing shouldn't you list all competitors?

How else would you like us to remove the orphan status if we cannot link to the rest of the wiki articles? This wasn't a spammy at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Julian Grainger (talk • contribs) 12:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You're welcome to change the category to something more appropriate, but "Gift" is not appropriate. Nor is "example spamming" or adding links to the Gift article.  That's promotional editing. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 14:00, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Some good edits
Actually it was all good edits. You templated him for vandalism when his edits were apt, and he admittedly overreacted when he next logged in. I warned him instead of blocking when he was up at AIV, but then you indeffed him for unclear reasons. My suggestion would be a complete unblock -- Samir 00:14, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually I retract. What he said to you was rather mean.  And your self-block was hilarious.  Carry on then -- Samir 00:18, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Dang, I was hoping no one noticed the self-block. I'd just gotten back from a 4 mile run and apparently wasn't thinking clearly. Thank goodness I was able to unblock myself, would've been rather embarrassing to have to use the unblock template. I see what you mean about my false-positive warning, but his reaction (to myself and others) clearly warranted a time-out. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 00:25, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * P.S. I think it's true that I have some good edits. Hopefully. OhNo itsJamie Talk 00:30, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

See Talk:Defenestration
see talk page.192.12.88.7 (talk) 14:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I did. OhNo itsJamie Talk 14:36, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Kapok Guitar
Hi. I had been thinking about that page as maybe a disambig page for two separate articles on similarly-named companies in China and Thailand. Is there enough notability from reliable sources to support that? If so, would you please userfy it? Thanks. — Jeff G. (talk&#124;contribs) 23:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Userfied. I also noticed that the advert had overwritten an article that had been there since 2006 describing a Malaysian brand as well as noting that the term was also used generically for any guitar made from Kapok wood. Not sure if the Chinese company is notable enough to mention.   OhNo itsJamie  Talk 14:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

I think this brand is very notable in China at least in mainland area. It almost the only guitar brand in china before 1979, though it is not as much popular as then. 14:55, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * So where's the evidence of notability? (I.e., WP:Reliable sources). OhNo itsJamie Talk 14:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

First of all, Thank you for your warning in my talk page. There would be full of EVIDENCES If you search the keyword '红棉吉他' in the chinese edition Google. lol. But i bet you won't do that,right? so there are link below: http://www.guitarchina.com/news/news/02/20041120/164420.htm http://www.hudong.com/wiki/%E7%BA%A2%E6%A3%89%E5%90%89%E4%BB%96 Maybe you can not read it coz it's all in Chinese. but it doesn't matter. you can use the google translate it then you probably aware of how notable it was. At the same times. I wonder why you'd like to maintain a old-wrong page about the kapok guitar in malay? no link, no evidence... nothing at all Finally, if there is a brand named Kapok in Malay or Thailand or anywhere out of PRC, please give me an EVIDENCE. If so, I suggest start a new page like Kapok (Chinese company) etc. TKS Hans 9:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC+8)
 * I tried to cut you a break by including info from the old article as well as mentioning the Chinese company (proof that a company exists does not prove that it's notable). If that's not good enough for you, I'll send the whole article to WP:AFD for lack of notability. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 04:34, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Did you read the link which I send u before??? I would be pretty upset if the answer is negative(it mostly is true), coz it prove that you don't care about  whether it's notable or not. so, I'd like you send the article to WP:AFD anyway. btw, let me  know if the brand do exist in malaysia. you didn't give any evidence for it,yet. Hans 15:41, 17 October 2009 (UTC+8)
 * Evidence of existence is not the same as notability. Article has been sent to AFD. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 14:57, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Fist of all,those links I send you is the evidence can prove that it is notable, not only for existence! second, could you give me the evidence for malaysia Kapok while you continuously insist the malaysia kapok is not a advert and recover it time and times again? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slyhans (talk • contribs) 06:00, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm done discussing the issue here. You can take your arguments to the AFD for Kapok Guitars. OhNo itsJamie Talk 13:20, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I have nothing to say for your indifference. I can hardly convice myself about the truth that you are a Wikipedian. anyway, I'd like to see you close this talk here. Sorry if any word inappropriate.talk —Preceding undated comment added 02:11, 21 October 2009 (UTC).
 * That's fine, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say for that matter. OhNo itsJamie Talk 02:16, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Inappropriate block warning?
for posting 

I assume I'm missing something, but that block warning seemed _way_ out of proportion. Could you explain? Hobit (talk) 02:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The diffs you provided don't tell me anything. You'll need to be more specific. I gave this user a warning awhile back for being incivil, and have not communicated with them since. I stand by the original warning. OhNo itsJamie Talk 04:17, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry I was unclear. It looks like you issued a final civility warning for commenting on the fact that your username isn't grammatically correct. At least that's what the link you provided on his page in the context of the warning indicates to me.  Did I miss something? Hobit (talk) 05:27, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Why do you removed my links?
I found that you have removed the references I added, which leads to my website. What made you to remove those links of my website? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.78.222 (talk) 08:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * See the blurb at the top of this talk page. OhNo itsJamie Talk 13:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Please block
Greetings Ohnoitsjamie. A year ago you blocked User talk:204.228.117.202. They are back at it. --Technopat (talk) 16:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Phew! Thanks - they were coming off the bat fast...--Technopat (talk) 17:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem, thanks for bringing it to my attention! OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Barbaro family
I'd appreciate another set of eyes on this page. User:Jky52 has been repeatedly been deleting sourced, but negative info about the Barbaro family. while incorrectly dismissing a nonfiction source, claiming it's novel.  I added 5 new additional English and Italian sources. Jky52 blanked them again. Edward321 (talk) 23:00, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Smells suspicious...both recent accounts appear to be thinly-disguised SPAs. I'll at least wait for the CU results before taking action. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 13:26, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Attack Attack!
Hi, I'm sure you know all the fuss about the rumors of who is going to be the new lead singer for the band, as repeated IPs continue to add unsourced and unreliable information. I put in a protection request, but I'm doubting myself now. Do you believe it is warranted? GaudiumInVeritate (talk) 21:21, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I justed checked today's history; semi protection seems like a good idea to me; hopefully two weeks will be good enough. OhNo itsJamie Talk 21:27, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully. Thanks though, it was beginning to get very tedious having to clean up. GaudiumInVeritate (talk) 21:33, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Robert Jenkin
Understand why you took the comment off, but it is true. So I've gone to the press again with the latest info regarding the police investigation, when it's published on line in a respectable tabloid paper then I'll re-insert the comment with the external link to prove it's true.

Apologies if I casme across as a vandal. I'm trying to stop this man from conning people, but I know you require concrete evidence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cedarheights (talk • contribs) 22:34, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Didn't think you were a vandal, just want to make sure that WP:BLP is followed. Thanks for understanding. OhNo itsJamie Talk 23:25, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Down with Webster
Recommend undelete as this band's Hall & Oates cover "Rich Girl$" has debuted on Billboard's Canadian Hot 100 at #47 for the week of 24 Oct 2009 and accordingly satisfies WP:BAND notability criteria, specifically "Has had a charted single or album on any national music chart". Bdell555 (talk) 00:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello? Do you have anything to say? I've asked you to apply Wikimedia policy, policy that has been generated by community consensus, as politely and as respectfully as I know how. As someone elected to an administrator position do you not feel you have any responsibility at all to communicate with the wikimedia community with respect to your decisions?Bdell555 (talk) 06:52, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relax, I've been busy with a lot of other stuff. If there was a high need for immediate restoration of the article, you could've posted it to WP:Deletion review. OhNo itsJamie Talk 15:30, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. I reckoned that if you had the time to respond to someone else on this page you had the time to respond to other queries.  People were complaining: "can't find anything on them on Wikipedia."  WP:Deletion review states that "Deletion Review is to be used where someone is unable to resolve the issue in discussion with the administrator (or other editor) in question. This should be attempted first – courteously invite the admin to take a second look.".Bdell555 (talk) 09:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

USER IP
A user vandalized a page on Wikipedia last year. The user's name is "Ronalxraygun". How might I get the IP address for that name. I know when a user posts anonymously, their IP is logged but in this case a user name was created and I cannot see the IP address. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.105.26.60 (talk) 16:48, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We don't reveal IP addresses of users. We will block users for repeated vandalism or personal attacks. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 17:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

 I will b e issuing a supoena then. Who would be the proper entity to address?
 * If you can figure out how to issue a subpoena, you can surely figure out the answer to that question. Good luck. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 19:48, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

REMOVAL NOMINATION
Hi OhNoItsJamie. Having seen the zeal with which you and a couple of others chase down the possibly-not-notable, I suggest for your inspection the lesser musical references in the popular culture subsection of the Hindenburg airship's article. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindenburg_disaster#Popular_culture the Zepplin album of course is notable, but the other bands seem like self-promotion by tiny entities. Cramyourspam (talk) 17:11, 23 October 2009 (UTC)CramYourSpam

Slightly confused about the deletion of Dying Scene sources
Hey Jamie, you recently deleted most (if not all) the external sourcing links to DyingScene.com. I run the website and ask that my editors update wikipedia pages ONLY if what they've published is not already on a wikipedia page AND it is factual and relevant. They all have access to this wikipedia account and unfortunately I can't monitor all the links they create. I tried to check on a few that I knew about (Craig Owens leaving Chiodos on the Chiodos page, and Deryck Whibley splitting from Avril on the Whibley page) and it looks like you deleted the reference link, though you kept the actual content in the article. I definitely want to make sure we stay compliant with Wikipedia's rules and was wondering if you could let me know which rule or rules were violated. Our site is only 4 months old, so is it that we are not viewed as a credible source yet? Did we violate something on another page, which caused all our links to be deleted, or is it just that we are sourcing our own website in the articles, in which case, if we wanted to update a page with information we published should we just not source the info at all? I'm pretty passionate about the punk music scene, and I've enjoyed being the first person to update a wikipedia page with new info on the few that I've done personally so please let me know what I can do differently to keep me (and my editors) compliant. Thanks.

Sort of new to Wikipedia Talk pages - hope this shows up in the right place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DyingSceneMusic (talk • contribs) 23:47, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * See WP:SPAM and coflict of interest policies. You can't come to Wikipedia and canvass links to your site. If you or anyone continues to do so, that site will be blacklisted. (Incidentally, most of the info I saw added with your site links were news updates that were probably available on the bands website). OhNo itsJamie  Talk 23:49, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Artist's Page?
Hi Jamie,

I saw that you've put a page that I edited up for deletion. I'm quite perturbed by this, as I do PR for that actor/filmmaker and would like to have this page remain active. How can you claim that there are 'no major roles' in a 'notable production'? That is a matter of opinion. There are several films, both independently produced as well as studio produced, available for purchase in major chains like Blockbuster, as well as on the internet, not to mention, several television shows he has appeared on. Please remove information you cannot verify, but do not delete the page. Where does it say in the Wikipedia rules that a person has to be a major superstar with "major roles" to be listed? If you follow your proposed guidelines for deletion, literally half the artists on Wikipedia should be deleted. Perhaps I have worded something incorrectly or placed incorrect sources as I'm relatively new to this, but I do not think the page should be deleted. Please explain your rationale further, or edit the article to meet your requirements and please remove it from the deletion queue. Thank you for your time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nevpan (talk • contribs) 02:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You are free to present your rationale for keeping the article at the afd discussion. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 06:44, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment – I have a discussion going on that page, please reference it. But what I came up with is the following: I have a suggestion for a total revision of this article that I believe will qualify based on aforementioned discussion, please let me know if this will work.  I would like to suggest that the article remain listed based on the fact of the actor's appearance in the television series 'Battles B.C.'.  He starred in an episode as Pharaoh Ramses II, qualifying him as notable AND significant and this fact can remain linked to the Ramses II article where the film/TV portrayals are listed.  And since there are very few portrayals of Ramses II listed in history of film/tv, this is a significant fact that should be listed on Wikipedia.  In addition, there are 4 other distributed films, 'Didgori: Land of Sacrificed Knights', 'Whitewall', 'Last Exit', and '10,000 A.D.: Legend of a Black Pearl' in which the actor has significant credits, which I believe would qualify him as notable, given the current criteria for "notability".  All other unverifiable biographical information can be deleted.  Thoughts?--Nevpan (talk) 07:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This is not the place to discuss this (and the arguments about your notability are unconvincing, for that matter). OhNo itsJamie Talk 13:57, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, Jamie, I didn't look carefully about what you reverted. I assumed that you reverted the revert of the revert of my edit. Sorry about that. Str1977 (talk) 23:28, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Easy mistake to make, no worries, especially given that the edit I was restoring was several edits prior. OhNo itsJamie Talk 23:33, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Why are you being mean to me?
Why are you being mean to me? Why are you threatening to block me when I have done nothing wrong?--Daniel L. Barth (talk) 20:35, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You've been warned by multiple editors to stop posting nonsense. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 20:57, 29 October 2009 (UTC)