User talk:Jac16888/Archive 19

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

→

Archive 25

Deletion of the Cats and Cats and Cats page

Hi Jac16888,

You recently deleted the Cats and Cats and Cats page that the user Osario had made. I'm not asking to have it reinstated as it had become a bit of a joke, as I'm no doubt sure you were aware (hence the deletion). I was just wondering if you were able to make a copy of it, I'd grown quite fond of it and would like to put it up on our site?

Many thanks,

Bencat x — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.0.224.91 (talk) 12:34, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Jac16888. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Taty2007 (talk) 07:12, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Re

Still. We shouldn't be saying Wikipedia will or can or has any capacity to sue any user. That's for the Wikimedia legal counsel to decide and no one else. --Golbez (talk) 14:21, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Unhelpful

Hey Jac16888. The dust seems to be settling on Uboater, but I did notice your decline here. I've got to say, I was quite astounded at how sarcastic it was, along with hints of legal threats. Yes, he deserved to be blocked and indeffed, but as an admin that was really a terrible block review. Remember the whole "admins should hold themselves to a higher standard" thing? Worm^TT(talk) 15:20, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh blah, yes I know I was very mean to the guy going around calling people cunts and threatening physical harm and it was very naughty of me and I shouldn't have done it etc etc--Jac16888 ^Talk 15:29, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes yes, it pales in comparison to what he did, but there was no need for it. If you hadn't escalated the situation, it could have plausibly been de-escalated. Assuming that he is who he says he is, you've just closed the door to him on any possible complaint about an article he's got a vested interest in, leaving him with no course of action but a legal one. Assuming he isn't who he says he is, you've been wound up by an internet troll, who will target you for shits and giggles in the future. Your actions have consequences, you speak for the community. Try and keep that in mind. Worm^TT(talk) 15:39, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Alright I know, you are right I did cross the line. Although for the record I don't think someone who makes a comment like http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AUboater&diff=497064721&oldid=497063802 that] really requires provoking--Jac16888 ^Talk 16:01, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

You're absolutely right there, it's not the sort of person we want on here. Thanks for putting up with me! Worm^TT(talk) 08:19, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Restablece mi pagina

Por favor restablece mi pagina que me ha tomado horas hacer. Atte. Russbelt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Russbelt (talk • contribs) 19:36, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page the first time you asked this--Jac16888 ^Talk 09:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Not blocked

Thank-you verry much for making sure I'm not blocked, I love using wikipidia and wish to continue. Thank-you.--Joeb20122012 (talk) 20:17, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

No problems--Jac16888 ^Talk 20:19, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 June 2012

• Special report: Springer's misappropriation of Wikimedia content "the tip of the iceberg"

• News and notes: Foundation finance reformers wrestle with CoI

• WikiProject report: Counter-Vandalism Unit

• Featured content: The cake is a pi

• Arbitration report: Procedural reform enacted, Rich Farmbrough blocked, three open cases

• Technology report: To support or not to support IPv6, and why knowing when this report was last updated might be getting easier

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 21:58, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

About the inappropriate edit to Joeb20122012 page

sorry about that edit, my account was hacked by someone, but i have changed password so it won't happen again, as i said, sorry! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brethrickacey (talk • contribs) 14:55, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Per WP:GOTHACKED I should really block you then. I'll let it slide this time, but consider this your only warning, you are responsible for any edits made by your account, whether you claim to have made them or not--Jac16888 ^Talk 14:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Help

Could you take a look at the Sarah Bakewell article? I've tried to clean it up but the author (who probably has a COI) keeps re-introducing promotional material and unsourced jargon. I've tried to communicate but they're not responding. Could you please protect/revert/warn/block as appropriate? Thanks Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 15:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Just noticed that the cavalry has arrived in the form of another editor. You could still warn the author if you think it would help. Regards. Basalisk ^{inspect damage}⁄_berate 15:59, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Should be alright now--Jac16888 ^Talk 16:03, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

RE bolcking

I have seen you discovered the person who tried to delte me. I am newish to wikipiedia and not shure of all the rules I had a look at some of them and under the user block policy a user should be blocked if "personal information disclosures (whether or not the information is accurate or not)" On Bretherickacey's user page he states his fall name and date of birth furthermore he is under eighteen and at risk to those without good intenions. I thought I'd just bring these factors to light to make sure Bretherickacey is not at risk or braking any wikipedia rules. Thank-you, --Joeb20122012 (talk) 19:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

It's alright, I'm aware of the situation. Thanks anyway--Jac16888 ^Talk 20:04, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Bretacey

Thank-you I know this is becoming a bit to regular but I just looked his User page and he is sponsering the Nazi sign. I am verry ofended and scared others will see this disgusting advertisment. Thank-you, --Joeb20122012 (talk) 20:14, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Again, I wouldn't worry about it. Forget about him and focus on your editing--Jac16888 ^Talk 21:02, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of Radio Utopia

Hey,

I was in the process of translating a page for Radio Utopia - admittedly I accidentally published the Spanish version prior to translation - and you deleted it. Is there any chance I can recuperate the work I'd done so far?

Thanks a lot,

Maxjjazz (talk) 22:10, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Yemen women's national football team

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, all I did was move it from a broken user subpage to a correct one, don't think that counts as a substantial contribution--Jac16888 ^Talk 16:05, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Борсово търгувани фондове

Dear Sir/Madam,

I recently added an article on this topic and I would like to express my dissatisfaction with the fact that You removed it. I do not agree that I have violated rule R10 ((A10: Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic, Exchange-traded fund)). It is true that I have used the information from it, but my article is 100% unique.

Please, reconsider this case.

Faithfully Yours,

Nikoletta Ven — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikoletta Ven (talk • contribs) 13:01, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

A), your article was about the same subject, if you want to write about Exchange-traded fund's, do so on the already existing article. B), your article was in Russian. This is the English wikipedia, i.e. English content, the Russian wikipedia can be found here--Jac16888 ^Talk 13:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Oh, this is such a misunderstanding. The language is Bulgarian and I wanted to add the article into the Bulgarian version of Wikipedia. Is this still possible? Could You please tell me where/how to submit the article so it does not violate the rules and in the same time can be submitted in Bulgarian? Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikoletta Ven (talk • contribs) 13:32, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

bulgarian wikipedia--Jac16888 ^Talk 13:35, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

• Investigative report: Is the requests for adminship process 'broken'?

• News and notes: Ground shifts while chapters dither over new Association

• Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations

• WikiProject report: The Punks of Wikipedia

• Featured content: Taken with a pinch of "salt"

• Arbitration report: Three open cases, GoodDay case closed

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 02:36, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Jac16888. You have new messages at PumpkinSky's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

See another update there. PumpkinSky talk 12:56, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Sock puppet of ChrisandZane

Your creation of "Comedy World The Movie" leads Wikipedia to think you are a sock puppet of ChrisandZane. Wikipedia Policy states that sock puppets are not allowed. Please stop using this account or ChrisandZane to fix this problem. Cjdude12 (talk) 18:03, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Think you've got yourself mixed up there pal, take another look at Comedy World The Movie's deletion log--Jac16888 ^Talk 18:30, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for correcting my archive page. I couldn't find out what was wrong with it and why it wouldn't properly link to my talk page. Haha. I appreciate it. HorrorFan121 (talk) 21:33, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

No problem, the mediawiki software is awkward when it comes to caps--Jac16888 ^Talk 21:45, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Marvel

What's your problem with this article? Now you nominated it for deletion. If it's a Flash game, it doesn't need a Wikipedia article no matter how influential and popular it is right now? Wow, you must rethink your life.

Also, your remark, "rm massive gameguide section, utter garbage and does not belong here" is really cruel. You could have describe the whole thing gently, considering the hardwork of people who contributed to the article. You are UNBELIEVABLE. Sorry, but you're ridiculously rude. 112.205.117.41 (talk) 01:24, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

It's not cruel at all, it doesn't belong here. If people want a insanely over the top game guide, there are other places they can go for it, it's not what wikipedia is for--Jac16888 ^Talk 13:07, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

page Julià Minguillón

dear Jac16888

following wikipedia recommendations, I created a new user account as Julià Minguillón in order to be able to create User:Julià Minguillón, instead of moving from Jminguillona

if it's OK to you, I'll move all content from Jminguillona to Julià Minguillón and then redirect Jminguillona to Julià Minguillón

thank you very much in advance

Julià — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julià Minguillón (talk • contribs) 09:35, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't think you understand what wikipedia is for, this is not facebook or something, you can't have a cv profile promoting yourself, all you should have on your userpage is content related to your editing of wikipedia. If you're not planning on editing then you shouldn't be creating a userpage about yourself--Jac16888 ^Talk 11:26, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Attack page deletion

That was 'speedy'. Thanks. RashersTierney (talk) 14:35, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

No problemo--Jac16888 ^Talk 14:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

John tummolo

The "John Tummolo" wikipedia page evidencing the inventor of, "Facebook" patent applications (60/482,805 dated June 26, 2003; and 887,207/10 dated June 26, 2004;) was just deleted by you, Jac. YOU censored facts although the page cited scholarly resources: THE US GOVERNMENT'S PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE. Who are you? Who gives you the right to arbitrarily decide "revisionist facts" and "deliberate omissions of facts"? What country are you operating out of Jac?

Kindly explain why facts upset you, "Jac". Please... explain yourself. <Article content removed> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.78.4.18 (talk) 17:28, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Sources, you need them, proper ones that fully support your story, and since there are no news articles about you sueing Facebook or being awarded millions of dollars I'd say it's a safe bet they don't exist, and I can't find any. Lots of people have claimed to have done lots of things, we need proof--Jac16888 ^Talk 17:48, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Jac16888 - I INCLUDED CITATIONS FROM THE U.S. PATENT OFFICE FOR "JOHN TUMMOLO" patent applications. YOU CLAIM "THERE ARE NO CITATIONS!!!!" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.78.4.18 (talk) 18:56, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Retore the John Tummolo article. It is supported by references to verifiable PATENT APPLICATIONS!!!!! urgggggg.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.78.4.18 (talk) 19:04, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I didn't have a long look at the article before it was deleted, so I can't talk with too much authority about this, but as I remember, the patent is only usable to cite the existence of the patent. For all the rest (suing Facebook, payoffs, patent infringement, etc.) you need a reliable source that actually talks specifically about those things; they cannot just be synthesized from the patent. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:09, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

What writ said. The only evidence you have is a patent application number, no actual patent or anything verifiable, and the fact is that if you had anything like that, you would be using it, not trying to rant about it on Wikipedia--Jac16888 ^Talk 19:14, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

THE FACT I FILED A PATENT APPLICATION REPRESENTS A DOCUMENT... A SCHOLARLY RESOURCE... THE FACT YOU ARE FIGHTING THIS FACT IS A CONSPIRACY. RESTORE THE ARTICLE AND IF ANYONE GETS UPSET... LET THEM PROOVE ME INCORRECT... BUT YOU ARE BEHAVING LIKE JUDGE AND JURY... AND YOU'RE ANONYMOUS... IT'S OFFENSIVE. NOW TELL THE TRUTH. EDIT THE CLIP TO YOUR LIKING... BUT PUBLISH THE FACTS REGARDING THE TWO PATENT APPLICATIONS. IF YOU DO NOT PUBLISH FACTS, YOU DISCREDIT WIKIPEDIA. IT BECOMES UNRELIABLE. IT'S YOUR CHOICE. THere's SO MUCH BS ON WIKIPEDIA IT'S AMAZING YOU"RE SO "PICKY" WHEN IT COMES TO A VERIFIABLE PATENT APPLICATION SUBMITTED IN 2003. YOU DON'T WANT THE TRUTH? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SourcePatent (talk • contribs) 12:35, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Firstly, stop shouting. Second, a patent application is not a patent, and I can find no way to use your application numbers to verify them. You have been told this repeatedly, and will continue to be told this, unless you can provide reliable sources to verify your claim, you cannot write about it, particularly considering you are accusing people of criminal behaviour without any proof. Go tell a newsgroup your story, if they believe you and they verify your claims and they write about it, then maybe you could have an article. Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth and not about revealing conspiracies and exposing crimes--Jac16888 ^Talk 12:57, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Jac - Don't tell me how to conduct myself before a swine who denies fact. I filed TWO patent applications. Look them up NIMROD. YOU COWARD. YOU CENSOR. Your conduct is tantamount to harrassment. A patent application is a fact, verifiable, a fact. For you to decide "only if approved it becomes a fact" is dishonest. YOU COWARD. SWINE.

I now strongly advise you promote the content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SourcePatent (talk • contribs) 18:43, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm a nimrod, coward, censor and a swine? Lovely. I don't see how I can make this any clearer to you since you have been told it already many times, patent applications are not patents (and I did try to look them up, patent numbers are supposed to be 7 digits, the ones you have provided are 8 digits), nor do they in anyway verify your claims about criminal behaviour. Tell me this, if your claims are so solid and verifiable, why is there no mention of this "theft" on the internet? why have you not filed a lawsuit against Facebook to claim the money? Why are two patent application numbers the only proof you have? We're not going to post potentially libelous content about people without solid evidence to support it, you can rant at me as much as you like, it's not going to change the facts--Jac16888 ^Talk 20:22, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 June 2012

• Op-ed: A call for editorial input in developing new Creative Commons licensing

• News and notes: "Mystical" Picture of the Year; run-up to Wikimania DC; RfA reform 2012

• In the news: Wales enters extradition battle; Wikipedia's political bias

• Recent research: Edit war patterns, deleters vs. the 1%, never used cleanup tags, authorship inequality, higher quality from central users, and mapping the wikimediasphere

• WikiProject report: Summer Sports Series: WikiProject Athletics

• Featured content: A good week for the Williams

• Arbitration report: Three open cases

• Technology report: Second Visual Editor prototype launches

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 06:31, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

jabaar edmond

what happen with page what was missed how can i fix? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bar20112 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

You can read WP:NOTABILITY, WP:VERIFY and WP:FIRST--Jac16888 ^Talk 16:41, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Marvel: Avengers Alliance-response

If you feel that there should be a plot section, go right ahead with getting it started. After all, there hasn't been any info on who "The Syndicate" is yet. Rtkat3 (talk) 10:18, June 28 2012 (UTC)

I don't care enough to write one. If you think there should be a level-by-level breakdown of the plot, then go write one on Wikia or some other site, that's not what Wikipedia is for--Jac16888 ^Talk 16:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

username change and account activation

Hi Jac16888,

I am Palma Chatonnet-Marton a WikiProject Medicine Translation Task Force member.

Please find my name here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medicine/Translation_task_force/People#Initial_languages

The reason why I contact you is to kindly help me in creating an active account under the name of "Palma Chatonnet-Marton".

When I begun to contribute to WikiMedicine Translation project, I did not know how exactly user account activation worked and by mistake I created two accounts: one named "Palmachatonnetmarton" and an other, which I am using actually: Palma Marton Chatonnet, but which I would like to change for Palma Chatonnet-Marton please. It is very important for us, translators to have these active accounts so as we can receive feedbacks from authors and I would really appreciate your quick help please.

I am sorry if I made too much hussle here :-), I did not understand quite well the system at the beginning.

Many thanks and kindest regards, Palma Marton Chatonnet (talk) 21:06, 28 June 2012 (UTC) Palma

If you want to change your username you can request it be changed at WP:CHU--Jac16888 ^Talk 21:47, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Hey Jac, thx for your feedback. On what am I supposed to click on pls? It is not clear for me, sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palma Marton Chatonnet (talk • contribs) 21:43, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

On the blue letters: Wikipedia:Changing username--Jac16888 ^Talk 22:27, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Suvorov Museum, Timanivka

Hi Jac16888, thank you for your rapid help. Sorry to waste your time. Ihorpa (talk) 22:09, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

No problem, although in future if you can't translate it properly then WP:TRANSLATION describes what you should be doing--Jac16888 ^Talk 22:12, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Orienbank

Hello Jac,

If I can type the history in my own words, but still related to what is said on their website, would that be acceptable? If so, there is one problem. My English isn't perfect to the point that I can make a decent Wikipedia-page. I was wondering if you have time to do so? Otherwise I'll give it a shot. Please let me know! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SeeminglySubdued (talk • contribs) 23:52, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

If you're not able to translate it properly yourself, please don't attempt to do it, it won't really be helping. Wikipedia:Translation is the correct procedure for translating an article from another language wikipedia, and if your English is not up to scratch, perhaps you would be better off editing another language wikipedia, one you're more familiar with, see the list of them here--Jac16888 ^Talk 10:14, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 July 2012

• Analysis: Uncovering scientific plagiarism

• Op-ed: Representing knowledge – metadata, data and linked data

• News and notes: RfC on joining lobby group; JSTOR accounts for Wikipedians and the article feedback tool

• In the news: Public relations on Wikipedia: friend or foe?

• Discussion report: Discussion reports and miscellaneous articulations

• WikiProject report: Summer sports series: Burning rubber with WikiProject Motorsport

• Featured content: Heads up

• Arbitration report: Three open cases, motion for the removal of Carnildo's administrative tools

• Technology report: Initialisms abound: QA and HTML5

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 11:41, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Soy Sauce sock

Hi Jac16888. Thanks for clearing up after User:Soysauceproducer and User:Jamie4ducks this morning - you may want to also take a look at User:SoySauceFTW, particularly their sandbox... Cheers, Yunshui 雲‍水 13:15, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Done and done, thanks for the note, I like to collect whole sets--Jac16888 ^Talk 13:18, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

I'll bet you're great at Mah Jong. Nice work; I'll let you know if I spot any more. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

About: Talk:Shraddha Sharma

Hi Jac16888. The Shraddha Sharma article is up and running again, and seems sort of OK. I've re-started Talk:Shraddha Sharma, a page you deleted.

• 01:28, 29 January 2012 Jac16888 (talk | contribs) deleted page Talk:Shraddha Sharma (G8: Talk page of a deleted page)
• 10:05, 29 November 2011 RHaworth (talk | contribs) deleted page Talk:Shraddha Sharma (A7: Article about a band, singer, musician, or musical ensemble, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)

I've already annoyed notified RHaworth about this, but them rules still say that I should also annoy notify about this. So here it is.--Shirt58 (talk) 14:33, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Alright then. Seems better than it was last time--Jac16888 ^Talk 15:21, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Jac16888. You have new messages at Gold Standard's talk page.
Message added 22:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Gold Standard 22:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Jac16888. You have new messages at Gold Standard's talk page.
Message added 22:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Gold Standard 22:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 July 2012

• Special report: Reforming the education programs: lessons from Cairo

• News and notes: Russian Wikipedia blackout; WMF tools; Wikitravel proposal revisited

• WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Football

• Featured content: Keeps on chuggin'

• Arbitration report: Three requests for arbitration

• Technology report: Optimism over LastModified and MoodBar, but change in clock time causes downtime

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 11:05, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

3RR Warning !

I don't think that have violated 3RR rule.I have done two revert[1] so far and I think, this warning is not needed. I hope you also reminded these alerts to other users. Maurice talk 19:37, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I didn't say you've had, but you're getting close, and you're the only one restoring your edit as opposed to several editors restoring it. The point of the template was to say that you need to stop reverting and start discussing or you'll be blocked--Jac16888 ^Talk 16:40, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Jac16888. You have new messages at TheGeneralUser's talk page.
Message added 17:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TheGeneralUser (talk) 17:19, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hi, Thank you for your note re: deletion of the Jeffrey Epstein page. I sent it to the source you suggested. Thank you. turvill Turvill (talk) 17:49, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

fleischbombe

Why did you delete the fleischbombe Page? Was Not a joke or misinformatin!!

It was about blowing animals up using microwaves, unless you can provide some sources and write it in English I'm not going to take it as a given that this "research project" is a real thing--Jac16888 ^Talk 18:18, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Else Cederborg

Hi Jac, I've done some more editing there and have declined your prod. Cederborg seems to be some sort of expert on Karen Blixen and she gets quite some 3rd-party hits on Google Scholar as well. So let's give this a try. If you still think the article should go, please feel free to afd it. De728631 (talk) 19:42, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Personally I don't think she's really notable, it seems the majority of her releases are self-published (authorhouse and saxo.com) and the rest seems to be some editing as opposed to writing. Feel free to have a go at it if you want--Jac16888 ^Talk 20:09, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 July 2012

• Special report: Chapters Association mired in controversy over new chair

• News and notes: WMF enacts reforms at Wikimania; main page redesign; 4 millionth article milestone

• WikiProject report: Summer sports series: French WikiProject Cycling

• Discussion report: Discussion reports and miscellaneous articulations

• Wikimania: Young chapter shows experience beyond its years

• Featured content: Taking flight

• Technology report: Tech talks at Wikimania amid news of a mixed June

• Arbitration report: Fæ faces site-ban, proposed decisions posted

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 11:30, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

CSD correct criteria

Hi Jac16888! I tagged "Asif Ali Zardari Kanger" with CSD-G10 but it was deleted by you as CSD-A7. I tagged it as an attack page because of its title; Asif Ali Zardari is the president of Pakistan and "Kanger" is an Urdu word which means pimp. I am not contesting your deletion, just want to be sure that I tagged correctly or not? as I am still a learner here, So can you please guide me how an article whose title is attacking but content is not should be dealt with? Thanks --SMS ^Talk 16:35, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

You needed that clear on the talk page or in your edit summary, as it was I saw an article which was just a name and DOB. There aren't many admins who speak Urdu around--Jac16888 ^Talk 16:53, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok I will make my tagging clear in case of title or content in foreign language in future. Thanks! --SMS ^Talk 20:27, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 July 2012

• Paid editing: Does Wikipedia pay? The skeptic: Orange Mike

• From the editor: Signpost developments

• News and notes: Chapter head speaks about the aftermath of Russian Wikipedia shutdown

• WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Olympics

• Arbitration report: Fæ and Michaeldsuarez banned; Kwamikagami desysopped; Falun Gong closes with mandated external reviews and topic bans

• Op-ed: The future of PR on Wikipedia

• Featured content: When is an island not an island?

• Technology report: Translating SVGs and making history bugs history

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 11:39, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Deletion

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Someone deleted <redacted> for reason G10, which states: " G10. Pages that disparage, threaten, intimidate or harass their subject or some other entity, and serve no other purpose. These "attack pages" may include libel, legal threats, material intended purely to harass or intimidate a person or biographical material about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced. These pages should be speedily deleted when there is no neutral version in the page history to revert to. Both the page title and page content may be taken into account in assessing an attack. Articles about living people deleted under this criterion should not be restored or recreated by any editor until the biographical article standards are met. " Of course, anyone who had actually read the article would have known that there was no disparagement, no threats, no intimidation, no harassment in any way. There was no libel, only facts that have been reported on. No legal threats. No material intended purely (or even as a subsidiary motive) to harass or intimidate anyone. The article was not negative in tone, but neutral. The fact that the facts in question were negative, is not really the problem of the article, or you might go delete the Wikipedia page of Manuel Noriega. Neither the page title or the page content had any attack. 16888, you deleted the article for no reason at all. I urge you to immediately restore it. --SpiritOfBanquo (talk) 17:12, 24 July 2012 (UTC) Of course I read the article, which is how I know that it contained accusations of a serious crime with no evidence to back it up, i.e. libel. Since you appear to be on a crusade, I suggest you find somewhere else to do it, Wikipedia is not the place for it--Jac16888 Talk 18:50, 24 July 2012 (UTC) Ah, so 'libel' is your problem. Unfortunately for you, there was a reference provided, a reputable news source (CBS) that underwrote the "accusations of a serious crime". Since your objection has been shown to be groundless, I request that you restore the article immediately. Thanks in advance. --SpiritOfBanquo (talk) 19:00, 24 July 2012 (UTC) Also, I suggest that you refrain from accusations that individuals you don't even know are "on a crusade", or that they make serious accusations with no evidence to back them up (when there is evidence to back it up), as that is... libel. --SpiritOfBanquo (talk) 19:01, 24 July 2012 (UTC) Yes, an article that gave no mention of the subjects of the article, and judging by your talkpage we only have your word that they are the perpatrators. Let me make this clear to you, perhaps you will take the hint. The only way your article could exist is if there were multiple reliable sources which verify everything the article is saying and which suggest notability of the subject. Terrible though the crimes may be, we can't exactly have articles about every single criminal out there--Jac16888 Talk 19:05, 24 July 2012 (UTC) My word? Will you take the victim's word? Will you take the word of the attorneys of the perpetrators? That's multiple reliable sources right there. Also, it surprises me that you don't think the crime is notable, considering the many news reports there have been over the past few days. Most of them concern the bizarre nature of the perpetrator trying to punish the victim, which is the most interesting part to me. --SpiritOfBanquo (talk) 19:27, 24 July 2012 (UTC) You keep coming back to this "the victim's word and the attorneys of the perpetrators word" the simple fact is that unless said word is given in a reliable source i.e. not on twitter, it's of no use here, and unless that changes there won't be an article about them. You can rail against that all you like, it won't change anything, Wikipedia is not going to report people as criminals without solid proof, end of story--Jac16888 Talk 19:32, 24 July 2012 (UTC) I know that. Hell, Wikipedia won't even report people as criminals with solid proof. Not sure whether it's laudable or going too far. Your new standard is interesting, though. For example, if Barack Obama were to tweet something, or post something on Facebook, it does not count, but a personal e-mail from the campaign does count? Regardless, this isn't even about twitter. She tweeted something. Maybe it's unreliable. Maybe her account was hacked. Who knows? (We do, because she later confirmed what she did in reliable news sources.) But the attorneys confirmed it by accusing her of contempt of court for that post. And they did this in what you would have to admit are reliable news sources. This is like refusing to accept secret government documents, because they have been posted on Wikileaks - not a reliable source, perhaps - even... even, even when the government confirms their authenticity by moving to charge individuals under classification laws for posting those particular documents. I understand that you may be defending arcane and technical rules that make little to no sense, and don't allow for anything to be posted, even with beyond reasonable doubt certainty, unless it's confirmed by a news outlet. It's difficult to run an encyclopedia. But even if you still think that under the rules, their names should not be posted, you'll have to admit that the evidence is absolutely solid. It's absolutely bizarre for you to say that I am demanding that you accept this on my say-so, when the evidence shows this to be as close to certain as one can be. It'd be more respectable if you said: "you know, your evidence is solid, but the rules simply don't allow for solid evidence when it's not from reliable news outlets". That's honest, and principled, and I would respect that. --SpiritOfBanquo (talk) 19:43, 24 July 2012 (UTC) The whole point of what everybody is trying to tell you is that your evidence is not solid because it's not from a reliable source. Clearly you have some reason for wanting to make these two people known to the world, but Wikipedia is not the place for you to do it--Jac16888 Talk 19:52, 24 July 2012 (UTC) What part of my evidence is not reliable? Can you point to the unreliable source? The victim? Twitter? News reports? The attorneys? Especially when all these sources agree with each other. I'm dying to know. If the victim is unreliable, then why did the attorneys for the perpetrators make such a fuss about it? Questions, questions. They are inconvenient, aren't they? And once again, you close off with a completely nonsensical claim. For someone who complains about libel, you sure like to make unsubstantiated claims. And starting it off with "clearly" doesn't make it any more convincing. --SpiritOfBanquo (talk) 21:48, 24 July 2012 (UTC) How many times do you have to be told that twitter is not a reliable enough source to call someone a criminal before you'll believe it? Anyway it's irrelevant, the article is gone, and if you recreate it without valid sources it will be deleted again, I have no interest in discussing this any further--Jac16888 Talk 21:51, 24 July 2012 (UTC) Of course you don't, people without valid arguments seldom do. You appear confused about the difference between sources and media. Is the Twitter Inc., the company, calling someone a criminal? No, it's the victim. The victim is the source. Twitter is the medium. The victim could have used a paper as a medium. The source would not have differed, only the medium. Just like when I talk to you in person, I am the source, and thin air is the medium. It's like saying that "dead trees" aren't a reliable source, when it's a paper you are disputing. It's like saying that a piece of electronic equipment (a.k.a. a phone) is not a reliable source, when it's actually a medium. "How many times do you have to told that a piece of plastic emitting audible vibrations is not a reliable source???" This is really not that complicated. I am absolutely shocked that you need me to figure this out. By the way, thank you for ceasing the mendacious and unsubstantiated suggestions you were making about my character and motivations. It I think any intellectually honest observer can tell whether that is the case, and who is reasonable. Well, that would be the case, if you hadn't hidden the entire discussion. Just because you may feel embarrassed about your performance is no reason at all to hide this discussion, and to deny observers the opportunity to laugh at claims that media are actually sources. So I request that you remove the hide marker. --SpiritOfBanquo (talk) 16:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC) is much appreciated. --SpiritOfBanquo (talk) 23:56, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

As I said, I'm not interested in discussing this further since you clearly refuse to accept what we're trying to tell you--Jac16888 ^Talk 10:11, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Help PLease.

Hello. I wrote an article about great medical doctor and well-known scientist in Azerbaijan. Rashid Talishinskiy. He passed away many years ago but he rests in hearts of thousands in our country. It's surprising that wikipedia doesn't have any information about him, so I want this article to exist. What is your reason for deleting it? Are there any editing issues that You want me to work on?

Could You help me to post the article if I sent you the ready article in Word Microsoft, the picture and the source?

Thanks.

Independent F (talk) 07:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)Independent_FIndependent F (talk) 07:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Well for starters the article needs to be in English, this being the English wikipedia. I suggest you work on the page you created at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/RƏŞID RÜSTƏM OĞLU TALIŞINSKİ, translating it into English and more importantly providing plenty of references to verify notability then submit it for review following the instructions in the template--Jac16888 ^Talk 10:13, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Appeal

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The master decrees that the discussion be closed. The master's will be done, reason, argument and logic be damned, for they are not on the master's side. I see that you also decided to hide the discussion. Wise decision, from a Machiavellian point of view. You don't want people to see that you disgraced yourself by not even knowing the difference between a source and a medium. (By the way, a backlight is not "the source" of the current message.) But I have another, completely unrelated question. So then can you tell me where I can appeal your completely arbitrary decision (which you couldn't defend if your life depended on it), and file a complaint against your unfounded and unsubstantiated personal attacks on my character, made solely because of your inability to hold a proper discussion or come up with even a single argument that wasn't laughably poor? Thanks in advance. --SpiritOfBanquo (talk) 13:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC) (talk page stalker) Deletion appeals can be made at deletion review. I'd advise you that it's a waste of time, as your arguments will be given short shrift there as well, since they are inconsistent with Wikipedia's policies. But go for it, if you really feel the need. If you're wondering why I say that your arguments are inconsistent with policy, it's because they seem to be based on the premise that the fact that someone got contempt of court for divulging names in a Twitter post means that the post is a reliable source. It doesn't. According to Wikipedia policy, that logical leap is not allowed as it is synthesizing what two sources say into something new (the new thing here being a reliable source that cites the names). That's a form of original research, and original research is not allowed on Wikipedia, due to its nature as an encyclopedia. In addition, there are the obvious and serious BLP concerns, which require a contentious claim of this nature about a living person to be backed by absolutely 100% rock-solid-reliable sources. Twitter, with a few exceptions that don't apply here (your Barack Obama Twitter post example, if coming from his official Twitter account, might be one of these exceptions), is not a reliable source. You can't mix up a non-reliable source with a bunch of other sources to make a huge gelatinous mass of info that somehow works out to be a reliable source after all. It's either reliable on its own merits or it's not, and in this case, it's not. And if you don't have any truly reliable sources to back up these contentious claims, they get deleted and stay deleted. Period. End of story. As far as the supposed personal attacks: I don't see any. I suppose there's Wikiquette assistance, but again, I wouldn't expect your claims to go very far there, as they appear to be unsubstantiated. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:35, 25 July 2012 (UTC) I already predicted that there probably is an arcane, technical reason for this, and that the arguments that have been presented up to this point are mere excuses; and your "original research" argument makes sense, unlike previous arguments that Twitter, thin air, and dead trees are "sources" and not "media". That's all I wanted and asked for: an honest answer. Not excuses, not embarrassingly poor arguments, not personal attacks, but an actual reason. Thank you for your substantive contribution - in fact, it's the first one in this particular discussion. You had me momentarily amazed, because contrary to my expectations when I enter this particular talk page, I suddenly and without warning encountered good arguments, as opposed to embarrassments and mere personal attacks. Unfortunately, my eye subsequently fell on your signature, and I was filled with deep disappointment. Yeah... My claim regarding personal attacks is not unsubstantiated at all. If you look through the previous discussion (which has been hidden, because Jac16888 prefers that people not read it, as it is embarrassing to him), you'll see that Jac16888 claims to know what people's motivations and intentions are, and that these are scurrilous - with no evidence to support it (and he didn't even try to make an argument or provide evidence - then again, that's also the case for other matters). Those are personal attacks - ironically, made when he was complaining that I "libeled" people with "no evidence". --SpiritOfBanquo (talk) 16:14, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Jac16888. You have new messages at De728631's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thank you

Thank you for moving my user pages to remove the space that was contained in them before the "/". I was not even aware I did that until you fixed it. However, I was somewhat alarmed when I went to one and found it moved, so I suggest next time you do that, you also leave them a note on their talk page. Thanks again. --~ScholarlyBreeze~ 17:35, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I could do that, but it would mean spending a lot of time notifying people--Jac16888 ^Talk 18:45, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I see what you mean. --~ScholarlyBreeze~ 13:23, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Delete My Page

I ask you once again to delete My Destination Marbella, as the administrators ,including you, at Wikipedia don't seem to understand that My Destination Marbella advertises companies on its website but not on Wikipedia. I regret placing hyperlinks and a couple of paragraphs. Since I have had to do this logged out of my account because you have blocked and blocked me from saying anything else and leaving e-mail as a maybe solution, I have had enough. I therefor ,for the third time, ask that you delete the account and page, if I can't edit it, if you can't understand that I have read your policies, read your feedback, told all of you that I will correct if given the page back, I was told that I didn't do any of the past things and left with rude and sarcastic remarks. This is not the Wikipedia I knew. Whilst at Wikipedia it has only been stressful and I could not understand the help pages as there are lots of pages which aren't very clear. I have explained everything and that enough. You have only caused more grief than good. I regret opening the page, I was going to open one for every single My Destination in the world but now I regret even thinking about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.40.87.227 (talk) 07:58, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Both the IPs that posted that have been blocked for block evasion. I have also posted a long reply on my talk page to a similar message, but if the block evasion continues then I will just block and revert: the situation has been explained enough. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:44, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Strike the future tense from that last sentence: [2] [3]. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:52, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

So you still don't consider "My Destination is focused on providing websites that offer unrivalled levels of local information" to be advertising? I'm sorry that you have failed to read our rules and learn what Wikipedia is for, but if you were planning on making "one for every single My Destination in the world" then it's better you were blocked now rather than after they were all deleted--Jac16888 ^Talk 17:31, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 July 2012

• Recent research: Conflict dynamics, collaboration and emotions; digitization vs. copyright; WikiProject field notes; quality of medical articles; role of readers; Best Wiki Paper Award

• News and notes: Wikimedians and London 2012; WMF budget – staffing, engineering, editor retention effort, and the global South; Telegraph's cheap shot at WP

• WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Horse Racing

• Featured content: One of a kind

• Technology report: Talking performance with CT Woo and Green Semantic MediaWiki with Nischay Nahata

• Arbitration report: No pending or open arbitration cases

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 11:59, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again

		A beer on me!
		For nominating me for the admin gang. It worked out fine and I'm already finding myself busy with mopping the digital library that is WP. De728631 (talk) 00:21, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Loch Ness Monster - Daily Mail reference

You just deleted my contribution by saying Daily Mail reference is not reliable. OK, if you consider so, I'm OK with that, but, try to understand my poit of view: check the contribution before. Sonar image (2011). It has two references, one from Daily Mail and another from a web log. This shouldn't be valid too then.

And the most classic/famous reference to Loch Ness monster ever, the Surgeon's Photograph, was published by the Daily Mail in 1934 and that's explained in the article.

The section "Photographs and films" is about alleged sightings of the cryptid and the Daily Mail published a photograph by a man alleging it is the cryptid. So don't you think this fit the page? I didn't even saw it firstly in Daily Mail but in Brazilian news, so, true or false (and I believe it's false like every evidence or trace of the monster), this reference still exists, was published, there is a new alleged photograph of the monster that's been spread around the world. So why ignore it?

Once Loch Ness monster is probably a hoax itself, is any reference about it reliable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thiago CA Leal (talk • contribs) 20:19, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Meh, you can restore it if you want, although I would consider any Daily Mail article to be about as factual as a Roald Dahl book so if you could find another source it would be better--Jac16888 ^Talk 20:29, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello

(in response to [4]

There were a lot of tags but none of them were out of place at all. Such a shame you feel the need to remove valid tags. Iamthemuffinman (talk) 12:02, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Did you even bother to check them against the article? Or attempt to tidy it before you went nuts with the tags? Or notice that I actually fixed the issues when I removed the tags? Let's take a look at your tagging shall we:

• advert - what exactly was an advert in this
• cleanup-reorganize - of a 5 line article?
• confusing - how is this any different from copyedit, incoherent, wikify or rough translation
• copy edit - see confusing
• dead end - took seconds to link the place names
• incoherent - see confusing
• orphan - probably the only legitimate tag you added
• weasel - the only weasel words I saw were "peace & pride" not exactly hard to deal with
• wikify - see confusing
• wikify - hmmmm, déjà vu
• rough translation - see confusing

If you spent a little less time on your tagging and a little more time actually improving the article we wouldn't be having this conversation. Also, hiding criticism of your editing doesn't make it any less true --Jac16888 ^Talk 12:12, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Whatever. Iamthemuffinman (talk) 12:14, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

How mature. I don't expect your editing career here shall last very long--Jac16888 ^Talk 12:15, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Thankfully I can easily disregard your opinion for something more worthy of my time. Like rifting through the endless articles needing copyediting. Iamthemuffinman (talk) 12:20, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes well I won't be disregarding you, instead I'll be watching you for further personal attacks or disruptive behaviour, I imagine I'll be seeing you at ANI fairly soon unless you check your attitude. And by the way, do you really think going through finding articles that need copyediting, and then tagging them as needing copyediting rather than attempting to actual do it yourself is really helping anyone? If you're going to spend time on Wikipedia you could at least make it productive--Jac16888 ^Talk 12:24, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like you are threatening to harrass me. By all means, go to Ani. I haven't done anything wrong, but I'm sure they'll find fault with your hostility. I would be very interested in finding out what you feel I have done that is "distruptive" however. Iamthemuffinman (talk) 12:27, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

You seem to give a lot of final replys, I'll bet there will be another. And harass you? No. Do my job as an Admin in protecting the encyclopedia? Absolutely. And I would consider calling someone a fucknuckle, or your comments to Martijn as being "distruptive", particularly considering your previous history when it comes to personal attacks--Jac16888 ^Talk 12:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh you are so original. *Slow clap*. Iamthemuffinman (talk) 12:35, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh look, another final reply, saying nothing and furthering providing evidence that you're nothing but a troll. Any more coming? A really absolute final reply? Perhaps a super-mega final reply?--Jac16888 ^Talk 12:37, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Ani

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Iamthemuffinman (talk) 12:54, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Bwwwooooiinnnnggggggggg--Jac16888 ^Talk 13:43, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

That's the sound of a boomerang btw --Jac16888 ^Talk 13:43, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

That is not particularly helpful. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

You're right, it's not particularly accurate but it was hard to describe the noise properly--Jac16888 ^Talk 14:01, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Seriously though, considering I was called a fucknuckle and reported to ANI for doing nothing but point out to a new user that their overtagging and blind reverting was inappropriate, me pointing out that said report had boomeranged is hardly causing trouble--Jac16888 ^Talk 14:08, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 August 2012

• Op-ed: The Athena Project: being bold

• News and notes: FDC portal launched

• Arbitration report: No pending or open arbitration cases

• Featured content: Casliber's words take root

• Technology report: Wikidata nears first deployment but wikis go down in fibre cut calamity

• WikiProject report: Summer sports series: WikiProject Martial Arts

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 09:42, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Samuel Wells (Anglican priest)

He probably meets WP:PROF, so I deprodded it. Bearian (talk) 20:29, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Not sure I agree, particularly considering the extremely weak sources, but oh well. Might afd it at some point--Jac16888 ^Talk 20:32, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Savas Unsal

Dear Sir,

I had created a biography page on wiki about myself, but I realized that the page has been removed with the following message:-

This page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference.

11:56, 10 June 2012 Jac16888 (talk | contribs) deleted page Savaş ünsal (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of http://www.iceiletisim.com/turkish_page.htm)

Your G12 error msg points to copyright problem with İCE iletisim Hizmetleri Ltd company which is the company I personally own.

Pls advise How can I post my biography again..

Thnks

Savas Unsal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Savasunsal (talk • contribs) 09:31, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

You would need to provide proof through WP:OTRS that you own the copyright of the content and that you release it to the world, but even if you did that the page would still probably be deleted, because a), we don't allow people to write about themselves, b) it wasn't in English, this is the English Wikipedia, and c) it had no reliable references to demonstrate notability--Jac16888 ^Talk 10:32, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Ang

Greetings Jac. Have you any thoughts on the notability of Ryan Ang since the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Ang took place? I am very unfamiliar with dubbing. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 17:29, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Virtually identical, still non notable, tagged g4--Jac16888 ^Talk 19:09, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 August 2012

• Op-ed: Small Wikipedias' burden

• News and notes: Bangla-language survey suggests the challenges for small Wikipedias

• Arbitration report: You really can request for arbitration

• Featured content: On the road again

• Technology report: "Phabricating" a serious alternative to Gerrit

• WikiProject report: Dispute Resolution

• Discussion report: Image placeholders, machine translations, Mediation Committee, de-adminship

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 10:49, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Explanation of Globial Page Deletion

Hi,

I was wondering how exactly I can bring the Globial wikipedia page up to A7 significance standards. I thought I explained pretty well what it does and how it's significant — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunnycmui (talk • contribs) 22:58, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

You explained what it is, not why it's significant, i.e. it's real world impact, and the way to do that is through multiple reliable 3rd party references, links to globial and a couple of press releases aren't enough--Jac16888 ^Talk 16:34, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Logility

Hello Jac16888 -

I see that the wiki page for Logility has been deleted. I work at Logility and was planning to add content and links to the page, including news references which likely meet the requirements of your noteability guidelines. Should I have the deleted page reinstated or begin from scratch? Can you assist?

Thanks, Loren Weaver Logility — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palesalaryman (talk • contribs) 21:00, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

You should do neither. Since you are part of the company you have an unavoidable conflict of interest which means you will be inherently biased, which is exactly what we don't want. If the company is in fact notable, then eventually someone else will write about it, in the meantime you'll just have to accept that you don't have a Wikipedia presence, and that there are better ways to make your company known.--Jac16888 ^Talk 21:46, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

VREI SA INVENTEZ EU UN OM?

CE NU E BINE LA VASILE BLIDAR? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zah julien (talk • contribs) 00:57, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

(Taking a guess at your question) I deleted it because you copy and pasted it from another website, which makes it a copyright violation--Jac16888 ^Talk 17:48, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Leave me the fuck alone.

STOP HARASSING ME. I have now removed all discussion FROM MY TALK PAGE regarding whether you were committing vandalism. There is no partial deletion, no context removed or left regarding that. I left the other discussion. You are acting like a sore loser. LEAVE ME AND MY TALK PAGE ALONE.--Elvey (talk) 23:14, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

This is removing all of it is it? Because it looks to me like you made the exact same edit as before. It's not about being a sore loser, (particularly considering I am in no way "sore" and I in no way "lost") it's about you attempting to change the meaning of comments in order to try and change the conversation. Since you're clearly unable or unwilling able to do it properly I have removed it myself, I strongly suggest you leave it alone, or next time I will be reporting you--Jac16888 ^Talk 19:33, 21 August 2012 (UTC

No, it's not the exact same edit as before. I took out the "excuse me?", as it was the only thing that I saw that could be considerd to be no longer in context that this edit of yours could possibly have addressed. Pray tell, if you want to keep insisting I changed the meaning of your 4:40 pm, 28 February 2012 comment, then tell me, what was the meaning of your 4:40 pm, 28 February 2012 comment before, and what was the meaning after?--Elvey (talk) 20:51, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

When you take out one sentence of a paragraph, that's an attempt to change the meaning and to change my comments, and I challenge you to find a single established editor who would agree that is acceptable behaviour. And the change you made was to hide my questioning your abusive use of twinkle, with the sentence it brings attention to the summary and type of edit you made, without and the attention of the paragraph is focused on just the change. --Jac16888 ^Talk 21:08, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh and I would hardly consider trying to keep my comments intact, or removing them entirely, to be harrassment, you can shout it as loud and as often as you like, it won't make it true--Jac16888 ^Talk 21:12, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

A sore loser refers to one who does not take defeat well. You are acting like a sore loser, apparently apropos my comment: Well, Fine print now indicates (as it has for months) exactly what User Jac16888 had been berating me for adding and insisting was false again and again and again - that fine print is illegal in some cases. And is a hell of a lot better because of it. And it's backed up to the hilt with heavily defended citations (that include direct quotes from the citations, and so forth so as to make no logical step even remotely resemble a logical leap) I added long ago that make it thoroughly, irrefutably blindingly obviously verifiable.) User Jac16888's despicable threats, personal attacks, straw man attacks, insults and bullying were extremely disruptive and the multi-prong attack on me suggest dissembling; on what ethical grounds would someone fight so hard to quash any indication in the article of the rather obvious and verifiable truth that that some fine print is illegal? --Elvey (talk) 10:36 am, 13 June 2012, Wednesday (2 months, 9 days ago) (UTC−7) I on the other hand, was a good sport - when I saw I had erroneously tagged an edit as vandalism, and handled the situation with the grace of a good sport, and to the extent I won - by proving that fine print is illegal in some cases, I mentioned it on my OWN talk page, so a passer-by could see that the disparaging comments about me and my sources were not well-founded; I didn't rub it in your face; IIRC, I didn't comment on your talk page until your additional harassment made your behavior as a whole abusive. Good sport means being a "good winner" as well as being a "good loser". --Elvey (talk) 21:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Sore loser behavior includes blaming others for the loss, not taking responsibility for personal actions that contributed to the defeat, reacting to the loss in an immature or improper fashion, making excuses for the defeat, and citing unfavorable conditions or other petty issues as reasons for the defeat. And that would include you, Jac16888, not taking responsibility for your harassing behavior by claiming that the many, varied instances of harassing behavior that I called you on, Jac16888, were just you keeping your comments intact; they were in fact completely unrelated. --Elvey (talk) 21:25, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Way to go completely sidestepping the issue being discussed here with regards to your out of line editing of my comments. How exactly were they unrelated? The only edits I have made with regards to you were to revert your removal of a select sentence. I achieved what I wanted to with regards to that article, the silly statement with a non-supporting source is no longer an issue, and neither is the incorrectly used template, so yes I would consider myself as having "won". Also:"despicable threats" where? "personal attacks" where? "straw man attacks" where? "insults and bullying" where? I didn't respond to your rant because I had no interest in doing so, any one taking 5 minutes to read the discussion would see your accusations against me and you summation of the discussion as completely false.--Jac16888 ^Talk 21:33, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 August 2012

• Op-ed: Wikimedians are rightfully wary

• News and notes: Core content competition in full swing; Wikinews fork taken offline

• In the news: American judges on citing Wikipedia

• Featured content: Enough for a week – but I'm damned if I see how the helican.

• Technology report: Lua onto test2wiki and news of a convention-al extension

• WikiProject report: Land of Calm and Contrast: Korea

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 08:51, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 August 2012

• News and notes: Tough journey for new travel guide

• Recent research: New influence graph visualizations; NPOV and history; 'low-hanging fruit'

• Technology report: Just how bad is the code review backlog?

• Featured content: Wikipedia rivals The New Yorker: Mark Arsten

• WikiProject report: From sonic screwdrivers to jelly babies: Doctor Who

• Discussion report: Sidebar and main page alterations; Recent Deaths; Education Program extension

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 05:50, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ingrid Rosas

Hello, Jac16888. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ingrid Rosas.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

—Northamerica1000^(talk) 06:07, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

MT Vulcanus

Please don't mark for deletion. I started this on late last night, Health problems and PC issues today. End sob story. I'm working on this one and in over my head. Not good with tables and don't speak German. Not started on References yet. Must be a way to save sandbox without making it visible. I cannot find. link? ThanksJohnvr4 (talk) 19:26, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

If you don't speak german then you have no business creating an article from the German Wikipedia, it doesn't help anyone to create a badly translated terrible article, hence why I just removed the awful history section, which would allow somebody who does speak the language to do it properly--Jac16888 ^Talk 19:28, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Didn't you marked it for deletion while I was editing it, and deleted within minutes of a temporary save of me re-writing it in English?  ::All good, That's policy and I'm new and still learning the ropes. What is the etiquette for Main page titles and redirects for a ship with more than one name? Should the title of the main page be it's first name, current name or most famous or infamous name? Should it include the M/T, MT, SS, USNS, USS and in what priority? Thanks Johnvr4 (talk) 22:37, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I marked it for deletion for being unintelligible and unsourced, and another editor disagreed on the basis that while it's current state was of no use, the original german article could be used to make a decent article, therefore I removed the worst of the content so someone part of the WP:TRANSLATION project could see the tag and do it properly from scratch. As for the title, I have no idea, you would be best of asking someone from Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships--Jac16888 ^Talk 22:44, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Got it all sorted and someone jumped in to help out as well. Johnvr4 (talk) 21:12, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

My sandbox

Actually, it was taken directly from the source not from Spanish Wikipedia, that's why I had the tag there so when I do move the article someone can translate it. Best, Jona^{talk to me} 22:53, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Well then that makes it a copyright violation, and even more inappropriate--Jac16888 ^Talk 22:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

I forgot about that :/ Well I removed it. Best, Jona^{talk to me} 23:58, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Govedo jedno

tesko si dujbre — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pacovmirko (talk • contribs) 20:38, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Operation Red Hat

Did the rest of the Operation Red Hat entry pass muster? I made sure to remove the FB link. Is the policy call for no mention of FB or is it that you need to have links in the external links section and you can't have links to Facebook? Not arguing with the deletion, just trying to understand the rules. Thanks againJohnvr4 (talk) 21:25, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can tell. As for the link, it's all about common sense, it would make sense for the article about Britney Spears for example to link to her Facebook page, but an article about a US military operation having a link to a page like that is just silly--Jac16888 ^Talk 21:51, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 September 2012

• News and notes: World's largest photo competition kicks off; WMF legal fees proposal

• Technology report: Time for a MediaWiki Foundation?

• Featured content: Wikipedia's Seven Days of Terror

• Op-ed: Dispute resolution – where we're at, what we're doing well, and what needs fixing

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 11:25, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 September 2012

• From the editor: Signpost adapts as news consumption changes

• Op-ed: Fixing Wikipedia's help pages one key to editor retention

• In the media: Author criticizes Wikipedia article; Wales attacks UK government proposal

• Featured content: Not a "Gangsta's Paradise", but still rappin'

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Fungi

• Special report: Two Wikipedians set to face jury trial

• News and notes: Researchers find that Simple English Wikipedia has "lost its focus"

• Technology report: Mmmm, milkshake...

• Discussion report: Closing Wikiquette; Image Filter; Education Program and Momento extensions

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 05:10, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 September 2012

• From the editor: Signpost expands to Facebook

• WikiProject report: Action! — The Indian Cinema Task Force

• Featured content: Go into the light

• News and notes: Tens of thousands of monuments loved; members of new funding body announced

• Technology report: Future-proofing: HTML5 and IPv6

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 16:31, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Hong Kong Academy for Gifted Education

Hello!

Understand the article about Hong Kong Academy for Gifted Education is locked. Actually I have another article called HKAGE with sufficient and reliable sources from newspapers and governments papers in Hong Kong. However, it is hardly to keep because other editors mentioned that the deletion of Hong Kong Academy for Gifted Education affected my HKAGE article.

As such, I would like to see if you could help to follow up.

As mentioned above, HKAGE article quoted from newspapers and governments sources so these justify its notability amd reliability. There are also many news coverage about the HKAGE (like SCMP), but it is charged by newspaper if shared on web.

Besides, HKAGE is a non-profit organisation supported by the government so it is not in a promotional nature.

Furthermore, all the information included is only necessary and factual, and thus it is written from a neutral perspective but not an exaggerated one.

From the above point of view, I can't see any point that HKAGE article is being an advertising article. In stead, it helps to let other organisations over the world to have more information as their reference and development. The article should not be deleted soley because another related article is deleted before. This reason cannot be avalid ground at all.

If you have any suggestion about HKAGE article, esp on the point of advertising, would you please kindly show me an example of how to modify by using the content in the article, so as to demonstrate the consistent standard of non-promotional in Wikipedia? As I checked out different sites, they have listed many products or quoted from their own websites, but those websites are not deleted. Please see below examples-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Sony_Ericsson_products

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hong_Kong_Bird_Watching_Society

I'm looking forward to your reply. Thank you.

Annahui (talk) 02:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

The version I deleted in May was blatant spam, the current information is less promotional, if you don't want it deleted you need to make your arguments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HKAGE, I have nothing to do with this version--Jac16888 ^Talk 17:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Jac16888. You have new messages at TheChampionMan1234's talk page.
Message added 22:54, 20 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TheChampionMan1234 22:54, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

re Chris lumbreras

Just FYI, I noted you gave this editor (User:N157) a final warning on his talk page; he has since reposted an article I've tagged as an attack page. No need to respond, just wanted to make sure you had the information. Ubelowme _U ^Me 16:05, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, they've already been blocked so hopefully that will be the end of it--Jac16888 ^Talk 16:24, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Computer Vand-køling

Hey there

Is it possible for me to recover the article "Computer Vand-køling" since it was a mistake that it got sent to en.wikipedia.org.

It should have been uploaded to da.wikipedia.org but i didnt get to correct it in time.

thanks

Geekius — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geekius (talk • contribs) 23:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I've restored it an moved it back to User:Geekius/sandbox. Please note though that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a how-to-guide, so unless you plan on changing it into a proper (and referenced) article, the Danish Wikipedia are unlikely to want it either--Jac16888 ^Talk 23:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Translation on "Tenedos" for the Islamic Encyclopedia

Wasn't asking for a translation of the name of the source. The source was added to support a claim the mosque had been built on top of an earlier one demolished by Venetians. Wanted a translation of exactly what the the encyc. said on that aspect. However the sentence seems to have been removed by now. Churn and change (talk) 21:34, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Well we have a template for that, Template:Source need translation, but asking somebody to translate an encyclopedia for you is not likely to get good results--Jac16888 ^Talk 17:21, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I am asking somebody to translate the specific part that backs up what is included in the article. The part has been removed, as I expected, so the issue is moot. Churn and change (talk) 17:28, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 September 2012

• In the media: Editor's response to Roth draws internet attention

• Recent research: "Rise and decline" of Wikipedia participation, new literature overviews, a look back at WikiSym 2012

• WikiProject report: 01010010 01101111 01100010 01101111 01110100 01101001 01100011 01110011

• News and notes: UK chapter rocked by Gibraltar scandal

• Technology report: Signpost investigation: code review times

• Featured content: Dead as...

• Discussion report: Image filter; HotCat; Syntax highlighting; and more

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 17:32, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Libamáj

Kedves Jac, miért törölted a komplett cikkemet? Tisoczki Aliz Wikipédia- szerkesztőhttp://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Szerkeszt%C5%91:Legalizabb — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legalizabb (talk • contribs) 21:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

delete

Hi Jac i hope do You have any copy about my Libamáj words. Please send me back and write me why You deleted. Thank You Tisoczki Aliz Wikipédia- szerkesztőhttp://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Szerkeszt%C5%91:Legalizabb

delete

Hi Jac i hope do You have any copy about my Libamáj words. Please send me back and write me why You deleted. Thank You Tisoczki Aliz Wikipédia- szerkesztőhttp://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Szerkeszt%C5%91:Legalizabb — Preceding unsigned comment added by Legalizabb (talk • contribs) 21:55, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

It was deleted because this is the English language wikipedia, and we already have an article about Foie gras--Jac16888 ^Talk 17:23, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 October 2012

• Paid editing: Does Wikipedia Pay? The Founder: Jimmy Wales

• News and notes: Independent review of UK chapter governance; editor files motion against Wikitravel owners

• Featured content: Mooned

• Technology report: WMF and the German chapter face up to Toolserver uncertainty

• WikiProject report: The Name's Bond... WikiProject James Bond

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 20:48, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Nordstrand Vel

Letting you know I undeleted this; I was hitting edit to translate it, having found sources, when I found you'd deleted it. I have asked the editor who created it to help me add more sources, and you should of course feel free to AfD it if you don't think it adequately demonstrates notability. But there was in fact a claim of notability buried amid the Norwegian (which had at least 2 copyvio sentences, so I've tried to gently tell the editor not to do that, either). Yngvadottir (talk) 15:52, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Didn't really see the notablility in the original, but I can't argue with what you've done to it, nice job--Jac16888 ^Talk 18:40, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

→

Archive 25