User talk:JzG/Archive 53

Archive 50

Archive 51

Archive 52

Archive 53

Archive 54

Archive 55

→

Archive 60

Notification

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Proposed_amendment, and the subthreads above it. You are being notified as you were one of the users who proposed or discussed the original sanction. Ncmvocalist (talk) 15:24, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Conversation on admin noticeboard re: block of ISP for low-income users

I have started a conversation regarding a block of an ISP for low income users that was initiated two and a half years ago and was recently lifted. You were one of the people that helped review the initial block or helped review it when it was lifted. I am cordially inviting you to join in the conversation.
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Two and a half year block of ISP for low-income users
Thank you very much for you thoughtful consideration. - Hydroxonium (talk | contribs) 03:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Luboš Motl

As a contributor to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luboš Motl back in 2005, you may be interested to know it has been re-nominated for deletion. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luboš Motl (3rd nomination). Robofish (talk) 16:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Cycling

• Westminster motorcycle parking charge (AfD discussion)

This may be of interest to you. Uncle G (talk) 19:17, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

• Nice. I remember the protests very well, the syncopated use of horns in particular. Guy (Help!) 20:13, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
  • I'd never heard of any of this until it came to AFD. Uncle G (talk) 11:10, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
    • Well, I guess it was not something that made national or international headlines, but it was pretty visible in its target area, the City of Westminster. I don't know if I'd have come across it if Trafalgar Square wasn't on my commute :-) Guy (Help!) 11:31, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
      • I almost certainly wouldn't have come across it if it weren't at AFD. ☺ On the matter of pictures, I recommend that you or someone else local to the events take a picture like this one. I did happen across this picture but I don't think it a good guide for what is wanted in a free content picture. It didn't seem quite illustrative enough of the subject at hand. Uncle G (talk) 11:50, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

• As far as I'm aware the protests are over following the court case, and I'm off the bike at the moment anyway, unfortunately, but I may be able to find a friend who has some decent photos. Guy (Help!) 12:41, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

OTRS, Feminists Fighting Pornography, and email

I would like to follow up on the open question of fact respecting the Feminists Fighting Pornography article and the OTRS ticket.

I understand that email is preferred but nothing in this message (this post) is confidential and I don't think I have access to emailing through Wikipedia. I think you probably do, so feel free to reply to me via email and let me know how I should reply. I twice tried to log into the OTRS system Aug. 7, 2010, but my login did not work for that purpose, and it did not work in the past, although my Wikipedia login works for Wiktionary and presumably for all Wikimedia projects. I am not an admin.

The history is reflected in the FFP Talk Corrections topic. Here's a briefer statement: Certain facts were stated in the article on the basis of a law journal. The statement was then edited pursuant to the OTRS system on the basis of an unpublished email. I have not seen the email. Further research produced another published source. I contacted Ron Kuby and Nadine Strossen but no reply has been received from either office or from either of them, but I have no reason to question the published sources because of these two persons' not replying.

Two published sources are available. OTRS has an unpublished email as a source that may differ. It is also possible that more than one event occurred so that there is no conflict. One published source indicates that multiple events did occur.

Could you please email me through Wikipedia's record of my email address with the full body text and basic headers of the email on which the OTRS edit relied?

Thank you very much. Nick Levinson (talk) 18:12, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

The discussion has moved to the article's talk page, where a reply has been posted. Thank you. Nick Levinson (talk) 01:15, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Xpand 3d

Who of the editors appears to have a close connection with Xpand 3D? I restored the article but I have no connection to Xpand in any way. I contributed also much to Dolby 3D, Masterimage 3D and other 3D stuff as an IP. I registered an account to have a userpage for restoration of the article. I can not see anything non neutral point of view in the article. But you seem to have obsession to delete this article. Perhaps you work for RealD, Dolby 3D or whatsoever? ;) Please tell me what you think is out of npov in the article. --Bothary (talk) 20:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

MyEdu edits and COI tag

Hey there, I am the author of the MyEdu page. It seems that you have removed some parts of the page (company progression) and have flagged it for conflict of interest. I would like to know the reason for the removal of the section as well as why it is being flagged. Everything is legit, sourced, and factual. Wtferguson (talk) 18:44, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm moving this discussion into its own section and assigning the title. It should not have been added to the end of an unrelated section (topic). Click the "New section" tab link when starting a topic on a Talk (Discussion) page. Thank you. Nick Levinson (talk) 23:56, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

MyEdu

Hey there, I am the author of the MyEdu page. It seems that you have removed some parts of the page (company progression) and have flagged it for conflict of interest. I would like to know the reason for the removal of the section as well as why it is being flagged. Everything is legit, sourced, and factual. Wtferguson (talk) 18:44, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

• Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a billboard. Guy (Help!) 21:06, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

I believe that with the sources used and the information that was provided, it was in no way advertising the company. If that was a billboard then so is this entire page - www.wikipedia.org/wiki/koofers. I would like a better reason for the removal of the content. Thank you. Wtferguson (talk) 15:16, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

• You believe, but you appear to be employed by them so not a good judge. Also we don't need laundry lists of "milestones" in the development of marginally notable companies. Guy (Help!) 20:36, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Larry T. Pretlow II. It'd be an easily accepted article under normal circumstances, but as I don't know the backstory I'm seeking your advice/action. Regards, sonia♫ 05:23, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Not to speak for JzG, but candidates for minor political positions are usually not considered notable in and of themselves I believe, per WP:POLITICIAN. I don't recall if that is why it was deleted in the first place. I do realize you've done a lot of work on it, and at the same time I have really no doubt that the originator of the article is the candidate himself or one of his staff. Syrthiss (talk) 11:30, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

There appears to be a decent amount of coverage- my concern was more WP:BLP1E. Having worked on articles that fall through the gaps is a part of every reviewer's (and every editor, I suppose) experience, and that is not an issue here. It's reasonably well-written compared to what AfC usually gets, but a quick check found the AfD and I decided that deferring to someone more familiar with the situation would be a good idea. sonia♫ 11:43, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

• Articles on "LaPret" have been deleted and salted at over a dozen different titles over the last year (see discussion a couple of weeks ago and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry T. Pretlow II). This is blatant astroturfing by his camp and I have deleted the AfC request as a non-starter, since it was recently deleted and salted at that title. The office for which he is standing is not notable, other officeholders do not have articles (see Advisory Neighborhood Commission Members, Washington, DC 2007-2008). He has also been mailing OTRS asking for an article. The answer there was the same: no. Extensive sockpuppetry is also in play, and I think it is probably time to start blocking the numerous WP:SPAs that are agitarting for and creating this article. Guy (Help!) 13:53, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Huckleberry113's Page

My page has been userfied, and I've altered it a great deal to meet notability guidelines. Please could you give it a once over before I move it into mainspace to check you're happy with it. I'd appreciate your input. - User:Huckleberry113/Master of Malt

Thanks! Huckleberry113 —Preceding undated comment added 10:14, 12 August 2010 (UTC).

Hi Guy, no problem, no, I have no affiliation with the whisky industry whatsoever - sadly, I might add! What do you think of my revised version?

(Huckleberry113 (talk) 11:34, 12 August 2010 (UTC))

Good day, AfD

Hello, you do not know me, but I see you were previously involved in a similar discussion. I have(I think) nominated an article for deletion at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/R._D._Reynolds

The input from a respected editor such as yourself would be greatly appreciated. Spoke shook (talk) 17:12, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Carriger

I believe you may have acted precipitously; see my response to the AfD. DS (talk) 19:35, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

New datum: She's been on the New York Times Best Seller List. DS (talk) 12:04, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Zen Department Store listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Zen Department Store. Since you had some involvement with the Zen Department Store redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Bridgeplayer (talk) 23:29, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello JzG! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 35 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Nigel Foster - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 09:49, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Huckleberry113 is clearly associated with Master of Malt

Hi Guy,

Huckleberry113 is clearly associated with the commercial company Master of Malt and is trying to influence Wikipedia's users by publishing articles on their behalf. If you look at his history you will have a clear view of what he is trying to do. He has made a small number of insignificant changes to other articles to give an impression of authenticity, but in reality all the articles he has contributed have been either about Master of Malt or in related areas (eg two other very small pages on other independent bottlers as a cloak of respectability).

In short, I think you are being a bit hasty in taking his word that he has nothing to do with the industry, as his entire time on Wikipedia seems to have been with the sole intention of creating a Master of Malt page. The original page was a blatant example of marketing and read like a thousand-word advertorial with gushing praise and a lot of uncritical subjective statements about how great Master of Malt was. This is why I have continued to check back and edit it. What I have been doing is not vandalism, I am simply trying to foil a clever marketeer. By waiting a few weeks, recreating the page and then showing it to higher mods like yourself and IronGargoyle for approval, while at the same time complaining about me to NawlinWiki, he has sucessfully pulled the wool over your eyes.

Please have another look at this,

Many thanks,

Whiskyinspector —Preceding undated comment added 14:20, 19 August 2010 (UTC).

Adam Rittenberg

I was wondering if you could userfy the prod-deleted article for me. I plan on publishing the article again and want to see what I can salvage. Preferably right here. I'd be very grateful. OlYeller^Talktome 15:09, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Lou Knee

Guy Chapman posted as "Lou Knee" on usenet in order to call someone a "piece of shit". When he was caught out, instead of doing the decent thing and admitting it, he poured scorn on his accuser and implied that they were talking nonsense, but didn't actually say that he didn't post as Lou Knee. He has since continually dodged the question "Have you ever posted as Lou Knee?" The only remotely plausible explanation is that Chapman made the Lou Knee post, but does not have the backbone to admit it. Nor does he want to lie, because apparently "God" will strike him down if he does. So instead he simply tries to deceive his way out of it and refuses to answer the question (apparently God's OK with dishonest behaviour and not facing the consequences of your actions or apologising to your victim, just so long as you don't explicitly lie).

Don't believe me? Try asking him yourself whether he made the post (if you're not one of the people who's too scared to ever argue with him, that is). The way that Crapman has behaved here shows unequivocally that he is deceitful, and that he will go to any lengths required to avoid admitting defeat or that he has done anything wrong. If he has done it with something comparatively unimportant like the Lou Knee saga, then he wouldn't hesitate to do it with more significant matters, and no doubt that has occurred many, many times.

So, in summary, you cannot trust Crapman. Just because he implies that something is or isn't the case, you can in no way take his word for it, however sneering and condescending he is about your allegation(s). The Lou Knee saga is just one of many reasons why Chapman is so reviled and despised all over the Internet. Whether or not you agree with his Communist opinions, if you are a decent and honest person then you cannot in good conscience support Chapman in any way. He simply cannot be trusted to be honest if he thinks that such honesty will put him in a worse position than he's already in. The Lou Knee saga neatly encapsulates so much of what is wrong with Chapman, and what makes so many people hate him, although of course it's by no means the full story: just one other example is his continual campaigning for anti-car measures which he knows have killed thousands of road users. As he has influence over the deployment of these measures, this surely makes him a murderer. Yep, apparently persecuting motorists is so important that a few thousand deaths here and there is an acceptable price to pay. Did you know that telling lies about road safety isn't grossly irresponsible as long as you're doing it in order to give drivers a hard time? Crapman thinks the end justifies the means, although of course he never admits it. How he sleeps at night, if indeed he does, is anyone's guess (although maybe he gets a prescription from his doctor for that as well as for his mental problems, which, unusually, he has been truthful about).

Peter Whitfield page deletion

why was the "Peter Whitfield" page been deleted? It meets criteria with no copy write infringements. Christopher1X (talk) 03:00, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

• Fore the reasons stated on your talk page when I first userfied it. Guy (Help!) 08:31, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

the article was redone after that just stating the facts of the author and the books he wrote with links to library archives to prove it. it makes no sense that it was deleted.Christopher1X (talk) 02:13, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

• As bullet points in the style of personal notes or an essay. Look at some other articles, your first was just a copy-paste form some website and you've simply been reposting it with less and less content. That's not how it works. Guy (Help!) 13:50, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

JzG, i protest the deletion of the article for supposed "copy write infringements". It is a PUBLIC RESOURCE. http://www.emmanuel-newington.org/seminary/resources/index.php

if you scroll down the page it lists... A Review of and Observations about Peter Whitfield's A Dissertation on the Hebrew Vowel-Points by Dr. Thomas Strouse http://www.emmanuel-newington.org/seminary/resources/Whitfield.pdf ...at the top of the page it CLEARLY says... "Public Resources - Listed below are resources, published by members of the Seminary faculty, that are meant to be of assistance to the general public."

Please restore the article.Christopher1X (talk) 08:14, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

• You seem very determined not to understand the problem or its solution. Guy (Help!) 08:30, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Christopher1X, the copyright holder calling their own work a public resource that is meant to be of assistance to the general public, regardless of how the work is published or not, is not the same as granting permission to copy. I haven't looked to see if there's an infringement, but on the point of licensing under copyright you should look for an explicit license. Only in limited cases can you infer one. For example, if copyright notice is lacking, that's irrelevant. However, you can generally write in your own words even though you're discussing the same underlying information. History is not copyrightable; how it is expressed is (generally). And part of JzG's commentary was about style. Nick Levinson (talk) 18:28, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Regina Rams

A user has requested Regina Rams (it is a redirect) be unprotected. You (log) protected it a while back due to an OTRS ticket. Is it ok to unprotect now?--Commander Keane (talk) 02:08, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

No prob...

Thanks for letting me know. I wasn't sure if this guy was the real deal or a pretender. :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:24, 26 August 2010 (UTC)