User talk:The JPS/archive18/archive12

I always welcome polite, constructive criticism and comments. New posts to the bottom, please.

If you're a vandal, do yourself some justice and put some thought into your insults. Replacing the page with "you are gay" isn't exactly ingenious, and I don't consider it an insult anyway: I'd much rather be gay than an illiterate chav. If I've deleted your article, or image, get over it. (Obviously you're welcome to question my decisions, but, seriously, there are some stalkers who really need help.)

Archives
2005 Jan-10 May 2006 10 May-4 June 2006 4 June-27 July 2006 27 July - 31 August 2006 September - 2 November 2006 2 November - 31 December 2006 1 Jan - 3 March 2007 March/April 2007 May/22 June 2007 June/19 Aug 2007

twat

twat...im not checking back so you cant reply. twat, twat, twat! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.130.125.91 (talk) 21:27, August 20, 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for this constructive comment. BTW, both "I'm" and "can't" have omissive (aka contractive) apostrophes. Also, "I'm" has a capital 'I'. Good luck at big school. (P.S. I'm fairly sure that you will "check back." Hi!) The JPS^{talk to me} 21:34, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:itv.com

Is it OK to have Template:itv.com, or will it be removed?
GMc^talk 12:40, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Mmm, I'm not sure. I guess we have similar templates for the IMDb and TV.com. I don't initially see a problem with this. The JPS^{talk to me} 12:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I just don't want to put it in all the articles with a page on itv.com, and then learn that the template will be deleted, after all the effort. :)
GMc^talk 16:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I know what you mean. I'd do a few, and see what happens. The JPS^{talk to me} 20:20, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Bound GA

Thanks for passing Bound (film) as GA. You've definitely made me think with regard to the ratings template! Cheers, --BelovedFreak 15:34, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Category:Friends episodes

I've fiddled around with the category based on the suggestion you made on Talk:Friends about seven years ago. If I've missed any episodes that you think are notable then just add them. This system might make it easier to find the important episodes before they are all redirected. Brad 18:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Hairspray (2007 film)

Hi, I'm just messaging you regarding the initial GA review you left on the talk page of Hairspray (2007 film). I've gone ahead and taken care of the references to the best of my ability (there might still be one or two that could use some work, such as a website that was in Spanish, but most of them should be okay), but I was wondering if you had any suggestions as to what to do with the release dates section. I don't want to delete the entire section because I'm sure at least some of the information there is viable, but I guess I just wasn't sure what should stay and what should go. Do you have any advice or suggestions? Oh, and if you wanted to respond to the article's talk page so that others would be more likely to see it, that would be fine too. Either way. Thanks. —Mears man 19:15, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Christopher Nudds

Can you clarify why you deleted this article? I see you tagged it as A3 but that is "no content whatsoever" which is obviously untrue. ugen64 01:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Because the obsessive vandal is back. I also don;'t see notability: change that to A7. The JPS^{talk to me} 08:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Lol pmsl he's not even anything to do with me!!! You people are so dumb lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.108.222.111 (talk) 18:38, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Mike Roth

Edits regarding sourcing have been made on the Mike Roth page. Is the page still a candidate for deletion? Meesheek 02:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The Apprentice (UK) FAC

Your comments have been addressed, please can you now decide wheter you shall support this article or not and update the table at the top of the article appropriately? Dalejenkins | 13:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

 Done I have changed the FUR for the book image and removed the sub-paragraphs. Dalejenkins | 14:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

 Done image removed. Dalejenkins | 14:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

 Done I have expanded the second paragprah of the parodies section. Dalejenkins | 15:20, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes Minister FAC

JPS, I didn't add that paragraph. Some of its content is obvious (e.g., the Ben Stanley–Ken Livingstone connection), but even so, at the moment I'm afraid it is uncited OR. In order for the article to reach Featured status, I would suggest moving it to the Talk page until references can be found. I've done a quick Google, but can't find anything. I did come across an FAQ section on Jonathan Lynn's official site, which is worth a look — and may provide some more content for the article. See what you think. Chris 42 18:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

August 2007 WP:FILMS Newsletter

The August 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by BrownBot 13:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello

May I ask why you weren't courteous enough to contact me via my talk page to discuss the article I wrote about threequels before you deleted it? It's my understanding that there should have been some discussion about this matter first. You started one AFTER you deleted the article, which I don't appreciate. Thank you. ConoscoTutto 22:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello. Yes, I apologise for non alerting you to the discussion. However, the article has not been deleted. It has been redirected. The difference is that it can still be accessed by anyone through the history section and reinstated if anyone wished to be bold. Chesrs. The JPS^{talk to me} 09:00, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

To access it through the history section, wouldn't one need to know it was there? How would one possibly know? And if you were "bold" enough to redirect the article, why can't you be "bold" enough to reverse the redirect? I am sure that in no time the term "threequel" will be as commonly known as the once non-existent term prequel is now. Thank you. ConoscoTutto 14:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I expanded the "threequel" section in the sequel article and added a reference. Please let me know if this is satisfactory. Thank you. ConoscoTutto 15:48, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

That's right, and because of the freshness and lack of reliable references a brief mention within the sequel article is the best place for it, at best. One reference to an entertainment rag isn't good enough to justify an encyclopedic article, or, especially, changing the lead sections of multiple articles. If the term does become established and used in more credible publications (academic journals, or even more tabloids) then so be it. This reminds me of the name of amateur bands who posit that their article should be kept because one day they might be famous. I'm not sure the historical background you are providing is accurate and in relation: they are merely second sequels. The JPS^{talk to me} 16:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad we could arrive at a satisfactory compromise. As far as changing the lead sections of multiple articles, I was told long ago that new articles needed to be linked to older ones as much is possible, which is what I was doing. BTW, the term "threequel" is being used not only by "entertainment rags" such as Entertainment Weekly but has appeared in trade papers such as Variety and mainstream publications like the New York Times, New York Magazine, and even the Christian Science Monitor, as well. Thank you. ConoscoTutto 16:26, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes Minister

Hi JPS, I'm unsure if you're the "lead" person on this FAC, or the nominator, but as you responded to my comments I'm just giving you a courtesy note: I'll be off wiki for at least all of next week, and looking at the age of the nom it may well get decided before I return and respond to any changes that get made. That said, I think it'll go through anyway, so I doubt having my support missing will have much effect :) J.Winklethorpe ^talk 19:56, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

And the thanks you get for adding all the new material is...another set of comments :) Sorry about that. The new stuff really lifts the article, mind you. J.Winklethorpe ^talk 22:09, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry about the poor cat too. But he was rather bordering on total trivia :) J.Winklethorpe ^talk 22:24, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Congrats on the FA. J.Winklethorpe ^talk 20:20, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

DLM review

Hello, I'm not sure if you're keeping an eye on Dead Like Me's talk page, so I thought I'd come by to let you know I left some comments regarding your review. Stormin' Foreman 02:09, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

North east!

Haha, I've just read you're from the North East. I've seen you around forever, and you're like on the Top Wikipedians listed by Edit List! Great to see a north-easterner on there! :D

Whereabouts are you from? - ǀ Mikay ǀ 12:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello! Yup, there's a few of us on here. I'm from Co. Durham. I won't spoil the fun of my pet stalkers and being more specific tho ;) The JPS^{talk to me} 13:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Sticky Wiki

How can I get the definition of a Sticky Wiki (a wiki site that allows for Cannabis information to be placed in it) onto Wikipedia? Can you help me come up with this example definition?

Thank You. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.25.158.46 (talk) 11:32, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Has the website had any significant press coverage? The JPS^{talk to me} 11:49, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Old SALT vs New SALT

This is mostly an FYI to you as an admin who still uses the old, templated method for salting pages. That method of salting pages is depricated, and the template is now up for deletion. While things can still change, the current discussion definitely looks headed towards deletion. Assuming that this happens, you will no longer be able to salt pages with the old method, and will need to begin using the newer salting method that involves cascading protection on the title, and allows recreation to be blocked while still having no article at the name, leaving it as a red link. This new method of salting is centered at WP:PT, and the instructions for how to make it work are there as well. - TexasAndroid 13:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

gumtree

You have exercised your undoubted power to delete the mention of bananabean.com on what is clearly an advert for gumtree. Why dont you delete the whole of the content for gumtree rather than exercise dubious selection? Someone must have asked you to keep an eye on this so you should have read their posting - tell me why mine is not permissible and theirs is - if you can - if you cant then kindly replace what you have removed! Its not hard to understand that people get peed off with you. regards Gary —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bananabean cs (talk • contribs) 09:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia must not be used for advertising. You clearly have a conflict of interest. The JPS^{talk to me} 10:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Here's a compromise: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gumtree The JPS^{talk to me} 10:06, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gumtree

Greetings, thankyou for your kind comments about the Article Rescue Squadron. Regarding your question, blantant advertisment is definatly against policy, and should be removed. Please have a read of the Rescue Squadron's project page and consider joining if you think you would like to help us :-) Fosnez 12:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, by the way, I hope it wasn't too bold, but I non-admin closed the above AfD, is that ok? Fosnez 12:31, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello. Yeah, I'll look into ARS more closely. Technically people involved in a discussion shouldn't close things regardless of their status (for instance, if I kept my delete vote, I wouldn't have been allowed to close it as delete). No harm done, though. The JPS^{talk to me} 16:13, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Greetings, I have had my understanding about Non-Admin closure enhanced by Tikiwont. To this end, I will refrain from closing articles that I have commented on/edit in the future, but I hold that according to SNOW I was still in the right here to close this one. Fosnez 21:51, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Who decided this? It has lasted only 12 hours and somebody has decided is hasn't a snowballs chance - at the very least it should have been merged with ebay. You are really damaging wikipedia - but I suppose you dont care if you are enjoying some favouritism from them. Why not let it run its course I can find hundreds of complaints that it is an ad or are they taking you out for a special lunch - its almost criminal what you have done - sleep well —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bananabean cs (talk • contribs) 18:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Can you provide similar independent reliable third party sources for your organisation? Wikipedia is not to be used for advertising. In any case, i think it would be ineffective. I doubt that this article would rank highly in a Google search for classified ads. The JPS^{talk to me} 18:34, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I looked at fosnez' comment - if he does teach at university god protect our children - he can't even spell definitely - yet he can judge me - people like you (fosnez) really damage wiki - you are arrogant and judgemental - go back to books - GUMTREE IS PART OF EBAY AND SHOULD BE MERGED WITH EBAY!!! - what do you not understand about this - what is this crappy rescue squad -(more illeterate academics) stand back and smell the coffee before you make another intervention ps tell your students and employers you can't even spell. Best wishes Gary (I wasn't a child of the convict ship!) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bananabean cs (talk • contribs) 19:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Where are you fosnez - you are usually quick enough to make your wiki contributions (was it 2000) - ps it was not a typo on your part it was pure ill education! Regards gary —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bananabean cs (talk • contribs) 19:23, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Well that was quite entertaining... Sorry to be doing this on your Talk Page JPS, but Bananabean, No personal attacks are allowed on wikipedia, please refrain from attacking me again. However I will now proceed to pull apart your attack with the contempt that it just deserves:

• I closed the AfD because it did not have a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding, merging Gumtree into ebay has a similar chance of success.
• I don't teach children, I teach adults at University
• Spelling? I'm sorry did you understand what I meant? Good, well thats all that matters really
• People TYPING IN CAPITALS REALLY DAMAGE MY EYES - please refrain from doing so
• The Rescue Squadron are apparently a groups of "illiterate academics", another personal attack, very nice, and you're basing this claim on what exactly?
• I can only assume that with you "child of the convict ship" you were inferring that my family were convicts on the first fleet, sorry to burst your bubble but we were free migrants
• And finally, funny how you were able to infer that I must illiterate because I spelt something wrong, but wouldn't be able to understand from another one of my userboxes that I lived in Queensland and might not have responded because I was asleep. Fosnez 20:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

The JPS why haven't you intervened here - fosnez has overstepped the mark and at least should be releived of his power - if all he is going to cite is SNOW then he sure knows how to put an end to discussion. He is bringing contempt to the door of Wikipedia. Regards Gary —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.187.175 (talk) 08:15, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Because I have my own childish arguments to ignore. In my opinion, Fosnez has acted with civility, responding calmly to your unwarranted insults. Although he made an error in closing that AFD, it is not, despite your rhetoric, a crime. As he is not an admin, he has no "power" (though neither do admins, really, as we are all answerable to the project). The JPS^{talk to me} 08:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

DLM review

It's clear that Dead Like Me isnt quite up to GA standards yet, I would like to withdraw my nomination. Can that be done? Stormin' Foreman 19:19, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, just remove it from the GAC page. I'll keep an eye on the article to see how you get on. The JPS^{talk to me} 19:46, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call

Hey fellow Wikipedian! Your username is listed on the WikiProject Films participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. If you still consider yourself an active WP:FILM editor, please add your name to the Active Members list. You may also wish to add {{User WikiProject Films}} to your userpage, if you haven't done so already. We also have several task forces that you may be interested in joining as well.

Also, elections for Project Coordinators are currently in sign-up phase. If you would be interested in running, or would like to ask questions of the candidates, please take a look. You can see more information on the positions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Coordinators. Thanks and happy editing!

An automatic notification by BrownBot 01:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Stacey Sutton redirected to A View to a Kill?

As I see you making Stacey Sutton redirected to A View to a Kill, some even less important bond girls do have their own articles.--Jusjih 02:20, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it was a test so see how the Bond project reacts to WP:FICT. Once TTN and his cronies get on to it, all of them without so called "real world information" will be redirected. Attention was drawn to Sutton because of the GA nom: I'll leave others' to do the rather robotic task of redirecting the other articles, as I wouldn't want to deprive them of pleasure. The JPS^{talk to me} 09:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

If Stacy Sutton does not deserve its own article, I would like to suggest merging the content to List of James Bond allies in A View to a Kill to be more precise.--Jusjih 15:06, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Boycrusher deletion

Hi. On 15th of May 2006 you deleted an article about the band Boycrusher. I checked the deletion log, but can't find a reason to why it was deleted (I'm new to checking deletion logs so I might be doing something wrong). Could you please explain what was wrong with it so I don't make the same mistake if I want to add an article about Boycrusher? Morgontupp 12:41, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi. {{nn-band}} means "non-notable band." Your article failed the criteria for inclusion outlined at WP:BAND. For inclusion, you MUST cite several reliable third party references. Otherwise, as far as I can tell, Boycrusher appears an amateur band. The JPS^{talk to me} 13:33, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Review

I have informed several members on the Wikipedia Review messageboards of your actions. Good luck explaining them all! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vitalshown (talk • contribs) 21:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

As long as they're brave enough to identify themselves when making any allegations about my off-Wikipedia activities. I'm sure they will, since they are fans of accountability. The JPS^{talk to me} 21:20, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Films September 2007 Newsletter

The September 2007 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Please note that special delivery options have been reset and ignored for this issue due to the revamp of the membership list (outlined in further detail in the newsletter). If you would like to change your delivery settings for future issues, please follow the above link. I apologize for the inconvenience. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 00:07, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Television episode notability

Hi, I saw you post in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Television/Episodes, and being somewhat new to wiki's editing side, I was hoping you could clear up a little confusion I have regarding TTN's crusade and the general wikipedia consensus on the importance of community trust (good faith). While I understand where he's coming from, I think the way he's going about it is creating enormous ill-will and substantially damaging the part of WikiProject Television that is a community of contributors, and I'm not sure why that isn't generating more concern.

By deleting/merging only the episode articles for less popular shows--and doing so for hundreds of articles at once, appearing a bit callous to their creators--many individuals are understandably having a hard time not taking it personally when they see much of their contribution wiped out in one mass-deletion move by (what, to all appearances, is) one man on a mission, who is deliberately staying clear of the "big" shows and their articles. For new users interested in creating new articles about television series, the high profile/featured articles and shows serve as role models; when they see that virtually all of the featured shows have individual articles for every episode (and [almost] no "nominated for merger for lack of notability" warnings on any of them), they're likely to assume that it's an accepted practice (even though it doesn't quite match the guidelines) and put a lot of work into creating similar articles for new shows, which TTN will then casually wipe out.

He's said on his talk page that he hopes to change all of the articles for smaller shows first, then go after the big ones. I know this strategy is easier for a solitary editor to carry out (although since it's an official wiki policy he's enforcing, I'm not sure why he needs to remove thousands of articles by himself), but I believe it's damaging the trust that contributors have when they create articles in the first place, and on his talk page, his attitude toward those whose content he erases, often seems closer to spiteful than sympathetic. He seems oblivious to all the people he may be discouraging from participating or contributing, and I don't think that's a trivial factor.

I'm not here looking for intervention; but as a long-time reader and relatively new user, I'm hoping that you (as someone very familiar with wikipedia, and familiar with what TTN is doing) can clarify whether the health of the community is the priority I think it is; and if so, why this course of action isn't (apparently) being strongly discouraged by admins in favor of a top-down approach, in which the highest profile shows are edited to reflect the standards first, then the smaller ones; so that everyone can see that the standards are being applied equally by the community (not just one chop-happy editor), new users are far less likely to waste time creating new content that will be discarded, and there's an understanding that smaller shows aren't being singled out?

In other words, am I completely on the wrong track in thinking that wikipedians' community trust, and spirit of cooperation, is something to be protected and preserved (as much as possible while also respecting content guidelines), with more respect than it's receiving here? If I'm right, is there anything I can do about it? My apologies for the length of this post (I tried to shrink it, honest) --F.dolarhyde 18:51, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Australian soaps

Its a shame that some people (you) have nothing at all better to do with your time than to police other's contributions. Sad really! A life needs to be enjoyed, not wasted away!

And anyway, there are countless errors and constant alterations on wikipedia, the whole thing is pointles anyway! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.9.61.204 (talk) 09:53, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I could respond by saying that it's a shame that some people don't have anything better to do with their time other than compiling the specific dates of when episodes of Australian soap operas were broadcast in the different regions in the UK. I'm sure that many people will also consider that 'sad', and the time 'wasted away'. Before throwing more insults, consider: "people in glass houses..." My message on your talk page was polite. The JPS^{talk to me} 10:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Rolling Stone lists

A user has decided to undo my merges of the three Rolling Stone (500 songs, 500 albums, 100 guitarists) lists because apparantly, I didn't merge them properly. Anyway, I discovered that 2 new pages have since been created - Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Artists of All Time and Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Albums of the 80s. There are no independant sources to prove their notability, and basically the articles are just a list of the Top 10, plus a bit of unsourced trivia and analysis. I think perhaps I should just nominate all five for deletion. What do you think? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:40, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it would definitely be worth listing those for AFD. If someone doesn't contest the PRODs, then I'll delete them in five days -- otherwise, AFD. The JPS^{talk to me} 08:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

What about the 500 songs and albums lists? Is it worth going to afd, or is it not worth it? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 13:47, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I think they should all go to AFD. The JPS^{talk to me} 18:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I'll nominate the two of them for deletion. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:42, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

How to deal with bad G4 nomination

This 29 August 2007 deletion of yours prompted this discussion. Please consider commenting at that discussion. -- Jreferee t/c 16:31, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

---

Agreed with your comment. regards flexcoupling —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flexcoupling (talk • contribs) 20:41, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Friends episode articles

The Chuckle Brothers have decided to bypass their self-imposed review of articles and just redirect them all without discussion. However, judging by their words, I strongly doubt they have even read all of the articles (I know at least one of them just tags using AWB), so I am forcing them to actually discuss their review nominations before taking any actions. Maybe you'd like to join in. Brad 15:34, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

RRD RE

Thanks. great to see another fan too. surething on the references.

I don't believe Lemon was ever a single ....... was it? -- WarioLoaf 20:06, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey. I think "Lemon" was a promotional single, but not released. I don't have a record of it charting. The JPS^{talk to me} 20:08, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Concerto for Constantine

Might I ask why you deleted my article on the band Concerto for Constantine? The fact that all three members have been members of separate otherwise notable bands makes the band itself notable, does it not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Number72 (talk • contribs) 10:13, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Removing the tag

Hi. If the article is proposed for GA review, I can see no reason to prejudice it with a tag. Although I personally don't like the style of the article, it seems to be within the de facto standards. It would be intersting what comments you get from the GA review. I think we should allow you to go forward and then revisit the issue after the GA review. Good Luck! I'll pull the tag. --Kevin Murray 22:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Kevin. The JPS^{talk to me} 22:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Image

Given what transpired, I'll be a lot more careful and skeptical in future, sorry about that mate Domain of lighting 05:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikinews username

Hi,

can you confirm here that you are in fact The JPS on Wikinews?

many thanks,

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 08:46, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Certainly can. The JPS^{talk to me} 00:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Actor templates

Hi, I noticed you were the author of User:The JPS/Director templates, and I was wondering if you were aware if actor templates are opposed by the community or not. I've had to clean up after Template:Leonardo DiCaprio and Template:Nicholson movies, which list even the minor roles of their career. I'm aware of actor templates being deleted, but I was wondering if you knew of a specific precedent in opposition to actor templates. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 19:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, I haven't been following it lately, I'm afraid. I guess the director templates are more acceptable as there's only going to be one template. However, for actors there are could be up to three per article, and it is quite POV to determine which actors are 'deserving' of them. The JPS^{talk to me} 20:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Univ of N'cle arms

hello, I noticed you removed the image I made from the Newcastle University template as it was a derivative work. I'm still learning at editing things on Wikipedia, but surely the renderings of the arms of all the Oxford, Cambridge & Durham colleges would fall into the same catagory and should be removed too? Admitunit 15:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I've asked for extra thoughts at Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#Template:University_of_Durham_and_similar. The JPS^{talk to me} 15:17, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean by 'dab' ?

See [1]. I assume you didn't mean WP:DAB ? -- John 17:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, this message got hidden amongst vandalism. Yeah, I meant DAB: the most important part of that edit was DABbing Radio 4. The JPS^{talk to me} 23:45, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Understood - thanks, I'd missed that when I looked. -- John (Daytona2 · talk) 15:57, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Project Runway Canada

Hi, I watch a reality show called Project Runway Canada. On the website and everything they promote 12 contestants/potential designers. Yet when I watched the first episode of the show. There were 13 designers at the beginning of the show where they all met and then Iman, the host came out with the first challenge and then they eliminated the first designer right away, leaving the 12 designers that were promoted on the website. I wanted to add the 13th designer, Tyler, to the Project Runway Canada page on Wikipedia. (The challenge which he was lost is featured on the episode recap for the first episode) However, a user named Loopscale keeps on undoing my correction telling me that he is not featured on the Website thus not making him an official contestant. I can understand that but he did appear on camera and participate in a challenge, which is referenced on the page. I would at least like to see a reference to his participation on the show on the Wikipedia page. 69.28.232.216 23:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)samusek2

REpower

can the admins please stop deleating this post before i have time to build it?

It is better that you build it offline until it is in a suitable state for publication. Please also consider our notability guidelines: WP:CORP. Any 'developed' article might be deleted under such grounds. The JPS^{talk to me} 13:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

alright i'll think about that —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simmzooka (talk • contribs) 13:33, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Pope Russell Boniface

Can you comment at the requested unblock of User talk:Pope Russell Boniface? --Stephen 05:33, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm a Celebrity... Get Me Out of Here!

In the article for I'm a Celebrity... Get Me Out of Here! ( the British version), people are updating the page with news of the current series airing now. They are adding information on the Bushtucker trials for this series where other series don't have any mention of which celebrities participated in whatever bushtucker trials. There was some debate as to whether to get rid of the trial list for this year's series, and some want to keep it but some people think that it is not right to put a trial list for this year when other series do not have any. (A lot of these posters are probably new users) I thought I would ask you what you thought was right for the page. 69.90.207.148 (talk) 00:38, 23 November 2007 (UTC) samusek2

Thanks re: Press Gang FAC

Thank you for your note on my talk page. I've added my support to the press gang FAC.--Opark 77 (talk) 01:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

A.F.C. Wimbledon

Hi, would you say that A.F.C. Wimbledon should be a ga.--Sunderland06 (talk) 16:21, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

It looks well referenced (first hurdle) and I can't see any obvious problems. I'll leave it to someone more experienced in reviewing football articles on making the call tho'. The JPS^{talk to me} 16:23, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

November 25th 2007

Perhaps we could discuss a truce? 91.108.236.206 (talk) 13:02, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

It takes little effort from me to hit 'rollback', so I'm not quite sure what you'd like. The JPS^{talk to me} 13:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

That is very naïve of you John. 91.108.236.206 (talk) 14:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

? The JPS^{talk to me} 18:18, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

It is very naïve for you to consider yourself in control here. 91.108.209.88 (talk) 20:13, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Would you like to elaborate? How are you empowering me exactly? The JPS^{talk to me} 21:42, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

All I wish to add is that it is certainly a bold assumption on your part. Be that as it may would you be willing to reach some form of compromise so that we might, say, put our differences aside? 91.108.194.137 (talk) 22:13, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

And your suggestion might be? The JPS^{talk to me} 23:23, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

I tell you what, if you can permanently ban Gscshoyru (talk · contribs) for me, then I will be willing to end any harassment campaign against you. Maybe then can we coexist peacefully. Heck, I may even invite you round for afternoon tea and a civil chat. 91.108.194.137 (talk) 23:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Ha, fat chance. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 01:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

So ending the harassment is the only thing you have to offer me? The JPS^{talk to me} 01:28, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I thought I was being reasonable John, I could have asked for much more. Underestimating me could be your downfall here. 91.108.202.199 (talk) 11:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

You've given me no reason to believe you. The JPS^{talk to me} 11:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I admit it is a little difficult to explain. Perhaps we could meet over lunch to discuss this in person? 91.108.202.199 (talk) 12:09, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Where would you like to meet? Somewhere public, obviously. The JPS^{talk to me} 12:11, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Naturally, I wouldn't have expected otherwise. Berwick seems like a good location to me. 91.108.202.199 (talk) 12:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Why Berwick? The JPS^{talk to me} 12:34, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Well I thought perhaps a short drive up the A1 might be convenient for you, plus I myself have never been there. 91.108.202.199 (talk) 13:10, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, too inconvenient, considering you've been very vague what might be in it for me. Since you seem to know a lot about me, just come to the reception of the building where I work. The JPS^{talk to me} 13:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Very well then if you'd prefer things this way. If you are not interested in a truce though, and would prefer the harassment and protection of your talk page to continue, then I suppose we can allow things to continue in such a manner. 91.108.202.199 (talk) 13:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

That's fine. Far less hassle than going up the A1. And it's less hassle for my colleagues and me to revert and protect than it is for you. The JPS^{talk to me} 14:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes but how much hassle would it cause you if I were to inform Wikipedia Review what you've been getting up to? 91.108.202.199 (talk) 14:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Getting up to what exactly? Stop being vague. The JPS^{talk to me} 15:09, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Well naturally there's this, although some innocent canadian has been arrested so I think you've probably gotten away with that. I do know what else you've been doing though, and it would be foolish to let slip my advantage by revealing here my enlightenment. 91.108.202.199 (talk) 15:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The point is John, my offer still stands. If you can block said user for me, I shall go away, otherwise you shall have to continue reverting vandalism to your talk page. 91.108.202.199 (talk) 15:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I have no intention of blocking any editor in good standing. The JPS^{talk to me} 16:13, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

You would link your real life identity to your allegations if you have any conviction, and are a fan of accountability. Otherwise, I might have to contact my workplace's legal department, and then Orange. The JPS^{talk to me} 16:21, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough then John, I see it shall be futile to contact Wikipedia Review, and therefore I shan't. I would like to take this opportunity to offer new terms for a truce. I will agree to end any campaign of vandalism on your talk page if in exchange you agree to block indefinitely Hailey C. Shannon (talk · contribs). I believe this is far more reasonable, the user in question being far less established/useful as far as editing this encyclopedia goes. In fact they are nothing more than a retarded and autistic teenage girl. 91.108.202.199 (talk) 16:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

My friend, you do realize that I have filed an abuse report on you, and that if you continue, your internet service provider will be notified of your nefarious actions? Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:06, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes I am quite well aware of that. 91.108.231.42 (talk) 00:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright, so if you keep this up, you'll be in a whole mess of trouble. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 00:20, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest I feel I am being rather reasonable at the present moment. I am not currently engaged in vandalism, I am merely requesting the block of another user, one who in fact has previously been disruptive themselves. 91.108.231.42 (talk) 01:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Do you have legitimate concerns? Are you able to cite examples? Are you able to express your concerns without resorting to immature personal attacks such as "retarded and autistic?" The JPS^{talk to me} 01:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't describe those as "personal attacks" to be fair. If you see her user page, she quite clearly states that she is female and has asperger's syndrome, making her "autistic" and "retarded". My concerns regarding this user are purely based on these facts. You may though be interested to know that said user was banned from the Simple English Wiki a while ago, for her disruptive edits. 91.108.231.42 (talk) 01:34, 27 November 2007 (UTC)