User talk:J.delanoy

My wheel-warring policy:

Admins: If you see me make a logged action that you think I should not have done, I will not consider it wheel-warring if you undo it without asking for my permission. However, if I marked the action as being done after running a checkuser query, or as part of a sockpuppet investigation, you should ask me or another checkuser before undoing it. In any case, if you do revert one of my actions, I would appreciate it if you tell me that you did so. Thanks!

Chess, anyone?

Make a move...
View current game and archives

J.delanoy vs. World
Chessboard	Moves
a b c d e f g h 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 a b c d e f g h
	J.delanoy to move...
	# J.delanoy World 1 e4 e6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Bd3 Bb4+ 4 Bd2 Na6 5 a3 Bxd2+ 6 Qxd2 c5 7 Nf3 O-O 8 e5 Nd5 9 Nc3 Nxc3 10 Qxc3 cxd4 11 Nxd4 Qg5 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Carolean edit

Hi J.delanoy, with all respect for you and the policy of wikipedia, i think you might have made a mistake when reverting what i had written on the article about caroleans. I was trying to add new constructive material to the article and it wasn't my intention i any way to vandalise. I would be very pleased if you could revert it back the way it were and tell me what was wrong with the text and i will do my best to make the text as you wish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.228.197.9 (talk) 09:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

No, you were fine. I was just being a total bonehead and not paying attention. I'm really sorry for doing that, and I have undid my change on that page, so everything should be back how you had it before. Again, I am really sorry for my lack of attention. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 09:15, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Editing problem...

Ughh....too used to different formatting. Do you know an internal link that could help me out with background colours, boundaries, etc? Thanks! Cheers. Imperat§ r^(Talk) 16:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

No I don't, sorry :/ Most of what I know I learned by looking around and seeing how other people do it. A good place to learn some fun tricks is in User:Phaedriel's userspace. She was freakin' awesome at combining wikimarkup and HTML. As far as colors go, they are just HTML colors. here is a mess of colors, and if you want moar, I'm sure googling "HTML colors" would come up with plenty of results. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Heh...when I said colours, it was part of "background colours" :P Thanks anyway, the userpage helped a bunch. I often use Web colors right here, in fact, for colour codes, though...Cheers. Imperat§ r^(Talk) 13:36, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

hey

...been a while! :) Thanks for this. And congrats on the adminship! Noticed that only now. prashanthns (talk) 16:32, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) I saw your post on Jimbo's talk page, and I went to your page to say "Hi" (and to be envious of your pic with him...) I saw the typo, so I fixed it, and I was going to leave a note on your talk page, but I got distracted by my teacher so I forgot. Welcome back! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Ahoy there....what was this removal of one my UBXs for, subsequently reverted? Just asking.... :)prashanthns (talk) 09:22, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Ooops....this was a removal of my ubx by another user, which I mistook for your edit. Pls disregard my previous comment. prashanthns (talk) 06:28, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Unusual template sighting

A new editor asking your advice: can you tell me what template {reset} is used for, and why an editor might put it on a page he created himself? Thanks, Chuckiesdad (talk) 05:24, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. I've never seen that template before. I think it's used when an article is really bad, like libelous, and the Wikimedia Foundation basically rolls it back to almost non-existent. In any case, only WMF staff can do that, so I undid his edit. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 05:34, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I thought as much but didn't want to presume. Chuckiesdad (talk) 03:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Please see

Please see the recent entries: Special:Contributions/68.158.255.197.LeadSongDog (talk) 19:53, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

your previous game

ouch,

did you see the chess competition I'm "attempting"? (check it out)

--TheCiscoKid _{Talk to me} 22:25, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Leona Lewis

Hi There, just seen the Leona Lewis page, noticed that you reverted the edits but on my browser i am still seeing nothing where the article used to be, maybe its just my browser but thought id check to make sure with you. (Neostinker (talk) 23:38, 16 December 2008 (UTC))

Try purging the server cache. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 23:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I believe there has been a mistake.

You have recently sent me a message regarding an unconstructive change to the Rochelle, IL page on Wikipedia. I made no such change to the page and I don't know who did or how the message was sent to me, because I don't have a wikipedia account and can't edit pages. Just letting you know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.54.25.114 (talk) 23:40, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, you don't have to have an account to edit >99% of pages on this site (although you can do a lot more if you do create an account and log in). If you are not logged in, Wikipedia's software treats your IP address as your username, so it is likely that someone else used the IP you have now to vandalize. Again, the best way to avoid getting irrelevant warnings is to create an account. I would encourage you to do so. Wikipedia requires absolutely no personal information to create an account, although it is recommended that you provide an email address in case you forget your password. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 23:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Unblock Request Notification

Hello, J.delanoy! A user you have blocked, Washington95, has requested to be unblocked, and your username is listed on my notification opt-in page. The unblock request is on his user talk page here. If you no longer want to recieve these notifications, remove your name from my list. If you would like to be notified about future unblock requests from this user, remove this template from your page. Thank you, DavidWSBot (talk) 23:51, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for unblocking me (I promise not to vandalize again). But i do ask of you a question.....How do you make user boxes? Please get back to and Thankyou User:Washington95 (talk) 00:10, 17 December, 2008 (UTC)

Hi Washington!

I think this page shows how to do it. If you can't figure it out, feel free to ask. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 00:14, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey, i got the user box and the content but I cant get the picture, Any tips, Thank you.Washington95 (talk) 00:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. Do you just want to add an image to your page? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 00:41, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes I just want to add an image to my page It's Me :) O Yea its me.. (talk) 14:46, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, just put [[File:<image's_name>|thumb|<left or right>|<size>px|<caption>]] on your page. I hope that makes sense the way I did that. If not, just tell me the name of the picture you want, and I'll put it on your page, and then you can move it/tweak it however you want. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 15:52, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Im am sorry to bother you but This is the image I want (But Its from another website....)http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlLA/original/mma.jpg.. Thank You —Preceding unsigned comment added by Washington95 (talk • contribs) 16:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

You're not bothering me! Anyways, you generally can't use images from other websites, because practically all images on websites are copyrighted. If you're not sure where to find an image you can use, a good place to look is on Wikimedia Commons. All the images there are freely usable her, and Wikimedia Commons is linked through with Wikipedia, so you can just type out the image's Commons name here and it will display here, even though it is not actually on Wikipedia. I hope that helps. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

How about this picture? http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Roundhouse-kick.jpg Thank You It's Me :) O Yea its me.. Washington95 (talk) 17:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Could you help me with the page I created? The Jack (ACDC Song)It's Me :) O Yea its me.. Washington95 (talk) 18:44, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I did what I could with it, but I'm not really the best person to ask about writing. I usually fight vandalism. You might try asking User:Realist2 for help. He writes a lot of articles about musical artists and songs. You also may want to take a look at our guide to writing your first article. Also, just so you know, you can't copy and paste text from other websites to Wikipedia. You can use their text to get an idea of what you want to write, but you have to use your own words. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 20:24, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank You for all your help I mean it!. I will contact that user.It's Me :) O Yea its me.. Washington95 (talk) 20:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Fable II

Hi, I noticed you just reverted some IP's edit on the Fable II article. That was fast!! I had already looked at your userpage earlier today, and a couple minutes ago I looked at "recent changes." The blanking of the page was literally the fourth edit on the list, and as soon as I clicked on the history (from the Recent Changes menu) I saw that you had already reverted it. Well, anyway, good job. Go give yourself a barnstar or something. ^Tezkag₇₂ 01:03, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Heh, yeah. I'm using a software tool, so I can't take credit for it, but thanks! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 01:04, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Vandlaism

Are you bothering to read anything I write, or is this some kind of bot?

Request for help with a distruptive editor

Hello J.delanoy,

You gave me some advice a couple months ago on how to avoid 3RR when dealing with disruptive editors while I was temporarily blocked. I'm on the brink of the 3RR on the John McCain presidential campaign, 2008 article and do not want to violate it again, so I'm asking for your assistance because of your previous advice to me and because you're a third party. But it has more to do with just the 3RR. I've been dealing with a disruptive editor for the past few weeks who is completely unopen to compromise, revert wars, and now is !vote counting on an RFC he started only a couple days ago, amongst other things -- and I've completely lost my patience with him. I do not believe that the disruptive editor, Commodore Sloat has been exhibiting good faith for some time during this dispute (as well as other disputes on the article, but that's neither here nor there). I've been pointing this out multiple times -- admittedly snidely and with sarcasm but my patience has been thin for a while, and he regards it as personal attacks even though there's plenty of evidence. I probably should've asked for assistance sooner, but better late than never, and I'm now officially convinced that there's no appeasing csloat because he has no intention of being appeased or reaching consensus.

As I said, this is related to the John McCain presidential campaign, 2008 article, particularly the World opinion subsection. This was a section that I created as part of an enhancement effort after the election, but it was also part of compromise to a major content dispute related to an edit that csloat made which was ultimately reformatted, reduced, and moved to the end World Opinion section. Everyone from both sides of the argument over exclusion/inclusion of the material supported the compromise, except csloat. Shortly afterward, he aimed most of his interest at the rest of the World Opinion section, focusing on removing content related to polling data about world disinterest in the election. But this isn't a content dispute (or just a content dispute, rather), this is about disruptive behavior both in editing and discussion.

First and foremost, I believe there is simply no appeasing him. I've made numerous compromises, and he has made absolutely none. This is best illustrated by comparing my original version and my most recent version. Here's a list of the compromises I've made:

1. Added information about a statistically insignificant margin for Laos in the 2nd paragraph; a slight modification of one of his edits.
2. Changed the lede sentence for the 3rd paragraph since it was not sourced with a more neutrally worded lede sentence; per his request.
3. Removed any reference to "apathy" and replaced with "no opinion" in the 3rd paragraph; per his request.
4. Provided separate sources from the main source for China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Latin America because these poll results weren't specifically mentioned in the main source's summary; per his request (which I'll elaborate on shortly).

As for Csloat, he hasn't made any compromises. All he's done is remove content and claim that I'm drawing conclusions outside of source material and distorting data. Here's the diff of his first edit/content removal where he pastes over data displaying various countries' disinterest towards the election with a redundant quote (all the information was already in the section's lede paragraph). Here's the diff from his most recent edit/content removal, and here's all that's changed:

1. After having it pointed out that his pasted quote was redundant with the first paragraph, he simply removed the first paragraph.
2. After pointing out the hypocrisy of him calling poll data about China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Latin America "cherry picked" but condoning inclusion of data about the European Union, Africa, Canada, Australia, Japan, and South Korea which came from the same source, he simply removed everything and replaced the entire paragraph with his original pasted quote.
3. Per a token compromise that I never asked for and don't support, he pasted a sentence about China after the quote.

CSloat came up with multiple reasons that my contribution was against policy. The accusations would come iteratively as each subsequent accusation was either disproved or addressed, and the accusations got more far-reaching each time -- to the point where his complaint had no valid basis in any Wikipedia policy or guideline. Here's how it unfolded:

1. Claimed my contribution was original research. I explained to him that this was not original research since everything in the contribution was backed by the source.
2. He then changed to claiming that my contribution was synthesis. I explained to him that this claim has no basis since synthesis requires multiple sources.
3. He claimed that the source drew a conclusion and that my edit was contrary to it. I explained that the source didn't draw a conclusion, it merely summarized poll data; I also pointed out that article specifically said that the majority of the world expressed disinterest, which is the material he was adamant about excluding.
4. He started an RFC where he claimed that since the poll summary article is titled "World Citizens Prefer Obama to McCain by More Than 3-to-1" that citing any information that is not about this is against policy (again claiming original research). Now this is just plain ridiculous, and I flat out called it the worst and most transparent excuse that I've ever heard for exclusion of material. But since I realized that simply explaining this to him wouldn't be enough, I appeased his ridiculous claim and went and found articles that supported all of the polling statistics that he wanted excluded. I hoped that this would finally bring a close to this.

So now, he's just saying that he simply doesn't like it. His most recent post to the RFC said that there are still "multiple issues" even though he didn't bother to list any, and that I have no more valid points.

But it's more than just his overt resistance to compromise and the various reasons he's come up with for exclusion. During the dispute, when he was on the brink of violating the 3RR rule, he instead placed a totally-disputed tag on my version of the World opinion subsection multiple times; since this was obviously not true and was clearly way too severe a tag, I regarded it as vandalism and removed it each time. During his countless reverts, in the edit summaries he'd often put "per talk", claim his edit was the "consensus" when the dispute was between just us two, claim his edit was "preferred" when again it was just us two, and claim my edits were "disruptive" when his edits were the ones removing content. The last straw was an RFC that he started, with a very slanted paragraph explaining the issue. After two days and only two other opinions voiced, he counted !votes and declared consensus and unilaterally reapplied his revert -- and this was only sixteen hours after my latest version which addresses all of his stated concerns. It became evident at this point that he was not interested in compromise or consensus, he simply wanted my contribution excluded and intended to count !vote as a basis for the exclusion.

The problem is, now one the people who expressed an opinion in the RFC is engaging in the reverting as well. I don't think this person is a sock puppet, but it honestly wouldn't surprise me at all if it turned out to be one.

If you made it through this entire post, I thank you since I know it's a lot to read. But I wanted to be as clear as possible what my reason is for needing help, because this has gone on for too long and I need help since consensus and compromise have proved impossible.

Thank you, and I appreciate any help you can offer. --Amwestover (talk|contrib) 03:30, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Suffice to say that the above is a complete misrepresentation of my position by Amwestover -- it is such a distortion that it borders on sheer sophistry. Other editors have seen this pretty clearly, as the discussion has shown that the only other editors who have shown an interest preferred the version that I've suggested rather than Amwestover's. I've tried several times to suggest that Amwestover read such gems as WP:AGF and stick to arguing the issues rather than hurling accusations of "disruptive editing." I've been more than reasonable in the discussion, and the version that is currently in place has the virtue of being supported by consensus. That said, I'm happy to look at any new version suggested by anyone else. But I implore Amwestover, please stop running around Wikipedia attacking me as some kind of disruptive editor or vandal when you know very well that neither of those things is true. If you don't want to discuss the issues in talk, please don't engage me at all. I have been very restrained about reporting your behavior -- you blatantly violated 3RR a few times now, and you have laced nearly every comment to me with sometimes vicious personal attacks, and you even filed a phony AN/I report on me and used part of your userspace to host an attack page setting up for another phony AN/I, and yet I have held back from reporting this behavior in the hopes that you would eventually realize the virtue of civil discussion. I ask you once more, please stop turning everything into an attack on my character. Thanks. csloat (talk) 18:57, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Header added 21

J. delanoy,

I recently changed content on a page for "The Minister's Black Veil" under the "Symbols" header. You reverted all my changes saying that changes made were unhelpful. However, I respectfully disagree. On the original page, it says "It is said..." Someone inserted a "who" tag. I found the 'who': Edgar Allan Poe. I quoted Poe and added the citation. Not sure why you deleted my edit when I'm actually responding to a "who" tag.

I changed it again... and hope you will consider leaving it this time.

Thank you,

EV 124.135.91.218 (talk) 16:40, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I undid your edits because you added a signature to the page, so I thought you were trying to test something. I did not realize you had made more than one edit in a row, and the tool I am using generally undoes all consecutive edits by the same user. I apologize for incorrectly warning you, and I undid my own edit, so the article should be back to where it was before I made my edit. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:42, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Indefinitely blocked user with no contribs

How is it possible for a user to earn an indefinite block without even editing? User:!!! WARNING !!! THIS ACCOUNT EXPLODES WHEN BLOCKED was indefinitely blocked, but has no contributions. Can you explain what happened? -- IRP ☎ 22:24, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Creepy talk page stalker here... I think the username was a give-away that the user was up to no good... See WP:UAA. l'aquatique || talk 22:39, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

They have five vandalism edits, all since deleted. Tan | 39 22:40, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Oops, nevermind, they don't. Still a username violation, I suppose. Tan | 39 22:41, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Lol, that was my first thought, Tan, but I checked and nothing. Nothing in the logs either, so it must have been the username. I have to say, though, the blocking admin's log entry was thoroughly unhelpful... (*rolls eyes*) l'aquatique || talk 22:51, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Hah! You guys crack me up. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 02:05, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Never misunderestimate the power of talk page stalkers... l'aquatique || talk 19:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Charles Hamilton, Musician

Heya, can I ask why you undeleted Charles Hamilton, Musician again? It's an A7, and it seems to be getting created quite a lot the last week, there might even be an AfD for it somewhere. --fvw* 02:49, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Ehm, to clarify: I meant again as in "after deleting it", not as in "what is it with you, that's the hundredth time you've undeleted that bloody article". --fvw* 02:51, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Not sure. A lot happened IRL for me between now and then, so I can't remember. I deleted it now, since you are clearly correct. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 05:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Joy

 Marlith (Talk)  has given you a kitten! Gifts of kittens promote Wikilove and holiday spirt. Hopefully this one has made your day better. Share the WikiLove and civility with everyone and raise the holiday spirit! Send kittens to others by adding {{subst:Joy Message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

 Marlith (Talk)  05:23, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

UntilItSleeps PublicPC Steals J.delanoys kittens, clones them, them returns the original kittens while keeping the clones. :D. Hehe, thought I'd drop by while at school. UntilItSleeps PublicPC 18:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Diatribes...?

Hi, JD. What, if anything, ought to be done about this sort of screed encouraging new editors to disregard Wikipedia policies? —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C18:05, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Anthrax. l'aquatique || talk 19:44, 18 December 2008 (UTC) On second thought, a nice note be more in line with civility policy. However, it doesn't look so far out of line as to merit any sort of administrative intervention. l'aquatique || talk 19:46, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

That's been tried several times with less-than-zero success. The notes, I mean, not the anthrax. —Scheinwerfermann ^T·_C19:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I think we should just let him leave his rant up. It's not really harming too much, IMO, since it's just his userpage. Although I do sort of like L'Aquatique's original idea.... J.delanoy^gabs_adds 04:42, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Now now, it is a violation of federal law to send a biological weapon via the us postal service. Better stick to non-dairy creamer... or use FedEx. l'aquatique || talk 04:50, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

/me uses FedEx... J.delanoy^gabs_adds 05:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Unblock Request Notification

Hello, J.delanoy! A user you have blocked, Mattmassee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), has requested to be unblocked, and your username is listed on my notification opt-in page. The unblock request is on his user talk page here. If you no longer want to recieve these notifications, remove your name from my list. If you would like to be notified about future unblock requests from this user, remove this template from your page. Thank you, DavidWSBot (talk) 05:19, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Hound.com Deletion

I really don't understand why the page was deleted when there are ton of other pages which are "blatant advertising" and nothing more than that.

Kindly have a look at the following links and let me know how they are different than what I had posted for Hound.com

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monster.com

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JobStreet.com

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bixee.com

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

In case I want the site listed here what should be the nature of the content. Seeking your co-operation.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.89.249.11 (talk) 06:58, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Two things: First, just because other similar pages exist does not mean yours is automatically allowable. If you have a problem with them, you are free to create an account or log in and nominate them for deletion. Second, it is impossible to create a page (other than a talk page) without a user account. Since you have not logged in, you cannot have created the page you are complaining about, so why do you care? If you are interested in creating a page, I would suggest you look over our guide to writing your first article. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 07:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

For the revert of my talk page :)—Sandahl 16:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

...to you. I'm working on like 5 fa-hopefuls right now, life is stressful... you? Ceran →(cheer→chime →carol) 16:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Ahhhh!

Quit beating me! I'm one edit away from getting 500 edits for this Huggle session! Until It Sleeps 17:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

HA HA HA HA HAAAAAAA!!!!! 17:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Uh, I think you put too many tilde's in your sig....

I don't think you put enough in yours ;-) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:38, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

• Until It Sleeps Facepalms himself* Until It Sleeps 17:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Wochende

Hi, I wasn’t surprised to see this new user blocked: indeed I had warned him that he was on the verge of being so. Nevertheless, I think that he does have a point over his final edit to Groes Faen. What he removed was an unreferenced paragraph about an actor called Simon James Morgan, who as far as I know, may not be very notable in himself (this is his imdb profile) and whose placement in this article does appear a bit over the top. The paragraph had been inserted by an anon, and I myself would have been tempted to remove it from an article I was watching.

Anyway, if you felt like reviewing your block of Wochende, I would be happy. Obviously if he returned to his vandalistic pranks he would deserve an immediate indef block.

Cheers, Ian Spackman (talk) 18:04, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Unblock Request Notification

Hello, J.delanoy! A user you have blocked, Wochende (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), has requested to be unblocked, and your username is listed on my notification opt-in page. The unblock request is on his user talk page here. If you no longer want to recieve these notifications, remove your name from my list. If you would like to be notified about future unblock requests from this user, remove this template from your page. Thank you, DavidWSBot (talk) 17:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Unblock Request Notification

Hello, J.delanoy! A user you have blocked, Vercettiboy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), has requested to be unblocked, and your username is listed on my notification opt-in page. The unblock request is on his user talk page here. If you no longer want to recieve these notifications, remove your name from my list. If you would like to be notified about future unblock requests from this user, remove this template from your page. Thank you, DavidWSBot (talk) 18:06, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

163.153.134.12

Hi. While I agree with the reversion, do you consider their recent edit to be vandalism? While not up to WP's quality of writing, it was an on-point comment and strikes me as a goodfaith edit. What do you think? --NERIC-Security (talk) 18:12, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know. Taken in context, it seems much closer than if taken singly. The reason the warning I left characterized it as "vandalism" is because they had recently been warned for a very similar edit, and apparently they did not get the idea after the first warning. I'm not 100% sure here, though. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 18:17, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

3rd millennium article

I corrected simply the last year of the millennium to be 3000 (cf. other articles about the millennia: 4th_millennium, 5_millennium etc.). In the edit summary field, I wrote both the changed and the changing text. I can't understand why it has been reverted. 217.153.107.210 (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure why I did that, since you were unquestionably correct. Sorry :/ J.delanoy^gabs_adds 18:19, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

:O

So hows it going? and im Me. 72.89.195.110 (talk) 01:45, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Pretty good, although Real Life has thrown be a couple of nasty curve balls... J.delanoy^gabs_adds 05:09, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Hubris sock

[1] might want to lock their talk as well. Cheers, JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 05:37, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 05:40, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: talk page protected

See my response on my talk page.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 09:10, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

List of Nobel Laureates by country

Although I disagree with the edits made by Stonehammer (talk · contribs), I do not believe that his edits constitute vandalism, and the block may have been premature. Looks like there were also WP:3RR violations on all sides. Better to direct the user to the talk page and give him a chance to discuss it there. -- Tcncv (talk) 17:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps it was. In this case, it was obvious to me that he was only here to push an agenda, namely, that Tibet does not exist. From my experience, users like that either flatly refuse to enter into discussion ("The Truth™ is not negotiable"), or if they do enter a discussion, they do nothing but cause needless drama.

I am open to reconsidering the block if he should choose to appeal. Instructions for appealing a block are very clearly posted on the "you have been blocked" notice that appears when a blocked user attempts to edit. However, I very seriously doubt that he will appeal his block. Most users who are here to push an agenda leave when they realize that they are going to be unsuccessful, and as I stated above, I have no question that that was his sole purpose here. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:22, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the chances of getting anything productive out of that user were slim, but you never know when someone might surprise us. Thanks for all your contributions. -- Tcncv (talk) 17:38, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for Advice

Hi, it's Marek here, would you mind taking a look at this edit. I do not agree that the format (my edit) was 'poor'. It is not the first this user has reverted me under similar conditions (on three other occasions). Could I please ask your advice. Thank you. Marek.69 ^talk 17:54, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I would say just ignore it. I don't think it's that big of a deal, and it is not likely other people are going to see that and go "Oh, Marek is a bad formatter". J.delanoy^gabs_adds 18:11, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I am ignoring it. Not really worth a confrontation, in my opinion also. I'm not worried about people labeling me a 'bad formatter' - they can make their own minds up on that. It's just that it's the fourth (or fifth) occasion of this user undoing my edits on 'Twin Towns' on pages like Opole, Wiesbaden and Wrocław with edit summary comments like (→Twin towns: formatted less ugiliy) and (rv fanciful and unacceptable format in a serious encyclopedia). It's just a bit annoying (and rude in my opinion) - I am going to let it go though. Sorry to have bothered you with this. Thanks Marek.69 ^talk 18:31, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

genus homo

i was perusing that page and looking at neanderthal's estimated time of death. i was just then thinking of the barbarians that were prevalent in ancient times that were killed off about the same time.

i was just then wondering if those two events were the same events.

the key in finding patterns is looking at EVERYTHING you know not caring if it makes any connection at all. the problem is you're wrong a lot of the time if you do such things... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.189.214.131 (talk) 01:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Uhhh. Where did that come from? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 04:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

i just noticed you edited that page and decided to ask you about what i came up with as a possible solution.

65.189.214.131 (talk) 06:23, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, well, I don't know. I only edited that page to remove someone's vandalism. I don't really know an incredible amount about that subject. You might try leaving a note on the article's talk page if you want to get someone's opinion on that, or, if you are just curious, you could ask on the reference desk. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 06:31, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Yep

Just like that. Thanks! StarM 02:06, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

WT:Talkroom

I was thinking of creating this page for people to have general discussion about Wikipedia. What do you think? -- IRP ☎ 16:08, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

A lot of people use IRC to do that. A wiki really isn't very well suited for general talk. Things like edit-conflicts would make it very difficult for more than two people to carry on a meaningful conversation. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:32, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

If they use the "new section" tab, there will be no edit conflicts. Do you still think it's a bad idea? -- IRP ☎ 18:12, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know. I would be willing to bet that a lot of people would go "SOCIAL NETWORKING!!!one!!!" and it would probably be MfD'ed for that reason, and because IRC really fills that role for a lot of people. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 21:25, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Editing Issues

Hi

I made a couple of changes to the scapegoat page, one because it completely lacked any citation whatsoever, and one link promoting a band that is unrelated to the page's subject matter.

I felt these deletions were appropriate, and they were done with the intention of increasing the page's accuracy and freedom from commercial content.

Here are the excerpts from the tutorial which I believed justify the edits...

"...articles should consist of encyclopedic information about "notable" subjects. What exactly constitutes notability is the subject of constant debate on Wikipedia, but few of us believe that there should be articles about every person on the planet, every company that sells anything, or each street in every town in the world.”

"Wikipedia requires that you cite sources for the information you contribute. All sources should be listed in a section called "References".

I'm a complete novice at this.

Many Thanks.

Bitsnpieces (talk) 18:24, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

69.23.193.153

Since that user has attacked you on your unprotected talk, you may now block the user with no more warnings. -- IRP ☎ 20:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Already done. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 20:29, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Untitled post

I am sorry J.delanoy, but I am telling the truth I did not vandilaze that page. How did I vandilaze A Little bit Longer? All I said was that it is considered by many Jonas bros. fans as the best album. How is that vandilism ??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by John1200 (talk • contribs) 21:03, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea about the edit you were warned for by Hexacord. You should take it up with him if you have an issue. But you must remain civil and avoid making personal attacks. That's why I warned you the second time. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 21:06, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about that I won't do it —Preceding unsigned comment added by John1200 (talk • contribs) 21:10, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

J.delanoy, "Untitled post" is better than "Header added", I suggest that you use "Untitled post". -- IRP ☎ 21:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've always used "Header added", and I don't think it's a big deal either way. If it bugs you when I use it, I can use "Untitled post", if you want. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 21:18, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Just making a suggestion, but it's your talk page, and you can use what you think is best, by the way, you forgot to reply at User talk:J.delanoy#WT:Talkroom. -- IRP ☎ 21:20, 21 December 2008 (UTC), modified 21:21, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Nrse aka? Special:Contributions/129.176.151.10 on Nurse practitioner

Hi. I was recent changes patrolling (recently upgraded to using Huggle, and therefore being careful)... and pondering what was happening on Nurse practitioner and how to address it the most appropriate way.

My impression is that Nrse and 129.176.151.10 are perhaps the same person (perhaps logged off accidently, perhaps not, perhaps not the same person. :) ... and may be making a legitimate attempt at improvement of the article '... yada yada yada

QUESTION: What's the key things a recent changes patroller should think about in a case like this? (Feel free to ignore this if you're too busy -- just for my enlightenment). Thanks. Proofreader77 (talk) 22:01, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think that nothing should have been done there. I made my revert in error, and for some reason, when I told Huggle to undo the edit, it didn't, and I did not notice. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 22:38, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. I guess there is more to thise than I thought. I'll take a closer look. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 23:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks, and yes, I just noticed this erasure on the talk page (already reverted) ... Perhaps they didn't know they shouldn't do that ... but I see it "doesn't smell right" (especially in the context of this kind of editing). No need to articulate here what you'd do about it, I can take a look later. Proofreader77 (talk) 23:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Yeah. And someone just indef-blocked nrse. Apparently, s/he had gone through a while ago and completely changed a ton of pages relating to nursing without consensus. I guess Ryulong decided enough was enough. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 23:19, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

One last FYI before I move on ... Your rollback took the page back to here (last edit by 129.176.151.10, who may also be Nrse) ... but there was another bunch of Nrse edits below that that haven't been reverted. (Excuse my not just "fixing" that myself, I just didn't want to step into something already being handled.) Cheers. Proofreader77 (talk) 00:17, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi there

I was wondering if you can help me out. Any idea why my contribution has been taken off? It's a link to a petition I feel is a highly relevant addition to the external links section of the bob dylan entry. I haven't edited much on wikipedia in the past so perhaps I'm doing something wrong? Please advise, thank you!

NYCBobDylanTribute (talk) 00:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC) Jason