Jump to content

User talk:JoshuaZ

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JoshuaZ (talk | contribs) at 00:17, 10 June 2009 (→Article userfied per request: reply to ChildofM). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Kip Kinkel

Hello Joshua Z, this is Marksdaman. The reason I redirected Kip Kinkel to Thurston High School shooting was because the article on the shooting gives information on the shooting and the background of Kip Kinkel, I just didn't think you'd need two pages about the shooting. Thats why I think we should leave the Kip Kinkel article redirect to the Thurston High School shooting. Thank you, and please respond Marksdaman My talk 19:36, 17 March 2009

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 6 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 19:14, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Easter!

On behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Easter! Sincerely, --A NobodyMy talk 06:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Contemplative Prayer

JoshuaZ-

My error - I thought you added the svcchapel source - I meant to remove it, as there are two issues with it:

1) It is a self-published source (which does not comply with WP:V) 2) It was a dead (404) link.--Lyonscc (talk) 03:19, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 13 April 2009

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:27, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 20 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 18:41, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Robert V. Gentry

An article that you have been involved in editing, Robert V. Gentry, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert V. Gentry. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Borock (talk) 06:10, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 27 April 2009

Delivered by SoxBot II (talk) at 04:23, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

AFD Re-opened

As you are an editor who had been involved in the Afd discussion of Jennifer Fitzgerald, I'm here to let you know that I re-opened the discussion on the article to gain a stronger consensus. After some discussion with a few other editors I agree that I may have closed the article too hastily and that further discussion is necessary before a final decision is made. Best wishes, Icestorm815 • Talk 19:27, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're invited...

New York City Meetup


Next: Sunday May 17th, Columbia University area
Last: 03/29/2009
This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, establish a membership process for the chapter, review the upcoming Wiki-Conference New York 2009 (planned for ~100 people at NYU this summer) and future projects like Wikipedia at the Library, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the March meeting's minutes).

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and generally enjoy ourselves and kick back.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:05, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Leslie

I don't believe Wikipedia takes the BLP issue seriously at all. It creates a policy, then refuses to enforce it with biographies of anyone who has ever attracted the fleeting attention of the press. A policy that is never enforced is not a policy that is respected. While this article is probably not the breaking point, the time will come when this refusal to consider the human dignity of the people we write about will bite Wikipedia on the arse and deservedly so. It is the one great blemish on an otherwise worthy project.

As your statement "someone covered in international news and continuing to get coverage isn't going to be harmed by a Wikipedia article" is just plain wrong. Newspaper coverage is ephemeral and fleeting, Wikipedia is supposed to be for posterity. Our actions here continue to harm the subject over and above the media coverage. The idea that the media have given her a good kicking, so our further little kick won't hurt is, to me, morally indefensible.

We have now enshrined one young girl's misfortune and her attempts to avoid an awful fate in a permanent, "encyclopedic" record and in the effort to keep this article we have likened the subject to a serial killer and to drug smugglers. A triumph for Wikipedia indeed! -- Mattinbgn\talk 23:43, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Protection

Hello, JoshuaZ. You have new messages at Icestorm815's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

AfD

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chuck Missler (4th nomination). Thanks. Steve Dufour (talk) 19:00, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 11 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 21:58, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 18 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 13:03, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 25 May 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:43, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sports statistics

Dear JoshuaZ, I appreciate that you may not deem the sports articles especially important (I'm not sure they're especially important); however, I've noticed that they're more prone to vandalism (people changing the stats to false ones in support of their team) than most. Since you're an admin, I have a request: can we restrict editing to such pages to signed-in users? It's incredibly tedious correcting such information, really.

Thanks,

--Leon (talk) 08:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 1 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 22:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A.E. Wilder-Smith

listen i dont need the quotes okay but the rest will stay or be put back on continually —Preceding unsigned comment added by Godlover32795 (talk • contribs) 19:42, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Thanks

RfA thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which succeeded with 56 in support, 12 in opposition and 3 neutral votes. I am truly honored by the trust that the community has placed in me. Whether you supported me, opposed me, or if you only posted questions or commented om my RfA, I thank you for your input and I will be looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas :). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). All the Best, Mifter (talk)

Mifter (talk) 23:42, 6 June 2009 (UTC) [reply]

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

Article userfied per request

See User:JoshuaZ/David Boothroyd. Given the sensitive nature of this, you and any interested editors have 1 week to alleviate the community concenrns over WP:BLP problems. I will run an MFD in about a week to judge the community's pulse over whether or not the problems have been fixed. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:19, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Check my message at User talk:JoshuaZ/David Boothroyd. I suggest you get some outside opinions before moving this to article space to ensure that it is in compliance with WP:BLP. Not that I have doubts about you, but this is an important issue, and the topic is prone to drama. Better safe than sorry. Jehochman Talk 19:48, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

JZ, what's your connection to the Boothroyd? It looks like the "anon" that originally created the article started it in your userspace. And now it's back in your userspace after admins rushed to delete the article when the controversy hit. What's going on? It seems like a sordid web of some sort. I don't see why we can't go back to having an article with a couple sentences in it about the latest incident. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:11, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't in my userspace originally. I'm not sure why it looks that way. Moves can sometimes do odd things to title behavior. And since some difs have been selectively deleted that can help make things look even stranger. If you do think there should be an article, the most helpful thing you can do is to help expand the draft in my userspace and help track down reliably sourced content that is not about the current controversy. JoshuaZ (talk) 00:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Boothroyd

Thanks for the invitation, but I do not intend to touch the Boothroyd article itself (in any location) with a ten foot pole until someone does something about the threats Jehochman has made toward me. TAway (talk) 05:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JoshuaZ&oldid=295482043"