Project Matrix

Page types	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
User pages	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
User page histories	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
User talk pages	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
User talk page histories	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
Your Preferences ("Number of edits" includes deleted edits)	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
Your Watchlists	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
View and Edit Your Watchlists	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
Contributions	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
Contributions & Edits (Luxo's Global user contributions tool; includes deleted edits)	all	all	all	all	all	all
Gallery (Duesentrieb's WikiSense Gallery DuesenTool script)	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
Project Matrices	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
History of Project Matrices	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
Edit Project Matrices	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple

Page last updated 18:35, 9 January 2025 (UTC). Purge the cache of this page if it is out of date.


Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #260

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Committed identity: 727de6b488652594443d85385a2cfd607fa15b739c8b755390d6621c3199b4d42f7c3877ca6746a6dc536836fcf0b8c96620135523fe88af6d6c2e44e87aa21b is a SHA-512 commitment to this user's real-life identity.

Welcome to my user talk page!

Please do all of the following:

Always link to the text, image, or edit you want to discuss. When linking to an image, use a colon. For example, "[[:Image:Example.jpg]]" produces "Image:Example.jpg".
Don't forget to provide a proper Edit Summary for each and every edit, and a proper signature for each and every post to a talk page or notice board. I may revert edits that do not have such features, rather than respond to them.
Reply to interactive messages at the location of the original topic to not scatter talk all around, fracturing the discussion. I do have nearly all pages I have posted to recently on my Watchlist. If I missed a comment, please use {{Talkback}} to drop me a short reminder with a link here.
Respect my babel boxes. Write in English. I'm also able to communicate in Spanish a bit, but with that language I can't give a guarantee that I will really comprehend the meaning of your message.
If you're copying files from any project to Commons, be sure to use the CommonsHelper.
If you're copying pics from Flickr, be sure to use Flinfo, the easy way to upload pics from Flickr.
If your text or image is lacking source, license, or permission, fix that instead of asking here what is wrong. There should be a message on your talk page explaining things in detail. Apologies for having to be so clear if this message is not related to the matter you would like to address.
Post here if you want to reach me, or reply to a post below via the edit link above that post.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to the Monthly Archive for the month of the last timestamp. Sections with less than two timestamps (that have not been replied to) are not archived.

Current Monthly Archive

(redlinked the first week
or more of each month):

2025/January

Past and near future
Monthly Archives:

Maintenance

Talkback and you've got mail notices

Please place your talkback and you've got mail notices below this line in this section (no subsection necessary). I plan to delete them when I have read them. Thank you.

Other correspondence

Another revert

Why did you revert my edits to http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=ASM_Headquarters_and_Geodesic_Dome&diff=447083202&oldid=447082822 stating that I need to use reliable sources? Did you bother to look at the sources I cited?

Every citation is reliable and I deleted NO content. It is all still there is appropriate sections User:GeaugaDM —Preceding undated comment added 04:10, 28 August 2011 (UTC).[reply]

You added over 8,300 bytes and increased the acreage without Edit Summaries. — Jeff G. ツ 13:50, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The figure change in acreage corresponds to the figure in the source: it was incorrect before GeaguaDM corrected it. The remaining material is certainly sourced. I've restored the edits. A lack of edit summaries is extremely annoying, but doesn't justify reversion in and of itself.—Kww(talk) 14:05, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that lack of edit summaries is annoying but it is not a justification to eliminate large pieces of sourced information. Also, it would help when you do revert please provide solid reasoning for your revert--it is exactly what you are asking others to do, it is only fair that you follow the same requests that you make of others. Best.--InvestorGuide (talk) 14:23, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for not understanding that I needed to summarize my edits. I have read more of Wikipedia's instructions and will do a better job at documenting changes and addtions. Thank you GeaugaDM 28 Aug 2011

Thanks. — Jeff G. ツ 15:59, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I didn't see the earlier change to the acreage. — Jeff G. ツ 15:59, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Tread On Me Brand

How can I put a neutral reference to the Don't Tread On Me company in the same way Nike has a reference in the Gadsden Flag section?

"Athletic apparel company Nike uses the image of a snake coiled around a soccer ball for an ongoing, patriotic "Don't Tread On Me" campaign in support of the United States men's national soccer team."

Donttreadonmebrand (talk) 03:39, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may not, because you need "to avoid subjects relating to the Don't Tread on Me meme." However, you may post referenced information to their talk pages. — Jeff G. ツ 15:11, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Username

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. However, I noticed that your username (InvestorGuide) may not meet Wikipedia's username policy. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account to use for editing. Thank you.

The notifier has not provided a reason why this username may not meet Wikipedia's username policy. Incorrect notifications must be removed. If you know that your username does not violate our policy, please remove the message and leave a note on the notifier's talk page.

— Jeff G. ツ 03:57, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What's the problem with the name? Please provide a reason.--InvestorGuide (talk) 13:32, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added a reason on your user talk page. — Jeff G. ツ 14:57, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

I didn't mean to step on your edit with this reversion. I was attempting to revert the editor before you and your edit squeezed in front of it somehow. Sorry. My76Strat (talk) 07:51, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I retagged Ben Gordon (Conrail) with A7 and G12, and the G12 stuck. — Jeff G. ツ 21:52, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

Thanks for going back further in the revision history of Neil Francis (rugby union) and reverting to the appropriate spot. Hopefully your edit will hold - that page has been vandalized for over a week by people just blindly reverting everything. 98.248.194.216 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:28, 2 September 2011 (UTC).[reply]

You're welcome. To help avoid such unpleasantness in the future, please always use Edit Summaries. — Jeff G. ツ 21:42, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please pay attention before reverting

You have three times accused me of making unconstructive edits and reverted them without even checking to see if the edits are accurate. I(f you check the individual wikipedia song pages (as I have) for each of the songs listed in the tables, you will see that the tables had the wrong name as the original artist and I changes it to the correct one as listed on those song pages. Please do some homework before making false allegations, especially when you do it three times in a row. 99.192.77.204 (talk) 01:30, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:WINARS. — Jeff G. ツ 01:31, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(1) I am not using Wikipedia as a source. The song pages have sources for the credits of original artists. (2) The names of artists I am replacing have no sources offered on the page for their legitimacy, so if you don't like my changes you should like the information I am replacing even less. 99.192.77.204 (talk) 01:39, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are missing the point. As I understand it, the "original artist" is the one who popularized the rendition the contestant is trying to emulate, not the original person to record the song before it became popular, not the composer, and not the lyricist. — Jeff G. ツ 01:41, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not missing the point. The word "original" means "first". The discussion of which artist to list and what "original" means has been discussed many many times on the AI pages over the last several years. Have you participated in any of those discussions? I have. Have you even read any of those discussions? My edits are correct. If you wish to research the AI pages more to be sure of that, please feel free to go ahead. The discussions, in all their detail, are there to be looked at. 99.192.77.204 (talk) 01:45, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What username did you use when participating in those discussions? — Jeff G. ツ 01:47, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the time I have not used a username. My IP address shows up as either starting "142 or "99.192". But when I do need to log in to make any edits I have used the name "142 and 99". Why do you ask? Does it matter? If you would like to check with another editor for verification that I am right about this, try User:Aspects. He/She does a lot more general editing of AI pages than I do. 99.192.77.204 (talk) 01:56, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Details of where the discussion was (so I can find it) would be nice. I threw Aspects a talkback notice. — Jeff G. ツ 02:15, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There was more than one discussion on more than one talk page. I can't say specifically where, as they were a while ago, but I'm sure Aspects will explain help. 99.192.77.204 (talk) 02:20, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent)Here are a couple of discussions from the last two seasons, although that last one does not seem to reach any sort of conclusion so I guess the status quo was kept, Talk:American Idol (season 9)#Will the REAL "original" artist please stand up! and Talk:American Idol (season 10)#Song version vs original artist. My personal opinion can be seen in the season 9 talk page where I would advocate for an artist matching the theme, but accept that original artist causes the fewest arguments. But I went along with the consensus that as long as an artist has to be named, it should be the original one. I have not looked at 99's recent edits, so I cannot comment on them specifically, since I am behind on my checking of my watchlist due to another edits I felt I had to make. Aspects (talk) 04:17, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's a lot of discussion. Perhaps it would be best to scrap that column, and maybe include a theme-specific column, like movie, artist, year born, etc. — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 21:42, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I have observed some pretty remarkable contributions from this account. I am curious, why are you not an administrator. Pardon that you have struck me as the kind of editor who could be a good one, and that you seem qualified by a cursory review. I worked out an essay, and I believe you are of the adman class. I'd like to see you become an admin. This essay explains, but you are exactly the kind of editor I had in mind when writing it. My76Strat (talk) 01:54, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the compliments. I would welcome your input about User:Jeff G./2011 RfA at User talk:Jeff G./2011 RfA. — Jeff G. ツ 02:03, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is great to see that adminship is a thing you are considering. No one can accuse you of being over eager as your last edit to that page was 5 months ago. I would not republish the earlier nominations as they are considered stale. You are fully qualified to self nominate with confidence, or if you prefer request a current nomination at WP:RRN which you should have no trouble finding. I would happily nominate you myself, but suggest you avoid the astigmatism some would acquire by such an association. I would trim some of the accolades to which you are entitled, focusing primarily on your involvement on en-Wikipedia. Some would find this enough cause to accuse hat collecting as a motive. Undoubtedly you will face some opposition from a particular class of participant who enjoys minimizing the qualifications of others, but I believe your contributions are strong enough to overcome their opposition which will likely come across as petty. Strike while the iron is hot, which it glows in white right now, and avoid defending yourself against any opposition which might arise. Your supporters will support you and rebut opposition with mitigation as necessitated. Now go get the tools, and join the ranks of the respected admin, which I am confident you will fulfill. My76Strat (talk) 02:41, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One other thing, I suggest you revert to the default signature for the entirety of your nomination as that will avoid 1 or 2 opposes which would almost certainly arise from the sub-group who find custom signatures problematic. My76Strat (talk) 02:45, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, does this look default enough? — Jeff G. 02:50, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When the sub-group whines, it is primarily regarding the obscure link to your talk page which requires hovering over the letter to realize the link. They absolutely want to see a link that says "talk". My76Strat (talk) 02:55, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but I was very attached to User:Jeff G./talk, which has been linked over 26,000 times. — Jeff G. (talk) 03:14, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be ok to link "talk" to User:Jeff G./talk? — Jeff G. (talk) 17:37, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that would also be fine. My76Strat (talk) 19:15, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The discussion at User talk:Jeff G./2011 RfA is mostly a continuation of this discussion. — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 20:31, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff- keep to your own expertise.

Jeff- Regarding LOVE ADDICTION You are removing content that needs to be part of explaining the views and angles of love and addiction. Why? I don't know, but you need to stop deleting authors and experts like myself who adds to this article.

This is also true for Sex and Love Addiction- as they are very similar yet have distinct differences as well.

Seems to me you are trying to promote a friend or acquatance or whatever- or simply have controlling issues (re: you are not an expert in this field and have NO credibility to remove expert content- i.e., LOVE ADDICT TYPES! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Empowerloveaddiction (talk • contribs) 04:19, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You removed referenced content in this edit. Please don't do that; instead please see WP:DR and WP:COI. — Jeff G. (talk) 11:22, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle

Forgot you were the guy who fixed the longlasting vandalism the other day. Sorry for being grumpy. But still, please watch out for introducing commercial links. 98.248.194.216 (talk) 06:41, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. — Jeff G. (talk) 17:25, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the look out. An unpleasant piece of work, it seems. I have posted a block request at ANI. Best wishes Span (talk) 20:44, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Hopefully, they don't do it again by socking to avoid their block. N.B. you forgot to sign this edit. — Jeff G. (talk) 17:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

American Goldfinch

The information I removed was nonsensical. I have removed it again. 136.152.179.5 (talk) 17:20, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks coherent to me. — Jeff G. (talk) 17:24, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Phylogeny. It has been obtained by Antonio Arnaiz-Villena." Phylogeny - I can has it? It's 100% unclear what the sentence is intended to mean currently. I'm sure the guy was trying to make a legitimate addition to the article, but as it is it makes no sense and adds no value to the article. I don't have time to dig through the paper to figure out what he meant to say currently. He probably means something like "Antonio Arnaiz-Villena compared DNA from the american goldfinch with closely related species to build a phylogentic tree" - but that's not at all clear that that is what the sentence is intended to mean. It would not be acceptable for us to assume that this is the intended meaning of the sentence unless one of us reads the paper - if we were wrong, it would be misattributing information to a source. Feel free to read the whole text of the paper and fix the sentence if you want, but unless you do, it should stay out. 136.152.179.5 (talk) 17:33, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, leave it out until then. — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 21:39, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Top Links