This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
Talk to Me. Email Me. 01:58, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that you will not longer be able to request restoration of the tools because of your prior inactivity. You have until December 30, 2012 to request restoration or else the policy will prevent you from doing so in the future; you would need to seek a new WP:RFA. Until December 30, you can file a request at WP:BN for review by the crats. Thank you. MBisanz talk 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
(delivered by mabdul 23:32, 3 December 2012 (UTC))
Welcome back. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 23:22, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Despite our conflicts way... in the past, it's good to see you around again, we can use as much admin help as we can, if you need help getting back in the project with our changing consensus and such just let me know. Thanks Secret account 16:15, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Your entry has been removed from Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians Ottawahitech ( talk) 15:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Punkcast. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. MarioNovi ( talk) 01:40, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you very much for standing up for me and saying I did nothing wrong. I am curious if you agree with how this AFD was closed? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Punkcast Also is it strange that he refers to himself in 3rd person? Thank you, MarioNovi ( talk) 20:30, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi there. I was wondering if you were by the deletion review for Wildebeest lately since I last left a comment about the link that you provided the last time you were there. It said "Yet this link is only thing I found on the link provided which lists information on Wildebeest's action figure." I couldn't find any other book on that link detailing about the Wildebeests of DC Comics. We'll have to come up with a Plan B for this and have the page officially restored. Rtkat3 ( talk) 3:50, January 26 2013 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GenHarrisonThyng.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. De728631 ( talk) 14:01, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, what other info would be needed to get this article verified? I added a few more citations, and there is an image up now as well. Thanks! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eamon_McGrath — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irishhurler ( talk • contribs) 06:48, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Dear Jreferee, I noticed that you did some work on the introduction to this article. At the talk page, I pointed out some issues and problems that I identified. Please feel free to add your thoughts and comments. Best regards -- FoxyOrange ( talk) 14:51, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey Jreferee, I removed the links to patents at the Freeboard (skateboard) article. I started a discussion on the talk page about it. Basically I quoted WP:PATENTS and WP:EVADE noting that the patents were inserted as a form of spam by a blocked user (who continues, by the way, to threaten me with law suits via Wiki email, not that it bothers me -- it's actually pretty amusing). SQGibbon ( talk) 13:02, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Why are you striking out my only vote with the summary Struck's nominator's additional iVote - that was my only vote. - Gothicfilm ( talk) 12:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jreferee. Since you gave me the "go-ahead" regarding my COI draft of the Guthy-Renker article back in April, I thought you may also be interested in a related article, where I've put together some content on Proactiv Solutions here. CorporateM ( Talk) 03:51, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Proactiv Solution, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Glee and Big Bang Theory ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:03, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Please, nosratallah khakian essay surveys should be returned to earth since the article was hastily removed and the remaining terms is Wikipedia. Thank — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.179.163.183 ( talk) 07:38, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jreferee, I'm not sure if you're around at the moment, but if you have a little time to help, I was wondering if you'd mind looking at a request for some updates related to a new BLP article? I saw your name in the list of members at WikiProject Biography, so I'm hoping you'd be interested. I wrote a new article on behalf of the subject, Freddie A. Laker, working for his company, so I have a COI and would prefer not to edit the article (or related ones) directly. I'm instead looking for an editor who can help with a couple of corrections to the text (errors due to the sources not being clear, but that Freddie later clarified). Can you help? The full request is on the article's Talk page, if you'd be able to take a look. Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon ( Talk · COI) 23:12, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jreferee, thanks for your input on the COI Noticeboard – I've replied to your comments there (link goes straight to the section). HOgilvy ( talk) 11:19, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
It is clear to even an uneducated eye that there is consensus to OVERTURN the closure of the move. There are 5 overturn (including nom) vs 2 endorse which is quite clear consensus to overturn. I STRONGLY suggest that you undo your closure and respect consensus otherwise I WILL file an RFC/U into your actions against consensus at [1]! PantherLeapord| My talk page| My CSD log 01:02, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
The Admin's Barnstar | |
I thereby award you with this Admin's Barnstar for closing discussions formerly listed at the Requests for closure subpage of the Administrators' noticeboard. Keep up the good work. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:16, 15 September 2013 (UTC) |
I would like to clarify my rationale for adding Category:Areas occupied by China after the Sino-Indian War to the article Khurnak Fort. As per four sources, China controlled Khurnak Fort only since 1958. Till then, both countries used to patrol the disputed region; the occupation of various places in the disputed region (by both countries) is what led to the war in 1962. After that, China had had absolute control over the fort. Hence, I feel it satisfies the criteria defined at the category page (China did not have absolute control over in the years before the Sino-Indian War, but has exercised full control over since the war). The category was discussed extensively at Cfd, with other editors supporting the category. In the light of this, do you think my opinion is reasonable (from a neutral POV), or that the body of the article still doesn't support inclusion in the category? The Discoverer ( talk) 18:39, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
I've got all the pre-8th edition blocks ready to go in my userspace. When I've finished the post-8th edition blocks, I will complete the merges in relatively quick succession. Look for that to happen sometime later this week p b p 16:32, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. You made some comments at WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Gene-callahan.blogspot.com. I have attempted to summarize the comments of various editors in a table. Please take a look and make any changes to the summary of your comments as you feel appropriate. I only ask that the summary be brief. Thank you. – S. Rich ( talk) 17:13, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Why did you close the move review as an Endorse Close? You said that there's no consensus in the move review, but there are four overcomes, two endorses, and a reopen or relist. Almost everyone in the move review wrote that at the requested move there was no consensus to move the page to the current title. I think that you should have closed the move review with an Overturn Close. Read here: "(If Consensus to move to a new title is clear) Move title to new title and close RM" or "Move title back to pre-RM title, reopen and relist RM if appropriate".-- Earthh ( talk) 14:24, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. PantherLeapord| My talk page| My CSD log 22:01, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
You spoke about the endorses but not the overturs. The majority of the users expressed an overturn, so there's a consensus.-- Earthh ( talk) 13:13, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Would you consider re-opening this move review so I can follow-up to clarify after BDD provided his explanation? And allow someone else to close it? Thanks! -- B2 C 21:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Please? With a cherry on top? -- B2 C 05:49, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
The reason I'm asking you to revert your close is so that I may clarify my position there, as it was obviously misinterpreted (including by you). But that's the reason I'm asking you. That doesn't have to be the reason for you to revert. The reason for you to revert could be simply because you were asked to revert. Again... please? -- B2 C 17:35, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Jreferee, Thank you for your closure of the discussion at ANI; it had been hanging for quite a while. I urge you to reconsider your comments about me in your closure comments. Once the sentence 'The international border between...' was disputed by another editor, I never made an attempt to add it back, because I immediately realised that it was not supported by reliable sources. When I wrote "my statement is not a fabrication", I was not trying to justify its inclusion in the article, but only trying to say that I did not come up with it myself. I have always been willing to address and accept others' viewpoints, and have always worked towards building consensus. Hence, I strongly and sincerely request you to consider editing out your comment 'The Discoverer personal opinion ... appears to be moving towards possibly getting in a way of editing neutrally'. Sincerely, The Discoverer ( talk) 18:01, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Update: not sure if you have been alerted, but an IP reverted the edit you made on Khurnak Fort when closing the ANI discussion. The IP (210.13.79.199) is a confirmed open proxy, and is suspected of being a sock puppet of The Discoverer. You may wish to comment on the sock puppet investigation page. Best regards, - Zanhe ( talk) 02:02, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Jreferee. I see you've noticed the edit-warring over at Tomislav Nikolić and Ivica Dačić. The content being inserted is obviously highly-charged and inflamatory, supported by unreliable sources. Furthermore, I've been personally attacked, with the editor in question ( User:QueerStudiesRS) baselessly calling me a "homophobe" because of my opposition to the user's biased edits. I have not made any personal attacks against the user. What do you suggest we do about it? 23 editor ( talk) 17:04, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Ivica Dačić". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 17:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Jreferee, This issue was addressed back in 2011 (see top of the page, /info/en/?search=User_talk:InPerpetuity). While I'm unable to find the email I likely sent to Wiki, I do have a copy of the emails I received from the Ontario Soccer Association with a letter permission. If you want me to resubmit, then please let me know. InPerpetuity ( talk) 19:22, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Jreferee, As above, these issues have been addressed and resolved with Cornell University and the Canadian Soccer Association, respectively. If you want me to resubmit the emails, then please let me know. InPerpetuity ( talk) 19:38, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
The Walter Poenisch needs some BLP sourcing. RNealK ( talk) 04:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
I have created a closing script for move reviews, which can found at User:Armbrust/closemrv.js. If you want to use it, than simply add
importScript('User:Armbrust/closemrv.js');
to your
vector JS page and
bypass your cache. (Not tested on
monobook or
modern either.) Regards,
Armbrust
The Homunculus 02:25, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
You received this message because you closed at least one MRV discussion in the last six months.
Can you clarify what you've done? It seems to me that you edited through protection during an edit war. The specific Russian American verbaige was an issue in the edit war that I just protected the article against and enacted 1RR restrictions. I think you made an honest mistake, so I'd like to allow you an opportunity to revert before I must take this to WP:AE.--v/r - T P 12:06, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
To answer your question "Why the opposition to this page being a guideline?", it appears to be because the objecting editors are trying to end run around consensus about how most manga series pages are formatted. As best I can tell the MOS-AM doesn't actually even address the issue they're fighting about, but they seem to nonetheless believe they would be in a stronger position if it weren't a guideline.
Seeing as the fight's been going since January and they've been unable to draw any outside support or interest, I consider it primarily a WP:TEND issue at this point. -- erachima talk 19:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Hey Jreferee, thanks for dealing with the Principal subsidiaries section of the Accenture article, as per the conversation on Talk—very much appreciated! I'm wondering if you had any thoughts about my other suggestion over there, regarding rewording Tiger Woods' role in the company's advertising? Cheers, ChrisPond ( Talk · COI) 13:18, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Your talk page post here is formatted to reply to Gråbergs Gråa Sång. No, it's indented to the right because it's standard practice to indent one's post to the right of the prior one, up to three or four times for each succeeding post until starting over at the left. Readers can understand from context the person to whom I'm replying. Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 16:30, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
My inclination would be to wait a couple more days and see if she returns to edit and responds to the concerns on her talk page.
If she doesnt return, we can probably just stub the user page to something short and appropriately user page-ish.
If she does return and responds positively and appropriately to her talk page, then we dont need to do anything.
If she returns and does not respond appropriately, then we can take the user page to Misc for deletion.
But i dont think we need to move it to article space and AfD it, at least not yet.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:55, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
The clarification request concerning you has been archived, with no action taken: [5] For the Arbitration Committee, Rs chen 7754 05:34, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. I've requested temporary page protection and will proceed with further steps. Activist ( talk) 22:07, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jreferee, thanks for informing me about the gallery's page. Are there anything you would like me to take note of? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CorneliaHTang ( talk • contribs) 08:55, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
I responded to your message on ANI. Thank you 124.149.70.154 ( talk) 15:16, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jreferee, your proposal is sound... I added a subbullet suggesting why don't we just add this draft attempt User:WashD101/sandbox to a subsection of American University... and redirect Roger W. Jones Award for Executive Leadership to there? Thanks for all your help... WashD101 ( talk) 21:25, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 November 1#Futz!. Dogmaticeclectic ( talk) 13:23, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | |
Kudos User:Jreferee for an AMAZING brokering of a creative solution to the List of Roger W. Jones Award for Executive Leadership recipients discussion. Impressive table, formatting and references! WashD101 ( talk) 02:41, 5 November 2013 (UTC) |
Are you an admin? I would guess not, because then you would know that an RfC should stay open for 30 days Wikipedia:Rfc#Ending_RfCs. I suggest you re-open it, pronto presto, because you are causing me to spend time that would otherwise be used more productively, and should I have to open a discussion on this at AN/I, that would be more waste of time as the policy is clear.-- Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 12:47, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm not happy with closing an RfC this early, especially at the request of the person who initiated it. It's probably going to go that way, but this isn't a BLP so there's no rush. Dougweller ( talk) 12:51, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
a/c to HumanRightsWatch link Neda Agha khan was struck in traffic jam and she was several kilometers away from protests and there were no Basij forces when she was killed. But a/c to FoxNews & CNN link she was going to protests and she was killed by Basij. Thats why I was asking that HumanRightsWatch report is more authentic than FoxNews or not. SpidErxD ( talk) 10:32, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
I've been away and unable to participate in discussions. How do I go about challenging the decision? Xave2000 ( talk) 16:00, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Xave2000 ( talk) 15:14, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Eric Estorick at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{ db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot ( talk) 05:30, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Given it's been kept at MfD, I've reposted a proposal to tighten it. See header. Cheers, Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 21:48, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Four editors supported deletion and four (including the editor who created the page) opposed. All provided valid rationales, and I can't see consensus that it "advertises/promotes a business" - those opposing emphasised it's relevance to Wikipedia, rather than to a business. Peter James ( talk) 20:22, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 November 11#Futz!. Dogmaticeclectic ( talk) 18:13, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Regarding your message on Conflict of Interest, I will keep that in mind, and will restrict from editing. Thank you! Yoonchip ( talk) 05:42, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
On 15 November 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eric Estorick, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that in 1964, art dealer Eric Estorick recovered 1,564 Jewish Torah scrolls which had been confiscated by the Nazi authorities following the genocide of the Czechoslovak Jews? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eric Estorick. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 08:03, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my help desk question [7] earlier today. MFM14 ( talk) 11:30, 16 November 2013 (UTC) |
Thank you Jreferee for all your help with my article, its very much appreciated as I am new and learning the site, I will get exact dod date. Re your other suggestion I can't at the moment find a reference to link the two artists, just links to paintings. ( Enuejel ( talk) 13:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC))
Can you please reply at Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#New_rule_proposal.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:52, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Dear Jreferee, thank you for your comments and feedback about my first contribution to wikipedia. It is extremely helpful as I have been putting a LOT of time in to it. I have since made edits to refine the article and incorporate all the feedback. I am also excited that a few others have helped me edit the page. I am quite hooked to Wikipedia and hope to author/contribute more within my expertise in nutrition education. ! Would you please be able to take a second look to advise me about how I may improve further? /info/en/?search=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Bhargav_Sri_Prakash
Thank you! ( Chippadum ( talk) 15:25, 19 November 2013 (UTC))
Can you please explain why the deletion decision for John Schlossberg was overturned? If possible, please include plain language for those of us who may be unfamiliar with Wikipedia lingo. Thank you. -- Crunch ( talk) 20:34, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
On 22 November 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Silver City Daily Press, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Silver City Daily Press newspaper in Silver City, New Mexico, has been owned by the Ely family since 1934? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Silver City Daily Press. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
Talk to Me. Email Me. 01:58, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that you will not longer be able to request restoration of the tools because of your prior inactivity. You have until December 30, 2012 to request restoration or else the policy will prevent you from doing so in the future; you would need to seek a new WP:RFA. Until December 30, you can file a request at WP:BN for review by the crats. Thank you. MBisanz talk 04:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
(delivered by mabdul 23:32, 3 December 2012 (UTC))
Welcome back. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 23:22, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Despite our conflicts way... in the past, it's good to see you around again, we can use as much admin help as we can, if you need help getting back in the project with our changing consensus and such just let me know. Thanks Secret account 16:15, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Your entry has been removed from Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians Ottawahitech ( talk) 15:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Punkcast. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. MarioNovi ( talk) 01:40, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you very much for standing up for me and saying I did nothing wrong. I am curious if you agree with how this AFD was closed? Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Punkcast Also is it strange that he refers to himself in 3rd person? Thank you, MarioNovi ( talk) 20:30, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Hi there. I was wondering if you were by the deletion review for Wildebeest lately since I last left a comment about the link that you provided the last time you were there. It said "Yet this link is only thing I found on the link provided which lists information on Wildebeest's action figure." I couldn't find any other book on that link detailing about the Wildebeests of DC Comics. We'll have to come up with a Plan B for this and have the page officially restored. Rtkat3 ( talk) 3:50, January 26 2013 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GenHarrisonThyng.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. De728631 ( talk) 14:01, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, what other info would be needed to get this article verified? I added a few more citations, and there is an image up now as well. Thanks! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eamon_McGrath — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irishhurler ( talk • contribs) 06:48, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
Dear Jreferee, I noticed that you did some work on the introduction to this article. At the talk page, I pointed out some issues and problems that I identified. Please feel free to add your thoughts and comments. Best regards -- FoxyOrange ( talk) 14:51, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Hey Jreferee, I removed the links to patents at the Freeboard (skateboard) article. I started a discussion on the talk page about it. Basically I quoted WP:PATENTS and WP:EVADE noting that the patents were inserted as a form of spam by a blocked user (who continues, by the way, to threaten me with law suits via Wiki email, not that it bothers me -- it's actually pretty amusing). SQGibbon ( talk) 13:02, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Why are you striking out my only vote with the summary Struck's nominator's additional iVote - that was my only vote. - Gothicfilm ( talk) 12:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jreferee. Since you gave me the "go-ahead" regarding my COI draft of the Guthy-Renker article back in April, I thought you may also be interested in a related article, where I've put together some content on Proactiv Solutions here. CorporateM ( Talk) 03:51, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Proactiv Solution, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Glee and Big Bang Theory ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:03, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Please, nosratallah khakian essay surveys should be returned to earth since the article was hastily removed and the remaining terms is Wikipedia. Thank — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.179.163.183 ( talk) 07:38, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jreferee, I'm not sure if you're around at the moment, but if you have a little time to help, I was wondering if you'd mind looking at a request for some updates related to a new BLP article? I saw your name in the list of members at WikiProject Biography, so I'm hoping you'd be interested. I wrote a new article on behalf of the subject, Freddie A. Laker, working for his company, so I have a COI and would prefer not to edit the article (or related ones) directly. I'm instead looking for an editor who can help with a couple of corrections to the text (errors due to the sources not being clear, but that Freddie later clarified). Can you help? The full request is on the article's Talk page, if you'd be able to take a look. Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon ( Talk · COI) 23:12, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jreferee, thanks for your input on the COI Noticeboard – I've replied to your comments there (link goes straight to the section). HOgilvy ( talk) 11:19, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
It is clear to even an uneducated eye that there is consensus to OVERTURN the closure of the move. There are 5 overturn (including nom) vs 2 endorse which is quite clear consensus to overturn. I STRONGLY suggest that you undo your closure and respect consensus otherwise I WILL file an RFC/U into your actions against consensus at [1]! PantherLeapord| My talk page| My CSD log 01:02, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
The Admin's Barnstar | |
I thereby award you with this Admin's Barnstar for closing discussions formerly listed at the Requests for closure subpage of the Administrators' noticeboard. Keep up the good work. Armbrust The Homunculus 22:16, 15 September 2013 (UTC) |
I would like to clarify my rationale for adding Category:Areas occupied by China after the Sino-Indian War to the article Khurnak Fort. As per four sources, China controlled Khurnak Fort only since 1958. Till then, both countries used to patrol the disputed region; the occupation of various places in the disputed region (by both countries) is what led to the war in 1962. After that, China had had absolute control over the fort. Hence, I feel it satisfies the criteria defined at the category page (China did not have absolute control over in the years before the Sino-Indian War, but has exercised full control over since the war). The category was discussed extensively at Cfd, with other editors supporting the category. In the light of this, do you think my opinion is reasonable (from a neutral POV), or that the body of the article still doesn't support inclusion in the category? The Discoverer ( talk) 18:39, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
I've got all the pre-8th edition blocks ready to go in my userspace. When I've finished the post-8th edition blocks, I will complete the merges in relatively quick succession. Look for that to happen sometime later this week p b p 16:32, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. You made some comments at WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Gene-callahan.blogspot.com. I have attempted to summarize the comments of various editors in a table. Please take a look and make any changes to the summary of your comments as you feel appropriate. I only ask that the summary be brief. Thank you. – S. Rich ( talk) 17:13, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Why did you close the move review as an Endorse Close? You said that there's no consensus in the move review, but there are four overcomes, two endorses, and a reopen or relist. Almost everyone in the move review wrote that at the requested move there was no consensus to move the page to the current title. I think that you should have closed the move review with an Overturn Close. Read here: "(If Consensus to move to a new title is clear) Move title to new title and close RM" or "Move title back to pre-RM title, reopen and relist RM if appropriate".-- Earthh ( talk) 14:24, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. PantherLeapord| My talk page| My CSD log 22:01, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
You spoke about the endorses but not the overturs. The majority of the users expressed an overturn, so there's a consensus.-- Earthh ( talk) 13:13, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Would you consider re-opening this move review so I can follow-up to clarify after BDD provided his explanation? And allow someone else to close it? Thanks! -- B2 C 21:19, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Please? With a cherry on top? -- B2 C 05:49, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
The reason I'm asking you to revert your close is so that I may clarify my position there, as it was obviously misinterpreted (including by you). But that's the reason I'm asking you. That doesn't have to be the reason for you to revert. The reason for you to revert could be simply because you were asked to revert. Again... please? -- B2 C 17:35, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Jreferee, Thank you for your closure of the discussion at ANI; it had been hanging for quite a while. I urge you to reconsider your comments about me in your closure comments. Once the sentence 'The international border between...' was disputed by another editor, I never made an attempt to add it back, because I immediately realised that it was not supported by reliable sources. When I wrote "my statement is not a fabrication", I was not trying to justify its inclusion in the article, but only trying to say that I did not come up with it myself. I have always been willing to address and accept others' viewpoints, and have always worked towards building consensus. Hence, I strongly and sincerely request you to consider editing out your comment 'The Discoverer personal opinion ... appears to be moving towards possibly getting in a way of editing neutrally'. Sincerely, The Discoverer ( talk) 18:01, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Update: not sure if you have been alerted, but an IP reverted the edit you made on Khurnak Fort when closing the ANI discussion. The IP (210.13.79.199) is a confirmed open proxy, and is suspected of being a sock puppet of The Discoverer. You may wish to comment on the sock puppet investigation page. Best regards, - Zanhe ( talk) 02:02, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Jreferee. I see you've noticed the edit-warring over at Tomislav Nikolić and Ivica Dačić. The content being inserted is obviously highly-charged and inflamatory, supported by unreliable sources. Furthermore, I've been personally attacked, with the editor in question ( User:QueerStudiesRS) baselessly calling me a "homophobe" because of my opposition to the user's biased edits. I have not made any personal attacks against the user. What do you suggest we do about it? 23 editor ( talk) 17:04, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Ivica Dačić". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 17:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Jreferee, This issue was addressed back in 2011 (see top of the page, /info/en/?search=User_talk:InPerpetuity). While I'm unable to find the email I likely sent to Wiki, I do have a copy of the emails I received from the Ontario Soccer Association with a letter permission. If you want me to resubmit, then please let me know. InPerpetuity ( talk) 19:22, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Jreferee, As above, these issues have been addressed and resolved with Cornell University and the Canadian Soccer Association, respectively. If you want me to resubmit the emails, then please let me know. InPerpetuity ( talk) 19:38, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
The Walter Poenisch needs some BLP sourcing. RNealK ( talk) 04:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
I have created a closing script for move reviews, which can found at User:Armbrust/closemrv.js. If you want to use it, than simply add
importScript('User:Armbrust/closemrv.js');
to your
vector JS page and
bypass your cache. (Not tested on
monobook or
modern either.) Regards,
Armbrust
The Homunculus 02:25, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
You received this message because you closed at least one MRV discussion in the last six months.
Can you clarify what you've done? It seems to me that you edited through protection during an edit war. The specific Russian American verbaige was an issue in the edit war that I just protected the article against and enacted 1RR restrictions. I think you made an honest mistake, so I'd like to allow you an opportunity to revert before I must take this to WP:AE.--v/r - T P 12:06, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
To answer your question "Why the opposition to this page being a guideline?", it appears to be because the objecting editors are trying to end run around consensus about how most manga series pages are formatted. As best I can tell the MOS-AM doesn't actually even address the issue they're fighting about, but they seem to nonetheless believe they would be in a stronger position if it weren't a guideline.
Seeing as the fight's been going since January and they've been unable to draw any outside support or interest, I consider it primarily a WP:TEND issue at this point. -- erachima talk 19:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Hey Jreferee, thanks for dealing with the Principal subsidiaries section of the Accenture article, as per the conversation on Talk—very much appreciated! I'm wondering if you had any thoughts about my other suggestion over there, regarding rewording Tiger Woods' role in the company's advertising? Cheers, ChrisPond ( Talk · COI) 13:18, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Your talk page post here is formatted to reply to Gråbergs Gråa Sång. No, it's indented to the right because it's standard practice to indent one's post to the right of the prior one, up to three or four times for each succeeding post until starting over at the left. Readers can understand from context the person to whom I'm replying. Thanks. Nightscream ( talk) 16:30, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
My inclination would be to wait a couple more days and see if she returns to edit and responds to the concerns on her talk page.
If she doesnt return, we can probably just stub the user page to something short and appropriately user page-ish.
If she does return and responds positively and appropriately to her talk page, then we dont need to do anything.
If she returns and does not respond appropriately, then we can take the user page to Misc for deletion.
But i dont think we need to move it to article space and AfD it, at least not yet.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:55, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
The clarification request concerning you has been archived, with no action taken: [5] For the Arbitration Committee, Rs chen 7754 05:34, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the advice. I've requested temporary page protection and will proceed with further steps. Activist ( talk) 22:07, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jreferee, thanks for informing me about the gallery's page. Are there anything you would like me to take note of? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CorneliaHTang ( talk • contribs) 08:55, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
I responded to your message on ANI. Thank you 124.149.70.154 ( talk) 15:16, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Jreferee, your proposal is sound... I added a subbullet suggesting why don't we just add this draft attempt User:WashD101/sandbox to a subsection of American University... and redirect Roger W. Jones Award for Executive Leadership to there? Thanks for all your help... WashD101 ( talk) 21:25, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 November 1#Futz!. Dogmaticeclectic ( talk) 13:23, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diplomacy | |
Kudos User:Jreferee for an AMAZING brokering of a creative solution to the List of Roger W. Jones Award for Executive Leadership recipients discussion. Impressive table, formatting and references! WashD101 ( talk) 02:41, 5 November 2013 (UTC) |
Are you an admin? I would guess not, because then you would know that an RfC should stay open for 30 days Wikipedia:Rfc#Ending_RfCs. I suggest you re-open it, pronto presto, because you are causing me to spend time that would otherwise be used more productively, and should I have to open a discussion on this at AN/I, that would be more waste of time as the policy is clear.-- Ubikwit 連絡 見学/迷惑 12:47, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm not happy with closing an RfC this early, especially at the request of the person who initiated it. It's probably going to go that way, but this isn't a BLP so there's no rush. Dougweller ( talk) 12:51, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
a/c to HumanRightsWatch link Neda Agha khan was struck in traffic jam and she was several kilometers away from protests and there were no Basij forces when she was killed. But a/c to FoxNews & CNN link she was going to protests and she was killed by Basij. Thats why I was asking that HumanRightsWatch report is more authentic than FoxNews or not. SpidErxD ( talk) 10:32, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
I've been away and unable to participate in discussions. How do I go about challenging the decision? Xave2000 ( talk) 16:00, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Xave2000 ( talk) 15:14, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Eric Estorick at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{ db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot ( talk) 05:30, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Given it's been kept at MfD, I've reposted a proposal to tighten it. See header. Cheers, Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 21:48, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
Four editors supported deletion and four (including the editor who created the page) opposed. All provided valid rationales, and I can't see consensus that it "advertises/promotes a business" - those opposing emphasised it's relevance to Wikipedia, rather than to a business. Peter James ( talk) 20:22, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 November 11#Futz!. Dogmaticeclectic ( talk) 18:13, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Regarding your message on Conflict of Interest, I will keep that in mind, and will restrict from editing. Thank you! Yoonchip ( talk) 05:42, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
On 15 November 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eric Estorick, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that in 1964, art dealer Eric Estorick recovered 1,564 Jewish Torah scrolls which had been confiscated by the Nazi authorities following the genocide of the Czechoslovak Jews? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eric Estorick. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 08:03, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my help desk question [7] earlier today. MFM14 ( talk) 11:30, 16 November 2013 (UTC) |
Thank you Jreferee for all your help with my article, its very much appreciated as I am new and learning the site, I will get exact dod date. Re your other suggestion I can't at the moment find a reference to link the two artists, just links to paintings. ( Enuejel ( talk) 13:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC))
Can you please reply at Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#New_rule_proposal.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:52, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Dear Jreferee, thank you for your comments and feedback about my first contribution to wikipedia. It is extremely helpful as I have been putting a LOT of time in to it. I have since made edits to refine the article and incorporate all the feedback. I am also excited that a few others have helped me edit the page. I am quite hooked to Wikipedia and hope to author/contribute more within my expertise in nutrition education. ! Would you please be able to take a second look to advise me about how I may improve further? /info/en/?search=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Bhargav_Sri_Prakash
Thank you! ( Chippadum ( talk) 15:25, 19 November 2013 (UTC))
Can you please explain why the deletion decision for John Schlossberg was overturned? If possible, please include plain language for those of us who may be unfamiliar with Wikipedia lingo. Thank you. -- Crunch ( talk) 20:34, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
On 22 November 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Silver City Daily Press, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Silver City Daily Press newspaper in Silver City, New Mexico, has been owned by the Ely family since 1934? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Silver City Daily Press. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |