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.
Latest comment: 10 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion
Hi, I was wondering why you reverted me at Gottfried, Prince of Hohenlohe-Langenburg? I am new to Wikipedia, so I would like to know what I did wrong. I can assure I did not do it intentionally. FiatLovers (talk) 06:57, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi, FiatLovers! First off, thanks so much for asking rather than being irate; I'm always happy to explain my reasoning. I actually thought that I sent you a message saying why I reverted your edit, but I apparently didn't - I apologize for that! My rationale is that your edits, while they may be true, consist of un-encyclopedic content (they are too specific or go into detail about non-notable sub-topics). For reference, please see WP:NOT (as well as WP:SOURCE, as you did not include sources), but also note that you did not do anything wrong here. I assumed good faith, and it isn't as though there's any penalty; in fact, I thank you for the fine job that you're doing in helping out. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 07:05, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your explanation. I have now removed the Notes section from Gottfried entirely, and written that his children were Serene Highnesses at the top. I had done the same thing as I did before to Gottfried's wife Princess Margarita of Greece and Denmark so I have changed that to the same as Gottfried's. FiatLovers (talk) 07:27, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
No problem, and it looks good! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 15:49, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
You're very welcome! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyhh2002 (talk • contribs) 04:10, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Final complete
Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks! I've finished grading the "practical" portion of that exam. There is a final practical that you may start. I will finish grading the other portion of your exam, soon. --Jackson Peebles (talk) 00:01, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Okay, finished grading - absolutely fantastic job. Go to the course page to see your final practical. This is literally the last thing that you have to do before you're done with adoption, and note that it does allow you to submit previous work. --Jackson Peebles (talk)
Quick question: How can I post diffs to the course page when I cannot edit said page? PantherLeapord|My talk page|My CSD log 12:13, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
There should be a spot right here where you can input the article (don't bother with the diff, I'll find that) into the input box that says "Add an article" next to your name (for as many edits as you want). I just tested it three times with my test user account, and it worked flawlessly. If you have a ton of article and would rather just list them out on a page in your userspace, you can also just plug that one page into the input box as User:PantherLeapord/Practical Results or whatever you choose. --Jackson Peebles (talk) 18:49, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice that the page you created was tagged as a test page under section G2 of the criteria for speedy deletion and has been or soon may be deleted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Matty.007 19:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Jackson Peebles/tpep requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 19:29, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
To anyone wondering about these: I use the "oops" defence and thank the editors Matty.007 and Thine Antique Pen for their extremely prompt catch of this error. It was intended to be moved to my userspace, and I accidentally moved the template in question to the article space. --Jackson Peebles (talk) 19:34, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
See
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Okay, thank you for the information. Just please cite information on the page itself so that others (and myself) can find it right away and also please try to follow our manual of style as far as grammar goes, etc. If you need any help at all, please jut let me know! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 05:13, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:LaFerrari. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 05:17, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Edit Summary
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Sorry about that, I noticed that it hadn't saved my summary - so I attached the same text to my subsequent edit. I'm on a bit of a Rail quest at the moment. This one in particular cloned a lot of information from wikipedia.de but had never checked any sources etc. It's a pity because there core of the article is probably 100% accurate, it's just completely unverified. Anyway, thank you for checking out edits - I know how suspicious a big "blanking" of a page can look. Koncorde (talk) 18:44, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
No problem at all, just thought I'd mention it - I forget all the time! Happy editing! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 18:46, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Gary B. Myrick page
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks for the rapid review. -- Dauster (talk) 19:09, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
My pleasure. I'm not the best at content creation, but I'm happy to lend a helping hand and criticize (or not criticize, in your case) others ! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 19:12, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Exam 7 Copyright
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I have finally completed exam 7 thank you for your patience Jackson TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 01:04, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 07 August 2013
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I left you a comment on question 7. Hmmm I dont see a preview for this talkback so not sure if I am doing it right. I will not find out until i hit the submit button I suppose. If it is not done right the comment is on exam 7 question 7. TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 19:30, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, Jackson, Sorry for keeping my lessons pending for so long. I was busy with my RL exams. I will try to complete my lessons as soon a possible. Thanks for the reminder note. Once again sorry for the delay. Take care. Avinendra (talk) 16:32, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for getting back to me. I hope the exams went well, and you take care, as well! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 17:36, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Jackson Peebles. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Avinendra (talk) 14:24, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you Jackson for all your help
Latest comment: 10 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion
I've finished my most recent exam! (maybe not).. what does this: Milestones All students will have participated in at least one RfC. mean? and did I miss something? --TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 04:42, 10 August 2013 (UTC)TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 05:11, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! I graded it just now - good work! The milestone is more of a suggestion, not an official rubric item. Don't worry about it - if you haven't participated in a RFC by now, you will. You probably have, already, though I'm not sure. --Jackson Peebles (talk) 19:11, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
tHANK you so much Jackson. Appreciate all the hard work that goes in to adoption. TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 19:21, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
talk you probably just overlooked it that this was the second post about a completed exam and i didnt specify that i had completed 7 and 8. Just a heads up still waiting on grade for exam 8. And i did find the example i used for my answer in exam 7 q.7 so i posted that there after leaving a TB here. Hope you have a fabulous weekend.TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 20:04, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Resolved, thanks for the reminder! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 14:20, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
When I paste the diffs into the entry field for "Add an article" in the course page it does not come up after I have clicked the button. Should I post the diffs here? PantherLeapord|My talk page|My CSD log 02:02, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Sure, whatever works. I like to think I'm flexible. --Jackson Peebles (talk) 03:31, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
You made your opinion explicitly clear in multiple places, surpassing requirements. However, your arguments made some claims that can't be backed up by fact, though they're almost certainly true (that we would lose editors). These should be phrased as "likely" things that "may" happen. Y
You did not say why you feel that it is adequate as-is, and the practical specifically "must be well-thought-out and show consideration of both views." N
The more common term should be used, and the RfC wasn't explicit in what it wanted. Adequate response. Y
Fair enough. I would urge you to review Wikipedia:Blocks_and_bans#Difference_between_bans_and_blocks, which I think is where the nominated individual pulled their data from, but they didn't do their reading well-enough. Since consensus is a pillar of WP, good answer. Y
Shows you did at least some research. I liked the editor, too. Y
Pass per Practical Option #4. Congratulations! You're done! Swag is coming your way. --Jackson Peebles (talk) 19:40, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Thank you! I had no idea that this existed! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 06:27, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
It doesn't; I made it just for you! (Minus the image; that was already on commons) PantherLeapord|My talk page|My CSD log 10:00, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
I thank you kindly for
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I thank you kindly for grading exam eight and for adjusting my grade for the other exam. I hate being wrong too, however its really cool to be right once in a while. Lol! Now do I just proceed with the final? And I would like to respectfully ask for leniency on the timing. Is this possible? I am not sure how strict the times are/ how long I get, but I will be attending school AND working 3 days a week, an additional 1 day will be just school, and another 1 day will be an extra long work day. Plus, and god help me through this, but I am moving the same week that school starts in my non-existent free time. Additionally, my son needs to be driven to his school and back monday through friday am and pm (a 50 mile round trip). I really want to start it so that I can sneak it in at any of the possible free moments that I am blessed with, but will do however you suggest, recommend or advise. I will wait for confirmation from you before I proceed. Oh and what do those images mean (next to the exam grades), the ones that look almost like little clocks? Just curious. Thank you, Kristin Tattoodwaitress (talk) 17:29, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
No problem Yup, you may! You can have leniency on timing, that seems fair given how rigorous you've been with the other exams. Your other activities take priority. Just try to get stuff done when possible (and you can do it in bits and pieces); you only have that and the practical left. The clock means I'm waiting on completion - it just mean you haven't given up but you aren't done. It's a good thing. Normally, when they're used, it means an admin is waiting on something to happen. --Jackson Peebles (talk) 19:57, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much, and thank you for the explanation on the "clocks" too. Tattoodwaitress (talk) 14:56, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Please grade my exam
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I've finished my most recent exam as of 20230305200236! --Original Authority
Thanks for using the inputboxes so effectively; you'd be amazed how much trouble people have with those. There are a few corrections that I'd like you to go over before we move on. Please take a look ! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 04:15, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the option to make corrections, I've made them all I think. Original Authority (talk) 12:39, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
No problem. Perhaps I'm not being clear enough, though. You just repeated what I said back to me in the second answer. This isn't a formality, I need to make sure that you know these things. Please elaborate further. --Jackson Peebles (talk) 22:35, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Which answer.
All of them that you didn't get at least a 4/5 on.
Latest comment: 10 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
I want you to recheck your facts i have not deleted any tags from Dr Vikas Mishra. Please check your facts before leveling acquisitions against anyone.And the page is not for promotion as it is of an Economist and his contributions and only people will benefit from it.
Being a responsible member of the wikipedia community kindly check your facts before accusing any one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ritvikvikasmishra (talk • contribs) 10:04, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for taking the time to bring your concerns to my attention. You may contest my "accusations" (which I consider to be more of "protections") by contesting the deletion and my nomination that your username be deleted. Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vikas_Mishra_%28academic%29&diff=567519674&oldid=567518678 for proof that you have deleted tags. Please provide WP:RELIABLE sources of Dr. Mishra's significance if you think that he is notable in accordance with WP:ACADEMIC (he may very well be, but not as-is). Please note that I am willing to help you with these edits if you have trouble, but I need something to go off of. --Jackson Peebles (talk) 10:12, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Dear Jackson thanks for the reply but i feel it is my duty to inform you that the PROOF you gave me for deleting tags of speedy deletion ,i.e,the link https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vikas_Mishra_%28academic%29&diff=567519674&oldid=567518678 clearly states that i deleted a tag on the 7th of august.Since i was a new user Wikipedia made me aware of my mistake and i never deleted it again.I am wondering why you reckoned of sending me the same warning after 10 days during which no tags were deleted.I hope you would recheck and realise that it was nothing but a repeat since i am already aware of the policies now.I hope we can be more upbeat about what is happening on wikipedia as it might send a wrong message to new users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ritvikvikasmishra (talk • contribs) 10:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
You're quite welcome for the response. I apologize if I sound passive-aggressive or something, I promise that isn't my intent. I actually try very hard to assume good faith, and we do all make mistakes. That's why I really encourage you to use the sandbox, as I suggested on the article's talk page. I also encourage looking at Adoption programs, if you're interested in learning more about Wikipedia and how to edit effectively without feeling like you're being "shot down." I'm involved with Editor Retention, and if I'm making you feel like I'm attacking a new user, that's not good at all. So, to summarize:
Your tag edit was almost two weeks ago. I'm glad that you've learned from your mistake and assume you're being more careful now.
I still, unfortunately, don't feel that you have a proper grasp on policy.
I also still, unfortunately, feel that the article is not notable.
I also still, again, unfortunately (and I really, truly do feel bad about these things) find your username to be promotional given the edits that you're making that I, despite attempting to assume good faith, perceive to be a conflict of interest and promotional.
Thanks Jackson for your help and prompt reply following are my thoughts;
1)Your tag edit was almost two weeks ago. I'm glad that you've learned from your mistake and assume you're being more careful now.
That mistake was rectified when i started, wikipedia helped me with it,thanks
2)I still, unfortunately, don't feel that you have a proper grasp on policy.
true but i will keep learning
3)I also still, unfortunately, feel that the article is not notable.
while looking at some articles it occurred to me that suppose being a psychology student it is difficulty for me to question the notability of an article based on core astronomy and i am honest enough to admit and not tamper with it ,wonder if you have in depth knowledge about the pioneering work done by the person in terms of 'growth multiplier' 'sociological economics' 'hinduism and economic growth' etc to question the credibility and notability of his contributions and studies
4)I also still, again, unfortunately (and I really, truly do feel bad about these things) find your username to be promotional given the edits that you're making that I, despite attempting to assume good faith, perceive to be a conflict of interest and promotional
since i consider myself an unbiased user i prefer the same username but thank you for your kind suggestions.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ritvikvikasmishra (talk • contribs) 10:57, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Just an FYI, I am chipping away at the final, hoping to have it done by the first day of school (august 24th) this way I won't have to squeeze it in. Hope you are having a great day so far. Tattoodwaitress (talk) 16:19, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Happy to announce the completion of [User:Jackson Peebles/Adoption/Tattoodwaitress Final Exam] I used every spare moment of time this weekend and happy that i did. Now on to the next portion.Tattoodwaitress (talk) 19:37, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Good work! You passed with flying colors! Let me know if you need guidance on the final! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 01:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
STiki emergency
Hello! Due to a security update to the wiki software, older versions of STiki are no longer functional. You've been identified as a user of STiki, and are kindly asked to upgrade to the current version at Wikipedia:STiki#Download before continuing with use of the tool. Continuing to use older versions will be detrimental to the STiki project. Please see Wikipedia talk:STiki#Errors for a discussion of this issue or to respond to this message. Thank you! 04:47, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Greetings, Jackson!
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I found your listing on Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area/Adopters. I'd be interested in the adoption program, but there are a few other things about your listing that catch my attention, as well.
My new user experience was a bit frustrating, to say the least. My first edit, it turns out, was undone by none other than ClueBot NG ... and if that tin can comes back, I swear, I'm going to WP:WHACK! the thing until it begs, "Dave, stop. Please stop, Dave. Will you please stop, Dave? I'm a-fraid."
Things went downhill from there, leading me to openly ask the pointed question in Teahouse "Does Wikipedia REALLY want new users??" The resulting responses both there and on my user talk page have been encouraging, but clearly, we need to revisit how we handle new users. So I've been working on a framework for doing just that.
That said, I'm still a newbie, myself, and am looking for help with the basics, as well as more advanced interests, and longer term goals of working to help develop a better means of assisting new users in the future.
I envision my project as being a comprehensive, integrated toolkit, containing a wide variety of resources, and meeting diverse needs, interests and learning styles. I see the Teahouse, an automated welcome message, a written tutorial based on the framework of WP:Tutorial, the adoption program, the "new user mode" and many other things as being integral components of that toolkit. I'm starting to realize that Wikipedia does have a lot of resources for new users. The only problem is that they are the result of multiple individual efforts, and are not coordinated and packaged in a way that a typical new user can be connected with them. I hope that I can help bring these resources together for everyone's benefit, newbie, old-timer and mentors alike.
You say you're working on video tutorials, so clearly your effort would be a component of developing a NEW new user experience. You also claim to have the most rigorous standardized program. I'd like to see what that is, exactly.
I'd love to work with you, and I look forward to hearing from you. I'd also like to thank you in advance for your time and consideration. I'd be willing to work in whatever capacity meets your current needs best. I see you currently have some other adoptees, so if you don't have the bandwidth at the moment, I do understand. In a prior life, I was a department trainer, so I do have some interest in your standardized program from the trainer's perspective, as well as trainee's.
Hi, GabrielD2, and thanks for reaching out! I'll address your message in the order you wrote your comments/questions.
Okay, that's great, no rush! Feel free to browse around and, when/if you're interested, leave another message.
Cluebot is notoriously accurate but does make mistakes (I even comment on this on my userpage). I know that this doesn't get at the root of what you're saying, here, and it's a bit of a digression, but you can report false positives. I like the reference, and I'm sorry your first experience was like that.
With this said, I'm in agreement with you, and so are many others. That's why Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention exists. I also recommend taking a look at what some of us are (slowly) chipping away at at mw:Grants:IdeaLab/Reimagining_WP_Mentorship. You may wish to contribute to this project rather than splintering off. I think that your heart and mind sound like they're in the right place.
See WP:VITUT. I believe that I say that I have what I believe to be the most rigorous course, and that's because I've built off of the work of Worm That Turned and Go Phightins! I added a practical section and grade a bit more harshly (I think). You can see examples of others' work at User:Jackson Peebles/Adoption and clicking on the links to exams, or you view the course page and browse the lessons, too.
Thank you for your time and efforts. None of us are paid, here (well, a few are, but not many), so I'm thrilled that you stuck around despite having a negative first experience. You could've left, and I'm glad that you view WP as being worthy of another chance. Feel free to follow up; right now, I'm working to get VIDTUT back rolling, but, once that's done, I think that our IdeaLab project will see some heavy-lifting - let me know if you're interested!--Jackson Peebles (talk) 01:18, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thank you for grading my final. So happy that I passed. My only confusion arises from the incorrect warnings of vandals and wondering why my going to the vandals talk page and using the warn option in the tab on their page resulted in incorrect warnings? Ready to begin the final step YAY. I am just going to keep track of my "answers" on a subpage I created as it doesn't appear to have its own page as the rest of the adoption does and will let you know when I am done. Thanks again Jackson for the prompt prompt grading and explanation for each grade as well. Good Job!! Tattoodwaitress (talk) 14:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 21 August 2013
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Jackson, I see you enrolled for our Writing Wikipedia Articles course, but are a very experienced and active editor. The course is primarily aimed at new contributors, but we enjoy having all kinds of students and mentors involved! Can you tell me a little about what you were hoping to get from the course? Would you like to be more involved? For instance, if you wanted to help out answering questions and demonstrating how Wikipedia works during our Thursday lab sessions, that would be a welcome contribution! Let me know. -Pete (talk) 00:27, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Pete, thanks for reaching out. I appreciate you calling me a "very experienced and active editor," but I think that's a bit of a misrepresentation. I'll acknowledge that I'm well-versed in anti-vandalism, copyediting, some other (pre-)administrative work, etc., but you'll note that I have never once created my own article and have only contributed a substantial amount to two (both related). I'd like that to change. If your course can motivate me to do it, I'm all-in. I also applaud that you have a course and want to see how it works, since I'm involved in editor retention. Two-birds, one stone. If you find my presence at all disruptive, please notify me immediately and I will cease participation right away (though I've only had a chance to view recorded sessions thus far). --Jackson Peebles (talk) 23:15, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Meh, seems accurate enough to me -- you obviously have a good idea of how things work here, and I'm happy to have you associated with the course in any way that makes sense! Feel free to join us any time. In addition, I'd like to have a discussion with various people who have taken interest in how to continue the course after the current session -- so I'll reach out to you when that happens. Thanks! -Pete (talk) 14:20, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Double-headed eagle. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:17, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 28 August 2013
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Iglesia ni Cristo. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 07:19, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
My practical
Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Sorry Jackson, School started last week, I also am moving (i have to go to school in the morning work in the evening and move what I can in between there).. also I have no real internet until tomorrow so its been tough (am using a hotspot right now just to answer your question. I will get back to it as soon as I am able to catch up on the homework I havent been able to complete due to the internet issue (along with the fact that they changed the professor and the books for one of my classes AFTER I bought the books).. its been a week from hell) Thank you for checking on me though. Be back hopefully sooner than later. Tattoodwaitress (talk) 02:50, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Since the anon editor made the article inconsistent I asked for 3rd opinions immediately after my revert. Please see Talk:The_Mortal_Instruments:_City_of_Bones for explanations of conflicting sources. The edit you restored makes the article text and infobox box office gross figures inconsistent, I only want to see some quality control and consistency in the article. I wouldn't mind if you had restored the edit and also changed so both places match. Please do discuss what you think the consensus should be, and help to decide one way or the other, your revert suggests you recommend going with the figures from The Numbers. It would be helpful if you would express that opinion on article talk page where it can be seen by others. -- 109.76.241.16 (talk) 01:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
It seems really odd to me that anyone other than you would revert edits to your Talk page and although it was vandalism (an insult, a simple one) you might have wanted to check the IP address and track back to see which edit they might have disagreed over and felt strongly enough to insult you about. Or maybe not, so you can just ignore this edit, unless someone else deletes this too. This is why I don't normally use personal talk pages, comments on the articles are all that really matter. -- 109.76.94.227 (talk) 03:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
109.76.94.227, thanks for your edits and the update. I review using the official reviewing guidelines; the only reason for the revert was that it was unsourced. Since it looks like that has since been resolved, we have no worries. I thank you for your diplomacy and calmness in addressing this situation; the talk page was the perfect place for that.
As for the reversion, thanks for the heads-up. It looks to me like the vandalism was anonymous and the revert was from one of my former mentees. I'm fortunate to have a few people who "defend" my talk page. I just wish they'd have addressed precisely why I'm a moron; I'm dying to know.
Hi! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Good evening Jackson, Just wanted you to know that I am working on my practical. Slowly but surely. On top of all that was already going on in my life I was also called for Jury Duty AND picked to be Juror #1, UGH.. BUSY. I finally got the internet hooked up too. Took way longer than expected but am now up and running. Hope all is well and productive with you as well. I thank you for your incredible patience. Tattoodwaitress (talk) 03:11, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, I saw you gave a good-faith revert to an IP editor on Durga. However, I'd already reverted and warned the IP for similar edits. If it happens again we should give a severe warning (level 2 or 3) as it would imply lack of understanding of the disruptive nature of unsourced editing, and indeed of the nature of Wikipedia. I think you're probably right that the editor was in good faith, but he's also doing damage repeatedly without responding to warnings. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:35, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Chiswick Chap, thanks for the heads-up. I was using STiki, so I assumed it'd automatically up the level as it usually does, but you used a specific (which is better than me) warning, so it didn't pick that up. I appreciate you letting me know! Thanks, Jackson Peebles (talk) 14:15, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Oh good. Let's hope they behave from now on. Chiswick Chap (talk) 15:04, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
so that others (and myself) can find it right away and also please try to follow our manual of style as far as grammar goes, etc. If you need any help at all, please jut let me know! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 05:13, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
Pass per Practical Option #4. Congratulations! You're done! Swag is coming your way. --Jackson Peebles (talk) 19:40, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Original Authority (talk) 12:39, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
