User talk:Jeff G./Archives/2009/August

Andre Johnson article

Andre is arguably one of the best receivers in the NFL today. As seen here http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/players/playerpage/396162, it says "Andre Johnson is one of the top receivers in the NFL" also "When he's healthy, he's pretty much unstoppable. " you can also go on youtube and watch NFL Defensive backs say, "He is one of the best receivers in the NFL" and if that doesn't qualify for unbiased I don't know what does. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.0.118.119 (talk) 05:47, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:DeathPenaltyAdMexico.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:DeathPenaltyAdMexico.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:41, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. That file has now been replaced by a free alternative, so I agree with its deletion.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 07:00, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

thanks

Thank you for helping edit the Murder of Brian Stidham article. I admit it is not too good yet but I will work on it tomorrow. It does have a lot of references and many more references that I did not list. Acme Plumbing (talk) 06:13, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 06:41, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:LA Ink Logo.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:LA Ink Logo.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY ^(TALK) 04:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, I fixed it.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 05:14, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

DocKino's unblock request

My first level 4 warning of DocKino was preceded by an unproductive pattern of behavior (including uncivil Edit Summaries) and the following three warnings in a 28-hour period: 1 (a 3rr warning) 2 (a level 2 npa warning) 3 (a second 3rr warning).   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 05:24, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

User 81.70.102.204 continues to ignore warnings

The user at 81.70.102.204 has continued to ignore warnings on his talk page and main page. He continues to revert the Ashkenazi Jews article. This seems to be an ongoing problem that has lasted for months now. Can you do anything? - Cyborg Ninja 00:44, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I warned the user yet again.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 01:00, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I think that's the same tag that I put last time - level 3, unsourced. I believe his edits are unintentional, but as you know, every time you get a comment on your talk page, you get a notice at the top of Wikipedia. He couldn't have missed that. Are you willing to suspend? - Cyborg Ninja 02:33, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Not being an admin yet, I'm afraid I can't. But you can ask an admin to after a fourth warning and another violation, at WP:AIV.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 02:35, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Capital punishment in Mexico

On August 11, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Capital punishment in Mexico, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it 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.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 02:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Great, thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 02:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

DocKino

Jeff, DocKino is an established editor. Placing templates on his Talk page suggesting such tidbits as that he read "introduction to editing" is just insulting. Your template is also after the fact. He was made aware of why he was blocked, and further corresponence from you about the block is inappropriate. I've removed your message there. If you wish to correspond with DocKino in the future, I suggest you leave the templates at home and type him a constructive message. Please do not continue to harp on the past incidents. --Andy Walsh (talk) 23:41, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Jeff, given your recent history with DocKino, I'm very curious about something. What just motivated you to make what appears to be your first-ever edit on United States, reverting a good edit by DocKino, who is a constructive editor of long standing on the article? This may be the time to refamiliarize with our policy that prohibits Wikihounding.—DCGeist (talk) 23:01, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

My revert was in light of this edit, especially its Edit Summary portion "removed wrong info (George Washington did not live in the White House)" by F203. I have edited article United States twice before. I agree with F203 that "George Washington did not live in the White House".   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 13:18, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

username

you're not allowed to create usernames in the format of x.x.x.x, where x is a 1, 2, or 3 digit number because people think they're IP addresses (even if they're not) and block them. one answer is to stick something on front to make it clear it's not an IP address. NotAnIP83:149:66:11 (talk) 10:20, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

"No Stalinism"

Please see my comments at your deletion nomination. I'm flabbergasted. Please let me know what exactly prompted your attention to my user page and that image and the context it is used in. VЄСRUМВА  ☎  03:09, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

This edit led me there.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 03:13, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

So, you take an apparently snide comment and decide I'm guilty of "promoting negativity"? You might consider dialog with editors before assuming they are POV asses (my perspective on the receiving end) and nominating items on their user pages for deletion. I apologize for my bluntness, but I do not find your handling of your concern over my "promoting negativity" constructive. Please do me the courtesy of contacting me first next time. VЄСRUМВА  ☎  13:32, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I've requested your response at the AfD regarding about whom and about what am "promoting negativity." VЄСRUМВА  ♪  13:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Continuing, new deletion criteria

Please note there is no such section "Fair use" at "Image copyright tags." Please direct me to the appropriate information. Thank you. VЄСRUМВА  ♪  19:03, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Non-free.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:06, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

File:AT&T Death Star Logo.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:AT&T Death Star Logo.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 22:11, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:04, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

rollback?

Hi. Why did you rollback this [[1]] edit? Thanks. NotAnIP83:149:66:11 (talk) 21:30, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

My rollback was of information that appeared to be unsourced.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:01, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for this reply. NotAnIP83:149:66:11 (talk) 08:21, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Keepscases

LOL

I find it amusing that you considered that an "attack". I'm the one trying to end the antagonism here. Keepscases (talk) 18:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad you're amused.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 05:01, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Keepscases

I moved the discussion to Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship. It's got less of a crowd but more people who are used to dealing with RFA nonsense. Also, a link is sufficient. No need to copy the text (and more people will ignore it if you do). -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:39, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

It's now at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Alleged_incivility_and_soapboxing_by_Keepscases et al.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 23:28, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Not here to build an encyclopedia

There's a longstanding precedent not to redirect pages in the mainspace to the Wikipedia or userspace. Exceptions are generally made for the "subspaces" like WP:, but this redirect should not have been created. J Milburn (talk) 16:10, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, you're right. I meant to put it in Wikipedia namespace.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 05:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

A new diff

I'd suggest adding this diff to the "evidence of failing to resolve the dispute" section of the Keepscases RfC. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 22:45, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Please go for it, take joint ownership, and feel free to remove the stuff I struck out. Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:47, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I've just added the diff, and will add more diffs as the RfC goes on. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 22:50, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

May I remove the "And I don't even need to provide my reasons for each diff, except in short that this user makes up nonsense reasons for supporting and opposing candidates and asking nonsense questions that don't help the RfA in any way. (quoted from section [1] by Mythdon)" from the RfC? I don't see a use for it and it only copies what I said. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 22:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

You may, but I'd like to keep something about nonsense in the page, if you don't mind. Please note that the subject of the RfC has already weighed in on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Keepscases.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:57, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

May I reduce it to "this user makes up nonsense reasons for supporting and opposing candidates and asking nonsense questions that don't help the RfA in any way"? --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 22:58, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but I'd change "asking" to "asks".   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 23:02, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I've just done it. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 23:04, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

And one more question, which is unrelated to what's being discussed here: If the RfC does not result in the intended accomplishment, what else will you do to solve the problem? --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 23:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Follow through with the next step on WP:DR, Arbcom.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 23:26, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

If there's an ArbCom case, I'll list myself as a party, though I'm not involved enough for such a listing. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 23:28, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I doubt the Arbitration Committee will appreciate your wasting their time with this little crusade. Should you decide to go that route, I'll see you there...but please understand that the bigger deal you make out of this, the worse it makes you look, and the clearer it becomes which of us is really responsible for the drama. Keepscases (talk) 15:01, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Keepcases RFC

Courtesy note, a section has been started regarding allegations on non-neutral canvasing.[2]--Cube lurker (talk) 19:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Just so you know, I personally am finding your actions against Keepscases to be bordering on harrassment. You've gone through every forum you can to get heard and can't. You've repeatedly, and at every opportunity, tried to get people to go the RfC to speak against him. I'll be repeating this to get it on the Keepscases RfC record, but wanted to let you know that IMO you are walking a fine line.---Balloonman ^{NO! I'm Spartacus!} 06:44, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Just to let you know, Keepscases's behavior seems to be getting worse, please see below.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:03, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

• Take note that the quote I gave below was in response to this question:

"Yes or no. Are you stating that MBisanz is incapable of holding a position of power due to a mental personality disorder?" by User:Dank--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 22:12, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Keepscases.

Hey,

Obviously he is not going to learn from the RFC and is not going to stop. "Yes or no: have you stopped beating your wife?" Is one of his newer comments on the current WP:RFB. I am at a loss of what to do. This is getting to be ridiculous.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 21:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not Jeff G., but let me make this comment. Since plenty of people seem to be endorsing Keepscases at the RfC, I don't think the disruption by the user will stop. Unfortunately, there are not enough people saying anything against Keepscases for it to stop, and there certainly will be no learning if Keepscases is given the message of "you can continue your comments and questions at RfA as you please, Keepscases. " at the end of the RfC. If ArbCom gets involved, will they give the user the same message? That's questionable. Keepscases should not be allowed to participate at RfA as long as the lesson isn't learned and followed through. Jeff G., please feel free to respond. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 21:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Given the comments of Cube lurker and Balloonman above, I don't feel comfortable doing anything further in public about Keepscases at this time, sorry.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 21:58, 14 August 2009 (UTC) (revised 21:58, 16 August 2009 (UTC))

However, something certainly needs to be done, no matter what needs to be done. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 22:03, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah jeff I understand completely. I just think the comment above is the worst I have seen yet. It won't stop unless something is done. I'm at such a loss as the people at RFC are usually not the ones dealing with him at RFA.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 22:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

That's right, it won't stop until action is taken. Comments like that are problematic, and what is also problematic is the supports and opposes, as well as the nonsense questions. There is a misconception though in the RfC that since Keepscases has a right to the opinions he/she is expressing, that he/she gets to express them in RfA. Wrong. There's a time and place to express certain opinions about certain things, and unfortunately RfA isn't one of them to express the opinions being expressed right now. Another misconception is that the ones that are being disruptive are the ones reacting to Keepscases. Wrong again. Reacting is not disruptive, provided it is not incivil, hostile, etc, but a firm reaction of "stop" is not disruptive, but in fact good. Sure it can result in a heated discussion, but it's not disruptive by any means. An indefinite block or site ban may very well be the solution to this problem, as it can solve it, but at the same time fulfill the apparent dreams of users saying "don't reacting to Keepscases, it's disruptive, and feeding the trolls". The bottom line is: Keepscases particpation at RfA is disrupting the integrity and purpose of what RfA is about. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 22:23, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I am going to refrain from commenting on anymore of Keepscases comments. At first I tried to be civil, but It has come to the point now where I have no more patients for him. I am going to get myself in trouble if I continue to respond to his aggravating questions. I will still be following the matter closely.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 22:29, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay. But, let me say a few more things. I have no more patience for Keepscases either, and have lost it upon seeing the comments made at the RfA's I linked in the ANI discussion a while back, and even though I seemed willing to convince Keepscases that the comments he/she was making were problematic, it in no way should suggest nor imply that I was willing to give the user a chance to continue to edit Wikipedia as long as the disruption goes on. A topic ban, in my opinion is not even good enough, and a full site ban, or indefinite block should be a better option, and I hope the RfC gets the job done, but given the comments there, I don't think it will, and that Jeff G. or any other user agreeing that Keepscases is disruptive may feel forced to request arbitration, which would be unfortunate for people hoping for a result at the RfC, but may be the only choice in terms of dispute resolution with the direction the RfC is heading. My interactions with Keepscases at ANI last week indicate that Keepscases is unwilling to learn anything, and can't recognize the problems, evidence by the user making comments like "I can vote any way I want and you can't stop me". Actually, if the community stood together against Keepscases, we can stop him/her from disrupting RfA any further, and if we stood together against people like DougsTech or any such user, RfA would be a much better place, and less drama, more peace. RfA is losing it's safety with people like Keepscases and DougsTech, with the behavior only getting no better if people keeping saying "but the user has a right to his/her opinion, so let him/her express it". We really need to do something, in whatever method, I just want something done. If I was an administrator, and if I saw users engaging in this behavior, I would block that user, indefinitely, without regard to the user's content contributions. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 22:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Keepscases has very little content building to his name. Mostly WP and Talk pages.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 23:12, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Not surprising. When I was searching for the diffs I linked in the ANI thread, I saw little to no content edits, but, then again, I don't work on content much either, but that's not to say I don't have a lot of article namespace edits. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 01:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Here are my current statistics:

• Article (2626) (39.14%)
• Talk (396) (5.90%)
• User (204) (3.04%)
• User talk (1658) (24.71%)
• Wikipedia (1033) (15.39%)
• Wikipedia talk (616) (9.18%)
• Template (115) (1.71%)
• Template talk (48) (0.72%)
• Help (2) (0.03%)
• Help talk (2) (0.03%)
• Category (10) (0.15%)

The first parenthesis refers to the number of edits while the second parenthesis refers to the percentage. What do you think? --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 02:03, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the three of you should find something better to do. It's funny how you all dream of being an administrator who could block me, and yet this conduct is totally unbecoming of you and will be brought up at a future RfA, should you pursue one. Regardless of what you may think of me personally, not only are you not letting clear community consensus get in the way of this witch hunt, but you are also twisting evidence to fit your agenda. ("Have you stopped beating your wife?" is a very common example of an unfair question; lookee, it even has its own Wikipedia article!)

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

Trust me, you'd be wise to forget about all this and move on to something else. Keepscases (talk) 17:00, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Whether it has it's own Wikipedia is irrelevant. That's like saying because moron has it's own article that you can call somebody a "moron". That article you link is actually a redirect to loaded question, but that doesn't make it relevant, however. To ask such a question when there's no proof that it even happened is uncalled for, maybe even a personal attack. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 18:30, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, perhaps you might want to take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=307679814#Keepscases, where you will see that the issue was closed (and everyone had a laugh out of it) once the meaning behind my statement was clarified. But hey, I guess I don't expect that to stop you--nothing ever seems to. Keepscases (talk) 18:43, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Still uncalled for. --Mythdon ^{talk • contribs} 19:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Royal Cheese

You sent me a message telling me that I had wrongly edited the Pulp Fiction (Film) article. I believe the only thing I ever edited was the "e" at the end of "Royale with Cheese". I am french and I can tell you that it's written Royal with Cheese, check out the french page for the Royal Cheese. --Nicoco95310 (talk) 12:32, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Please see the discussion of the fictional Royale with Cheese in the film Pulp Fiction at article section Quarter Pounder#Product_description.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 05:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Nevertheless, I don't see why It should be written with an "e". If I look at the film in english with english subtitles, it's written "royal with cheese", not "royale". I acknowledge that anyway the real name is "Royal Cheese" and not "Royal with cheese" but that doesn't mean it has to be misspelled --Nicoco95310 (talk) 12:33, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I have seen and heard that scene in the original English multiple times, and to me (and evidently to the majority of the good-faith editors of both of the abovementioned articles until you made your edit) the word sounded like a bastardized English version of the French "royale" (/ˈrɔɪæl/) (which rhymed with "al", the first syllable of "ballet", "gal", "hal" (the first syllable of HAL9000), "mal-", "pal", the first syllable of "Sally", "shall", the first syllable of "tally", and the first syllable of "valley"), and had a very different sound to the "a" (/æ/) than "royal" (/ˈrɔɪəl/) has (/ə/) in English, but did not sound like the true French (/ʁwa.jal/). Compare wikt:fr:royale with wikt:royal.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 21:42, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Re:Reverting your edit on Caffeine

Thank you for contacting me on that. Every priority article is being watched by several recent change patrollers at any given moment, who examine every edit made. Therefore, edits merely adding a space character and rearranging tags in a citation template are highly discouraged as they distract RCPers, swell the article history and increase the burden on WP servers. Note also that all priority pages (GAs and alike) are being regularly brushed up using tools such as AWB, which automatically implement most WP formatting policies. I hope as experienced editor you would understand all that and refrain from such edits. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 00:04, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I see. It appears that you mistook me for someone who contacted you, you prefer to keep duplicate access dates, wordwrapped page numbers, and syntactically incorrect cites, and you failed to notice that I was using AWB. Or maybe you just forgot WP:DTTR.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 05:04, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I did mistake you for someone who contacted me in this regard. My sincere apologies on that. As to not saving AWB results if they are minor, please think about that. Materialscientist (talk) 05:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Jeff - I was the one who questioned the revert, and I've engaged in a bit of discussion about it on my talk page. I've suggested there, and will repeat the suggestion here, that User:Materialscientist consider WP:PERF.  Frank  |  talk  14:07, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 21:07, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Python vs Alligator

I recently noticed that you were editing a snake page. There has been an attack in Florida where people from Asain countries have brought Python's as pet's. When they are no longer able to keep them they release them into the wild. These snakes have bred with local snakes also recently an asain python ate a wounded alligator but was attacked by another alligator. The Python blew up with the aligator inside it. The alligator that made the kill left and left the dead animal as a threat to the Asain Python's. Study's show that a war for territory has erupted. Do you wan't to help me make a page on this, or a more discriptive section in the American Alligator Page. --Schmeater (talk) 01:56, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you have any verifiable references from reliable sources to use in building such an article?   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 03:04, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Well no, but I saw this on the news and on the American Alligator Page there were a few links, and I would call the page Floridan Python Danger. I think the Python type was a Borean Python and would really like to work with you on a project, if you think those link's aren't enough just give me a chance to work with you. --Schmeater (talk) 01:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Pointless edit

This edit was really pointless. We should not use AWB for this type of pointless edit, or your license to use AWB can be revoked, see Wikipedia:Awb#Rules_of_use.

Apart from that, I would say the protection templates should be above the {{Otheruses}} template. Debresser (talk) 11:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

"No, per Wikipedia:DISAMBIG#Usage_guidelines the disambig templates are at the top."[3]   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 01:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

That is correct. And see Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Templates that protection templates also should be on top. I do a lot of work with protection templates, and asure you that between protection templates and disambiguation templates, protection templates are almost always the first. I hope you are willing to take my word for it. I'll make a mall change to Wikipedia:Protection_policy#Templates (I'll make it "the very top") to stress this point. Debresser (talk) 07:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Random Edit

I received a note from you, containing the following information:

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Talk:Marriage at Cana has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 21:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I have never edited anything on Wikipedia, nor am I even a registered user (as far as I'm aware!), and I believe this has been misdirected.

Thank you.

86.155.3.238 (talk) 16:14, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Left a reassuring comment concerning dynamic IPs on the user's talk page. Acroterion _(talk) 16:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 21:15, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Unforgiven

Your reversion of edits to Unforgiven on Aug 9th were without merit, and have had a deleterious effect on the quality of this article. Improvements in grammar, sentence structure, etc. do not require citation, and the only reliable source would be any standard book on English grammar. One of the passages your ineffectual edit reinserted was this: "After a twenty second glare into Little Bill's beaten eyes". The length of time is completely uncited and lacking any verifiable source. Where is the proof that exactly 20 seconds elapsed? It seems to violate NPOV to call Little Bill's eyes "beaten". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.162.11.237 (talk) 17:42, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Until your edits, the glare had been referred to as "twenty second" in the article since this edit of 01:51, 13 March 2009 (UTC). Before that, the glare was referred to as "twenty-second" in the article since this edit of 13:38, 1 January 2009 (UTC). Before that, the glare was referred to as "three-second" (and Little Bill's eyes were called "beaten" until your edits) in the article since this edit at 03:20, 19 November 2008 (UTC). Conversely, your edits were the first mentions I could find in the article history of "torture" or "drinking heavily". I used WikiBlame to assist in my research.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 08:28, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism?

Hi Jeff. I got a message from you just now saying that I vandalized the page on Stevie Ray Vaughan. I'm not sure what you think vandalism is, but as far as I can tell, I don't consider that "vandalism". And every time I go to edit the page, someone deletes it. What's the matter with putting useful info about the greatest guitarist of all time into an informative article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abbj1991 (talk • contribs) 23:47, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

You appear to be deleting more than you are adding (at last check, deleting over 8,000 bytes).   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 23:49, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Robina Qureshi

Hi jeff , re http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Robina_Qureshi&action=history thankds for reverting the edit. the anonymous ip user maliciously vandalised the site a few days ago. thanks again. Tiger3456 (talk) 00:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 00:42, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Test templates

Ta muchly. It's a decent enough short-term fix, and should let me do what I need for the moment. 81.110.104.91 (talk) 01:11, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 01:13, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Misuse of rollback via Huggle

Please take care when using Huggle to rollback things, especially in cases where the edits you are rolling back are not eggregious and obvious vandalism. This edit here: [4] appears to be a good faith edit; and as such rather than merely rolling it back, you should make an effort to explain in the edit summary why it is being reverted AND should make some effort to engage the user that made it in discussion where you clearly explain why their edit is being reverted. Rolling back good faith edits without explanation, even if they should be reverted, is not in best practices, and can result in your rollback privileges being revoked. Please take care in the future when using tools like Huggle that you only use them as intended, and avoid biting the newbies when you do so. --Jayron32 02:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. With all due respect, that reversion and subsequent warning were in light of this reversion and subsequent warning a few minutes earlier, plus the user's months-long documented inability to cite reliable sources, and my explanations were in my warnings.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 04:03, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Jaseng Hospital of Oriental Medicine

Hello, I am having a difficult time updating my hospitals information on Wikipedia. I received a copyright msg and another violation msg. I am not trying to perform any illegal activity, I only wish to update the information as it hasn't been done in two years from my knowledge. Please help me perform this, as I am ignorant on the process. Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasenghospital (talk • contribs) 08:11, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Can we verify that it is no longer accurate or that it is out of date with a current reliable source? Would you be more comfortable creating article ko:자생한방병원 and having someone else translate to English? Please also see the responses at Wikipedia:Help desk#Help_editing_a_page. Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 12:50, 24 August 2009 (UTC)