This page 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: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Just because this guy posts on Kotaku doesn't mean it's a conflict of interest. That's like saying you're not allowed to edit the Wikipedia article because you're a Wikipedia editor and it's a conflict of interest. Even if he's a fan or something, that doesn't make it COI, it just means someone else should take a look at the article to make sure it's neutral. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:57, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
It may or may not be no solid evidence either way. Note the notice used the word may. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:00, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Your use of the template on the rugby union article: Donald MacMillan (rugby) (and also Template:refimprove at Peter Thompson (rugby) while in good faith, is unwarranted. Please review Template:One source#Editorial usage. While the articles only have one source, the source used is highly reputable, and the article is a very short stub with facts cited. If anything, I overused ref's in these stubs. These will be reverted. SauliH (talk) 19:31, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Well that is your opinion, these articles need expansion ans a range of sources to satisfy the BLP guidelines. You would be better off focussing on providing encyclopaedic content rather than re-hashing a brief directory entry on ESPN. How about finding some substantive coverage in WP:RS. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 19:36, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
contrary to being a brief directory entry on ESPN, the scrum.com website provides the full international player minutiae in the links that this lead page heads up. The scrum.com website is not merely a directory as you purport but keeps highly detailed records of international representative player statistics. You are sorely mistaken, and a query posted to WP:RU would confirm this. Finally, the article stubs are the beginning stage of fully accounts of these player's and will with time fill out with additional ref's. Rather than forewarning readers of non-reliable sources which is the true intent of these tags, they needlessly put doubt on the information presented. From the link posted above:
A single source is not automatically a problem. Good judgment and common sense should be used.
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello - thanks for the deletion warning - I'll improve the article within the next month, in the hope of it staying, and also ask for assistance from a couple of archivists of the period.
I think The Noseflutes qualify via: Has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself and reliable. This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries - they get a chapter in John Robb's Death to Trad Rock, and were regularly reviewed in the British music press of the time (Melody Maker, NME, Sounds, Q, etc) - it might take me a while to track down the reviews, though I've just found the following quotes (I didn't know the band had an online archive until your message spurred me into a chunk of seeking, so thanks!)
also: having looked up the definition of album, their two EPs on Ron Johnson records should be listed as Albums, so released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable) might also be relevant.
and also: Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city - to quote Death To Trad Rock, "The Noseflutes became the house band in Birmingham"
I'm sure there'll be more I can dig up. I hope you don't mind me letting you know directly. Cheers.
I'll copy this text to the article discussion page, too.
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
OK, extremely curious, have to ask. Why did you think Virginie Bovie was unsourced? Almost every sentence (or if not, every other sentence) has a footnote appended. I know you realized this yourself and removed the tag, but the presentation seemed pretty straightforward to me and I guess I was just wondering whether I had done something you found unorthodox at first. Cynwolfe (talk) 00:50, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
That is easy. The references were under the external links not above them as per MoS. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 07:47, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. That's helpful to know. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:31, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Signpost: 2 August 2010
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi there! I noticed that you chimed in on the dispute going on about the Cassandra Clare page. Would you mind checking out the discussion on the talk page and chiming in? I've already spent too much time trying to get this page into better shape, and with the other editor's reversion it's become less informative than when I started in June. Any help from more experienced editors would be MUCH appreciated! Infoaddict1 (talk) 07:06, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, thank you for making the report, I really appreciate it! Aquintero (talk) 17:37, 07 August 2010 (UTC)
Note
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I've explained my reasons for my edit - something you have not bothered to do. Please stop harassing me. HupHollandHup (talk) 22:47, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Your reasons are flawed and not in accordance with Wikipedia policy. Removing correctly sourced material is vandalism. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:48, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
A good faith removal of irrelevant and POV material is not vandalism. You don;t know what you are talking about. HupHollandHup (talk) 22:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Peer review request
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Please see here Thanks for your feedback at the FAC nomination for Illinois (album). Since you left critical—and valuable—feedback there, I figured you might be interested in taking a look at the peer review that I have requested. I do not anticipate that you will have much to add (you may have said all you have to say already), but since you showed a willingness to give feedback once, you may wish to again. Either way, thanks for what you've done thus far. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:24, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Spain
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Jezhotwells, thank you for your message, however, -as you may suppose- I defend the term for "Germanic kingdoms" or any other name more right, because:
After Rome, Iberian peninsula (Hispania) was ruled by NO one kingdom nor people (Goths), it was ruled by Suevi, Goths, Basques/Cantabrians (free peoples), Vandals, Alans and Byzantines.
If you keep the term "Gothic kingdom" you are giving more value to Goths in the history and all peoples deserve the same historic treatment.
I consider that we could find other title more suitable, for example: Roman Empire and Early Middle Ages, Roman Empire and Germanic invasions or Roman Empire and Medieval beginning.
Thanks again for your attention, I wait for your answer.--Alexander Vigo (talk) 07:32, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Thanks for affirming that the review on L.A.P.D. (band) was inaccurate. I was wondering if you could look at GA review on "Freak on a Leash" too, and tell me if it was inaccurate. I honestly think that it shouldn't have been quick-failed. Thanks, CrowzRSA 23:13, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Suggest that you take it to WP:GAR if you are unhappy. There seemed to be a number of problems. Editors have different opinions on what can be achieved in seven days. I must say that I am less tolerant of badly prepared articles these days tahn I used to be. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:29, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Castile
Latest comment: 13 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
"Castilla" is "Castile" in English. What is your problem? Always it has been "Castile", I do not know why you move without consulting anybody. Please, do not disturb me. Satesclop 16:46, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
And what pray is La Mancha in English? Jezhotwells (talk) 16:55, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
And try reading the article talk page. It might give you a clue. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:00, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Thank you J for taking the trouble to do this assessment. I particularly liked the tool box that you use – are the different elements in it explained somewhere so that I can use it myself and make use of all its features?
I shall do as you recommend and gradually tick off your suggestions before submitting the article for peer review. A few clarifications:
Could you be more explicit in what you mean by “text book” style, indicating how this might differ from “encyclopaedia” style and “Wikipedia encyclopaedia style” in particular. This would be a great help for my future editing.
Could you give me an example or two of parts of the article that are “inaccessible” as, apparently, “much of it” is inaccessible at present. Again, this would be a great help for my future editing.
I’m not sure what you mean when you say “No mention of environmental history in South America, Australia, Africa and Asia. The article should reflect a global view. If there really are no such studies intehse areas then please mention it, but I suspect that that there are.” There are whole sections on the places you list – I must be misunderstanding you in some way. Granitethighs 02:15, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I don't get your response to me regarding the Provenge entry. Did you look at Nbauman's talk, because I have had a repeating exchange with him and tried to work it out and he just reverts the article to his earlier version?
It's not about the use of a brand name--it's about the substance of the article and his insistence on keeping his slanted, inaccurate article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SaulK (talk • contribs) 20:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Like I said at WP:EAR please use the article talk page. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:14, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you!
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Just wanted to take a moment to thank you for informing ArbCom of the ANI thread about the "become a Wikipedia editor" lessons that are making the news. They'd said they wanted to be told of this kind of thing, but I had no idea how to do it. ( I presume it involves leaving a flower pot on your window sill, with the shades open, or something like that. ;-) Anyway, thanks! I appreciate it. Best regards, – OhioStandard (talk) 12:45, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
No problem, you're welcome. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Bumblebee
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I was merely history merging the two versions that had been created by one of the users not using the move tab (as my edit summary says). I didn't really care which Wrong Version ended up as the current name. Black Kite (t)(c) 21:22, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough, sorry to have bothered you. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:26, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
The Signpost: 23 August 2010
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Thank you for your quick response to my question regarding external links. The wiki links you provided were helpful, especially the one about external links. It's also valuable to have the opinion of an editor well versed in the wiki world.
I supposed I remain somewhat befuddled about the matter of external links/article spam on the Social Entrepreneurship page. It does seem sensible that external link policy would exclude promotion of sites. If not, the extenal link section would be impressively long and burdensome. However, I note in the article there are a number of organizations mentioned which appear to be included to illustrate real-world examples of social entrepreneurs. This makes sense, for to create a meaningful definition of a concept would be to illustrate its use in the "real world". External links to LISTS of organizations seems like a great idea.
Nonetheless, I seek a better understanding, not of external links, but of the inclusion of organizations within the article as illustrative of the concept. Who picks these organizations?
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I hope that you noticed that a sign in Blue and italics signify another country. See the notices for Portugal, France, Andorra etc. They are obviously not Autonomous communities of Spain. I even put had Gibraltar put with (U.K) in Brackets. I dont know why you didn't notice that. I have been to Gibraltar, so I think that I know it's British. Next time, before reverting, please check how it was written. Thanks! --92.11.114.100 (talk) 11:02, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Map shooting
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Jez, could you put Biscay, Gipuzkoa and Álava onto your watchlist as well, same problem with the drive-by map shooting. There, it's an anon IP and I've raised the issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spain but they're, hm, slow to respond. Cheers Akerbeltz (talk) 17:42, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Tony Sokol
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Ah, right, thanks for letting me know, I think I must have mis-read the policy Kneale (talk) 12:37, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Clevedon/GA1
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for your comments & the On hold notice. I had already responded at Talk:Clevedon/GA1.— Rodtalk 21:32, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
The Signpost: 30 August 2010
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The Barnstar of Diligence
For your hard work at the Editor assistance request page. I see your name pop up there constantly, helping right foundering ships. Keep it up! — e. ripley\talk 19:04, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
RE: Sherlock Holmes Baffled
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks very much - it must break some sort of record for "shortest FA" ! Bobtalk 19:34, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Richard Neal
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I made some changes for the GAN at Richard Neal. Thanks. —Designate (talk) 15:53, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Russian Airplay Chart
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Removing the backlink without removing the reference makes it nearly impossible to find the references so they can be removed.—Kww(talk) 14:36, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
?? - it is just removing a wikilink, no more no less. The article has been deleted twice already. Although Ten pound used the word reference, they clearly meant link. Removing references in bulk is not something that any editor should be doing. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:47, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
I replied at EAR. I followed up on your edits and removed the chart from nearly all of the articles (four of them are a hairy edit that I'm not in the mood for). It's listed on WP:BADCHARTS as a chart that should not be included in any Wikipedia articles. Removing the wikilink just makes it much harder to find places that the chart needs to be removed.—Kww(talk) 17:16, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I accept that there was no intention from you to imply wrongdoing and I apologise for jumping down your throat. Nevertheless, you were following the suggestion made by the OP that a good article had been lost and completely failed to take any note of my statement that I had looked at the deleted article and found this to be incorrect. You should either have taken that result on good faith or else asked for someone to double check. Continuing to allow the assertion to stand that the article had somehow been tampered with was not really on, but again, I apologise for going over the top, it was really no big deal. SpinningSpark 21:56, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Begging You
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for chiming in there. --John (talk) 04:36, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Jezhotwells—I noticed that you have made edits to the article The Trojan War Will Not Take Place. I am looking for people who are interested in creating quality articles on the plays of Jean Giraudoux and related subjects (I am almost finished writing the article on Ondine). I also glanced at your article-in-progress on A C.H. Smith—it is exactly the sort of writing that I aspire to.
Giraudoux is not a big enough subject to be a WikiProject; but 20th century French drama certainly would be. For an outline of my ideas on the subject, see my personal page at the link below. If you are interested, drop me a note on that same personal page.
I know little of the subject, I did add tags about the citation style which have been addressed, so I have removed them. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hello--thanks so much for the time to pop in...but I think we need something deeper in the way of help. This user Anupam that you may have noticed is causing major trouble, and the only other editor there sides with him excessively. I hope you can offer further assistance or send in another admin.
My health does not permit a continuation of this nonsense and I cannot technically report Anupam on the three revert rule...he's gone far beyond that. Time constrains me from reporting him for edit warring, which he has done and for which he has been warned in the past. Again, thanks. Would that we should all have real lives outside Wikipedia, as you and I have.75.21.106.189 (talk) 11:58, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Hey I know it's probably no skin off your nose but I thought I'd give you my take on this situation. If it's not immediately obvious I think editor 75 is a bit unstable, he takes things very personally and thinks Anupam is some sort of evil scheming madman or something. While 75 and I tend to have similar opinion of how the article should progress, I'm trying to be as objective and reasonable as possible but 75 always finds something in my posts to throw a tantrum about. For example when I asked to see some evidence of Anupams supposed "transgressions" from the edit history, he flies off the handle and starts claiming I'm accusing him of something (never managed to work out what) and "siding with Anupam excessively", etc.. I don't disagree that Anupam has made some poor edits and reverts that I don't agree with, but as far as I can see he has not broken the 3r rule (which I don't actually think 75 understands) certainally not way beyond breaking the rule, and I really can't see that he's been overly disruptive. Anyway, as much as I appreciate 75's help and think he's made some good contributions to the article, I think it's probably for the best if he takes a break, because I think there is some sort of fundamental misunderstanding and it's causing 75 unnecessary distress. Vespine (talk) 02:02, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, Jezhotwells. You have new messages at Talk:2010 Giro d'Italia#GA Review. Message added 11:10, 12 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
GA Review update
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
... and it surprised me how much this affected me. (theseones) My weakness in writing articles is always the prose, not that I'm dyslectic but just because I'm not a native English speaker. It also hurt that you did not give me any time to fix the problems, and failed the nomination without giving me the opportunity to defend.
But now that it's a few hours later, I see that you did the right thing. It is not the reviewer's job to guide the nomination into something of good status, although I've assumed that role as a reviewer before. I think my previous GA-nomination may have been passed too easily, which made me too confident that I had learned the 'trick'.
Until today, I had no idea that Wikipedia stuff could influence my mood this much, so I guess it's time to evaluate my priorities again. This will mean that I cut down on Wikipedia for some weeks, and could mean that I stop permanently.
Thank you for 'waking me up'. You've helped me by failing these nominations. I am writing this to you, to let you know that if you for some reason should notice that I'm no longer on wikipedia directly after you failed two of my nominations, you should not think that you scared me away, but you should know that you helped me to find better goals in my life. I know it was more probable that you would never noticed that I would leave wikipedia, but I still felt I had to write this. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 14:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
The Signpost: 13 September 2010
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi, Jezhotwells! Sometime ago you reviewed Honório Carneiro Leão, Marquis of Paraná (which is now a featured article). I've recently nominated José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco which is kind of "follow-up" to the former. If you have interest and time, could you review it? Since you read the article about Paraná, it would be far easier for you to understand the subject on Rio Branco. Kind regards and thank you anyway, --Lecen (talk) 02:03, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
Basement
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Let us get something straight - on the Alveda King page someone wondered about her married last name and I happened to find it and supplied a link to the actual lawsuit document which shows her legal married last name. Period! I also questioned why she seemed to refer to Martin Luther King Jr as her grandfather when everyone knows he was her uncle and questioned if anyone knew her DOB. Period! This has nothing to do with Jan Brewer.
Secondly, my question about Jan Brewer and why links to the main newspaper in Phoenix AZ the Az Rep were not good enough had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Alveda King. You're snarky response linking the two is unbelievable. So it appears to me you are politically motivated in your answers to defend Jan Brewer so leave it alone and let someone else who is not invested in it answer the questions. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RealNaturopath (talk • contribs) 00:20, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Might I suggest that you refrain from making personal attacks and assume good faith, especially when responding to attempts to help on a Wikipedia noticeboard. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:27, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You endorsed a prod on John Wesley 300: pioneers, preachers and practitioners, so I thought you should know that I removed the prod because the talk page indicates that deletion is not uncontroversial. Compliance with policy/procedure is the only reason I did this, and I have no prejudice towards opening an AfD. —KuyaBriBriTalk 20:03, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Wrong button - my bad
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
I just accidentally clicked on Twinkle'srollback - vandalism button here when I meant only to decline your speedy deletion nomination. I have noted my mistake in the next edit summary, but do please let me know if I can do anything else for you. Regards, - 2/0 (cont.) 01:23, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Ah, and I see you already noticed. You are absolutely correct that your edit was not vandalism. However, our article appears to predate that one. - 2/0 (cont.) 01:25, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
GAN
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
What you want to do is, rather than edit it on the GAN list itself, you'll want to edit it on the talk page of the nominated article. harej 20:32, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
I have done and several noms in the Misc section actually have the corect subtopic, so it seems there is a flaw there. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:33, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
EAR
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi Jez. Could you have a go at archiving some of the page again please. Cheers, --Kudpung (talk) 08:53, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, Jezhotwells. You have new messages at Talk:Advanced Gemini/GA1. Message added 09:00, 19 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
And another one. --GW… 10:15, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
The Signpost: 20 September 2010
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks again for your effort in reviewing Minehead.— Rodtalk 16:57, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Edit sumaries
Latest comment: 13 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, i think that should adding a festival image in spain article cuz is an important part in the culture of spain and its lifestyle, cuz that the tomatina picture is a festival famous in spain. The theatre roman picture cuz is more panoramic than the last, i think that is a better image cuz its see more the complex. And tapas picture cuz is too famous eating in all regions and mostly bars in all Spain. Cheers --Venerock (talk) 00:18, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. but my english but is simple for write and understand but once again, thanks--Venerock (talk) 00:34, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
This is English Wikipedia, so you are expected to follow standard English Wikipedia policies, practices and guidelines. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:36, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
I accept that; please, include to User:Diplomatiko(edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) as you included to me in the discussion Talk:Spain. Cause he reverted my edit in Spain article --Venerock (talk) 01:07, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
"There is no need to rush, please await comments from other editors. It may take weeks or months. In the mean time, please provide a rationale for each image replacement, one by one". Jezhotwells (talk) 01:31, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
jajjajaj nooooo Are you joking right?, and i think´d that you answered to me very slowing, that with you answer i didnt could go to my gf house, that i need to go there, and you say that, that just for a change in the spain article i have to wait a couple of MONTHS to make my edit. And the another thousands of people that makes changes in different wikipedian articles, you say at their that? that they have to wait months for can making edits or changes; and the rest of wikipedian that changes the spain article dont need discuss like this, just they change it (in the SO mostly of the cases). Salutes--Venerock (talk) 01:44, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for the GA review. Before I ask someone to copyedit, I want to reorganize the article. Would you please elaborate on your comment "The organisation is bitty, the whole is not coherent." with examples? Thanks. --RedtigerxyzTalk 12:14, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
History of botany
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for helping out Jezza - I have adjusted the images but feel free to do whatever you think is necessary to make them right ... please let me know if there are any other improvements required. Thanks.Granitethighs 22:26, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
General Note
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I can see you have quite a lot of experience dealing with issues of protocol, and that's all great, and as a new editor I do appreciate frank criticism, it cuts down on the crap. What I don't appreciate, however, is being bit in the ass. I haven't been around long enough to even know the index of the in house style is here, but in most places there is a window to do a better job rather than the article getting flushed down the toilet. I have two full time jobs as a medical scientist, and I can say I thoroughly understand the requirement of citations-but I'm still getting my head wrapped around WikiMarkup and proposing my article for deletion will not give me a chance to do better. The article was less than a few hours old. Please.
Dr. Caulder (talk) 04:07, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
The proposed deltion notice actually says "If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article so that it is acceptable according to the deletion policy." If you are working on an article build it in your user space and then ask for reviews at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback. Cheers. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:21, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Whitefriars, Bristol
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! Your submission of Whitefriars, Bristol at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:52, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
The Signpost: 4 October 2010
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Not sure why you unlinked Greyfriars, Bristol - the office block, in that case, is on the same site as the friary and is mentioned in that article. The office block itself is, I would have thought, unlikely ever to have its own page, so why redlink it? Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:08, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
Because it is redlinked on the Wikiproject Bristol page asdn someone put it up there as a requested artcile. i agree, it is not likely to have an artcile. I unlinked in Whitefriars as Greyfriars now links to an artcile about the old Fransiscan monastery, not an office block. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:02, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
The Greyfriars article, final para, refers to the office block - which is why I originally put the redirect to there. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:24, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Greyfriars, Bristol
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On 6 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Greyfriars, Bristol, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) 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.
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On 7 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Whitefriars, Bristol, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) 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.
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
hi i dont know if your paying attention but here [1] you were incorrect. it was wrongly deleted because a vandal blanked the page and put on a speedy delete tag. i think this new user was right to ask how this happened. i think we should think more before we tell new users they are doing the wrong thing. Aisha9152 (talk) 15:05, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
You are right, I should have waited until an admin who could view the page history had commented. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:29, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
La Masia
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for your extensive feedback. I have responded to all actionable issues that you raised and renominated the article. I understand that you have no further obligation to the article, but if you feel it is now up to snuff or something that you can work with it is out there.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:52, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Thrud
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thanks for your edit here. Would you care to expand on your reasons and perhaps leave a comment here as I'm trying to get the FA discussion re-opened. Thanks. GDallimore (Talk) 22:38, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Blackfriars, Bristol
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
On 12 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Blackfriars, Bristol, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) 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.
Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Could you do an unofficial GAN review of Case Closed to see whether it has a good chance of passing or not? I would also like advice on improving the article and appreciate it if you would reply to my talk page. Thank you. DragonZero (talk·contribs) 10:12, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
You may be best off putting it up for peer review. I noticed that you have five disambiguation links that need fixing. Amazon is not generally considered a reliable source. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:50, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Re:GAN
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I nominated that article several months ago! I just nominated the 1987 PHS. Anyhow, I realized my mistake with Paine 86. YETropicalCyclone 17:10, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I am just use to the old way. YETropicalCyclone 18:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Betelgeuse GA
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Just a short note to thank you for your timely review of the Betelgeuse article. If you have any other thoughts on what will be needed to achieve Featured Article status, that would be great. I'm pretty new to Wikipedia, so this whole process is quite a learning curve and every insight valuable. Thanks.--Sadalsuud (talk) 00:37, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
The Signpost: 18 October 2010
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Latest comment: 13 years ago3 comments1 person in discussion
Tweaked the article and replied; perhaps I hadn't made clear enough in the article until now that the closure is only temporary until repairs are carried out, and so the parish itself hasn't been combined with its neighbours even though the parishioners have to worship in neighbouring parishes for now. Perhaps in the current financial climate it will be a long wait! As for the Italian POW thing, it is odd (I hadn't picked up that Italy was an ally in WWI) but we may have a "sources say X" > "absolute truth" issue... Look forward to hearing your views in due course. Regards, BencherliteTalk 14:39, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Ping; POW bit removed. BencherliteTalk 10:39, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Many thanks for your prompt and careful review. It's much appreciated. Regards, BencherliteTalk 16:39, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Hamburg International
Latest comment: 13 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion
Jeez, why are you so mad at ... about Hamburg International?
He (she?) removed operations by the charter operator "Hamburg International" because they're apparently grounded, and you must revert them all at lightning speed, with the grand explanation that the airport is up and running? Who said it wasn't? Sorry, but either I am completely missing something or I'll have a hard time remaining polite to you. Hamburg International really IS in fetters, here's just one reference: < ref > http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4959491/ </ ref > Jan olieslagers (talk) 19:45, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Your cite is a report of a rumour on a forum, not an WP:RS. It makes no mention of planes being grounded. The edit summaries made no mention of an airline, just Hamburg International which is the name of the airport. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:50, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
OK, references need to be added, but that's no reason for you to attack like if he or you were a wild beast. And my reference DOES mention planes being hurriedly found with other operators, so something MUST be wrong with Hamburg International's, OK? And the forum I cited is one of the more serious, you cannot dismiss them that lightly. Again and above all, NOBODY said anything about Hamburg Airport being closed, as you keep implying. The changes made were all removals of "Hamburg Airlines" from the column "operator" (or was it "airline"?) so anybody of reasonable intelligence can see there's no relation to Hamburg Airport. There is quite a difference between lack of references and the vandalism you keep whining about. You are making it hard for me not to shout! I really believe I must be missing something. If not, I am close to reporting YOU for unacceptable behaviour. Let it be clear I have no knowledge of or relation to "Per Astra &c" except in the present context. Jan olieslagers (talk) 20:00, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Hey, and Viking Airlines is indeed defunct. The website is down, all aircraft have been returned to lessor. This an abysmal performance of you to just revert all those edits. I really do feel offended by this. Per aspera ad Astra (talk) 20:10, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
And well you may - but what has Viking Airlines got to do with it? Jan olieslagers (talk) 20:20, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Really, their website is functioning.[2]. And Gatwick Airport reports that VKH672 from Stockholm will land at 04:05 tomorrow morning.[3] Viking Airlines has indeed ceased business, but Viking Hellas is taking over their flights.[4]. Your edit summaries specifically said Viking Hellas. Please get your facts right before embarking on deletions of information from 60 or 70 articles. Wikipedia is not a newspaper, wait for the facts to become established before relying on reports of rumours about Hamburg International airlines. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:23, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
I have to agree we are not newspaper journalists, and will agree to your request for a little patience and for established facts. But you do seem to be applying Personal point of View to a person, what's more, to a fellow contributor, and that is FAR worse than the already deadly sin of applying it to any article! Kindly keep your manners, henceforth, most of all towards people who mean well even if they stumble. Even stupidity is not a crime - and Per Astra is far from being or behaving stupid. Enough said now, for me, back to toil! Jan olieslagers (talk) 20:36, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
I guess the statement above could also apply to "...if he or you were a wild beast."? Jezhotwells (talk) 21:18, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
First of all, Viking website is not working. It's blanked out and not loading. Secondly, where is your source that Viking Hellas takes over any Viking flights? Many of them are seasonal during summer, so nobody knows so far if/when service will restart. And as you obviously thought I was referring to Hamburg International Airport (why didn't you just look at what I was changing in the article at all?), you beter should not teach me anything about proper work with Wikipedia. Per aspera ad Astra (talk) 20:31, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
{http://www.flyviking.com/index.cfm} is working just fine in the UK, I can assure you. My source that Viking Hellas is taking over the flights of Viking Airlines is:
Reals, Kerry (19 October 2010). "Viking aircraft impounded at Gatwick for unpaid debts". flightglobal.com. Reed Business Information. Retrieved 19 October 2010. Viking Airlines has temporarily ceased operations and returned its aircraft to the lessors while it restructures and downsizes its business.
A spokesman for the carrier said yesterday that the Viking Hellas division would take over the flights that were scheduled to be operated by Viking over the coming weeks. He stressed that the carrier was "not in liquidation".
But in a statement issued today, Gatwick Airport says: "We can confirm that a Viking aircraft was detained by Gatwick Airport yesterday (18 October) as a result of an unpaid, long-standing debt owed by Viking Group.
"Gatwick did not take this action lightly, but after months of chasing payment without success it became apparent that this was, regrettably, the only option left to recover the monies owed. The aircraft was released last night following the receipt of payment made by Viking Group." {{cite web}}: line feed character in |quote= at position 141 (help). Flight Global is a reliable source. I note that it carries no news items about Hamburg International airlines being in trouble and I can find nothing else in the media. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
I'm in Germany, and the Viking website is down. First, it did not load, now it has completely disappeared. And even if some Viking flights are taken over by Viking Hellas over the next few weeks, this is not noteworthy here on Wikipedia (far from scheduled, regular service). And please pause and think first before bluntly reverting - some of the edits you reverted were one month old, and had nothing to do with today's dispute. Per aspera ad Astra (talk) 20:58, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
And as noted on your talk page, Hamburg International is indeed operating flights to Boa Vista, Cape Verde. Your edit on the Bristol Airport page removed a reference supporting this. That is unacceptable. I note that your edits to other airport article also removed references. That is vandalism. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:44, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Demise of Viking airlines
For the information of the two of you, surfing to http://www.vikingairlines.com/ is now redirected to http://www.flyviking.com/index.cfm? which shows the Viking Hellas pages. This must have been accomplished through a web redirect:
<screendump>
nslookup www.vikingairlines.com/
Server: 195.238.2.22
Address: 195.238.2.22#53
server can't find www.vikingairlines.com/: NXDOMAIN
</screendump>
Have fun cleaning up! Jan olieslagers (talk) 21:13, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
As I stated above, IMO it would be wrong just to change all Viking services to Viking Hellas. As most flights are seasonal, we have no idea how this will evolve next summer. And "rescue flights" for stranded passengers are not notable. Per aspera ad Astra (talk) 21:18, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
No one is talking about rescue flights - Viking Hellas is taking over Viking airlines flights for the winter 2010/11 season. That is what the reference from a reliable source says. Next summer is next summer. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:40, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
It's not about all winter, only the next few weeks. This is what I would call rescue flights. Per aspera ad Astra (talk) 21:47, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for doing the GA review of Charles Holden. I notice that you're part of the Bristol Wikiproject and it occurs to me that Holden might fit within your project's scope as several of his buildings are in the city. The Central Library is his only Grade I listed building. --DavidCane (talk) 23:00, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I think I will add the project banner. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:01, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
User:Andreasegde, Revolution, and Twinkle
Please do not make the mistake of reverting a long standing contributor, one with GA's if not FA's under his belt, as vandalism, per edit summary. If you are finding Twinkle a little difficult to operate, it can be removed. Also, when politely commenting upon another editors misuse of grammar at their talkpage it behooves you to spell the article subject correctly. LessHeard vanU (talk) 17:16, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the note about the misspelling, I have corrected it. Might I suggest that it behoves you to spell behoves correctly. As User:Andreasegde had had that edit already reverted, with an explanation, continuance of pursuing the edit amounts to vandalism. Have a nice day!. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:26, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Edit warring - if that is what it was - is not vandalism, and behooves is a legitimate spelling of behoves - and my preference. LessHeard vanU (talk) 17:48, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I got an explanation: "You have already been told this, so kindly leave this alone." Sounds like an order to me. :))--andreasegde (talk) 19:15, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the Welcome!
Thank you for the speedy response to my question and your supportive comment about what I did about the edit at Tahash. I'm going to take your suggestion and drop a note to Aaron Solomon Adelman's talk page and see what happens. Maybe being a contributor won't be so bad after all. Thanks! Michael Paul Heart (talk) 23:07, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
You should see the response I got! It's almost as if the man hasn't really read the article! Back at the Request site I also added a further response with a request for direction on what-to-do-in-general? in cases like this one. Thanks again! Michael Paul Heart (talk) 07:05, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
I read your response. Also told Hiergargo|Aaron Solomon Adelman the matter is closed. Thanks for your help. Michael Paul Heart (talk) 14:12, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
A typo?
Hi. I noticed your comment here. I presume you meant to type disingenuous? Don't mean to be annoying, just thought you might like to know. Best, – OhioStandard (talk) 14:09, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Ah, thanks, was indeed a typo. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:41, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
It was nice of you to review the article. Just wanted to say thank you for spending time reviewing it. Zuggernaut (talk) 22:35, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for help with Pamela Geller
Thanks for taking the time to help with Pamela Geller. Having another reasonable voice really helps. Much appreciated! guanxi (talk) 19:50, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Update on review status
Hi Jezhotwells, I hope you are doing well. :) Thanks for doing the GA Review, at Talk:Beautiful Heartache/GA1. I added some responses there. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 10:23, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Added some more responses there. I think I have addressed your suggestions? ;) Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 12:04, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
I saw that you put up the Nightmare article for GA review. Though, I agree that the review was quick and didn't address specifically how whether the article passed all criteria (though Wildroot said so on my talk page, there were not criteria subpage filled out), does your reverting of your own review mean you agree with the decision or that you simply didn't have the time to fill out all the necessary info to start the GAR? I'm ok with it one way or the other, as a GAR would certainly get it another review and point out any issues if they exist. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 00:34, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
So could you give me a reference that confirms your idea about 'The Beatles' being an adjective is grammatically correct? Otherwise, one might think you're just making it up. --andreasegde (talk) 18:22, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
No, you misunderstand: Beatles is being used as an adjective in this sense, not "The Beatles". It is just the same if saying a "Stones song" or a "Westminster precedent" or the "Bristol sound". See Noun used as adjective, also Fowler, H.W. (1931, 2003). The King's English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 41, 271–2. ISBN978-0198605072. {{cite book}}: Check date values in: |year= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) Cheers. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:46, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Using this line of thinking contradicts 'vegetable garden', 'pickle jar', and 'junkyard dog', etc., which are only used when the first noun is singular, and not plural. Westminster and Bristol are singular. Try this for fun: [5]--andreasegde (talk) 19:04, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
"Beatles" is singular when capitalised and used as a noun describing the band. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:13, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Westminster and Bristol are also capitalised. This means you are ignoring my (referenced) explanation entirely. This kind of thing is frowned upon because it's called original research, as you well know.--andreasegde (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
No, I am trying to explain it to you. "Rolling Stones", "X-Men", "news", "gymnastics", "statistics" are plural nouns that are treated as singular. Thus "The Rolling Stones tour", "the latest X-Men film", "the news programme", "the gymnastics display", "the statistics class". English is complicated. Simplistic rules such as those in the reference you give are for elementary learners and only show the commonest cases. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:29, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
You still have to come up with an informed reference to substantiate that. (BTW, you might not know that the use of the apostrophe is often debated by experts in the field, so please don't tell me that English is complicated). Now, how about that reference? You could try this: [6], which is The Apostrophe Protection Society--andreasegde (talk) 19:39, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
I have given you a reference: Fowler's The King's English, still in print and used as a style guide by The Times and the BBC amongst others. So does your apostrophe society recommend changing "news programme" to "news' programme" or "gymnastics display" to "gymnastics' display"? Of course not! Please don't be silly! Jezhotwells (talk) 19:52, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
'News' and 'Gymnastics' are uncountable nouns, because without the 's' they would be adjectives. 'Beatles' is a plural noun.--andreasegde (talk) 20:10, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Any answer to my question, or are you just going to ignore it? It would be nice to know.--andreasegde (talk) 23:03, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
I have given you the answer several times, pity you don't seem able to understand. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:06, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
You have not given me any answer at all, apart from a book title. On the other hand, I have given you various reasons to invalidate your spurious reasoning. You do not have the right to maintain that just because you think it is so, then it must be. Please read this: [7]. --andreasegde (talk) 10:52, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Which bit of "pp. 41, 271-2", in the reference that I gave, do you not understand? Jezhotwells (talk) 16:26, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
When you return, the above article's GA review awaits your attention. Regards, hamiltonstone (talk) 03:40, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Good job archiving that page. If you want to see how to incorporate the archiving into the WP article, see this. Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 03:26, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
Hmmm. It seem that I sort of agree with you. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:39, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
I hate to ask, but...
Could you review the final three of TonyTheTiger's lacrosse articles at GAN? They're the ones in the oldest backlog box. Me and aaron north knocked out most of them but we're both kinda burnt out on the subject. (I'm burnt out on reviewing in general, but am forcing myself to so the process keeps moving) WizardmanOperation Big Bear 03:23, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Well I did one, which I failed on criteria #3 - not broad enough. I really don't get anything out of reviewing this relatively obscure sports stubs. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:18, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
EAR
Hi Jez. I've made a userbox here. If you don't think it's a good idea I'll CSD-G7 it. Otherwise, I'll keep it and create the cat that goes with it and notify the active members so that they can choose to use it if they want. I'm also working on making tpl versions of the custom messages I use at User:Kudpung/Custom talk page messages#EAR.--Kudpung (talk) 06:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Looksgood. I think you should post about this at WT:EAR. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Done. How many names do you think we should wait for to get the consensus? --Kudpung (talk) 12:23, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Dan Cocoziello/GA1
Lacrosse players do not stand up to the same standard of breadth of coverage as most major sports. I was recently involved in a similar debate at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/B. J. Prager/1. Look at his pro career. He barely played. There is nothing notable to add. I just put his stats in to make this clear. Look at the Prager debate because I am apt to send this one to GAR as well if you do not reconsider. The entire google news search of his pro career yields two articles. There is literally nothing to add for his pro career. There might be a few tidbits about his high school days to add, but nothing truly notable.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:19, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
By all means take it to GAR. Broadness is a GA criteria and the artcile, as it stands, fails to address that. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:24, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Dont know how to post the disputed discussion or sockpucket to Rabbi Pinto ? Have and its not working, and they keep whitewashing can you assist ? Thanks in advance —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.112.21.194 (talk) 17:34, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
As to post at the article talk page, try clicking edit on the talk page. You managed it here, so you should be able to at the article talk page. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:40, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
GAN
Thank you for reviewing the Justice League article. I appreciate it when someone comes along and does a really scrutinizes of the article--it allows for better growth of the article--instead of doing a once-over and just passing with no real comments. Cheers. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 23:15, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Egyptian hieroglyphics and Hieratic script — does Wiki have 'em?
I really would like to find out if the Wiki body of knowledge includes accessible and usable ancient alphabetic and writing characters. I enjoyed getting some ancient Proto-semitic and Phoenician characters from the codes displayed on the edit pages of some of the articles I read. And if there isn't a body or resource pool for accessing and using the images of ancient script characters in the Wiki universe, I would like to "officially" suggest it. The one I'm interested in right now is Egyptian Hieroglyphic forms, and Egyptian Hieratic. Really have enjoyed your support! Michael Paul Heart (talk) 00:42, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Life (book) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! PM800 (talk) 02:51, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
I've responded. - PM800 (talk) 03:07, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Peter Jarrette Artist/Author/Multi Media
Gosh. Am I in the right place for my response? Thank you for your reply Jezhotwells. I am struggling as you can see. Still, I will persevere. Frankly I'm finding the negotiating of the site to be daunting. --Eggs Aldo (talk) 16:37, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
The citation you require on Dr. Oliver Bertie Jarrette in the Peter Jarrette article; This gentleman, the grandparent of the article subject has been deceased for over 50 years. What information can be inserted in this citation request? --Eggs Aldo (talk) 16:54, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
I suggest that you start by explaining why the subject is notable and that you use inline citations to make sure that all statements are referenced. It is all explained in the pages taht you have been pointed at. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:18, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
Peter Jarrette Artist/Author/Multi Media
Hi Jezhotwells. I'm replying to thank those who have made efforts to help me to date. It seems to me that the issue of notability is a subjective one. Often times people who are notable to some barely have any obvious credibility to others? My subject has in recent years been nominated outstanding Brightonian in the annual Brighton and Hove Business Awards and this has been for his outstanding works in promoting others, businesses, charities and events in the UK city in which he currently resides. However his works have been high profile over the years in several countries and in many varied arenas from the art world to the publishing world resulting in his works being incorporated in the New York Public Library archives as explained in the article and the archives here too of the Windsor Royal Family. My subject is a published author too of four worldwide children's books and even the invited illustrator for published diaries for his own home country that were produced for Embassies, Consulates and High Commissions around the globe. These are just some of the points made in a much more full profile of my subject's works to date and with three novels to be published in the near future for international release and possible film/tv serialisation it is my desire to have an open building page for him here on Wikipedia that might augment his Google profile and that of other social networks. I assumed that notability was established in the article as it was laid out starting with his early years as a child and developing. Certainly I'd hoped the subject headline would also serve as a clue as to the nature of the subject's works. To be fair it is hard to cram all his achievements into the first few lines of the article? Would that be more suitable for the site? I imagine then I would be working backward. Still I've been directed to the adopt process and await more input from more proficient editors like yourself. Thanks so very much again though Jezhotwells for replying as it is good to know there really are eyes out there who are very ready to help out!
Editor Assistance: techno-utopianism: user Loremaster
Recently you replied to my editor assistance request and noted my RfC was already in progress. I asked for editor assistance because nobody had replied to the RfC although perhaps I was overeager in wanting a quick reply. I've just noticed I actually should have asked for a Third opinion because there are only two editors involved. What shall I do, shall I leave the RfC and also create a Third Opinion Request? Perhaps you could do the Third Opinion request for me? I am relatively new to this complex resolution aspect of Wikipedia. I feel lost. I have also logged"This" as well regarding your advice on the editor assistance page.
I should let the Rfc run its course (30 days). Perhaps no one will comment. This sort of thing may take time. Jezhotwells (talk) 14:26, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Jezhotwells. You have new messages at Ffbond's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Peter Jarrette/Artist/Author/Multi Media
Jezhotwells,
Wow. Am I having a time of it being buffeted by some of your editor peers. Never mind, they are assisting me if even in a brusque way. My subject has been listed now as a Trindadian-American artist. Jarrette is a Trindadian-British and has never held an American nationality. Can this be rectified? My subject's veracity has been called into question and by doing so his actual existence is being questioned as he has only ever worked in these fields to a high quality. I'm sorry to be back here so soon but I see some positive manipulation (thank you whomever)is underway to the article which I have re-edited after being accused of portraying Jarrette as mixing with the vilest of people as I establish him at his early time in NYC entertainment and art/fashion scene with those very names he worked with being described as drug taking parasites? All this aside, if allowed to continue on my aim to establish a page for Jarrette I'm sure I will reqiure your help less and less in days to come.
Try listening to what people are telling you, Read the guidelines and policies that you have been pointed at. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:36, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
On 19 November 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Life (book), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards' memoir Life, Richards makes unflattering claims about Mick Jagger, but adds "I love the man dearly; I'm still his mate"? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) 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.
hello
Having contributed an article some years ago i now wish to remove it.Can you pleasehelp me?
Thanks
Sid (Nazargunj (talk) 11:47, 19 November 2010 (UTC))
I suggest that you enquire at Wikipedia:Help desk. Please note that the article you contributed to is not yours and there would have to be consenus amongst editors that the article should be deleted, which is usually done on grounds of noatbility, or rather lack of it. Wikipedia:Deletion policy explains our deleteion policies. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:26, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your review. I have tried to address all of your concerns, but have a few questions. Could you please return to the article? I think that we are very close. Again, many thanks, Racepacket (talk) 14:19, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your advice. I hope that I have successfully met your concerns. Racepacket (talk) 03:49, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
I only found one more note from you about the lead. Please let me know what more I can do. Racepacket (talk) 00:19, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. It has been a pleasure working with you. Racepacket (talk) 04:00, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
RE:GAN Reviews
I am in the process of reviewing them. Candyo32 18:21, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
OK, I just wondered. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:22, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Joseph J. Romm
Is it possible to withdraw this GA nomination? I am the only editor who does any research and maintenance on the article. Please see my comment at the bottom of the GA hold comment, as well as the nominator's. Thanks. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:31, 28 November 2010 (UTC) [Update at 22:49]
Thank you!
The Reviewer's Barnstar
For your quick and thorough review of Cuisine of Madagascar, which has brought the first ever article on a people-related Madagascar topic up to the level of GA. Thanks for helping me to fill this hole in African GA articles. Lemurbaby (talk) 01:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for reviewing Flavas. I have addressed your concerns and responded at Talk:Flavas/GA1. Siawase (talk) 22:30, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much for promoting it. It was a pleasure working with you! Siawase (talk) 07:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for reviewing Doom Bar, am obviously quite pleased it made it through. As we discussed, there's a couple of areas for improvement, especially in the formation of the bar where I need to do a little more research - and I'll see if I can create an animated GIF. I'll try to get these done before the end of the year.
I was just wondering, do you think that it would be possible to get the article up to Featured standard? Have you got any tips on what would need to be done, where I should focus? Besides the formation, I've also read a little bit about some research into "underground forests" which can be found under the Doom Bar, which I might mention. Otherwise, any thoughts would be appreciated. Cheers Worm 08:56, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Perphaps best to get a peer review? And maybe get a really good copy-editors to give it the once-over. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:44, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Already submitted to peer review (feel free to comment!), and I'll have a look at the guild of copy-editors before submitting it FA. Thanks for your helpWorm 11:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
I suggest that you check out copy-editors carefully, some of them arenot really up to scratch, but being a good copy-editors is a highly skilled achievement, in my opinion. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:53, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello
Hi Jezhotwells, hope you're well. As an editor who has used the services of the Guild of Copy Editors, I thought you might be interested in knowing that the Guild is currently holding elections for its coordinators. To view the discussion and voice your opinion, please visit the election page. Thanks! – SMasters (talk) 14:59, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
A discussion has begun about whether the article Scott Davidson (guitarist), which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.
You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Drmies (talk) 05:02, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for your update. Drmies (talk) 15:33, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi. :) Articles tagged for close paraphrasing pop up at the Copyright Problems board so that we can evaluate them if they haven't been taken care of in a week. I've removed the extensive quotations from this one per WP:NFC, but since I can't read more than a few words of Spanish, I'm having some difficulty assessing this one. Any chance you can point me to a specific subpage or two of that website that are problems? Google translate may be able to help me once I get there, but I'm afraid that it isn't really helping me navigate much. :/ I can try to dig up a Spanish-speaking copyvio admin if necessary, but thought I'd see if, with your guidance, I can handle it myself first. :) --Moonriddengirl(talk) 16:18, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Sure thing: this, this and this for starters. Those are all in English. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:37, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
LOL! Well, that will make it easier! Thanks. :) --Moonriddengirl(talk) 00:19, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Whitefriars, Bristol at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:52, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Life (book) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! PM800 (talk) 02:51, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
