User talk:Jreferee

---

• Archive

Thanks

Thanks for putting the revision in after my response. --Milo H Minderbinder 15:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Gustav von Schönberg translation (From a note to YFB)

Hello Yummi,

I hope the following observation is going to be of some use. "Gericht", of course, means "law" (or "justice") and "Assessor", well, means the same thing in English. So the literal translation would be "law assessor" or "assessor of law(s)", in other words someone who would assess what civil(?) law(s) would apply to any given case as it comes to court. I don't know if "law clerk" would do, probably not. The problem here may be that there probably is no equivalent functionary in the courts of the English speaking world. The foregoing is an educated guess.

Cherio, Peter Horn 16:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Cherio again, Peter Horn 16:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Lostpedia

I've already said everything that I have to say about Lostpedia on the LostNav page. Rather than engage in a heated debate for the next several months, which degenerates into emotional and personal attacks, I'd prefer to just let my comments stand as they are. Tulane97 17:36, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I think that this issue of adding lostpedia to the template needs to go to mediation. -Blue Tie 19:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Further more, why did you change Lostpedia to being a "engaging web advertisment" for the Lost Experience??? Its a fan website and nothing to do with ABC/Channel 4/Seven Network's Lost Experience. --217.65.158.118 09:16, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

• My actions were supported by footnotes (now deleted by other users). My reasoning for whatever actions I took are on that articles talk page and in the edit summary to my posts for that page. In particular to your comment, I don't believe I took the action you mention above-- Jreferee 16:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Impossible vault

Hi Jreferee. I saw the listing you made at Wikipedia:Requested moves, and your proposal, while uncontroversial, may not be possible. Article histories aren't stored by section, but just one version after another. When you look at the history page, each of those versions is something that could move, or not. There's not really a set of versions from here that contain the history of the architectural information and not lots of other stuff that it can't be separated from. I hope I'm making sense...

If you can see a reasonable way to split off part of the history while keeping the history of what remains in the right place, I'll happily do it, but I don't see it. Perhaps it would be better to leave a note at Talk:List of architectural vaults indicating that the material for your initial version came from Vault (disambiguation), where people can find the GFDL history if they need it. The whole point of preserving histories is so that content can be traced to a particular contributor, so as long as we leave a paper trail, we're generally pretty happy.

Please let me know if I can help in any way. -GTBacchus^(talk) 07:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Smiley Award

Feel free to place this award on your user page, as a token of appreciation for your contributions. If you're willing to help spread the good cheer to others, please see the project page for the Random Smiley Award at: User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward

Edit Summaries

I've noticed a huge improvement in your use of edit summaries. Good job and keep up the good work! Cbrown1023 19:50, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Diffs

Hiya, on your post[1] at User_talk:Rebecca, could I please recommend that you include some diffs? For example, it would be helpful to add this diff [2] next to the "psychopath" comment. This assists other editors in verifying the specific incidents, and can make your comments and concerns more effective. Thanks, and let me know if you have any questions, --Elonka 23:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Munich

Hello,

You are invited to join WikiProject Munich!

There are a lot of things to do in this project. From creating new articles to finetuning articles into featured article status.

How can you help?

• You can join a Task Force.
• You can help comform Munich-related articles to Wikipedia Policy.
• You can get free Munich-related images under GNU Free Documentation License.
• You can create and edit of Munich-related articles.
• You can do translations from German Wikipedia to English Wikipedia on Munich-related articles.
• You can help do assessments of Munich-related articles.
• You can help expand articles currently in the Stub-class and Start-class.
• You can help reference articles.
• Since original research is against Wikipedia policy, you can research topics to expand. This means you don't need to know anything about Munich.
• You can help expand stubs and start-class articles and help finetune other articles into Featured article status.

A WikiProject of this nature is very broad. Munich has a rich history in sports, culture, politics along with many more topics. Feel free to help out in your area of interest.

If you want to check the project out you can click the link above. If you want to join the project, you can sign up here.

If you have any questions feel free to contact myself or any other member of the project.

Leisha Harvey

Oh, spare me the rhetoric.

I have no problem with the persondata, but the infobox was completely useless (not to mention factually incorrect in a couple of places), and virtually all of the content you added was indeed worthless - either padding that served no purpose and added nothing to the article, or original research conclusions, such as the vague claims of "her name being used as a political and legal football".

Secondly, I'm almost impressed that you bothered to go through all my archives and message everyone I've ever had a dispute with in an attempt to somehow get credence for your edits, rather than trying to write something which actually added to the article.

Finally, trying to make something out of my response to a stalker who was threatening me offline is just below the belt, and shows that you're really grasping at straws here. Rebecca 03:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

It's unsurprising to see that you overlooked all of the above before responding. The infobox served no useful purpose, and was factually wrong in numerous places, so it was removed. And yes, all four of these facts were indeed "worthless padding". The statements about Harvey's pension would have definitely been notable if they had been acted upon; the fact that someone put out a press release is not notable for Wikipedia purposes. Similarly, the fact that someone put out a press release associating a politician with a former colleague who was a convicted criminal is hardly notable - it's almost to be expected in the circumstances. It might have been notable if it had some substantial effect on the election (as with, say, the "Guilty Party" ads attacking the Victorian ALP in the 1990s), but on these facts, there is no evidence that it did. It's just including material for the sake of including it. This isn't personal - you made edits that weren't great, and they were reverted accordingly, just as I'd expect people to do if I'd made edits of this kind. You can try to make this personal as much as you like with your rather vicious comments of recent days, and attempts to drag in anyone I've ever clashed with, but I'm only interested in the quality of this article, and I'm not going to play these games. Rebecca 01:39, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Solicitation and other things

Hi Jreferee. Although you may honestly disagree with Rebecca's edits, the way in which you have attempted to dispute them is disruptive. Spamming (vide contribs) 18 different users (and at one stage an article talk page – which I've deleted) is utterly inappropriate and aggressive. Moreover, in assuming bad faith and labelling Rebecca's edit as vandalism (please see that page for a description of what that actually is), which you did in at least three places (diff, diff, diff), you have failed Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Please be more aware of these policies when involved in future content disputes. Also, an apology to Rebecca for misrepresenting (diff, diff) an edit summary which related to an obviously distressing (and completely different) issue, wouldn't go astray. Thanks, --cj | talk 01:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• Cj - Your conclusion above that my 22:11, 22 November 2006 post to Rebecca violated Wikipedia's Spam guideline, assume good faith policy, and no personal attacks policy, as well as misrepresented administrator and former arbitrator Rebecca's "Actually, fuck this, I won't be intimidated by a psychopath" edit summary.
  Appropriateness of Your Post. Your post on my talk page gives the impression that it is from an unbiased, neutral administrator. However, you and Rebecca appear to have a close friendship and shared political beliefs about Australian politics, something you did not disclose in your post on my talk page. Rebecca is the third user listed on your user page [3], you and Rebecca were the fifth and sixth editors [4] to be added to WikiProject Football (soccer) in Australia. Within 24 hours of Rebecca's post to Newhoggy, you also posted to Newhoggy's talk page [5]. You are familiar with administrator (sysop) Rebecca enough to refer to her as Bec. You joined the WikiProject Australian history 24 hours after Rebecca joined.[6] You and Rebecca sided on numerous resolutions together regarding WikiProject Australian politics. Both you and Rebecca apparently share the same Australian political views [7] [8] and corroborated together on the same Australian political articles. [9] Your post on my talk page originated with Rebecca's conduct [10] in an article about Australian politician Leisha Harvey. In addition to not disclosing your close friendship to and shared political beliefs with Rebecca as part of your post on my talk page, you made a permanent record of your administrative Wikipedia violation conclusions without first soliciting my input.
  Validity of Your Conclusions.
  (i) Wikipedia's Spam guideline. To reach your conclusion that I violated Wikipedia's Spam guideline, you apparently needed to mischaracterized my 22:11, 22 November 2006 post (vide contribs) as a content dispute. After editors Seraphimblade and Elonka, I was the third editor within a day and a half both to become concerned about Rebecca's conduct on Wikipedia and make such as post on her talk page under an existing thread called Concerns. I was the twenty-first editor within a few months to both become concerned about Rebecca's conduct on Wikipedia and make such as post on her talk page. Rebecca's conduct had previously affected the 18 editors who took time away from their writing to post their concerns on Rebecca's talk page. [11][12] Prior to my 22:11, 22 November 2006 post, Seraphimblade and Elonka had made the posted concerns of these 18 editors the subject of the Concerns thread and made many of their Rebecca talk page posts the subject of the Concerns thread. My alerting these 18 editors about the Concerns thread did not violated Wikipedia's Spam guideline.
  (ii) Vandalism, Assume good faith policy, No personal attacks Rebecca indiscriminately deleted my numerous changes to the Australian politician Leisha Harvey's article. The reasons for the removal of each content item was not readily apparent by examination of the content itself. Further, her sole justification for her intentional removal of legitimate content was a frivolous explanation in her edit summary.[13] Rebecca indiscriminately deleted my numerous changes to the politician Leisha Harvey's article and left an impression that my edits were low, despicable by labeling my edits as worthless. My statements (diff, diff, diff) addressed the actions of Rebecca. Rebecca's actions constituted Vandalism. I did not violate Wikipedia assume good faith policy. My vandalism comments (diff, diff, diff) were not a personal attack. A review of comments on Rebecca's Wikipedia conduct prior to my 22:11, 22 November 2006 post, including [14] and [15], bolsters these conclusions.
  (iii) Misrepresentation The representation in my posts regarding administrator-and-former-arbitrator Rebecca's July 19, 2006 edit summary -- Actually, fuck this, I won't be intimidated by a psychopath (diff, diff) -- was based on the text of that post July 19, 2006 edit summary. Your expectation that I should have represented her July 19, 2006 edit summary in the context that she identified on 23 November 2006 - five hours [16] after I posted my 22 November 2006 post - is not reasonable.

--Jreferee 01:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Apologies for my very belated reply.

I'm afraid your comment to me demonstrates, at best, a propensity to assume the worst in other people. Among your myriad accusations against me, the most perplexing was: "you made a permanent record of your administrative Wikipedia violation conclusions (sic) without first soliciting my input." I haven’t a clue what this is supposed to mean.

You appear to assume that my message to you was done with my administrator hat on; it was not. One doesn't need be an administrator to caution another user against behaving contrary to policy. Indeed, my status as a sysop is completely irrelevant here.

Furthermore, my editing relationship with Rebecca is entirely beside the point. Your diversion to this is an example of circumstantial ad hominem, and I won’t respond to it other than to say that it’s both baseless and offensive.

With that in mind, I’ll get to the actual issue. You claim that your posting to Rebecca was not a content dispute, and that it was mischaracterisation to say otherwise. I disagree. Your grievance concerned an edit war at Leisha Harvey; that you chose to break with wikiquette and make comment on the contributor, instead of just the content, does not change this. In any event, the nature of the dispute does not change the fact that you failed to follow Wikipedia:Spam by soliciting 18 editors you knew to hold gripes against Rebecca. This was blatant canvassing, and rather like rousing a lynch mob; in other words, it was disruptive, and not the correct way to resolve a dispute. To quote the guideline: "Wikipedia editors are therefore not to engage in aggressive cross-posting in order to influence discussions".

Now, to the dispute itself. From Wikipedia:Vandalism: "Vandalism is any addition, deletion, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." Rebecca’s reversion of your changes was clearly not this, so you had no reason ascribe malice and thus make a personal attack when you labelled her edit "vandalism" in the summary of your subsequent reversion. Instead, you should have challenged her revert and explained your changes on the article’s discussion page.

To the final qualm. My point was you should never have misused the quote in the first place; it was inappropriate for you to attempt to use an unrelated happenstance to further your complaint, especially when you were not even privy to it. Regardless, my call for an apology was not based on the circumstances of the misrepresentation, but for the misrepresentation itself. Whether you care to do so or not is not something I intend to push. Thanks, --cj | talk 19:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Re:Nice article

Thank you for the comment left on the talk page of the David M. Gonzales article.

One of the interesting things that I found while writing this article is the fact that according to the news release, Congressman Breman took all of the credit for correcting the mistakes of the subjects photos and decorations, while it was his aide Flores the one who really did all the work. Cheers! Tony the Marine 16:45, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• You're right about the image. I've taken care of it. Tony the Marine 17:33, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:50Chaudhary.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:50Chaudhary.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Chowbok ☠ 06:47, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Did you know

On 25 November, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Isaac Newton Van Nuys, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 07:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Re: David M. Gonzales (Images)

Looks good to me. Cheers Tony the Marine 03:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

• What I did is eliminated one photo (too many of the same) and used one in an infobox that I created to compare it with the mistaken photo that the Pentagon used. It's been good interacting with you. Cheers! Tony the Marine 16:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the help!

Much apprecaited. Just be careful about overdoing it with the images, I'm trying to bring these to featured status, and if there's too many fair use images with shaky rationales (like with the DVD cover), they're going to complain. Also, the did you know entries don't allow fair use images, so don't add those. Keep up the good work! --badlydrawnjeff talk 03:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Mansfield Cut Underwater Archeological District

I wanted to thank you for your assistance on this article. This is the first article that I've created that I thought was interesting enough for DYK. I had trouble sleeping last night because I thought it was too stubby and it was wonderful to find someone else working on it this morning, especially with the addition of that great map and additional reference documents. ~ BigrTex 18:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Did you know

On 1 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Crossair Flight LX498, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Since you did the bulk of the work destubbing, I'm counting you as the creator of the article :) --GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 12:35, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

On December 5, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article David Jack Holt, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your many contributions! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Photo needed

I'm not super mobile at the moment as I don't have a car. I'm also in the middle of an end of semester struggle in school and will be going home at the end of the semester. The short of it is that I don't think I'll have time to get down to Springfield anytime soon. You might try asking Minh Nguyễn, who's also listed as an Ohio photographer. Minh goes to Stanford, but will be probably be going home to Loveland, Ohio for winter break. Loveland is a few counties closer to Springfield than Oberlin, so he's probably a safer bet.14:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Hurriquake

I support a name change for the article on HurriQuake! I added alot of content to it, however did not create it. Thanks for bringing that up on the talk page of the article. Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 00:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Recent article creation

A tag has been placed on List of famous bearded people, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article is a repost of either already posted material, or of material that was previously deleted under Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion. If you can indicate how List of famous bearded people is different from all other articles, or if you can indicate why this article should not be deleted, I advise you to place the template {{hangon}}, and also put a note on Talk:List of famous bearded people saying why this article should stay. An admin should check for such edits before deleting the article. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 4 under General criteria. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. We welcome your help in trying to improve Wikipedia, and we ask you to follow these instructions.

Note that the original AfD was for List of bearded people. And sorry for the generic rubberstamp warning. Amarkov ^blah_edits 01:28, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

I began this article almost on a whim to eliminate a red link on another I'm writing. While I remembered Gen. Thyng from my years in the AF, it was mostly negative in light of the 66 elections. The more I probed, the more I found, but I am the first to admit that the re-organization, images and other help rendered by you made this a very nice article. Thanx very much. --Buckboard 06:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Zanta

Note that Zanta has been restored, and place on AfD for a proper deletion debate. -- Zanimum 14:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

DON'T

Dont' use m:OTRS templates as you did on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Zanta_April_2005.JPG , in order to get permission, ask the copyright holder email to permissions@wikimedia.org with the license and the image name, and then someone WITH access to m:OTRSwill come along and tag it. -- Drini 05:40, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

SNAP

multiple recreation by orchestrated BLP-violating troll army out of baltimore. check out this edit summary from twice-recreator of that article. Why? - crz crztalk 15:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

SNAP is a fine subject if notable. Wanna write it? I'll be happy to unprotect. - crz crztalk 16:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Beards

I fear you are getting your hopes up if you think that won't be deleted as it stands. There seems to be a pretty clear consensus to delete on the grounds that it is unmaintainable and unencyclopedic. I won't close it myself, but I'd be surprised if it didn't either get deleted from the AfD or go to DRV and get deleted later. I don't really know what to suggest - this is one of those articles that slips between the cracks of policy, it might get a mass of keeps one week and mass of deletes the next depending who hits the page and what their current mood is. Cheers, Yomangani^talk 17:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

WP:NOT and WP:OR are relevant here, but you've already argued against these applying. Since they are open to interpretation the admin should close on consensus. "Unmaintainable" is usually accompanied by a suggestion that the list should be handled by a category but I haven't seen that suggested here. Maybe some reference to WP:LIST would help you. Yomangani^talk 22:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Issue regarding Avenged Sevenfold

Hey,

Thanks for the message on my talk page.

I thought it might be a goo idea to contact you about this page: Untitled Fourth Avenged Sevenfold Album

Is it really necessary? According to the Wikipedia Policy, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and seeing as it is to be released in October next year and not even its title are confirmed, it's a waste of an article at the moment, isn't it?

I'm not sure if users like me can apply a page for deletion, but if you could or contact an Administrator if you find the page ot be superfluous, I'd be grateful.

Musikxpert 04:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Topics in LAHCM (city)

Awesome! I'll link it up to the right spots at some point. You done good. jengod 02:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

List of colleges and universities in California

I do apologize for calling your addition spam. That was inappropriate, and it was the result of my making an assumption without paying attention to the link (the college and university lists frequently get hit by spam, and I just assumed that was what your edit was). Anyway, I don't think that the purpose of your edit was very clear. All of the U.S. college and university lists are being revamped (albeit very slowly) to a more consistent format. It is subject to change (just like everything else on Wikipedia), but I didn't have any context to understand your edit. The current structure organizes institutions by their type (private or public; two-year, four-year, or graduate). What exactly is the inaccuracy that you are addressing? As for liability, I am not a lawyer, so you will have to take that to the appropriate people if that really is a concern of yours. —Cswrye 21:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

That organization system makes sense, and it's very objective. I was never very fond of the names of the "two-year" and "four-year" categories myself, but I didn't know of any good alternative names. There's nothing saying that we have to use California's system of classification though, and personally, I'd rather use a more generic organization system that could apply to all colleges and universities in the U.S. (and, ideally, the world, but that might be hoping for too much). If you want to implement the BPPVE system though, go ahead. I won't jump the gun and revert it like I erroneously did before. —Cswrye 18:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Australian ufology

Please help to prune the cruft and original research from this article, it badly needs a scythe taken to it. Thanks, Guy (Help!) 16:42, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Pacific Western University

Wow! That is a really great job! Is it OK for other editors to make a few additions/changes on that scratch page, or would you prefer to discuss it as is? My concern is that once it is live on the article page, it will not be editable until it is unprotected. Some of the proposed changes I have are minor (splitting the intro into two paragraphs), but others are a little more complex, like sourcing the many institution names. There are a few other things we could source, too, but I am really impressed with the amount of work done on it! Jokestress 19:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppet? Is there nothing you'd stoop to for white washing this NOT ACCREDITED place? The alumni you listed is pitiful. FFGGGFFFF 20:47, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

2006 Kolkata leather factory fire

Hi, You made a start a little while ago on converting the citations to references. I've just completed the job (in fact I stopped you with an inuse tag because I wanted to learn), but there's one pretty obvious problem. However, I don't know how to fix it. Perhaps you could take a look, and finish off the job? Please? Thanks! Blood red sandman 23:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I thought i'd probably done something stupid like that - but hey, I'm on a high right now because I've finaly got my head round the reference system. Thanks for fixing that! Blood red sandman 23:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Bio templates

On articles like Mike grunerud, maybe you might want to wait a bit before creating Talk pages with the bio template? I mean, when the article consists of "So-and-so is a 14-year-old that nobody's ever heard of," the article's not likely to be around long, and adding the Talk page is one more page an admin has to delete. Just a thought. Fan-1967 18:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I checked my contribution list and it does not indicate that I made any posts on Mike grunerud or Talk:Mike_grunerud. Also, I thought that the talk page and history pages were deleted with the article page is deleted and didn't realize that I was creating extra work. I'll delay tagging the talk page to give the article page a chance to first be tagged with a speedy delete. Also, I'll skip those tagged with a speedy delete where further directions on the article talk page probably won't result in saving the article. -- Jreferee 18:36, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

You can't see your contribution because I've already deleted it. I deleted four or five of these talk pages. I also moved one, as you tagged a talk page for an uncapitalized name and it didn't get moved to the proper title with the main article. It's great that you're doing this, but slow down a bit and make sure that the article's gonna last more than a few minutes.  ;) -- Merope 18:50, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

By adding Bio templates, I am hoping to reduce the number of AfDs by giving these new editors help sources that are particular to their article. It looks like I can offset the New page list. I could delay my Bio template tags by putting the offset= to whatever number you think would avoid the present problems, e.g., 50, 100, 150. I'm not sure how long speedy delete articles last. If I only tagged the articles that appear on New pages 51-100, would that solve the problem? -- Jreferee 19:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

We-ell, in my opinion, the best solution would be to read each article and determine whether it meets a speedy deletion criteria. Some of the ones you tagged were pretty obviously SD material. I don't really want to endorse any course of action that doesn't involve reading the articles before tagging. -- Merope 19:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Each of my bio tags require that I determine whether the person is living or dead and which work group(s), if any, might be relevant to what is discussed in the article. Obviously, I read the article to get that information. Apparently, there already is a schedule of people working the new articles to tag those that need SD tagging. I do not want my actions to interfere with that process as in the incidents you already identified. You are right in that some SD material might get passed the initial SD taggers. Also, there are some SD tagged articles that might be saved by placing bio tags on the talk page and yes I will make learning mistakes. It looks like an offset of 50 articles gives the SD tagging crew enough time to make their SD determination and to act on it. If additional kinks crop up, please feel free to contact me to work it out. -- Jreferee 19:24, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Topics in L.A. history

Just wanted to let you know that I linked up User:Jengod/Topics in LAHCM (city) at the top of Category:History of Los Angeles and I'm working on putting it elsewhere. Thanks again. Great work. jengod 08:24, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On 22 December, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bimbo Boy, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Yomangani^talk 15:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:DoSscreenshot.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:DoSscreenshot.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BigDT 21:05, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:WKCMAWayfinding.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:WKCMAWayfinding.jpg. However, Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation.

—Angr 08:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:WKCMAWayfinding.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WKCMAWayfinding.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 08:40, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Approved for AWB!

Thank you for your recent application to use AutoWikiBrowser. I have approved your request and you should now be able to use the AWB application. Be sure to check every edit before you save it, and don't forget to check out the AWB Guide. You can get any help you need over on the AWB talk page. Feel free to contact me with any questions, alphachimp 19:28, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Namus

Sorry, I'm not actually using a tool. "Namus" just came up on my watchlist, and I saw the new disambiguation page needed to be formatted per the Manual of Style.--Cúchullain ^t/c 19:27, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 30 December, 2006, a fact from the article Star Wars: Storm in the Glass, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Virgin Unite, was selected for DYK!

On December 31, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Virgin Unite, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 02:34, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Tireless Contributor Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		You definitely deserve this, Jreferee. You've been with the project for less than three months, but you have already earned a reputation as a hard-working and dedicated article writer and contributor. Thanks for all your hard work. Nishkid64 20:53, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

You deserved it, buddy. Keep up the great work. =) Nishkid64 00:39, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

List of Mutants and Cyborgs In The Virtual Dungeon Vandalism

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the work of others. Thank you. --209.158.19.218 06:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Tacit Software AfD

Jreferee, thank you for your constructive comments and help on this AfD. I have made some changes to the Tacit Software article per your comments and have answered your questions on the AfD discussion itself. I'd very much appreciate any additional thoughts you may have. --Cbyeh 05:35, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Jreferee, thanks again for your comments. I have made some additional changes per your thoughts. Thanks for pushing me to make this a better article. --Cbyeh 03:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The road to hell

Erm. I think the idea is that we are all on the same road, whether we realise it or not. Grace Note 04:53, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

DYK!

On January 10, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Fjuckby, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Nishkid64 15:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I added a pronunciation based on the IPA. Is it close? Mak (talk) 18:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know why the {{audio}} template doesn't have the play in browser option, but maybe with this one you will be able to hear it. Mak (talk) 19:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

According to the IPA it's closer to what I did than Fuck-by is. Have you heard it said by a native speaker? Just curious. Mak (talk) 19:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Nuyorican Poets Cafe

Hi - it would be helpful if when you created new articles that you made sure all content was transferred, including photographs, or else the article is diminished. --DavidShankBone 21:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• I was unaware that there was a photograph of the cafe. Thank you so much for adding it to the article! -- Jreferee 21:47, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

That's odd - it was on the old article when I checked only a month ago, and it's also founded on many other Nuyorican pages. Must just be one of those things... Thanks. --DavidShankBone 21:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Macarthurj.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Macarthurj.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Template_talk:Infobox_Biography

I think the image size works fine, I used it multiple times. Are you sure you enter the right info? I think you are supposed to enter 100px instead of just 100. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Offer of help

Thanks for the offer of collaboration. Maybe you can add your opinion to the Joyce Kilmer talk page. We were debating whether his siblings deserve a one sentence mention. The deleter says there is no place for that information in the article. A third opinion, or fourth would be very welcome. It's just one line in a full page biography, but the deleter is very determined. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 05:28, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Images

Hey! I'm afraid Matthew may have exaggerated my expertise, but I'd be happy to help in any way that I can. Let me know exactly what it is you're trying to do - just tagging images? adding them? placing them? Leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Verloren Hoop 22:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Great! There are a few issues with image copyright tags that need to be cleared up, because they've just been changed recently. Certainly any questions you have are welcome. Verloren Hoop 17:40, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

1 - Art tags 2 - Publicity photos The best way to keep track of issues is on the image tags talk page. Verloren Hoop 03:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Your offer of help

Thank you for offering to help (re: your comments on my talk page). I'll keep that in mind. —ExplorerCDT 03:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Joyce Kilmer

On Talk:Joyce Kilmer, couldn't we have just have had one section entitled "bringing this article up to FA status" instead of cluttering up the talk page with one section for each criteria. Most of the criteria, IMHO, are already met and likely won't be discussed at all. Could you please condense all that clutter under one section header, please? —ExplorerCDT 18:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I've also restored some of the recent, continuing discussions that shouldn't have been archived. I don't mind the more acrimonious stuff, but there were discussions abotu protection (which should not be archived until the protection is over), and references, and the status of the name "Sister Michael" for Kilmer's daughter that still might need to be fleshed out. I've restored them to the talk page and deleted them from the archive. —ExplorerCDT 18:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll leave the headers up, for now. It would be wrong to remove them before the discussion starts. If the discussion starts, gets underway, and no one doubts that the article is well-written, compelling even brilliant, for example, certain unused headers will likely be removed in order to focus the discussion on points actually being discussed. —ExplorerCDT 19:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

DYK!

On 17 January, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nuyorican Poets Cafe, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Savidan 01:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Sheila Gallagher, was selected for DYK!

On January 17, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sheila Gallagher, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 21:17, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD Bot

Hi Dan - I've always thought that there should be a notification bot that informs contributors to an article when that article is up for deletion or is in deletion review. I ran across your PocKleanBot and now think such an AfD bot is possible. What do you think? (If the AfD Bot has already been suggested, please point me to the discussion.) Thanks. -- Jreferee 18:04, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

• Such a bot is unfortunately unlikely to get approval since the bot approval group seem to consider bot-generated user-page messages as "spam" regardless of how well-intentioned they are. Both PockKleanBot and DeleteAsstBot (which aimed to help with the afd process) had to be pulled after failing aproval. - PocklingtonDan 08:03, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

• I agree with you that the deletion process could be more automated. Bot-generated user-page AfD and Deletion Review talk page messages would not be spam since each process permits notification talk page messages. For example, per how to list pages for deletion, it is generally considered civil to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the article that you are nominating the article. Also, step 3 of the steps to list a new deletion review requires that the poster inform the administrator who deleted the page by adding {{subst:DRVNote|PAGE_NAME}} on their user talk page. If you were to develop a DelNotifBot that implemented the allowed AfD and DR talk page notifications, I would be more than willing to work with you to get it approved. Once DelNotifBot is approved, it may be easier to get approval for new features to that approved bot to increase the automation of the deletion process.-- Jreferee 16:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Wild beasts

Many thanks for sorting out the above page that started. It was my first ever edit back in October and I only added details so they would pass WP:MUSIC in order to get it relisted. I was going to do the cleaning up after it had been accepted back - but you've now done it for me!!! Just out of interest, how did you get all the info? Thanks again RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 20:05, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• Hi Ryan - I added the info from the reference and then footnoted the info using the reference (some of which were already in the article and some found via Google). Also, if the added details to pass WP:MUSIC to get the article relisted were the ones I placed a "citation needed" next to, the article would be improved with a citation to the information on the internet. I'm glad I put effort into saving your first Wikipedia efforts, especially on behalf of a fellow member of Wikipedia Class of October 2006. -- Jreferee 21:00, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• Well lets just say you did a better job on it than I would have. I've been a bit side tracked lately doing new page patrol and vandilism reversion so I guess I havn't had chance to learn all the tricks of the trade when it comes to actually creating quality articles. I set myself a little challenge now today though, get the Kendal page up to featured article status. I've created a subpage (Kendal/featured article) an I'm going to do all the work their then move it onto the main article so the article isn't messed up as I'm changing it. Might have to ask you to have a look at it when its near completion if thats ok? (It's in its very early stages at the minute) You seam to know the business! Thanks again for the Wild beasts RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 21:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

• I don't know whether you looked at What Links Here, but you can find more information to add to the Kendal article from this link. -- Jreferee 22:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

Cheers for all the help with Kendal and the wild beasts, would never have thought to look at the what links here page. Hope this helps................

		The Original Barnstar
		This is for all your help in improving articles and always looking out to help other editors RyanPostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 22:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning, as well as for your kind comments accompanying your !vote. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 20:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Courtesy notice

I've left you a reply to your question on my talk page. I really like to keep conversations threaded, per the note at the top of my talk. If you really want replies left here, let us move the entire conversation here, leaving a refactor notice there pointing here... I'll watch and do my best to answer in a timely fashion. That's not my preference though if I can help it. ++Lar: t/c 20:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Ping! Answered your answer. I don't do this for just anyone :) ++Lar: t/c 20:41, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Main page

I read your comments on Lar's talk page. FYI, no administrators are "in charge" of the main page. Its precise design was determined via months of nightmarish debate and ratified by an 18-day poll/discussion with over 900 participants. —David Levy 01:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. That is the information the AFMP project needs. The many AFMP 2006 and AFMP 2007 suggestions to alter the main page fixed text came from a lack of understanding of what it would take to implement such a suggestion. If we just list a rule that main page fixed text will not be changed as part of the AFMP project, editors will still suggest such changes. If we also add to the project a description of what it takes to change fixed page maintext with a link to the discussion you mention, I think it will reduce the number of such suggestions in future projects (AFMP 2008, AFMP 2009, etc.). Since you seem to know more about this issue than others on the project, it would be great if you would add the description to the project. Thanks. -- Jreferee 02:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

WikiGnome award

Hi Corpx- You recently opposed my WikiGnome personal user award proposal because it does not really resemble a barnstar. I placed additional comments on the proposal page here that I would appreciate your reviewing in hopes that you would change your position. Also, I am open to suggestions as to how I can make the award more look like existing personal user awards. Thanks. -- Jreferee 20:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Bleh, I withdrew my comment. As somebody else indicated on my page earlier, I'm probably not really qualified to issue judgements. Corpx 00:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Sheila Gallagher

Thanks for improving my stub of an article. And nominating my photograph. I took a walk along the river from my hostel near St Pauls and on returning after crossing the Millenium Footbridge, I was struck by the charm of a lollipop lady against the grand mass of St Pauls. I spoke to her briefly and was charmed by her. She mentioned that she had an OBE, so when I returned home to Canberra, I did a little research and came up with an article. What a lovely lady and colourful character she is! I'm hoping to see her again this year, and I'll certainly be giving her a printout of the article. --Jumbo 03:11, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Blass

I would like to edit it so it has a better NPOV, but I will do so only with your permission. What c. should I edit? (Besides other qys I raised just now on delrev, who are these notable students? that usu. means students who have gone on to further brilliant careers as a result of ones teaching, not people whom one happens to have had in class. BTW, did you ever find any publications in math?DGG 01:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I changed the infobox to better reflect what is in the article. The information I found is reflected in the article and I did not find any publications in math in the general areas where I looked (e.g., newspapers). From this, I believe that information about Blass' math efforts have not made its way to the general public. I am not qualified to review math journals and determine whether that information may be added to (or kept out of) the article, so I did not review math journals. The article now is open for anyone to edit, so please feel free to do so. -- Jreferee 15:20, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Piotr Blass (Second nomination)

I moved it to the articlespace, as the article was desalted per the common concensus on DRV. I also relisted it at AfD per the same concensus. I would just like to congratulate you on producing a well-referenced and well-written article. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 07:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

AfD Nomination: Piotr Blass

An editor has nominated the article Piotr Blass for deletion, under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the nomination (also see What Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on why the topic of the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome: participate in the discussion by editing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piotr Blass (third nomination). Add four tildes like this ~~~~ to sign your comments. You can also edit the article Piotr Blass during the discussion, but do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top of the article), this will not end the deletion debate. Jayden54Bot 15:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

He was kinda already aware of that, but meh... Daniel.Bryant 19:33, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Asher Mutsengi

Hi, I noticed you commented on Africa Festival's user page concerning this page as well. I nominated the page for AfD and he continued to blank the page after I did this. I checked back now and it was deleted. Any clue on why this happened?--Thomas.macmillan 19:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

The article was Speedy delete g7 (Unremarkable people, groups, companies and web content). After reviewing the g7 criteria, it looks like the speedy delete was correct. -- Jreferee 15:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I realized this after finding the AfD discussion.--Thomas.macmillan 15:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Help with GA

Will you help me go through a GA review with Raoul Wallenberg? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 01:09, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

It might be too soon for a GA review since it looks like a peer review is pending. In my view, each sentence should have a footnote (expect those in the lead section). Otherwise, how is a reviewing editor supposed to know where the information came from to be able to verify that information? The copyright material in the article footnotes needs to be delted. The footnotes in the article need to be revised to be proper footnotes. I revised footnote 5 to give you an example of what I mean. Also, if you haven't done so, you may want to go through each of these links looking for material to add to the article. This should give you a start. Once you addressed all the peer review statements, then the article may be ready for GA review. -- Jreferee 16:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:SSSN DVD Cover.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:SSSN DVD Cover.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 00:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Image:SSSN DVD Cover.jpg is a duplicate image of Image:Sheshouldasaidno.jpg, uploaded two days earlier on November 27, 2006. Please delete Image:SSSN DVD Cover.jpg.-- Jreferee 16:28, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Harry McNish

In case you are interested, this article, which you found some useful sources for back when it was a wee stub, just became a featured article. Thanks for your help. Cheers, Yomangani^talk 12:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The guy whose cat had more notoriety than he did? I am impressed by your hard efforts and those others who contributed to bring McNish up to a featured article. To me, this is Wikipedia at its best - presenting quality information to the world on an encyclopedic topic that otherwise would remain known by a few. Congratulations and I do appreciate your notifying me of the article's featured status. -- Jreferee 15:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

WPBiography project tagging

I came across STTWBot while {{WPBiography}} project tagging articles listed at DYK. Is it possible to modify STTWBot to assist me in tagging biography article talk pages with {{WPBiography}}? Thanks. -- Jreferee 16:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

My bot currently has approval for tagging WikiProject France and WikiProject Germany only. Any change has to be approved at Wikipedia:Bot requests first. So when if you can wait then I could request for an approval and help you out, should take perhaps a week or so. STTW (talk) 16:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

In my WPBiography tagging, I review the article for living, groups, etc, and then paste and then edit the following text according to my review of the article:{{WPBiography |living = yes no |class = |needs-infobox = yes |activepol = yes |a&e-work-group = yes |politician-work-group = yes |military-work-group = yes |sports-work-group = yes |s&a-work-group = yes |musician-work-group = yes |listas = |needs-photo = yes }} This string of text contains the most used WPBiography text and is useful for most articles. This may help you in configuring the bot. It would be nice to work with you on modifying the bot so I can get an idea of how bots are put together. -- Jreferee 17:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Banjee (copied from here)

I was told by House of Scandal that he is the author of the photo and the model gave permission. Note the face is largely obscured. Admins involved with DYK are aware this photo is being used and none have objected. Please assume good faith. Thanks! Shaundakulbara 18:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

The images in Banjee are potentially libelous to the persons in the images since the images appear to be of living people and the persons in the image are associated with being thuggish men who have sex with men. Since article does not include Wikipedia reliable sources to support such an association, I do not believe that the images meet the requirements of WP:BLP. I deleted the images because WP:BLP requires quick deletion under such circumstances. -- Jreferee 19:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

You are working with the assumption that having man/man sex or dressing in a certain way is a bad thing. If the article was about straight men who dressed a certain way would THAT be a problem? The subjects of the photos can't be identified from these pics anyway. There is no problem here. Please, please let it go. Shaundakulbara 19:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:DoSscreenshot.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:DoSscreenshot.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 08:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

BLP/DRV/AFD/ArbComm Mess

You seem to be quite active in Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. Please look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Fraser University 1997 harassment controversy, and at least the most recent DRV, and decide whether to mention the AFD on the noticeboard or it's talk page or not. If the AFD results in a keep closure, then I would like some of the BLP regulars to put the new article on their BLP watchlists, given the history and the BLP driven ArbComm remedy that the article is subject to. GRBerry 20:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Did you know?

On 4 February, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Disco D, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 23:30, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Marsden

This page has had a troubled history. You may wish to read this: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Rachel Marsden/Evidence. CJCurrie 03:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Biography of living persons adminship

"Biography of Living Persons Administrators ("BLP Admins") carry out a specialized, narrowly tailored administrative role within Wikipedia." Please see WP:BLPADMIN to offer your thoughts on this proposal. CyberAnth 03:44, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Joyce Kilmer

They removed the protection on the Joyce Kilmer article. As I'm busy this week with funeral stuff and other obligations, can you keep an eye on it to make sure Alansohn and Richard Arthur Norton don't start fucking it up again. If they do, please ask for it to be protected until the issue is resolved. —ExplorerCDT 10:43, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Web traffic

Hi Jref. Thanks for your comments at the Adam4Adam AfD Debate. I can see your comments are well-thought out and even required a little research. I appreciate that sort of effort very much even if it leads you to a different conclusion than my own. Would you please tell me what resource you used to determine the amount of web traffic? That seems like a resource it would be helpful to have at my disposal now and in the future. Thanks. House of Scandal 16:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

• I see now by its mention in the article that it was Hitwise. Thanks much. House of Scandal 17:19, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Thank you very much for adding the company info box. I made a correction in the intro as "A4A Network Inc." is current business name not frmer operations name and is already discussed in the text. I am glad the substance of the article has improved enough to sway your opinion in the AFD debate. Best wishes.--House of Scandal 06:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Permissions email

First of all, I want to apologise for the delay you experienced. We're quite backlogged. I'm not sure that's the reason nothing happened, however. I've looked over the email you forwarded to us quite carefully, and I am unable to find the actual release statement in it. Did your email client perhaps trim it out of the email due to the length? Am I missing it somewhere in the midst of the text? Would it be helpful for me to send you back what you sent us? Jkelly 18:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

No need to apologize, but I appreciate it. At the top of the email, the email client wrote "Below is a summary of your request and our response." In their response at the bottom of the email, the requested Permissions were granted. (Category Level 1: Rights and Permissions; Category Level 2: Permissions) -- Jreferee 18:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I saw that, but that's not really a binding licensing statement... it looks more like their email-sorting queue to me. You never got a further response from them? I'm afraid that we really need something more authoritative than that, since we wouldn't know who to attribute the copyright to, a requirement of the GFDL. Jkelly 18:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I'll contact them again. -- Jreferee 20:44, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that it didn't work out. Let me know if there's anything else I can do. Jkelly 00:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Your note

Thank you Jreferee for your help and effort in this matter - it is very much appreciated. Crum375 20:41, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Make Way for Ducklings

I started that 25 months ago, eh? *sniff* It's so hard to see the little ones grow up and go out on their own ... (although if you check the history from last year, you'll find that I tried and failed to slash out large parts of the article! Perhaps it's just as well I didn't succeed) - DavidWBrooks 20:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Please reasd talk page

Jreferee, if you plan to edit the Afshar experiment article, please read the talk page and refrain from making changes. I am currently mediating a conflict in this article. Thank you! Sdirrim 17:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I removed most of the references to living person Afshar in the article to resolve a request about the article on the BLPN page. Please feel free to revert any of my changes should that aid your mediation. -- Jreferee 17:51, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:SSSNPoster.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:SSSNPoster.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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 20:27, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Template:Did you know/Next update

I saw you made some good improvements to the wording on T:DYK/N... when changeing wording there, don't forget to change the wording at Template:Did you know/Next update/Clear as well, because that's used to refresh, so your changes would be lost (if not done there) at the next time ../clear was used to refresh. I wonder if that tip needs to be saved somewhere :) ++Lar: t/c 21:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Lar. I added the DYK next update clear to the list at Wikipedia:Did_you_know#DYK. I'm not exactly sure how/when the DYK next update clear page is used to refresh the DYK next update page. Would you mind providing more detail about the DYK next update clear page on the Wikipedia:Did you know page. Thanks. -- Jreferee 19:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

AB Row

Your work to the article is brilliant. I thank you for expanding it so far and added all the references you did. Plus, I must thank you once again for pulling your finger out and contacted Carl Chinn. Whether he does edit the article, we'll have to wait and see, but I certainly do hope he does. Great work, lets just hope the AfD is resolved. - Erebus555 19:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. As of June 2005, the original boundary stone marking the border of Aston and Birmingham was located in the reception area of Gabriels per footnote 1 of the article. Is it possible that you can go there and get a photo of the stone for the article? -- Jreferee 20:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Sure but I cannot say when I can go due to things I've got going on here. - Erebus555 20:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Helping out with the Unassessed Wikipedia Biographies

Seeing that you are an active member of the WikiBiography Project, I was wondering if you would help lend a hand in helping us clear out the amount of unassessed articles tagged with {{WPBiography}}. Many of them are of stub and start class, but a few are of B or A caliber. Getting a simple assessment rating can help us start moving many of these biographies to a higher quality article. Thank you! --Ozgod 20:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Are these unassessed articles listed some place? Thanks. -- Jreferee 21:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they are located here. Most of them are simply of the stub or start class and contain an unfinished WPBIO box. I have personally have been devoting myself to clearing out this list, but if you could assess between 20-30 articles a day it would help greatly. I would love if you could cover 200 a day, but that is asking a lot. Thank you in advance for helping out in whatever way you can. --Ozgod 21:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

To assess the article, do I need to fill out the class parameter and the priority parameter or just the class parameter? -- Jreferee 21:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to jump in the middle of a discussion, but you only need to fill in the class parameter. Prioritizing has been halted for now, and the only ones prioritized are those identified as Core biographies. Mocko13 21:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest just filling out the class parameter - priority can be determined later. If you can as well, fill out the |living, |needs-infobox= and |needs-photo= as well since have those tagged will help move it along to the class. I would suggest copying and pasting the template I posted here so you can simply copy and paste and quickly fill in the necessary class and other info. Thanks again! --Ozgod 21:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I placed more detailed instructions on how to assess biography articles here. -- Jreferee 21:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Brilliant - thank you for doing that! I modified the table so the fields are clear so it is an easier copy/paste, but explained that most fields (with the exception of class and listas) are yes and no responses. If it is more confusing, just do an RV on what I changed. Again, thank you! --Ozgod 22:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you do not put "no" for most of the parameters. Except for the living parameter, you delete the parameter with the answer is no. Please read the instructions I provided, follow them, and let me know whether there is any confusion. Thanks. -- Jreferee 22:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Totally fine, I did not know if clearing up the template would make it easier for users to copy and paste and then fill in the answers. --Ozgod 23:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for dedicating so much time and effort to this - your contributions are invaluable. Here is to hoping we can clean out that enormous backlog by December of this year. --Ozgod 05:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject Biography awards

Honestly, I'd probably keep it at 1000. Barnstars are meant to be hard to get, and 1000 isn't that hard to obtain really. Then again I just did 100 in an hour because I don't have a life, I may be in theminority in terms of drive. If it gets more people interested you can do it if you want. Oh and how are you not an admin yet? I'll gladly nomiate you if you want to be one (though I'd say et's what until after the assessment drive.--Wizardman 22:43, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll keep it in mind. -- Jreferee 22:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Assessment Drive

Thank you for creating this an adding me to Awards committee. I have committed myself for the time to drive through the X through Z alphabet. Random choice, I know, but I feel most people will go from A backwards. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ozgod (talk • contribs) 01:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC).

Easy with the Prods

I have Yuri Ruley on my watchlist, and I was shocked that it had been proposed for deletion. He is most certainly notable, and it even says it in the article. I looked at your contributions, and in the midst of all your good, hard work I see a major problem. You are putting {{prod}} on many articles that should not be deleted. Read WP:PROD to see how to properly use them. The first sentence states: Proposed deletion is a process for deleting articles (and, under certain circumstances, user pages) that are uncontroversial deletion candidates but do not meet the criteria for speedy deletion. The ones you have prodded are not "uncontroversial" (meaning nobody would argue to keep it) by any means. A lot of them you have tagged should not be tagged at all, but if you think they don't meet any notability criteria you should put them on AFD. But quite frankly I question your interpretation of WP:NOTABILITY, if you have even read it at all. Sorry for sounding harsh; in reality I'm not mad or trying to belittle you; I just want to see this corrected. See WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, etc. →EdGl 22:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The topic for Yuri Ruley has not been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works from sources that are reliable and independent of the subject and of each other. The topic fails WP:NOTABILITY. Ruley himself might have fame or importance, but WP:NOTABILITY requires that to be set out in published works. The article also needs to reflect those published works. WP:PROD provides contested examples. The standard "nobody would argue to keep it" does not seem consistent with those examples. Your action of removing the PROD template was enought to contest the prod. Thank you for the note; I'll be more aware of the prod standard for future articles. -- Jreferee 22:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, that is a good explanation. I'm sorry, but could you show me where "WP:PROD provides contested examples"? I just don't see it. If an article is contested in that way, then it should be dealt with on WP:AFD, correct? →EdGl 23:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The WP:PROD contested examples: "Articles that have been previously proposed for deletion or undeleted, or discussed on AfD, are clearly contested and are not candidates for {{prod}}." If a prod is contested (as you have with Yuri Ruley), then the next step may be AfD (not another WP:PROD). In otherwords, since the Yuri Ruley article history has a contested PROD in it, the article should not be deleted via PROD even if another PROD is placed on the article. -- Jreferee 23:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh, now I know what you mean. I was thinking about something else, but my point is that you should check and see if somebody can argue against its deletion before prodding an article. If the answer is no, go ahead and prod it, but if the answer is yes, use AfD. Since Yuri is a member of the band MxPx, an article-worthy subject in itself, you can bet there would be those who have legitimate reasons why the article should be kept. The fact that the AfD result would result in an almost unanimous "keep" is besides the point (haha). You seem like a pretty hardcore deletionist to me =). Bottom line, unless I'm totally mistaken, use AfD unless deletion is a total no-brainer. →EdGl 03:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikiproject Biography March 2007 Newsletter

The March 2007 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Mocko13 22:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Assessment Awards

I apologize - I had a blank moment - awarded him his barnstar and cleared his name. I do apologize for upping the final award to 3,000+ but it seemed redundant to have two awards for reaching 1,000, hence why I changed the top to 3,000. Sorry for any confusion I have caused. --Ozgod 00:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. It might be better to reduce the #2 award to 750 and give barnstars at each 1,000. I figure it will take me four days of hard, focused work to reach 1,000 so 1,000 seems about right for a barnstar. Also, I think it might be more impressive if the awards came from the committee. We also can give awards individually, too. -- Jreferee 00:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

With my work schedule smoothing out I can refocus on clearing 200 articles a night (my job hours change day to day, so it was a bit nightmarish this past week). I will leave giving out barnstars until the end of the Assessment Drive (also, will be renewing it after March 24th? I will be content if we can get it below 100,000 or ideally 80,000 by March 24th). --Ozgod 00:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Expansion of WPBiography banners?

Thank you for your efforts in the current assessment drive for biography articles. I noticed from your edit of Željko Joksimović and from your contributions that you are expanding WPBiography banners from one line to multiple lines. I've found that when editing busy article talk pages, possibly with multiple project banners, that the collapsed form of the WPBiography banner is much better suited. If there is some policy to keep the expanded form, please let me know, but if not, please keep the banner in the collapsed form. Thank you. - cgilbert^{(talk|contribs)} 02:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. However, I am expanding WPBiography banners with additional parameters, not from one line to multiple lines. The Željko Joksimović WPBiography banner lacked three parameters: (i) a&e-work-group, (ii) musician-work-group, and (iii) listas. I expanded the Željko Joksimović WPBiography banner by adding these three parameters to that WPBiography banner. As for keeping the parameters all on the same line, it might make my task more difficult, but I'll give it a try. -- Jreferee 02:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, Thank you again for your contributions to the Biography assessment drive. - cgilbert^{(talk|contribs)} 02:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yves Pouliquen

I am strongly disputing your proposal to delete this article. I am taking the issue to a Wikipedia:Articles for deletion debate for further input. As you will see, I am also questioning several other of your taggings of articles with "proposed deletion". I can't help getting the impression that you have been rushing through some category of biographies of people with names beginning with the letter Y and tagged them without actually taking a close look at the articles. If you make so many obvious mistakes, why wouldn't I assume that you have made some less obvious ones (i.e. proposing the deletion of people who are not members of the French Academy or Pulitzer Prize winners but would still normally be regarded as "notable" for some reason)? Pharamond 08:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Biography Nominations

G'day mate. Sorry to have to put my Admin Hat on so soon, but I'm just wondering what to make of the Prodding you've been doing recently. I can't quite follow what's going on at the moment, but you seem to have put some noses out of joint, so if you have the chance to let me know what's happening, I'd be very grateful. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Congradulations on your Adminship, to which I was happy to provide my support. Recently, I've gone through about 600 biographies as part of the biography assessment drive that I helped put together. For those biographical topics that have not been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works from sources that are reliable and independent of the subject and of each other, I took a more detaied look. If the article further stood out among those lacking published work references and it seem unlikely that published work references probably were not available, I place a {{prod}} template on some of them, giving the failure to satisfy WP:NOTABILITY as the reason. My hope was to prod those interested in the topic to improve the article to address the concerns given as a reason for the proposed deletion. I've received two responses. The first editor provided some helpful suggestions on using prods and a second editor oddly took the issue to AfD. I've modified my PRODing based on the first editor's helpful suggestions and provided my reasoning to the second editor as part of the AfD. I looked on your talk page, but saw no mention of this. Would you be so kind as to tell me how you came across this issue? Thanks. -- Jreferee 16:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)