User talk:JodyB

user page // talk page

projects • policies • interests • templates • external

awards • personal

Daphne, Alabama • Spanish Fort High School

admin

Hello and welcome!
If you post to my talk page, I will reply exclusively here. If I posted recently to your talk page, I will read responses exclusively there.
Please make sure and sign your message with ~~~~

This user is an administrator on the English Wikipedia. (verify)

The current date and time is 29 May 2024 T 08:51 UTC.

Thank you for your vote on my RfA

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a vote of 41/0/1. Please accept a slice of panettone as an expression of my gratitude. Feel free to help yourself to some chocolate zabaglione as well. I am humbled by the trust placed in me to use the tools wisely. Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 21:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

So many edits...

Hi, no, I'm not. What I'm doing:

• I go to the user creation log.
• I open up a new tab.
• I copy and paste {{subst:Welcome}} ~~~~ onto the new account's talk page.
• I save the page.
• I repeat.

It doesn't really take that long, once you've done it a few times. Littleteddy (talk) 12:43, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Copy of the Compean article e-mailed out to some of the press.

FYI. I just wanted to let you know that the Jose Compean article to Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, WGST-AM in Atlanta, Jim Pinkerton of Newsday, Glenn Beck, Brent Bozell of Media Research Center, and Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media. also, congrats on your DYK! Chris (talk) 13:23, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. What do you expect to happen with the articles you mailed out? -JodyB _talk 14:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/ILOVETHEOC

Apparently we suck at WP:DUCK ;) -- lucasbfr ^talk 17:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Just thinking the same thing. Just call me Quack! -JodyB _talk 17:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 11 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jose Compean, 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.

--Carabinieri (talk) 19:44, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Great success!

Click that-a-way to open your card! → → →

Dear Jody, Thank you for your participation in my request for adminship, which ended successfully with a final tally of (52/10/1). I was impressed by the thoughtful comments on both sides, and the RFA process in general. The extra buttons do look pretty snazzy, but I'll be careful not to overuse them. If you have advice to share or need assistance with anything, feel free to drop me a message or email. Thank you and good day! Cordially, — xDanielx T/C\R 06:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC) Credits - This RFA thanks was inspired by Carlosguitar's RFA thanks and LaraLove's RFA thanks, which were both inspired by The Random Editor's RFA thanks, which was in turn inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks.

Vandalism?

I had not the capability of logging in, while at work, when it came to Lara. When others were exclaiming how 'hot' she was, as an admin, I exclaimed, "I want her to revert my edits!" Had I been logged in, this would not have been an issue. Even greater, even if I was an anon, where did I vandalize? That is a harsh accusation. the_undertow ^talk 13:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Your conduct is disrupting the functioning of this project. You are smart enough to know better. When someone who knows better does poorly and does so with intent then that's a form of vandalism. The issue with your talk page and the POINTY addition of your name and SSN while seeking a namechange is poor behavior for anyone especially an admin. -JodyB _talk 13:06, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

There is no 'especially an admin.' All editors should be held to the same standards. Vandalism is not subjective - you have the burden of showing where I damaged the efforts of others. My talk page has been rectified; it is transparent as it gets. My namechange has been in the works for 6 days, my SSN is my own to publicize. It is an exercise in transparency, and a good faith measure. the_undertow ^talk 13:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome to your opinions but I believe that administrators should strive to set the example for the wider community. Ideally, all editors should behave but if admins do not then it doesn't make sense to demand that others do better. Your very recent choices are troubling and together suggest you are being disruptive. By itself, a name change is fine - I did it once. But it seems you are creating a situation whereby the name change becomes necessary. Your SSN is yours (I guess) and publishing it is your choice too. I simply ask you to back off and let's get back to editing the encyclopedia. -JodyB _talk 13:24, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

your suggestion is noted. if i am disruptive, it's not pointy, so be it. but the name change was and is not relevant - as it was in place before all was said and done. your advice is well received, but no vandalism was done on my part, nor will it ever be. the_undertow ^talk 13:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Then you and I will have no problems. - JodyB _talk 14:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

How ominous. But even if we do have problems, not everyone is going to get along, and that is just a concept that I am used to. As of right now, I think we are all good. the_undertow ^talk 22:31, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

User:71.170.220.213

Greetings. I was cleaning out some CAT:TEMP pages and came across User talk:71.170.220.213, that you'd indefblocked. I've been told that, normally, we don't indefblock IPs as such. The reasoning is that if the user changes ISP and the blocked IP were eventually assigned to a new computer, it would in turn be indefblocked. Would you consider unblocking and reblocking them say, for 6 months or perhaps a year? Thanks for your consideration, --Bradeos Graphon (talk) 22:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, not sure why I did that. I will certainly have a look. -JodyB _talk 22:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah Hah! I was partially wrong. I did leave an indef template on the talk page but I only blocked for 72 hours. He was already unblocked. -JodyB _talk 22:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I think that there are some block templates floating around that were modified from indefblock templates but didn't have the CAT:TEMP flag removed. I've seen 2 more since I left you the above note. Thanks! --Bradeos Graphon (talk) 23:15, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Adopt ME!!!!!!!!!!!!! Udonknome

Hi, I'm looking for a "wikiadoption". I like contributing but I have a very limited knowledge in certain fields, especially advanced editing or Image Policy. I truly wanna help but often turns out that my "contributions" are often not-so-helpful. If you could help me I would truly appreciate it. Udonknome (talk) 03:27, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Links to deleted article

Hey there! I randomly ran into List of minor Star Wars Sith characters while reading some articles and noticed you deleted it. There are actually quite a few links and redirects to this article. Is there a reason you didn't remove the links? Just curious. --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 20:10, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Working on it. There were three articles - lot of links -JodyB _talk 21:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh no prob. I can help out - just wanted to make sure they weren't being kept for a purpose. --Spike Wilbury ♫ talk 21:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm doing it with AWB but its still tedious. I'm only removing the mainspace links right now. -JodyB _talk 21:36, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Just as a follow-up, I think the redlinks in mainspace have been eliminated. There may be a few that I failed to catch but I think most of the are gone. The redlinks outside of mainspace are left as they serve as notice to user pages and discussion pages of the changes. In the process, several redirects were deleted as G6 housekeeping as they redirected to a page deleted via AfD. -JodyB _talk 13:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Your Coincidence with ILOVETHEOC

You unblocked this guy after he promised not to post "copywritten [sic]" photos anymore. There seemed to be some confusion about whether he should have been blocked. I'm not confused, he clearly deserved it. Look for "Hot_Lilo.jpg". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kww (talk • contribs) 03:46, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Let's see, I did not unblock him. He was caught in an autoblock which expires on its on after 24 hours. I would have unblocked him as I had no reason to block him in the first place. I thought he was a sock and I was wrong. The image you are presently upset about will work its way through the process and an admin will deal with it. Absent any evidence of a copyvio what exactly do you want me to do? -JodyB _talk 04:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

True enough. I was trying too hard to use a cute phrase over the link. I do think he needs monitoring. I'll continue to look for the exact image (it's part of one of those sets, where you find fifteen images with the arms in different positions). Just thought you should be aware of things going on with someone you had just been involved with.Kww (talk) 12:41, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I am in an especially delicate situation here. My involvment with him was only because he was coincidentally caught in an autoblock at about the same time as I blocked another user for copyvios of images. I incorrectly suggested he was a sock. RFCU proved me wrong. For me to now rebuke him, not to mention block him, without the strongest of evidence, would be a serious error in judgment. -JodyB _talk 12:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)