User talk:Jeppiz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, Jeppiz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! bodnotbod (talk) 16:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Historicity of Jesus closed[edit]

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

6) Fearofreprisal (talk · contribs) is warned to not engage in personal attacks or cast aspersions of bias and intent against other editors.

7) The Arbitration Committee endorses the community-imposed topic ban preventing Fearofreprisal (talk · contribs) from editing Historicity of Jesus.[1] It is converted to an Arbitration Committee-imposed ban affecting the Historicity of Jesus, broadly construed, and enforcement of the ban should be discussed at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. Fearofreprisal is cautioned that if they disrupt and breach restrictions, they may be subject to increasingly severe sanctions. They may appeal this ban to the Committee in no less than twelve months time.

For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 11:30, 30 December 2014 (UTC) (Message delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk))

Please see the CMT talk section.[edit]

Renejs (talk) 00:37, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Since you are an editor who reverted the update of Grant, please see the CMT talk discussion.Renejs (talk) 00:39, 1 January 2015 (UTC)


Please don't feel badly or think you took a harsh tone! I am used to a lot worse here on wikipedia, from stubborn users who will not listen to others' opinions/ideas and revert edits without good reason. Thank you for being civil and I appreciate your feedback! --user:Neddy1234

International law re: Golan Heights[edit]

If you were actually going by international law, then you wouldn't have undone my revision. Although I expect nothing less from editors who have agendas here. (talk) 19:05, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Socks reverting your edits[edit]

Have you seen Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/O.Turani/Archive, which records previous investigations of his/her use of sock puppets.-- Toddy1 (talk) 06:49, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Walter Payton edit[edit]

Hi Jeppiz, I got a message from you regarding an edit of Walter Payton indicating that I may be construed as vandalizing the page. I suspect that you set your Oct 2014 censure to trigger based on an IP address which is variable. I don't know of the article, I didn't edit it, I don't vandalize pages and only edit articles with my login name (Merek). Hopefully you don't make some action to block me based on a changing IP address. I've been an occasional contributor for the past dozen years or better. Thanks for your attention. 2015 01 29 3:08 p.m. (UTC -8). — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)


Any opinion about this [2] version? Bladesmulti (talk) 04:23, 13 February 2015 (UTC)


Wikipedia Rollbacker.svg

I have granted rollback rights to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback and Wikipedia:Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. – Gilliam (talk) 12:33, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words, very much appreciated!Jeppiz (talk) 12:34, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Talk: CMT[edit]

Jeppiz, I'm not actually a sock or a blocked user, although I appreciate you have only my word for that. The book in question is a critical study of the decidedly unhistorical methods of the CMT and some of its leading proponents, with a major emphasis on Carrier (including some rather alarming links to Holocaust deniers, which I didn't include in the comment because they are not relevant). The only reason I put forward that information was to inform debate because I thought it might be useful in the discussion, although it is clearly not useful in the article itself.
I have contributed to that talk page before, about the Grant quote (including the non-NPOV edits by Cole) and criticizing Carrier, and you may notice that dear old René was very annoyed with me for describing Carrier's methodology as 'implausible', describing it as 'wildly NPOV' (which given his record was almost as funny as being accused by Gordon Brown of reckless spending). However, if you feel it's not relevant, by all means remove it.
I am however more than slightly puzzled and a bit hurt that you confused me with René Salm, a notorious forger and liar whose work has been so regularly bashed by actual professional archaeologists (whom he describes as 'conspiracy theorists') that it is a wonder even AAP keep publishing it! I am actually a professional historian and work at a college in the West Midlands of the UK. However, again, since I keep my identity a closely guarded secret I know you have only my word for that.
Happy hunting. (talk) 11:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

It is however quite funny and richly ironic that Salm has been blocked for a further two weeks as a result of this error, when actually for once - literally for once - he had done nothing wrong! However, that should make all your lives a bit easier for a while. Good luck with making the changes. (talk) 13:51, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

The Harmed Brothers[edit]

My page for band The Harmed Brothers is not advertising. It is merely a band history. Don't understand why it's tagged for deletion. Gobloots (talk) 01:25, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Your Work at CMT[edit]

Just wanted to drop by and say thanks for all of your work with this article. I can only imagine how frustrated you've been at times. It's greatly appreciated that you've worked so hard to maintain a NPOV throughout. Kudos good sir! Zarcusian (talk) 06:24, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Zarcusian, I really appreciate that!Jeppiz (talk) 14:48, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 21[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Priestly source, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Harper (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

de facto control[edit]

Election articles[edit]

You indicated that I needed to review other election articles. I did not need to do this, but just to appease you, I did. The results confirmed my edits. The US Presidential election article starts with the fact that Obama defeated Romney. See Here: [[3]] The US 2008 election. See here: [[4]]. The US 2004 election. See here: [[5]]. Ok, enough about the States. Let's look at Israel. 2013: [[6]], just as I proposed a short little summary in the lede. 2009: [[7]], just as I proposed a short little summary in the lede. Your editor was incorrect.--MaverickLittle (talk) 21:33, 18 March 2015 (UTC)


I referenced hadith (sahih ones) and then why did you revert it. On Depictions of Muhammad. A.A.Wasif | Talk 11:28, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Think you are missing a "not"[edit]

Read carefully. I think you meant "don't like it".—Kww(talk) 17:42, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ataypura[edit]

@Jeppiz, you haven't responded to my ping of over a week ago. Perhaps you didn't receive or notice it? I need you to respond or I will close the case. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:46, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

@Bbb23: Thanks for reminding me! I've been away for a few days, and somehow didn't see your first ping, my apologies. You can close it; I'm fairly certain as per WP:DUCK that these are puppets (they repeat the same edits, using the same arguments word by word in edit summaries) but they have since moved to using yet another account. But under guilty until proven innocent (two-three users MIGHT have the same interest, the same POV, the same sources and the same vocabulary), I guess it can be closed.Jeppiz (talk) 13:34, 23 March 2015 (UTC)


Sorry Jeppiz, I was not trying to be a WP:Soapbox. Am I aloud to display my personal faith in Jesus on my user page? Thanks. CookieMonster755 (talk) 20:42, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Of course, you can put almost anything on your user page as long as it doesn't attack anyone else.Jeppiz (talk) 21:04, 26 March 2015 (UTC)