User talk:Jsharpminor

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

Dark Blue (song)[edit]

Hello, and thanks for creating this article. It's been tagged for notability for nearly 4 years now. Could you look at WP:NSONG and see if you can improve the article? Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 09:41, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

You're probably right. Among the many notability arguments is that the article sat as barely a stub for 4 years... it really wasn't worth saving. Thanks for making it a redirect rather than a delete, so that I was able to see what exactly was lost -- the answer, of course, was "pretty much nothing." Jsharpminor (talk) 01:42, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 9[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dark Blue (song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page One Tree Hill (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) 18:42, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer granted[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hi Jsharpminor, I just wanted to let you know that I have granted the reviewer userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, please contact me and I will remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions. Happy editing! ~ Amory (utc) 04:08, 10 April 2013 (UTC)


Thanks for reporting vandalous users to WP:AIV. In general, sysops don't like to block if there has been no editing since the final warning; that defeats the purpose of giving the warning in the first place. In the future, with users like and, please report when vandalism has been so egregious as to continue past a final warning. Thanks again for your help! ~ Amory (utc) 19:48, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Atta laevigata[edit]

You undid my edit and wrote that it "didn't appear constructive". I changed that translation from "large-bottomed ants" to "big-ass ants" because translated literally from Spanish to English: "hormiga" is "ant" and "culo" is "ass". "-ona" is a suffix that means "big" or "large".

Therefore hormiga is "ant" and "culona" is "big/large-ass" not "bottom".

Irbananaking (talk) 07:04, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I'll leave it alone then. Jsharpminor (talk) 08:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Atlanta People[edit]

You undid my edit of Atlanta People because you said it was not constructive due to my recent change in the Hattiesburg MS notables section. I was using the Hattiesburg as a test to see if I properly formatted my chages the correct way before putting an edit in the Atlanta section. This information is not made up. My father is Thomas O Barnes, the board of directors of Barnes Group Inc, and if you do not believe me, contact him. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:42, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I believe you. Really, I do. But that doesn't mean that your father merits inclusion in the wikipedia article on people from Atlanta. If there have been multiple independent reliable sources that published substantial material about him, then please add those sources to any articles or contributions that you write. Otherwise, it just looks like an editor with a substantial conflict of interest attempting to gain notoriety by adding someone that they know to Wikipedia. Thanks. Jsharpminor (talk) 08:45, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Oh, wait, I think I see this. You're Byron Barnes, and you're adding yourself to the list of people from Atlanta? Wikipedia isn't the Yellow Pages. We don't need articles on everyone and everything that exists. The list of people from Atlanta is short for a reason. Jsharpminor (talk) 08:52, 11 April 2013 (UTC)


...for reverting the recent vandalism on my user talk page. You sure seem to have made a couple of friends today. The second of those two edits may qualify for revision deletion under criterion #2 or #3. If you want that edit removed from your talk page history, please drop a message with any of the administrators on this list. Thanks again. —KuyaBriBriTalk 14:32, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

You're quite welcome.
I certainly hope it takes more than a guess at my country of origin to qualify for a RevDel! (Now if he'd posted my home address and names of my children, that'd be a different story...)
Anyway, keep calm and carry on! Jsharpminor (talk) 18:17, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Nepal chief of police bios[edit]

Hi, re our enthusiastic but non-communicating Nepalese new editor. It's my understanding that an editor is allowed to remove BLPPROD templates if he/she has added a source. Also these police bios don't constitute "vandalism", they are just beginner's attempts. A chief of a country's police is generally notable even for a small country and all the recent ones have plentiful hits in print and press. In ictu oculi (talk) 09:00, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Reverting messages on my talk page[edit]

I don't want people reverting messages on my talk page unless they're clear vandalism such as an attack comment. You reverted a comment on my talk page an IP made about a revert I did. That's just commenting, which isn't vandalism. Lugia2453 (talk) 20:44, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Ah, sorry about that! Jsharpminor (talk) 20:52, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Arlene's Flowers lawsuit[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Arlene's Flowers lawsuit has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Wikipedia is not the place for news reports. See WP:NOTNEWS.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Cindy(need help?) 05:39, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Baker and Linsley vs. Wildflower Inn[edit]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not just a collection of links to other sources, so I wonder why you created this short article without telling us what the case was about (other than in the broadest terms), or, more significantly, what the outcome was - you gave the financial figure but didn't say "who won". Even for a stub article, I'd have thought it more important to tell us the outcome than just quote the size of the settlement! PamD 11:56, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Baker and Linsley vs. Wildflower Inn for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Baker and Linsley vs. Wildflower Inn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baker and Linsley vs. Wildflower Inn until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Funny Pika! 11:31, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Arlene's Flowers lawsuit for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Arlene's Flowers lawsuit is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arlene's Flowers lawsuit until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Funny Pika! 12:14, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Verity Gospel Music Group Logo.png)[edit]

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading File:Verity Gospel Music Group Logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Werieth (talk) 14:57, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

February 2014[edit]

Information icon Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give PublishAmerica a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into another page, America Star Books. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. —Largo Plazo (talk) 19:44, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

OK, I see what ya did there.[edit]

Sorry, for reverting that !vote. I thought you were attempting to close again. You sent so many templates I lost what your were doing there.--Maleko Mela (talk) 03:41, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Your use of rollback[edit]

Wikipedia:Rollback makes it very clear when rollback may and may not be used. Your reverts here and here, using rollback, are not permitted by the rollback guideline. Is there a reason you should continue to keep the rollback user right given you were both involved in an edit war on the page and used rollback? Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 07:44, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Editors are not permitted to delete other editors' comments on article talk pages. Doing so is disruptive editing. The extent to which I was involved in an edit war, if you wish to call it that, was to post a comment stating that an admin had declared a discussion closed, to close said discussion, then to restore comments inappropriately deleted from article talk pages. Both of the edits you mention are exactly that: restoring deleted comments in article talk. (Note that I have said absolutely nothing about the issue other than that Mark Miller's reopening of the discussion is in the wrong venue at best, and tendentious at worst. Nor was I involved with the discussion prior to reminding him of the admin's verdict.) Restoring a deleted comment on a talk page seems perfectly consistent with the spirit of rollback to me. Jsharpminor (talk) 08:19, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

Difference between revisions HBO (Asia)[edit]

Hi Jsharpminor thanks for creating the article. Feel free to override the changes but I basically replaced information that's factually incorrect (eg. ownership and programming) with information that's more accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:40, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Cheers! Jsharpminor (talk) 03:50, 7 May 2014 (UTC)


It's my edits which are in line with the consensus at the talk page, so why am I being disruptive? I honestly have no idea why you are warning me. Bandy boy (talk) 22:27, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Because edit warring is disruptive, even if you are correct and your edits are in line with consensus. Warring means reverting back and forth with other editors. Once is understandable, twice should be avoided, but three or more is what is called a 'bright line'. A quick skim of the history of the page seemed to indicate that you have reverted users' edits more than 3 times in the past 24 hours. If this is not so, then I apologize. Jsharpminor (talk) 23:33, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
EDIT: Seems that you have reverted this page at 15:50, 18:55, and 19:25, which is three. I'm not an administrator, but seeing as you have multiple warnings about it, I would stop before going further. As far as consensus is concerned, when you're reverting two different editors, that looks at first glance like there is clearly a lack of consensus for the changes you're making. Jsharpminor (talk) 23:37, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
I understand that it may look like that, but the consensus is established on the talk page and I am just reinstating the consensus version, as far as I see it. if the other users want a change, I think they should discuss it. However, I have done no more editing there now. Bandy boy (talk) 23:42, 8 May 2014 (UTC)


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Jsharpminor. You have new messages at AbigailAbernathy's talk page.
Message added 22:31, 13 May 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A Wild Abigail Appears! Capture me. Moves. 22:31, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi, apologies if this is the wrong place to post. The edit to Paul Nuttall's page was entirely relevant, as I myself attended Hugh Baird College, and it is not in Bucharest, Romania as stated, but rather Bootle, Liverpool as I attempted to change it to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:48, 22 May 2014 (UTC)


Thanks for the help with the Bit Boy!! Arcade/Bit Boy!! vandalism. I suspect it was a 4chan attack or something like that. I have semi-protected both articles and that should put a stop to it. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 23:42, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks so much for that!! Jsharpminor (talk) 23:44, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
And I just handed out a block to the autoconfirmed account that was participating in the attack, so that should be the end of it now. Oh, I forgot to mention that the Cloudwalker27 account was helping revert vandalism in this case. It was a little unusual to see a new account trying to revert things, but they were indeed helping. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 23:51, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, I noticed that. I even looked at his talk page to make sure that I hadn't accidentally warned him... turns out that ClueBot is probably the only reason I didn't issue a 4im warning to Cloudwalker that I would have regretted.
When the tempest started raging and the page got about 5 reverts a minute, I kinda got a little careless in who I classified as a vandal and who I classified as a helper. Especially since he ended up using the same wording as some of the vandals in his edit summaries. Fortunately I only mentioned him on AIV incorrectly, as opposed to actually 4im-ing incorrectly. Jsharpminor (talk) 00:06, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Everything it all good. I left Cloudwalker27 a note regarding their help with the article. I saw your AIV report and I cleared it without action. Like I said, it was very unusual to see a new account jump in to help fend off a 4chan attack that is going fast and furious, so misclassifying them would be very easy to do. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:19, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
k i did a mistake in the indigo dye editing Shrutikrishnamoorhty (talk) 06:37, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

indigo dye[edit]

i agree i will delete the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shrutikrishnamoorhty (talkcontribs) 06:39, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Chickenfoot is a supergroup[edit]

The very first sentence of the Chickenfoot article is: "Chickenfoot is a supergroup of U.S. origin." So, it makes perfect sense to refer to it as such in the Michael Anthony article. Please put my edit back, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:53, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


Wikipedia Autopatrolled.svg

Hi Jsharpminor, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! — xaosflux Talk 03:17, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Paula (album)[edit]

In regards to your notification about Robin Thickle's new album Paula: If a certain album does not reach a higher score than at least half the total percentage you could consider that said album is certainly under a rather negative impression, so I dont understand why you think that it is not necessary to remark it. I now is just a little aspect of the overall understanding of what that album is and what impact has had, but is nonetheless an actual one. Thank you (Itisnotcohen (talk) 00:40, 11 July 2014 (UTC))

This... is this word salad or am I supposed to get some meaning from it? Jsharpminor (talk) 00:45, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
User:Itisnotcohen has made one edit: to my userpage. I'll feel free to ignore it unless any further discussion is wished; in which case please make it here. Jsharpminor (talk) 00:47, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Here, Jsharp, I'll clarify a bit. The edit is referring to is this one. S/he is referring to the fact that s/he changed "mixed reviews" to "mixed to negative reviews". While it may not have been a perfect edit (it's contradicted in the next sentence of the article), it was obviously a good-faith edit. Rollbacking it as vandalism was probably not the best choice; Huggle has a good-faith revert button (in the Page menu, or keyboard shortcut Y, if that's what you prefer). Next time, please think before you bite and call a newbie's message "word salad". S/he simply followed the advice in the template you gave him/her, and let you know that you might have made a mistake. I did rename this section, I have no idea what it was trying to sayLucasThoms 01:07, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Ah, okay.
I've been seeing quite a few edits by IP editors making factually inaccurate changes of "mixed reviews" to "mixed to negative" (or, in some rare cases, "mixed to positive".) When it's within spitting distance of the 50% mark (which is the definition of mixed), and especially when it's directly contradicted, I tend to assume that it's not good faith. Since the default level-1 template is "I didn't think this edit was constructive, so I reverted it," I don't think that's a BITE that is disproportionate to the unhelpfulness of the edit in question. Jsharpminor (talk) 03:46, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, that makes sense. I can see that view of the original edit. By BITE, I meant your reply to his/her message on your talk page, which you eloquently described as "word salad" and opted to ignore.—LucasThoms 03:49, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
*giggles* ... Ahem...
Yeah, that probably wasnt the most tactful way to go about it.
By the by, I do realize that everything I type on Wikipedia is public for the whole planet to see, and you have every bit as much right as the next guy to view my userpage, and actually your explanatory note was exceptionally helpful, thank you for it! - but how did you ever find it to respond to in the first place? Did you randomly start monitoring my userpage at some point, or is there some other tool that I don't know about yet? Jsharpminor (talk) 04:01, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
I...uhh...I actually have absolutely no idea how I ended up here. If I had to guess: I spend a lot of time on Special:ListUsers, looking at each new user's first contribution (if it's good, they're a good person; if not, they're probably gonna be a WP:VOA). It's kinda unusual for someone's first edit to be on a user talk page, so I probably looked into it, and found you. —LucasThoms 04:22, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Looking at your contribs, it's also possible that I saw you in the history of Tinashe, which we both Huggle'd tonight (that just sounds wrong). Either way, here I was and there I go. Or any other wise-sounding pseudo quote. It's really up to you. —LucasThoms 04:36, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User:StellaCunningham[edit]

Hello Jsharpminor. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User:StellaCunningham, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: User's first and so far only edit - creating a userpage. It's not in article-space. Please read WP:BITE. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 03:27, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I think you may have a point... If I can humorously direct you to WP:DELICIOUS? Jsharpminor (talk) 04:37, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
On a serious note, I did leave a message on Stella's page linking to WP:NOTWEBHOST, as the page in question looks like it's an autobiography that wishes it were in articlespace, yet is in userspace. This doesn't strike me as noobish behavior. Jsharpminor (talk) 05:41, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


Attention (Redacted), you have undid some of my edits on the History of Iran. Wikipedia is not a place for biased articles, slanted information, or blatant Antisemitism. I formally request you restore my previous edits before I report you to Interpol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: refactored, personal attacks removedLucasThoms 15:01, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I occasionally use Huggle and have been known to get a little happy with the "Revert & Warn" button. I was expecting to find that I'd both reverted a good editor and had an oversight issue on the same day. Imagine my relief when I find that the "truth" in question is [1], this, and this. Jsharpminor (talk) 15:40, 25 July 2014 (UTC)