Jump to content

User talk:WJBscribe: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
MiszaBot III (talk | contribs)
m Archiving 2 thread(s) (older than 4d) to User talk:WJBscribe/Archive 17.
Line 70: Line 70:


There has been discussions on both of their user pages about it ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Yankees10#Originally_drafted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Yankees10#Originally_drafted] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chrisjnelson#Originally http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chrisjnelson#Originally]. At first I thought this was kind of a dumb argument, but it has potential to spiral out of control (they've put so much work into changing all the articles that at this point they wouldn't admit they were wrong even if they knew they are) so it would be nice to get some more points of view or have a ruling on it. [[Special:Contributions/67.137.0.28|67.137.0.28]] ([[User talk:67.137.0.28|talk]]) 19:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
There has been discussions on both of their user pages about it ([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Yankees10#Originally_drafted http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Yankees10#Originally_drafted] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chrisjnelson#Originally http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chrisjnelson#Originally]. At first I thought this was kind of a dumb argument, but it has potential to spiral out of control (they've put so much work into changing all the articles that at this point they wouldn't admit they were wrong even if they knew they are) so it would be nice to get some more points of view or have a ruling on it. [[Special:Contributions/67.137.0.28|67.137.0.28]] ([[User talk:67.137.0.28|talk]]) 19:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

:A mediation case has been started on this topic. Please see [[Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-05-05 Tyrell Johnson (American football)]] for more discussion on this subject. [[Special:Contributions/67.137.0.28|67.137.0.28]] ([[User talk:67.137.0.28|talk]]) 00:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


== Need a fast username change ==
== Need a fast username change ==

Revision as of 00:33, 6 May 2008

18:23, Monday 11 November 2024

User:WJBscribe
User:WJBscribe
User talk:WJBscribe
User talk:WJBscribe
User:WJBscribe/Gallery
User:WJBscribe/Gallery
User:WJBscribe/Barnstars
User:WJBscribe/Barnstars
User:WJBscribe/Drafts
User:WJBscribe/Drafts




Hi! Please leave a message and I'll get back to you...

Don't hesitate to get in touch if you have a question or need help. I'll do my best and can probably point you in the right direction if it isn't something I can sort out myself.

Will


AcappellaHosting

Hello, is there a way to undelete the Buffalo Chips page? We have several published articles about our group, several published albums, references on many websites, and we are ranked in the top 24 groups in the country. I can provide all needed links if asked.

Thank you.

Thank you

I know you didn't vote, but nonetheless...

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 194 supporting, 9 opposing, and 4 neutral.
Your kindness and constructive criticism is very much appreciated. I look forward to using the tools you have granted me to aid the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers, Anthony and Acalamari for their nominations.
Thank you again, VanTucky

Need your assistance

Hello WJBscribe. Normally I would go to User:Daniel for this kind of help but since he is on hiatus, and he left you on his list of "helpful ones", I have come to you for help. I do not know if you are familiar with permanently banned User:SEGA? He (and his cast of a thousand socks) was given a community heave-ho quite some time ago. He still filters through with a user account every now and then. His edit habits are very repetative and I believe I have spotted another one. SoonOrSoon (talk · contribs) is (I am almost 100% sure) SEGA under a new name. Like I said, I usually get Daniels help as he knows SEGA well and has assisted me in keeping Wikipedia as "SEGA-free" as possible. If you have some extra time could you investigate my concerns (whether they be right or wrong) Thank you and have a nice day! 156.34.215.138 (talk) 01:55, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking into this. WjBscribe 13:22, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A checkuser has confirmed that SoonOrSoon (talk · contribs) is indeed SEGA. I have blocked the account indefinitely along with MatterOfTime (talk · contribs). Don't hesitate to get in touch if you locate another one. WjBscribe 12:15, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Oliver article

Hello WJBscribe. I really need your assistance.

I understand that the article about Dennis Oliver created back in January 2008 was deleted because it was lacking references, which is a reasonable cause.

In February 2008 the article was posted again , very well improved with sufficient notable and verifiable references to reliable sources like newspapers proving every single statement noted in the article. The second improved version has also been nominated by editors like "gromlakh" as a good article, and it has been rated as star class and protected by the project.

Last April an editor named User:Thiste who is coincidentially involved in the same field as Dennis Oliver ( Fashion), began critizicing the article about Dennis notability. In less than 3 days the article has been unilateral deleted, solely by the admin named User:Pigman As showing in the history of the article, the admin named User:Thatcher immediately restored the article after its revision, clearly stating that the reason why Pigman deleted the article was unjustifiable. But, against after the admin Tatcher restoration, Pigman returned and placed the deletion tag on the head of the article.

Pigman is also stating that the links to Dennis Oliver are only showing his name and there are very little comments about him. I am spanish and italian, and after reading all the links to spanish newspapers on Dennis article I can see that there are very good reports about him as an actor an as a assitant director, also in most of the articles is a picture of Dennis!, which clearly shows his acting notability. Furthermore, not every actor is lucky enough to be famous as a Sean Penn or Tom Cruise, but that does not mean that cannot have an article in wikipedia, right?... Wikipedia is not a printed book running out of space that needs to be purged....and Dennis has a reputable career as an actor with important roles on theatrical pieces. In Dennis article every single line is backed up with a link to an external site to prove it, including Dennis website and his listing in the actors database (Imbd).

To prove the opposite to Pigman statement who probably does not understand Spanish, I am translating the text of one of the newspapers linked to his article that reads the following and which also includes a huge picture about him:

Congratulations to Dennis Oliveras He study acting with Alba Olmos and Gloria Zelaya in a Puerto Rican theater rolling under the direction of Hector Luis Rivera (TEB Theatre) took part in the drama "Amantina or the Story of a desamor." Then, with the same company in the farce "Flemish Twist". Finally "Who is crazy here," under the direction of Otto Montoya. Recently, this boy born in Yauco, Puerto Rico made assistant director Alicia Kaplan in the play "Love and Legacy of Blood" carried scene at the Teatro Natives Queens.

The link to the article translated above is: http://dennisoliveraspr.googlepages.com/dennisoliverasdirectorassistant

Dear administrator, I do not know to much the way around wikipedia, please help to keep this article and to remove the deletion tag. Thank you very much. The link to Dennis Oliver deletion page is below:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dennis_Oliver

again: thank you for your helpjustice all the way (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)justice all the way[reply]

MediationBot doesn't seem to be clearing processed requests from the pending-requests holding cell. The two requests currently there should have been moved a while ago: Kolo, I rejected a few days ago (curiously, it's also been added to the rejected cases list, as the link, rather than transclusion); the other, has been rejected, and since deleted. I would empty the pending page myself, but I understand editing that page breaks it. Any ideas? Anthøny 23:33, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think we exaggerate that "editing breaks the page" bit to stop people fiddling with it (or maybe a previous version of the bot was more sensitive). I think you're fine doing any action the bot would do anyway (it doesn't break itself). Let ST47 known what's not working properly so he can fix it when he has a moment. WjBscribe 12:13, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Help Please

This dispute seems to span at least 100 articles and on a couple of user's talk pages is probably where it's probably best discussed, but I don't know how to add a mediation request on them. There are a couple of users (User:Yankees10 and User:Chrisjnelson) who have decided in the interest of uniformity to change every NFL player's article from saying "was drafted by..." to "was originally drafted by..." Their intent was to convey that this is where the player's career began. Often when a player moves to another team their article says they "originally came from such and such team and now are at another team". To make all the articles consistent they decided to make every single article say "originally" in them, even the ones who haven't moved to another team.

Since doing this they've gotten their articles reverted many times. Using the word originally implies they have been drafted more than once, when in fact they have not. Or it may imply they've moved on to another team, where in fact many of them have not. Several users feel putting "originally" into an article where it doesn't make sense is wrong, others have pointed out that it's bad grammar. They've gotten into editing wars over it, which is not uncommon for these two users. Chrisjnelson has been blocked 17 times for edit warring over the last year and Yankees10 was just blocked last week.

There has been discussions on both of their user pages about it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Yankees10#Originally_drafted and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chrisjnelson#Originally. At first I thought this was kind of a dumb argument, but it has potential to spiral out of control (they've put so much work into changing all the articles that at this point they wouldn't admit they were wrong even if they knew they are) so it would be nice to get some more points of view or have a ruling on it. 67.137.0.28 (talk) 19:01, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A mediation case has been started on this topic. Please see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-05-05 Tyrell Johnson (American football) for more discussion on this subject. 67.137.0.28 (talk) 00:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need a fast username change

Given the current situation with Barbara Bauer we need a quick username. A vandal has taken to using her name to vandalize several articles the very first was WP:ANI. The username is of course User:Barbara Bauer. Also it violates WP:Username and it is of a living person and clearly from the accounts edits is not her. The account has been blocked indef as vandal only. Um if you need a username may I suggest User:ANv. Random Choice just based off of first vandalized page. For further WP:ANI#User:Barbara_Bauer Rgoodermote  01:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. WjBscribe 09:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 04:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi WJBscribe. I appreciate it was a long time ago but if you look at this page you'll see a user has reuploaded a number of photos which you deleted back in May 2007 to Commons and I was hoping you might be able to assist in deciding whether this is appropriate in relation to the reason you deleted them. See here for the deletion log entries where you state that you've deleted them due to false licenses. I understand all these users were apparently involved in some sockpuppetry case which Shalom is now attempting to question. Was there perhaps evidence that these were simply copied of the net somewhere in order to deceive users into thinking the accounts were used by different people. Thanks for your help. Adambro (talk) 08:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the images following checkuser conclusions that those purportedly depicted were in fact only one person. Given that the images had been uploaded to suggest separate people, their descriptions were misleading and there was some suggestion that the image quality was more consistent with them having been taken off the web that being uploads of personal images. I do not recall the images having actually been located on the web - I doubt that happened. I based the deletions on the idea that the images could not be what they purported to be and were therefore falsely licensed or at the very least misleading (not depicting what they claimed to). As I understand it, ArbCom still stands by those checkuser findings and Poetlister has been unblocked for "good behaviour" - she is a user in good standing on other projects, including enquote where she is an admin and bureaucrat.
The situation on Commons may be different. One of the problems with the fact that the checkuser results weren't followed up onwiki is that I'm not sure what the "standing" of these accounts is on Commons. If Commons accepts the enwiki checkuser results, then I don't believe these images should stay given their misleading descriptions and the difficulty in investigating the veracity of the licenses. If however Commons doubts those checkuser results, it may be willing to keep those images (though query whether they fall within the scope of commons).
As currently uploaded, the images do seem to have a new licensing problem - they give the impression that Shalom is the owner of the images who is releasing them when this is clearly not the case. As a separate issue, they should definitely be deleted if those licenses are not changed. WjBscribe 10:04, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Will, you might be interested in above RFA.--NAHID 17:35, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't transcluded, was it ever? Best not to even comment inside RfA's like this. Avruch T 14:13, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]