User talk:Jac16888

• Hi, This is my talk page, Please leave messages at the bottom.
• If you post a message on this page, I'll usually reply on this page to avoid fragmenting the discussion, although I may notify you I've replied.
• If I've left you a message on your talk page, I will be watching it, so you're most welcome to reply there rather than here.

Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 3	17 January 2009	About the Signpost

News and notes: New board members, changes at ArbCom	Wikipedia in the news
Dispatches: Featured article writers—the 2008 leaders	WikiProject Report: WikiProject Pharmacology
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 23:42, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Translation

I will see what can be done. For now I have not too much time, but in the end of Februar. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 14:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. You don't have to make any kind of real effort by the way, if you don't want to, even if you just have a look at an article and point out what it means it would be a big help. Cheers

Re: dopplegangers

Can you elaborate on what you mean by stating that my dopps aren't registered accounts? I thought I had registered them; what do I need to do to ensure they are registered, and someone else cannot stake a claim? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 02:05, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

They are not accounts, I found them listed at Wikipedia:Database reports/Ownerless pages in the user space, if you look at the toolbox, they don't have user related options, contribs, logs etc, all you're done is create userpages for them. I'm not certain but I believe you simply register the account as you did for your original one--Jac16888^Talk 02:10, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I rather thought had done so. I will give it a whirl again, and ring you up if I run into some difficulties. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 02:22, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to have them be alternate accounts that I would edit under. They were sinply to prevent a user from snatching up the account and impersonating me at some point. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 02:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I know, but they still need to be registered. At the moment another person could still register them and start impersonating you--Jac16888^Talk 02:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, I jsut tried to sign up for all of them, and am being told that the account names are already in use - as my DOPPs. Give it a try and tell me what yoyu thinl. Obviously, I would ask that if you find yourself able to set up the account, that you not do so. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 03:09, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I tried the first one, I told me that it was too similar to other names, didn't say it was already in use. What I suggest you do is follow the instructions here, Wikipedia:Request an account, unfortunately its not something I know much about. Fill in the form, explain the reasoning, give a link to this convo, and they should be able to help you out--Jac16888^Talk 03:18, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 24, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 4	24 January 2009	About the Signpost

Jimbo requests that developers turn on Flagged Revisions	Report on accessing Wikipedia via mobile devices
News and notes: New chapters, new jobs, new knight and more	Wikipedia in the news: Britannica, Kennedy, Byrd not dead yet
Dispatches: Reviewing featured picture candidates	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Delivered at 04:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC) by §hepBot (Disable)

User talk:80.195.253.88

If he's abusing the template you might as well semi protect his talk page. — Realist² 05:46, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Beat you to it, and to rfpp, already reblocked with no talk page--Jac16888^Talk 05:48, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh of course, you can do that through the block log, silly me. Way past my bed time. — Realist² 05:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Marios Winding

Thanks for adding the Speedy tag to this. Just wanted to preserve for posterity Google Translation's contention that this guy makes a good personal trainer because "he loves the body to the limits of strain". If only that were one of the notability criteria :) Gonzonoir (talk) 19:22, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

WeldonHenson Page

I want to inform people about myself, and the information I have on my website is essentially what I want to put on the weldon henson wikipedia page. Do I really have to rewrite the whole thing since I am writing about myself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weldonhenson (talk • contribs) 20:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

userpage deletions

You've deleted several sockpuppet accounts. we don't delete those accounts. thanks--Hu12 (talk) 23:34, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm aware of that fact. However, we do delete them when there is no account actually there--Jac16888^Talk 02:10, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

What makes something important or significant?

You deleted my page -- I was starting the build of it. Had noted I host a radio program, teach at a University, and so forth. Your comments say that I didn't indicate the importance or significance of the subject. That seems pretty subjective. Is there a guideline somewhere? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.183.216.101 (talk) 02:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:NOTABILITY. Anyway, you shouldn't be writing about yourself--Jac16888^Talk 02:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

userpage subpage

I made a subpage to my user page called User:Edguy99 Organic Molecules that you have deleted. Can I bring it back long enough to get a copy and is there a proper way that I should do this type of thing? TIA Edguy99 (talk) 08:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Your userpage still exists, I simply moved it to User:Edguy99/Organic Molecules and deleted the redirect. This is because it needs the / to make it a proper subpage, as it was, it was just a user page which belonged to nobody--Jac16888^Talk 16:14, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, that helped Edguy99 (talk) 06:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

thanks

just a short thanks for doing that for me. Kilnburn (talk) 17:05, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

no problem--Jac16888^Talk 17:07, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing up my page! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaderaid (talk • contribs) 18:47, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

thanks

thanks for fixing my talk archive, now if only i figure out how to get one of those fancy bots to auto archive my talk I would be really in business ;)

all the best --Curuxz (talk) 12:03, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem. By the way, a good archiving bot you could use is User:MiszaBot II, it has instructions on how to do it too--Jac16888^Talk 12:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Why did you just revert me?

Why did you just remove my statement at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration? --Dragonfiend (talk) 02:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I slipped on my watchlist and hit rollback to your edit. I didn't mean anything by it. Guess that new feature's going to take some getting used to. --Jac16888^Talk 02:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I thought maybe I messed something up. Thanks for reverting it back. --Dragonfiend (talk) 02:15, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

San Fernando Valley Quakes

Not sure why linking to another page within Wikipedia is inappropriate, but I'll take your word for it. Not sure why me working on the article for the team is a conflict of interest either, as I have taken great pains to ensure a NPOV on the article despite my association with it. If I didn't work on it (and the hundred or so other minor league soccer team articles I and a small band of others help maintain), virtually no-one else would. --JonBroxton (talk) 02:53, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Rachel Corrie / Saint Pancake

You may be interested in my post here. Thanks, Mike R (talk) 18:23, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Please don't take this the wrong way if I'm somehow involved and forgot, but why are you telling me this?. I hope you're not canvassing--Jac16888^Talk 23:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Irvington, New York

Thank you for catching my errant sig in this article. I can imagine how it got there -- punchiness is the most likely explanation -- but can't understand how I didn't notice it all this time. Thanks. Ed Fitzgerald _{t / c} 18:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I was a bit surprised too, knowing you were a "regular". I had a quick look see when it got added and couldn't find it. Most likely you just clicked the sig button by mistake and never noticed--Jac16888^Talk 22:57, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Spam?

I absolutely do not agree, but this is the only thing what I can do.

Let us see what time brings on.

(On deleting article EURELECTRIC - yes; but e.g. Unipalm, Centra, UCPTE, UCTE - not :) Pas-6 (talk) 12:33, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your admin help

re: User_talk:Omarcheeseboro#AFDs_and_Songs, I appreciate your answer. I'm not sure why you said you're not sure "why admin help is needed". If there is somewhere else I should've asked this, please let me know. If you feel that I should've figured this out on my own, I'm sorry, but I like to make sure I'm doing the right thing before taking the time to nominate 10+ articles for deletion. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 19:00, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh sorry, I didn't mean to sound accusatory. I assumed you knew about {{helpme}}, which is one used for general purpose, adminhelp is generally used if you need deletion/restorartion/something that uses the tools etc--Jac16888^Talk 19:20, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I didn't mean to imply that you were accusatory. I was looking to see if I should've brought this up somewhere else, which you addressed. Thanks. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 19:23, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 5	31 January 2009	About the Signpost

Large portion of articles are orphans	News and notes: Ogg support, Wikipedia Loves Art, Jimbo honored
Wikipedia in the news: Flagged Revisions, Internet Explorer add-on	Dispatches: In the news
WikiProject Report: Motto of the Day	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 21:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

ActionScript Foundry page deletion

Hello, why ActionScript_Foundry page was deleted ? Lionart (talk) 09:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't actually the one who deleted the proper page. I deleted ActionScript Foundry, which was a redirect to ServeBox ActionScript Foundry. ServeBox ActionScript Foundry was speedily deleted because it fit under deletion criteria A7, by another admin, which made the first page a "dead link" which is why I deleted it--Jac16888^Talk 02:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

WP:NPA

Please do not attack other editors, which you did here: User talk:Encyclopedia77. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Encyclopedia77 Talk 21:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

replied on talk page. For anyone else, this is in response to this comment I made, [1]--Jac16888^Talk 22:06, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

LIMSpec deletion

I was wondering as to the rationale behind deleting LIMSpec. That is an industry term in the laboratory informatics industry, coined by its trade association, the Laboratory Informatics Institute. It is a generic template consisting of areas to provide lab information to potential vendors, and a set of standardised functional requirements, numbered and categorised, so that labs may more easily create RFPs, RFQs, RFIs etc. It also functions as a documentation matrix as their informatics system(s) grow and change, logging maintenance, etc. and providing an area to support validation and verification.

I look forward to hearing from you - I can be reached at avmuso@yahoo.com.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.238.122.130 (talk) 01:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't actually the one who deleted the proper page. I deleted Limspec, which had been moved to LIMSpec, making it into a redirect. LIMSpec was deleted after a prod tag expired, by another admin, which made the first page a "dead link" which is why I deleted it--Jac16888^Talk 02:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Reallikeunreal —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reallikeunreal (talk • contribs) 12:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

User:Nickmas tree

Errr... You just indef. blocked a user who last edited in 2006? I declined it, due to WP:SUL and WP:USURP issues on usernames with blocks bu the bot beat me in my comments. I guess it doesn't matter now, but I do question the value in blocking accounts that have not edited in two years. Pedro :  Chat  23:04, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I am an arse. An account comes back after two + years to vandalise. Wow! Apologies my friend! Pedro :  Chat  23:06, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

No worries, it did actually occur to me when I made that block that anyone without the bit would not know why I did it--Jac16888^Talk 23:10, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

And, indeed, those with the bit that didn't check the deleted stuff! Sorry Jac! Pedro :  Chat  23:13, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!!!!

What? I'm doing something right?! Hey thanks!! I'll keep doing it!!! Riotrocket8676 ^{You gotta problem with that?} 02:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

PS: What did it say? Riotrocket8676 ^{You gotta problem with that?} 02:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Check your inbox--Jac16888^Talk 02:16, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Deleted Dj Iroc Bio.

How Are You Doing??? My Name Is Dj Iroc, I Was Wondering What Copy Rights, I Violated??? I Have Worked As A Producer And Dj For Over 15 Years. I Have worked On LP's From B.I.G, Mase, L.O.X, Drag-on, Big Pun, You Can Check The Credit's. I Am Alicia Keys Dj Right Now, Can You Help Me??? I Am Just Trying To Put My Bio, And Info Up For The World To See. I Appreciate Your Help In Advance. My E-Mail Is Also Djiroc@gmail.com Thank You. (Amwdjs (talk) 08:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC))

Jadran (ship)

The translation of Jadran (ship) is complete. Your comments would be welcome. -- Eastmain (talk) 15:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

See [2] and [3]. Thank you, that was the best possible outcome of that AFD. If you're ever free, we always need more volunteers over at WP:PNT, even if all you do is determine what articles mean so action can be taken--Jac16888^Talk 17:42, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Salomon Isacovici

Dear Jac 16888, I happen to have been present during the writing of the book, which is visual proof. ALso, I happen to know that the author has just told me the following: Los puntos básicos son que hay un contrato firmado por ambas partes y que reposa en la biblioteca del congreso de USA en que expresamente se señala que Salomón me contrató para escribir su autobiografía, que él irrspetó el contrato y que lo publicado fue escrito por mí.

In other words, stop denying the truth. How can I possibly prove to you that all I am saying is true? As I state, the community supported Isacovici, leading to there to be a lot of FALSE information circulating on the Internet. Let me know how you want me to prove it to you, but you've got to stop spreading misinformation on wikipedia

Thanks, Hoolio9690 (talk) 21:54, 9 February 2009 (UTC) Hoolio9690

Well we'll address these separately since its easier that way. Firstly, if you personally know the subject of the article, then you shouldn't even be writing about him, see WP:Conflict of Interest. Secondly, I was there when the book was written and never saw anyone else. Actually I wasn't, but you can't prove that, you are not a reliable source, just as I'm not. I have reverted your edit again, although I changed autobiography to biography, as the article stands it doesn't say that Isacovici wrote the book, and it mentions the claim that Juan did. If you want to add it again, find a source other than yourself. Finally, I am not "spreading misinformation on Wikipedia", all I care about is making sure everything I see is sourced reliably--Jac16888^Talk 22:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I JUST UNDID WHAT YOU DID, BUT YOU'VE TAKEN IT BACK AGAIN. PLEASE RESPOND TO THIS BEFORE MAKING ANY CHANGES. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoolio9690 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I was in the process of replying when you reverted. Here's what's going to happen now. You are going to read and take in the above. You are then going to revert yourself, and not re-add it again til you find a reliable source. I suggest you do that straight away--Jac16888^Talk 22:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Jac1688: I do not mean to irritate you. However, may I just ask whether there is any more reliable source than direct contact with the author himself? I'm apparently not supposed to be related according to guidelines. I didn't know this. However, couldn't the matter be proved by checking the library of congress of the USA? Apparently, in the library of congress of the USA there's a settlement that states that Juan Manuel was the author. Is that a sufficient source? My whole point is that what I'm saying is true and all I need is to prove it to you so that it will stay. Do you need an email from the author's university email? What type of source do you need? I am fully aware that you need a source, but I'm just unsure about how you want me to get it. As this is a controversial issue, there are probably plenty of sources and articles on the Internet which state that Isacovici wrote the book. Why? Because a whole community of friends helped each other. Only because there's an article on the Internet does not make it reliable. However, what I'm saying IS TRUE. Exactly how do you want me to prove it to you? I know you're only trying to keep reliable information on Wikipedia, but you must understand my concern when I get on and find something that is blatantly wrong. Could you please tell me what source to use. After all, if we actually searched in the library of congress we'd solve this issue. I'm sorry for all the trouble. I appreciate any help. Thanks, Hoolio9690 (talk) 22:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC) Hoolio9690

If the library of congress has that info, then it will be sourceable in some way, or else there will be sources out there. If not, then numbers win, if there are many people saying one thing, versus just you saying another, I have to believe them, its more likely they are correct than believe there is a big conspiracy going on--Jac16888^Talk 22:43, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

[[4]] Ummm...Nope. In this case, there is a 'big conspiracy' going on. It's extremely feasible: pay a load of lawyers, get a lot of friends to help you out. Anyway, this matter has apparently been solved legally, but not on the Internet, where the friends of Isacovici continue to spread the word that he wrote it. How do you gain access to the library of congress through the Internet? The only way I really see of finding that source is by going to the library of Congress in person, unless you have any suggestions. And I'm not able to do that. And in reference to the conflict of interest, I may know the author, but I haven't been sent by him to change this information. I'm doing it because I don't want Wikipedia to be spreading misinformation.Hoolio9690 (talk) 22:54, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Hoolio9690

I find it very hard to believe that there is a big conspiracy over something so minor. If there has been a legal resolution, there will be records available online. I suggest you find them. If there are more sources against you then for you, then tough, go find more. Source beats no source everytime--Jac16888^Talk 22:57, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I know you find it hard to believe it, but it isn't. This is the story: Juan Manuel wrote the book from having talked to Isacovici on numerous encounters. Isacovici died in 1998, but left a letter that claimed he had written the book completely and it was his autobiography. Juan Manuel tried to defend his position against all the numerous people who supported Isacovici and many articles were thrown around the Internet. Lawyers were called, but the lawsuit didn't go all the way through due to the expense that it is to have a lawsuit. So, the agreement was made that they were co-authors, and at least that can be confirmed everywhere on the Internet. And yet, in the library of congress, it states that Juan Manuel was the only author. No articles have been put up on the Internet concerning the truth of the story becuase Juan Manuel decided it was an unfair battle he could not win. Thus, the Internet is full of articles against Juan Manuel. I know this story seems hard to believe because anyone could be inventing it or supporting the other side of the argument. What occurs is that you must agree that the Internet is not infallible or containing all the information known to man. So, can't we make a compromise of some sort? Can't it be stated that there are two versions of the story or put one of those little markers that Wikipedia sometimes includes that says that the site needs more sources? By the way, it wasn't something "so minor". If you were to write a whole book and then people stole the authorship and then you were helpless against their pressure, I'm sure you wouldn't be too happy. Once again, I just want the truth to be known. I will continue searching for a source, but I really think we should make a compromise of some sort. After all, the Internet is not perfect and I can't just hop down to the Library of Congress. Once again: [[5]] Hoolio9690 (talk) 23:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC)Hoolio9690

I've rewritten and sourced those sections. Jac16888 and Hoolio9690, could you take a look at my changes and see if they're okay? Cunard (talk) 00:05, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Looks alright to me, nice and neutral. Good job--Jac16888^Talk 00:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm afraid you were wrong, my friends. Internet information is not always actually true. The article has now been reedited but with more than enough proof of authorship. In other words, all those sources introduced by Cunard are unreliable and false! I'm afraid, I was right. [[6]] Good luck trying to prove me wrong now.Hoolio9690 (talk) 03:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)Hoolio9690

Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 5, Issue 6	8 February 2009	About the Signpost

News and notes: Elections, licensing update, and more	Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia's future, WikiDashboard, and "wiki-snobs"
Dispatches: April Fools 2009 mainpage	WikiProject Report: WikiProject Music
Features and admins	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 22:08, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

WP:PNT

A very good day to you, Sir. Nice to see another admin active around the page mentioned above; I've been taking care of it (on and off) for the last 2 1/2 years, and I can tell you, it can be very frustrating at times. Cheers and happy editing. Lectonar (talk) 13:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I know what you mean about PNT, although I'm quite pleased with the progress we're making now, e.g. CAT:PNT is down to 9 items as I write this, when I first got involved, only a month or two ago I think it was around 70ish items. Actually since you're here, I could do with your opinion on something. A few times there have been article listed at PNT that was a foreign language (non-latin alphabet based ones) version of an article, different text but nothing new or usable. Some of these, I deleted as G6 non-controversial maintenance based on the following logic - if it was in English it would be redirected, if the title of that redirect was too obscure, it could be deleted as an R3. What do you think? Acceptable criteria fit or am I pushing IAR a bit far? --Jac16888^Talk 16:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I use IAR a bit differently here and redirect the foreign language title (if usable) to the english article (redirects are cheap, and if someone ever looked at the history, the untranslated text would still be there), but I think you're solution is fine. Have a nice day. Lectonar (talk) 08:17, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Ahmmm, and thanks for moving my award page; in all those years I've been around, I didn't notice. Lectonar (talk) 09:40, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I never thought of it like that before, thanks for the advice. And I wouldn't worry about the userpage thing, only reason I spotted it is because of the several hundred other ones I've done recently(WP:Database reports, its a gold mine if you're bored and feel doing grunt work), annoyingly all a few days before they added the suppress redirect function when moving, if I'd waited a few days it would have halved the time I spent doing it--Jac16888^Talk 02:50, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

justifying my article

I reedited it. I'll come back to it and add more when it's written to your standards.

Turnarounds question

Hi Jac Re your deletion of our content in January, we'd like to resubmit focusing on the definition of transitional leadership (in corporate life), which would mention the issues surrounding leadership that have been written about by various experts including Anthony Holmes. What is your practical, detailed advice on how to avoid this page being removed? Thank you. User: Turnarounds 00:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Turnarounds (talk • contribs)

I wasn't actually the one who deleted the proper page. I deleted User:Turnarounds, which had been moved to Anthony Holmes, turnaround specialist, making it into a redirect. Turnarounds was deleted for being spam, by another admin, which made the user page a "dead link" which is why I deleted it. However, if you want some advice, don't create it at all, you're clearly related to the subject in some way, if they are truly notable, someone else will create it--Jac16888^Talk 00:27, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Dj Iroc Page Deleted??

Hi, This Is Dj Iroc Again, I Noticed You Answered Everybody's Question But Mine??? Can You Please Help Me??? --Amwdjs (talk) 05:30, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

How Are You Doing??? My Name Is Dj Iroc, I Was Wondering What Copy Rights, I Violated??? I Have Worked As A Producer And Dj For Over 15 Years. I Have worked On LP's From B.I.G, Mase, L.O.X, Drag-on, Big Pun, You Can Check The Credit's. I Am Alicia Keys Dj Right Now, Can You Help Me??? I Am Just Trying To Put My Bio, And Info Up For The World To See. I Appreciate Your Help In Advance. My E-Mail Is Also Djiroc@gmail.com, P.S The Myspace At 58300157 Or Myspace.com/djirocamwdjs Is My Page. Thank You. (Amwdjs (talk) 08:30, 9 February 2009 (UTC))--Amwdjs (talk) 05:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC) --Amwdjs (talk) 07:31, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost — February 16, 2009

From the editor — A new leaf

Commons Picture of the Year
Picture of the Year 2008 begins voting

News and notes
Flagged Revisions, historical image discovery, and more

In the news
Political tiff, error repeated in press, predictions of doom

Dispatches
How busy was 2008?

WikiProject report
WikiProject Gaelic games

Discussion report
Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations

Features and admins
Approved this week

Technology report
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Arbitration report
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist.
If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 06:52, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

for reverting the move of my user page and talk page. Cheers, Rivertorch (talk) 07:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Odd vandal, that Index Sales. His targets were all old timers, and neither much editing these days. Sad, sad, but thanks for the reverts & blocks. Geogre (talk) 12:42, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for you quick response. --J.Mundo (talk) 15:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Arabic translation

Sorry, I'm out of control busy and I can't take on any new projects. Good luck at finding someone! Aelfthrytha (talk) 20:06, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

no worries, thanks anyway--Jac16888^Talk 20:10, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Bun39

I wanted to get your feedback on the feedback I left Bun39 (talk · contribs), on a way he might get re-instated. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:33, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

strange, I didn't get the orange bar for this message. Anyway, re your possibilities. At this moment in time, or any time soon, there is no chance I'm likely to unblock him, unless he pulls a FA or two out of his, well, you get the idea. As far as I can tell, he's just been a nuisance who just ignored everything he was told. However, I suppose I can see the logic in what you're saying about waiting a year, maybe it'll give him time to grow up. See what he says, but don't make any promise's, assuming good faith is great but we don't want to shoot ourselves in the foot--Jac16888^Talk 01:46, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Award

		The Original Barnstar
		Thanks for doing a lot to help Wikipedia Abce2 (talk) 03:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)Abce2

Martyn Joseph

Hi, I saw you had commented on Skyegirl173's talk page about this article. While I do not doubt the artist himself is notable, his children, their names, and their ages are not; nor are the children in the public spotlight. There are those who prey upon the subjects of our articles, and the children of our article subjects are particularly vulnerable. There is a bit of a tightrope we have to walk when it comes to BLPs, including factual and significant information, while leaving behind the trivial, particularly if the trivial is potentially harmful. This article has been vandalised a lot (to the point the subject has apparently mentioned it in radio interviews), so it needs to be kept as tightly edited as possible. Best, Risker (talk) 06:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

...I'm baaack.......

Hello why did you not agree with me on the old user, I had only vandalized a little bit and you agreed with someone that I should be indefinetly blocked, how was I a vandalism-only account! Anyway, have a good day.--Starwars1791...continued (talk) 03:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)