User talk:Jaiwills

Welcome!

Hello, Jaiwills, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! New Rock Star 05:31, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Gibson Girl

Please make fewer edits (with larger changes in each edit, if necessary) as it makes it hard to follow the changes in the article history. The "show preview" button can help show what the article will look like without saving the changes, allowing fine tuning of the article. Rmhermen 00:36, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gibson Girl

Hi, I was just wondering if you could tell me why you've taken over a hundred edits just to move pictures around in the Gibson Girl article. Why don't you just create a subpage off your user page at User:Jaiwills/Gibson and get the article the way you want it to look there, then copy and paste that into the article? Or at least put {{inuse}} on the Gibson Girl page so that people see that you're working on it? Also, how about making the pics a bit smaller. With the pics being so large it makes the article hard to read and very messy looking. A gallery might like good, such as this one. Dismas|^(talk) 00:37, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Preview button

Can you please use preview more often? I notice that this has been mentioned to you before. - brenneman ^{L} 07:49, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Houston, we have a problem

Hi mate. While I have made an edit to the page in question, I've now got my admin hat firmly in place. I'm also speaking as an experianced editor trying to give friendly advice, so please do listen.

Use preview. Don't make thirty small edits when one or two larger ones will do.
Respect consensus. When two seperate editors have reversed your actions, don't re-reverse. Talk.
Sign your posts on talk pages.
Read the Wikipedia:Ownership of articles policy. Twice.

I applaud the adding of sources, and am glad to see you citing policy and guideline in your arguments, but your approach could use a little tuning up. Better now than when the editing gets hot.
brenneman ^{L} 12:19, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bondage articles

I admire the intention of your edits. Please contact me, either on my talk page or preferably by activating your e-mail. Taxwoman 22:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Preview

I would like to thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. However, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thanks again. —♦♦ SʘʘTHING^(Я) 10:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional portrayals of psychopaths‎

Delighted to be able to send you this message to compliment you on your remarkable work in turning some information I shuffled off to save space into an excellent an informative article. --Zeraeph 17:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For your work on Zazel...

Thanks - excellent work bringing Zazel to life! bd2412 T 00:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summaries

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. Powers ^T 13:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Angel

While it may be true that my comments were not inappopriate, I still believe I made a mistake by not giving Jaiwills a fair chance to get out of his loop without feeling (mistakenly) ridiculed.

And I am NOT proud that the Laura Angel talk page looks like a battlefield after making some corrections about a week ago. Therefore I removed all superfluous word fencing from the talk page. That includes not only my but also some of Jaiwills responses (as far as they evolved from my posts), as well as some cheeky stuff from mirwais (whos under my thumb anyway *giggle*). I know this might not be the “standard” procedere for you Wiki guys, but I think it is the best for both parties and the wiki bio as a whole. Let's be nice to each other.

I do not want anybody to be banned over my contributions, but personal attacks are off limits. However I don't hold a grudge against Jaiwills. As stated by himself Jaiwills seems to be a guy interested in a broad range of subjects and thus I'm sure he can be a valued contributor to Wikipedia once he learns to keep his temper. A lesson we all learn and re-learn (especially me).

Jaiwills, my wikipedian newbie (that's me) advice to you is: write an article about one of your fav fetish movies featuring bondage hoods and then link this picture you like so much as fair use to your work and additionally to the wiki about bondage hoods. I just wanted to stress once more that I do not "make fun" out of you just because you contribute to certain articles, on the contrary, I appreciate that you tried to make the article on LA better in your point of view. By the way, the notion about Goldlight productions was no joke or smartypanty lecturing, just ask them if you can use this promotional head shot.

The crux with articles on adult actors is that much of the information you will find somewhere on the internet is likely wrong and that most of those who retired have little to no interest in providing additional information (or any at all) and just want to find a little piece of mind. Maybe those of you who work on this "pornstar biography" project should keep this in mind and add a possibility for actors to request to be removed. By the bye, I will try to add some nice pictures to this wiki somewhere in the future.

feel free to delete my comment (and the various admonitions that evolved from your participation on the LA page) from your talk page once your ban is lifted.

peace, PartySan CZ 22:05, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:I'll bring the food

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Tabercil 07:52, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user has a long history of repeated personal attacks, warnings and blocks for such. Therefore, I've blocked for what is a relatively long period of time, but I think it is justified: we don't have to tolerate comments like "will you please just die"[1]. Jaiwills, understand that if you wish to edit here, you must follow WP:NPA. — Matt Crypto 20:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Jaiwills (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

it is not fair that i should be blocked due to a campaign of unsolicited harassment and insolent remarks by the likes of i'll bring the food and Matt Crypto; it is obvious that these guys have some kind of personal vendetta against me and will not leave me alone and are just going out of their way to provoke and insult me at every possible opportunity

Decline reason:

You don't get it, do you? If you are blocked for personal attacks, the thing that does not get you unblocked is posting an unblock request with more personal attacks. Next time it's a permanent block. -- Sandstein 20:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Jaiwills (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

How long have you been a clown??? Personal attacks, my rosy pink ass!! I am the one who is constantly being attacked on my talk page by you jerks who are forever stalking me around on different articles -- and there is absolutely no reason for this abusive behavior! It's obvious that you fuckers can dish it out but just can't take it! I really don't care if you don't like me, pal. I don't like you either! This isn't a social club! For the last time, go away and leave me alone!! You know you wanted to ban me anyway merely to satisfy your own frivolous spite and vanity. I can always edit on another computer with another account. It's really not that difficult, so I am not in the least bit threatened by you. I have made extensive contributions to the site and this is the kind of crap I have to put up with??? Unbelievable! Truly unbelievable!!

Decline reason:

Try again, once you've calmed down. Right now, you don't seem ready to do anything but troll. Sorry. Luna Santin 09:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Righty, blocked indefinitely. — Matt Crypto 09:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good! I'm glad, asshole! You've just proved my point -- and you haven't seen the last of me either! Now fuck off!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jaiwills (talk • contribs) 04:42, December 8, 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:1984 film DVD.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:1984 film DVD.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 20:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source for Image:Last Tango in Paris nude.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Last Tango in Paris nude.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then you need to specify who owns the copyright, please. If you got it from a website, then a link to the website where it was taken from with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 22:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 22:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Last Tango in Paris nude.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Last Tango in Paris nude.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 22:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:1984 nude screenshot1.jpg

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:1984 nude screenshot1.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. When you use a generic fair use tag such as {{fair use}} or {{fair use in|article name}}, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 22:27, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Stockard Channing1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Stockard Channing1.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Yamla 19:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Hells Belles.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hells Belles.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 00:43, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Ian and Myra.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ian and Myra.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 01:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Ian Brady.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ian Brady.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 03:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Ponytail hood.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Ponytail hood.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 07:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Room 101 scene.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Room 101 scene.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 03:39, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:1984 main title.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:1984 main title.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:John Hurt 1984 ii.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:John Hurt 1984 ii.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Richard Burton O'Brien.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Richard Burton O'Brien.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 05:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing!

This site really is a con, isn't it? You people are just despicable, vengeful parasites and intellectual-property thieves. You really think you can block me from editing articles that I spent hours creating and writing?? What have you written lately? You don't own my writing! Such ingrates! Utterly appalling!! Parasites and thieves!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jaiwills (talk • contribs) 04:01, February 2, 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you don't own your writing. Sorry, that's misleading and a bigger troll than your rant above... you licensed all your contributions with the GFDL, which essentially puts all that text into the public domain. Here's how it occured: each time you edit the page, just above the Edit Summary box is the following text:

Content that violates any copyright will be deleted. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable. You agree to license your contributions under the GFDL.

Look at that last sentence, then look at the actual GFDL license. To quote from the license preamble: "The purpose of this License is to make a manual, textbook, or other functional and useful document "free" in the sense of freedom: to assure everyone the effective freedom to copy and redistribute it, with or without modifying it, either commercially or noncommercially." And to quote from Wikipedia:Copyrights: "you can never retract the GFDL license for the versions you placed here: that material will remain under GFDL forever." Tabercil 23:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's just the kind of arrogant response I've come to expect from you loathsome, slime-covered maggots who are forever looking for an abscess of pus to swim in!

You can bloviate all of the pompous pseudo-legalistic blather you want. It doesn't change the fact that you are still a despicable parasite and an ingrate who feeds off others' contributions to this site. I know that you people don't appreciate that fact since you clearly enjoy interfering with users.

It's not right that I should be blocked from articles that I myself wrote and created -- articles of a very high quality, I might add -- by some smarmy bullying cretin like you!!! How can I "vandalize" my own article??? I fail to see how my writing violates some copyright when you're the one who is ripping me off and depriving me of due credit.