User talk:Jehochman

This is Jehochman's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24: 7 days

Please leave a new message. I answer posts on the same page.

Wow. A clean talk page.

re recall criteria

Jehochman, all I am saying it would have been wise to have taken more care when proposing for a recall. You obviously knew about her latter post, and it would have been helpful to note that in your request. That would have prevented a lot of the confusion. Anyway, whats done is done on that front. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 23:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to stay off that page. Could we move that discussion here, perhaps, and you can link to it? No, I did not recognize that there were two slightly different posts (though I may have linked to both of them on different occasions), because I am the type of person who lives by the spirit of my promises, not by the letter. People are concerned about Elonka's administrative actions, not her actions as an ordinary editor. That is clear. Sorry if I seem testy, but this ordeal has been very hard to stomach. I do not like putting another human being through such stress. Jehochman ^Talk 00:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries; that page is too busy anyway. For context, I am neutral on the recall, have pointed out that you were aware of the more clear recall criteria, and would like those endorsing it to be clear about what administrative actions concern each endorsee. Im not pleased that you have put her through this either, but the main issue I have with your actions was that you didnt articulate what administrative actions where problematic, and didnt frame the recall around the criteria you knew about. Consequently others have endorsed it based on regrettable comments which we all make from time to time when the shit hits the fan.
While I think an RFC would be preferable, the current one had/has issues, so I feel that we need a clear indication, from six people who dont merely hold a grudge over some regrettable comment, that they see recall as the solution to particular admin actions/behaviour. I am asking people to jump through hoops a little, but I hope it is obvious that six clear statements, or the absence of such, will give us a clear direction to take moving forward. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 00:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I support what you are doing. It is better to make things clear! Jehochman ^Talk 00:28, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

bar code reader

Question, Once I receive the Intermec reader, and start my conducting the physical inventory at Building X, will I have the capability to create and print the barcode label there at the inventory site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.65.147.107 (talk) 17:06, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea why you chose me to ask this question, but I'll try to help since I know a little about this. The scanner just reads. Typically, if you want to print a barcode label, you need a barcode printer, some software, labels, and a computer. If you google:barcode printing or google:barcode software or google:physical inventory, there should be numerous companies offering solutions. Jehochman ^Talk 17:13, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm definitely open to mentorship

Just let me know. Cheerio! ScienceApologist (talk) 15:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like you are trying to plug every leak with your thumbs, but you don't have enough to go around. A better approach would be to rebuild the dike one section at a time so it stops leaking. What I suggest is that we identify a high importance article that has been overrun with fringe views and original research, then clean it up to good article or even featured article standards. I have found that quality certification helps prevent backsliding, by establishing a consensus for what the article should contain, and by bringing in lots of eyes, especially those of quality-conscious editors. I think I can find a mentor who could help you with this endeavor. However, I'd like you to agree to disengage from the multiple disputes you are involved in (take them off your watchlist), and focus on a small number of "renovation project" articles. The mentor that I could find for you would help deal with any disruptive editors. Jehochman ^Talk 20:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have plenty of experience cleaning up articles to good and featured status. However, I have absolutely no desire to do this for articles outside of my discipline. I've run-off the vast majority of astronomy pseudoscience POV-pushers, so I'm not sure what else you are wanting. The closest I can think of it cold fusion which has been plagued by editors with very particular agendas and administrators in great need of WP:CLUE, but there's no way I would be able to devote myself full-bore to just that article as I find dealing with the likes of the characters that hang out there to be overwhelmingly aggravating and dull for anything more than a week. ScienceApologist (talk) 21:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

Just so you know, 208.54.94.111 is requesting an unblock. PhilKnight (talk) 12:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I left a note there. Jehochman ^Talk 13:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep.

I agree with the "officialness" of the warning, I'll reiterate I called it "appropriate". Fritzpoll posted on my talkpage, I'd been watching this issue unfold/develop over the weekend and was tangentially involved. While you were (presumably) typing up your edit there, I was compiling a list of the contentious areas that the user in question has decided to "do battle", and was shocked at how many divisive issues he is involved in in just the past week. I went to his talkpage to post my post, and was surprised (and refreshed) to see someone already there. Keeper ǀ 76 15:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Playing devil's advocate

It wouldn't take too much digging to show that I am a UK resident, and that the IP accused is also from the UK. Does this shift the balance of evidence in Abd's favour for a CU? Why am I asking this? Because if it is to be done, then t'were well it were done quickly Fritzpoll (talk) 19:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry. I have worked on enough RFCU cases to be familiar with their standards. There is no evidence to connnect you; no check can be run. Abd is bluffing and trying to get you upset. Just ignore any further provocations. You should see some of the things that people have said about me![1] Jehochman ^Talk 19:32, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe - cool, just throwing it out there. Fritzpoll (talk) 19:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SA

I'm not sure this is a job for the mentor since the damage is already done. I am probably more concerned than MartinPhi is but I hate to see an editor come back to this. This kind of behaviour wears down editors. Martin left feeling discouraged, and despite the encouragement of several editors who felt he had a lot to offer. He has finally returned. This kind of behaviour undermines Wikipedia civility and collaborative editing at a subtle level call it what you will on the surface. Thanks and best wishes.(olive (talk) 01:52, 12 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Damage done can best be resolved by offering assistance to repair the problem. Additionally, you can request more "eyes" in the form of uninvolved parties. We don't sanction editors to compensate for past errors. We do sometimes use sanctions to deter or prevent future problems. Since one (and possibly a second) mentor have been engaged, I think that remedy should be utilized first, before we move on to the next possibility. Jehochman ^Talk 02:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that we don't sanction as punishment. I also feel concern about this kind of situation. I have no desire to punish anyone. At the same time, I have no desire to see an editor face unfair situations and environments in attempts to edit. However, The mentor will know best what to do, and I'll leave my concerns in his hands. Many thanks for your comments.(olive (talk) 02:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)_[reply]

Java

Hey,

I'm trying to put a javascript menu on another wiki.... any idea who I could ask about the mechanics of that? ——Martin^phi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 06:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

a note

I sent you a personal email about a situation that I find troubling. I hope you understand and I hope you don't take offense from me emailing you. I welcome any communication or discussion. My feelings and thoughts are very scattered, so please take that into consideration before reading. Ottava Rima (talk) 04:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck

It looks like you're the new tar baby, Jehochman. ;) Now you're also harrassing Abd. ^S._D.Jameson 04:15, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When stepping in between a troll and a target, I often get attacked. It comes with the job. Jehochman ^Talk 13:26, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your question:

I have voluntarily given you my identity and IP address on a popular WP discussion site of which you are a member. If you need further information, you may contact me there. (As a reference, it was the place in which we were discussing who to invite to the party...) Gretab (talk) 21:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will use that information if necessary. Jehochman ^Talk 21:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GlobalCollect page

I am curious to know why you speed deleted the page I wrote regarding GlobalCollect without any prior warning as to what was unacceptable in the article. My goal was to create a sterile company profile (similar to the pages of CyberSource, Basic Research, Aveda, and a myriad of other companies on Wikipedia), not blatantly advertise for this particular company. Furthermore, you protected the page so I could not even rework the content to meet the Wikipedia standards. Any information you can provide would be greatly appreciated.