User talk:Jeff G.

Top Links

Logs Warnings ©tags Del.guidelines {{Message}} CommonsHelper Flinfo MagicWords EditWL&UT EditTopLinks EditTopLinks RC sp WP:ADCO/RFC BRFAer RfAdrafth Reflinks (simple semiauto reFill) NPF lbrxpdf lbdcrxp Guestbook WP:BL UDR gen RTRCip

Project Matrix

Page types	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
User pages	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
User page histories	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
User talk pages	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
User talk page histories	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
Your Preferences ("Number of edits" includes deleted edits)	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
Your Watchlists	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
View and Edit Your Watchlists	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
Contributions	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
Contributions & Edits (Luxo's Global user contributions tool; includes deleted edits)	all	all	all	all	all	all
Gallery (Duesentrieb's WikiSense Gallery DuesenTool script)	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
Project Matrices	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
History of Project Matrices	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple
Edit Project Matrices	Commons	en	de	m	b	simple

Page last updated 04:09, 14 July 2024 (UTC). if it is out of date.

Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #260

Committed identity: 727de6b488652594443d85385a2cfd607fa15b739c8b755390d6621c3199b4d42f7c3877ca6746a6dc536836fcf0b8c96620135523fe88af6d6c2e44e87aa21b is a SHA-512 commitment to this user's real-life identity.

Welcome to my user talk page!

Please do all of the following:

• Always link to the text, image, or edit you want to discuss. When linking to an image, use a colon. For example, "[[:Image:Example.jpg]]" produces "Image:Example.jpg".
• Don't forget to provide a proper Edit Summary for each and every edit, and a proper signature for each and every post to a talk page or notice board. I may revert edits that do not have such features, rather than respond to them.
• Reply to interactive messages at the location of the original topic to not scatter talk all around, fracturing the discussion. I do have nearly all pages I have posted to recently on my Watchlist. If I missed a comment, please use {{Talkback}} to drop me a short reminder with a link here.
• Respect my babel boxes. Write in English. I'm also able to communicate in Spanish a bit, but with that language I can't give a guarantee that I will really comprehend the meaning of your message.
• If you're copying files from any project to Commons, be sure to use the CommonsHelper.
• If you're copying pics from Flickr, be sure to use Flinfo, the easy way to upload pics from Flickr.
• If your text or image is lacking source, license, or permission, fix that instead of asking here what is wrong. There should be a message on your talk page explaining things in detail. Apologies for having to be so clear if this message is not related to the matter you would like to address.
• Post here if you want to reach me, or reply to a post below via the edit link above that post.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 7 days are automatically archived to the Monthly Archive for the month of the last timestamp. Sections with less than two timestamps (that have not been replied to) are not archived.

Current Monthly Archive    (redlinked the first week    or more of each month): 2024/July Past and near future    Monthly Archives: 2006/December 2007/January 2007/February 2007/March 2007/April 2007/May 2007/June 2007/July 2007/August 2007/September 2007/October 2007/November 2007/December 2008/January 2008/February 2008/March 2008/April 2008/May 2008/July 2008/August 2008/September 2008/October 2008/November 2008/December 2009/January 2009/February 2009/March 2009/April 2009/May 2009/June 2009/July 2009/August 2009/September 2009/October 2009/November 2010/January 2010/February 2010/March 2010/April 2010/May 2010/June

Template:Vandalcount

Other correspondence

Parking

You guys are on point tonight. I figured my edit of "Miroslav Klose" would get nailed quickly enough but an edit of "Parking"......I'm impressed by the response time. I do think you should manage to work "reverse parking" or "backing in" into your article though as it is a very popular form of parking. Just a thought. Thanks for your time, have a good evening, and see you next edit.  :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.191.170.243 (talk) 00:44, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ 00:51, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

STOP

Stop removing my edits mate. Who do you think you are? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.154.234.206 (talk) 01:03, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

reliable source

You want any reliable source, read any damn history book about the war huh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.113.208.155 (talk) 00:50, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Which one did you read, and where exactly did it say that Sweden shared in the victory of the English Wars (Scandinavia)? Please cite it. Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ 01:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I guess you don't read much history, arn't you? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.113.208.155 (talk) 01:28, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

The AIV I had declined

I blocked that user once I saw that he had resumed editing and you clarified. In the future, describe edits like that as disruptive, rather than vandalism. Daniel Case (talk) 03:43, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I have drafted some response language at User:Jeff G./Disruptive editing responses - please take a look at it. Thanks again!   — Jeff G. ツ 04:20, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit war

Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on International Association of Certified Home Inspectors. While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 19:15, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I have flagged it as a copyvio instead.   — Jeff G. ツ 21:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

It looked suspiciously like a copyvio but I wasn't able to find a match. Without a tag or edit summary, it's an edit war. Thanks for clearing up. Toddst1 (talk) 21:17, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ 21:18, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Albion's Seed

Re this notice - the IP concerned has, for some weeks now, been carrying out similar types of edits to a variety of articles, and his preferred edit summary is "copy edit". He was blocked for about 24 hr in late May for unsourced POV-pushing. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:06, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.   — Jeff G. ツ 21:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Aspect ratio (image)

Why do you think that list of TV channels belongs to that article?--Ancient Anomaly (talk) 22:35, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

For the same reason that the lists (tables) are in the article for Asia and Oceania. That list has been in the article in some form since this edit 09:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC).   — Jeff G. ツ 22:46, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Los Angeles Tennis Club

Please review your use of rollback to revert the IP at the article above, and explain how the edits are "vandalism". You might owe the IP an apology. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:02, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for your concern. In this of its first series of edits to that article this month, the editor at that IP Address deleted a referenced paragraph about living person Angela Buxton without explanation. In its next series of edits, it made more unreferenced changes involving living persons, including an unexplained deletion. Similarly, in its last series of edits, it made even more unreferenced changes involving living persons, including an unexplained deletion. All of these are contrary to policies and guidelines, including WP:BLP, WP:V, and WP:RS. It has yet to explain any of them.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:20, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't ask why you reverted the changes; I asked why you used rollback, didn't explain your revert, called the IP's edits "vandalism", and reported them to AIV. I note that, with one or two exceptions, the whole page is essentially unsourced, so adding unsourced material doesn't seem to be a reasonable reason to demand blocking without talking to the editor first. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:30, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I used rollback because Huggle is configured to use rollback, I am allowed to use rollback, and unexplained/unsourced changes to content are blatantly unproductive, one type of edit upon which rollback is permitted. Twinkle and Huggle use language that calls such changes vandalism by default. Huggle decided to automatically report that IP Address to AIV on my behalf when I elected to have it take action on the last set of changes. Reports at AIV are not demands for blocking, they are requests for administrator attention. Fyunck(click) (talk · contribs) and Epeefleche (talk · contribs) tried talking to this editor as 98.238.208.110 (talk · contribs) using templates, to no avail. Others have tried talking to this editor in previous guises (per Fyunck(click)) as Djensen409 (talk · contribs), 71.197.77.124 (talk · contribs), and 67.161.160.59 (talk · contribs), also to no avail. I cannot withdraw my AIV report, but I have apologized.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:57, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Jeff, thank you for your comment on his talk page. However, the rest of this response concerns me even more than I was initially. You should consider a little more if this is really the approach you want to take. As I'm sure you were told when you started using Huggle, you are responsible for the edits made with those tools; nothing is Huggle's fault. It is really not on to report an editor to AIV if you don't think they're vandalizing. It is not on to call an editor's edits vandalism "by default" if they aren't vandalism. Please either figure out how to use the non-default approach when necessary, or stop reverting anything except clear vandalism with Huggle. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Huggle has two options for reporting users, "Vandalism after final warning" and "Inappropriate username". Twinkle has three options for reporting users, "Vandalism", "Username", and "Sockpuppeteer". Neither has an option for reporting disruptive or tendentious editing anywhere. I have started using WP:DE for disruptive non-vandalistic editing by users with redlinked user talk pages (see my mention of User:Jeff G./Disruptive editing responses above), but with this user there was already a fresh level 4 warning on its user talk page, so I trusted too much in the judgement of Epeefleche (talk · contribs).   — Jeff G. ツ 02:22, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Then don't use automated tools and templates. If there isn't a template that says what you're trying to say, write it out. If the edit isn't blatant vandalism, don't use rollback. If Huggle doesn't give you an option that doesn't use rollback, use another button. The undo feature is very much underrated- it's not just for new editors, I use it frequently and I'm an admin. If the edit is disruptive, but not vandalism per se, undo it with an explanation in the edit summary, and leave the editor a polite note explaining why the edit isn't appropriate. If that doesn't work, then you can escalate to using rollback etc. I don't know how Huggle works with warnings, but Twinkle has a complete index of warning templates, so use the right one. Imagine if you were a new editor and you changed a genre on a music article (for example), only to have it reverted without explanation and to see some template message about vandalism on your talk page. How would that make you feel about your first experience with Wikipedia? Without wishing to sound unpleasant, Huggle is not a substitute for thought or communication. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:35, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for pointless warnings

"Please stop reverting other people's edits, as you are doing in Martin Tyler. You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. If you revert again, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia without further notice. Please discuss any disputed changes on the talk page. Thank you. — Jeff G. ツ"

At least do what you ask me to do. Go take a look at the talk page before undoing my edit. I discussed it on the talk page at the first place and then you simply undid my edit without making a response to my discussion. Please send one of these warnings to yourself.-- And Rew 02:55, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I have already responded there.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:57, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes thank you for your response, by the time I posted the above message you hadn't yet. And by the way I apologize for my harsh language, I got furious because I was about to get blocked from Wikipedia -- And Rew 03:03, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ 03:53, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

CHiPs vandal

So, they're now spamming their own talk page. Sorry if I stepped into the middle of something that I shouldn't have. I'm still sorta new at this, so I'm just wondering what's the appropriate action here? Let 'em go and when they get bored, revert the page back to normal? Or, just completely ignore them and let them do whatever they want to their talk page (keeping in mind that's a shared page and other, innocent, anonymous IP editors might see it? Just wondering. Cheers! -- Bgpaulus (talk) 04:21, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

The next step is to block them. Please see WP:RBI.   — Jeff G. ツ 04:23, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the info! -- Bgpaulus (talk) 04:28, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ 04:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, too, for reverting that same vandal's damage to my talk page! -- Bgpaulus (talk) 17:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome again.   — Jeff G. ツ 18:37, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Abkhazia–Venezuela relations

I am never good at nominating articles for deletion, it isn't my speciality however it appears that you're rather good at it. I can't really remember what to do. Could you please nominate "Abkhazia–Venezuela relations" for deletion on my behalf. I previously nominated it for deletion in September last year, however the article is still not notable, it doesn't go beyond diplomatic recognition and that is already covered in the article "International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia"; "Abkhazia–Venezuela relations" just repeats that article. It adds nothing new, it isn't notable and it is just a redundant article. Regards IJA (talk) 15:26, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I think they should be merged, so I have tagged them as such and started a discussion at Talk:International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia#Merge_from_Abkhazia.E2.80.93Venezuela_relations.

For semiautomated AfD, I have been using the "xfd" feature of Twinkle, which unfortunately does not work with Internet Explorer.   — Jeff G. ツ 18:36, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Cheers IJA (talk) 19:45, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Unisonic (band)

I'm just reminding you to be a bit more careful when prodding an article, checking the history first. It had already been proposed for deletion and this is a clear case of the author intentionally removing the prod tag. If you think the article should still be deleted as poorly referenced, you need to go to WP:AFD. Thanks, PleaseStand ^(talk) 15:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry. I PRODded it for different reasons, but since my PROD has been reverted, I have sent it to AfD.   — Jeff G. ツ 18:28, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

June 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Communist Party of China has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you.

Irritating, isn't it?

Now, here's what happened. This was the status before my edit:

ideology =
Communism,
Maoism,
Deng Xiaoping Theory with Chinese Socialism,
Three Represents,
Scientific Development Concept. Note the high degree of accuracy.

This is the edit by an editor who did not log in (202.40.139.168)

>Chinese Socialism,
Social conservatism
Chinese nationalism . Notice the lack of accuracy.

So, I reverted it. And, I will do so again. Please explain why you do not accept the standard description of current CCP ideology, and instead support this original research.

Thanks! DOR (HK) (talk) 13:11, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. I have reverted my warning. You also made a mistake in posting to my user page, rather than my user talk page.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:42, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, the page is so crowded that I couldn't tell what it is! DOR (HK) (talk) 07:45, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Myth Men Guardians of the Legend

Hey Jeff G.

Im just wondering why it was deleted. The page was Myth Men Guardians of the Legend. Reply on my talk page. Cheers mate! Canterbury21 (talk) 06:52, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

You posted in the wrong place (on my user page, not my user talk page. Article Myth Men Guardians of the Legend still exists, but is the subject of a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myth Men Guardians of the Legend, where I wrote "No indication it meets notability criteria for books. Unsourced. Contested PROD." You may comment there if you wish.   — Jeff G. ツ 16:29, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Linda R. Reade

Hey! I did post credible and verifiable sources, such as the NYTimes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.15.152.39 (talk) 21:54, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Not in this edit.   — Jeff G. ツ 21:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Alright. Im learning. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lower458 (talk • contribs) 22:11, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Did you post the "Hey!" message above?   — Jeff G. ツ 22:13, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lower458 (talk • contribs) 22:15, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

68.185.103.237

Please see WP:LTA/Grawp. In other words, if you see HAGGER, just report the IP as JarlaxleArtemis or "Grawp." Just a heads up  – Tommy [message] 23:36, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but can Grawp be blocked on sight for ban evasion, and is WP:AIV the best method to notify an admin about the offender?   — Jeff G. ツ 23:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

AIV is designed for vandalism, I think it's okay. I'm especially pleased with many new sysops so I have no reason to think it wouldn't be. I just sent the message here cuz I saw you give the JA/G (IP) a 4im warning, and wanted to let you know that it's okay to just report him. Thanks  – Tommy [message] 23:45, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Darrin McGillis

Appears we have a person libeling a living person Darrin McGillis using a blog as sourced info--98.242.241.252 (talk) 02:08, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Please see WP:OVERSIGHT.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:09, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

User: XJRfoBY

You recently flagged me for this edit, stating I was personally attacking someone. I don't see how I was attacking anyone. Could you please elaborate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by XJRfoBY (talk • contribs) 05:04, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Your Edit Summary called Rrius "a liberal".   — Jeff G. ツ 05:06, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

With all do respect, that's not an insult, it is an accurate description. He was recruited by Devono because he was an experienced editor who had reviewed a variety of liberal pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by XJRfoBY (talk • contribs) 05:33, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello

Why are you deleting what I wrote on Jayg's page?Ekarfi13 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.132.185.48 (talk) 05:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Why do you keep impersonating Ekarfi13?   — Jeff G. ツ 05:45, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

the article Maghrebim is very important for our community , we have an identity , we do not want people to forget it. why are you saying I'm impersonating ? I'm not.Ekarfi13 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.132.185.48 (talk) 05:50, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Why aren't you logging in then?   — Jeff G. ツ 05:51, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok I do it then..but I'm enregistered in the French Wikipedia Ekarfi13 —Preceding undated comment added 05:56, 22 June 2010 (UTC).

Thanks, but you still need to datestamp your posts.   — Jeff G. ツ 05:58, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

El Mezquital

El Mezquital was some sort of hoax/non notable group, so I deleted it. The speedy tag wasn't strictly correct, as the article doesn't exist on another project (at least in that form). (eswiki) NativeForeigner ^Talk/_Contribs 06:22, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.   — Jeff G. ツ 17:36, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

A question

I'm just wondering how you came to the conclusion that removing a category from a few articles was vandalism to the point that you reported the IP to AIV. Maybe I'm missing something, but removing one category from a group of articles doesn't seem like vandalism to me. For the record, your report was declined by User:Materialscientist. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:30, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

The user was quickly depopulating a category, without expressing any reasons either in Edit Summaries or in talk pages, despite being asked not to.   — Jeff G. ツ 23:33, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

{{subst:uw-vandal1}}-{{subst:uw-vandal4}} isn't really asking them to stop. They may have had a perfectly good reason for removing that category. I know I'm giving you a bit of a hard time of late, for which I apologise, but Huggle isn't a substitute for discussion and just disagreeing with or not understanding an edit doesn't make it vandalism. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:08, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I asked.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:16, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

The Cheese (producer)

Hi Jeff - sorry for that deletion, was not aware of protocol, definitely didn't mean to mess with an article in that way. My bad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thecheesefeed (talk • contribs) 00:48, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Please sign your posts and see Wikipedia:Autobiography. Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ 01:19, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry

yo im sorry and i wont change music genres its just the song is east coast hip-hop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.168.227.54 (talk) 02:53, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Please feel free to make your argument on the talk page, and then if you can establishing a consensus there, you can change the genre, with reference to the consensus in the Edit Summary.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Mistaken reversion

Apologies for this mistaken reversion. You and I were apparently both seeking to revert the immediately preceding edit; you reverted that, and I reverted you. I'm guessing that this was due to a mis-click on my part. Another editor noticed my error and reverted me here (for which I have thanked him). Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 07:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for the notice.   — Jeff G. ツ 03:14, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Empire of Brazil

Hello! Well, I'm quite surprise to see that there is someone else who pays some attention to that article! About your question, I removed because the text is wrong and misleading.

Any reader who would like to know more about the history of the Brazilian Empire should take a look - for now - at the following links (as long I am not done with the article):

• Pedro II of Brazil
• Decline and fall of Pedro II of Brazil
• Honório Carneiro Leão, Marquis of Paraná

It's all a matter of having patience. Soon all will be done. Kind regards, --Lecen (talk) 19:07, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that information. I saw your deletion on recent changes.   — Jeff G. ツ 19:11, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

User:Adamjaviv

Am I the only one who finds it strange how all of his edits are immediately (within 1 minute) after vandalism edits from IPs? -Regancy42 (talk) 05:27, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Maybe he's using WP:RC to find edit candidates?   — Jeff G. ツ 05:28, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Too coincidental. I don't know, it looks suspicious to me. -Regancy42 (talk) 05:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

False Accusations

Please stop pasting false accusations on my page, I have never removed or deleted anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.249.98 (talk) 07:32, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Please stop removing SineBot's signatures and start adding your own. Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 07:35, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I just checked, and what happened was an accidental deletion, my apologies to you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.249.98 (talk) 07:38, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I am new to Wikipedia and so I'm still learning the edit rules and such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.249.98 (talk) 07:40, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Welcome. You should read the following next: WP:V, WP:RS, WP:Signatures, and Template:Welcome-anon.   — Jeff G. ツ 07:43, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

What vandalism?

First I have a roll back guy say i am adding un-sourced material. I am not doing that and in fact I am adding sources and putting sources to material that does not have it. And correcting mistakes or what others improperly changed and did not source. When I ask for an explanation of this the roll back guy ignored me. Then I do another edit and you accuse me of vandalism. My edit to that article did not constitute vandalism. Please show where I did any vandalism and please provide the proof of what wikipedia rule I broke in that edit that qualifies as vandalism.74.194.176.82 (talk) 08:26, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

In this edit, you deleted the text "He is projected to be a draft pick in the 2010 NBA Draft. His" and the text "His primary weakness is his lack of strength." without explanation.   — Jeff G. ツ 08:29, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

First of all kindly explain how that is "vandalism". Under Wikipedia's rules that is no such thing as vandalism. The first part about him being an NBA draft pick.......he was not an NBA draft pick. How can it be vandalism for removing that? So for removing something about him being a draft pick, when he was not drafted is "vandalism"? The second part is not vandalism either. "His primary weakness is lack of strength"? Really? According to whom? So someone's personal opinion on how strong someone may or may not be (with no proof of this opinion I might add) is considered encyclopedic to you? And I asked for you to please kindly show me the Wikipedia rule that states what i did was vandalism.74.194.176.82 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 08:33, 25 June 2010 (UTC).

Please see Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace/Multi-level_templates#Deletion, Wikipedia:Blocking policy, and Wikipedia:Vandalism.   — Jeff G. ツ 08:45, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I will repeat it once again. He was not an NBA draft pick. So it should not say in the article that he was going to be one. A personal and unverified and unsourced opinion on how strong someone is or is not, isn't considered encyclopedic content. Removing those two things is not considered vandalism. Do I need to ask some admins to settle this? Because the first thing I get is from the roll backer that I am putting unsourced info which was a false accusation. That's not true as I was putting sources. I asked him for an explanation and he ignored and it would provide no proof of his accusations. I got a level 1 warning whatever that is. Then suddenly you accuse me of vandalism when I was not vandalizing anything. Then say i got a level 2 warning. So is that how this works? Someone did not like an edit I made so he falsely accuses me of not sourcing material, then he has you jump in and accuse me falsely of vandalism? Is that how this works here? Will I get a level 3 warning for some phantom violation next? If you can't explain these actions properly I will have other admins look at this, because I know this isn't right what you are claiming.74.194.176.82 (talk) 08:52, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, you're right. I have withdrawn my revert and warning. I also withdrew your comment on my warning because it no longer had context.   — Jeff G. ツ 09:15, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect level for vandal template

Hi Jeff,

You issued a level one warning diff to 68.173.67.147‎ for vandalism to 14th Street (Manhattan), when I have already issued up to level three for the same vandalism. Could you please change that to a level four warning and report to AIV? Thanks! Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:38, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

 Done   — Jeff G. ツ 08:59, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:10, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

French exonyms

Please explain your recent series of reverts (e.g. [1]) there and the AIV report of 82.253.37.69 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Materialscientist (talk) 08:40, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

There were about 11 unsourced additions of content to article French exonyms by that IP Address (which has yet to respond to anything posted on its user talk page), following about 21 similar additions by a nearby IP Address. I'm sorry if I seemed bitey.   — Jeff G. ツ 08:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Why do you think those edits should be referenced? Do you write in French? Have you looked at other exonym articles? Materialscientist (talk) 09:05, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't everything in mainspace be referenced? No, I don't write in French and I haven't looked at other exonym articles. Assuming that you do and have, I trust your judgement and have withdrawn my revert and warning.   — Jeff G. ツ 09:20, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. A friendly advice is to write a short note instead of tagging user talk when you can't evaluate the correctness of certain edits. Both rollback and autotagging are offensive tools which do repel many potential writers. Unreferenced edits are gray area sometimes, and tagging users both for not providing refs and removing unreferenced information is, at least, inconsistent. Materialscientist (talk) 09:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you as well.   — Jeff G. ツ 09:42, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand why he reverted my edits either?74.194.176.82 (talk) 08:44, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Please see the preceding section.   — Jeff G. ツ 08:55, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

I did not vandalize anything.74.194.176.82 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:03, 25 June 2010 (UTC).

Help in understanding vandalism

Jeff--

I need help in understanding why my edit of a paragraph in the article on O Holy Night was reverted and classified as vandalism. I gave my reason as "immaterial" when making the edit, as the passage referred to an occurrence of a famous song on an episode of a TV series, which struck me as highly insignificant without further explanation. Please help me to understand why this is vandalism. Is the explanation "immaterial" not in keeping with Wikipedia's policy? When a passage of mine was deleted by another user as "subjective" (and not reverted), I took this an indicator that such explanations should be short and sweet. Please give me input on this, in case I am not understanding the policy properly. Thank you.--Udpert (talk) 08:48, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

This cannot be considered blatant vandalism - Rollback should never be used for this. Oh, Jeff... Doc9871 (talk) 09:03, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, please see my following reply.   — Jeff G. ツ 09:23, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

The name of the section you edited was "Notable renditions". It appeared at the time that the rendition was by a notable character in a notable episode of a notable TV series, and could qualify as a notable rendition. I'm sorry I didn't notice at the time that the episode was a redlink. I have withdrawn my warning and reversion.   — Jeff G. ツ 09:10, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

It's always best to undo with an edit summary rather than rollback (except if someone writes "poopy" all over a page). This tool can come back to bite you... Doc9871 (talk) 09:35, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you as well.   — Jeff G. ツ 09:47, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. "I feel special!" ;P Doc9871 (talk) 10:02, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

What tools do you use?

Hi. You seem to help out a lot with maintenance activities on this site. I recently ran across your name at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations and got curious as to what tools you use to generate those reports about the usernames. Thanks. -- Karunyan, 13:55, 26 June 2010 (UTC)