User talk:JBW

If I left you a message: please answer on your talk page, then place {{Talkback|your username}} on my talk. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, unless you request otherwise, and usually I will notify you on your talk page. Please click here to leave me a new message.

Peter Hopkins

I saw that my article about my god Peter Hopkins, whom we all worship where I come from,had been deleted and I wondered why because It was in no way finished and I you had allowed me to continue working on it then you would have seen how significant this person is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamiedwi (talk • contribs) 15:35, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

I take it that is supposed to be a joke. Try using Facebook or MySpace. Wikipedia is not for this sort of thing. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:42, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi

Thank you for your feedback. I read the guidlines on conflict of interesst and I can assure you that I have only one goal and that is the unbiased family history. My question for you was on how I can create my own page under these guidlines and how pages for my grandfather and father could be created. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peamm2009 (talk • contribs) 21:19, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

request for a new page..

hello sir i was trying to create a page for my school anglo arabic sr. sec. school n that page was deleted i m new on wikipedia can u please tell me how to make a valid page . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Md.abdullahali (talk • contribs) 06:49, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Md.abdullahali JamesBWatson (talk) 10:20, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Message from Universalstonecutter

This not spam -

Hello, JBW. You have new messages at Your unversalstonecutter's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

please follow the rules for Quit deletion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Watchlist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Universalstonecutter

January 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. One or more of the external links you added in this edit to the page So Goes My Love do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. You may wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

This statement is false -Quaity article require external links and reference your have violate the base rules of wiki you must permit edits follow deletion rules I have been on this website for many years The five pillars of Wikipedia please reread the late two about ownership of a page auto delection is not fair to menmbers - you should discuss statements which are incorrect

Dennis Dickens universalstoinecutter2002@yahoo.com

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Universalstonecutter (talk • contribs) 11:45, 25 January 2011

Thank you for that message. There are, unfortunately, many parts of it which I don't understand, but your main point seems to be that some links which you added to So Goes My Love were valid and should not have been removed. I have restored the links in question. It does help to give an edit summary to indicate the nature of your edit, especially when you are adding links to sites such as flickr, as such links are very often unconstructive, and with no explanation of the edit it can be very difficult to see what is going on. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Dennis Dickens please read the external links they contain research materials and references to the books and website that have published my research photo links can validate the facts i placed on IMDB Triva etc universalstoinecutter2002@yahoo.com http://picasaweb.google.com/home http://www.flickr.com/photos/universalstonecutter/ www.theatrecrafts.com/studiotourforum/viewtopic.php?p=572 http://www.thestudiotour.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=247 http://www.thestudiotour.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=719 http://www.thestudiotour.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=643&view=previous http://www.thestudiotour.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=959

1. I am removing the duplicate copy of material from your last post here. Please don't duplicate posts, as it makes this page difficult to follow.
2. I don't understand the relevance of the links you give here at all. Perhaps you would like to clarify your point. However, since, a I mentioned above, I have already restored the links to the article, I am not sure what further point could be relevant. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Joe Day (footballer)

Hello. You recently deleted the page Joe Day (footballer) because its PROD has expired. While the prod was ongoing, I noticed that the article had been created at its creator's user talk page User talk:MadDogRDFC, and moved to mainspace from there, so the history of that user talk had moved with it to the history of Joe Day (footballer). I left an explanatory note for the reviewing admin on the prod notice, to ask them that when they dealt with the prod, please to make sure the talk page history got back where it belonged. Obviously now the article's gone, I can't link to a diff, but did you not spot the note? or had someone removed it without me noticing? Anyway, assuming it's possible, please could you or someone retrieve the user's talk page history from the deleted article history. thanks, Struway2 (talk) 14:21, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for pointing this out. Your explanatory note had been removed by another editor. I have now restored the legitimate talk page history. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:34, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Editorial assistance

I see that you are listed on the page for editorial assistance.  [Here] is the most recent edit if you can take a look at a two-editor dispute.  After six weeks, the sum of the other editor's edits seems to me to have only the goal of ignoring dispute resolution.  Thanks, RB  66.217.118.152 (talk) 09:54, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I decided to look into this, despite having little time now to spend on Wikipedia. I found it a tortuous and time consuming task, with need to keep following links from one conversation in one place to another elsewhere in order to try to find out what the whole issue was about. It would have helped had you provided more information.

You have been continually posting about an issue concerning Johnuniq over a period of nearly a month and a half. As far as it is possible to make out the initial cause of this was a brief comment from Johnuniq on 14 December 2010 on an article talk page, pointing out that some comments there did not seem to be concerned with a proposal fro improving the article (which is the purpose of an article's talk page). Johnuniq has very patiently tried to respond to your continuing posts, despite having considerable difficulty understanding what you have been saying. Johnuniq has time and time again asked for clarification, as often it is difficult or impossible to determine what your point is: you clearly have some sort of difficulty in communicating, and I too have found your points extremely difficult to follow. You have raised the issue at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts. (Discussion preserved here.) In that discussion another editor wrote "If three editors tell you here that they don't understand what point you are making, it should be a good indicator to you that the point you are making is not clear." You do not seem to have grasped that point,a s you have come to me without making any effort to clarify your meaning.

My conclusions are as follows:

1. It seems that the whole thing is a reaction to one brief and perfectly innocuous talk page post about six weeks ago. While it is not entirely clear what it is you are objecting to, it does seem that continuing this battle for so long is a gross over-reaction to a minor incident.
2. Very often the best method of dispute resolution is to realise that the issue at stake is not worth more of your time and trouble, and to simply leave it. That must surely be so in this case, after such a long time. You have come to me to ask for help with dispute resolution, and that is my advice. If you are willing to take that advice then no more needs to be said on the issue, and the rest of my comments after here are irrelevant.
3. If you are not willing to take that advice then I have to tell you that your persistence with this issue has become harassment, even if you sincerely do not intend it that way. I note the following comment made by CliffC in the Witiquette alert discussion: "John has shown great patience and forbearance in responding to them in the face of the IP's refusal, or inability, to explain just exactly what he wants. I have considered advising John to just delete such messages as they appear, rather than waste time responding to them, but that might create even more distractions like this one".
4. Your continual posts on this were described in the Witiquette alert discussion as "disruptive", and I fully agree.
5. Johnuniq has been far more patient than most editors would have been under the circumstances, but there is no reason why he should be subjected to more of this harassment. As far back as 28 December 2010 he wrote "I think we are nearing the end of our discussion."
6. Several editors responded to your Witiquette alert, and you received no support from any of them. Instead of accepting that consensus is against you, you have decided to forum shop by coming to me. I concur with the views expressed by all the editors apart from you at that discussion. Your further step in seeking support has therefore resulted in an even greater consensus against you.
7. Please drop this issue, and leave Johnuniq alone. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Your Welcome

Dear JBW

Thank you for your welcome. It is appreciated as I am new to this. Possibly, like yourself, I will get sucked in to spending too much time editing and will welcome your guidance in amends that I make/would like to make. There are many minor and some major errors and incorrect or misinformed pieces of information on the encyclopedia. I use Wikipedia daily. I think it a wonderful resource and would like to do my bit to improve it for all.

Regards

Mythbuster121 Mythbuster121 (talk) 10:12, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

20:03, 24 September 2010 JamesBWatson (talk | contribs) deleted "TMNT Robots" ‎ (Expired PROD, concern was: WP:OR)

Hello,

My name is John, and I am an aspiring designer for a comic book based table top game, and was wondering if there was any way that this page could be undeleted or replaced. It would be a great help in gathering information expediently, as well as do a great service to the comic book enthusiast and nerd community. Information on the subject is relatively easy to find, though not with proper citations and bibliographies included. If need be I am more than willing to contribute to an edited or entirely new page, but am new to using Wikipedia to this extent and require assistance.

Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CallMeMOTO (talk • contribs) 10:43, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Help on Survivor: Redemption Island

I don't know if Survivor is your cup of tea, but I need on a certain user Gbold1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) and his edits on the article I mentioned. He was already warned about adding unsourced info into said article, but he seems to reinstate his edits. His latest now has a source, but I don't think it's reliable (and it's in the External Links section as well). Can you help on this guy. BTW, I gave him a level 3 warning, but afterwards, he "reverted" my revert after that. But I don't want to 3RR on the guy. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 11:16, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

James Kealing

This is a fake article by a prolific sockpuppeteer: please see WP:Sockpuppet_investigations/Jake_Picasso. Thanks, Borkificator (talk) 12:28, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Deleted. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar and cookie

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I was trying to revert the vandal's edit using the undo button and you beat me! Have a cookie! WayneSlam 20:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Wayne Slam has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

WayneSlam 20:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

User: Mysticbumwipe

Hi James. Last October you unblocked an editor because he changed his name from the unacceptable "Mysticbumwipe" to the more acceptable "Mystichumwipe". He appears to be editing again under his original name.[1] Jayjg ^(talk) 00:37, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me. I have blocked Mysticbumwipe indefinitely and Mystichumwipe for a month. This was a ridiculously blatant piece of sockpuppetry during an edit war, apart from the username issue. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:44, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I think it's within reason to assume that it was an accident, since he's said before he uses the other name outside Wikipedia. I'll reserve comment about the edit warring until I've looked into it more deeply. —Soap— 12:50, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

As I have indicated on the user's talk page, I am not entirely happy with what they have done, but the use of the Mysticbumwipe account was probably accidental, and I have decided to unblock Mystichumwip. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi James. That's fine. There wasn't actually any active edit-war, so he probably wasn't intentionally socking. Thanks for looking into it. Jayjg ^(talk) 18:12, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of youth search and rescue

Hi you have just deleted the youth search and rescue wiki. I have just found a link that verifies the organisation The site is not made to use urls very early so i cannot link url very well. http://www.societies.govt.nz/pls/web/dbsiframe.show_report_on_browser?p_access_no=93DB3C1EC12F8B8C95B15AF2950449B5&p_report_name=msrcert2_i.rdf&p_parent_window_url=DBSCONT.control_tabs%3Fan%3D93DB3C1EC12F8B8C95B15AF2950449B5%26cn%3D1864342%26tab%3DAL&p_reference_number=1864342&p_report_parm_string=p_reference_number=1864342~p_letter_code=L025

If the link fails please go to this site

http://www.societies.govt.nz/cms/homepage/banner_template/SOCAGENT

then to Register Search

and search for "1864342" in Standard Search

This proves the organisation is legitimate. I will also rework the links as i did not know that that counted as advertising. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommot00 (talk • contribs) 12:00, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't know what you mean by "the organisation is legitimate". If you mean that it really exists, nobody has questioned that. The links you have provided confirm that the organisation exists and is a registered charitable trust, but they do nothing to address any of the three reasons for deletion (explained on your talk page), so I don't understand the point of providing them (unless, of course, you haven't read the message I took the trouble of writing on your talk page). Nor does it address the conflict of interest issue, also explained on your talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:40, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Relative inactivity

Hello, JBW. You have new messages at Talk:Free Studio.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Study In Pakistan

Thank you for deleting the page. But, I started a SPI.. Can I continue even if both the users are blocked? Novice7 | Talk 11:26, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

"Can you?" Yes, certainly. "Is there any point in doing so?" I'm not sure. It is just possible that someone may find yet more sockpuppets, so perhaps it is worth trying. In cases like this I tend to think "if in doubt go ahead, just in case it turns out to be useful". JamesBWatson (talk) 21:52, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I already started an investigation, but it was closed. Maybe I'll have to wait for some more puppets. Thanks for the advice... Novice7 | Talk 03:39, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello again! A new user has come up MBBSINPAKISTAN (talk · contribs). Same website as before, a possible puppet. Can you tell me how to proceed with the Sockpuppet investigation? Novice7 | Talk 12:21, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

We don't need a sockpuppet investigation, as I have blocked the account as a spam-only account. Thanks for pointing this out to me, and do let me know of any more that you see. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:38, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Oh, thank you. Yes, I'll surely keep an eye out for the user(s). Novice7 | Talk 12:41, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

I've replied at my talk. Novice7 | Talk 12:48, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Undeletion of Gloria Ferrer page

Hello, I am respectfully requesting to have the Gloria Ferrer wikipedia entry undeleted. I have re-written the text from an unbiased point of view and added several journal entries to the page describing research to show that this subject has encyclopedic interest and merit. Please tell me how I can send these revisions to you for review. Thank you very much--24.5.52.51 (talk) 21:30, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

If you like you can post the material in User:JamesBWatson/Gloria Ferrer, which I have created for the purpose. If what you post seems to me to be suitable as an article I will move back into the main Wikipedia article space for you. If I think it needs improvement I will suggest how you can improve on it. (If it really is totally unsuitable then I will explain why and delete it, but I hope that won't be necessary. Although the earlier article had problems, it looks to me as though it should be perfectly possible to write a good article on the subject, and I am willing to help if necessary.) I am doing this in my own user space, as you have written to me anonymously, without using a Wikipedia account. If you have an account you can do it in your own user space if you prefer. However, whether you have an account or not, since I have created a page for the purpose you are welcome to use it. JamesBWatson (talk) 21:45, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, I have logged in and put the revised page on the User:JamesBWatson/Gloria Ferrer page you created. I hope this is correct, I appreciate your help very much. Very Best regards--Designforimpact (talk) 21:57, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

OK. Unfortunately I have to go offline now, but I should have time to look at it within the next 36 hours or so. JamesBWatson (talk) 22:02, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Studyinpak

I declined your checkuser request simply because I don't see any additional proof of secondary accounts other than the duck one. If there is evidence that I have missed, feel free to query my talkpage with some diffs and I will get a CU to look into it. Thanks for your understanding. -- DQ (t) (e) 23:48, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

I did not mean to vandalize the page but Lefteris Pantazis is NOT gay.Remove it ,its slander.

I did not mean to vandalize the page but Lefteris Pantazis is NOT gay. Remove it because it's slander.(Ny proof reader (talk) 19:39, 30 January 2011 (UTC))

I have removed him from the category, as the claim is unsourced, though I do not regard it as slander. For future reference, though, the way to remove an article form a category is to edit the article, not the category page. If you edit the article you will find a link looking something like [[Category:LGBT people from Greece]], and you need to remove that. Removing content from the category page merely removes information about the category, and does not remove any articles from that category. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:46, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

I think there are a multitude of court judgemnents, from just about every corner of the world, where it has been determined that it is slanderous to label someone as a homosexual if that would make society in general have a detrimental opinion of him/her. What I can't say is how old those judgements are, whether or not several or many exist from the latest decade, and what type of society this person lives in. What amount of hypocrisy is involved in the professed acceptance of the majority of any society of homosexuality, is another question. Hypocrisy clouds the issue in a manner that makes it practically impossible to be determinative about it. There is nothing in the history of the universe that has been lied about as much as human sexuality. Cordially, SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:12, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

The only comment I mace relating to this is "I do not regard it as slander". I made no comment on general social attitudes. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:43, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

User:DJMIXX305/DjMixx

FYI, I have given this user some feedback but I do not disagree with your speedy. They did the right thing by taking the article to userspace rather than re-posting so I wanted to at least give them some positive criticism for making the effort. Cheers, Fæ (talk) 13:48, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Response to your talk as per deleted article

I am KunleAdetoke. I saw your comments on my article on Debo Onifade after deleting it. I am sorry I mistakenly removed the speedy delete comment. I am also sorry that I probably didnt write it appropriately. I interviewed Debo Onifade, and captured my discussions in the article. I have seen so many articles without as much references or quality contents like this on wikipedia and I thought this was good enough. But I am willing to adjust it.

First, can you please send me back all the article contents because I lost my own copy. I will like to have your advice as I try to revise it

Kunle