User talk:Jmax-

User talk:Jmax-/Archive 1 Hey I'm Ernie Green. Somebody hacked into my site. If anybody else uses that name, it's not me, I'll now be posting under a different name. Please assume this screen name on wikipedia is not legit.

Your role

I think you need to rethink your role on the Wiki. For someone claiming to have an anti-censorship, pro-authority (in the sense, I imagine, of having knowledge about the subject you are contributing to) view, you appear to have done little except make every page you've edited (that I've encountered, at least) significantly more boring, flat and information free. Wikipedia isn't about confining information to mainstream sources or forcing all formatting and style to be universal -- it's about providing a solid, user-generated work of reference that includes everyone, not just your personal favorites. You do appear to do good work from time to time, but I'd urge you to take a more professional, less autodidacatic approach to this project. — UnknownCity

hy

hy cacophony 00:53, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hy Jmax- 00:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hy --CableModem^_^ 04:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I am not sure how to post here so I'm just using the edit botton. Why did you delete the links I put on the CRO page? They did not promote a thing but explained what the term means. Since there is no real write-up on the page yet, the links are useful. If you weren't for copyright, I would have just copied from some of them. Well, they probably are copyrighted. I've put the links back with an explanation of why they are there.

XS (Perl)

What cleanup does the XS (Perl) page require? Swmcd 07:15, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ★MESSED ROCKER★ 01:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: IRC channel ban

I have replied to your message on my Talk page. --Slowking Man 09:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Accusing me of being Tony Pierce!

Haha. Thanks for the quick retraction. Commendible. I've made much worse mistakes and just deleted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by LADude (talk • contribs) 09:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

whitelist

Hi Jmax-, according the most recent discussion at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Jmax-bot, it looks like a 3-person whitelist is being envisioned, which should simplify the spoofing feature greatly. Thanks again for your help with this, and your patience as we try to work through the options! - Banyan Tree 18:32, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for a job well done on the FA counter - that's one less chore for editors to keep track of. Regards, Sandy (Talk) 15:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IRC cloak

my (new) IRC nick is Jmax-, and I desire the cloak wikipedia/Jmax- . Thanks. --Jmax- 21:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your post at WP:AN

I have replied to the post you made yesterday on the administrators' noticeboard. Because my post may have been inconspicuous in the middle of the threaded discussion, I am mentioning it here in case you care to respond. Newyorkbrad 22:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Harassment of HighInBC

I am very concerned about your reaction to HighInBC's complaint of harassment [1]. Unless HighInBC has posted his workplace phone number and invited people to call him, simply the act of calling him to say "Hello HighInBC" is harassment per WP:HARASS and is very threatening; basically saying "I know who and where you work but you don't know who I am." Adding a threatening or offensive song compounds the problem, especially since an IP editor has threatened his family. Please do not endorse this behavior and if you really know the caller, tell him to knock it off. I note that while you have been a wikipedian for more than a year, most of your article edits are simple spelling corrections and most of your Wikipedia space edits relate in some way to GNAA. You may wish to disassociate yourself and your edits from the GNAA if you wish to be seen as a productive wikipedian. The more trolling and harassment that comes from them, the less likely the community is to tolerate editors with any connection to them. Especially please do not condone real life harassment of editors. Thanks. Thatcher131 00:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, for some reason you linked to WP:HARASS, but after reading and re-reading the harassment guidelines, none of them apply to somebody making two, non-threatening phone calls. Perhaps you could point out the proper section? cacophony ◄► 01:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about the opening paragraph? Newyorkbrad 02:10, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I has responded to this comment here[2] on my userpage. The calls were not non-threatning, nor were the IRC communication or the comment on this wiki[3], that is what you are defending. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 02:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You all misunderstand: I was not defending him, merely putting into question the nature of these "harassing" phone calls. I did not condone them, I merely asked for some clarification. --Jmax- 08:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any phone call is harassing, unless the other user has specifically invited it. Thatcher131 12:29, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Translation

Are you allowed to contact the translators now ? User talk:Tawker wanted to do it, so it seems to be fair.

Jmfayard 11:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let him do it, he's already got something set up -- Jmax- 20:08, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New article bot

Replied at Wikipedia_talk:Bot_requests#No_bot_despite_wide_support.3F - thanks!--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 21:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hello

I am WikipediaIRAN. Thanks for your help. I didn't know how to answer to you, so I edited this page. And for your question, don't worry I did it myself. I didn't pick it from other sites. Sorry for my English but if you could speak French...

Adobe Flash Player

Would you care to explain to me why you don't consider it POV when an editor, with less than two hundred edits, who blatantly espouses an interest in the "free software movement" spends the last week inserting the words "proprietary" and "free" into the leading sentence of articles? AlistairMcMillan 01:11, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VIVEK NARAYANAN

why did u delete my page i just wanted to promote my OPEN source software.Wikipedia is an open source project.An encyclopedia ANYONE can edit,not quite! Vivekn999 11:54, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

aerofox

do u have anything personal against me why are u deleting all the pages i create--Vivekn999 12:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you taking issue on me linking to highly relevent papers?

You sent me several messages today, one about me editing links to external conference paper that has been in the page for over a year, all I was doing was making the entry more informative.

The other two are also links to relevant conference papers by a recognised expert in these fields, I don't see the problem, as these are not promoting a service or products and are meant to be read by end users and security staff.

If you are not interested in having useful data here, then that is Wikipedias loss.

In the past I have edited many articles and pages on Wikipedia, this is the first time I have received accusdations that I'm spamming or otherwise posting unsuitable data. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.77.242.91 (talk) 13:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Money laundering

Thank you for experimenting with the page Money laundering on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Natl1 13:33, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Money laundering. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Natl1 13:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I stand by my dissision to revert even thought you may not have had a vandalistic intention. Even thought I see that you were trying to clean up the external links, you deleted many legitamate articles and government websites that were not spam. Before you do such large and controversial edits disscus them on the articles talk page. Also, do not restore your edits once they have been reverted by someone and do not assume that since you did not have a vandalistic intention that the reviser "just made a mistake".--Natl1 14:02, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback?

The easiest way of getting rollback privileges is to simply request admin rights. Looking over your contribs I'd say you have a fair chance. I'd say go for it, we can always use another enthousiastic soul, and knowing your way around bots is a plus. >Radiant< 17:08, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

However, given the several-month-break you took earlier this year, it may be best to wait until the end of January, or thereabouts. $.2 >Radiant< 17:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changes

Sorry, forgot to subject and sign. Please excuse the repeat message.

Had some changes rolled back and wanted to see if I could get them reinstated. I placed external links to pages that carried scores and updated news for minor league sports teams. According to Wikipedia:External links (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links), "information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail" is an acceptable reason to add external links. In fact, the article specifically cites "professional athlete statistics" as an example. For instance, one of the links added was for the Quad City Riverhawks, with the link going to http://www.oursportscentral.com/sports/?t_id=1942. You can see that scores, stats, press releases and links online newspaper articles for the team are available there, something that is too detailed and constantly changing for a Wikipedia entry. All are also missing from the official team website.

Preeths10 18:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand where you're coming from, but it seems the submitted link falls more squarely into What should be linked than Links normally to be avoided. While one may contend that the link possibly promotes a website and contains advertising, it also includes information which can't be found anywhere else and is highly relevant to the subject.

Preeths10 19:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misunderstand about adding site

I may did a mistake because I didn't read the rules about adding an external link. So far I'm already have a link add to my site from "Premature Ejaculation" and it's a useful information.

I just figure that other relate documents to the content in my site are listed in Wikipedia and I try to add my link into them. But you consider that my link is spamming, I didn't mean that because my web site is a useful information for this problem.

I have to say I'm sorry about that and if possible. Would you please add my link back to "Premature Ejaculation"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ebiz4life (talk • contribs) 19:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Re: be more careful!

Apologies; you reverting just before me must have thrown my script off, I didn't even get an edit conflict :/ ShakingSpirit^talk 10:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jmax-bot missing

Jmax bot hasn't run in two days. What's up with it? Raul654 15:22, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]