User talk:Jayjg/Archive 38

Thanks for visiting my Talk: page. If you are considering posting something to me, please: *Post new messages to the bottom of my talk page. *Use headlines when starting new talk topics. *Comment about the content of a specific article on the Talk: page of that article, and not here. *Do not make personal attacks or use the page for harassment. Comments which fail to follow the four rules above may be immediately archived or deleted. Thanks again for visiting.

Quotes in footnotes

The discussion has moved here on quotes in footnotes. Can you join it with any comments you may have. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:23, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Jerusalem FAR

Jerusalem has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. <eleland/talkedits> 21:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Comment

I have no opinion on the content at The Holocaust Industry, but the atmosphere at the talkpage is not helpful. Please try to keep future comments focused on the article only, and not the editors. Thanks, Elonka 04:17, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Jayjg and User:Blackworm editwarring on circumcision

I was going to post this on AN/I, with the title above, but I got an edit conflict. I then noticed that it says on AN/I that notices of edit-warring should go to 3RR Noticeboard. I looked at that, but they say it's only for violations of WP:3RR. Our dispute doesn't qualify for that either, so I'll post what I was going to post on AN/I here. I realize this might cause editors who like you and respect you to be drawn to the dispute, but then, I'm willing to take that chance in the interest of avoiding a "real" editwar. Here is what I was going to post:

I'm requesting help looking into this issue. User:Jayjg does not have consensus for the recent inclusion of his latest edit to circumcision (which I have left in his desired state), as I believe is evident here. Could an admin please take action and edit the article as policy dictates. I'm tired of doing it. I've made a good-faith effort to make my points, and I'm feeling that Jayjg is not addressing them, or those of other editors, adequately. Please read the discussion. Thanks. Blackworm (talk) 06:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

[End of post.] Since I didn't actually leave it in impartial admin's hands on AN/I, I reserve the right to revert your latest change. I hope I won't have to, and that you'll self-revert. Blackworm (talk) 06:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Lapsed Pacifist

I'd noticed the green line push, it is definatly a POV push at this point, when multiple editors over multiple articles are telling him why it is wrong yet he persists. Arn't there ArbCom restrictions designed to stop this stuff on the mid east articles? Narson (talk) 08:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Your deletion of Global apartheid

It's under discussion here. Having reviewed the article, I don't see any valid speedy deletion rationale. Is it possible that you erred there? Sarcasticidealist (talk) 06:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Your friend Rezistena is on ANI

This ANI thread involves a checkuser case you were a part of. Your insight would be appreciated. weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 13:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)