User talk:JzG

R       E       T       I       R       E        D

This user is tired of silly drama on Wikipedia.

I am here for some very limited purposes, because some people have asked me to help in some specific cases. I am prepared to do this. I am not intending to be here much, at present. I have not yet decided whether to start using this account actively again. No, I don't want to talk about any of the foregoing, thanks, the people concerned know who they are and how to get hold of me. This is about some ongoing unresolved issues being discussed on one or more mailing lists, when that debate comes to fruition I will take a view. Guy (Help!) 12:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please see User:JzG/Harassment links.

---

This week I 'ave been mainly in Malta

---

Cypri

We may have another problem related to that issue, and articles that link there. Next time we're both on IRC, remind me, and I'll explain. DS 00:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Have you returned?

Just wondering. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 01:47, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Pending JzG's answering the question himself, you might be interested in the note he put on the top of this page. Newyorkbrad 03:42, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Uh huh, I missed the strike through. That's subtle, but good :) So that means he's back. Hopefully, he kicks some butt of various POV-warriors. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 04:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

The text under the large print is also of relevance. Newyorkbrad 04:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Could you enable your email?

I'd like to get in touch privately. Privatemusings 23:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• Done, not that it is hard to find. Guy (Help!) 23:37, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Cool, thanks (didn't know where else to look, sorry!). Privatemusings 23:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I've sent you an email. Privatemusings 23:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

A Question on article history

Greetings. With reference to Talk:Wikinfo, you have "removed unsigned post...by banned user." I haven't looked at the post content links and have no opinion on removing the post - however, when paging through the change history, it looks an awful lot like I am the user you are reverting, it is my name shown on the edit before yours. Your summary makes clear that you are killing an unsigned post but on the face of it, I was the last one to edit the page.

Are you using sysop tools? Is there a hole in the way WP handles admin actions? I know I didn't make that post yet the browser seems to be telling me I did. ????

Thanks Franamax 12:30, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• No, it wasn't you. And no I'm not using sysop tools. Guy (Help!) 12:50, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

OK thanks, good to know. Can you explain what it was you did that leaves me apparently holding the bag? That hasn't happened to other editors when I've reverted pages. At least as far as I can tell - am I missing something? Franamax 11:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar!

The "What a Brilliant Idea!" Barnstar

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		Awarded to Guy for thinking of a quick and simple solution to a month-long dispute on First-person shooter. Rather than issuing a finite block on User:HavenBastion or simply protecting the page, you took it a step further and simply indefed the vandal. Your block shows that now, and in the future, Wikipedia will not tolerate ignorant link-spammers. NASCAR Fan24(radio me!) 17:56, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Am aware of what you are up to (re BADSITES and good luck), good to see you back and take care, SqueakBox 20:35, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• BADSITES is a dead duck, there are a few active WR posters who post gigabytes of junk every time a link is removed from anywahere. What I'm working on is in response to several long and incredibly detailed discussions about harasment, the way harassers, stalkers and abusers "spread the meme" and suck in new, unsuspecting victims, and ways we can make sure that we only have to have each drama once. Guy (Help!) 20:44, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Good luck, I opposed DennyColt's BADSITES proposal but certainly am not opposing your current actions in any way, SqueakBox 20:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I am sure we are as one on this: harassment is unacceptable, and endlessly rehashing it, as we currently do, is sapping everyone's energy and driving people away. We've got a couple of good ideas which have support in principle from Jimbo, hopefully we will be able to make a difference. Guy (Help!) 20:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

There is little chance that a proposal that does not allow a new SPA to show up on adminstrator's talk pages with "good-faith" links to Wikipedia Review that just happen to reveal their place of employ will pass muster with the current crowd. MOASPN 22:25, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes I read your article a while back on good faith and its problems, good stuff, I am certainly dealing with my own issues re this one and new user, socks, SPAs et al, but everything is fine. Hope you enjoy Malta, and your comments re going to the Proms (lucky you!) etc always amuse me. Best wishes, SqueakBox 02:49, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Collaborative real-time editor

Hello, JzG. I noticed you moved Collaborative real-time editor to Collaborative editor. I'd like to ask you opinion about, given the current contents of the page and the existence of Collaborative software and List of collaborative software, moving the page back to its original title, which is, in my opinion, more exact. What do you think? Waldir 23:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/THF-DavidShankBone Dismissed

The above named Arbitration case was dismissed due to the inactivity of one of the participants.

For the Arbitration Committee, - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 22:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

SmartBookFinder

Greetings JzG,

  I took your suggestions/comments on the SmartBookFinder article. I modified it and re-added, I would like for you to re-consider it. As I think it adds the knowledge based on wikipedia. Thanks in Advance!

Theprofessional1 23:17, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Categories

I would like to the article on SmartBookFinder.com to the following categories: (1) Product searching websites (2) Book websites

Can you help me with that as well? Thanks!

Theprofessional1 23:19, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

BookFinder.com

Hi JzG. I was rather surprised to see the BookFinder.com article speedily deleted, without any discussion or public input. The article was about four years old, and survived an AfD discussion in 2006. The BookFinder.com website lists 950+ media mentions from sources in 21 different countries (including coverage in the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC, BBC, CBC, NPR, etc), suggesting more than adequate basis for notability, though perhaps not fully reflected in the article text. I believe the speedy deletion and associated removal of backlinks may have been performed in error, and would like to see the article reinstated. Thanks for your time. - Anirvan 10:02, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• It was tagged as an advert, I'm just the janitor here (Twinkle fixes the backlinks automagically). If you want the content to fix and move back you're more than welcome. Guy (Help!) 10:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed that the SmartBookFinder.com article had been deleted recently (1, 2). "SmartBookFinder.com" is utterly unrelated to BookFinder.com (besides having a deceptively similar name); I can see how the similarity of the names might have proven confusing. Is it possible to just have the accidental "collateral damage" deletion of the BookFinder.com article undone, so the article's history can be restored? I work with the website, and appreciate the fact that the article's been edited primarily by third parties; I'd like that neutrality to remain on the record, so future editors don't think it's a puff piece ad written by insiders (to help reduce the likelihood of future deletions!) Thanks. - Anirvan 10:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Are you saying you are associated with the site? Or are you just a user of it? Guy (Help!) 10:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The former. I'm associated with it, which is why I want to edit it as little as possible. (Sorry for not being clear.) - Anirvan 10:45, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Time to stop

I've stopped revert war long ago, as you probably can see. My last edit was 23 October 2007. What exactly do you want me to stop? Necator 18:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The reason why did I put that to ANI, is the advice at wikiquiette alert. [1] So I am not the only one, who censures Jtrainor behavior in disputes. And please don't blame me in everything and treat Jtrainor as an angel. Necator 21:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

The Greatest Canadian

That sort of massive content removal really calls for a comment on the talk page with some links to precedents. DoubleBlue (Talk) 20:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

sorry to bug you...

Are you going to work on Ticket#: 2007101710014636? It was marked urgent but there hasn't been any action on it. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 20:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Jeff Clarke & Gordon Wilson

Today you deleted entries on Jeff Clarke and Gordon Wilson. What basis do you have for deeming both men "generic CEOs"? What kind of benchmark are you using for what makes a CEO worthy of an entry? For reference, Jeff Clarke is featured on the cover of the current issue of BusinessWeek, one of the most respected business publications in the world with a circulation of 1 million. This is in addition to recent articles in Newsweek and The Wall Street Journal. I would hate to see these entries replaced with less substantiated text in the future without a good reason. TP kelli 20:35, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Larry Craig

About your removal of the image from the Larry Craig article:

It would have been more helpful to first discuss this issue on the Talk page. The last time someone unilaterally removed the image under the guise that you've used and even tried to delete it, I had it reversed on a Deletion Review (that one was tried by administrator based on "I don't like" as one of the reasons). People who work on the article try at least to discuss the issue and working together in a collaborative way, and come to a consensus to avoid disruptive edits and edit wars to the article - and not getting caught in editors who prefer do otherwise.

After all, the Wikipedia articles are written for the benefit of its readers...not for the benefit of editors who have other thing going on. →Lwalt ^♦ talk 21:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• s/unilateral/WP:BLP/. And go away. Guy (Help!) 23:14, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Archimedes Plutonium

Hi. I am wondering why Talk:Archimedes Plutonium still exists when the article has been deleted per AfD. Shouldn't the talk page be deleted too? 128.250.6.244 22:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• It's a redirect. If you think there are WP:BLP issues, feel free to take it to WP:MFD. Guy (Help!) 23:13, 29 October 2007 (UTC)