User talk:JGXenite/Archive/2008

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

January 2008

Sheffield station platform

I don't think I'm going to be able make the source verifiable, but just for your edification I've uploaded a bit of the drawing for a few days. I'll remove the comment. Platform 5 cross section http://www.maj.com/gallery/talltim/Other/platform-5.gif Talltim (talk) 14:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that, and I see what you mean. It was just that I had never seen or heard it referred to (and unless you have access to the drawings or took part in the construction, you probably wouldn't know) so that is why I questioned it. ~~ [Jam][talk] 15:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
No probs, happy new year Talltim (talk) 15:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Same to you :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 15:26, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

historic

Hi. I've just seen your edit to the Yorkshire article. Personally, I feel that "an historic county" makes more sense grammatically than "a historic county". It might also be worth considering that the Yorkshire dialect tends to drop the "h", making "historic" sound like "istoric", and therefore "an" more appropriate than "a". However, I think it is more of a pedantic point than anything else. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


Lol. I like your description an 'istoric. That is true, I cannot argue one bit that phonetically and verbally, an 'istoric is probably the correct version but in writing it should be a historic, a hospital, a hedgehog. Because they are all hard aitches. The only exception I can think is an honour, because it's a soft h.

I'm just trying to keep hold of proper grammar and keep as much as wikipedia as I use and see free from modern grammatical mistakes, particularly the plethora of nouns with capitals. Anyone would think English is turning German. Peanut4 (talk) 15:00, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

OK. That is fair enough. I thought it best to ask rather than get into an edit war over the "n" :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 15:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Ai. I know what you mean about a daft edit war. I'm sure something like this might get changed again. Partly because I expect the 'n' is probably not actually wrong, just that it's not quite as right. Peanut4 (talk) 15:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
That is certainly an interesting (and probably quite right) way of looking at it :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Linux and Wikipedia's approach to pronunciation

Hi,

I see you reverted my change to Linux, in which I removed the ad hoc pronunciation "lin-uks" (while not logged in).

I am a frequent contributor to Wiktionary, where we use standardised pronunciation schemes.

"lin-uks" to me reads as IPA /lɪn•ʌks/, and that does not match the IPA given (the vowel in the second syllable is a schwa). In some accents (including some American accents, "tux" indeed pronounced /təks/, so perhaps my choice of rhyme (for the final syllable) was inappropriate. The problem with ad hoc pronunciations is that they are right for some readers but not for others, while IPA is universally understood (provided you know it, of course). According to Wikipedia's style guide, "Pronunciation in Wikipedia should be given in a way such that phonemic interpretations will not differ depending on the reader's regional dialect. This can be accomplished using the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)" Hence the non-IPA pronunciation does not belong here.

True, not everyone knows IPA, but in that case, why does Wikipedia use it? Why not come up with a pronunciation scheme based on respelling, like many American dictionaries do? There is in any case a link to a page on IPA for those who want to find out about it.

For these reasons, I am removing the ad hoc pronunciation again. — Paul G (talk) 13:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for your reply. Since you weren't logged in, I just assumed it was some random user removing what I felt (at the time) was an appropriate piece of information. However, I can understand where you are coming from (even if I don't understand IPA) so that is not a problem now. :) ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Tomb Raider: Underworld

Hi. Concerning your recent edits to Tomb Raider: Underworld, I just wondered where you had got your information from regarding the release dates and the extra platforms you added. Also, as Wikipedia is a global site, it is probably best to use autumn, rather than fall, as that is not a globally used term. Thanks :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC)


I go this info from Tomb Raider Chronicles link NickDCXfan (talk)

OK, thanks for that. I hadn't seen the article yet and I've updated the page with the relevant details. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Rants by Bald Eagle

If you think the rant on Talk:Linux was bad, maybe you should see their rants on Talk:gNewSense. ~~ [Jam][talk] 10:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


I don't think we need to accept this disruptive behavior on talk pages. -- AdrianTM (talk) 11:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, aside from dragging them up in front of ARV to get them blocked for personal attacks, I really don't know what we can do. ~~ [Jam][talk] 11:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Just weather it out. They're very vocal, but very much a minority. It's odd, normally I take it pretty hard when I get attacked on here but there's something pretty awesome about being singled out for bending the whole project to my iron will every few months on Talk:Linux or the like. Chris Cunningham (talk) 11:56, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, you seem to have become somewhat of a celebrity for having control of the whole project. I feel honoured to be in the presence of such a person :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 13:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Good that you have an "iron" will Chris just put it to good use and do not let it become blind obstinacy. Otherwise it seems you are doing this intentionally because you get to feel awesome by creating unnecessary conflicts. Bald Eeagle (talk) 21:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Please do not use my talk page to start having a rant at Chris. You already do enough of that on Linux-related talk pages. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:51, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Admin delay

Is it just me, or do all the administrators seem to be tied up doing other things, since I don't think any of the requests on the sockpuppet page have been dealt with. ~~ [Jam][talk] 17:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


WP:SSP doesn't seem to be much of a priority (one of the reasons I nominated myself to be an admin). In all reality, it really isn't that big of a deal other than the cases get kinda complicated. If it were up to me, I would block some of these people pretty quickly. In short, it isn't as easy to to as some of the other pages (such as WP:3RR) and most admins just don't want to get involved in that area. Give it time, they'll come around...or I'll become an admin: whichever comes first... — BQZip01 — talk 18:49, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

February 2008

Talk page warning apology

My apologies - I didn't see you had changed the Polish Wikipedia link. In future, please make sure to use an edit summary. Thanks. ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:09, 3 February 2008 (UTC)


Okay, no problems. Hairspray Qeen en (talk) 12:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Dfb9001

Can you look at this user. Possible vandalsim only account. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 21:33, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not an administrator, but looking at their only two edits, I can't see that there is anything wrong with this user. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:49, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
I've had the user page speedily deleted (I know you blanked it, but best to have it cleared off completely). Unless this user starts actually vandalising Wikipedia, there is no reason to take any further action against their account. ~~ [Jam][talk] 05:00, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Kara Tointon

hi

there have been several interviews with both concerned regarding their relationship. were both have stated that they HAVE been in a relationship but it ended before 15th January 2004 when it was leaked to the press. I have only just joined Wiki so do not know as yet how to source claims. However, as being a fan of both, if you google either party you will find sources galore —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brummie Bee (talkcontribs) 17:48, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to Wikipedia. I've just done a Google and found an article on Digital Spy about Kara and James splitting up (this isn't relevant to Hannah though, so doesn't need to be on her page.)
However, my point still stands about speculation - unless you can find a valid source to say that Hannah and Dougie dated, that should be left off Wikipedia. ~~ [Jam][talk] 17:58, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Skype free uk skype to uk landline

I've added a comment to the Skype Talk page. As you say it is indeed not true that calls to UK landlines are free, sorry; it may be that new Skype users get a few free calls? Best wishes 213.208.107.91 (talk) 00:44, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I had a quick browse around the Skype website, and couldn't find anything about a free calls promotion. While I don't disagree that this could be the case, unless it can be cited, it should probably be left off Wikipedia. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
When you join you get one free 'test' call. Talltim (talk) 12:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

March 2008

List of characters from Hollyoaks

Please stop moving the character Louise Summers to the departing section. This reliable source says she is staying. -Trampikey(talk)(contribs) 13:54, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, the only source I had at the time was the one saying she was leaving. Now that I've been informed she isn't leaving, I won't restore that previous edit. ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:19, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

ClamAV Userbox

Thanks for correcting my ClamAv userbox to ClamAV, it was a typo! - Ahunt (talk) 00:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

PS glad you liked the userbox enough to include it on your own user page! You were the first editor to do so! - Ahunt (talk) 00:45, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey. No worries :). It's a nice userbox (plus I do use it - so it's helpful in that respect) :D. ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I have been trying to make userboxes to let people know what great free open source software there is out there. It all helps to get others to try it out! I have a few more I have made, on my user page. - Ahunt (talk) 12:31, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

??????????

A question of curiosity? Are you doing some intelligence action in wikipedia? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 12:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me, "intelligence action"? What do you mean? ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:20, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Are you watching other people's talk page? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 12:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
I watch many different talk pages. I was watching yours because I left you a question and was awaiting a reply. I noticed one or two discussions which I felt inclined to reply to, hence my edits. ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

10 reviews per album

Hello. Could you tell me where I can find this rule? Also, deleting the reviews after the first ten is probably not the best way of doing it as some of those reviews would carry more weight than the ones that were left (for example, I'd consider Guardian and Times reviews as having more weight than the "All Music Guide" in the case of Tangled Up). ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


Here : Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums#Professional_reviews —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reqluce (talkcontribs) 21:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I didn't realise there was a rule on the number of reviews you could have, but thanks for pointing that out. I'll probably restore the previous version to choose some more appropriate reviews for Tangled Up. ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Rxart

please, aid to neutralize and to improve this article that is in favor of being erased. It is a popular distribution in Latin America and that is entering Europe, and the European Union even contracted the creative company of Rxart to work in project MANCOOSI. excuse my English please. Thank you very much, I hope that it can help me.--190.49.162.85 (talk) 19:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I don't know anything about Rxart so I wouldn't be able to contribute anything. ~~ [Jam][talk] 19:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Rxart exists, and if wikipedia the flock would be committing an error. There are many references to Rxart in google, would request to him if you know something of Spanish to help to that they do not erase the article of rxart, thanks you very much.
Here some links:
--190.49.149.249 (talk) 22:08, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm not debating whether or not it exists, but I still don't know anything about it so I can't do anything to help improve the article. Neither do I know any Spanish. Sorry. ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
ok, anyway thank you very much.--190.49.149.249 (talk) 22:22, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
here I respond friend to you.--190.49.149.249 (talk) 22:56, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Code 9

Hi. While I don't doubt that Digital Spy is wrong, it is not an official source of information for programmes. Can you cite any official BBC source that says Spooks Liberty / Rogue Spooks has been renamed to Code 9? The Mirror, on its report that Joanne Froggatt had been cast to play a major role, said it was still called Spooks Liberty. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


With respect, I wouldn't call 'The Mirror' a reliable source either. Digital Spy is a leading news source which is actually where many of the entertainment tabloids get their news from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Netgem21 (talkcontribs) 14:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, neither would I (call "The Mirror" reliable) but I'm still inclined to leave it as "Spooks: Liberty" as the latest[5] from the BBC Press Office suggests it is still called Spooks Liberty. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
I think that, unless an official source comes along as says it is called Code 9 (I've searched the BBC website and can find no reference to Code 9) then I'll move the stuff back to Spooks Liberty (with reference to the BBC sources that say it is Spooks Liberty). ~~ [Jam][talk] 15:16, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Linux distros page

Is any compromise possible on having the various distro logos on that page? I spent a while tracking them down and putting that layout together. How about if they were further down the page? Or in a gallery? --❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 16:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I suspect a gallery somewhere might be appropriate, but I didn't think the inclusion of those images in the middle of the page was particularly appropriate. Maybe you could have them in a box down one side of the page instead? I'm afraid I don't know the guidelines regarding the use of images on Wikipedia, so might be worth looking those up too :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I think this is more of an aesthetic disagreement than a guidelines issue; including images that illustrate the topic of an article is pretty standard fare for Wikipedia, and an image right at the top of the article is quite common. I moved the logos down to the Examples -> Popular Linux Distributions section of the article; hopefully you will find this less intrusive. --❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 12:39, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
I think that looks better personally :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 13:57, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

vandalism removal

in return to your message about me removing content from Girls Aloud i did so because it was vandalism saying "girls aloud rule" and a image template in a irrelevent position which to me looked like vandalism as well could you tell me if i was right to remove this vandalism? sorry for not stating what and why i did it. Maxtitan (talk) 08:23, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. It seems you were right. After looking back, it turns out that you were fixing it, but hadn't completely fixed it. I assumed you had introduced the mistakes so I reverted them and warned you. Sorry about that.
Just so you know, in future, please use the "+" button above to add your message to talk pages - don't place them at the top. Cheers. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

April 2008

I don't agree

The imdb site says that Troels Folmann will be the composer, so..... Tudor Tuloc (talk) 11:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I wouldn't entirely rely on IMdb since some (most?) of its information is contributed by normal people like us. Until a more reliable source comes along saying he is, I'd keep it off in my opinion. ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
You might be right but some people wants to know that Troels will be the one to score the game, he will surely post something on his blog. Anyway, I've moved my user page to the old one to make no confusion to anyone. Tudor Tuloc (talk) 13:47, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm sure people will want to know that, but I don't believe IMdb can really be used as a source due to its contributed content (probably in the same way you can't use WP as a source for itself). And thanks for your comment regarding your user page. ~~ [Jam][talk] 13:58, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Father Kieron Hobbs entry

Dear James,

Thank you for your message on removing my entry on Father Kieron Hobbs. The persistant immediate deletion of this entry by yourself has been noted with growing concern by an increasing number of people and is the subject of much speculation. I can only assume it may be due to the fact that you have labelled him as a minor character in Hollyoaks.

I thought I should bring to your attention that Father Kieron Hobbs is officialy listed as a member of the regular cast of Hollyoaks and has an opening credit in Hollyoaks along with all the other major characters in Hollyoaks. He debuted at the same time as Niall Rafferty (who does has an entry in wiki) and has received just as much air time if not more. I would also like to point out that other characters like Bill Ashworth, Nana McQueen and Valerie Holden who do not appear in the opening credits or the cast list, have entries.

Therefore, I would be very grateful if you could explain your reasons for the persistant removal of the Father Kieron Hobbs entry. You should be aware that any reply (or lack of) will be used as evidence in a dispute resolution by the HEC and this message and your response will be made available to the public domain.

Thank you.

Pen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pen021 (talkcontribs) 15:52, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Considering that Wikipedia is in the public domain, I don't see why it was necessary to warn me about that. I also have no idea what the HEC is, so could you please enlighten me?
This discussion has been held in several places already (Talk:Hollyoaks#Father Kieron, Talk:Kieron Hobbs#Notability?, Talk:List of minor characters from Hollyoaks#Kieron Hobbs (notability discussion)) - I assume that you have already read those pages, as my points have been laid out time and again there. You will also notice on the original Kieron Hobbs page that SatyrTN also commented that the page did not meet the notability guidelines of WP:FICTION, and so should be deleted (or merged into the minor characters list, as I later did).
Also, as you state, Bill Ashworth, Nana McQueen and Valerie Holden are not major characters but have their own pages (EDIT: this has since changed - I've merged them all into the minor characters page now). The same with Niall. These pages get created either by anonymous users or editors who do not read the guidelines for the creation of fictional character pages. It then boils down to a very limited number of "dedicated" editors to decide what to do (merge, re-write, delete etc.), and we do not have the limitless time required to go through each page and do this.
I should perhaps also point out that I did not delete the entry - I merely redirected it to the minor characters page. As I have stated on the minor characters talk page, I think this title is inaccurate, and would like to re-titling. As yet, I have not had anyone feedback their comments to me so I haven't yet gone ahead with it.
I hope my reply is satisfactory to you, but please get back in touch if you need me to clarify anything. ~~ [Jam][talk] 17:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Call The Shots flagicon use

In response to your warning regarding the edit that was made to include flag icons, I have since reviewed the flag icon article and I seem to be unable to find any explicit rules regarding the use of flagicons with dates in infoboxes. They are in thousands of infoboxes for singles and albums. The format that was listed under the date before (and now presently) is far more hard to read, which is you reasoning for the warning. A clarification would be appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.169.78 (talk) 01:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

It seems that there is no clear policy on the use of "flag icons" (the ones in infoboxes) but there has been a lot of discussion on this topic. The most centralised discussion I could find was on Wikipedia talk:Manual of style/Archive 66. While I doubt that any article on a Girls Aloud single would suffer from flag icons looking the same, they are still more difficult to see for someone who is visually impaired and for automatic parsing tools to read (I believe Google does something like this). In my opinion, I'd prefer they stayed as textual descriptions. ~~ [Jam][talk] 09:51, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Improving Facebook to Featured Article status

I am currently working on improving Facebook to Featured Article status, and I noticed that you have made substantial contributions to the article recently. If you have time, I would appreciate it if you could help out and improve the article. Some comments by other editors have been left at the peer review, Wikipedia:Peer review/Facebook/archive2, so feel free to address those issues, also. Thanks for your time! Gary King (talk) 08:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I would like to improve the article to featured status, and I believe it is ready for that. But, I already have one nomination right now, so I can't nominate another article. If you think you can donate some time to the article's nomination, then I would be more than willing to help out. Please let me know. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 22:39, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Hy there again

Have you seen the picture inside this article Heart of Neolithic Orkney (you'll know it if you've played the 16 years old episode of the TR5). This is stunning, I think we should give some references to the people to see that the Lara Croft's world has some "mirrors" in our world. It was alright for me when I saw there are no more references to other fictional works at the end of each Tomb Raider game articles (there was a vague reference to some movies, but the real places are much better to be mentioned). At least we should do that for TR4 and TR5, where the game producers where inspired more then ever by the real world. Tuloc (talk) 15:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, without official reference to these locations, it is purely speculation and comes under original research, so I don't think we could include it. While I'm sure the game producers will have drawn inspiration from the real world, we can't really say where unless we know officially and can reference it. The picture doesn't ring a bell, but I haven't played TR5 in a while. ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:54, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

RC

What happened to RC- I wasn't here on wikipedia at the time. Please reply as I am eager to know Britishrailclass43 (talk) 13:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I've replied on my talk page. Adambro (talk) 14:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

sorry

hi there i recieved a message from you a few months back and would just like to say sorry for the deleting, i was new at the time and didnt know how the features worked, please except my apologies, Jamie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.174.53 (talk) 16:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Jamie. Thanks for your message, and I accept your apology. You might want to take a look at WP:WELCOME for information about editing Wikipedia and how to avoid future problems :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

British Spellings

Hi. Thanks for fixing a few wrong spellings on the Hannah Ashworth article. Unfortunately, you also changed many correct British spellings to American. Considering that is a British article, please do not unnecessarily change the spellings to American English. Thanks. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:10, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


Sorry to offend any cultural spellings, I know you guys made the language anyway, but there were also total mispellings such as "scrathing" instead of scratching. Unless scrathing is the way to scratch in the UK. ;p - Tubeyes (talk) 08:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I know - I'm not complaining about the total misspellings, just the fact that your corrections also "corrected" valid British spellings. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:14, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
No problem! Sorry I've disgraced the motherland! - Tubeyes (talk) 08:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
LOL! It's OK - I'll let you off just this once. Do it again, and I might have to set the Queen on you! ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:51, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
Hehe, I'll just show her my British sympathies by throwing my Flying Circus box set at her in defense. :] - Tubeyes (talk) 09:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello there

I've got a message from you. Maybe you can explain what I did wrong with editing some sources?

Thanks in advance! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tombrai1 (talkcontribs) 14:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, firstly they are not sources - they are external links containing other relevant information. Also, you should not really change established links - you should only add to them if they are relevant and meet the guidelines at WP:EL. That is why I reverted your edits and warned you. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:35, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

My edit on iPlayer was not incorrect.

The bbc recently allowed access to iplayer from the iphone. This stream (a .mov file i believe) can be intercepted by simple programs that basically mask you computer to make it look like an iphone. Please before replying to me Google "iplayer-dl" (without the quotes) Thank you (oh I'm not signed in and i wasn't then so I'll write my user name instead of signing) mczack26 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.199.151.5 (talk) 11:22, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

However, this is not an "authorised" service, therefore I don't feel it is necessary to mention it. ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
Technically it is authorized. It is a service offered by the bbc that is legal. If you want to download it that is up to you but the bbc have authorized it and it is legal to do technically mczack26
The "iplayer-dl" script is not provided by the BBC, and it makes use of "hacks" to download the iPhone/iPod Touch Quicktime videos. Therefore the BBC does not officially support any kind of download service on the Mac or Linux platforms, and that is why it is not appropriate to say that on the iPlayer page. ~~ [Jam][talk] 13:09, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Greenhead College

Hi Richard. I apologise for the problems that this IP address has been causing. Unfortunately it is the external IP address that is shared by our staff and students when accessing the Internet within college. I've been keeping an eye on the situation, and have been disabling the web access of students that I have found vandalising Wikipedia and notifying the other members of the IT staff about this problem. ~~ [Jam][talk] 10:36, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


Hi! Thanks for the message. It is only a 12 hour block, so is more of an indication of the seriousness of the situation and what may happen than a penalty. Tracing and blocking an individual users access is a difficult process through a shared school IP, so I appreciate the time you are spending doing it. Obviously a new term has recently started, so it may well be a new pupil and may settle down! The two prior blocks were for 7 and 14 days respectively so the potential of a 12 month Schoolblock is very real. Perhaps pasting a public 'classroom' list of those pupils blocked for vandalism will have a deterrent affect, if they see other pupils are aware of their actions and how it may result in their loss of access because of it, assuming it is not politically incorrect to do so! Richard Harvey (talk) 14:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, a 12 hour block over the weekend isn't exactly going to cause too many problems, but I know exactly what you mean. Thankfully it is not an exactly difficult task since I have the date and time of the vandalism, and can use the external proxy logs to track down the user responsible. I shall speak to the other IT staff about a possible "name and shame" campaign regarding Wikipedia vandalism, and try and see if we can get some information into our IT enrolment classes at the start of term so that new students know that it is not acceptable to vandalise Wikipedia in this way. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:55, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Fantastic work James, why can't we have Wikipedians embedded within the IT dept of all large organisations. Adambro (talk) 23:04, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm sure it would solve a lot of problems if we did! That or we just implement a site-wide anonymous editor ban (not that that is every going to happen... and it wouldn't entirely solve the problem either...) ~~ [Jam][talk] 23:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

RHEL release dates

Hello you removed my section about Red Hat Enterprise Linux support dates. I think the dates are important part of the information about RHEL, because they are unique in Linux world - no one disribution offers souch long dates.

Now I add section about where to find souch information on RH pages (I spend about 45 minutes to find that) and I hope it stays there ;-)

Petr Klima qaxi (just at) seznam (dot) cz —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.20.118.130 (talk) 13:52, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello. The problem with your original edit was that you added far too much list information to the page. Wikipedia is not a list of statistics, which is what I considered the support dates to be. Your link is probably more appropriate, although it probably needs re-wording. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Pages moves

Hello. I was just wondering why you are moving lots of Linux distribution pages? I noticed you moved the Ubuntu page recently, and have just moved the Fedora page, but I can see no actual reason for you doing this? ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:24, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


Hi, I've moved some pages about Linux distributions like ubuntu or Fedora, because I think this way most people can easily understand what "Fedora" or "ubuntu" mean... (in computing) as simple as that... and in no way this removes the references to "Linux distribution", that appear in the first sentences of both articles, so people can easily check what a "Linux distribution" is... I think this makes those articles more "acessible"... while still being correct in all senses. Hope I explained it well... I think it was a good idea, what do you think? Cheers SF007 (talk) 14:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, my only concern was that there didn't seem to be any discussion before these moves were initiated. I know about WP:BOLD and all that, but I figured it might have been appropriate to have initiated some discussion beforehand. However, I suppose it is OK to change them to "operating system". ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Keff McCulloch Vandalism

Ban me then :P I'll just redial my internet. 79.73.181.242 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 20:54, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Gmail

I am being bold!!! One of the reasons Wikipedia is so widely used is that it's more up-to-date than traditional encyclopedias.100 MB is a perfectly reasonable update point vs. 500 MB. Be reasonable!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xp54321 (talkcontribs) 23:23, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I will admit that it does take a long time to reach over 500MB these days (since they have slowed down their allocation of space). However, that is no reason to keep reverting the pages without discussion. The first time it was reverted, it should have been taken to the talk page for discussion, instead of the constant reverts that then ensued.
Also, I noticed that Pc12345 changed the page in exactly the same style as you - if you are also using that account, you may find both those accounts blocked for sockpuppetry and evasion of 3RR. Just a heads up on that point. ~~ [Jam][talk] 23:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

NYMR

I keep making a complete hash of things, I've mananged to on NYMR anyway please revert this Britishrailclass91 (talk) 15:01, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I've reverted it for you. You know that you can reverted it yourself - go into the history tab at the top, find your edit and hit undo. That will bring up a window confirming what you want to change, and then just click save page to revert it. ~~ [Jam][talk] 15:11, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, right, I didn't realise that I could revert it myself. Sorry about the vandalism on commons, I hope I will be able to build your trust in me back upBritishrailclass91 (talk) 15:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

No worries - that is why we experienced editors are here :). I'm willing to forgive you about your vandalism to Commons, and the other problems we had earlier - just make sure to take on board those comments made by the other editors, and to know when to step back and take a break. ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:31, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Gmail

Thank you for your cooperation. I'm confident we'll soon have consensus.Xp54321 (talk) 01:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, we'll see what the community says. ~~ [Jam][talk] 01:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Oh, if the rate of storage increases to previous high levels I have nothing against moving to a new longer interval.(250 Mb,400Mb,500MB,whatever the community says):)Xp54321 (talk) 01:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Is there an active RfC for this now? If so, can you post the link on the gmail talk page? For the record, I don't think an RfC is really needed here - I think the three of us pretty much agree on the 100Mb interval - but if you want to go through that process, go for it. Tan | 39 01:51, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I've just put an RFC tag at the top of the section in the Gmail discussion page (see here). Well, I think that we can leave it there a few days, see if any other members of the community respond, and if not, I'll take it off and we can agree to the 100MB increment for now (until such a time as we need to re-evaluate that). ~~ [Jam][talk] 01:55, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Very well, I agree.:)Xp54321 (talk) 01:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert

That IP managed to hit me right as my professor decided to give us a quiz. Thanks for keeping an eye on things. :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:40, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

*shock* Editing Wikipedia in class? How could you?! Don't worry - I do it in lectures all the time. :D No worries, I just spotted it, thought it looked dodgy so dealt with it. ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

May 2008

Tomb Raider PC Version

You have removed two of my major posts on Tomb Raider I, citing that wikipedia is not a how to guide. You are right, I did not release, so I have created a how to at "Wiki How" for installing the PC Version of Tomb Raider I.

So then how are the following statements which I added back into the wiki a how to guide?

"Running the PC Version of the game on more modern computer hardware and software than was around when it was released in 1996 can be a little bit tricky. This is mainly due to the fact that the original Tomb Raider was released for DOS and not Windows."

"Under Windows 9x Tomb Raider I run without modification. However, Windows 2000, Windows XP and Vista do not share Windows 9x's full direct hardware DOS support. Attempting to run the game from the CD results in a DOS Box flash and then nothing. Non the less with a little patience, persistence and know how, it is indeed possible to get things up and running on Windows XP and Vista."

You need to be reasonable about this. At the least, the above material is a statement of present fact relative to Tomb Raider I. It needs to be included in the article. An external link to the how to wiki, at the least would also suffice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ant75 (talkcontribs) 01:37, 1 May 2008

Well, aside from the "How To" point that I cited before, I am also concerned that the content you provided is a copyvio of another website. I'm not sure that a whole two paragraphs is necessary, but perhaps one paragraph with a reference to a recognised Tomb Raider site (TombRaiderChronicles.com is frequently used) that provides a guide might be appropriate. ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Nothing I have written is directly copied from another website. I will condense the above into one paragraph and once again add it to the Tomb Raider wiki. I am happy to provide TombRaiderChronicles.com as the link. You are correct, it is of great value to anyone interested in the Tomb Raider series and it does indeed have its own how to guide. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.100.113.217 (talk) 11:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
It just seemed like the content was very similar to that on the TombRaiderChronicles.com site. As I said, it is probably best that you condense it down and use the TombRaiderChronicles.com site as a source to it. (PS: Just a friendly note - you should probably ensure you sign in when you contribute to Wikipedia - not edit anonymously.) ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Uncontroversial proposals

Greetings, Software Engineer!

  • I made a booboo like so (an arrow insertion):
→=Uncontroversial proposals=
  • Can you check on the Move Request Page if all's in order? I think I corrected it. Thanks. --Ludvikus (talk) 15:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
Seems to be OK to me. ~~ [Jam][talk] 15:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Girls Aloud vandalism

Hey, if you notice any more of those IPs, let me know. That IP you last reported went on a long streak of edits for about an hour, so I'm considering trying to figure out what a good range to block would be if it continues. You can also add them straight here if you like. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I've seen this user before - editing from a school in Ireland, and later, from their own personal Internet account (on Eircom). If I see any further vandalism, I'll let you know :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:06, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Just got the last IP you added - if we get one more, there should be enough to place a fairly accurate range block. The pattern of vandalism clearly indicates this is all the same person. Good catch. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
I spotted their first edit on Girls Aloud, knew it was the same person so added it to your list as per your last request. It would appear that they persist in editing from those two Eircom ranges (159.134.13x.xxx), so I suspect it will be a case of blocking that range from editing anonymously. ~~ [Jam][talk] 19:35, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Done. I kept it as limited as possible, so it doesn't cover the entire Eircom range, but should hopefully keep the vandal from doing much more for a while. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:44, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
Nice one. It's annoying that that range has to be blocked, but they might reconsider their actions once they realise they can't edit any longer. ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:59, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

funpidgin article is spam ???

Could you please remove your request to remove your speedy deletion request from the funpidgin article ? It's not spam in any way because this page refers an open source project, not a company. And all I did was to change some references to the funpidgin home page in the Pidgin(software) article to a stub ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sorin7486 (talkcontribs) 13:49, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

It is not my request, so I cannot remove it. While I do not believe the article is spam, it does not have enough content in it to justify its own page. It is really just another low level branch of Pidgin that just happens to implement a few minor things that people don't like in Pidgin. ~~ [Jam][talk] 13:55, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
sorry.. I thought it was your request ... as for the level then Adium shouldn't be a separate article either ... There's a reason why I've set the article as a stub and I think we should give the project some time to see where it goes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sorin7486 (talkcontribs) 14:00, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Adium is a client for Mac OS X. There is no reason why it shouldn't have its own article. However, the Funpidgin software is, as I said, just a fork to fix a few minor issues in Pidgin. I really don't think it is notable enough for its own article. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Pornography

Have you actually reported it to someone? ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:12, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


Well everyone knows, it's all over the wikisignpost and also there is a link to a real newspaper article in the signpost, take a look. Britishrailclass91 (talk) 12:48, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I didn't see the Signpost, so I didn't know about it. Just seems like unnecessary over-reaction to me. ~~ [Jam][talk] 13:04, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Since when did image of naked person automatically equal pornography? There must be a lot of pornography in medical libraries then. The issue of the album cover has been widely discussed and the consensus is that it isn't child porn and it is appropriate to include. Adambro (talk) 19:41, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Like I said, over-reaction (and not entirely surprising, given the source of the report). ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:04, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

BBC News music

Hi. I was just wondering why you had removed the "Top of the hour" music from the BBC News Channel article? Apart from being out of date now, I don't see any reason to remove it. I've restored it for the time being. ~~ [Jam][talk] 15:59, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


Hi. I removed it because it was out of date, but also because there is a fair use issue with the file. Wikiwoohoo (talk) 16:09, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

That is fine. Your edit summary didn't really explain why you had removed it, hence my restoration of it. ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Hollyoaks box

Hi. Since I can find no legitimate reason for using this template over one of the standard character templates, it is in the process of being deleted. However, all the pages need converting to the {{Infobox soap character}} standard parameters (see the Tfd page for details) so if you could lend a hand it would be most appreciated (considering you updated lots of pages to use the template). ~~ [Jam][talk] 11:03, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


I just though I could do it like the other ones and make it a bit neater, but Maglo's already said he'd deal with the box conversion ala the Brookside one. I'll still help Conq 18 May 2008 14:03 (UTC)

Ah, it seems to have been more or less completed. Thanks anyway. ~~ [Jam][talk] 13:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

User:Chris G vandal

Thanks for warning him --Chris 11:03, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem. I'd give them the benefit of the doubt, but since they vandalised then reverted it so quickly, I'm a tad suspicious of their true intentions. ~~ [Jam][talk] 11:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Sheffield

Your edit to the Sheffield station page was unnecessary, especially since the page you decided to redirect it to was blank. Please do not unnecessarily redirect articles when there is no need. Thanks. ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


I was in the middle of the move before you interfered. Welshleprechaun (talk) 16:27, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It is a controversial move which you have not discussed. Please discuss it on the talk page before you do. ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

You should not do copy and paste moves. You should have discussed it on the talk page first, and if consensus was reached, you should have requested the page was moved by an administrator. ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


I've reverted this move in full now. Adambro (talk) 19:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for dealing with this. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Latest stable release template

Hi Jam

Thank you for reverting my changes on Fedora and CentOS. I just tried to add the latest version template instead of the normal text, so that any changes on the version could be done directly without need to edit the whole page.

I could add the lsr template to Notepad++ but I couldn't do it for the above OSs. Could you figure the problem?

Thank you in advance!

Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Byassine (talkcontribs) 14:20, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

By the looks of it, the {{Infobox OS}} template doesn't have the "frequently updated" parameter you specified. {{Infobox OS 2}} does, but I don't think this template is in much use yet.
To be honest, for OSes like CentOS and Fedora, their version number don't update that frequently, so there is no real need to have a separate template for the version details. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:44, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Here you go!

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjaco18 (talkcontribs) 22:32, 27 May 2008

Please quit sending me messages

Hello. I don't know who you are, and I don't know why I have a message from you everytime I browse WikiPedia.


If you are trying to discuss something with me, you are probably trying to reach the wrong person.


Can you please stop sending me messages? I have no interest in any discussions.

Thank you for your consideration of my request. I promise, I do not bother anyone and you'll not hear from me again.

Thanks, Mike 74.196.218.199 (talk) 15:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The only message I believe I have left you is regarding an edit test made to the Fedora (operating system) article from your IP address. If you didn't make this test, then I am sorry but you have obviously been allocated the IP address of someone that did it. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, you should register for an account. ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Reconsidered

Hi. You removed my AIV report for this IP address citing that it was a school address without recent vandalism. I don't think it is a school address since it vandalised at 1am this morning, and the WHOIS details for the IP address would contain details of the school if it was one. Also, there was vandalism both today and yesterday so I don't understand why it wasn't blocked. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


The school thing was a case of thinking one thing (shared IP) while saying another. Anyway, I continued looking that one over and blocked the vandal. I'm still not sure a block was technically the right thing to do because of how much time had passed between the anon's last edit and when the AIV report got addressed, though. Doczilla STOMP! 08:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, that's fine. I guess the problem is that they vandalised mainly UK-based articles at a time when most UK editors would be asleep, hence the time it took before someone addressed it. Thanks for blocking them though - might make them think a bit harder before vandalising articles. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:13, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Melissa Hurst

Regarding this article, would it be OK for me to move it now to the List of past minor and recurring characters from Hollyoaks as I proposed in the AfD, or should I wait for the outcome of said AfD? ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


I would be perfect if you create a section for that character in the List of characters. This would make the decision in the Afd much easier. -- Magioladitis (talk) 19:00, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I've merged the character details in the list. ~~ [Jam][talk] 19:19, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
Nice! I think it needs trimming though. Let's leave Afd for a day or two and then we close it. I'll just inform that all info is not in the List. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

June 2008

RHEL/CentOS-Fedora Core linkage

Hi. Just saw the comment on your edit. Yes, those details are on the RHEL page, but they are also unreferenced. My main point is that although I know that RHEL and CentOS are derived from the baseline Fedora distribution available at the time (a source on the Fedora article says just this), there is no proof from either Red Hat or the Fedora Project that suggests this exact mapping of Fedora -> RHEL/CentOS. That is what I was contesting. ~~ [Jam][talk] 06:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


I know that it does not have sources. However, the reason I do this is just to convienient people, especially if it already exist on RHEL. If you dislike it, you can take out the one in CentOS, but should also remove the same section in RHEL. George Leung (talk) 07:10, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Who Are You??

Why do you keep correcting me? Do you actually have a life at all? I only copied a template from another page and you give out to me. I make a few spelling mistakes and you give out to me. I add lyrics to page (I didn't know you couldn't) and you give out to me! Give me a break will you!! Most of my messages are from you! grr!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Liamr02 (talkcontribs) 11:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I keep correcting you because you keep making edits that appear to me detrimental to Wikipedia. Perhaps you need to familiarise yourself with the policies of Wikipedia, especially with the Music project since you keep editing music-type pages. ~~ [Jam][talk] 11:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

All done

Hi. The template you created recently is in the wrong namespace - it should be Template:Stub-Phasmatodea, not Wikipedia:Stub-Phasmatodea. If you need help moving it, give me a shout. ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:52, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


{{Phasmatodea-stub}} Eg.{{Mantodea-stub}}

B jacob (talk) 19:51, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, you actually moved it to the main space under the name Phasmatodea-stub - I've now corrected this and moved it to Template:Phasmatodea-stub. ~~ [Jam][talk] 19:54, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Harley Raine

I declined a speedy you put on this article. It was uploaded, tagged and reviewed in the same minute. Please give time for the article to be expanded, because articles are generally written in stages. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 22:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The page has already been deleted twice before, hence my "jumping in" to delete it. However, I'll wait a little longer to see if it gets expanded further. ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:03, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello

would you like to nominate for my featured picture nomination here cheers

thanks

B jacob (talk) 02:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but this looks like canvassing to me. ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:53, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Barnstar of Reversion2.png The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For your efforts in fighting vandals and thereby preserving the integrity of Wikipedia content (and to thank you for reverting vandalism against my user talk page), I bestow this Anti-Vandalism Barnstar upon JGXenite, a.k.a. Jam. Rise, Sir James! Doczilla STOMP! 20:38, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Cheers, thank you very much :D. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

In reference to references

I have now gone back and edited the page again, citing more sources. I was not aware how stringent this policy was. Thank you for pointing it out to me. Bouhb. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bouhb (talkcontribs) 10:09, 5 June 2008

Unfortunately, your edit still does not cite any valid references, and appears to be mainly speculation. ~~ [Jam][talk] 11:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

RPP

Hi. I'm not sure what you did, but your request RPP request removed all the content from the page, bar the "current requests" section. I've restored the page to before your request, and re-copied it in manually. Please take more care in future. Thanks. ~~ [Jam][talk] 05:06, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


Sorry i was not aware of that i was using twinkle sorry about that.

Staffwaterboy Critique Me Guestbook Sandbox 12:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

That's OK - I've never seen Twinkle corrupt the page like that before. If it happens again, it might be worth dropping the Twinkle developer a message to let them know. ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Puppet question

How are they similar? I'd love to block a puppetmaster, but I don't know the history. Doczilla STOMP! 11:23, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I've posted some other revisions for comparison on the AIV page. Unfortunately, this user is a prolific sockpuppeter, and use many different ISPs and usernames. Rodhullandemu and Fram are the best people to talk to it about. ~~ [Jam][talk] 11:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Once you posted those links, someone else beat me to blocking the person. I'm certain your links helped. If this person is a recurring problem, those of you who know the case might consider compiling a list like the one at Category_talk:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Creepy_Crawler for easy reference. Doczilla STOMP! 11:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the page reference. I might consider doing that, and mention it to Rodhullandemu and Fram. I only ever catch them when they make changes to the Paul O'Grady page (especially since the edits are always the same!) ~~ [Jam][talk] 11:40, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I've known this vandal for several months now. His principal targets are UK soap operas, comedy programmes & their actors & characters, also (although not recently), car manufacturers. He is obsessed with infoboxes, even tinkering with them on his user & talk pages. I've tried to work out a suitable rangeblock but currently it's too large to avoid collateral damage. He also appears to use two ISPs (one home, one school?), so he will just switch between them. However, a list of targeted articles might be useful to have, even though I'm not keen on watchlisting them all! --Rodhullandemu 15:41, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
You don't necessarily need to watchlist them all. You can simply wait until you happen to spot that vandal, and then glance over his/her edit history and refer to the specific similarities which appear on the list. That way, an admin can see at a glance how many similarities there are without having to scrutinize unfamiliar edit histories to look for the pattern. Doczilla STOMP! 18:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
So essentially, we compile a "base" diff set of edits that can be used by administrators and/or other editors to check whether it is WJH1992 or not. ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:59, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Something like that would really help any admin unfamiliar with the case to know to slap a prompt indefinite block on each sock. Doczilla STOMP! 07:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I'll start on doing something like that when I get a chance (probably later this evening) unless someone wants to get started? I guess the page we'll be using is Category talk:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of WJH1992? ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
That sounds good. Doczilla STOMP! 08:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

(out) Right, I've updated the Category talk:Wikipedia sockpuppets of WJH1992 with details of the Paul O'Grady edits, and I'll have a look for other similar edits we can list there. If you can keep it up to date with the most recent edits (or edits that show stereotypical behaviour of WJH1992), then it can be used as evidence in future when they need blocking. Cheers :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, this is a good start. I'll add in a section about editing behaviours. --Rodhullandemu 12:44, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Cheers Rodhullandemu, your contributions would be most appreciated (since I think you and Fram have the most experience with this user). ~~ [Jam][talk] 13:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Unblock request

Vista-clean.png

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Autoblock of 213.121.151.142 lifted or expired.

Request handled by:  Netsnipe  ►  16:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

hi

I am cordially inviting you to add a comment to my featured picture candidate found here Thanks a heap


cheers

B jacob (talk) 21:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Your message on User_talk:Tyw7

Regarding your message left on my user talk,

81.86.68.253
If, as you claim, this IP address is linked to your account, why are you still editing anonymously as the IP address? [Jam][talk] 09:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I find it easier to just click the edit button and editing anonymously than logging in and then editing.-- Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (talk) 11:10, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I see. Surely if you are using the same computer and browser, it would just be easier to let the browser remember your log in? ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
I don’t want my computer to remember anything so as my account would not be compromised by spywares, etc. -- Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (talk) 15:04, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. Still, it is probably better that you use your named account, rather than your IP address (even if you have indicated that that IP is linked to your account). ~~ [Jam][talk] 15:06, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism around entry Murray Gold

Somebody has created a malicious page vis-a-vis the entry on composer Murray Gold here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mr_chuzzlewit —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.229.135 (talk) 20:12, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up - I'll look into it. ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:21, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
It appears that the user has not edited since March last year, but I think I'll see if I can get the user page deleted as an attack page. ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:24, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Bjaco18/Stop and Stare 14

Hi. I see that you blocked Bjaco18 for vandalism threats. You might also want to either keep an eye on or block Stop and stare14. This is allegedly his sister (and hasn't edited much since he set up her account). However, she might start "editing" now that he is blocked. ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


Yeah, I'm watching both of them. Thanks, Gwernol 20:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Just thought I'd give you the heads up in case you'd missed her :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Ján Mikolaj

Just wondering why you thought that the Slovak Education Minister was not notable. What links here shows that Mikolaj is mentioned in many other articles. I hope this was an isolated slip. Regards, BencherliteTalk 10:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, probably. Well, it was an article created by a new user with very little edit history. It seemed to me non-notable (no sources and little formatting) but didn't think to check what linked to it. ~~ [Jam][talk] 10:47, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

student lounge

student lounge has recently been rescued, you may wish to review your vote at the deletion debate as new sourcing and copy editing has taken place.Myheartinchile (talk) 19:59, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I have already done this. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Jodie Prenger

My mistake, I really need to brush up on the use of images on wikipedia, as it is one area that I know little about. Thanks for correcting my mistake.♦Tangerines♦·Talk 16:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not a problem. I'm not that up-to-speed on image regulations, but Geniac had already said it was OK on the page, just not in the infobox. Hence that is why I reverted your edit. Don't worry about it :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:51, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Userpage vandalism

Many thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page (and thanks for the 'Thanks' for when I reverted some for you). - tholly --Turnip-- 18:04, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

No worries :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:18, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism revert

Thanks for the vandalim removal on my user page! Not a happy bunny it would seem! ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 23:26, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

No worries, and no - it appears not. Never mind, they've been indef blocked. ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

User:WJH1992

Thanks for the quick reverts. His biggest problem at the moment is finding an IP address that I haven't blocked, but he doesn't realise that the more he uses, the more focussed a rangeblock can be. I've got all night! --Rodhullandemu 21:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem - I was just checking my watchlist when I saw them. I'd have reverted the first lot of vandalism if you hadn't got there just before me! And yeh, it does seem to me like most of the IPs he uses have been blocked (although the first one had been used a while ago... clearly it has been recycled and unblocked since then). ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey Rodhullandemu. You have a message at User talk:77.102.144.25 *rolleyes*. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:54, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for that, have replied but he's like the Duracell Bunny and his edits are still disruptive. --Rodhullandemu 15:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Indeed. I'm not entirely sure if there would be any grounds for unblocking him, especially since he continues to avoid his block and vandalise pages. I guess he would have to go on very long term probation (no edits whatsoever) before he would even be remotely considered for unblock. ~~ [Jam][talk] 15:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, do you think User talk:212.139.113.218 might be a sock (which I've tagged as such for the time being?) ~~ [Jam][talk] 15:08, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for letting me know. Blocked for a week, and the rangeblock narrows.... --Rodhullandemu 15:13, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Nice!

Your are quite fast in your edits. I've just uploaded the file and there you are. Nice! Tuloc (talk) 09:21, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't hang about :D. Actually, I just randomly popped on, saw your edit (which is great by the way) but just decided to rewrite the caption slightly so it was less "original research"-like and more descriptive of the picture. ~~ [Jam][talk] 09:28, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Alan Light vandalism

Hi there, thanks for fixing my cock-up on the Alan Light article. I got confused with the firefighting the vandal and ended up nominating the wrong page for CSD, then not restoring it properly etc etc! Anyway, thanks :) Ged UK (talk) 12:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

No worries :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:35, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Girls Aloud & Shrek vandal

Hi Rodhullandemu. I wonder if you might be able to help me (since you eat, sleep and breathe sockpuppet tracing) - there is a vandal in Ireland that vandalises Girls Aloud and Shrek articles. On Girls Aloud pages, they tend to remove Kimberley Walsh and replace her with Laura Mary Carter. They always vandalise from Eircom addresses (159.134.x.x) and also vandalise from their school IP address (87.36.158.133). I was wondering how we could tackle this disruptive user (perhaps by doing something similar to WJH - a category talk page relating to their edits) but I'm not sure if there is a "root" user who started this all off. Would you mind lending a hand? ~~ [Jam][talk] 19:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


Sorry I missed this, the schoolIP had been blocked for three months (although that now mostly cover the holidays), and the Eircom IP was blocked for 24 hours. I've watchlisted all the pages and am aware when the block expires. He won't last long if he comes back. --Rodhullandemu 16:09, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I didn't want to give you too much more work to do but I wouldn't mind your help is keeping them at bay. Cheers. ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
The Eircom vandal was blocked for 24 hours earlier this evening, and if he comes back, I'll protect the articles for long enough for him to lose interest, say a week. --Rodhullandemu 22:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

CSD

Me again :D. I've just been PRODing a few Strictly / DwtS / DoI articles that are complete speculation - Dancing on Ice: Axels and Spins and Dancing with the Stars: The Ultimate Game - and another, Strictly Come Dancing: Conga Party‎, has been PRODed by another editor. Do you think they might be eligible for CSD? I'm not sure what category they would fall under if they were eligible for it though. Any ideas? ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:00, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


None of the CSD reasons really fits these, but if the text has been lifted bodily from some website, they'd be good as copyvios. Meanwhile, the PROD may well concentrate the minds of the authors into providing sources. Otherwise, if the PROD is contested, I'd just AFD them per WP:CRYSTAL since there's no indication of when (or if) they'll be released. --Rodhullandemu 22:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. Given they are three practically identical articles (all created by the same editor) for three similar shows, I suspect it is all nonsense dreamt up by the aforementioned editor. I'll leave them as PRODs for the time being (I doubt the editor will remove them, but we'll see) but I'll take them all to AfD if the PRODs get removed. Cheers (as always) for your help :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:16, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Disruptive User

User:Atlantik made this edit to his discussion page. That is the second happening of him removing warnings. And also I discovered this. 216.221.123.212 (talk) 02:15, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I've got their talk page on watch. If they start reverting it again, I'll give them one final warning before sending them to AIV or the 3RR notice board. Let me (or Ericorbit) know if they are still being disruptive and we'll see what we can do. ~~ [Jam][talk] 09:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

NGO TV

Why is my article being deleted constantly. I have sources. Check it out yourself ngotvchannel.com Uktvhistory064 (talk) 12:51, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

The TV channel is not notable enough. One third-party source is not really enough, and the article is mostly speculation (*might* be free to air, *may* launch on satellite.) You should read the relevant guidelines for creating new articles, and follow them, to stop your article being deleted in future. ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:53, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the message

I got your message. You're right, I didn't know I was taking something out. I went back and put my message in the discussion section. Thanks for restoring what I took out.

Just an ironic note, I had never gotten a message before on Wikipedia, and I happened to be looking up "answering machines," when I saw "You have new messages," and I thought it was just something on the entry. Then I opened it and saw your note. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.232.189 (talk) 19:36, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

It's OK - just take a bit more care in future :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 19:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Troels!!!

Only the main theme tune? What is that? He is part of the Tomb Raider: Underworld, even with one tune. I'm sure there will be no other composers in Underworld. What do you think?

Anyway, I'm glad you have appreciated my little map work. See you later in time! --Tulok (talk) 15:38, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I understand what you are trying to say but I was quite astonished to find out the truth. I still don't belive. Why did you kept the info for you? --Tulok (talk) 15:43, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
If you listen to the 3rd podcast on the Tomb Raider website (http://www.tombraider.com/server.php?show=nav.7), he says that he is only doing the theme tune this time, but that he is the consultant for the rest of the music (that's off the top of my head...). Someone else is composing it (again, can't remember who - need to re-listen to the podcast). ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:13, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Delete of Big Ten Baseball Tournament

You gotta give articles a chance to grow, bro! Seancp (talk) 21:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I realised that. However, it probably doesn't meet the criteria for a new article, since it has very little content in it. Ideally, you should have created it in your user space then moved into the main article space once it had more content. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:19, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

July 2008

Trivia

regarding your revert of my change of up to eleven I have to ask how my input was any more trivial then a lot of the other items on that page, for example: "In Neversoft's opening cinematic in Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock, the guitarist turns his amp that goes up to eleven, but the number 11 is covered with a sticky note reading 12. Additionally, the volume settings in the Options menu range from 0 to 11." which also has no source cited. --Lemming64 21:12, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

That page is probably mostly trivia really. I've removed a number of entries that seemed extremely trivial to me, and asked for citations for most of the remaining ones. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and just because someone else has put something trivial there, doesn't give you an excuse to! ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:28, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I never said it was an excuse too, I am relatively new and not wholly familiar with all of the policies. I was just following the example set on the page in question, and thus to avoid a repeat mistake by someone else, it really needs all of the ones that are similar to mine to be removed. --Lemming64 21:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, it is probably a good idea to get yourself familiarised with the various policies here: WP:WELCOME is probably a good place to start. Like I said, I've removed some of the ones that seem very trivial to me, but it probably needs the expert eye of someone else to pick out what can be kept and what can go. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:59, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Being silly

You are being silly if you think my edit removing inaccurate information from the Fedora page is vandalism. Swfdec is NOT enabled by default in Fedora 9. That is incorrect information based on earlier beta release which did include it by default. Make sure you understand facts before accusing people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.80.58.210 (talk) 11:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

You gave no reason in your edit summary for removing that entry. If you edit summary has said something like "not enabled by default" then I wouldn't have reverted it and warned you. Perhaps in future you could use an edit summary so your valid edits aren't reverted? ~~ [Jam][talk] 11:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

The Patrick Star Show afd

Hello, it appears you didn't complete the deletion nomination for The Patrick Star Show. I've taken the liberty of completing the nomination on your behalf by creating the deletion sub-page and adding an AfD message to the article. Regards. --Muchness (talk) 12:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I'm not sure what happened - I think TWINKLE must have had a hiccup when creating the AfD. ~~ [Jam][talk] 12:18, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I updated the detailed call charges list on the 0870 page

Please could you take a look at the latest version and fill in the gaps/tbas. I used the 0845 page as the model - hope you like it. I've been wanting to do that for ages! Repton3 (talk) 07:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Sorry I didn't reply back, but have been quite busy recently. I think the 0870 and 0845 pages need a good clean out, and I really think they could do with a complete merge into the Non-geographical numbers page, as we are missing pages on 0844, 0871 (now also 0872!) and 03 numbers. ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:34, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: In23065

I've been "observing" this interaction, and I wonder if In23065 needs taking to ANI? Their behaviour towards this anonymous user is out of line IMHO. ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:36, 6 July 2008 (UTC)


I am saying yes, I have been in numerous edit disputes with User:In23065 over various Big Brother articles and unlike other editors he thinks his ways are always right no one else's, doesn't take into consideration if the issue was already brought up and a resolution was reached regarding a certain issue. I think he is now having WP:OWN issues with the comment on his own talk page regarding the subject "but I will let you contribute if you promise not to add these nominations" he was trying to get all articles regarding Big Brother (UK) semi-protected due to vandalism but the only one that was being vandalized was the current season but this is common with the Australian, American, and British versions on English Wikipedia. I think now he has gone too far and if you look back at both my contributions and his you will see that on many occasions we have had disputes and I have even had to have editors who have been with the project longer than he or myself regarding certain issues. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 04:33, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you want to take this to ANI then? ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:30, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
After thinking, yes I have always tried to reason with him or come to a solution but I think now I will take this to ANI. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 07:47, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
I have reported him here. I think I did my best it was my first time reporting someone, I would like you to go over it and add anything you feel necessary since you have been observing this interaction. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 08:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Also it seems you have a good knowledge of Wikipedia could you answer me this, what is a good size for a logo I was thinking 137px to 179px. 300px is too big I think because the logo becomes too dominate, isn't their a rule in about oversize logos? ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 04:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not familiar with the context in which you are asking this. I assume you are referring to the Big Brother templates. I think 180px (let's go for a round number) would probably be good enough. 300px is always too large - a max of around 250px is usual I think. ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:30, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
In23065, uploaded past Big Brother UK logos in 300px and messed with the templates used on many Big Brother articles to make all images used with the templates 300px. I thought 300px was too big for an article. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 07:47, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Can't believe you are talking about me behind my back. Anyway I changed the template as i noticed that when opened to reveal the housemates for that series the template expands and therefore doesn't look very nice however if you have a larger picture in the template then when it expands this problem does not occur. In23065 (talk) 10:43, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

There was never any "behind your back" going on. It was perfectly possible for you to see both mine and Alucard's contributions. Like I said to Alucard, I'm not familiar with the template in question, but smaller images are usually better than larger ones (300 is probably far too big for any template). ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
You and Alucard were trying to get me banned and guess what it didn't work and Alucard has ended up being called "Lame" by an Administrator. In23065 (talk) 19:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Actually, we didn't want that (well, I didn't) but your conduct towards that anonymous user was inappropriate, as was your conduct towards myself and Alucard. Perhaps you need to cool down a bit, edit a few other articles for a bit? Think of it as constructive criticism... ~~ [Jam][talk] 19:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
What was inappropriate about my comments. In23065 (talk) 19:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
In terms of the anonymous user, "I will let you contribute if you promise not to add these nominations", "Please go away little child" and "im going to make sure that the table is kept clean from irrelevant facts". I don't feel that any of these comments were appropriate, especially your effective demand that they can only edit if they don't edit that page. I don't know anything about the Big Brother stuff, but I think that information isn't exactly unhelpful, and so should probably be included. ~~ [Jam][talk] 19:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Basically that table is about nominations and they are trying to add a task to the table which has nothing to do with nominations. The only thing that relates the two is the fact that "Suitcase Nominations" has the word nominations in it and that is it. OK yes my comments were inappropriate but I had tried to explain to him but he kept reverting the article and I had had enough. In23065 (talk) 19:33, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Man of Music, Heart Of Gold

Hi, I declined your speedy deletion template on this article. WP:CSD#A7 applies only to articles about web content or articles on people and organizations themselves, not articles on their books, albums, software and so on. I suggest WP:PROD. Thanks! Darkspots (talk) 20:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Cheers. I'd just seen your decline, and I've PRODed it instead. ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:20, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. Regards, Darkspots (talk) 20:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

My Talkpage

Thank for the revert, I have no idea what that was about --Chris 02:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

No worries. It seemed very random (and probably inappropriate) so figured I'd be bold and revert it for you :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

my page was deleted while having a hangon tab placed on it so that I could complete the work

HEY WHY WAS MY ARTICLE DELETED EVEN THOUGH IT HAD A HANG ON TAB AND WAS MARKED AS NOT COMPLETED AND STILL A ROUGH WORK IN PROGRESS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ravepuppy (talkcontribs) 01:24, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I do not delete articles - I merely mark those I feel should be deleted. You need to talk to the deleting administrator - Wknight94. Also, it is bad etiquette to write IN ALL CAPS - please don't do it in future. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:20, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Weomradio edits to WEOM-LP

I restored one edit this user made to WEOM-LP - I verified that the previous URL to WEOM's website no longer worked, and the URL he provided was correct. I did not restore any other information provided by this user there, or on Thomasville, North Carolina, as it appeared to be blatant advertising.

FYI, and thanks. --Leuqarte (talk) 18:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the FYI, much appreciated. ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Riccosimba6

Hi, just to let you know that I have created the above discussion page about User:Riccosimba6. I am notifying you because you added the sockpuppet tag to their userpage on 6th July, though I can't find any supporting evidence as to why. Perhaps you would like to add what you know to the above discussion. -- roleplayer 01:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I suspected that 82.7.198.245 (talk · contribs) was either a sockpuppet or was the IP of Riccosimba6. This IP would, along with Ricco, would remove the deletion templates of pages that were scheduled for deletion, and also contributed to the same pages as Ricco. ~~ [Jam][talk] 02:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

A-Channel News at 6

Hello

I was wondering if you could help me and Dongxhang1 create a A-Channel News Page larger article that is in General —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.181.154 (talk) 17:10, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Probably not, as I know nothing about the channel. I've already placed a link on your talk page for the guide to creating new pages - I suggest you follow that. ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:43, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Need Help with Funguy

Hey Jam, I was wondering if you can help me with the user Funguy. He has been adding various unsourced info on shows like The Graham Norton Show. I know that a series 4 has been commissioned but he is continually adding unsourced info about rumoured guests and official dates. I keep on deleting it but he keeps on putting the info back and adding other unnotable info. He seems to do this to other british talk or variety shows such as The Sunday Night Project as well. I am not a mod and you know more than me. I was wondering if you could talk to Funguy and set him straight as I think he is a new contributor and he does not understand the rules of Wikipedia. Any help wold be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance69.157.171.185 (talk) 13:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)samusek2

I have written a final warning on his talk page. If he continues, I'll report him to AIV. ~~ [Jam][talk] 13:08, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, Jam! Now I have not seen him lately, but now you have that guy 76 changing things as well (I have seen the messages you sent him and his threat). He put a source up, but he reverted his spelling mistake. I think he will be back to change that one. As for the show returning, I wanted to tell you that a good source is SRO Audiences which confirms that there will be a new series later this year and there will be prebooking available, however you can only get the site and not just the Graham Norton Show. Itès under The Current Series Section. http://www.sroaudiences.com/ Hopefully these guys will not give you any more problems, but I know you can handle them.69.157.171.185 (talk) 21:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)samusek2

I haven't seen the 76 reply, although I've sent my reply back to them now. Obviously they are oblivious to our policies, so I've sent them a link to our guidelines.
Thanks for the link - however it isn't really precise enough to say that it is coming back in September. As long as we have a verifiable and reliable source that says it is returning in September, then I'm quite happy to leave it there.
Oh, and I'm not too concerned about new and anonymous users - I haven't done anything wrong, and I've had enough threats over my time to have grown a fairly thick skin against such empty threats. ~~ [Jam][talk] 10:19, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I apologize for bugging you again. I don't want to seem like a pest, but I just wanted to ask you if you had seen the latest updates on the Graham Norton Page. A user named UpDown has changed quite a bit on the page and was wondering if you agreed with certain parts of it. There is one part that I am a bit upset about. He has taken down the link to the BBCAmerica link and will not let me put it back up anywhere on the page saying that WP is not a list of links but I feel that since BBCAmerica is a significant part of the article, I thought I would put it at the bottom, the actual BBCAmerica Website underneath the BBC website. Am I right in wanting this.

Also, I am just curious, what is the difference between the word "and and the "&" as he has changed this too. Is there a reason not to use symbols, as it hasn't been a problem until now.

I am sorry for bothering you, but this is a bit annoying. I know everything must be above board, but it's a bit weird, updating this page for the past year and a half with no significant problems and then having someone like Updown come in and sort of fix everything his way and any arguments to the contrary that were ok before are shot down by him, plus he seems to be watching over me now. Anyways, any advice would be appreciated. Thanks69.157.171.185 (talk) 07:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)samusek2

Hey. I had not seen the recent changes, but I've taken a look now. Personally I can't see any reason why not to include the BBC America link, because it is presumably the official site in the US. I've re-instated the link and I'll post a comment on UpDown's talk page to let them know why. ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:55, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Question

What do I have to add to make it creditable? I made it long and containing lots of information that proved it was creditable Pezmc (talk) 18:03, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Your articles are blatant advertising about a company that is of little or no relevance to the real world. You need to read WP:FIRST and prove (from reliable, third party sources) that your company is notable. I don't think they are so will probably be deleted. If you continue to re-create them, you will be blocked from editing. ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:05, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

August 2008

Re: Dr Who

Thanks for the "welcome" and as to not adding spoilers, I didnt see any mention of the word spoiler anywhere in any of the editing guides. I know what a sand box is, Thanks.--Will Decay (talk) 23:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

My point was that it was unnecessary to add the text "*spoiler*" to the page. That is why I reverted your edit. I believe that WP:SPOILER has some mention about WP not warning about spoilers. ~~ [Jam][talk] 09:44, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes and the page also has "should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception" in its heading. The reason why I added the spoiler tag is because it contained information not related to that article about a future episode in the series, the policy page says that it is expected that a subject will be covered in detail but nothing about future events in a fictional series. I appreciate you informing me of wikipedia policy. I haven't changed it back because I don't care enough, I'm just pointing out that the policy itself is not absolute and does not cover the specific thing that you removed. Thank you --Will Decay (talk) 23:23, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:The Stolen Earth - Shadow Planets.png)

Ambox warning blue.svg Thanks for uploading Image:The Stolen Earth - Shadow Planets.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

saint mary's

you mean greater than equal sign ">" but yeah, dumb me, thanks though!MYINchile 17:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeh, I did. No worries :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

User:WJH1992 and his myriad sockpuppets

Hi, I'm trying not to be over-optimistic here but it's been a week since he edited from any of his known IPs, and none of the watchlisted articles he targeted have popped up with characteristic edits. It was an uphill struggle with Tiscali trying to make them understand our problem, and I got to the point of issuing them with a caution for aiding and abetting a Section 1 Computer Misuse Act 1981 offence; however, up to three abuse reports a day copied to their complaints@ seems to have abated the problem for now. Thanks for your script, it's useful for picking up edits, and hopefully if they have terminated his account, we may not need it. However, he is the Duracell bunny, and expect we will see him again in some guise or other. --Rodhullandemu 23:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, one of the IPs that my script has been monitoring picked up some changes from one IP (not the Tiscali one) but that was probably someone else. I'm not sure whether you saw that WJH1992's user page was updated with a link to this checkuser, suggesting that they might be related. Fingers crossed though that your complaints to Tiscali have finally been taken on board and they've kicked him off the Internet. We'll just have to remain vigilant and keep an eye out for him returning. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Cheryl Cole

Hi. Would you mind explaining why that source is not worthy of mention? ~~ [Jam][talk] 19:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)


Because the source/story is a random, trivial, tabloid article. So she kissed a randomer on the cheek, woop-dee-doo, shock horror. Not. If we included every little detail of the lives of Jennifer Aniston and Katie Price, their articles would be 10000GB+. We break WP:TRIVIA and WP:RS by including it. Dalejenkins | 19:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

It was hardly that random really, considering it happened during her and Ashley's "dodgy period" - but fair enough. It just might have been preferable to put that in the edit summary when you deleted it. ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:00, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
I did mention that I was removing "tabloid trash", you must not have read properly. Dalejenkins | 20:02, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
That's not really a good reason IMHO - mentioning TRIVIA and RS might have been better. ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:04, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

re: Fedora edits

Hi, I replied on my talk page. SF007 (talk) 23:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my User page.-Abhishek (talk) 20:08, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

No worries. ~~ [Jam][talk] 20:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

User:83.67.55.217

Hi, would you mind explaining why this constitutes vandalism? I know that User:83.67.55.217 has been causing some problems with his/her edits, but not all have been vandalism. Please take care when using semi-automated tools like WP:TW. Thanks, --RFBailey (talk) 21:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I just went and reverted their edits because of the complaints regarding undiscussed changes and incorrect information. My apologies if I reverted edits that were actually constructive. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:40, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
This user first came to my attention a few days ago after a post here. I reviewed all their edits up to that point, and found most of them were fine. There were some problems, such as the removal of some "Historical railways" succession box templates, but a good many were constructive. However, I don't think this was a case of serial vandalism; some of the edits were down to a lack of understanding of the complicated {{s-rail}} templates for instance.
I'm annoyed by the lack of judgement you have displayed here. The time I spent the other evening on reviewing his edits and deciding that most of them were OK has effectively now been wasted, as you have now reverted them all anyway. --RFBailey (talk) 21:51, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
As I said before, my apologies for any problems I've caused - it was a spur of the moment thing that obviously went a bit too far. I'll review all of the reverts that I made regarding this user, and restore any edits I feel were actually valid. ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
I've already been over them (for the second time, in some cases, although it transpired he'd revisited many of those), so you don't need to review them yourself. I've fixed any problems that were created, and will keep an eye on him. However, you do need to be careful with mass reverts. Thanks, --RFBailey (talk) 03:16, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that, and I'll be more careful in future. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:30, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Soaplife reference

Responded on my talk page, of course. Flyer22 (talk) 03:12, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot (talk) 19:25, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hi. Just a quick reminder regarding edit summaries - it helps other editors to not revert good faith edits you make if you explain why you are doing what you did. An example was my reversion of you moving the Nevada section in the Tomb Raider III article. If you had explained in the edit summary why you were doing it (like you did the second time around), I wouldn't have reverted it in the first place. Thanks. ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:54, 29 August 2008 (UTC)


Oh sorry about that i was too tired at the time to write one. I just thought the list should go in that order as South Pacific Level does come up first on the world map after india.Super Badnik 22:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

It's OK - once you explained it in your edit summary, that was fine. Always best to remember to include them if you can :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 23:03, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok, thanks, i'll remember this in future :)Super Badnik 10:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Good good :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 15:20, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

September 2008

Who is a female voice in Tomb Raider: Underworld offical trainer?

This female voice is Natla. I know this. User: Mustafa Bars, 20:57, 03 September 2008

It doesn't matter if you know it is - if you can't find a reliable source to back it up, it cannot be put in the article. ~~ [Jam][talk] 18:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

RE: YouTube (channel of almost all clips of John Paul McQueen and Craig Dean love story in External links section)

I responded on my talk page, of course. And would appreciate your thoughts on something I queried after my response, which is also in relation to YouTube. Flyer22 (talk) 23:10, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Series vs Season

Hi. Just in case you didn't know, in the UK, we use series instead of season. Since the Billie Piper article is British, and is referring to a British programme, you should continue to use series instead of season. Cheers. ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:50, 12 September 2008 (UTC)


Ah, I'm sorry. I wasn't aware of the distance. I shall keep that in mind. Thank you! - Disinclination (talk) 03:06, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Just thought I'd let you know so you were aware for future reference :). ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Natla

Natla, the character from Tomb Raider, until a few days ago had her own page on Wikipedia, but someone has deleted it and has written instead a smaller section in the Tomb Raider Recurring Characters page. How can I get Natla's page restored? She is not just another minor character (like Zip, Larson, etc), but Lara's main antagonist, and deserves a page even more than Kurtis Trent, another TR character with an individual page, and her co-rulers Qualopec and Tihocan, who are also comparatively minor characters but who have their own entries. Ostercy (talk) 08:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Please take it to Talk:Tomb Raider characters. Cut and paste moves - like the one you did - are not acceptable. There are already discussions regarding what we are planning on doing with the characters on that talk page. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Fedora Image

Hi, I uploaded a desktop screenshot of Fedora but now I wonder is it copyright infringement of any kind due to the Firefox, Amarok logos? If so, how do I delete the image from wikimedia? I have already removed the image from the articles. -Abhishek (talk) 14:45, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

You may be able to request deletion under CSD G7, although I don't know if these criteria apply to images. If not, you could just put it up for deletion using the Image for Deletion process. ~~ [Jam][talk] 17:12, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks I have added it in the list of images to be deleted. -Abhishek (talk) 18:09, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

The Promise artwork

Hi, I know you are not responsible for this, but for the Girls Aloud song The Promise cover artwork has been put up. The song was only premiered today, the video is being shot tomorrow. So the picture in question is unoffical, especially since Girls Aloud headquarters sent emails to all forum users stating that the cover will be unvieled in the coming weeks.

Plus the image used is taken from the Girls Aloud 2009 Calendar, with some text added to it.

Please help. I don't know anyone else to deal with this problem. Thanks. Liamr02

Hi Liamr02. I've removed all unsourced content from the single page, and by the looks of it, the artwork is already up for deletion due to invalid licensing. I'll let that run its course. Thanks for the heads up though. ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:47, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Template talk:Coronation Street character

Hi. Maybe the discussion in Template talk:Coronation Street character is interesting for you. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:24, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll take a look, although I doubt I'll have anything constructive to bring to the discussion. ~~ [Jam][talk] 15:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
There is a discussion if we can replace "years" with "first-last" and the template in general with the generic Infobox soap character as it happened with the Hollyoaks one. -- Magioladitis (talk) 15:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh right. Well, I'll take a look and see. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:30, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Graham Norton 4

Thanks Jam, I was going to ask you earlier. I also wanted to let you know that Funguys additions were also original research (no source) and not true. I have checked the listings for 25 September and the show is not on then. He will always try to add in stuff like that. I erased it last time and he reverted my edits. Then that article came out for BBCAmerica. I knew the show would come out between 25 september and 11 October, and then due to the 9 days after airing in the States, I thought it would be 2 October. The listings for 2 October are on Digiguide, but some of the schedule still says TBD. I understand what you mean about original research, but I thought that since it mentioned the 9 days after airing schedule and everything, ... well suffice it to say I wasn't sure how to handle it. (I knew that the BBCA source was a valid source somehow though.) Also please watch out for Funguy. He may try to post unsourced material as well. Cheers!76.67.138.163 (talk) 22:04, 14 September 2008 (UTC) samusek2

I hadn't had chance to check out Funguy's addition, although it did seem like OR/unnecessary (especially since nothing else about series 4 had been posted up). I'm not doubting the validity of the BBC America source, just that it can't be used to prove when the show will air in the UK. It would be best to wait until the BBC Press Office puts up the listings for that week and see whether the show is in or not. ~~ [Jam][talk] 07:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, Jam. It's Thursday and no mention of it on the BBC Press office. I did find something on the link below giving the premiere date and some guests, and they get their info from television listings. Whatever the case, by tonight early Friday, RadioTimes will most likely have a listing for it as it will be two weeks from Tomorrow. I'm just a bit aggravated that they announce info for the new series of Jonathan Ross while we have to wait ages for info on the new series of Graham Norton. http://thecustardtv.blogspot.com/search/label/TVweek 76.67.138.163 (talk) 16:37, 18 September 2008 (UTC)samusek2

Here we go again!

I almost dreaded the return of Strictly knowing that there'll be some people who can't resist spoiling it for the rest of us. I put the comment on both the Strictly main page & Series 6, but see it's been ignored already. Do you think it's worth requesting the page be locked on a weekly basis? It would save so much aggro. --Whoosher (talk) 13:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether such preventative measures would be grounds for protection. There usually needs to be some sign of vandalism or disruption, and posting up "spoilers" (which is really all they are) is probably not accepted under those terms. Feel free to give it a go though if you want. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:02, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
After some enquiring to one of my admin friends, the addition of spoilers isn't a valid reason for protection (I didn't think it was). The only comeback we have is that it is unsourced content, and so the users involved can be warned and then blocked if necessary. He said he'd keep an eye on the articles involved though. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:12, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Link marked as spam

Hi JGXenite.

Please can you explain why the link I added to the Strictly Come Dancing page was marked as spam and removed?

Thanks,

pms549 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pms549 (talkcontribs) 00:21, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Fan sites generally fail the WP:EL policies and so shouldn't be included on the site. ~~ [Jam][talk] 06:42, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
I have had a look at WP:FANSITE; in particular the section about "Links normally to be avoided". I can't see anything that applies. What particular policies within the WP:EL or WP:FANSITE do you think it fails? Thank you. Pms549 (talk) 13:33, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, firstly, it is a Japanese site, therefore it fails on language accessibility grounds since non-Japanese speaking people can't read it (and this is English Wikipedia). Being a fan site, the link also seems to just promoting that website, and WP isn't a directory of links. Those seem to be the first two points that spring to mind - there may be other reasons why it isn't appropriate. ~~ [Jam][talk] 13:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate the point about the Japanese language. The problem is, there isn't any Japanese Strictly Come Dancing page or information on the Japanese Wikipedia and, well, I didn't want to start one. The dance related Japanese Wikipedia sites link to the English page, just like this one does: ja:シャル・ウィ・ダンス?_(テレビ番組).
I referred to the site I added as a fan site because that is what it is called, but if you look at the information pages on the website - or perhaps the page translated into English using the Google translate service, you can see that it provides background information, information about the program format and the way it is judged and results much like the English Wikipedia page does.
I doubt I'll be changing your mind on this one, but thank you for explaining your reasoning behind removing the link anyway. I appreciate it. Pms549 (talk) 22:20, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, lets put it this way, my comments are really only my interpretation of the given guidelines. From your latest set of comments, I can see why you would feel that link would be appropriate. If the link was to be re-added, my only comment would be to reword the link - using the term "fan site" is likely to see it being removed again.
I think the best way to proceed from here would be for you to post something similar to your last comment here (condensing all we've discussed so far) and put it on the Talk:Strictly Come Dancing page so that other editors involved in editing that page can air their views. That way, we can see what the general feeling is from other editors. ~~ [Jam][talk] 23:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Continuity Deletion

Hi Super Badnik. Could you please explain why you deleted the continuity information on the Lara Croft article, considering you didn't put in any edit summaries explaining why. ~~ [Jam][talk] 17:59, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


We agreed on the Talk Page that assuming that the Core and CD games are different continuities instead of simple retconning is orginal research. I was just going to change the section, but when i read it was all about how these games are apperently in two continuties, i just deleted it and moved the image to another sectiion.Super Badnik 18:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

OK. Might have been useful to have pointed that out in the original edit summaries, but it doesn't matter now. ~~ [Jam][talk] 19:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Your advice on editing discussion pages

Thanks for the advice; sorry for my mistake BunnyDust (talk) 13:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

It's OK. I guess if you are new to editing, you weren't to know. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:02, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Actor & Actress

I assume you do not understand proper English usage of the words Actor and Actress. In the English language the proper definition of an Actor is

• noun 1 a person of male gender whose profession is acting. 2 a male participant in an action or process.

In the English language the proper definition of an Actress is

• noun 1 a person of female gender whose profession is acting. 2 a female participant in an action or process.

So you see this is why I changed the article antiedman

See Actor#Terminology for the reason why actor is used in favour of actress. Please do not continue to revert articles back to actress without discussing it on the relevant talk pages. ~~ [Jam][talk] 14:14, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarifying

I must thank you again, because I must admit I'm confused sometimes of what I want to write down, and then my English gets very mixed up. I assure you that the same thing written in my native language, would be also very confusing to the one that reads it.

--Tulok (talk) 15:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, and don't worry about it. ~~ [Jam][talk] 17:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

October 2008

Tomb Raider Underworld

Just leave the Playstation 3 version for a while besides mine is high resolution —Preceding unsigned comment added by Royxomonuchi (talkcontribs) 18:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Discussion continued here.

Yo ! are u some kind of Administer ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Royxomonuchi (talkcontribs) 16:43, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

No, I'm just an editor who is concerned about your actions. You continue to ignore the rules that you were blocked for violating! If you make one more edit that is considered to be out of line, you will be blocked for a longer period of time. Until you start editing properly, these blocks will continue. ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:46, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Dude why are u being so mean ? I am not vandalizing ! I just replaced the picture with a higher resolution one ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Royxomonuchi (talkcontribs) 16:51, 3 October 2008

No, you are vandalised because you continue to revert the edits of other editors who have told you that you are in the wrong. Unless you start listening to the more experienced editors, and following their instructions, you will continue to be blocked. ~~ [Jam][talk] 16:53, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Girls Aloud Gallery

As per Rodhullandemu's previous comment - "non-free content is not permitted in galleries, and this is an overuse anyway" - I've reverted your edit again. I'm sure it was a good faith edit, but we can't allow it - sorry! ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:28, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


Thanks for telling me! =] But I seen it on Orson's page, so I thought that it was allowed! Sorry! Liamr02 —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:30, 6 October 2008 (UTC).

It's OK. I think the gallery on the Orson (band) page is probably violating our non-free rules, especially since some of the images appear to be only licensed for use on the relevant album/single page. It is a good idea, but probably not appropriate really. ~~ [Jam][talk] 21:33, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Cool! I just realised that the image on Dreams that Glitter - Our Story is not the correct one. I could get a picture, but I would not know how to upload it legally. Any suggestions?Liamr02 —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC).

Well, as long as you can source where the image came from (which website for example), then it should be OK to use it under the fair use policy. Just upload it over the existing image, update the licensing and fair use template as required, and that should be fine. ~~ [Jam][talk] 23:56, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Discussion page

I have the right to write on a discussion page.Max Mux (talk) 07:34, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but if the editor doesn't wish you to post on their talk page - and reverts your edit - it is bad faith to undo that edit. Please stop reverting Magioladitis' edits - they obviously don't wish for you to post on their talk page, and continuing to revert their edits will lead to you being blocked for disruption. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

But its urgent!Max Mux (talk) 08:16, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

If the editor doesn't want it on their talk page, then it doesn't matter whether it is urgent or not - reverting their edit is bad faith and you shouldn't do it. Your message appears to be regarding the sockpuppetry case you are engaged in - you should probably post your question on the case page instead. ~~ [Jam][talk] 08:30, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Girls Aloud Out of Control

As The Sun Newspaper is acceptable as a source for most other GA Wikipedia entries, it can only be assumed that it is fair to use their citation that this is the artwork for 'Out of Control'. I will happily add The Sun's webpage as a source, and include a disclaimer that this is artwork as opposed to the official cover. !Daibh (talk) 23:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

It would be acceptable if the source had been provided, so please can you provide the source for the image.
In future, if you add images to WP, please can you correctly source the images so that other editors don't remove your contributions for being incorrectly sourced. ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning, however, as the article is cited as an 'Upcoming Album', it is quite possible that ALL of the information (including pictures) could change at any time, and therefore, sources are only going to go so far in providing verifiable information. Your concern is appreciated, I just think a sense of perspective would be appropriate for an article of this nature. Regards. Daibh (talk) 23:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

True, but contributions to the page still need to be cited, even if they are likely to change in future. We frequently have problems with editors adding fan covers to new singles and albums, so any official images need to be cited as such so that they don't get removed by accident. ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:44, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I can defeinitely accept that. Thanks again. Daibh (talk) 23:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Just things to keep in mind in future.
Another thing is edit summaries - best to use them every time you edit as they also help to add credibility to your edits (not just after you've had an edit reverted and are justifying it retrospectively.) ~~ [Jam][talk] 22:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

T:AC

Hi. Your recent edit to Talk:Assassin's Creed removed the archiving tools. I am assuming it was a mistake, but if it wasn't, can you please explain on the talk page why you feel they should be removed. Thanks. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 06:57, 10 October 2008 (UTC)


I haven't removed them. The {{talkheader}} template already has an archive listing feature, so I considered the archive box was unnecessary. Diego_pmc Talk 07:06, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah, OK. I didn't originally see the archive stuff in the talk header - my mistake! Thanks for clarifying it to me. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 07:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Fix

Thanks for the quick reflist fix on Huddersfield, I pressed submit instead of preview and then my PC threw a wobbly and crashed before I could get back to it. :o) Richard Harvey (talk) 08:00, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

No worries :). ~~ [ジャム][talk] 08:33, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

About List of Spooks episodes

Hi, if you'd cared to check the link, you'd see BBC have updated that page and it now shows when the first two episodes are being aired, so I saw no reason in altering the source provided, since the source itself was updated... Toer86 (talk) 22:20, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd checked the link earlier today, but it was still unplaced at the time. I have since checked the link and found that it had been updated. Thanks for pointing out my mistake. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 22:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

G1 nonsense

This is not the appropriate tag for hoaxes. It's for pages that literally cannot be understood. Random characters or words strung together resulting in nonsense. For the albums you've tagged today, CSD G9 would be the appropriate criteria. لennavecia 17:45, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the heads up. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 18:42, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Primary sources

A while back you added a primary sources tag to the Carrier (software) article. Don't take this the wrong way, but I think you might be confused about when this tag is appropriate.

Primary sources are inappropriate for controversial claims in topics that are open to editorializing. For instance, if you are writing an article about a court case, using comments from one of the people involved in the case, and nothing else, would be an example of where primary sources are not sufficient. Obviously one person's view of the details of this case are going to be different than the other's, or they likely wouldn't be in court in the first place. To create a balanced view of such a topic, one would need to have a variety of sources, or at least primary sources from both parties.

On the other hand, statements of fact, especially published fact, are typically best supported from primary sources. For instance, a document published by Xerox describing the internal workings of their XNS protocol stack is an example of a primary source, and yet it is absolutely the best possible source one could use in that article. In this case Carrier is fully described by its documentation, so that documentation is the only reliable source on its workings, and absolutely appropriate as a reference.

Maury Markowitz (talk) 15:09, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah OK, thanks for the heads up. I guess I did get confused about their use... ~~ [ジャム][talk] 17:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Ironically my very next edit was to Hotline Communications, a poster-child for primary sources... Maury Markowitz (talk) 21:31, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
This may sound ridiculous, but your offer to help, as simple as it was, was incredibly touching. I've been having a very rough time of things lately, and this computer problem was the rotten cherry on top. To know that there's someone willing to offer help, completely out of the blue, to someone halfway across the world is simply incredible. Thank you so much. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:42, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I really can't accept your offer just now - I'm going to have to reinstall Windows, and so all of my free time right now is sapped up burning CDs of all my files. Once things are fixed up, I may ask your for that assistance, though. In any event, as I said above, you've done a lot to raise my mood just now, and for that I really can't thank you enough. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:42, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

You're very welcome Hersford. I'm really sorry to hear about your problems, and I hope you manage to get them sorted. Feel free to call on my help in the future if you want it - I'll be very willing to lend a hand (if I can!) ~~ [ジャム][talk] 19:00, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Tangled Up Tour

Um, I added the references at the top of the table, in the title section. One reference was from Billboard, the other was the rest of list (only available to subscribed users), which someone had posted on a message board. I don't get how you could say I didn't provide a reliable source, when the listings were official ones from Billboard's listings. -24.92.46.22 (talk) 22:26, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

The fact that you said "someone" posted it on the list proves that it wasn't a reliable source. The reason that you have to be subscribed just adds to the reason why I removed the data you provided. Unless you can find reliable sources that provide data for all the figures, there will likely be deleted in future. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 23:19, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi! Thank you for your advice pretty much. :P And sorry for using the plain references only, but it was particially because I just encountered some sort of emergency to deal with yesterday and didn't have much time to cite a source more in details. Thus I just kind of rushed it... =\ Will take your advice. ;)

Much respect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovelctr (talkcontribs) 07:00, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I'd usually just improve the references myself but I'm pretty busy at present with uni work. If you could convert them to something more than plain references, that would be great. :) ~~ [ジャム][talk] 08:26, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

October 2008

Information.svg Thank you for making a report about 79.97.111.90 (talk · contribs · block log) on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and all users are encouraged to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, it appears that the editor you reported may not have engaged in vandalism, or the user was not sufficiently or appropriately warned. Please note there is a difference between vandalism and unhelpful or misguided edits made in good faith. If they continue to vandalise after a recent final warning, please re-report it. Thank you! Toddst1 (talk) 21:10, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

November 2008

Hi there!

Thank you, I'm aware of the citation rules and stuff and I do follow them I promise, it's just sometimes it's difficult to find "decent" sources. Especially with sales and the like because the official charts never seem to release sales. But I'll pretty much always try to have a reference/source for what I add. In case you're wondering, I got the "Call the Shots" sales from the forum at Girls Aloud.Net. Anyway, happy editing! :] - I'MSKYHiGH (talk) 20:11, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, forums aren't a reliable source so unless you can find an official source (Digital Spy, Music Week, newspapers) then please leave it off the site. Thanks. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 20:19, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Common terms

Hi. Please can you stop re-linking common terms like England and artist? Thanks. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 08:10, 4 November 2008 (UTC)


I thought it was standard policy to link those terms? --6afraidof7 (talk) 15:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

WP:OVERLINK is probably a good place to start. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 09:04, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, did you leave a response to the above message on my page? Because I keep being notified of new messages but can't find any. --6afraidof7 (talk) 17:22, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Nope, I've only just replied to your message here. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 09:04, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

James Sutton

Hey. I never suggested it wasn't true - it just wasn't sourced - and I couldn't be bothered doing the work to find the source (at that time anyway). ~~ [ジャム][talk] 09:59, 8 November 2008 (UTC)


Hi there, don't worry - I didn't mean that summary as a criticism. I hadn't seen it sourced either so was just interested :) DWaterson (talk) 11:30, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

No worries - I didn't take it that way. I was really just explaining why I had {{fact}}ed that statement. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 14:30, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

your deletion of facebook domain name history

hey jgxenite. thanks for your comment. what i added is true about the history of facebook.com domain name. perhaps i could have added more sources, but i did add one. in addition, when i added co-founders, i also provided article links. that should have been enough to remain on this page. you should have reverted only the domain name history, if possible. i will revert it back and add more sources.

thanks. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djgreen101 (talkcontribs) 18:09, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

You provided external links, which are not appropriate within the main body of the text. Additionally, Mark Zuckerberg already has a Wikipedia page, which you deleted in the process. Before re-adding any of the domain history content, please find reliable sources - a note of "check the previous history on Google" isn't a reliable source. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 18:13, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

TudorTulok/Locketudor

Are you this person? ~~ [ジャム][talk] 18:58, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


Yes, I am the same person. --TudorTulok (talk) 21:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Mind if I ask why you are using another account? Unless you are deciding not to use the other one? If so, you should have probably requested a rename. Either way, it is probably best that you blank your other account and redirect it here, so that people don't think your new account is a sockpuppet. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 21:37, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Don't you worry, I won't use the other account. Thank you for your concern. Good night! --TudorTulok (talk) 21:56, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
OK. Just didn't want to see you get into trouble :). Night. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 22:38, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Nice to see that people cares of the others. --TudorTulok (talk) 11:20, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for [6]. —Wknight94 (talk) 12:41, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome - I usually know there is something wrong when someone edits someone else's user page. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 19:00, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

December 2008

Re:

that was kind of weird --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 00:43, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't mind me :) LOL ~~ [ジャム][talk] 00:46, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
I honestly didn't think there was anyone who remotely had the same username as me! that's weird! who did you think i was?? --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 00:47, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

It wasn't the same username, it was same name - Chris Murray. I also mistook your SteelersFan bit for meaning the Sheffield Steelers. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 00:50, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Haha! Well i always come across the Sheffield lot when searching for the Steelers. Also the fact that i have one of the most common names in the history of all time. I can't believe we're having a conversation about this! --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 00:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
It clearly is a pretty common name if I've managed to completely confuse you on two levels! ~~ [ジャム][talk] 00:56, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
two levels? i thought you just got my name wrong haha --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 01:01, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Well, the fact that you shared the same name and like of the "Steelers" (until I realised it wasn't the same Steelers). ~~ [ジャム][talk] 01:03, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Well it was lovely meeting you! I hope to run into you again some time! --SteelersFanUK06 ReplyOnMine! 01:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Same to you :). ~~ [ジャム][talk] 01:35, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Ugggh...

No, I'm not stalking you. I saw that you had added a picture to The Loving Kind, and that it said it had been uploaded to Commons. However, the image isn't licensed correctly so I've requested it be deleted. I don't see any reason why it can't be uploaded here though under the correct licensing (non-free capture of a music video - whatever license that is) and with attribution to the source where the image was captured from. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 23:53, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and I'd like to request you don't use edit summaries like "*JGXenite is a freaky stalker*" or make comments like this - it is uncivil and I don't appreciate it. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 23:58, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I apologize. I'm always mad like that when people delete stuff I upload. (even though i pretty much knew it was a bad upload anyway~) And I did edit out that ~sentence~ like 10 minutes after I made it. Friends? :3

And I don't think I'm going to upload anything except covers anymore, lol... ~ I'MSKYHiGH (talk) 17:06, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Apology accepted - I know you edited it out but you still said it which was why I was annoyed.
There's nothing wrong with you uploading images, but just make sure to license them properly in future. I don't mind helping you if you need my advice about licensing an image in future. Just remember that Commons is only for free images or images you've made yourself - album covers and screenshots aren't allowed. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 19:28, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Nicola Roberts (etc)

There is going to be a duplication of information on any artist page when there is a separate discography page, just as there is going to be a duplication on any artist page when there's a separate album page. Leaving a section blank and merely linking to elsewhere is poor form- instead, the section should have a summary, and then link off to the main article. The best way to summarise a discography is to list the major releases. J Milburn (talk) 16:57, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

OK, that is fine. Just thought I'd point out why I'd made my edit and let you decide what you wanted to do with it. ~~ [ジャム][talk] 18:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:Lara Croft

My mistake. I hadn't noted that the article was written in British English. I'll take note next time. -- Nomader (Talk) 16:01, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

No worries - just wanted to let you know. We get so many people coming along and changing it back, citing that it isn't spelt correctly... ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 16:03, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Haha yeah, I understand. Normally I notice these things but I usually see them in "colour". I dunno, artefact appeared as a mis-spelled word in my browser and I just went ahead and fixed it -- I'm not that familiar with British English, my bad. -- Nomader (Talk) 16:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Yeh, I guess that's the issue with the British and the Americans have different spellings for the essentially the same thing. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 16:56, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Spooks: Code 9

Thanks for adding the {{as of}} tag - I wasn't aware of that. BTW, your "<ref name="digitalspy"> edit in /*Reviews*/ squished the reference to their Episode 1 review, because you had already used the "digitalspy" name to refer to an earlier article. It looks as though you need to be more specific when naming references (e.g. <ref name="digitalspy_2008_03_25" />. See you later - Pointillist (talk) 23:42, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for the heads up and fixing my referencing problem. I probably just added it without thinking about other references on the page. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 00:03, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - FFMG

Thanks for the edit on my talk page [7], but, as that user has been indef blocked, I thought it might be better to reply on my talk page. FFMG (talk) 07:01, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

No worries. The user hadn't been indef blocked at the time, but I thought the edit was defamatory towards you, hence my edit. However, you're free to revert it if you want :). ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 09:47, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Overlink

Where have I been overlinking? --Heslopian (talk) 21:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

1 2 ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 21:15, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
I suppose I did overlink on 1 and 3, but the whole point of my edit to 2 was to reduce the number of links. --Heslopian (talk) 23:27, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Well, true for "2", but you did still overlink to American, which I think was unnecessary as most people will know what an American is. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 07:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
The reason I linked American was because, while I concede that the majority of fully functioning people are indeed aware of what an American is, they might be interested in reading an article about the country. --Heslopian (talk) 14:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
If people are interested in the country, then I'm sure they could find the relevant article themselves. While I'm sure you edit was in good faith, I just don't think it was necessary, that's all. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 14:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Bryon Leslie

Could you mark your tagged pages as "patrolled" please? Twinkle should do it automatically. It makes things easier for other users by cutting pages already looked at out of New Page Patrol. Ironholds (talk) 17:07, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Ah, sorry about that! I thought it had, but I think I did a few from the history pages (after reviewing their edit history) and I guess it didn't mark them as patrolled from there. I'll remember that in future :). ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 19:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

The Loving Kind YouTube video

Just an FYI, I've AGF-reverted your deletion of that link. If you look at the video, you'll see that it is from the official Girls Aloud YouTube page, which means it isn't a copyvio link. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 11:22, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks; my bad. I guess I've assumed a bit too much that most links to Youtube are copyvios. Stifle (talk) 11:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
No worries. I'm just going through the Girls Aloud singles to check, and have found a few copyvio videos (obviously videos from Girls Aloud, Fascination or Polydor channels aren't copyvios). Keep up the good work through :). ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 11:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Duffy (singer)

Thanks for your help in restoring reliably cited material that has been deleted without any given reason or talk page discussion. I asked that the article be given limited semi protection 2 days ago but it has not happened yet. Perhaps a second request might help Edkollin (talk) 21:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC).

No worries. I think it is unlikely that a second request will make much difference - it is usually the volume of vandalism, not the volume of requests that is taken into account. I'll keep an eye on the page (as will other editors no doubt) and if it continues, another request can be put in for protection. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 21:52, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
We have our simi protection so thanks again Edkollin (talk) 16:06, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Yeh, I put in a request for it because of continued vandalism. I've also final warned an IP that kept vandalising, so we should be able to get them blocked if they continue once the semi protection expires. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 17:36, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Spooks edit

I live locally and noticed the royal naval college used in at least 6 episodes in the last two seasons. Most recently as a place where lucas met his iranian sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.232.69 (talk) 22:24, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

As I said on the Spooks talk page, do you have any source to back this claim up? While I'm sure it is possible, personal experience isn't a valid source. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 22:26, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Sorry i didn't notice the reply in the talk thread. I'll move this discussion to there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.232.69 (talk) 22:27, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

December 2008

The source was actually reported before the airing of the show and if you had watched the show you would know that Julie Goodyear played Sarah Harding's mother, not Kimberley Walsh's and therefore, that information from the source was incorrect. This time I have put a link up for the corrent occurance. 60.240.121.240 (talk) 13:55, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

YouTube isn't a valid source. Please find a proper one. I've reverted your edit for the time being. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 17:34, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Tomb Raider

Hi. It's good to see some improvements on the Tomb Raider pages - many of the infoboxes were a bit unmanageable! However, you seem to have removed the Moby Games link from some pages, but kept it on others. Did you mean to delete them all, or keep them all? ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 17:47, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


Hello. Yep, just thought I'd go through the series tidying up =) I generally remove the Mobygames link if an official link is present and leave it if there's no official link. I try to avoid Mobygames generally (WP:VG/EL says they should be on a case-by-case basis), but it's better than not having any link at all! Thanks! Fin© 17:50, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I think that for all games prior to Tomb Raider: Legend, we should probably use Mobygames since the official site doesn't really have anything on those games any more (did it ever have anything about Tomb Raider 1??) How does that sound? ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 19:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Sure, no problem - I tend not to actually follow official links, I just take a cursory glance to see if an official link is there =) Thanks! Fin© 22:13, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. I've added the MobyGames links now to all the Tomb Raider articles below Tomb Raider: Legend. I actually replaced the official link on the Tomb Raider article, but had it reverted, so added it as a secondary link with explanation in my edit summary of why I did it. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 22:19, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Pink - When We're Through

I can prove you that this is the right track title but I don't know how to add references in an article! You can go and find the truth here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Pink-Sober/dp/B001JDLJ2A/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1230546137&sr=8-1 This is the English amazon page where you can find the back of the cd single! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ktar (talkcontribs) 10:23, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

That page merely shows the Sober track. It doesn't show any others... ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 10:30, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Here is the back of the cd single: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B001JDLJ2A/sr=8-5/qid=1230546846/ref=dp_otherviews_z_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&img=1&qid=1230546846&sr=8-5 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ktar (talkcontribs) 10:36, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

OK. I'll see about referencing that into the article. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 10:38, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


SMS Notification codes

A message for you there http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:T509#Proposed_deletion_of_SMS_Delivery_Notification_Codes_North_America T509 (talk) 22:28, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

No Zotero logo shown on the Zotero article page ? Is there any reason ?

Please, look at my comment on the Zotero discussion page, here. What is the reason for the absence of official Zotero logo in the information box of this page ? Could you add one ? Thank you for your answer. Happy new year 2009. Shinkolobwe (talk) 21:37, 31 December 2008 (UTC).