User talk:JZCL

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

A barnstar for you![edit]

Kindness Barnstar Hires.png The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
Thanks for the kind welcome! Finally, A source that shows me how to format a page.

Very appreciated! DrDillard (talk) 19:53, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Water polo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Swimming (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Diligence Hires.png The Barnstar of Diligence
Great Person! Hamdirfan987 (talk) 16:46, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Fasination[edit]

Hello JZCL. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Fasination, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: WP:CSD#R3 is only for recently created redirects, but this has been here for six years. Take it to WP:RFD if you like, but redirects from misspellings are usually kept. JohnCD (talk) 19:02, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi John, yes I can certainly understand why this does not count for this CSD. It was just that I thought that this might be a guideline (about the "recently created" redirect) since yesterday I placed a CSD tag on Familt guy and it was promptly deleted, despite having been there for possibly about 8 years. I do understand that it is probably more of an implausible typo than "fasinating"; however doesn't seem to serve as a particularly useful redirect since it has only had 17 views over the past 30 days, and I thought that redirects for misspelling often had a note explaining this such as this. But please correct me if I'm wrong. JZCL 19:12, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
The point of "recently created" is that if a redirect has been in place for a long time there may be links to it from outside WP which would be broken. Advice about when to delete redirects is at WP:RFD#HARMFUL, the general principle being that they are very cheap and worth keeping if there is a possibility they could be helpful. The explanatory note on Athiest is put there by the {{R from misspelling}} template, which is a useful one and I have added it to Fasination. It probably wasn't there because the "Template:R from" family has been developed since the redirect was created. You can read some interesting arguments about redirects at WP:RFD. JohnCD (talk) 20:39, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. That's really useful to know. JZCL 21:39, 16 December 2014 (UTC)


Thank you very much! --The Theosophist (talk) 20:23, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

April Fools' Day redirects[edit]

Hi JZCL. No matter how obvious it seems, you should probably add at least a brief deletion argument to the April Fools' Day redirects you nominated at RfD. I wouldn't be so pedantic, but I've seen editors close such nominations as speedy keep on the grounds that it "fails to advance an argument for deletion". --BDD (talk) 21:30, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Ah yes sorry, I intended to do that later but forgot! Thanks for the heads up. JZCL 09:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion tags[edit]

Do not re-add declined speedy deletion to articles. Also, don't add bogus warning templates to user talks pages. WilyD 15:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Hey, I'm sorry I didn't realise you were an Administrator, but what ever happened to AGF? All I saw was that DGG had placed a CSD tag on a page which had been removed by a user with warning templates on their user page, and I incorrectly assumed you were some type of vandalism/disruption account. So again I'm sorry for my misjudgment, but please do allow a little more lenience towards editors like myself who are only trying to fight the large amount of vandalism on this Encyclopedia. JZCL 16:04, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
It doesn't actually matter that I'm an administrator - anyone but the creator can remove bad speedy tags. And hopefully you can see the irony at invoking AGF in the same breath as admitting you assumed someone was a vandalism-only account and acted on that without investigating what was going on. WilyD 16:18, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes but I think there was a difference. You were fairly blunt and rude to me. I was only trying to help and you were very critical towards me. There would have been a difference if I had been trying to annoy you or something. JZCL 16:27, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Moreover I immediately apologised for my mistake, and you have been not the least bit grateful. JZCL 16:29, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
PS why did you block yourself 4 times? JZCL 16:27, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
I was blunt, yes. Rude? I wouldn't agree - you see your own intentions, but everyone else's actions - if you were sitting in my chair, you'd almost certainly see templating as ruder than warning a user causing disruption (on purpose or not, there's no reason to assume anything*) to knock it off. I don't want to be apologised to, I just want you to not re-add declined speedy deletion tags to articles - if you stop doing that, great! If not ... not so great. But, frankly, the important thing is that you learn from your mistake, not that you apologise or whatever. As much as you ask for lenience, I haven't done anything to you - I only told you not to do things you should not be doing. I didn't block you, or protect the page, or even warn you that I might do something if you didn't knock it off.
As for my blocks, they're all pretty old, but I assume this was the relevant edit. I certainly don't recall specific edits from the better part of a decade ago. WilyD 16:49, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
OK thank you for your explanation, and I do completely understand how it would have come across and apologise once again if I have affended/annoyed/patronised you or wasted your time. As for the rude part I was referring to your edit summary when you first edited my talk page which hurt me somewhat after I had been more bold in the past month or so, and it is somewhat disheartening to find an editor say something like that. Anyway, you learn from mistakes... so hopefully I will be more careful next time. Regards. JZCL 17:05, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Okay, I might cop to the edit summary being a bit harsh. BOLDness can be a wonderful attribute, but when you're doing new page patrol you're usually the first point of contact for clueless newbies - bold aggression or otherwise feasting upon their flesh is usually a bad idea. They're liable to feel dealing with you the way you've felt dealing with me. Cheers, WilyD 17:09, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
Thanks for your help with the Ahmed Mac ANI thread I opened! First time having to use ANI to report an issue and you made sure the query ended up where it needed to be... (not the first time I've seen you help out on ANI either...) Thanks again! Mike1901 (talk) 21:33, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Aaron and me[edit]

Quite right JZCL, the voice of reason. I don't mean to be abrasive but sometimes things written are harsher than when spoken, with a smile on one's face, which I usually have. I can imagine us meeting up one day somehow at an airport or something by coincidence, and getting along famously. It is just a little spat. Si Trew (talk) 19:20, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

@Si Indeed; it is often difficult to judge one's intentions across the internet, especially if communicating with someone half way across the world or whatever. But sometimes someone takes it to the next level. I suppose you kind of asked for it, but there you go. Some may take that message more literally than others. JZCL 19:38, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

WikiDefender Barnstar Hires.png The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
I have no idea why I didn't think to speedy tag the hoax article. Thanks for getting it taken care of! Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 23:00, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

User talk:JZCL/Tests[edit]

Hello. Unless you want this page deleted please remove it from the CSD categories. Chillum 15:11, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi Chillum, I have attempted to remove the hidden categories but do not seem able to do so as I am not an Admin. Is there any chance you can do it (or tell me how to)? JZCL 15:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

I have removed the templates from the page, that gets it out of the categories. I am assuming you were testing something and not trying to ask for the page to be deleted. If you were asking for the page to be deleted I can do that if you like. Chillum 16:47, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

No, it's OK, I just use the page for general tests, but thanks. I thought you were saying there was a way to remove the hidden categories in that I could have the templates on the page but for the page not to be added to the category pages, but no big deal. Thanks, JZCL 16:51, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

2015 Wimbledon Championships[edit]


Those links you removed from the infobox link to the current brackets, not the brackets for the previous year. I'm not sure why those links list the defending champion, but it is always that way in the tennis articles. Once the tournament ends, the defending champion gets replaced with the new champion. Even if you don't think the defending champion should be listed while the tournament is in progress, the links are needed so that people can navigate to the brackets for the current tournament. Please don't remove the links even if you disagree with listing the defending champions, as then the infobox will lose its main functionality of linking to the brackets. Calathan (talk) 15:54, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, Calathan that was my bad. I have only just returned to the action and it appears I need some gentle reminding! Thanks, JZCL 15:55, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)