User talk:JakobvS

Your comments on Talk:Jes Rickleff[edit]

As per your suggestion, I have nominated this article for deletion. You can vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jes Rickleff. To vote, add a line with *delete*: your comments or *keep*: your comments. Thank you for your input. Plastikspork (talk) 22:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jes Rickleff. I thought you might also be interested in voting on this one, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Destiney Sue Moore. Thanks! Plastikspork (talk) 18:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And one more, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jessica Kinni, perhaps less notable than Destiney, but more than Jes? Thanks for your input! Plastikspork (talk) 19:10, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome![edit]

Hello JakobvS, welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Mootros (talk) 19:40, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please see here:[edit]

Here Kingdom of Germany: "Requested move 2"

Disambiguation link notification for May 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bassam Tibi, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Enlightenment, Migration and Pluralism (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) 08:51, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mattress Performance[edit]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Sarah (SV) ^(talk) 21:20, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017[edit]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Political correctness. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 20:33, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that wasn't novel syntheses, but simply a sentence from the cited article, put in other words, but do as you please.--JakobvS (talk) 06:58, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote that conservatives wouldn’t use... the article says they’ve shown little ability to use..., which is not the same thing. I don’t know where you got outrageous. Doug Weller talk 18:56, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Me neither, because I didn't. Anyway, the article 1) states conservatives hadn't the ability to use the pc means of the liberals, 2) rather diffusely insinuates it wasn't the conservative way to use those means. So, neither having the ability nor the "morals" to use certain means, I summarized that as "they don't use certain means". Anyhow, I guess there are better ways to put it. You know one? That'd be cool.--JakobvS (talk) 19:06, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve no idea, but your wording didn’t represent what the source says. You did write “outrageous”. Doug Weller talk 20:20, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]