User talk:JeffJonez

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

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Wikipedia Reviewer.svg

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. —DoRD (talk) 21:27, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Mitchell (government official) [edit]

Hi, JeffJonez, by any chance did you make the following edit? [1]. If not, I think anon spoofed your address in adding this comment to the AfD. ttonyb (talk) 05:35, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Just to follow up here: Nope, not me. :) - JeffJonez (talk) 00:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

IP Use of User name JeffJonez[edit]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ttonyb (talk) 14:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Ship of fools[edit]

Hi JeffJonez. In this edit, you unlinked a redlinked band on a disambiguation page. It's generally best not to do that: if the band's not notable, their entry should be removed entirely; if they are notable, it's best to leave the red link so another editor can be inspired to create the article. 28bytes (talk) 17:32, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Remember to be nice![edit]

Please don't revert new folks, just because they're new. You were new back in 2007. I hope folks were nice to you back then too!.:-)

It's much nicer to welcome people and explain to them how they can be helpful! --Kim Bruning (talk) 19:28, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I suppose you might mean the "DO NOT EDIT" comment, but it was an unsigned aside on a section marked in red "Please do not modify" about reddit. I'll not SHOUT so loud next time. :) - JeffJonez (talk) 21:29, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
It's usually better to just let newbies bumble about a bit and help them out. I'm from the generation when reverting people was considered really mean.
I know you were trying to do the right thing. :-) In general, it's often more important to be nice to people than to follow signs! --Kim Bruning (talk) 22:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thanks for the help. One man band live (talk) 04:20, 12 July 2011 (UTC)


not every tiny fact on this wiki needs to be, or is, cited. Not going to get into an edit war on it; just sayin'. ElectricRay (talk) 14:50, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but big juicy opinions about sexual fetishism *do* need a citation, otherwise it's still just original research. - JeffJonez (talk) 22:48, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Glucose sensing[edit]

I found the links added in the history to be just what I was looking for in my research:

Can we agree on how to introduce such information to the topic?

BR/ nrbray

Fantastic Art[edit]

Hi Jeff, I see you've made numerous comments and edits to this article. I've had s go myself and as a relative newbie would be interested in your comments/further revisions. Chrismorey (talk) 00:50, 4 August 2013 (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) 16:10, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

GamerGate Sanctions Notice[edit]

Commons-emblem-notice.svg Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to, (a) GamerGate, (b) any gender-related dispute or controversy, (c) people associated with (a) or (b), all broadly construed, 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.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.
Cheers. --Jorm (talk) 05:21, 2 June 2016 (UTC)