User talk:Jehochman/Archive 1

RFID

Jehochman, there are many companies mentioned. Stating a company does not mean it's spam - I've added the paragraph without an outside link. (LouRFID 15:37, 28 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Jehochman, I volunteer to clean up SMARTCODE CORP. SC Web 01:17, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Started to clean up, added some articles from Forbes, RFID Journal, Information Week etc. SC Web 02:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jehochman, I've cleaned the article acording to WP:CORP - Can you check to see if it's ok? - SC Web 17:49, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. The weblinks I have listed contain direct information related to the topic "religious reaction". They have been listed here since July of 2005. Your definition of spam does not fit. These are not advertisements.--Metron4 18:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. I'll put up a notice on the Talk page. Thanks for being open-minded.--Metron4 18:37, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Black Hat SEO versus White Hat SEO

I agree that there are 2 great articles already in existence- SEO and Spamdexing. My suggestion is that White hat and Black hat (Spamdexing) would both fall under the general umbrella of SEO, so the SEO article could have a small section talking about specific methods, which referrs to the 2 articles on White hat and Black hat (or it could be one article on SEO methods contrasting both the good and the bad). I would move Spamdexing to Black hat, considering that Black hat SEO seems to be the more widespread term of the two. Aside from the fact that I've never used "Spamdexing", Google supports me: Spamdexing => 157,000 results, Black hat SEO => 1,360,000 results. Anyways, just my $0.02. What do you think? LinguistAtLarge 04:21, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Search Engine Optimization

Just FYI. I added the "Search_Engine_Optimization" block with the most important and respected resources that cover the story from perspective of the webmasters and search engine marketers. The first resource is kind of in between. It's not an "official" Source from side of Google and also not a pure Webmaster. See also the Articles Talk Page. Thanks. --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 01:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment at my Talk Page. Now lets get the External Links Issue resolved. I contacted you, because I believe, that you have also an interest in this article. --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 05:20, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to you at my talk page. Thanks. --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 08:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Barcode-scanner.jpg

Hi there,

I was looking at Image:Barcode-scanner.jpg, which I note you uploaded. I was just hoping to confirm the license; can't find anything on the Argox website saying their images are cc-atribution. It's a very grabbed-from-a-website looking image, so it might be worth noting in the description that it's correctly licensed.

Thanks! 137.205.148.15 12:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added a note to the page that the owner of the picture gave permission. Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 01:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trouble with vandals

Hello, I noticed a comment you made on RadioKirk's talk page about a vandal. As I'm not an admin, I can't block either, but I was hoping I could help by pointing you in another direction; next time, if you have a troublesome IP you need to report, consider taking it to WP:AIV, which usually has 5-6 admins on at all times. That way, it is much easier to get troublemakers blocked. Anyway, cheers, and I hope I helped! :) Master of Puppets ^{FREE BIRD!} 15:57, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Informational Resource

I am a very nice person. I tried adding my website that is NON COMMERCIAL with NO ADVERTISEMENTS and no source of revenue for myself.

I work very hard on the articles on the web site. This is not a collection of EZine Articles I collected. Rather, it is a collection of my works. Professionally marketing articles. Please respect my decision to add this informational resource that will be useful to students and adult professionals looking to research on various topics of marketing from a reputable source.

www.CaffeineMarketing.com

If you have any questions please email me at matthew.peschong@mnsu.edu

Wikipedia is not a directory. See WP:NOT Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 02:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SEO

I think you made some good edits at search engine optimization to help improve the encyclopedic quality of the article, but User:Arteworks might not agree, and his reaction could be severe. See [1] and [2]. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 10:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SEO Edit

My problem with highrankings is that it's an SEO company that just happens to own a forum... It doesn't belong as a link.. because if Wikipedia get's into that business .. everyone will start linking to their company's forum.

Best Regards, Roger

Roger, I hope you are watching this page. If you place four tildes ~ in a row, that will insert your signature so I can leave a reply on your talk page. Anyhow, the other resources are also connected to SEO's and commercial ventures. Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 01:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce Clay and the Term: Search Engine Optimization

Hi Jonathan, Regarding our talk at the [Bruce Clay] article. I thought you might find this post at Search Engine Journal interesting. Cheers. --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 02:37, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appended anonymous user marketing to the Internet Marketing entry

This is an area that is missing from the current entry - can you explain why you removed it. As I am new to wiki - did I not follow proper protocol?

Reply requested,

ThoughtLava 03:20, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A suggestion

Jehochman, what do you think of this idea? [3] — Moondyne 16:57, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AIDC companies list

Why did you remove X64 from the AIDC companies list?

Please sign your posts. ;-) If you want to add them to the list, you should first create a page and establish their notability by citing references. Please be sure to review WP:RS and WP:CORP. Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 20:11, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shiny new buttons

Two weeks ago I couldn't even spell administratur and now I are one (in no small part thanks to your support). Now that I checked out those new buttons I realize that I can unleash mutant monsters on unsuspecting articles or summon batteries of laser guns in their defense. The move button has now acquired special powers, and there's even a feature to roll back time. With such awesome new powers at my fingertips I will try to tread lightly to avoid causing irreversible damage and getting into any wheel wars. Thanks again and let me know whenever I can be of use.

~ trialsanderrors 05:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SEO - your comment at my user page

Hi Jonathan, see my comments to your message at my user talk page. Cheers! --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 11:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barbara Coll

I am still new to editing Wikipedia so I must apologize if I am getting this wrong. About a month ago I heard Barbara Coll speak at Google’s headquarters about SEO and was astounded that she was not listed here (being an encyclopedia). I tried to establish a page, but my “newness” and excitement were reflected in the article. Fortunately, an observant administrator helped me understand Wikipedia better and to my understanding the “gushing” was removed and I am still in the process of improving and adding to the article based on his advice.

To this end, I included citations from reliable sources, Business Week and New York Times and am puzzled why you would delete them and suggest (in the Barbara Coll talk page) to include blogs and forums. I am fairly certain that according to Wikipedia they are generally not acceptable sources. Please clarify. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources

My understanding of encyclopedias is they “Cover all branches of knowledge or all aspects of one subject” (Webster’s) and as such, this is what I was in the process of doing. The awards and list of prior speaking engagements is part of that process; as well as the “proof” I suppose that she is a well known speaker and has been for some time. There is still much I wish to add to ensure this fits the encyclopedia model.

As for the gushing adjectives, they were promptly removed weeks ago, so I am not sure to what you are referring. Again, could you please explain?

Your edit has confused me as your recommendations appear contrary to Wikipedia’s own guidelines. I look forward to your response.

LidDavis 08:37, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thank you

Hi

wow - so much to learn here. Thank you for your help. I will do my best. But need to ask for more help please.

Is there a time limit? It may take me a few days. Still a little confused (sorry) I looked at the Bruce Clay article when compiling this, and thought the references I had used - particulaly NYT & Business week were OK. Can I not put them in?

Also, I understand I need to include verifiable sources and given I would like to include that she is a well known speaker I thought listing some of her prior speaking engagements (various places around U.S over a few years) would be a good way of showing this. If this is not acceptable, perhaps you could advise other options?

As for the photo, no, I did not take it - it is ex Internet, but I understand it is OK to use as it is press release stuff and therefore holds no copyright.

Again, thank you for your advice and I hope you have time to answer yet more questions :-)

Cheers

LidDavis 17:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perfomics

I got your message, thanks. Check out the cleaned up article. You might want to check for grammatical errors. Happy New Year! Cheers! --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 04:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SEO reference

Jonathan, Saw your comments and responded on my talk page. I am trying to substantiate with references, when material is copyrighted I look for someone in the industry to validate the facts rather than leaving the language of 'claimed information'. I am not with an SEO, but I do have solid industry knowledge that I am adding into wikipedia on and trying to give validation points. Blathering1

Your errant accusations of my using a sock puppet Junoxyz are unfounded and invalid. Please check your facts before making improper accusations. Blathering1

OK Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 15:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your closing Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Matt_Cutts

Are you an administrator of Wikipedia ? I can't find you in the list Wikipedia:List_of_administrators#J. Although these debates were obvious keep I think that closing AfD on the own articles (Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Virtutech and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Argox) is a little bit rummy. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 22:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't take it personally, I was confused with that. I consider it as clarified now. Happy editing. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 23:40, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hasmonean

Thanks for your feedback at RFF. I have continued expansion of Hasmonean and developed a few of the related articles as well (Antipater), et al. Kaisershatner 17:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Intermec

Just curious. Some years ago I used to work for a company called Intermec. At the beginning of last year, when the company became an independent entity, I looked it up on Wikipedia and found it here as a short article, about the length it has now. I edited the article, noting that it was now an independent public company. Later, I noticed that someone from the Intermec marketing department had added a great deal more of information about the company. I thought that wasn't kosher, but not knowing what to do about it, did nothing. Now I see the the article is now much reduced again, and is listed as a stub. You were the originator of the current article. What happened? Was the previous article recognized as spam? What process took place to deal with it? Thanks, --Halcatalyst 16:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

League of Copyeditors participation drive!

Dear League member,

We've started a participation drive for the remainder of February. If you can, please help clear the backlog by adopting the following goals each week:

Select an article to copy-edit from the backlog. After your copy-edit, list the article in the articles ready for final proofread section.
Select a different article to proofread from the articles ready for final proofread section.

Thanks for your help! Rintrah 16:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thank You,
Jehochman/Archive 1 for your Support! Thank you for your support in my RfA, which closed at 111 / 1 / 2. I am humbled and rather shocked to see such kind comments and for it to reach WP:100. Please feel free to leave a note if I have made a mistake or if you need anything, I will start out slow and tackle the harder work once I get accustomed to the tools. Thank you once more, I simply cannot express in words my gratitude.

...fly on littlewing. ~ Arjun 19:51, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Search Engine Optimization Article

Hi Jonathan,

I was writing Danny Sullivan, Aaron Wall, Rand Fishkin and Bill Slawski and email to provide their input as well. Just FYI. See my post at SEJ, also the update which I added on Friday night [4]

Bill Slawski has a wikipedia editor account and I wrote to Rand and Aaron because of their posts here [5] and here [6] and my comments I left there. Danny, because of his repeated comments at Daily SearchCast and also his posts to Jason Calcanis post [7], post to Digg Comments regarding the post [8] and posts to David Pasternacks posts [9][10].

Their past experiences with Wikipedia makes them hesitating, but I still try to convince them to contribute at least a little bit.

My Motivations come from the comments made by the three about the SEO article and numerous other posts and a comments over the past months. Just to name a few:

Greg Bosers post [11] to the Pronet post about "Socially Driven Sites Hate SEOs" [12]. My posts at SEJ regarding David Pasternacks posts 1,2 and 3 [13][14]. Technical post at SQL Server Magazine Issue 11/2006 where I sent the Author an Email and could not believe my eyes when I got the response. See my post at SEJ [15] and the post by Melissa Burdon at Grokdotcom [16], which relates to this post by me at SEJ [17].

As you can see, it was mounting and my edit did not come out of impulse. I just wanted to show you that. --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 08:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and SEO

Hey Jonathan. I left you a comment at my talk page. Cheers! --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 18:00, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you believe it? The moment Bill Slawski turns up and contributes to the article (minor changes) is he getting attacked by a lets call it "not so knowledgeable" editor out of the blue. I have never even seen that guy before. See here. You might want to provide your comments to this as well. --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 05:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see Bill getting attacked. It's a good discussion. Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 14:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plenty of tests

Oh, I have plenty more tests that I'll need to do, before I get blocked by Guy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JustZisNemesis (talk • contribs) 22:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I see you've been blocked indefinitely. Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 09:23, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Editor review/Jehochman

Thought I'd give you the heads up, since it's been so long: you got another review. Peace, delldot talk 20:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page has been removed from WP:ER and archived (possibly by me, don't remember). If you want to leave it open, I'd suggest relisting with a banner saying what you told me, so no one sees that it's old and archives it. You could start a new one or just re-post that one at the top. I can't see any reason why you can't leave it open as long as you want, especially since your reasons are so noble. If you think someone might object, you could put a note on WT:ER mentioning your reasons. But I doubt anyone will. Peace, delldot talk 22:56, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Admin coaching

You asked me about coaching. If you're still interested please follow up at my user talk page. Regards, Durova^Charge! 01:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can u help me

hi jehochman can u tell me how i can refer my blog to others so that i can learn more about SEO and SMO and how to use wikipedia i will be truely greatful to you thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Masoodsabir (talk • contribs) 11:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks for the Welcome

Just noted the Welcome note. Thanks for that.

Best regards.

--Bwelford 19:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ronald Reagan Peer Review

Hi there. I want to thank you for your comments for Ronald Reagan's Peer Review. It's good to get feedback, and I will definetly take your ideas and suggestions, and turn them into reality! Thanks, Happyme22 00:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quick request

This request got archived without response; as someone else left a note here soon afterward, I suspect that you didn't notice it. Were I making that request today, I'd also include this diff and this diff. Would you mind enforcing your advice? Nyttend (talk) 23:10, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done.[18] Jehochman ^Talk 14:43, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In light of this[19] where another administrator gave @Nyttend: a ruling[20] on similar edits, there is no question that Nyttend is violating WP:ADMINSHOP. Lets not forget Nyttend's other attempt[21] to find an administrator here since his seeking out Sphilbrick at Commons. Furthermore, you Jehochman rather than ignore these violations, are willing to oblige Nyttend as he violates Wikipedia policy. This is a damn good case for ANI if not ARBCOM for Nyttend or possibly both of you. So I suggest you back off. I fix notable people sections and add establishment categories and since Nyttend works on those articles, I check his edit history for articles that need work on both those issues....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 10:56, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I will block you indefinitely if you continue to harass Nyttend. Let it go, or you will be let go. I really don't want to do this, which is why I'm being so patient with you. Please don't keep pushing it. Jehochman ^Talk 15:09, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No harassing is taking place. I'm fixing articles. This needs to go to ANI. You're over the top with threats and punishments far above anything that would be warranted. Which they aren't....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:13, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are stalking Nyttend, and if you go to ANI, the result will be a severe sanction against you. All what you did to him will come out, and some admin will come along and give you a block. If you are wise, you will listen to me. I'm trying to help you. Jehochman ^Talk 15:45, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No you're not trying to help me. You're a bully and a practitioner of what I call the #1 rule of administrators at Wikipedia- Protect your own. If you're sure of any outcome at Wikipedia, you'd take me there. Nyttend would have too. You're not, so you bully and intimidate instead. Nyttend has made discredited accusations against me of personal attacks, one of which led to a block that noone supported and was overturned, and he afterwards threatened to get me blocked for behavior he himself has said didn't happen. There's more too and not all of it is mentioned above. You're ignoring that and supporting him plus threatening an editor with a indefinite block. Go back and see rule #1.

You can't be bothered with what WP's harassment policy says. I will quote you= “the singling out of one or more editors, and joining discussions on multiple pages or topics they may edit or multiple debates where they contribute, in order to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work." Show me an edit I did to confront or inhibit Nyttend's work? Sphilbrick at Commons and linked above wrote the following in reply to an edit in Nyttend's harassment claim-

In Monticello, Arkansas[22] William change the heading from "notable residents" to "notable people". He has stated elsewhere that he believes this is the better choice. I concur. His edit did not affect your edit, modify or in any way challenge or inhibit your edit. It was an improvement to the article. No rational person could possibly see an edit by you making some improvements of the article, followed by an edit by William making different improvements of the article and think to themselves that William was confronting or inhibiting you.

Your fellow administrator said that. What does that make you?...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 16:22, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You will stop following Nyttends contributions or you will be blocked indefinitely. Your choice. Jehochman ^Talk 16:40, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]