User talk:Jodosma

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


Hi! Welcome to Wikipedia. Thanks for your useful edits to Henry Sidambarom. Since it looks like you are quite good at fixing spelling and other typos, you might be interested in joining the Guild of Copy Editors, a group dedicated to cleaning up the text of Wikipedia. Either way, I hope that you choose to stick around. Cheers, Tdslk (talk) 22:33, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Almost there! The trick is to use only curly brackets, no straight brackets. If you just copy and paste this:

{{User Copy Edit}}:your page will look like this:

Writing Magnifying.PNG This user is a member of the
Guild of Copy Editors.
It takes practice to learn all of the formatting tricks. If you can't figure out something, a good place to go ask a question is the Teahouse, a forum designed especially for new editors. Tdslk (talk) 04:10, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Jodosma, I'm glad to hear that you're hooked. A few comments based on your edits:
1. You asked at talk:Vityaz (MVD) how there could be a merger with an article that doesn't exist. Good question. My guess is that the article got deleted after the merger was proposed, so I removed the merge tag. Generally, very few people keep track of the talk pages of smaller articles like this, so your question might have gone unanswered for a long time. Another place you might have asked your question is at the Teahouse, a forum designed for new editors learning the ropes, where it would get answered quite quickly.
2. The convention on Wikipedia is to put new comments on talk pages below older comments, unless you are responding to someone else's comment.
3. Don't edit other's comments, even just to fix a typo as you did at talk:Pontefract. That comment is ancient and the editor hasn't been around for years, so it's not a big deal, but if you did that in an active thread it could raise hackles.
Keep up the good work! Tdslk (talk) 22:29, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

The Good Shepherd[edit]

Hello, regarding your comments here, many of the off-topic comments are years old. You can remove comments per WP:NOTAFORUM if they are truly not relevant, though I think some comments wanted to discuss an element as possible for mention in the article. Alternately, old comments can be archived at Talk:The Good Shepherd (film)/Archive 1 following steps at WP:ARCHIVE. Just wanted to let you know all this! See this and this as examples. Erik (talk | contribs) 21:07, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

  • I partially reverted your edit. While you are correct that the talk page is for improving the article, repeating that comment over and over, especially to comments that have been dormant for years, isn't helping the page either. I did leave the one comment you made that was not a copy and paste one. Niteshift36 (talk) 21:23, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your advice; I'm new to this so sometimes I may get a little over-enthusiastic. I will persevere. Jodosma (talk) 21:31, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
No worries! Welcome aboard. :) Erik (talk | contribs) 22:03, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Congrats... You asked an awesome question in the Teahouse![edit]

Hey Jodosma! Thanks for your great question about test/vandalism edits which you asked at the Teahouse. It's really cool of you to be making an effort to protect Wikipedia articles and to notify other editors when they have made an error. Please come by to the Teahouse anytime for more tips. We'd love to have you back!

Great Question Badge Great Question Badge
Awarded to those who have asked a great question on the Teahouse Question Forum.

There are no stupid questions, but some are excellent! Good questions are those that reflect serious curiosity about editing and help others learn.

Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges

Ocaasi t | c 16:17, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. It was this edit. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 20:22, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Olympic results index[edit]

I have noticed your article for creation. I know I'm not the most experienced editor, but I'll give you my take on it anyway.
I don't think it is neccessary as Template:Infobox Olympic sport, Template:Sports at the Olympics and the series of templates like Template:Olympic Games Figure skating cover the same information (or function as a navigational aid). Perhaps other editors will disagree with me.
In any case I don't think it is a good idea to use red links for articles that will never exist, e.g. Badminton at the 1920 Summer Olympics and Tug of War at the 2012 Summer Olympics. These articles will never be made as their subjects do not exist and linking to them is discouraged by this guideline. I would recommend changing these years to text, and possibly grouping longer periods together (e.g. for golf: 1908-2012 instead of 1908 1912 1920 (...) 2004 2008 2012). (talk) 20:35, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Olympic results index, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as List-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Lugia2453 (talk) 19:05, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

2012 Summer Olympics Parade of Nations[edit]

I would have to disagree with removing the red links. In order to determine how reliable the sources are, it would be useful to have Wikilinks to those sources. But of course there would have to be articles created about the sources, which I'm not prepared to do right now. I might create stub articles just to meet the minimum requirement, when I can do the research.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 15:51, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Offering a second opinion: I also am wary of deleting redlinks; they are a useful tool for content creators and guide us with regard to what pages are needed. My philosophy is that Wikipedia is a work in progress, there is no deadline, and there is always time and space to create articles that are currently mere redlinks. Keri (talk) 17:25, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
If you want to, you can easily create redlinks to anything in any article in the anticipation that the article may at some time in the future may be created. If you want to create an article then do the work, but don't leave redlinks all over the place. Imagine a page in which every second or third word were to be in a different colour. Redlinks are useful but pleae leave them out of the refs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:28, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
But in the refs we're seeing potential Wikipedia articles. Who knows whether the sources are useful?— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:46, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
If you want to create an article the last place you should look is Wikipedia. There are redlinks all over the place. Here's a redlink, go to it! Create the article! Jodosma (talk) 19:10, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
I think you're all missing the point here; removing the link doesn't remove the info, if you want to know more about a source just cut and paste it into the search box. Jodosma (talk) 19:30, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────That won't work without an article. Well, it might, but you end up having to go to Google.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:23, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Anyway, Wikipedia is all about making it easier for people to find important information. I'm going to try to remember to research these red links.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:25, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
While you're about it, have a go at the green links, and the orange ones too! (I don't know how to do that yet... Doh! I just saw it). Jodosma (talk) 20:41, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm not aware we have green and orange links. I think users can set preferences so disambiguation pages are a different color from regular Wlinks. And I just saw how many red links I'm dealing with. Oh, well ...— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 14:42, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
One down! It already had a stub article and the link needed to be piped.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 15:56, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
Isn't it wonderful that we're all doing all this work for nothing. Jodosma (talk) 20:39, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Commonwealth Games links[edit]

Hi Jodosma! Regarding Commonwealth Games results index – I think an easier way to present these edition sports result links would be through the linking the numbers on the table at Commonwealth_Games_sports#Current_Commonwealth_Games_program. What do you think? SFB 19:42, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

I see what you mean. It would require a lot of work to do that and I see no reason why it couldn't be done but I would like to see my page remain; it's a little more easy to amend. Incidentally the year 1911 in that table could be linked to Festival of Empire.  Jodosma  20:17, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough. I was wondering what that reference to 1911 was. I shall have to remember to add the medallists to that page! Thanks. SFB 21:01, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Nice work![edit]

Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
You've learned how to use basic wikicode in your sandbox. You can always return there to experiment more.

Posted automatically via sandbox guided tour.  Jodosma  20:40, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

"defeat to" → "defeat by"[edit]

I'm slightly bemused by your "defeat to" → "defeat by" changes. Is this a personal preference, or a perceived grammatical error? Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 10:36, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Sometimes it is a grammatical error but mainly it can cause ambiguity so I think "defeat to" is best avoided. It seems to have become a lot more prevalent in recent years, primarily in sporting articles on this site and also in the press and other media. With "defeat by" there is never any ambiguity. It's easier and quicker to change all occurrences instead of examining each one very carefully; however, if these edits are causing a problem then that's what I'll do. Jodosma (talk) 11:23, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
No worries, I was just wondering in what instances it would be a grammatical error? I occasionally go through periods of creating large-ish numbers of articles, and I wouldn't want to create unnecessary copy-editing work for others. Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 13:23, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
I suppose what I was getting at is that grammar is what we use to get our ideas across to others. Anything which causes the information to be received in a way which is different from what was intended (e.g. by causing an ambiguity) can be said to be bad grammar. "defeat to" is not in itself bad grammar but may be the cause of it. For instance, the phrase "Arsenal's defeat to Leeds" may be ambiguous; is it Arsenal's defeat or a defeat to Leeds? With "Arsenal's defeat of Leeds" we are in no doubt that Arsenal defeated Leeds, whilst with "Arsenal's defeat by Leeds" (!) we are again in no doubt, this time that Leeds beat Arsenal, however unlikely that may be. Best wishes. Jodosma (talk) 07:22, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for that, I now understand what you mean, and I'll use "defeat by" in future. As an aside, I'm actually a Leeds supporter, and I believe we haven't beaten Arsenal since 2003... mind you we've not been in the same division since 2004. Best Regards. DynamoDegsy (talk) 20:05, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Degsy. I wouldn't call myself a supporter of Leeds, just a follower, (or fan). Happy editing. Ciao. Jodosma (talk) 20:20, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Whitney Awards[edit]

I think your suggested changes are WONDERFUL. Thank you for taking the time to make the article better. Please! Carry it over!

Thanks again. Truly. Thmazing (talk) 05:59, 23 May 2014 (UTC)


You've picked off 4 of my "afterwhich's" so far. My spell check didn't catch them, and it sounded like a real word. Thanks for all your hard work! Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:38, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. Jodosma (talk) 23:39, 27 May 2014 (UTC)


Hello, sorry for speedy reverting your edits to the entry on Hilbert's nineteenth problem‎, without even analyzing them carefully, and thank you for pointing out the typos. Daniele.tampieri (talk) 19:43, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Jodosma (talk) 19:46, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Copy and paste move[edit]

Information icon Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you tried to give Synchronised Swimming at the 2010 Commonwealth Games a different title by copying its content and pasting either the same content, or an edited version of it, into Synchronised swimming at the 2010 Commonwealth Games. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is legally required for attribution. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you). This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other pages that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen. Thank you. SFB 16:52, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Category:Mountain passes of the Appenines listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Category:Mountain passes of the Appenines. Since you had some involvement with the Category:Mountain passes of the Appenines redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Jodosma (talk) 12:29, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

My signature[edit]

Hello Jodosma,

Please don't use my signature to make a point. Thank you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:00, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Punctuation after formulae[edit]

Regarding this edit, you might want to take note of MOS:MATH#PUNC. SpinningSpark 23:42, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I reverted that edit and another similar one. It's been a while since I did any maths so I dug out an old number theory book which agrees with MOS:MATH, although I don't recall adhering to this rule myself in any exams I took, which were several; I suppose there's no time for it in an exam. Jodosma (talk) 07:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Well for exams it is not really important, their purpose is to test your understanding. For published mathematical papers and books it is absolutely standard. My personal opinion is that it is unnecessary and distracting, but as a serious encyclopedia we should stick to the recognised style. SpinningSpark 12:31, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Copyeditor Barnstar Hires.png The Copyeditor's Barnstar
Good catches with file names. Keep it up! Widr (talk) 09:38, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Links fixing[edit]

I appreciate that you updated the links on USA Women's R. William Jones Cup Team. However, while the links were dead, the "new" links (of the form "" are temporary and will be changed again in September, so I've been holding off fixing the links, as I will have to do it again in September. There's no way you could have know this, but if you run across any other "" dead links, you might let them go and I will fix them in September.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:26, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. It will save me some time and effort. Jodosma (talk) 15:40, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Långholmens spinnhus[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:05, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Jodosma[edit]

I preciate your help. This article (Spanish invasion of Portugal, 1762) took me more than two years of research. I will do some minor changes, but feel free to improve them. Hispanicultur (talk) 18:42, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Article Spanish invasion[edit]

Hello Jodosma.

Thank you again for improving the page Spanish invasion of Portugal (1762). A new Sources section listing only those works which are cited would be very useful and more appropriate as well as segregating the other books and articles listed but not cited (in “Further reading”). Since I am not a native English speaker, I would be glad if you could dispense some of your time in reviewing the text (semantic). However, there is one thing that should remain as it is: the complete citations in the references. Please, do not remove them (they play a central role in the article). I know, by experience, that one citation online available today could or will not be available tomorrow or a few days later, and so, the reader could not get access to citation. Thanks. Hispanicultur (talk) 14:22, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

@Hispanicultur: I did a bit more work on my example page. Please check it out and let me know what you think. The layout can easily be changed. Jodosma (talk) 20:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jodosma! Sorry for the delay, but I was (and I will be in the next days) in a professional formation. I think that, from the reader’s point of view, two things must be assured: 1) It must be possible for a reader to access a citation from a book , even if it is not on-line available (we have already seen this point, and this matter is settled as I infer from your example)

2) It must be possible for a reader to quickly confirm and confront the citation inside the reference with what is written in the book, by “clicking” in the book’s name or/and in the book’s page (with different external links). If the external links associated to one page or book’s name are eliminated, that won’t be possible any more. It won’t help if the book (in the bibliography) has a link, because there are many pages cited for the same book. Besides, some of the books are in Castilian (Spanish), French or Portuguese, so, the reader should be given the opportunity of confronting the translation with the original. So, please, if you want to simplify the references, eliminate whatever you think it is necessary, but keep the book’s name (with the respective external link) and the book’s page (with the respective external link) inside of each reference. You can, for example, delete the name of the press and the city where the book was published: <reference> author’s name, book’s name, year of publication, page </reference>

Thanks for your time and help. Hispanicultur (talk) 23:28, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Ps: I still think that the best contribution you can give (as you have been doing) is improving the text. Your English is certainly better than mine (grammar, semantics, etc.) and expanding/organizing the bibliography. A help in these fields would be precious. The references do not need an intervention. Hispanicultur (talk) 00:17, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

@Hispanicultur: OK, I will do that, however I did come across one ref which should be a Wikilink. Left a note on Talk:Spanish invasion of Portugal (1762) about it. I'm not quite sure how to deal with that one. Jodosma (talk) 12:43, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Jodosma: Nice work. I don´t know what to do with the Page from the Portuguese wikipedia in the reference, but it doesn´t matter. In the limit, the link can be removed. The article, is getting better, and that´s the point. I see that even in the middle of a "battle", you still find energy to edit so much in wikipedia! What do you eat at breakfast? Hispanicultur (talk) 11:01, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

@Hispanicultur: Editores da Wikipédia desagradáveis e pomposos! (Espero que eu tenho esse direito). Olá Jodosma (talk) 12:19, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Olá Jodosma: Yes, i know the kind of... may your sleep not be disturbed... Hispanicultur (talk) 21:54, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

revert reasons[edit]

Hi, I reverted your CN tag at List of Scientists Opposing etc etc. My reason as stated in the edit summary is as follows

"maybe it needs tagging, maybe not, but if it does need tagging CN ain't the tag, since the only way we could satisfy a CN demand is thru a self-reference to the consensus of wikipedia editors"

Any scientist only merits a wikipedia article about his or her self if a consensus of Wikipedia editors agrees they are a WP:NOTABLE person. Citing that consensus would be a non-permitted WP:SELFREF. So if you remain troubled by that particular text, feel free to criticize it, but please do so in with a proposal that is actually implementable, if there is a consensus to proceed. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 19:50, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

@NewsAndEventsGuy: Are you a scientist or a Wiki admin. I don't think you can be either of those, your grammar is bad, you use unnecessary words (actually) and fail to be consistent in your use of capitals. After looking at your user page I'm suprised you don't call yourself Niccolò. Jodosma (talk) 21:52, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Ironically, besides maligning my grammar, the only question in your post lacks a question mark. Nonetheless, the answer to that question is "neither". NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 21:56, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
@NewsAndEventsGuy: My question was rhetorical. Perhaps I am Niccolò? Jodosma (talk) 22:04, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Doesn't matter to me either way. If you'd like to discuss article improvements while assuming good faith please join the thread at the article talk page. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 22:13, 4 December 2014 (UTC)


Please read Talk:Earth#To_.22the.22_or_not_to_.22the.22 and participate in the discussion. --NeilN talk to me 19:40, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Jodosma, honestly, your changes "the Earth" to "Earth", "the Moon", "the Sun", "the Universe", etc. etc.? Also, note, we discussed much of this, and while not unanimous, the sentiment seemed to be for "the Earth". If I were you, I'd concentrate on other issues. Grandma (talk) 19:44, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

@I'm your Grandma.: Can you really not see the difference. "Earth" is the name of a planet in our solar system. "The earth", or "earth" is the ground we walk upon, Would you say "the Venus", or "the Mercury". If we are talking about the ground we walk upon then it is "earth", people living on Mercury would call it "mercury" and people living on Venus would call it "venus" unless it begins a sentence, when it may be "The earth upon which I was walking", but " I was walking on Earth" means that I was walking on the surface of the planet which we have named "Earth". Jodosma (talk) 20:18, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Manor Kilbride Correction[edit]

Trophy.png Manor Kilbride Correction
Thanks for your correction of 'falled' to 'fallen' on the Kilbride page. Killimordaly (talk) 21:18, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Question from D3323[edit]

Can you added a photo to the It (character) page? I have a photo you can try on this site: "Pennywise in the swamp" <----Click Here to enter.

@D3323:If you want to add a photo to an article you can easily do it yourself. If you need any assistance please try the Teahouse. Good luck, after looking at your user talk page it seems like you may need it. Jodosma (talk) 08:42, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

List of St Helens RLFC players[edit]

Hi Degsy, I want to do some work on List of St Helens RLFC players using wikitables to smarten it up a bit. Before I start I want to find out the meaning of all the "Y"s and "N"s in the article. I left a note on the talk page about it. The page creator seems not to take much of a part on this site now so I thought I wlould ask you. Do you think they indicate something to do with international play or something else? Jodosma (talk) 09:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Jodosma, having looked at this I've found players with only a handful of games with a 'Y', and major players with an 'N', and vice-versa, so I don't believe 'Y/N' indicates international players, not every player has a 'Y' or an 'N', and I'm unable to identify a meaningful pattern. With the Article's initiator, and the other major contributor now inactive, there's no one to ask, so it's a bit of an enigma, perhaps we could get Alan Turing on the case :) As an aside, the notes that accompany some of the players names, e.g. for Gary Ainsworth "Signed on loan from Leigh for period March to May 1985" appear to match exactly the 'Further Info: section' on Best regards DynamoDegsy (talk) 11:16, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
@DynamoDegsy:Thanks mate. I'll just try a post to Londo06 first before I do anything else. If he doesn't reply in a couple of days I think I can go ahead, perhaps leaving those "Y"s and "N"s in but commented out until their meaning can be verified. Thanks for the info about the Saints web page; it can be used to add some inline refs. Jodosma (talk) 11:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Irresistable Angel: Suck It All Up[edit]

Hi Jodosma: As far as I can tell, this is just an inadvertent misspelling (although I've seen Irresistable as a possible variant spelling given in some dictionaries). The Sharp reference you mention is the only English translation that I know of. As far as I know, there is nothing in the Japanese that would affect the spelling - my own preference would be Bewitching Angel as a sort of play on words but since our authoritative source (Sharp) gives Irresistible Angel, I would go with that. Good editing! Cherryblossom1982 (talk) 18:42, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for editing and fixing my garbage Kattinakere. Yes you got it right except for only one thing. The reservoir is fed by rain water from near by mountains. The water in the reservoir and its channels flow on and gather more water along the way to become the river Dhandavathi. Appreciate your help and some English lesson. (talk)

National varieties of English[edit]

Information icon In a recent edit to the page Monowheel tractor, you changed one or more words or styles from one national variety of English to another. Because Wikipedia has readers from all over the world, our policy is to respect national varieties of English in Wikipedia articles.

For a subject exclusively related to the United Kingdom (for example, a famous British person), use British English. For something related to the United States in the same way, use American English. For something related to another English-speaking country, such as Canada, Australia, or New Zealand, use the variety of English used there. For an international topic, use the form of English that the original author used.

In view of that, please don't change articles from one version of English to another, even if you don't normally use the version in which the article is written. Respect other people's versions of English. They, in turn, should respect yours. Other general guidelines on how Wikipedia articles are written can be found in the Manual of Style. If you have any questions about this, you can ask me on my talk page or visit the help desk. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Model aircraft[edit]

Thanks for the interesting little exchange. Tricky word! -- Jmc (talk) 00:21, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

@Jmc: You're welcome. Yes it is tricky, I've had a similar reaction from about four others. Jodosma (talk) 07:08, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 1 April[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:23, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

History of Cumbria[edit]

Dear Jodosma, I really appreciate your work in tidying up the citations for this article. It is mostly written by myself (worse luck) and I couldn't face the task of sorting out the references into Harvard-style citations and a "Sources" section until I'd finished the text (probably never at the present rate!) However, I do have a little niggle for which I take the blame. Viz: in the citations whenever a book or journal article/chapter is first mentioned, I put both the pagination of the total book and/or the journal article or chapter, plus the actual citation pages concerned. These have now been lost or confused. As an example, if you look at citation 183 about Morland church, the cited reference is on p.531 and the pagination for the whole work is p.xx,1-775. The present citation thus makes no sense. I think that the Sources listing should include the paginations of the total work, especially so with the journal articles which really ought to specify the vol., issue, and pages of the complete article concerned so that folks can get interlibrary loans,etc using that info if they wish to read the whole article. What do you think? (I'm assuming here that you've completed your editing:if not, please forgive me. Laplacemat (talk) 20:10, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

@Laplacemat: Sorry I made a bit of a mess. I can go back using the history pages and cut/paste the original info into the present version to bring the Sources section to the state you require. It will take a while but I don't mind. If I understand you correctly you would prefer the source in your example to look like this (no page number in the sources listing):
The inline ref would then be simply: Hyde (2010), p. 531.
Jodosma (talk) 20:47, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
@Jodosma:, no need to apologise, it was my decision to do it that way. If you could bear to do it as with the Hyde/Pevsner example that you give, that would be excellent. It only happens at the first mention of a work, so hopefully not too much time involved. Best wishes,

Laplacemat (talk) 21:16, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

@Laplacemat: You're welcome. It's a bit late now. I'll make a start on it tomorrow. Jodosma (talk) 21:23, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
@Laplacemat: I did some work on History of Cumbria this morning then we had an edit conflict. Can I assume that you're happy with it now? Jodosma (talk) 09:43, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
@Jodosma:Sorry to have caused the edit conflict. Thought I'd help out where I have copies of some of the sources. Laplacemat (talk) 13:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
@Laplacemat: Just to let you know that I've finished on History of Cumbria. I hope that all is in order. Jodosma (talk) 15:09, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
@Jodosma: I think we've cracked it : it looks much tidier than before. Many thanks for your efforts, it probably would not have been done had you not stepped in. Best wishes.Laplacemat (talk) 10:02, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
@Laplacemat: Thanks. Good luck with your editing. ciao. Jodosma (talk) 10:16, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Goose breeds[edit]

Hi! Perhaps you should stop moving goose breed pages without discussion? Livestock breed names are invariably capitalised in Wikipedia, as in reliable sources elsewhere. If you are in doubt about this, I suggest starting a discussion at WT:WikiProject Poultry. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:10, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of PLANED[edit]

Hello Jodosma,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged PLANED for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. TheMagikCow (talk) 11:37, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Re deletion.[edit]

I do not care who you, do not dare swear at me. It was an honest mistake which I have corrected. JLOPO (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 19:47, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

@JLOPO: It's not the first time you've done such a stupid thing. Learn the rules. Jodosma (talk) 19:52, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
@Jodosma: I know the rules, maybe it is you that needs a refresher. . JLOPO (talk) 19:55, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm JLOPO. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you. JLOPO (talk) 19:59, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

@JLOPO: I don't think you made an "honest mistake". I think you did it deliberately. Jodosma (talk) 20:08, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
@Jodosma: Why would I do that, I have never heard of you until about an hour ago, your crazy. JLOPO (talk) 20:17, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
@JLOPO: You could just be a sockpuppet vandal. Jodosma (talk) 20:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── EEEEYY! Everybody calm down, and cut it out. I have no idea what has happend, or why you are acting like children, throwing words as crazy and vandal at eachother, but it is not nice! (tJosve05a (c) 20:35, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Jodosma/Jane Strauss[edit]

If an article is in mainspace, then it must be either categorized or tagged — there is no exception ever allowed for any reason. If it's an incomplete article, then you need to keep it sandboxed in user or draft space until it's done. I see that the page has since been moved back into userspace where it belonged, and accordingly the tag could be removed — but as long as it was sitting in mainspace, our rules for mainspace content required it to be either categorized or tagged for lacking categories. Bearcat (talk) 21:14, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

re: Proxy barnstar[edit]

No socking, he just copied this to his userpage, I believe this is an accepted practice. I do something a bit similar on my user page, too. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:43, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Mark Margolis[edit]

Hi Jodosma, hope you are well. I noticed you edited Mark Margolis' wiki page & I'm wondering if there should be a page for his son, Morgan Margolis? He's a former actor, & current film producer & CEO. Djjames88 (talk) 21:32, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Write it yourself. Jodosma (talk) 21:55, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I've tried to write his page but it appears somebody already tried & it was deleted before mine. Now when I try to create it's cites the previous deletion. I'm just asking for a little help here, thought that was why the Talk page existsDjjames88 (talk) 00:04, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

If someone like yourself, who clearly understands Wikipedia, could start the page & give me some tips, I can complete it. I thought maybe I could spring it off of Mark Margolis' page Djjames88 (talk) 00:06, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Why not use Wikipedia's own advice, which you can see by clicking here. Good luck. Jodosma (talk) 11:09, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

I'll try that, thanks I'll need it!! Djjames88 (talk) 23:01, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Try using these links: IMDb Morgan Margolis, Morgan Margolis is building a Knitting Factory empire, Morgan Margolis, Memory alpha, Knitting Factory Entertainment CEO Morgan Margolis Represents Indie Music at Digital Hollywood Spring 2015 etc., and please create your user page. Jodosma (talk) 23:38, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Marie Serneholt[edit]

If you want to, please take a look at this weeks TAFI selected article, Marie Serneholt. Regards.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:48, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 17[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Rise (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paul Clayton (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) 11:07, 17 November 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) 16:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 26 November[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

@ReferenceBot:I don't see the "error" so sort it out yourself. Jodosma (talk) 21:17, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

[Sic] tag on alternate transliterations[edit]

Hi. Just a short note regarding edits at Baddam Yella Reddy. There are many different ways to transliterate Indian names into Latin script, and we should be cautious to say that there is a right and wrong spelling. 'Telengana' is perfectly fine to use in English, even though the modern state (which never existed during Reddy's lifetime) uses Telangana. --Soman (talk) 11:40, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

@Soman: I wasn't making any judgement. I marked it [sic] because that was the spelling used in the ref. Whether it is a "correct" spelling or not is for someone else to "decide". Jodosma (talk) 21:25, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ayub Khan-Din, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Central Television (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) 10:44, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Typo Team barnstar[edit]

Barnstar Typo Team.png The Typo Team Barnstar
Thank you for fixing all those typos! Have a nice day, The Quixotic Potato (talk) 20:13, 28 December 2015 (UTC)


Disambiguation link notification for January 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jeff Lang, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ngoni (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) 09:45, 25 January 2016 (UTC)


If you want to, take a look at the article about Molly Sandén. Any improvements are welcomed :)--BabbaQ (talk) 22:56, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

How kind of you to take down my list[edit]

I just want to thank you so much for taking down the list of paintings by John Ingleby, which I carelessly (and wrongly) placed in his article. This was your edit. I will now copy your good and kind example by doing exactly the same: half of these articles Category:Lists of works of art include such table, and therefore I shall start taking them down, one by one, when I have a few minutes. Once again, many thanks for your avant-garde, positive contribution to my wiki-education. Odd that over 10 other languages have the exact table! Odd also that John Ingleby is the only Welshman! But who am I to argue! I shall just follow suit! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 14:32, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Instead of taking down all lists which include images, I've now followed the en-wiki way, which is to create a new, separate list. Take a look at Lists of works of art by John Ingleby (painter) and many, many thanks for your very careful and inspiring guidance. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 18:50, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
@Llywelyn2000:Your rant is stupid, I corrected a simple error. Jodosma (talk) 20:18, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
@Llywelyn2000:By the way, Ranty, I didn't "take down" anything so just fuck off out of my face you twat. Jodosma (talk) 20:29, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

I see now that it is Poeticbent I need to thank for the taking down the table, just before you did your correct edit. I do appologise. Cheers! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 21:01, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Ok,thank you, but @Llywelyn2000:, I think you would do better by using {{ping|Poeticbent}} to speak to the editor concerned. If you need any help about how to do this please let me know. Jodosma (talk) 21:41, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Reference errors on 3 April[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:17, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Muhammad Ali[edit]

No sir. Eva is the subject of the clause - she is doing the quoting. It's just a different word order to "Eva [she] is quoting whom?", but the same grammar. I think you are probably thinking of "Who is being quoted by Eva [her]". Davidships (talk) 00:32, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

@Davidships: You are right. Please accept my apology. I think I must have had one too many at the pub. Jodosma (talk) 20:04, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
It's OK, and don't have one too few next time Davidships (talk) 22:23, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


Remember, that's in Italian Lira, not Pounds. :) Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:44, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, Jodosma. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)