User talk:JodyB/Archive 4

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 2

Thank you for taking the time to participate at the discussion in my Request for Adminship. Unfortunately the nomination did not succeed, but please rest assured that I am still in full support of the Wikipedia project. I listened carefully to all concerns, and will do my best to incorporate all of the constructive advice that I received, into my future actions on Wikipedia. If you can think of any other ways that I can further improve, please let me know. Best wishes, Elonka 04:14, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Students

Congrats on attaining adminship. I don't think Dweller knew you were an admin when he posted you his quiz.  :-) Maybe you should let him know.

By the way, maybe you would want to place this somewhere it will easily catch your attention, as it lists all the students at the VC:

Keep in mind that E went for RfA and didn't make it. So he especially needs nurturing. Perhaps you could look over his RfA and give him some pointers on the next one?

I've directed everyone involved with the VC over to the article meaning of life for a class collaboration, to provide those of us who don't have WP:FAC experience to get some under the watchful eyes of our coaches who do (TRM and Dweller). Yep, hopefully we can bring the article to featured article status.

I hope to see you on the students' pages. (I'm working my way from the bottom of the list to the top this time).

The Transhumanist 09:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Europe

Thanks for your input, I agree that the best thing would be for both of us, Scipio and myself, to take a short break from the page :-) However, his behavious outside the page, attacking me by hurling abuses at my religion, my ancestry and accusing me of being things I resent, is unacceptable. Disagreeing is one thing, and I've done it with many users with mutual respect and no problems. Attacking other users for disagreeing, as Sxcipio has done, is something completely different and does not belong on Wikipedia. In any case, I'm taking a break for now. Cheers! JdeJ 23:07, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. After your intervention yesterday, I thought the controversy would be over. Especially as I took your advice and took a break from the article. Since then, I haven't edited the page nor had any contact with Scipio. Yesterday he even seemed prepared to contribute in a civil way, so I thought there would be no further problem. Now, I find what I can only see as an attempt to pick a new fight on my talkpage. [1]. In short, it's a rabid attack on me with accusations like "it was the irrational, fanatical, hostile way you treated me and my culture, with such disdain and hatred that you wouldn't even listen to me", "The most ironic thing is you are allowed to cover your page in White protestant people and culture", "I am sure you will send me your hate mail and death threats" (if this isn't a strong insult, what is?), "many good americans are getting tired of this bias and ethnocentrism and arrogance view that you & your Faction so arrogantly show".

As this comes after almost 24 hours in which I haven't had even any indirect contact with the user, I assume he writes just to provoke me. I won't answer him, but I hope some moderator can step in as this user seems to be on Wikipedia more to pick fights than to contribute. For that reason, I have posted on the incidents board and here, but I won't answer Scipio. I've tried to contribute constructively to Wikipedia ever since I joined, and deeply resent being continously insulted, even when trying to put an end to the dispute. Cheers JdeJ 18:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Indefinite username block

Why did you indefinitely block (with account creation disabled) User:Jesus.amen.emerald.christ? The username may be inappropriate and merit the {{UsernameConcern}} template, but it certainly did not merit that user being banned forever. Nowhere else on Wikipedia do we indefinitely block for a single offense, especially not one this minor. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 19:13, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I blocked the username because I thought it was inappropriate. I did not block the recreation of an account or the IP address itself. Since you ask, I will unblock it and send it over for discussion. Although I personally agree with pretty much all of what she/he said on the user talk page but felt the name could be troublesome. The user did not, at that time ask for an unblock but I will handle it as I said. JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 20:27, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Fairhope, Alabama

I should have noticed this earlier: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fairhope%2C_Alabama&diff=149898915&oldid=149898766 The IP address in question is coming from FSCC. Which campus, that part I'm not sure about. All labs are open, even during the break, from 8AM-5PM. I actually work for the FSCC Labs, but this doesn't determine which campus or if the user is a Teacher or Student. I'm pretty familiar with the topology of their network and everything points back to Bay Minette. I'm going to do some further research. Maybe I can make unoppositional, friendly contact with this person. --Mnemnoch 21:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the links. I was following the activity on WP:RFCU and saw when it came about. As far as the above mentioned IP address, there's really no way to determine who the user is without checking logs. However, I can confirm that they're faculty of the College using Fairhope connection. The labs elsewhere were closed on Wednesday. The only way that this user were to truly abuse the system is to abuse the wireless the campus offers. This, also, can very easily be circumvented by a simple request that I could make showing them how the network could be vunerable to an attack. In the end, the user has opened up a few ideas that I've got to propose to the IS Admin. --Mnemnoch 02:13, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

New activity on the RFCU page since you notified me. --Mnemnoch 03:32, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Scipio3000

Hi. Do you have time to take over as the admin monitoring developments at Sicilian-related and other entries which User:Scipio3000 is editing? I could really use a second opinion from another admin, and, for that matter, a break from the whole thing. El_C 23:33, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

NetBank

Why did you undo my changes about NetBank? I just cleaned up a lot of the page and it was reverted!

I removed most everything about NetBank because the company has gone under. It was delisted from the stock exchange today and will cease to exist in a few months. Therefore, the information on the page is no longer valid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.175.123 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 7 August 2007

Not the full story is it? You blanked large portions of the page without leaving any edit summary. That is a hallmark of a vandal. If the facts you mention are true they should be in the article as part of the record of the company, assuming you have proper sources. JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 01:12, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I have not looked up the article. However, I know that Netbank was bought by another bank. So an editor should just note that. Heidianddick 22:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

thank you for deletion

what I was actually trying to do is to delete a stolen image. I took the image. It is stolen from me. [Image:027 ERP gantry.jpg]. Please delete that one. Heidianddick 22:34, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the revert. Just so you know, I'm going to tag that vandal as a sockpuppet. There's been a bunch of "--Machine" vandals recently, and I encountered one yesterday. The sockmaster is "TheInvisibleMachine". Again, thanks! :) Acalamari 15:52, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Myles Balwin

Would you minding telling me why the bio on Myles Baldwin was deleted? Archifile 02:23, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your question. I have reviewed the article and found that it be considered borderline as to whether or not it should have been deleted. It was tagged as {{db-bio}} by another user who thought it should be speedied. I did not find any real assertion of notability which is a grounds for speedying. The fact that he worked at a couple of notable places is not necessarily enough for him to be notable. It needs the assertion that he is important (notable) and the third party sources for verification. In any case I am going to undelete the article and move it to your sandbox for editing. You will be able to find it at this location. When you finish adding the assertion and sources you can move back into the projectspace. I'll be glad to help if you need me to. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 10:28, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Edward321

Hi JodyB, Edward321 keeps vandalising sections I am working on. I created these sections prior and he keeps changing them, can you please stop him from vandalising my work, as he has no other intention except to mess with me, as he has no knowledge or prior interest in this time period, until he started obsessing over me. It is not fair he is allowed to do this, since I was blocked for doing the same thing. Also I am concerned by the large amount of effort and time he has put in to getting me in trouble, he has compiled huge amounts of information on me, isn't that odd? Please help me, so I don't get in anymore trouble, thank you(Scipio3000 23:17, 12 August 2007 (UTC))

Where?--JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 01:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

FYI - Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Unfair treatment from Administrators. seems to be about you and the above user. - auburnpilot talk 05:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment

Thank you for your comment on my RfA, which was successful. Lyrl^Talk _C 00:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Scipio3000

No need to worry, I have better things to do than argue with him :-) Should he start to attack me again, I will of course answer him although not in his style. I have no interest whatsoever in the article on Sicily, although I hope his past editions of removing all the parts he doesn't like isn't repeated. Should he start doing that over and over again, I might revert him once to help other responsible contributors avoid 3RR. Most likely, though, I won't have any interaction with him at all. JdeJ 16:58, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Scipio3000 making more attacks on his talk page

Mathsci asked Scipio3000 to post comments on his (Mathsci’s) talk page, not on his (Mathsci’s) talk page archive. [2]. (Post was restored by you after Scipio3000 deleted it. Scipio responded with ‘I will delete what I want on my own talk page.’ [3]. Later, Scipio3000 called Mathsci’s post. ‘crap’, ‘sarcasm’ and ‘insults’ [4] and accused him of being ‘bossy’ [5]. Edward321 02:21, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for working with him, and I wish you the best in that. Considering his standard method of dealing with content disagreements still seems to be personal attacks, even during his block, I think you may be wasting your time.

He does have some valid points. The Greek section does need expansion (not that he added any to the Greek section) and the article does need sources (not that he added any sources). I hope he can become a useful contributor, though his behaviour leaves me more than a little skeptical that he can learn to work with other editors. Edward321 12:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Edward321 as to why I haven't added anything 1)I have been blocked on here 95% of the time! 2) I have been told not to touch the Sicily page!

I cannot believe JodyB you say I had no substance in a complaint, I am infuriated. The only thing Edward321 changed was the exact sentence I worked on only 5 minutes ago...And only that exact sentence....this was no coincidence considering our past. How can you even say that! I am sick of this abuse, I want this matter to be resolved by a commitee and have your current actions reviewd as you also told me I don't need any protection what is up with that!? This is a good ole boy system on here and I am being dragged through the mud...I want other admin. to review your action against me and how you didn't even review my complaint, no I am sorry but this treating me like a DOG ends TODAY!! So is this what they taught you at school, how to degrade someone and treat them like dirt!? I am not doing anything wrong and I hardly think an accidental post on an Archiove page demands this condemnation! You HAVE NEVER GIVEN ME A CHANCE AND I REFUSE TO BE TREATED LIKE THIS, I WANT HIGHER AUTHORITY!(Scipio3000 04:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC))

Latest accusations

Thanks for letting me know about him reporting me. I wonder what he claims I've done? Edward321 03:07, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

GEEZ I WONDER TOO? YOU MAKE ME SICK!! Come on now quit acting like this, THERE IS A COMPUTER TRAIL SHOWING WHAT YOU DID!! HOW CAN YOU DENY THAT???? THIS IS SICKENING AND I AM REPORTING YOU TWO BOTH TO HIGHER AUTHORITY I HAVE HAD IT!(Scipio3000 03:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC))

Well, now I've checked. Considering the unjust claims he makes is there anything that can be done to remove this defamation of me? I frankly don't know how to respond. Could you perhaps post something on the incident page? Edward321 03:15, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Dude you changed my exact sentence how can you deny this?? There is a computer trail, how can you deny you changed my sentence...when there is proof right in front of us...NO no this ends TODAY!!!(Scipio3000 03:38, 13 August 2007 (UTC))

Sicily

I restored info Scipio3000 deleted previously deleted from the page - we'll see if he has learned to work with others. Also, I deleted the section he added on cuisine since it was a blatant copyright violation of http://www.bestofsicily.com/food.htm [6] and http://www.bestofsicily.com/wine.htm [7] Edward321 14:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Well I gues that was answered quickly. [8] Edward321 14:43, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		Thanks for the heads up. Looks like he's done quite a bit more than claim ownership while I was gone. Again, thanks for keeping me informed and for helping resolve this unpleasant little mess. I appreciate the extra miles you have gone to try to help Scipio3000 overcome his problems and the patience you showed in spite of his repeated ill-treatment and accusations towards you. Edward321 00:30, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

JODY

I am working hard on this site, last night alone I added 5 new sections and over 10 pics, When I took abreak last night before I could finish I feel asleep I was going to do this in the morning. On sunday I was working on this until 6 in the morning, I am a person not a machine! I have the approval of 2 other Sicilians, Thesicilianist and Sicilianmandolin. Not only did Edward321 delete my section, which he could of at least warned me to put in citations, he also changed sentences in sections and where I had cited material he rewrote those sentences too...Why is he allowed to plague me like this? I have asked him to discuss this with me so we can work it out and he refuses. I have contacted the Italian Defamation league. YOu know this sidpute needs to be resolve btween us, I have minded my own business and he continues to harrass me and everything I do!

I don't see how someone like Edward321 who 1)has no knowledge of the subject material, 2)Is not Sicilian or Italian, 3) Never made any prior contributions to the Italian or Sicilian page until his vendetta with me and 4)Did not contact any of us working on it over all his changes. Look at the page now, the cuisine section is merged with the mafia ns the sports, wine and olive oil are all gone. IT IS A MESS! All that work! I told Sicilianmandoloin I was not done and this was WIP..meaning today I was going to add citations and fixed up links, etc. I am sorry I have had a horrible couple weeks and I was Sunday I was up till 6 in the morning working on it...the least he could do was notify me or ask the other 2 people working on this if it is okay to add sentences to sections and delete what I wrote.(Scipio3000 15:43, 14 August 20

SINCE YOU REFUSE TO HELP

1)Edward321 has had a problem with me for the past week, check his trails...and I have asked for help over and over and no one helps me, that is why I have contacted the Italain defamation league and civil rights. I have tried to reach out to him and he refuses and no admin. on here is helping to resolve this and I wonder why?? You ignore me, when I HAVE VALID COMPLAINTS..LOOK AT HIS COMPUTER TRAIL ON ME. SEE FOR YOURSELF. He is doing this to harrass me. I complained to you about him on Sunday because he only deleted exactly what I did and only what I did and Now on Tuesday he only deletes what I do again...how is this a coincidence or an interest in our culture. He never worked on any Italian articles prior to this...CHECK TO SEE...Becaue the Italian Defamamtion group is going to and there going to ask you why didn't you even check??? So why??

2)I am told I must contact other people working on this article..why is he not held to this?? Should he not consult me over these changes or consult the others...I was told this is a group project...yet Edward321 can do what he wants...why? And when I don't I am blocked...hmmm seems like something fishy is going on here....

3)and no I disagree with you, If someone does not KNOW the facts and history of our culture they should not be allowed to write whatever they want! Without consulting the 3 people working on this and that is why I have contacted the Italian defamation against Wikipedia...you refuse to help me after several, several request and pleas for intervention, so now I have brought in greater authority. If I was Black, Jewish or Hispanic you would never allow someone who had no knowledge of their history to make changes without consulting the 3 people working on this.

4) Please check Edward321 prior work and see if before this week he ever worked on any Italian or Sicilian pages before his vendetta with me...HE did not! This is why your wrong and the computer trail will show this..and where the Italian defamation league will see for themselves and they'll ask you why didn't you check?? why?

5)Did you check the page Sicily, to see the damage that has been done?? If he was helping it wouldn't be a mess now! look how the cuisine section is merged with the mafia, the sports section is gone too along with the wine and oive oil, the page is a mess! I worked days on this, And you say he is helping?? I can't believe in this day and age this is happening! That is fine you don't care, but I have all the computer trails of his continued harrassment, but The Italian defamation league and civil rights will take this into their own hands, since you absolutely wwill not listen to me or even check Edwar321 trails of him harrassingme and ONLY MY WORK, he hasn't changed anything but what I have done on the Italian People page and Sicily...so is that only coincidence, especially considering our past? I can't even believe I am being trated this way.(Scipio3000 16:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC))

Block

How long did you block him for, he's still insisting he's done nothing wrong. DarthGriz98 16:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I've noticed, nothing will make him back down, he even is threatening us with some Italian Defamation League. I'm not an Italian, and I'm all about freedom of speech and that everyone can edit, so I say let them come. Legal threats won't be tolerated. DarthGriz98 17:06, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

This is bordering abusive and I find it really uncalled for. The editor has been requested to comply with simple terms that other editors have to comply with and has failed to do so after requesting mediation from JodyB. Strong passion about their work or not, threats shouldn't be tolerated. --Mnemnoch 18:49, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

This user has been warned again and again that they are not supposed to use copyrighted material, and before this blocked even occured I investigated Scipio's allegations that JodyB and Edward321 were harassing him, and found them to hold no merit. This block today is more than fair for personal attacks and copyright violation. He has also threatened the users involved with the Italian Defamation League. When he does not get his way, he retaliates with asking for help from other users and threatening others. WP does not allow legal threats which calling the Italian Defamation League would be. DarthGriz98 19:03, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I've extended Scipio's block to indefinite in accordance with our policy regarding legal threats. The threat can be seen here. - auburnpilot talk 19:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I hadn't seen the lawyer part. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 19:48, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I was actually reading through the entire situation when that comment popped up, so I went ahead and acted on it. Also, I've just protected his talk page from editing for 48 hours. This comment was the final straw in the decision. I've also noted the block and protection on AN/I. - auburnpilot talk 21:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Deleted article "Alex the Jester"

Hi JodyB, I noticed today that an article I spent quite a bit of time writing had been deleted. Excuse my inexperience, but is there a way for me to view the full comment you left on the deletion page? It seems to be cut off, and I have to protest your claim that the article was an advertisement. For one thing, I am not the subject of the article (Alex Feldman), or a relative or friend of his. For another thing, I was very careful to stick to a factual article, with referencing and structure based on other existing articles. My only connection to Mr. Feldman is that we live in the same town, I saw him perform once and occasionally see him on the street (before I saw him perform I just knew him as "that guy who rides around on a unicycle"). I looked him up here but there was no entry, so I tried to create a stub, but that was deleted. I thought because I was inexperienced it would be better to start the entry and let other people add to it but evidently not. So I took some time to make a full article, and I emailed him to ask if he could give me some photos. He sent me a photo and also let me look through his scrapbook, so I referenced some of the significant articles from major papers but I don't see how that is advertising either. I did not realise that simply being thorough would give the false impression I was writing about myself?

So I am at a loss. For my part, a fair amount of time has been wasted, and something I was a bit proud of is now gone. For his part, he has toured a dozen or so countries (not having the article any more I don't remember the number) with his act which is both unique and significant (how many other court jesters are you aware of today) but is somehow less significant than all the other clowns who have articles? Some of those articles are indeed blatant advertisements and written by the subject of the article himself--I won't name names but I am very frustrated about the inconsistency here.

This all seems a bit unreasonable and I would appreciate my article being restored, as it seems it was deleted as the result of a misunderstanding, or at least some part of it restored if the rest was objectionable. Maybe I should not have linked to his web site, but that seemed to be just common sense, usually when I look up an article here if there is an associated web site it is linked. I apologise for being a bit upset but I expected if there was a problem someone would correct it by editing, not by erasing all my work. Bakemaster 18:00, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your question. I have reviewed the article in light of your questions and would make the following observations. First the article was deleted because it reads like an advertisement. It did contain some links but those links largely consisted of brief statements in which the subject of the article was incidental. It is no reflection on him, just that there was no assertion that he was notable and the person who tagged the article felt is was more of an advertisement than anything else. If you have sources that assert his notability, please let me know and we can talk about userfying the article, that is, moving it to your userspace or sandbox where you can add in the sources that assert notability. Please note that the article was deleted once before shortly after you first created it and you recreated it. If you disagree with what I have said here, you may take this to WP:DRV. Thank you. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 18:35, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. I am not sure what you're asking for in terms of sources to assert his notability. I am fairly certain I referenced an article from the Boston Herald in which he was exclusively featured as a notable local clown, and although the Herald website only gives a summary unless you become a member, it is one of the two major daily papers in the Boston area. Judging simply by the kind of information available on Wikipedia, the mere fact of that article would seem to establish his relative notability. No offense, but I find this whole situation a bit unreasonable when I look at the List of Famous Clowns from which one of my related entries for Alex the Jester was deleted as not notable enough, and read about "Adam the Clown, from Dead Rising. Equipped with two chainsaws that he juggles, he is a boss in the game. He dies by falling on his chainsaws and suffering from massive blood loss." Not to mention some of the other clowns' articles in the Theatrical - Contemporary section of that same list. I know that pointing at another article and saying "well, that one's worse!" is not a good defense in itself, but hopefully after looking at how blatantly commercial many of those entries are you can understand my incredulity at having been plucked out of the crowd. It's like being pulled over for doing 67 in a 65 zone while others drive by at 90 miles per hour.

I feel like I'm getting argumentative but really I would just like the chance to get some of what I wrote back. If being one of the handful of professional court jesters in the world (at least, have you heard of any others? I never have) and having articles written about you in publications across the country including two features in the Boston Herald (admittedly, one was about his wedding, but were he not a professional court jester that article would been a single line, not an article) isn't notable, I'd like to know what is.

As I mentioned above, the initial article I created was intended as a stub that other users could expand, and when it was deleted I took that as a message that I needed to put some time in to write something more thorough and referenced. As the deletion review page you linked advises: "If a short stub was deleted for lack of content, and you wish to create a useful article on the same subject, you can be bold and do so." I don't want to make this a big issue, I would prefer to be able to work with you to resolve the situation, but to be honest I don't see much of an indication that you are taking this seriously. Bakemaster 20:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

So because I fail to restore an article that has been twice speedied I am not taking it seriously? That's absurd.

Now, you have pointed to some articles that may be poorly written and un-sourced. I fully agree with you that there is plenty of junk on Wikipedia. So your point is? Please see WP:OTHERSTUFF.

As for the notability and the assertion of notability please go back and review the citations you mentioned. I went back and checked the online citations and did a nexis search and found nothing notable. I certainly could be wrong so send me the citation and I will read it. A no, a passing reference to a jester/clown at a wedding is not acceptable. I think most would call it trivial. A full length feature could be different however.

My offer still stands to userfy the article. If you think you can add to it, let me know and, as I said the first time, I would move it to your userspace for you to work on. Yes, I think you are being argumentative and without any reason. I would ask that you tell me if you want it userfied and I will do that. But do not ever suggest that I don't take my role seriously. That was uncalled for and should be embarrassing that you would even suggest such. I can assure you I don't spend the time here I do without being serious about what I do. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 22:13, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I interpreted your "Please note that the article was deleted once before..." as a condescending brush-off, as I expressly stated the timeline of events regarding my first and second attempts; it seemed like you were not reading what I had to say. If I got the wrong impression then I apologise. I feel I have presented my position well but clearly we are getting our wires crossed to no one's benefit. I do hope that I can improve the article to meet Wikipedia's standards, and I would like the opportunity to work on it "userified". 209.6.102.56 01:41, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Done. It is here. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 11:09, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Scipio3000 Continuing to Be Disruptive

I just noticed you were back on Jody. Unfortunately Scipio3000 is still not turning over a new leaf and he is really bringing us all back to the same mess at User talk:Scipio3000. I reposted the issue on ANI, since I wanted to get other administrator's feedback and not be too trigger happy with the block button.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 18:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Now that Scipio is blocked from editing he's sending me emails. Fortunately filters can drop him in the appropriate folder unread, though I have kept them as evidence should that be needed. Edward321 13:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I did not block his ability to send emails as that is to be avoided when the user talk page is protected. He has also sent emails to others. I probably would not reply as that would confirm receipt and it would show your email address (unless you respond via the link in Wikipedia). Of course that is your choice. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 14:24, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

So far it's just two emails, dated yesterday afternoon, titled 'Wikipedia e-mail' and 'Hey boy'. Either Scipio300's calmed down since then or my ISP spamfilter got anything else. Thanks for the info, I figured as much and have no desire to give my email address to Scipio3000 Edward321 23:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Virtual classroom discussion

I've restored the Virtual classroom's main discussion area. The previous one got chopped up into student coaching pages.

The current topic of discussion is Trends on Wikipedia and where we are heading. Please come and join us.

The Transhumanist    22:24, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

EasyPriojectPlan DELETION

Please Explain why you deleted my article "EasyPriojectPlan".

The format was the EXACT format as the Microsoft Project article.

PLEASE EXPLAIN.

Since you choose to recreate the page rather than waiting for discussion or going through deletion review, I have again deleted it and protected it against recreation. The project was little more than an advertisement for something that asserts no notability. Also, please ensure that you sign your comments. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 02:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Joe Lawson Page Deleted

I was reading about the Cavemen sitcom, and I saw that Joe Lawson was their creator. I found that there was no page for him, so I decided to create one, and it said you deleted it, after I had just previewed and saved, and was about to edit further. I'd really like to understand why you did that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NOPIDAM (talk • contribs) 21:48, August 22, 2007 (UTC).

I have recreated the article but work quickly and establish your sources and assert notability. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 21:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Instant Update DELETION

Please explain why you have deleted Instant Update page? It had more content than WebHat, and WebHat article is still there. I even placed HANGON on that page and you've deleted it :/

AvramYU 07:14, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, two other administrators deleted the article before me. We all agreed that the article lacked even an assertion of notability which is a requirement for any article. The existence of other, similar articles in the encyclopedia is not relevant. Each article stands on its on. Please read WP:N, WP:V and WP:RS. Then if you choose to recreate the article you will be able to do so with notability and with proper sources. If proper sources cannot be found to establish notability the article will not be able to remain. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 11:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

EasyPriojectPlan DELETION

An editor has asked for a deletion review of EasyProjectPlan. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. AngellpPezzullo 15:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits

You deleted the article IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits, as CSD A7. I argue that as a magazine and not a person/group/company/web content, the IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits is not eligible for A7 and should be (perhaps only partially) restored unless it qualifies under another speedy criterion. BigNate37_(T) 19:52, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi Nate, Thanks for you kind response and discussion. If you like, I would be willing to move it to your userspace to allow you to work on it. Just say the word. However, the article will need to assert some notability and you will need some kind of sourcing to verify its notability. Let me know what you desire. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 19:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't have sources on the magazine, nor can I assert its notability. However, that does not warrant speedy deletion. Perhaps a deletion review would be appropriate if you contend that this stub remain deleted? I'm of the opinion that we don't delete stubs because they fail to meet Wikipedia:Notability on their first day, and that the speedy deletion criteria are to be taken strictly. BigNate37_(T) 20:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

I am going to un-delete the page at this time. There is a discussion here which is not yet complete that will be pertinent in the future. However the idea that any article should exist which cannot be verified or sourced is rather amazing. Nevertheless, you are correct about the technical exclusion of this article. It will be back in a few minutes. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 20:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

That discussion (not specifically that section) has been going on for quite some time. I was active in the A7 discussions a short time ago—last month, if I recall. We didn't really get anywhere while I was chatting about expanding A7. At any rate, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and I believe the inverse is also true; innocuous claims require a bare minimum level of supporting citations. There is a reference in the article, albeit a poor one from the primary source?—the IEEE society that publishes it. Everything in the article can be verified and is sourced. BigNate37_(T) 20:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

EasyPriojectPlan DELETION

THE ARTICLE WAS IN THE SAME "FORMAT" - IT WAS NOT COPPIED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IT DESCRIBED THE PRODUCT - YOU ARE A "NERD-BULLY" WHO ENJOYS HARRASSING PEOPLE AND DELETING ARTICLES THAT YOU CLEARLY HAVE NO UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONTENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I WILL BE REPORTING YOU - THE CONTENTS OF MY SIMPLE 1 SENTENCE ARTICLE CLEARY SHOWS YOU ARE ABUSING YOUR POSITION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AngellpPezzullo (talk • contribs) 05:10, August 23, 2007 (UTC).

Business Voice

What in the content lead to this article's deletion?

I am not promoting the business, just detailing a company history, and significant players...no different to that of BBDO or Ogilvy + Mather.

WIll you advise what to change in order to prevent future deletion?

thanks, Jcramer519 20:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)Jessica

Thanks for you question. The article was tagged by another user as being about a non-notable company. If you have the sources that assert its notability I will be able to un-delete so you can add them. At that point, the article should be fine. Let me knwo. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 20:42, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

fring deletion

"Endorse deletion. Actually, it's been deleted 8 times in the past although I am not sure they were all identical. This one was deleted in March and is just now coming here? The deletion was appropriate as it was spam."

Does this mean that i cant get it unbanned? I was not the original author and would like to add a non spam article. I have made a temp article here: User:Goplett/fring Please help me so we can get this article online without it being viewed as spam.

With your help it is possible.

regards

Simon

Goplett 20:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

It absolutely does not mean you cannot get it re-created. You are doing the right thing at deletion review although the time delay is odd. Anyway, I'll be happy to help. I'll have a look and reply. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 21:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your speedy reply and help. I have been trying for some time to get this article unbanned but am taking it slow because I dont want to go the route of the spammers, I want an article that i can be proud of and that will benefit wiki users. I am new at this whole wiki thing, so gota learn slowly.. Thanx for your help, looking forward to your reply.

Goplett 21:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanx for the speedy reply. Is it possible for you to help me edit this article, i see you have way more experience at this than i do. will try starting with some of the stuff you suggested. i got the idea of the pictures from the skype article, how come skypes pics can stay? will try find and alternative for the pics, but i am afraid there wont be any. Goplett 21:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Also if you could please explain what all the technical words means at the deletion review. "Doesn't seem to meet A7 or G11, which are the only two obvious CSDs (CsSD?)" afD? please excuse my ignorance. man have i got alot to learn..

Goplett 22:14, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

CSD means Category for Speedy Deletion. See WP:CSD. You will find several subcategories which correspond to General (G) section 11, or Article (A) section 7 etc. AfD is short for Articles for deletion.--JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 22:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Entry

Hello, it says that you have deleted an article I wrote on Kust Bioswale. I mean this in the nicest possible way, but how come? Is it because it is not something 'big' enough to be in the news? I could not find any resources linking to it (other than the pdf file of my citie's minutes, when mentioned). but it is a cool place near where i live (yorba linda, southern california). Thank you so much for your timeTimworden 00:18, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your question. It was deleted because it did not meet the usual requirements for inclusion in Wikipedia. If you can find an article that's be written about it, perhaps in a local newspaper or two, we can surely re-create it and I would be pleased to help. Maybe a local website or an online reference? You could also consider adding the information to Yorba Linda. Let me know if I can help and please don't take it personally. We've all had articles that just didn't make the cut. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 03:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

My Rfa

Hi, as you can see I have withdrawn my rfa as to be honest looking at it now I probably wouldn't have supported it if I was on the judging, first of all i would like to thank you for you comments and although you did not support I was glad to have a sort of "neutralness" from you, as for the future I will try to address any concerns raised. I would also like to point out that I take the security of my account very seriously and even more seriously after an I.P address in Hong Kong tried to reset my password(And yes my password is rated 'strong by three different password security raters). I will continue most of my regular actives but I am also going to try to get many Linux articles up to GA status as well as trying to get some previous Linux FA back up to FA. As for future rfas i am pretty sure I will try again but I am not going to put a date on it. --Chris  G  12:58, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Atlanta Wikimania bid IRC meeting

Hello, The first of likely many IRC meetings to coordinate the Atlanta Wikimania bid is being held tonight (Aug 23) at 7:00PM EST in #wikimania-atlanta on irc.freenode.com. If you can, it would be great if you could log on. If not, I am sure there will be plenty more times to discuss the bid :). --Cspurrier 14:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

If you can make it, the second of likely a long series of IRC meetings is being held Friday (Aug 24) at 7:00PM EDT in #wikimania-atlanta on irc.freenode.com.--Cspurrier 19:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

adoption

Dear JodyB,

I've been around Wikipedia for 2.5 years, and have made over 1200 edits, including contributions to about 50 articles (plus many talk pages and meta-discussions). It doesn't sound like I need a mentor, does it?

But I do. The rules and procedures of Wikipedia continue to surprise and confuse me.

I truly strive to make my edits constructive, factual, NPOV, and balanced. On most of the articles I've edited, my edits have been well-received. But not always. On a very few articles about controversial topics, my edits get routine instant reverts, either with no comment at all, or accompanied by accusations of bad faith or various rule violations. (The alleged violations always come as a surprise to me - I try very hard to follow the rules, and any violations are inadvertent.) I also spend a great deal of time and effort seeking to vet changes which I think someone might conceivably object to, through discussion on Talk pages, before actually editing the articles. But, nevertheless, I keep getting accused of various WP:rule violations and evil motives.

A few weeks ago I got charged with a 3RR violation on Steven Milloy, which I did not believe was a true violation. I'd had one previous 3RR violation, 2.5 years ago, when I'd been on Wikipedia for just 9 days, and my 1st & 4th reverts had been just under 24 hours apart; it resulted in a one-minute block. The editor who charged me with this new 3RR violation had, himself, violated 3RR on the same article a few weeks earlier, but got no block or warning. But I got blocked for a full week.

Now there is a proposal (by the same editor) to permanently ban me from editing the Steven Milloy article. Most of the comments so far support the ban, so it looks like they're going to ban me. (Update: they have now banned me. NCdave 07:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC))

I'm obviously having trouble working with some of the other editors "the Wikipedia way." I hate conflict, but can't seem to avoid it on Wikipedia.

One of the supporters of banning me suggested that WP:Adopt might be helpful to me. That was the first I'd heard of WP:Adopt. After reading what it is, I think he is probably right.

I think that perhaps one of my problems is that I am learning Wikipedia by myself. None of my "real world" friends are active on Wikipedia, so I lack Wiki-friends to ask questions of, and bounce ideas off. I am not content in [these] circumstances. I would be grateful if you would fill that gap as my Wikipedia mentor.
NCdave 05:49, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I will be pleased to mentor you. I have read over the recent discussion at WP:CSN and will try and read over your RfC this morning. I will be traveling this weekend and should have access at the hotel once there. The charges brought against you are serious and I understand your angst concerning them. Nevertheless, I strongly suggest you move on and not attempt to revisit the issue at this time. We should work on developing a strong record of solid edits that are free of conflict. Even though you have been here quite a while, I would suggest you take a day and re-read some of the key policies. Keep me posted on what you are writing and where you are editing. I will look over your shoulder and always be available for consult. If you err, I will let you know. I live in the States, in the Central time zone. Thats UTC -5 so you can guess my usual schedule from that.Good luck to you. I look forward to working with you. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 11:30, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Jody! NCdave 15:33, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Cheese and Crackers

That article was done by a user related to a blocked public high school. I don't know how but when looking at the edit history for that IP range that edit came up and I was about to delete it as well. --Amaraiel 14:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

• Actually, I probably should have used category g11, blatant advertising, on that one ("this video 14 min and 56 second long video is the greatest thing you'll EVER see!!!"). In general, though, I don't interpret category a7 quite as strictly as some other administrators do. See WP:SNOW (to be used judiciously). Welcome to the team! NawlinWiki 14:36, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Oops! I'm soooo sorry! I meant to say I meant to request deletion. I'm not an admin. I'm sooo sorry for the misrepresentatioan I assure you it wasn't intentional. I just checked my contribs and noticed what I typed XD --Amaraiel 14:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

• Not a problem...and thanks to you both for your comments. --JodyB _{yak, yak, yak} 14:42, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

About the DRV you have....

Yes by all means, you can undo your own action. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 21:07, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

fring DRV

Hi Jody,

Btw how long does the DRV take? IE. When will I know the outcome of the DRV? Also in the references section on the article can i link to the fring Blogs containing info about fring? or is this not reliable reference?

looking forward to your reply.

Simon

Goplett 12:03, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

As I'm here checking on my comment above, I'll reply. It normally takes about 5 days. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 18:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania Atlanta bid team meeting

Hello, The Wikimania Atlanta bid team meeting is being held nightly on weekdays. This week meetings are starting at 9:30EDT and running for a few hours. If you can make it to the meeting (or at least pop in) that would be wonderful. Meetings are in the IRC channel #wikimania-atlanta on irc.freenode.net.--Cspurrier 21:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

VC student

I think Bart133 is ready for adminship. It's time to start thinking about his RfA. Do you think there's anything else he needs to do to prepare for RfA? The Transhumanist    17:28, 31 August 2007 (UTC)