Jump to content

User talk:Jredmond/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

"Please do not keep undoing other people's edits without discussing them first. This is considered impolite and unproductive."

Right, so stop undoing my edits.

"If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours."

OK, so you violated this rule, before I did. Pot, kettle, blah blah.

-- http://pudge.net/

We abolished General Government some time ago and redirected it to History of Poland (1939-1945), but this anonymous Polish nationalist idiot recreated it. I intend abolishing it again soon, so please do your River Bug disambiguation at the other article. Adam 23:51, 29 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks for the pointer. -- Jredmond

Please edit Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit when you are logged out. -- Tim Starling 01:47, Oct 30, 2003 (UTC)

Done. Thanks! --Jredmond
No you haven't, look: the article history shows one edit by Jredmond, and none by 66.134.157.122. Special:Contributions/66.134.157.122 shows no edits relating to a change in attribution. -- Tim Starling 00:07, Oct 31, 2003 (UTC)
You're right - it's done now. Sorry. -- Jim Redmond

Hi Jredmond, as you have contributed to Baseball/temp, I'd like to ask for your opinion whether it's time to move the rewritten article to Baseball. Please comment at Talk:Baseball/temp. Thanks, Kosebamse 16:56, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hi Jredmond, I've just reverted your edit to January 27 which changed (d. YYYY) to († YYYY). The consensus is that the dagger symbol looks like a Christian cross and as such is POV, so another user and I have been changing all the anniversary pages to the standard (d. ) and (b. ). I asked on the village pump before doing this, and no one liked the daggers (even though I did). Cheers, Fabiform 16:33, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Ah - I see. Guess I should have been paying more attention at the village pump... :) Thanks for the heads-up, and I'll fix any other improperly-formatted birth/death years that I see. Jim Redmond 17:13, 27 Jan 2004 (UTC)
What I didn't mention was that I changed about 2 months worth of anniversary pages _from_ (d. ) to the dagger symbol before someone told me I should be doing it the other way round.  ;) I'm somewhere in February at the moment, and another user started with December, so if you're really _bored_ have a look at one of the January pages for guidance, and then start in the middle of the year! Fabiform 00:56, 28 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the copyedit

Thanks catching that typo in 1974 in gay rights. Davodd 07:15, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)

St. Louis Blues

Thanks for your help in fixing links disambiguating Saint Louis Blues! Cheers, -- Infrogmation 21:45, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I read your note at Talk:Jim Thorpe, and took it as an incentive to start a much more extensive article about him. I've posted a working version just now. However, my knowledge of baseball and football is not that good; could you have a look and maybe add/correct some of the base- and football related stuff? Thanks, Jeronimo 19:36, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Wow, that's a pretty dramatic improvement! I especially like the photographs and the stamp image. So far, everything looks good, but let me dig through and see if I can find anything amiss. - jredmond 20:16, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Ah, yeah. The punctuation was what I was getting stuck on. Thanks. -- Jim Regan 05:31, 22 May 2004 (UTC)

Hello. I saw that you made an edit to VfD to remove some punctuation from someone's MediaWiki links. You got that right, and it's a help, but you have to be sure to check the old link as well. There was a comment (the original deletion reason) at Template:VfD-VP3.2 Public License, and changing the link to go to MediaWiki:VfD-VP3pt2 Public License doesn't transfer it. I copied it over, so it's fixed now.

I'm glad you're helping in VfD, it's a time-intensive process.

Have a nice weekend,
Ben Brockert 18:19, May 22, 2004 (UTC)

D'oh! I knew I forgot something. Thanks, Ben. - jredmond 02:31, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

Learning Project

Hi there, I found you when I read your comment at the vote regarding Pro-American sentiment. Unfortunately no one has yet taken care of it. But there are more important things. I started a project about learning, mainly vocabulary. Some guys discussed it with me on my user page. Maybe you are interested, if so, please let me know there as well. Get-back-world-respect 19:29, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

NRA

Thanks for removing the POV from National Rifle Association. --H. CHENEY 01:14, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates#Che_Guevara . Are you still objecting to the article because the iconic image has not been moved up? You have a point, but policies state that portrait pictures are the ones that should be placed toward the top. Notice that this is the case for virtually every bio piece. 172 18:43, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

No; I'm still objecting to that article because I haven't had the chance to check it out post-updates. (Past few days have been weird. Sorry.) I'm reviewing it now, and will be updating my objection shortly thereafter. - jredmond 19:08, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. 172 19:15, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

.int

Yes, I am aware of wikilinks, and I just forgot about it for .int. I edit often from here, as it's work. I don't log in from work. It's a nat with only 8000 ip's, so I'm probably not posting from the same address as my .int edits.

Sorry. (p.s. I'm suprised the 'you have new messages' went to the right address, I heard there was a bug with messages for anons.) --207.181.42.20 20:09, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)


Mel Carnahan

Thing is, I meant to type Jean Carnahan there, since Mel never took his seat (for obvious reasons). But I guess I had Mel on the mind. Thanks for fixing that, and yes, I'm going to put a footnote there. :) --Golbez 17:22, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

Seismic retrofit

Thanks for the needed copyedit on the article - up to this point it has been mostly a dump of related topics, not cleaned up, so the help is appreciated.

One small thing, however - The gallery was carefully constructed with no small effort and so placed for a purpose - too often images are resized smaller in width by users with small screens (800 pix wide) to get room for the text, while users with wide screens will find that right margin stacked images will leave the sub-article boundaries, since so little vertical space is taken for text on a wide screen. Either way the article winds up with images so small that they must be individually clicked to see important details, and even if not, much of the visual impact of an image may be lost. A floating gallery solves the problem neatly for users of screens of any size, but requires some thought both as to image width (especially with varying aspect ratio images) and the amount of title text must properly progress - all to avoid having left adjusted images hanging up on minor descents rather than moving properly to the left margin. Note that non-floating galleries simply do not work well on a wide variety of screen widths - either you have excess white space on the right on a wide screen or have to scroll (if the browser even properly allows it) on narrow screens. (For examples of extensive floating galleries please see Shanghai#Architecture, Tiananmen Square and Military engineer). The three external truss images that were in a neat little gallery now looks rather bad on my (1280x1024) screen - the dormitory extends down into a blank area on the right and the two orange truss images are off to the left, with a big blank space between on the right margin. I was also planning to add another related picture to the gallery - I will offer you an opportunity to restore this since you are actively editing and as always I am open to arguments as to why this should not be done. Answer here as I will watch, otherwise I will restore this part Sunday evening (PDT). Best wishes, and thanks again for the edits -- Leonard G. 03:22, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

P.S. I moved some unedited chat concerning floating galleries to my talk page - see User_talk:Leonard_G.#Floating galleries -- Leonard G. 03:33, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Cuisine of Trinidad & Tobago

Hi Jredmond, I saw your editing on this section, especially about callaloo where you needed some expert reviews. The article concerning the callaloo as it was before editing was alright. Being a Trinbagonien cook makes me an expert of the matter. The italien influence on Trinidad & Tobago cuisine although is represented by Pizza Boys only.

Would you mind calling a newspaper reporter?

Hi, I'm Curtis Krueger, a reporter with the St. Petersburg Times in Florida, (which you can see at www.sptimes.com). I am writing a story about Wikipedia and would like to talk to some Wikipedians about why they like to contribute their time to this project. I got your name from a list of most active Wikipedians. I am hoping to speak to people either today (Thursday Oct. 14) or tomorrow. You can email me at krueger@sptimes.com or call toll-free at 1-(800) 333-7505 ext. 8232.

Thank you! Curtis Krueger St. Petersburg Times

Happy Birthday!

Happy birthday, Jim! (Only one day late!) Best wishes. --Whosyourjudas (talk) 00:48, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Queen James

Please monitor the James I of England page and its talk page.

Invite

Hi

I'm posting this to invite you to participate in WP:LCOTW , a project you may be interested in. Please consider nominating and/or voting for a suitable article there. Filiocht 12:32, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

Jesse Liberty

You reverted the addition of Jesse Liberty to List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual people. Following the link to the blog in question, it does appear to check out however I've never heard of him. Is your contention with the fact that he's not famous enough for the list (fair enough) or that there's something wrong with the claim that he's bisexual and noteworthy enough for wikipedia? If the latter, perhaps an edit/vfd for the JL article is in order. Thanks in advance --fvw* 15:57, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)

I don't doubt that he's bisexual, but I do doubt that he's noteworthy enough for Wikipedia. Additionally, the edit that inserted him into that list smacked of vanity: nine of the thirteen edits from that anon user are about Jesse Liberty and were done in a fifteen-minute span this morning. I'm heading over to VfD now... - jredmond 16:28, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

User:141.154.227.246

Do not keep reverting the St. Louis Cardinals page. Do not harass me in my talk page. 141.154.227.246 17:17, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

  • yawn*. The page histories stand for all to see. - jredmond 17:46, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Wikipedians who blog

Hi! If you have a moment, could you check out m:Wikinews and blogs and comment? We're looking to learn how wikinews can work with bloggers, and vice versa. - Amgine/talk

Template:ASGBASEugber

That's what I thought, but wanted to make sure. I deleted the "template" as it now serves no useful purpose whatsoever. Thanks for your reply.—Ëzhiki (erinaceus europeaus) 18:52, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

Hehe..interesting coincidence

We both chose the same day at Wikipedia:Million pool for the same reason...though separated by one year.--24.228.45.144 17:20, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Er, sorry...that was me, I forgot to log in. >_< --Etaonish 02:22, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)

Steve Bartman

Good job of making it more succinct. As a forever-Cubs fan, when the Bartman incident happened, I said to myself "This is trouble!" not so much because of the so-called "interference", but because of Alou's reaction to it, of the bad karma or distraction it could cause. And when Gonzo dropped the ground ball, I said "This is REAL trouble!" The events are all interlinked.

Notable artist

Please help us understand why you are systematically expunging the entries around Nathan McClain (1973-1997) the U.S. illustrator, artist, and painter who died at 24? We've recently become aware of this deceased artist who has received international recognition and is developing a passionate following.

I cannot find enough background on him or enough evidence of international recognition to warrant inclusion in this encyclopedia. Google only gives a memorial page and an "artist of the month" bio; if he were truly internationall recognized there would be more. Of course, you're welcome to chime in on the VFD listing if you like. - jredmond 16:35, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New city naming convention

Jredmond, what do you think of my proposal for the ciy naming convention at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (city names)? Dralwik 01:12, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I changed some things. Dralwik 02:02, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

expos/nationals debate

There is a major debate going on, and I wondered if you might want to chime in. The debate involves how to deal with franchise moves in baseball. The question is whether Montréal Expos should be its own article or if it should redirect to Washington Nationals. All other instances of franchise moves in MLB redirect the old team name to the new team name, and the history of the franchise is covered within the new team name (for MLB, NBA and NFL examples, see here. Some people are confused and think the Expos and the Nats are different teams. Some people don't want to upset Canadian readers.

Indeed, the Washington Nationals are not a new team - the Montreal Expos franchise has moved to Washington, and the old franchise name should redirect to the new franchise name, just like the 20+ instances of this occuring in Wikipedia. For example, Brooklyn Dodger history resides in the Los Angeles Dodgers article. New York Giants history, including the Shot Heard 'Round the World, resides in the San Francisco Giants article.

If you have the time, maybe you could chime in on the conversation there, Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Montréal Expos. Kingturtle 17:23, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

RFA

Hey, I see your name a lot on my watchlist as I also like to keep an eye on the date and year articles for vandalism; you seem to be really vigilant in reverting vandalism. Are you interested in being an Admin? Read up on the literature for what's involved (although you've been here for a while, you probably know what it entails). It seems like you would get a lot of mileage out of the revert tool. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) July 7, 2005 15:03 (UTC)

Ha! More often than not, my "vigilance" is a byproduct of lulls at work — it's easier to hit F5 on my watchlist and deal with any changes to the pages thereon than it is to, say, clean up my desk.
I'd be honored if you nominated me for adminship. There are a couple admin tools (protection, un/deletion, blocking, DB queries) that could be very useful, though, and while rollback isn't one I'd use very often (I like leaving a reason for my reverts) it could really help defend against bot- and script-vandals.
Thanks for thinking of me. — jredmond 7 July 2005 18:19 (UTC)
Consider yourself nominated: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Jredmond. Just note your acceptance on the page. Note: The cool kids wait an hour or even a day before accepting the nomination. At least, that's what I did ;-). --DropDeadGorgias (talk) July 7, 2005 21:09 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 22:14, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

  • Allow me to add my own congratulations -- I'm sure you'll do an excellent job. If you ever want to run a situation or problem that you're unsure of by an old admin, please feel free to use my talk page (I'm sure the same goes for all the admins, but I remember when I was first adminned being given this offer by Angela and Cimon Avaro, as I recall, and I found it very useful on a couple of occasions). Best regards, Jwrosenzweig 22:46, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Thanks, both of you. I'm still getting my "admin legs" but already love the rollback function... - jredmond 15:05, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
      • W00t. Though I will miss some of your descriptive rollback summaries, you're now a sleek, streamlined vandalism reverting machine. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 15:27, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Welcome

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been removed or reverted. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --151.203.216.151 17:29, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --151.203.216.151 17:31, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

you need some advice. never, and i mean NEVER, go onto someone's talk page and revert the changes they made to their own talk page. that harassment is as bad as spamming, and is NEVER excusable. DO NOT DO IT EVER AGAIN. understood? --151.203.216.151 17:41, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Sorry; was just restoring those "inane ramblings" that some "vandal" left for you to read. - jredmond 17:43, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Welcome message

Don't worry about 'mangling' the welcome message. If the user does nothing but vandalize, I suppose he/she doesn't desperately need it. :) Thanks, Sango123 20:28, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

I do have a user name

I just don't always log on. 131.107.0.106 19:17, 18 July 2005 (UTC)Ksnow

Gotcha. Things make a whole lot more sense now... - jredmond 19:26, 18 July 2005 (UTC)


AIDS article needs your help to make it a Featured Article

Hi there! In an effort to make the article here on AIDS the best possible before trying to submit it as a "Featured Article", I've looked up some active submitters in the last month or so and found you. Please, take a little time to go by the AIDS article and it's Talk page to see how you can help. One rather large source of confusion and complication, the References/External Links section, has just been cleaned and polished, thus your experience should be much more tolerable in general ;).

AIDS is a very serious world wide issue; never before have we needed to spread AIDS education as much as we do now. We need as many people as possible working together to make this article on AIDS the best it can be. Hope to see your contributions soon! JoeSmack (talk) 23:47, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

I'll do what I can. Thanks for asking! - jredmond 01:53, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

OMG Purge the history!

Can you get rid of that disgusting thing from the history of my talk page? Thanks for moving it off the front of my talk page so quickly.Hipocrite 18:07, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, but I can't do that... - jredmond 01:50, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Re: Suggestion for your "Message" page

Hi, Jredmond. Thanks for the suggestion. I have removed the section header; the only reason why it was there was to make the welcome message appear in the table of contents and the "bulk" of the talk page, rather than isolated at the top. Thanks again, Sango123 18:45, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

No problem. I saw the reason behind having the section header there, but it appeared to be causing more trouble than it was worth. - jredmond 01:51, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

80.229.167.97

Thanks for blocking him, I was running all over trying to find some help....went to interventions, jumped on IRC. He was a lot of work! He had something for the Anglo-Saxons for sure. Rx StrangeLove 01:47, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

No problem. In the future, though, Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism is probably your best bet for getting somebody's attention. - jredmond 01:52, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism to your user page

I've been cleaning up after a vandal today and found that he/she had hit your user page. I reverted it back to your last version. Hope that was OK. I feel odd editing somebody's user page but since it was vandalism I figured you'd be cool with that. Tobycat 20:31, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

LOL. Looks like we are are on the same cleanup duty today. Thanks for returning the favor. :-)

Tobycat 20:34, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting mine; it's no problem reverting yours.  :) The anon is on a nice little enforced wikivacation now, so for the time being at least there'll be no interference from him. - jredmond 20:39, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Wikiproject Years Survey

Hi. To get everybody thinking, I've created a survey about Year pages here. I'm telling all the participants of WikiProject Years and everyone else who has shown an interest in year pages or participated in the discussion. If you could check it out it would be appreciated, and tell anyone you think may be interested.Trevor macinnis 17:27, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

2029

What's wrong with my 2029 edit?

Ahkayah cuarenta y siete 15:48, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
We've been removing all events that list Nth anniversaries from year and date articles; the general consensus is that such anniversaries are not encyclopedic in and of themselves, and only serve to clutter up an article. The only possible exception would be if something encyclopedic happens while people are observing such an anniversary. - jredmond 15:58, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Willy on Wheels

Thanks for blocking him so fast. Can the clean up be done automatically or does it have to be done by hand? Ryan 19:10, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

No problem, though Golbez, Canderson7, and Gamaliel all beat me to the block. Unfortunately, though, it looks like we'll have to revert his changes by hand. - jredmond 19:13, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

My entry is not about content; indeed, content doesn't enter into it. If you'd bothered to look at the diffs, you'd see that the two editors concerned are reverting so as to turn correct into incorrect Wikilinks, correct into incorrect formatting, and so on. As an admin, I'd hoped to be taken as seriously by other admins as I'd take them. I've replaced the entry in the hope that another admin will take the trouble to investigate (as the rubric on the page says that they should). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:27, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

I did look at the diffs, though. They're stubborn newbies, they got a little too huffy when you fixed their mess, and they could really stand to learn proper wikiformatting before arguing with an experienced user, but they are not vandals. As such, it wasn't really appropriate to list them on WP:AIAV. Sorry. - jredmond 22:01, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

3RR warning

Yeah, I know. I've only got so many reverts before the vandals win out.... FuelWagon 21:34, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

You aren't the only one subject to 3RR. GordonWattsDotCom is dancing close to the 3RR edge as well.
WP:3RR is in place because outright reversion is not an acceptable reaction to an editing controversy, period. If you think it needs to be protected, then ask for page protection; if you think Gordon is being unreasonable, then consider mediation or an RfC; if you want someone else to review it, then list it for cleanup for peer review. Just be careful of reversion for a little while. - jredmond 21:56, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

thanks for the 3RR warning. I was pretty sure I had used up my vandal ammo for the day. Do you have a tool that automatically notifies you? That would be nice just so I can keep an eye on myself. As for your suggestions, the article was in recent mediation, though it seems to have gone inactive without resolution. It is tagged "controversial". the article has been locked before. it had a peer review a while ago. And, well, my recent experience with RFC's has shown them to be troublesome. I posted an RFC about one sentence in the intro of creation science and a bunch of people came in and completely rewrote the entire thing, so all it did was change the location of the argument from one sentence to another. The Terri Schiavo article has been the target of some serious POV pushers. NCDave was one of them and has a user RFC against him from way back. GordonWattsDotCom actually has a website and proudly declares that he filed a court order in florida in an effort to keep Terri alive, and posts a picture on his user page of him at a protest at a demonstration for Terri's parents [1]. Suffice it to say, he's got a point of view of what happened around Terri Schiavo and he's not afraid to push it. FuelWagon 00:11, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

I have Terri Schiavo on my watchlist... from there, the history verifies reverts. An automated tool would be nice but it can't catch some of the subtler attempts to circumvent 3RR.
I really don't see Gordon's edits as "vandalism", though; he is definitely working to include his own POV, but to his credit he's at least attempting to add other POVs as well. (Remember, NPOV isn't the absence of POV, but more of a detached retelling of relevant POVs.) While you may find it distasteful, you are really going to have to work with Gordon to find a common ground here; he's being more than reasonable about his phrasing surrounding the E-word, even attributing and sourcing it appropriately, so I think you should be able to work something out.
If this is getting to be too much, then ask to have the page protected and take a break from the Schiavo article. Cleaning up silly vandalism (not Gordon's edits, but "Billy is a poopyhead"-type scribbles) may help you regain your composure here.
In the future, though, you may want to restrict yourself to one revert per day: this'll keep you far from 3RR danger. - jredmond 00:24, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
Detached retelling. uh, yeah. I'm not seeing that. His "reasonable" ness around the euthanasia word is "get it in anyway he can". and the only reason he finally found a decent source was because I reverted his attempts to use "google" as a source. Now, the other POV's will need to be inserted because he simply inserted the one's he wanted, and left the rest to everyone else. And when the intro explodes again in size, it'll be my fault, because I'll be the one who puts in the other POV's to balance the one he inserted. This is going real swell. FuelWagon 00:39, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

moved from User: page

Pshaw. You don't have lulls at work. I know the truth... GuruBuckaroo 02:53, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

reply

In reply to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GordonWattsDotCom&diff=20736285&oldid=20563690 "your comments on FuelWagon's talk page" - Thanks for your concern, Jredmond - I wasn't trying to egg on Wagon, but merely offer my support that his voice be heard, while striking a (balancing) tone to remind him (again after you commented) to be careful and avoid 3RR troubles. Please take note that I am open to listen to opposing feedback and give others credit when they have made good ideas. If the editors on that page can come to agreement, and I think that's near, then I would not want anyone blocked, because it would slow down their ability to offer input. Please also take note that I have tried to practice what I preach in attempting to fit in others' opinions and thoughts when editing.

I think that the Schiavo page (as well as most or ALL of Wikipedia.org) should be:

  • 1) Permanently protected
  • 2) Not edited unless editors actually go through a process like an editor applying for (say, for example) a New York Times web editor job -and have the editor post his mug and name online - and
  • 3) Have us poor blokes paid for our work

However, that is just my opinion. In spite of our "unreliability" reputation, the Schiavo article is number THREE in the world in Google.com, even ahead of the CNN.com site -due in part to the "open" nature of it -the same thing that prompted my three-point complaint/suggestions above. Thanks again for your concern; If I were rich and didn't have to worry about money, I'm try to edit here more often, lol.--GordonWattsDotCom 03:27, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Willy on Wheels

Thanks, Jim. I popped by as an anon and when I saw that, I couldn't log in fast enough. Dweeb came back as "Lucky 6.9 the newbie administrator on wheels" or some such retarded ramblings and vandalized my talk page. I love knowing I got under his skin.  :) - Lucky 6.9 19:53, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

How come I always attract the weirdos? He came back as "Unlucky 6.9" with the challenge to block him before he could do his "page move chaos." - Lucky 6.9 19:58, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

It isn't just you who attracts the weirdos, which is a very sad thing when you think about it... in any case, by using your fantastic admin powers, you're bound to receive a little negative attention from those people who aren't playing nicely with others. It's just a curse of the mop. - jredmond 20:04, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

User:Filumenae

Thanks, that was getting to be a little wearing... Alai 18:02, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Not a problem; revert wars just suck. If Filumenae can keep from auto-reversion, though, and actually try to work WITH people, then I'm willing to let him/her stay. - jredmond 18:16, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Request

I am asking past editors of the Karl Rove page to weigh in on a survey. If you can spare a couple of minutes, please visit this page: Talk:Karl Rove/September Survey, read the introduction, and answer the three questions that have been posed. Thank you. paul klenk 09:05, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

User:BROOKE-CANADIAN

Nice job! By the time I clicked through the manual reverts and VIP, you had this one wrapped up. — Lomn | Talk / RfC 20:20, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! I wouldn't have noticed so quickly if she hadn't hit an article on my watchlist (Hurricane Katrina), though. - jredmond 20:24, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Diamond jubilee

Please explain to me why in 2012 you can not have Diamond jubilee and you can have French presidential election. In France there is no vice president, so if Chirac and/or his successor resigns or dies before 2012, the election will not take place in 2012, indeed there can be a French presidential election litterally any year. I don t see the difference with the 60th anniversary of the reign, at least we know that 1952+60=2012, that wont change.Hektor 04:41, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

While it's true that there may not be a presidential election in France in 2012, we also have a long-standing tradition of removing Nth anniversary listings from year and date pages. This is why I also removed the hundredth anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic from that page; though the original event was encyclopedic, the anniversary itself is nothing more than clutter.
Besides, unlike the French election, there is no guarantee that Elizabeth's Diamond Jubilee will be observed: if she dies or abdicates in favor of her son Charles before 2012, then they'll skip it. The French election, on the other hand, is almost certain to happen at some point (even if it isn't in 2012). - jredmond 15:36, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
Fine with me. Just to note that Victoria's Diamond Jubilee was a major event in 1897.Hektor 02:52, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

38.116.200.10

  • I've blocked this user. He has received enough warnings in the past and continues to indulge in petty vandalism. =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:25, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
Works for me. Thanks for the heads-up. - jredmond 17:27, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Votes requested on cfr Tudor and Plantagenet

Hi! I note your input on the Tudor dynasty page, I would greatly appreciate your voting on the proposed renaming of Category:Tudor to Category:House of Tudor, and Category:Plantagenet to Category:House of Plantagenet it seems the vote was suggested by obsessed with uniformity, however renaming the categories would be a mistake in my opinion, due to the fact that Tudor people is a sub category of Tudor, and having it as a sub category of House of Tudor would make no sense. Also, in my opinion House of Anjou is the more normally used phrase for the descendants of Geoffrey of Anjou rather than House of Plantagenet. please vote here Thanks, Arnie587 21:44, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

I think you're barking up the wrong tree; my entire involvement with the Tudor dynasty article was reverting vandalism, and I have no opinion one way or another on categorization of the royal houses of Europe. - jredmond 21:49, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

"Minor" edit

Jredmond, I noticed you marked an edit as "minor" where you replaced a block of disputed text into the FR article. I'm not sure if you're watching the FR talk page, so I'm leaving this message here. Marking an edit as minor is reserved for typographical errors, formatting, and other changes that do not substantively change the meaning of the article. In this case, it clearly does not apply. Not sure whether it was a mistake on your part or not, but do please keep this in mind in the future. Again, I'm not sure whether you've been participating in the talk page, but if not, please stop by and discuss these things with your fellow editors. paul klenk talk 16:22, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

An anon (who had not worked on that article previously and had not been participating in the Talk page discussion) blanked the disputed paragraph without comment, so I rolled the anon's changes back (using the admin "rollback" tool). Rollbacks are always marked as "minor", no matter how significant the change. - jredmond 16:29, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Well, I appreciate the explanation, but the passage is disputed by several users, not just an anon. Anons have the same editing privileges as others, and others have in fact been discussing this passage on the talk page. I'm not sure a message in the edit summary is needed when everyone else participating on talk -- if they're actually reading it -- knows why the passage is being removed. I also appreciate knowing about the rollback too, but to my mind it should be changed so the roller-backer has some discretion to mark the edit. Thanks. paul klenk talk 18:10, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

apologies and thanks too

i am a little new at this, i do apologise. I am not sure how all this works. I just thought it interesting to stick an element into an article 2020, and i received a message i think from you, jim? (if this is going out to you, i am not even sure of this!), saying you had taken it off. Which makes sense, because i suppose, the wikipedia, will get completely bunged up with rubbish. So, the question is, how can i insert that comment? With your approval? After all, i think it is possible and indeed hopeful, to have a concrete date up ahead for anyone who wishes to align themselves towards some massive - and peaceable - social change. But this is now turning into some kind of discussion page. Is that what wikipedia also does? Sorry to bother you with such infantile questions. If it regards the psycho-social efficacy of 2020, then i am willing to discuss it. Though i would not like to put you out. I am sure you are a busy man. Thanks for taking your time to read this. And perhaps to reply.

Not a problem. We're all new at some point.
I can't find anything to substantiate the claim of 2020 as the year that mankind can achieve world peace, though. If you can cite a source for that date, then it can stay, but beware of posting your own research. (The "Theories of apocalypticism and/or spiritual transformation" section on 2012 has some good examples.) - jredmond 16:58, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

AIDS Article

I was not attempting to vandalize, but remove previous vandalism. Someone had copy-pasted "EVERYONE HAS AIDS" several times, so I was putting a boilerplate so someone would remove it, since I could not find the code that contained the phrase. Once I had seen that someone had fixed it, I removed the boilerplate. I didn't do anything wrong.


Jean Carnahan

Thanks for correcting me with the Jean Carnahan dates...I thought I had read elsewhere that she served until 2003. I reverted to my last edit of the Women in the United States Senate page and corrected the dates for Senator Carnahan on the list and the timeline, so all is fixed now. :) Vic Troy 20:26, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks. I was a bit worried about that timeline, being a timelines-in-MediaWiki n00b, but it's good to see it working again. - jredmond 20:35, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Blocked

I have blocked you for a 3RR violation on Disco in this series of edits: one, two, three, four, five, six, and seven.

I understand you were fighting the sustained reversions of a PoV warrior, but that is what Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR is for. I will be posting a notice of this block, and if anyone thinks I was mistaken, he or she can unblock. WP:3RR says "In cases where multiple parties violate the rule, sysops should treat all sides equally." DES (talk) 19:08, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

That's fair enough. Could you unblock this IP, though? It's a NAT, used by several other editors besides me. (I don't know how the blocklist has the IP masked, but it should be listed somewhere near my name.) - jredmond 19:36, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
I've undone the block. You are free to edit. However I recommend in future that you ask for assistance at a earlier stage (so this kind of thing doesn't happen) Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 19:51, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
Thank you, Theresa. I'll bear that in mind next time.
While I'm back, I'm going to remove the autoblock on this IP address so that other people on this network can edit. - jredmond 20:30, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for being a positive example to everyone and handling even a possibly unjust block with good grace. --Michael Snow 00:00, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Happy birthday!

Birthday greetings! (albeit belated) :) =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:44, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

User:Jenmoa/birthday --User:Jenmoa 15:34, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Titoxd's RfA

Thank you!

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA. I never thought I would get so much support! Thanks to your help, my nomination was the 10th most supported RfA in Wikipedia history. Now, please keep an eye out on me while I learn the new tools, ok? Thanks again! Titoxd(?!?) 17:07, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jredmond/Archive_1&oldid=1141822100"