User talk:JFHJr

Opening an RfC

Hi there. I'd like to suggest that you not do this unless you're going to complete the other steps listed at WP:RFCOPEN - that wall of text that's going to be captured by that doesn't work well as a "brief neutral statement" for an RfC. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:37, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. This holiday weekend, I'm pecking away on a mobile device and was trying to add to the RFC markup but kept getting edit conflicts. To me, that's an indication this proposal probably has enough attention to find the OP a discussion. Cheers! JFHJr (㊟) 20:51, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Where is Kate? for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Where is Kate? is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Where is Kate? (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

IgnatiusofLondon (he/him • ☎️) 11:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

If it fails, renom after 10 years. Seriously. It just takes perspective. JFHJr (㊟) 04:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

Well it didn't take quite 10 years. Felt close though! Cheers. JFHJr (㊟) 02:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the revert

Hi JFHJr,

I see now that you had already piped the nac tag, so thank you. I saw it, but didn't really see it, lol. Cheers, Malerooster (talk) 11:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Abdulla Bin Mohamed Bin Butti Al Hamed

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Dear JFHJr, I can see you are interested in contributing on this article Abdulla Bin Mohamed Bin Butti Al Hamed, there are many thing can be done to it but by people knows about the person and the country, could you please guide me what to do, the admins on wikipedia are dealing with us as we're experts on wiki.

Ahmaddarwish74 (talk) 04:24, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Greetings. Anyone can contribute to any Wikipedia article. Generally, a proposed edit will be accepted if it's supported by a reliable third-party source. You just told me "we're experts on wiki" so I need to know how many people I'm talking to! Thanks, experts! JFHJr (㊟) 05:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Not sure if i'm able to understand you.

anyway, as per Wiki policies can i request to remove articles talking about me from wikipedia? Ahmaddarwish74 (talk) 05:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

The contributions and technical logs of User:Ahmaddarwish74 are available for anyone to see. That's a major condition of your registering an account and using it. You have ignored my question about how many people I'm talking to. I'll ignore any more of your expert questions until you tell me who "we" is, what people you're taking about. JFHJr (㊟) 05:36, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

I'm the representative of the person the article talking about. Ahmaddarwish74 (talk) 05:39, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. How many Wikipedia accounts do you have? If it's more than one, please tell me which names so I don't repeat my discussions unnecessarily. JFHJr (㊟) 05:42, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Only this one. Ahmaddarwish74 (talk) 05:43, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

@Ahmaddarwish74: Alright. As a representative, you have an undeclared (but extremely obvious) conflict of interest. If you want to improve this article, you need to propose edits supported by a reliable third-party source. If you seek removal of content based on sources, you can discuss it on the article's talk page; if there's no consensus from the talk page, see WP:RSN to ask about how good the sources are objectively. You should never edit the article directly because of your conflict of interest. You should always propose edits on the article's talk page, and disclose your conflict of interest before mentioning the change you want to see. Cheers! JFHJr (㊟) 05:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for this clarification. Ahmaddarwish74 (talk) 05:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Fugabus

I would wish to be your menee and you be my mentor. I'm impressed by your ability to resolve the dispute that no editor has been able to resolve for a while now on Simon Ekpa.

Please, I will be more happy if you accept my request. «fjuːgəbʌs» (talk) 22:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Greetings and thank you. I'm glad that I could contribute to forming a WP:CONSENSUS that you felt comfortable joining. I am open to responding to any questions you bring to me here (until I'm not). I will respond as my free time allows. You should keep noticeboards like WP:BLPN and WP:RSN as lines of second resort, after a good try for consensus on a talkpage. I am not interested in being anyone's mentor, but I'm happy to be a resource for you if I can be. My solicited advice for you today is: try to piss less people off; try pausing and tracking the general consensus. Also, this ("you can stop asserting") and that (all) might be construed as uncivil, so talk about the topic, content, and sourcing instead of other editors. The corresponding editors did not like it. While being bold, aim still for dispassionate. JFHJr (㊟) 22:47, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

PS. I didn't invent this wheel. I based my edit on GGS' observation from the article history. @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: thank you! JFHJr (㊟) 22:55, 5 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. We'll see if the peace holds. If not, you might get a ping, unless you're there already! Please watchlist if you haven't already. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 04:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

A couple of related discussions, may give some context:[1][2] I'm not saying they're interesting. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Oh joy:[3] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:34, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: I'm learning a lot on the fly here. But one big lesson is it's going to matter what I name my org when I'm ready. It's super convincing to end the registered name with "GIE" but it's important not to stop there, or these things might happen. The lesson in foresight is that I'll need to add "The Tacitly Universally Recognized Democratic People's Autonomous National Transitional Successor to the" before the org name to head off certain problems with reality. The registered org name alone makes it official and verifiable in reliable sources to repeat as facts. On behalf of the hypothetical TURDPANTS Republic of Lahti GIE, I'm excited. It takes a quarter tank of gas to get to Raleigh and back, and the NC Secretary of State corporation filing fee is just $125 for creation, unless I want an LLC. JFHJr (㊟) 20:29, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Addendum: Limited Liability Corporation just sounds like the safer route for this org's president, prime minister, emperor, and messiah (it's all just me). JFHJr (㊟) 21:23, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

Fugabus, cont'd

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I restored the revision you reverted on Biafra but this time, I added multiple RS for fact checking. 1 2. 3.

Can you please allow that to stay?

Best, «fjuːgəbʌs» (talk) 19:08, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

No. The sources that you cite either merely repeat the org's name or claims, or else are very sarcastic about Ekpa's claims. You've also inaccurately described edits as "vandalism" and described what you think I "want" in your edit summaries. That's inappropriate. Your POV pushing needs to stop now. JFHJr (㊟) 19:11, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

No,this particular source of Southern Examiner went direct to the point and I found it today on the internet. It has been online since February, I think. I apologize for using the word "vandalism". I think I missed it there. «fjuːgəbʌs» (talk) 19:38, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

What about that source makes it look like a WP:RS to you? JFHJr (㊟) 19:41, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

BTW discussions about sources belong on the article talk page or on a notice board, but not on my talk page. Discussing article content on user talks is eminently ineffective. You should port your proposal there, and expect to observe and follow the consensus that emerges regarding the changes you've made. So far, you have failed at that. Cheers. JFHJr (㊟) 19:57, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Comment

Hello, hope you are well! I noticed this [4] edit of yours, I started Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CaseOh (which was... weird...) and have been following the recent discussions a little. The "if it's online, I can put it in a BLP" approach wasn't good, hopefully the topic ban will help. That said, IMO

• The "Italian occupation of Yugoslav territories" stuff is not BLP content
• The CaseOh stuff, while PROMO, is not obviously BLP-problematic, at least not in userspace.
• As currently written, the topic-ban is about articles, "broadly construed", but still. So, talkpages, userspace, etc, not covered by ban, though of course covered by BLP. My reading is that technically submitting BLP-drafts would be allowed. And we generally don't mess with each other's userspace.

So, I don't think that edit was entirely called for. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Oh well, probably moot. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:46, 13 May 2024 (UTC)