User talk:J Di/1206

december 2006 |

Thomas Malton[edit]

You deleted this article under A7. However, a google search will show the man is quite notable. I can also see, from the google cache version, that there seem to be no problems with it. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 03:55, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi J Di,

I am the original contributor of this article and I too believe this article to be notable. Please reconsider your decision and revert the deletion if you believe it appropriate.

Rgds Downunda 04:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw this on the help desk and have to agree with the above, Malton seems notable enough, published work etc. Sure this was just some misunderstanding/omission? Niels|en talk-nl talk (faster response)| 04:09, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been restored, and deleting it was not a mistake. _JD^talk 06:12, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look here – [1]. I should have closed this earlier. ;-) — Nearly Headless Nick ^{L} 05:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dean Geyer and others[edit]

Um Regarding to this:

"Articles about people that have competed in such televised contests have been deleted or redirected to bigger relevant articles in the past. JD"

Do you have any proof of such things? Shaggy9872004 05:35, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you being serious? _JD^talk 10:47, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I have been more serious in my whole life. Shaggy9872004 23:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even know what to say to that. _JD^talk 23:22, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aw J Di, can't you find any proof? Shaggy9872004 23:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to get blocked, you're on the right track. _JD^talk 23:27, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I should be more specific and explicit by saying have you got proof of this with Idol contestants? And how have I violated wikipedia conditions?Shaggy9872004 23:29, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps, Wikipedia:WikiProject Big Brother#Precedents lists where this has happened for Big Brother-related articles. Tra (Talk) 23:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I don't know of any other Idol articles that have been deleted or redirected to other articles in the past; I know only of other music contest shows. And you using "Aw J Di" like that is you being uncivil, something you've been warned about before. _JD^talk 23:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exacly, then why have you done it to these wonderful and talented singers on Australian Idol, and when I said 'Aw J Di', I was trying to be polite to you in a friendly way.Shaggy9872004 23:36, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you're talking about. _JD^talk 23:39, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I meant you haven't seen it on other Idol pages, then why are you doing it to these guys plus the 5 day debate has already ended and I'm going to tally up those scoresa and remove the signs if I need to. Shaggy9872004 23:41, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, you don't need to. AfD is not a vote. _JD^talk 23:44, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well if more people want to keep them then it's obvious we keep them. Shaggy9872004 00:26, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD doesn't work like that. What people say is more important than how many people can type * '''Keep''' per above. ~~~~. _JD^talk 00:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So what you're saying is if people type keep, they can type delete at the same time?Shaggy9872004 00:32, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even know what that's supposed to mean. _JD^talk 00:41, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So what you're saying is that I can type something like this down:

' KEEP-I would like to delete these articles '

You said that how many keeps doesn't matter, it's what's in the content that matters. I say that you're wrong. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shaggy9872004 (talk • contribs) 00:58, 3 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Go read this section of WP:AFD. _JD^talk 01:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ITV-corporateident.png listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:ITV-corporateident.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —Wikiwoohoo 20:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for deleting the images I had nominated for deletion. If I could delete them myself to take the work away from others then I would :). Wikiwoohoo 21:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DVD section[edit]

Maybe this should be more clear to you, if users want to know what the Wedgetel call centre is, they only have to look at the 'Character' section of the page. These DVD descriptions tell people what HAPPENS in the episode, it doesn't tell you who they are. Otherwise we'd be having pages of info on the characters. By the way, I only did this because the talk page is locked. Shaggy9872004 23:25, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you can edit this page, you can edit any other unprotected page. I searched the page for Wedgetel, and didn't find it anywhere outside the DVD synopses. The synopses may be there to tell people what happened in the episodes, but they still need to properly explain things to the readers. _JD^talk 23:28, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed up the character section, what used to say Indian call centre now says Wedgetel call centre.Shaggy9872004 23:37, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changing a word just makes it even more uninformative, and you forgot to change an an to an a. _JD^talk 23:40, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning[edit]

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Shaggy9872004 00:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR doesn't apply to vandalism. _JD^talk 00:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you admitting you vandalised the page then? Shaggy9872004 00:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. I meant 3RR doesn't apply to reverts of vandalism. _JD^talk 00:29, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't vandal anything and you know it. Shaggy9872004 00:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I know is a lot different than what you think I know. _JD^talk 00:38, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What you know is a lot different to what you think you know.Shaggy9872004 00:59, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What you think he thinks you know is a lot different to what I think you think he thinks you think you know – Gurch 22:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOL I don't know what you all think to know but I know that you're behaving like little children Shameless 16:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remain civil[edit]

Regarding to you comment: 'I didn't say I didn't believe you; I said I didn't know what to believe. Stop dragging this conversation out already; I don't care about what you have to say. _JD^talk 02:09, 3 December 2006 (UTC)'[reply]

It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; please keep calm and remember that action can be taken against other parties if necessary. Attacking another user back can only satisfy trolls or anger contributors and leads to general bad feeling. Please try to remain civil with your comments.Shaggy9872004 02:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the love of God, go away. _JD^talk 02:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind .Shaggy9872004 02:24, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't stop this now, I'll block you for harassment. _JD^talk 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just giving you a warning. But for saying that here's your final warning: If you continue, you'll be blocked. Comments like this should not be made by anybody. The two warnings were for these comments, and they are not vandalism. If you continue being uncivil towards other users, you will be indefinitely blocked.Shaggy9872004 07:04, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Too much of an idiot to write your own warnings; you have to stalk my contributions and copy one I wrote. Real nice. Don't bother replying; nobody'll be here to care. _JD^talk 11:14, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, indefinitely, right, lol. Seriously knock it off, Shaggy - this is harrasment and it's a blockable offence. And J Di, you should genuinely start ignoring Shaggy, since these conversations of yours aren't going anywhere. M isza 13 11:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

pic[edit]

I put the GFDL-self tag on my pic! wot do you mean? Chavatshimshon 21:38, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The image still needs a source. Where did you get it from? _JD^talk 21:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Block this IP[edit]

If this IP, 203.10.224.58 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), further disrupt and vandalizes The Wedge (TV show), please block him from editing on Wikipedia. Thank you! Shaggy9872004 08:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't answer to you. Do what everybody else has to do; report them on WP:AIV. _JD^talk 08:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive[edit]

Your editing are disruptives as well. You have 0 PROOF that it is the numbering. We have providing 2 accurate sources on the numbering yet you fail to ignore them. Just because YOU THINK its that. It's an Encyclopedia not a Fan Site on What you THINK. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.33.230.34 (talk • contribs) 13:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I don't have 0 PROOF, and there's no proof that your PROOF is accurate. We have two conflicting sources from the same website, and something some person that works for the network said. Wait for more discussion. _JD^talk 13:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vandal block[edit]

Hello, J. Regarding this, I have a quick question I hope you can help me out with. When does a vandal get soft blocked when the IP is a shared one? When I noticed that another contributor left a "final warning" message on the talk page, I assumed it was protocol to alert WP:AIV that they were still editing pages. At what point does an admin take action in such circumstances? Thank you so much! —scarecroe 18:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators all have their own ways of doing things. I didn't block that IP because their last edit was five hours after their penultimate one. The vandal hadn't made any other edits by the time I got to the report on AIV, and I see no point in blocking an IP an hour after their last vandalistic edit. As I said, other administrators do things differently, and another may have blocked the IP. _JD^talk 18:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thanks for the reply :) —scarecroe 19:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ostia[edit]

Sorry not to be registered; I'm mac9 from it.wikipedia. I just intented to correct the article that was wrong. Ostia and Ostia Antica are different places with different history. Mac9 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.223.229.203 (talk) 13:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Despite all these negative comments, I wanted to thank you for reverting my userpage so quickly after that IP vandelised it. --Iriseyes 13:09, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shortcut[edit]

What is the rvv shortcut that shows the *Reverted edits by ____ to a previous version by ____*? Post at my user talk to tell me, please. Eiyuu Kou 16:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's an automatic edit summary when I use administrator rollback. _JD^talk 17:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would I be able to get this feature? I make alot of reverts and it would be more convienient than posting rvv. Eiyuu Kou 17:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator rollback is only available to administrators, but there are other things you could use. Popups are easy to use, or you could try User:Voice of All/UsefulJS#Non-admin RC Patrol JS (Stand-alone), which adds admin-like rollback buttons to diffs and user contribution pages. _JD^talk 17:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look above (not mine). Also what do I have to do to become a moderator? If you somehow look at my contributions, you will see that I make alot of reverts and it would make me proud to become an authority figure on Wikipedia. Vandals are a pain to all that is Wikipedia and all the help possible is needed to remove them. Please tell me if and how to become a moderator. Eiyuu Kou 18:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFA has information on nominating yourself for adminship, but I seriously doubt you'd succeed at the moment; some people might think that you're not active enough with 151 edits over four months, or that you are inexperienced. You'd probably be better off trying editor review first. _JD^talk 20:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

YOU STOLE ALL MY LOWER CASE LETTTERS< YOU BASTARD! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm (talk • contribs) 17:43, December 6, 2006 (UTC)

Playstation 4 page[edit]

Why did you delete the Playstation 4 webpage? --Xernous —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Xernous (talk • contribs) 22:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. _JD^talk 22:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had provided sources of information talking about when it will happen. It was not a guess; it is going to happen in or around 2010. Why not have it open so information can be supplied to it as it is gathered in the future?--Xernous 22:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A PlayStation 4 article was deleted in October after an AfD (nomination here), and the three links used as sources were the same. More than one source is required, and it needs to be more certain than that; it needs to say that the PlayStation 4 will be released. Please read WP:V, WP:REF, and WP:RS. _JD^talk 22:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If, in the future, me or someone else provides multiple articles talking about it will be released, will you consider reopening it?--Xernous 02:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles can't just talk about the console's release, as not many people like speculation in Wikipedia articles. Confirmation is required. I'm sure somebody else will create an article for it nearer the time when there's more proof that it'll be happening. _JD^talk 20:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Armanen image deletion[edit]

Hi, you deleted this image: RunicArmanenFutharkCirclecopyrightVictorOrdellLKasen.JPG

This has been deleted twice already and I have left comments and today before you deleted it made a comment on its talk page. Why is it being deleted? I gave correct citation, copyright, lisencing and informed everyone that Victor Ordell L. Kasen had released it to Wikipedia. He then released it to the public and on his site it states that as long as credit is given anyone can use it, and Wikipedia. I cannot see the problem? FK0071a 23:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The image had a licensing tag on it that said that its use was only permitted on Wikipedia. That's why I deleted it. If you want to re-upload the image and it has been released into the public domain, you can do this but please don't re-add the {{Permission from license selector}} tag. Please also make sure that you add source information and select the correct licensing tag. _JD^talk 23:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see, can you change it to public domain please? FK0071a 00:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few different public domain licensing templates; you'd be better off picking one from WP:TAG#Public domain yourself. _JD^talk 20:34, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure the image is elegible for copyright. A straightforward circular arrangement is not really an original work. Maybe use {{PD-inelegible}}, but in any case the filename should be changed. dab (𒁳) 11:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User page[edit]

Hi, thanks for reverting my user page! Tra (Talk) 22:42, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Big Brother trivia[edit]

do you think it's fair to include those versions of BB who didn't followed the rules of nominations / evictions in the seasons with least evictions statistics? I don't think that would makes sense. Shameless 16:49, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would depend on how different the rules are in those seasons. _JD^talk 16:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please give those seasons were supposed to have nominations and evictions but zero evictions took place. Shameless 16:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like something that'd need more opinions. If you start a discussion on the article's talk page, I'll comment on it there. _JD^talk 17:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

done. Shameless 17:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you delete this file?[edit]

Image:Hammer and sickle 100px.jpg

If that's the case, why? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jouvenel (talk • contribs) 17:30, 8 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Yes, I did delete that image. I deleted it because it was a replaceable fair use image. I would have tagged it with {{replaceable fair use}}, but Image:Hammer and sickle.svg is already available on Wikimedia Commons so I saw no point in leaving the image for seven days. _JD^talk 17:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why not delete Image:Hammer and sickle.svg instead of my image? If you noticed I've uploaded it to improve the logo's quality. Jouvenel 18:12, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from the SVG image being more free, I'm not an administrator on Wikimedia Commons. The JPEG image was small and not of a superior quality. If you do want to upload a better image, please upload it in SVG format and with a non-fair use license. _JD^talk 18:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I didn't know that. But when I said "logo's quality" I've referred to the drawing of the sickle and the hammer. I think that my logo it's far better than the one in that SVG file, more aesthetic and more accurate to the usual sickle and hammer that we can see in the flags of any Communist movement. I wanted to help a little, but I'm not communist anyway :) Jouvenel 19:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That SVG image is meant to be how the hammer and sickle appear on the flag of the Soviet Union. I don't actually know anything about the hammer and sickle, so I don't know how it appears on any other flags. If you do want to upload a more accurate version, the only problems I can see are the licensing tag and what other people would think of a different image compared to the SVG one. There is also a category on Commons with a few other images; one of them might be similar to the one you uploaded. _JD^talk 19:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look at this images of the flag and the logo: [2][3][4][5] I think that the "sickle and hammer" logo have an evolution. There are primitive logos, but it doesn't exist an original logo for the sickle and the hammer. But it seems to exist an "official" way to make the sickle and hammer logo today, and this is the only one. Except this new logo, all the others have irregular sickles and deformed hammers. This logo remains the same in different places, and looks like it was "performed" to be the final sickle and hammer logo. In those four links you can see exactly the same sickle and hammer. Jouvenel 19:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

For fixing my boxes.--Darkest Hour ^$_$^$_$ 19:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User at 71.161.60.9[edit]

He has vandalized about 15 pages, including user ones. Check his history, he needs a harsh block. Thanks. Shy1520 20:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The IP has already been blocked. _JD^talk 20:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bobabobabo[edit]

Bobabobabo is a she. For proof I refer you to Revision as of 22:18, 16 May 2006 by Bobabobabo of her user page. So instead of “Do not believe these e-mails. They are not editing from a school, and they continue to try to be disruptive.” It should be, “Do not believe these e-mails. She is not editing from a school, and she continue to try to be disruptive.” more importantly, who is the admin. in charge of videogame systems? there is an argument that is going on concerning weather or not wiimote should be mentioned and we need someone in authority to settle it. the argument is already longer than the article in question.J.L.Main 19:45, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators don't have any authority, and I can't help right now as I don't have an Internet connection. You will have to ask somebody else. _JD^talk 21:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

can you recommend some one who can? and although Admins don't have any official authority they do have certain powers which imbue them with a certain type of authority. J.L.Main 22:47, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You could try on WP:3O. _JD^talk 00:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Niall Feighney[edit]

Hi J Di, please could you block User:Niall Feighney as he keeps vandalising One Tree Hill... Thanks mate, godgoddingham ³³³ 21:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a message on the guy's talk page. Some of his edits look as though they were made in good faith. _JD^talk 00:07, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thankyou! godgoddingham ³³³ 11:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User Page[edit]

Hi.You were the one to welcome me to wikipedia.I'd like some help on how to create a good user page. If you're interested, please leave me a message as soon as possible. Thank You.Salmans801

I'm probably the last person you should be asking about a good user page... Sorry. _JD^talk 16:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bad fair use rationales?[edit]

You said: "Hi, I have a problem with a few images. Shaggy9872004 (t c) has uploaded three images of DVD covers from a website (I think they're watermarked, actually) and has added fair use rationales to them. I tagged them with {{no rationale}}, saying the fair use rationales on the images were insufficient as all they do as far as I can see is describe the image instead of saying why Wikipedia can use them. I was wondering if you could have a look at them and perhaps get involved if there is a problem with the images. Shaggy9872004 is probably not going to me now; he did go as far as "reporting" me on WP:AIV after I added back the {{no rationale}} tags. The images are File:789302.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), File:789303.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), and File:789896.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). I'd be grateful for any help you can offer. Thanks."

You are correct; I've left a comment on the user's talk page and readded the no-rationale tag to the images. --Yamla 16:54, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. _JD^talk 17:02, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit protected[edit]

Why did you add tl| to my {{editprotected}} request on Template talk:Spam? I had an open request. Please read carefully and do not undo other users' requests. Furthermore, adding tl| is not the appropriate way to remove the request. As the template reads, simply remove the template when the request has been dealt with. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 15:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's the request then? _JD^talk 15:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the page? I asked that the format be changed because the tables are overlapping. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 15:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I have read the page. You haven't said how you want this format to be changed. _JD^talk 15:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how to change it, since I can't test it to see what would work. — Chris53516 ^(Talk) 15:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good for you. _JD^talk 15:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GWB[edit]

You realize that it was vandalized as recently as Dec 11? Fully unprotecting it = very bad idea. DS 21:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever. _JD^talk 21:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry J Di[edit]

sorry for the revert of your revert. I immediately reverted my revert but you had already reverted my revert of your revert.... puuuh. :-) Happy vandalfighting. Rettetast 22:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From one vandal killer to another[edit]

Thank you for scraping that vandal off my user page. Cheers! :) E. Sn0 =31337= ^Talk 23:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the block[edit]

Thanks for the block on vandal User:RockerAndRollerNeverSleeps4Life. That was an exciting bit of fun, I got to raise my vandalcount, and he was so focused on hitting my userpage that I don't think he bothered vandalizing any more articles. You rock. -FisherQueen 19:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Woo. I'll never understand what's so fun about having the crap vandalised out of one's user page though... _JD^talk 19:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

editprotected[edit]

Tasc has made other edits in the meantime, but has not returned to justify the changes. Appears to be interested only in edit warring, not discussion. Can you please implement the revert? — coelacan talk — 19:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I said I'd unprotect the template, and that's what I've done. I'm not going to revert it; you can do that. _JD^talk 19:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whichever. =) Thanks for trying to bring everyone to the table. — coelacan talk — 19:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

boy[edit]

you said something about vandalizing the boy page with an image of hyde... hyde IS a boy! really, i swear! i was kinda disconcerted that only third world children were depicted in the main text of the article, so i put someone in there that makes it look like boys exist outside of poor, downtrodden places! counter-acting people who feel like i only need to know of the plight of less fortunate people by including a person who has succeeded at being a boy in an article about boys is vandalism? well then ban me right now! 69.134.140.80 23:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to take a moment of my time to apologize for leaving my workstation long enough for an idiot to use my IP to be an idiot... It won't happen again, I promise. I'm sure he meant this Hyde, who, as it turns out, is male. He has been explained to why that was vandalism, and why obsessing over J-rock is silly. Evil oranges 00:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But J-rock is so good!!! _JD^talk 00:28, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But obsession is bad! Like when Gardevior obsesses over my lack of capitalization on the Internet. It's ok though, he obviously didn't read WP:AGF or he would not have told me that all admins suspect me of evil! You don't, do you? Evil oranges 15:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect everybody of evil, I just don't tell them. ;) _JD^talk 15:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gasp! Even me? Evil oranges 00:57, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

867-5309 edit[edit]

I had noticed you had reverted what I had put back up. I had put it (what the one person deleted) back up because I had paged through the last several edits in that page, and still noticed it (the deleted section) up, as well as the IP (170.206.224.54), sending me some stupid no-nonsense message to me (you can look in the history section of my discussion page to find it), so I had assumed that person was nothing more than a vandal.

If you want to discuss this with me further, im all ears :) PYLrulz 12:02, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment[edit]

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Indefblock_on_User:Tasc, since you're the blocking admin your thoughts would be appreciated. – Ch acor 16:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Hi J Di. Thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage. Gimboid13 20:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User Talk:Tiggydong[edit]

x) West Brom 4ever 18:31, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PHPCow article removed again??[edit]

We've created another user: publisher to post the page of PHPCow please unblock the page or provide details why you keep blocking it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Publishing (talk • contribs) 19:44, 16 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Please help to PHPCow to finally publish an article we're waiting for the publication for ages and we have leared a lot on what to submit and how to...however the last article was deleted without any explanation which is not fair. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Publishing (talk • contribs) 19:59, December 16, 2006 (UTC)

The reason for the article's deletion is in the deletion log. J Di ^talk 20:02, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you just get rid of helping and simply rejecting any tries? we're in trouble and asking help honestly. Please don't block but suggest what to do —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Publishing (talk • contribs) 20:17, December 16, 2006 (UTC)

Stop creating a new section for every reply. I didn't say I was going to block you, and I don't see how you can be in trouble because PHPCow doesn't need an article. Read WP:N and WP:WEB. The notability problems don't need to be explained any more than they already have. J Di ^talk 20:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How would you compare our artilce to ArticleLive then? Do you mean that there is any difference? Honestly, that all is not fair. PHPCow LLC is a software developing company, creating products like news publishing and it's it should be under definition like any other company. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Publishing (talk • contribs) 20:37, December 16, 2006 (UTC)

I deleted ArticleLive because it did not satisfy Wikipedia's notability guidelines. If you don't want to read and accept them, that isn't my problem. J Di ^talk 20:49, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We have not asked to delete ArticleLive. I think you really miss-understanding whole thing about notability guidelines. I've read it 2 times and i don't see any proof of your actions. If you still confirm you're right then check Check: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_content_management_systems eRedaktør, Accrisoft_Freedom, Lisk CMS ... they all violating notability guidelines then. Why don't you delete them then??? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Publishing (talk • contribs) 20:59, December 16, 2006 (UTC)

I deleted ArticleLive of my own accord. I'm not going through that page looking for other articles about non-notable companies to delete. The person that nominated the second article for deletion included in their nomination, "This company is not notable enough", and the article was deleted with no opposition. This should be more than enough to show you that PHPCow isn't notable enough for an article on Wikipedia. J Di ^talk 21:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

but eRedaktør, Accrisoft_Freedom, Lisk CMS are notable enough?? you made no sense really! I'm sorry. If I were wiki admin, I'd never accept you under editorials but seems noone cares so good luck. Just strange companies with more then 5 year in business can't submit the product name under simple definition where wiki succesfully add: Penis, dick, cock, Asshole and many others like that. Congratulations wiki and J Di, you do a professional job!!! applausing! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Publishing (talk • contribs) 21:21, December 16, 2006 (UTC)

Template:Microsoft[edit]

I have started a new discussion regarding what should be included in this template. AS a recent contributor, I would like to ask that you join in this discussion. I look forward to speaking with you. --W. Flake ( talk | contribs ) 01:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smallville[edit]

Thank you for bringing that page to my attention. The information is already on the television series page, so I just placed the other up for deletion. If you across anymore similar pages, please let me know. Thank you. Bignole 17:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the information is already there, the page should be redirected. A redirect would be of more use to people than a redlink. J Di ^talk 17:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, I just don't know how many people search for just the high school. Bignole 17:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Come on guys...[edit]

It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; please keep calm and remember that preventive administrative action can be taken against other parties if necessary. Attacking another user back can only satisfy trolls or anger contributors and leads to general bad feeling. Please try to remain civil with your comments. Thanks! — FireFox (talk) 22:27, 17 December 2006

AfDs on soap articles[edit]

I don't like it - they shouldn't be deleted en masse. PMA 12:46, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like it either. I've left the guy a message saying that if he doesn't create a nomination or say that he will, the tags will be removed. J Di ^talk 13:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good for you - they should go. PMA 13:24, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He'd doing it again - ask someone to deal with him. PMA 01:46, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

Thank you for catching and reverting the vandalism to my user page. I appreciate it. --Yamla 17:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Smile[edit]

§Sir James Paul<<--wikiholic§ has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

Vandalism of my userpage[edit]

Thanks for reverting the vandalism of my userpage and blocking the involved user. All while I was sleeping too! I guess I've passed another milestone in becoming a true Wikipedian :) Harryboyles 22:23, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Arts sprotection[edit]

Perhaps almost 3 weeks of semi-protection is enough? feydey 18:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so... I'll unprotect it though. J Di ^talk 18:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User page - thanks[edit]

Thanks for the revert of vandalism on my user page, Gnangarra 23:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Larsinio page[edit]

hey brau, it's true that larsinio was mc plus plus, so why did you revert my edit on my bro's page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.161.68.57 (talk) 22:40, 22 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

It looked like it could have been vandalism. J Di ^talk 22:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dean Geyer[edit]

Can you add a website on Dean's page if he knows about it, has mentioned it at public appearances, has been on it himself, has 4000+ members, has been featured in magazines and mentioned in interviews with Dean? Or is that STILL not enough? I'm referring to deangeyer.net by the way. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MandyJane123 (talk • contribs) 05:10, December 24, 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't look to me like the website has much content. You could try asking on Talk:Dean Geyer. J Di ^talk 09:36, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's more the forum. MandyJane123 05:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Husnock[edit]

This Wikipedia user left the site five days ago. Someone vandalized his user talk page to say he is still here. I tried to fix it but got reverted twice by you. If you are watching his page please stop other attacks on it. This man has been through a lot. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.42.21.76 (talk) 16:30, 24 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I've just looked through the page's history, and can see an IP added that word. I thought your edits were vandalism because of this edit, where Husnock didn't correct the message. I've reverted the message back. J Di ^talk 16:33, 24 December 2006 (UT)

Christmas[edit]

That was a mistake reverting a talk page edit and you just beat me to it. Whoopps! SqueakBox 20:23, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Big Brother 2006 (UK) is a candidate for WP:AID[edit]

I nominated it there in hopes of raising it to Good or Featured Status, and since you've done a lot of work on it, I figured you might want to give some support for it. FireSpike 19:02, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather not, but thanks. J Di ^talk 22:16, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing warnings[edit]

Are you implying that we can remove warnings from our user talk page if we like, even if we're blocked? I thought there was a poll saying we can't remove legitimate warnings or replace them with innappropiate content? ^{Power level (Dragon Ball)} 19:41, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the poll ended with no consensus. Editing other people's comments, including warnings, is vandalism so a person will get blocked if they do that anyway. The person's blocked now so the warnings are pretty pointless; they've served their purpose. That aside, your revert removed new messages that had been posted on the talk page, including a declined unblock request. If you have a problem with the warnings being removed, you could ask that the user add links to previous revisions or create archives. J Di ^talk 22:16, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Big Brother[edit]

Hi. First of all excuse if this is not the correct place to write this. I tried to send you an email but it shows me an error. This reply is about your wikibox 'This section does not cite its references or sources' in Big Brother facts. I think we should start a debate before adding any permanent boxes to an article. You added it without any consulting to the community. But about that matter, please read this. What do you think? I wait for any reply or I will remove the box and open a debate in the article's talk page. Greetings, Pabs. 21:25 CET, 25 December 2006

You couldn't send me an e-mail because you either haven't added an e-mail address, or it hasn't been confirmed. You can sort it out in Special:Preferences.

The {{unreferencedsect}} template isn't permanent - it can be removed at any time - but I'd like to see some references added to the article if possible. A lot of the things mentioned in the Facts section are original research, which isn't allowed in Wikipedia articles. There's also the whole "verifiability, not truth" thing. Taking it to the article's talk page might be a good idea, it may get the attention of people willing to look for references, but if you do decide to do that, please don't remove the {{unreferencedsect}} template. J Di ^talk 22:27, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Colors[edit]

Why do you keep removing colors from all the Disney info boxes and navboxes? You state that they are "blindingly bright" yet they aren't and if they are thats a problem with your monitor settings not the colors of an info box. Maroon is defiantly not a blindingly bright color, nor is a dark green one. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 23:47, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've only used that reason for removal of colours on one article, and bright orange is too bright for me. There's nothing wrong with my monitor. Infoboxes are supposed to be consistently formatted, and I think that includes not making parts of an infobox a different colour so they match images. J Di ^talk 23:55, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yet there is not official policy/guideline that says they can't until then I think you should leave the color of the infoboxes and navboxes up to the editors who work on their articles, theres nothing that says they cant color them to make their appearance look better so you should talk with other editors before you make these changes. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 23:58, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles don't belong to anybody, and the people that edit them a lot are probably biased. They may prefer a version they or one of their friends have edited over any other, even if their preferred version has problems. Colours don't even need to be used in the infoboxes; they don't look better with them. J Di ^talk 00:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editors aren't always biased about things, they may prefer your way but the only way to tell is to ask them and find out, if more editors want it with colors then thats the way it should be until an official policy comes out stating otherwise. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 00:35, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The last place I'm going to ask about what people prefer on these articles is the articles' talk pages. They don't get much attention so I'd only expect comments from people that frequently edit the article and don't have a problem with the colours. If you want to know what other people's opinions are, you should bring this up somewhere more neutral. J Di ^talk 00:42, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about we bring it up on the articles talk page, then post at WP:RFC/ART and get opinions of other editors --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 00:51, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking about putting it on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Style issues. Maybe it should be put on both. J Di ^talk 00:56, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, lets put it on both this way we'll get a decision from both areas. --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 01:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tor Lillqvist[edit]

Hello, you speedily deleted Tor Lillqvist which I'd tagged. The creator, User:NerdyNSK, left me a note asking if a copy could be userfied for her/him. Can you do that? Many thanks in advance and Season's greetings. Cheers, Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:55, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. I've restored the article and moved it so it's now in his user space. J Di ^talk 12:09, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User Talk[edit]

I have been getting tons of comments about some pictures that I put on my uncyclopedia page. Some IP's have been leaving a lot of comments about it. If this happens again can you please semi-protect my talk page. At the top I will tell them to email me about it instead of leaving it on my talk page. I also taold people on my uncyclopedia page to not leave me comments at wikipedia about it but it did not work. Happy new year and god bless.--Sir James Paul 19:17, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to semi-protect your user talk page because there's nothing wrong with the two comments that IPs have left on there, and because unregistered users cannot e-mail other users. J Di ^talk 19:30, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

logo use[edit]

Hello, I uploaded the photo yanaboo_end.jpg for use on my profile page. Yanaboo enterprises [www.yanaboo.com] is a company I own and operate. I created the logo (in yanaboo_end.jpg), however since it is my work (and copyrighted), I cannot release it into the public domain. I, the creator, however, am authorizing its use on my user page. How can I do this?--Rocketrye12 04:08, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page[edit]

Hello, I have reverted your addition of a notice to the main page for two reasons:

I don't think it is necessary to clutter the main page with a (default) bright orange notice of a relativity harmless event that affects only some users.
Main page notices should be added to Template:Main Page banner, not directly to the main page.

If you still feel the addition is necessary, and have discussed it with other users, you can add it on the template. Thanks, Prodego ^talk 03:03, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really bothered. I only added the message because somebody in the IRC channel thought it was necessary, and I was surprised my edit wasn't reverted sooner. Nobody seems to care now anyway. J Di ^talk 03:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Allegations that Tablighi Jamaat has ties to terrorism[edit]

There is a request at WP:DRV to overturn this A7 speedy by the original nominator. Are you ok with it? ~ trialsanderrors 20:59, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't delete the article under CSD A7. I deleted it under CSD A1 because it was an almost empty table. If somebody wants to undelete it, I'm not going to stop them. J Di ^talk 21:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:HouseCharacter[edit]

Template:HouseCharacter has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --The JPS ^{talk to me} 12:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Block of User talk:71.224.156.59[edit]

Hello, and thank you for blocking this IP. However, if you look at the IP's pattern of usage, it only does maybe two edits a day and then disappears for days if not weeks at a time. A three hour blockage will probably not mean much to this IP for that reason. I'd recommend a two week block because that will prevent this IP from editting upon its next logon. Ronbo76 23:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC) BTW, I don't know enough about all the pages this IP vandalized to reverse the edits. Some are easy spots as with the JFK article which is on my watchlist. Someone or a group of editors needs to review all past edits of this IP. Ronbo76 23:39, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]