User:RenamedUser jaskldjslak901/Archive16

I have to ask why you deleted the article stub I created on Clayhill, the band. I intend to write a thorough article, but I don't have the time to write it in one go. I won't bother if you are going to keep deleting it.

Hi Jaranda,

Just thought I'd see how you were doing, I saw you had been promoted to admin, congratulations! I would've voted, but I didn't realise you were nominated! At the same time, I'm sorry to read on your userpage that your surgery wasn't fully successful. How dedicated, taking pictures of your injuries for the relevant Wikipedia articles! I hope you begin to recover soon. Thanks again for your help at WP:V0.5. Regards, Walkerma 06:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Got it, my mistake. Ytny 07:36, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

You do realize that a majority of the people fighting to keep the ED article are either those that have been gone a long time and just now returned to vote keep...new editors with only a few edits...other editors with less than 50 edits, or even major contributors to that website, four of which have either stated publically that they are sysops there or have the exact same usernames here as sysops there. IN other words, who is really edit warring when myself and hipocrite ahve been trying to make sure the article complies with policy? You lost me, since it has nothing to do with a content dispute and everything to do with maintaining policy.--MONGO 07:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of vegetarians. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. --Deathphoenix ʕ 12:17, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, the Urban dictionary is out. Other improvements have also been made. Kindly re-evaluate. :NikoSilver: 16:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Wait...so I'm not supposed to upload those images?? I only started uploading those images because I saw other people had done it for other players and nothing had happened.

Please reply soon!

Thanks,

--Nishkid64 20:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I did check for many of the guys if there were free images, and there weren't any, so I went along and uploaded valid fair use rationale images. (I appropriately tagged them as promotional) Can you just look over a few pictures, and see if I'm doing it correctly. I don't want to find out later that all my images will be deleted because of something I didn't comprehend or I missed.

--Nishkid64 21:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you don't just delete an entire article just to stop "insulting edit summaries". Did the idea of simply semi or full protecting it not cross your mind? Restore it. Now.--Kross^Talk 04:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind, you its back.--Kross^Talk 04:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I saw you note to Essjay and your deletion log. I bet that was fun ;). NoSeptember 04:46, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

No it wasn't fun :( Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 04:47, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

The vandalism has went on for a long time today, I think you should put it on to prevent it rather then later. There are a lot of people that read the page, and what the vandals are saying is very offensive License2Kill 03:59, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Take a look at this. --Shane ^{(talk/contrib)} 07:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I have a question and a request.

1) Is there an explanation available of your reasoning for the delete judgement? I would like to learn more about the reasons before deciding what to do next.

2) I would like to take a private copy of the article for the purposes of possible expansion (it had been growing over the last few days prior to deletion and much usueful information has been lost).

Thank you, --Michael C. Price ^talk 07:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the article copy. I have two concerns about the AfD verdict.

First, the deletion reasons seemed to resolve down to notability, yet the article had considerable media exposure going back 20 years -- more so than many other articles here. Okay, I realise that an appeal should stick to procedural issues, but I just had to get that off my chest.

Second, the result was judged as a vote, yet the guidelines say an AfD is a discussion, not a vote. I (and many others I suspect) debated under the impression that their arguments would be carefully weighed and balanced -- yet I find my contributions would have been as effective as if I'd just submitted a one-line vote. I can appreciate that the AfD was long and tedious to wade through and that it seems to be customary for admins to judge by a vote -- but this is clearly contrary to procedure, outlined in the opening statement of the AfD:

please note that this is not a vote, but rather a discussion.

--Michael C. Price ^talk 08:43, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jaranda, I have been looking at the deletions guidelines and I see that:

deletion is not a strict "count of votes", but rather a judgement based upon experience and taking into account the policy-related points made by those contributing. - Wikipedia:Deletion policy

To the extent that voting occurs (see meta:Polls are evil), the votes are merely a means to gauge the degree of consensus reached so far. Wikipedia is not a democracy and majority voting is not the determining factor in whether a nomination succeeds or not. - Wikipedia:Guide to deletion#Discussion

Another volunteer (the "closing admin") will review the article, carefully read the AFD discussion, weigh all the facts, evidence and arguments presented and determine if consensus was reached on the fate of the article. -- Wikipedia:Guide_to_deletion#Closure

There was no consensus here, in which case the default is keep

An AFD decision is either to "keep" or "delete" the article. AFD discussions which fail to reach rough consensus default to "keep".

On the basis that procedure has been violated I shall be taking this to review, but I would like to hear your views first. And I urge you to reconsider your decision as well.... --Michael C. Price ^talk 12:24, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

• I replyied via email a few days ago I discounted any anons and new user votes which there was and it was an close call AFD but I agreed with Northenglish more, it was an very long AFD as well so I didn't read all the agreements of it I agreed I used votes and read the few keep and delete votes I could find. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 19:52, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I entirely follow what you mean, but have raised a deletion review request here, where you can see my concerns about deletion practice in general, as well as in this case. In brief the whole voting business is contrary to policy, although it seems to be "usual practice". --Michael C. Price ^talk 20:23, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jaranda, I've added the following comment to the DRV:

• NOTE for closing reviewer: since the AfD was closed the userfied version of the Mega Society has been further developed to satisfy the requirements for verifiable sources and provide evidence of notability. Also other high IQ societies (Prometheus Society, Triple Nine Society) and their founder, Ronald K. Hoeflin, have had AfDs withdrawn against them as their articles were similarly developed. --Michael C. Price ^talk 22:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

And Avi has changed his recommendation:

• After contemplation, my opinion would be to conditionally overturn, if, and only if, better sources besides Omni could be brought as proof of notability, and a bit more about how the society interacts with other socities or peer-reviewed High-IQ research could be brought. If that cannot happen the article should be remain deleted. -- Avi 02:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Replace with userfied version Mega Society -- Avi 22:25, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

In view of this, would you please consider updating your vote from endorse to userfy? --Michael C. Price ^talk 08:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Question... what I am supposed to do with "Mandy Moore" now? It got a single vote, which was an object - the objecter said they were objecting because Wikipedia has too many entertainment FAs. So obviously, that vote doesn't count it. I didn't get any other votes either way. So - it neither failed nor succeeded. Mad Jack 23:01, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

If unsure, surely the default is keep? --Michael C. Price ^talk 08:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for contributing the impressive the pile of supports gathered on my RfA, which passed with a final tally of 0x0104/0x01/0x00. I'm happy that so many people have put faith in my abilities as an admin and promise to use the tools wisely and do my best not to let you down. If I ever may be of assistance, just leave a note on my talk page. Misza13, the rouge-on-demand admin wishes you happy editing! NOTE: This message has been encrypted with the sophisticated ROT-26 algorithm. Ability to decipher it indicates a properly functioning optical sensor array.

My bad I didnt know that that image was a free use image. --Mikedk9109 20:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Please make sure to provide a helpful edit summary (per the instructions and big red box) when editing the nominations list in future. This will help us keep the Good Articles wikiproject running more efficiently. Thanks.  -- Run!  10:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

On 23 July, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mackey Sasser, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Did Brett Butler really steal a base off on a throw back to the mound? Great additions to the article! (and hope you're enjoying adminship!) Cheers -- Samir धर्म 18:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

How do you tell what is the proper copyright for each image uploaded? --Happyman22 00:35, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi -- thanks for commenting on the nomination of Electric Six. I have a question for you regarding the fair use rationale you requested before promoting the article -- posted at Talk:Electric Six. Thanks! Dylan 02:05, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed you reverted my edit on the Esperanza/Alerts page. I deleted the edit mase by an anon User, who is supsect of using anon IP throughout the city of Ottawa. There is a RfAR going on right now over this matter. I just wanted you to know, that these suspect anon IPs who made the Arthur Ellis statement, also harassed Francs2000 in his final Wiki days. And User:Arthur Ellis has not left Wiki at all. Pete Peters 04:15, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm wondering why my edit was reverted on the "9/11 attacks" page...All I did was add a link to the Loose Change video under the "Conspiracy Theories" section. What was wrong with that?

The original picture right now is really gloomy.. you don't like the one I put up ? It's from the same source  :(

--AQu01rius 01:54, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you so much for voting in my recent RFA. It passed on the relatively narrow vote of 38/8/8. It was also one of the least-participated-in RFA nominations in several months, so pat yourself on the back, and join the party on your left, but first, take your cookie! NOTE: I can't code HTML to save my life. I copied this from Misza13. I guess I should write him a thank you note as well. Cookies sold separately. Batteries not included. Offer not valid with other coupons. May contain peanuts or chicken. Keep out of the reach of small children, may present a choking hazard to children under the age of 3. Do not take with alcohol. This notice has a dark background and therefore may be eaten by a grue at any time. The receiver of this message, hereafter referred to as "Pudding Head" relinquishes all rights and abilities to file a lawsuit or any other litigious activities. RyanGerbil10, Jimbo Wales, and the states of Georgia, North Dakota and Wisconsin are not liable for any lost or stolen items or damage from errant shopping carts.

Thank you so much! RyanGerbil10(The people rejoice!) 03:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the revert on my userpage. I tried to thank you on IRC but I don't think you saw it. tmopkisn ^tlka 07:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Mwalcoff 02:19, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

DDDDDDDDDDDDDDAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMNNNNNNNNNN, you caught it just a second before I did :) Fredil Yupigo 02:46, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Not sure why I was looking at an outdated history, but inexplicably reverted prior to the recent one. Thanks for noticing and correcting that. --Leflyman^Talk 04:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I see that you've recently blocked User:Anne Boleyn, who died a long time ago. Please note that the username policy only applies to living or recently deceased famous people. For example, User:General Eisenhower is a good contributor here. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

You were interested in a large-scope article on Scouting for the V0.5 project. We've gotten it to A-class now (plan on FA, but that may be awhile) and I've listed it on the noms page. Also, for the FA part of the project, what are your views on the FA History of merit badges (Boy Scouts of America)? I wrote it and don't want to review it myself. thanks,Rlevse 13:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello,

Could you close Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gustavo's Class since you closed the speedy? Thanks, --EngineerScotty 00:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, Jaranda, thanks for supporting my RfA, which registered a tally of 104/4/7. Which means... I am now an admin!!! I was and still am very flattered by all the kind comments that I recieved, I will also take into account the comments about how I could improve. I guarantee I will try my best to further assist Wikipedia with the mop. Feel free to drop in and say hi or if you need anything. Again, thank you so much! Yanksox 04:05, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Just curious. Was your ID Aranda56? Right now, your ID is Jaranda, so is Aranda56 your former ID? *~Daniel~* ☎ 06:54, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

My former account name was Aranda56 yes Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 06:55, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

You asked if you could nominate me for adminship. I suppose so; I've been sort of reluctant when asked in the past, as I'm always unsure of how much time I'm going to devote to Wikipedia, and I'm also leery of the headaches it might lead to. But I guess the positives will outweigh the negatives (I hope). And thanks for the consideration. MisfitToys 00:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for this edit. I have been cleaning up the article over the last few days, and I couldn't remember how to group the references. Thanks again! Iolakana|^T 11:06, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Congrats on blocking 3 of my accounts. By the way, that "secure.wikimedia.org..." thing does work in showing my real IP, but it sucks in that it's 10x slower, do you know why? I was going to ask Jimbo Wales about it, but ... it was TOO SLOW! 64.12.116.8 01:21, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[1] I feel like I stole it from you. :P Yanksox 01:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Jaranda. It's been almost two weeks since you nominated Dawson's Creek for review. Can you let us know your thoughts on its progress? Thanks, Sandy 02:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

It seems uillermito en Ruedas has dumped his old accout for User:Whiskey Tango, who sent an unblock request for his autoblock. He said he was only joking when he made the other acct, so out of AGF, I've unblocked Whiskey Tango. You may want to keep an eye out on him though. --LBMixPro^{<Speak|on|it!>} 09:49, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

PLease leave alone. IT has a valid scource. There is no external link. I have listed the magazine and page number--TheTruth2 19:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

You need the exact issue and page number, something you didn't do, as for me I'll stop reverting as I'm in the edge of WP:3RR and I don't want to be blocked Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 19:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi there, I noticed that you have deleted a picture of the Halo 2 collector's edition. I have a new picture for that link. If you have any problems with it, then let me know on my talk page. Delta Spartan 22:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your oppose on my RFA. The final vote count was (0/10/0), so I am now an normal user. Feel free to let me know how I'm doing at any point in time or if you need anything. I can't give it though. Once again, thank you. GangstaEB help me improve! 23:28, 31 July 2006 (UTC) I did steal this off Wickethewok's RFA thank-you too.

The user:202.76.145.45 who place the article with vandalism before you protected it. This will be revert back to your name but with out that nonsense at the bottom. See here. Also did you protect The Game article? If you did, thanks. LILVOKA 03:12, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not in active at all... www.cardpricer.com has a ton of images available for free under resources and you can view their checklists (which count in the 20,000 according to their homepage). Please explain why you keep deleting it. This company was at the national and it is a great product.--Wolverinegod 02:01, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I did it for FF8, but then I realized we need to discuss it on the talkpage first. — Deckiller 05:51, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I did it to an rather inactive article of mine Jack Tatum. I'm probaly the only person who has it on my watchlist. The 5 selected wasn't discussed nither, and those are more active articles. But yea you have to discuss in more active articles Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I like the whole idea if it applies to FAs only. I think that, once an article is featured, it should be stabilized. This will also encourage more rigurous discussion on the development page, as an editor can't simply just "add in" the new edits to the stable version, but they have to discuss and justify first. Additionally, it serves as an answer to the latest RfA criteria spikes, giving adminship a great incentive. — Deckiller 05:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou for your participation in my RfA. Due to an almost even spread of votes between Oppose and Support (Final (16/13/6)) I have decided to withdraw for now and re-apply in a couple of months as suggested. I thank everyone for their kind support of my editorial skills; it meant a lot to me to get such strong recommendations from my fellow editors. If you ever have any hints as to how I can improve further, I would love to hear from you. Viridae^Talk 15:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

The Editor's Barnstar I award Jaranda this barnstar for his efforts in deleting thousands of pieces of unworthy content from Wikipedia in just one month as a sysop.Keep it up!!!Blnguyen | rant-line 01:56, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I was about to ask this user to not add non-information to Wikipedia. The user had been involved in a single hoax article (and its promotion). Before I was able to post you had blocked this user claiming sockpuppetry. There are no pages linking to the userpage and I'm having trouble seeing how you reached this conclusion. --Oldak Quill 02:48, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response and enlightenment. May I ask that in the future you mention in your block description who the person is a suspected sockpuppet of, and why, so that people like me don't bother you with questions? :) --Oldak Quill 03:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Just so you know, I undeleted Image:CreekPromoHolmesJackson.JPG because it was in use on the Katie Holmes article when you deleted it, but the "fair use orphan" template hadn't been removed from the description page. Thanks. Extraordinary Machine 15:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I just read the "warnings" you issued within several minutes of each other regarding stubs, prior to the three hour block you issued against me. These articles may not have been as thorough as they could have been, but they were NOT stubs and my removal of the stub status was within reason. The articles included full name, birth dates, and primary biographical information and represented an overuse of the stub. I think you acted far too aggressively against my goodwilled edits and abused your administrator status. I at least wanted to present you with my side of things, since I am a fairly long-standing editor with the best of intentions. MiamiDolphins3 15:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

They were stubs, they were less than 100 words, several like Roscoe Parrish barely had any info that wasn't the full name, d/o/b and the team he played for. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 21:00, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey Jaranda, I was wondering if you could help unblock my account - I was reported on the 3RR board, or an alleged 7 reverts, but only 2 of them were reverts, and all the others were attempts at compromise wording. See: here.

Any help you could provide is appreciated. Since my first block, I've been very careful about not violating 3RR, and I'm very concerned that I've been blocked on the basis of false evidence. Thanks! --JereKrischel

Remember Blu Aardvark? He vandalized wikifur.

• http://furry.wikia.com/wiki/User:Jewbo_Wales (it has his IP address to compare with)
• http://furry.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jewbo_Wales

I'd put that on his userpage, but it's protected, so you should. The most I was able to do was to mark User:Jewbo Wales as a sockpuppet of him here, which I think it is. Anomo 03:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)