User talk:J.smith/archive01

Note: This is an archive. New messages should be left on my talk page and not here. In-fact, any edits here will be reverted. Thank you, ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 23:57, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, J.smith/archive01, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! karmafist 23:07, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- While I appreciate this comment and links, was there any particular reason? J.smith 23:27, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- - Nope. Many Wikipedians just welcome new users. It feels good to be nice to the newcomers, you should check it out over at WP:WC. karmafist 23:40, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- - - Ok, thanks for the warm welcome then! J.smith 23:48, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re merging of "Consensual reality"

In the interest of being WP:BOLD and due to the fact that it looked, to me, like they were describing the exact same concept, I performed the merge. If it is straightforward, discussion is not usually necessary before merging. However, by your comment it appears that it may not have been straightforward like I thought. If so, I apologize and please feel free to undo the merge if you think it's best. But if you do, can I suggest adding a disambiguation to the top of each page, or an explaination in the articles explaining how consensual reality differs from consensus reality? It will help folks like me who are unfamiliar with the terms. HollyAm 06:21, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll spend some time working up an explination befor I split the articals again... to avoid confusion. (Signed: J.Smith) 08:18, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfC At Star Sonata

Sorry I did'nt have more time to take a more pro-active stance... you really seem to be in the right about this. Good luck resolving this, message me if you run into stiff resistance - I'm reasonably good at exposing morons in all of their various shapes and forms. - JustinWick 22:42, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No one else seems to be commenting, but I *HATE* anonymous editors ('cept occasional anonymous spell/grammar fixing), especially when they won't quit. There's no reason anonymity is necessary in this circumstance (there are no political persecution issues, privacy issues, etc). Maybe there is a better way to get RfC noticed? - JustinWick 23:41, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure... Perhaps we should move on to a RfA and perhaps get an injunction against the anon editor from editing? I donno... I'm getting tired of this fight. Exceptionally after getting the article gutted (for a good reason, I guess). I turned out to be right and wrong at the same time. Irony. So in the case of a video game when most of the community exists on the game's own forum, how do I source general opinion without just linking to 5-10 forum threads for each citation? (Signed: J.Smith) 00:07, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that there's a ton of bias on threads... a few loud complainers does not an unbiased sampling make. I think Wikipedia's NPOV is a ridiculous, unattainable ideal, however it's good to try and at least approximate it, and unreferenced facts don't really help anyone. Without sounding terribly mean, are these facts that you are unable to cite actually noteable/important to wikipedia readers? Maybe just advertising them on the talk page is best... Talk pages seem to be a great place to put stuff that's POV but still informative (NPOV is often a ridiculous restriction), or anecdotal. Sorry everything got gutted but yes, it seems mostly for the best. At least you seem cooperative and willing to compromise, that's very cool. - JustinWick 04:52, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I sympathise with the feeling of having an article gutted, I know I was quite ruthless, but I hope you understand my reasoning. I did try and rewrite where possible, I did feel bad when I couldn't. I found another review, don't know if you want to add it as well and/or source it for info: http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/setView/news/gameID/160 As JustinWick mentioned above, it is difficult to use fourms for reference, due to the large amount of different opinions expressed. Sourcing general opinion is difficult, there have been cases where I *know* something is true, but can't put it in, as I can't *prove* it. Fustrating, but also good - if I'm challenged to prove something is true, and I can't, I have to admit the possibility that it's not! Also, I must echo the comment above, despite the fact that the article you put a lot of effort into got gutted, you were always well intentioned and reasonable. (one of the reasons I've kept an eye out for Star sonata reviews you can use to back up the claims you had to take out, none found to date, alas). All the best, MartinRe 23:42, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Escape Velocity

Have you played EV, and if so, is Star Sonata that much like it? I've dreampt since I was what, 14, of an MMORPG version of EV. I still consider EV to be the "best" game I've ever played, in terms of enjoyment factor. - JustinWick 04:54, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From what I understand, much of the impresation for SS is from EV. Sorry, no citation:P I've never played EV, but from the screenshots it's very similar. Let me know if you try it and I'll give you a hand starting up. (Signed: J.Smith) 05:01, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately out of time for games at the moment... maybe in the summer... - JustinWick 02:22, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Joi Gordon

Okay, I've put it up for AfD. Thanks for keeping me up to date on it. Cnwb 01:15, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exocet

Heh. Well, obviously I think it's notable, since I created an article on it. It's a bit out of style now, but it was an extremely popular font in the 1990s, used for many things, not just Tazo Tea. Any listing of important modern typefaces would include this. —Chowbok 04:07, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know I put the Prod on it, incase you didn't have it watched. ---J.Smith 04:25, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD

Based on what I've seen from you on AfD, I think that you might have something to add to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cart00ney. I'd appreciate you weighing in on the matter in either direction. Savidan 19:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Star Sonata

In-article infoboxes are depreciated, {{Infobox VG}} is used for consistency between articles and also it makes the article wikitext smaller and easier to read/edit. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games. — Ian Moody ^(talk) 23:32, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, but...

Thanks, but that wasn't a test. It was a question.

I decided to release first version of a game I'm producing, and that was it.

I appreciate if you do more research before touching my work again.

Once again, thanks for your concerning, I do appreciate it.

If you want to talk to me, you can find me on gTalk.

The game starts on http://www.highsolution.us

--Cacumer 03:48, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

nice

I agree with your comment. My job is to explaing to them. I am trying to get my teacher phd heavily starting this year.

That was a game project. Do you know how powerfull a game can be on teaching art?

I think sometimes I might go too fast, sometimes I might go to slow... That was a "too fast" time.

Maybe you could understand what I'm trying to say if you read more of what about I've said already.

I can only tell you this: it is simple in the end.

And thanks for all your concerning, I really appreciate it! :)

--Cacumer 07:26, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cool

I would garbage those old messages on top, if I get aproval from you. I mean, it's ok by me. :)

(I think that's something media wiki should have, garbage collector tools)

I still haven't received anything on my gtalk, I hope we can still do it. I don't know why I got nothing, tho.

--Cacumer 07:38, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen those garbage collector tools. I'll look into it I have more time. However, on wikipedia we can do whats called archive... I'll leave them on here for now and archive them when there a few months old. Oh, you really should read "notability" to understand better why your artical got deleted. ---J.Smith 07:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Omega Directive

While this relatively small concept in Star Trek is not very important. It was a Red Link in an existing Star trek Voyager Article. I used some of the information from that article to create the Omega Directive page I included extra information, and Hopefully now that the page exists super nerds who have read all the Star Trek books will be able to contribute more information. Which is what this is all about. I believe that the Omega Directive page should continue.

If this concept had more then just a single star-trek episode about it, I'd agree. (well, I guess I would if it had more like 4-5.) ---J.Smith 22:05, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

shooting incident photo

thanks for putting that in the correct way. I put it in earlier in a nice manner and somebody removed it. I, immaturely responded by posting it many many times. Sorry —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chillyfoo (talk • contribs)

You need to fix the copywrite for it. Or it will be removed again. :( ---J.Smith 04:31, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply at Wikipedia:Userbox_policy_poll#Oppose

I look forward to your response. JesseW, the juggling janitor 10:39, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Skrawl

Hi. So, you prodded Skrawl as being redundant to ChalkZone. So I redirected it to ChalkZone. But the article creator as reverted my changes with no comment. I don't feel like reverting him, but I'm writing him a note asking him about it. I though maybe you'd want to give the article another look and see if you wanted to redirect it or put it up for AfD, or just leave it alone. NickelShoe 15:23, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ani maldjian

Hello! I see you have {{copyvio}}'ed Ani maldjian. I'd like you to know that I have also found the article on http://www.armeniapedia.org/index.php?title=Ani_Maldjian, so perhaps this is not a copyvio but a candidate for cleanup? Misza13 ^(Talk) 20:03, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'ello

I've actioned your message regarding Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Customer_Asset_Lifecycle_Management.

On an unrelated note, looks like we're almost neighbors. I'm in Carmichael. Small world, eh?

— Adrian~enwiki (talk) 12:33, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell are you talking about?!

I didn't blank anything! I added a new section to the Simon Belmont article, that's all. Even check the version history. Buzda 06:03, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

errr.. there's egg on my face. I read the page backwards. ---J.Smith 06:06, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Buzda 06:09, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HELP!

I've been banned! Help! What can I do? ---J.Smith 21:07, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you go to edit a page, you'll notice a red box with the name of the administraitor who blocked you. E-mail that administraitor. --Pilotguy ^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 21:09, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see any blocks on your block log. Compu terjoe 21:11, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

arg. It thinks I'm "65.223.100.226". Frankly, I haven't seen any vandalism on that account either. (I think the IP is from this building however) ---J.Smith 21:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Contact the blocking admin and your network administrator (reporting abuse). Compu terjoe 11:46, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvios

Hi, if you find a copyright violation that's been made within the latest 48 hours, you can tag them using {{db-copyvio|url=http://url.of.copyvio.com}}, don't forget to notify the user by adding the automatically generated string off text that appears at the bottom the the template on the article. --O bli (Talk)^? 17:28, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I know. I've been having problems with my connection to wikipedia. It keeps stalling. ---J.Smith 18:09, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deathmaker

Since you originally prodded it, I thought you might like to know that Deathmaker is now at AfD. NickelShoe 23:56, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey J. Smith,

I am not vandalizing anything. Wikipedia is not the locale for anti-Doolittle (or pro-Doolittle, or anti-anybody)campaigning. I have tried gentle edits to make the page less biased and more objective; I have tried adding material, or deleting modest amounts. In each case, my edits get changed back to a silly anti-Doolittle diatribe. Seems to me it makes the most sense to just clear it, and leave bare-boned facts. Write a reasonably balanced entry, no one will object. But don't call the quest for an accurate, neutral entry or two "vandalism." - user:Overacker.

Solar eclipse

Hi, what were your reasons for reverting my last change to Solar eclipse? —Daphne A 21:32, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because I believe the information is relevant to the article. If the section gets too long we can move it to a new article. ---J.Smith 21:34, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for your mediation at Talk:Solar eclipse. Adam78 21:45, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't thank me yet, I'm reporting both of you for violations of 3RR. ---J.Smith 21:50, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your message how "archives" work. I'm aware of it very well – I've been a contributor for almost two years. I was aware of the 3RR rule, too, just I didn't pay attention to it. Adam78 10:35, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Solar eclipse again

What is to be done now, when a new user (perhaps a sockpuppet of Daphne A) reverted the article to a previous version without giving any reason and having any discussion? Shall I initiate some process at Wikipedia:Requests for comment? Do you have any better idea? – For example, I wonder if you could provide a Third opinion. Adam78 09:01, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all: Create a Solar eclipses in fiction page and place those items in it. If your goal is to end the argument, that would do it nicely. Daphne is obviously in the wrong here, but there is a simple solution and it shouldn't be ignored for the sake of providing him wrong. Secondly, if this continues to be an issue, take a look at WP:SOCK and place the "maybe" tag on his talk page. ---J.Smith 19:23, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, that's all right for me; I just thought this article might prove too short and so it may be voted for deletion eventually. Thank you for creating it. Adam78 20:14, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At most it would get a vote to "Merge". That would be ironic wouldn't it? ---J.Smith 20:24, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Penny Sanchez

I'm puzzled as to why you had put that article on AfD when in fact your nom did not propose its deletion, but its merging. Why didn't you either simply merge it, or propose a merger? Esquizombi 08:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was merged. Then it was re-created. If you look at AFD, there are more then "keep" & "delete" as choices. I think the person who closed made an error however. This is a clear case of no-censenus to me. ---J.Smith 20:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops!

Hello J.Smith, thanks for fixing my oops. Userfying was my intention. I quickly started the page to discuss ID with a new user. But the user stopped editing and I never looked at it again. --FloNight ^talk 11:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Save the numbers

Hi, you may or may not have realized that the "campaign" to save 3055 was a joke. Thought I'd better let you know lest you went away with the wrong impression. --BostonMA 21:18, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm ok. The humor musta went over my head. ---J.Smith 22:02, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you have to be in the right mood. I've been depressed about Wikipedia for a bit, but when I read the article, and everyone debating it so solomnly, it really cracked me up. I mean the original article read: "3055 is an odd number divisible by 5". Wow, what a revelation! --BostonMA 02:07, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Schools

WP:SCHOOL isn't formal policy, and I don't cite it even though other people do, but it's a pretty good read as to what the actual consensus is. Virtually every deletion nomination for a school is rejected, and most of the few deletions that take place are reversed on review. Copyvios, hoaxes, and blank pages excepted, of course. Monicasdude 01:17, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If it had consensus, it would be policy. I like WP:BEEFSTEW myself. ---J.Smith 06:17, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John Doolittle

Thanks for your honest comments. I appreciate them. (Truth be told, I was unsure of your motivations at first, too!). As for your questions:

Perhaps we can work together to expand the article in other directions? Currently about 95% of the article's content is about the "scandals" he's been involved in. 40 years of his life is summed up in one sentence in the preamble.

I agree that his entire prior career is given way too much short shrift. However, I must confess, as I don't live in Calif, I'm not up for doing a whole lotta research on this. Mostly my contributions to various articles relate to updating as to current events, as a political news junkie.

Oh, regarding the Julie-fund raising section, has there ever been an accusation about some kind of wrong-doing?

Not exactly, although this seems to be "raising eyebrows." Here's what the San Diego Tribune had to say:

A number of other politicians use their spouses as campaign consultants, including Rep. Bob Filner of Chula Vista. The practice is legal as long as the spouse is doing legitimate campaign work at a fair market price. Zubel, who has publicly criticized Filner's hiring of his wife, Jane, notes that there are significant differences between Jane Filner and Julie Doolittle. Jane Filner is paid a salary rather than a commission, meaning there is no direct connection between her earnings and the amount of contributions coming in. She also has had previous campaign experience, as executive director of the Democrats' 2000 political action committee. “The question you have to ask is whether a person has enough fundraising experience, training and skill so that an independent person – not connected through a spousal relationship – would hire them as a fundraiser,” Zubel said. “In those terms, Jane Filner probably has a bit more legitimacy in terms of being a fundraiser.”

I would find it more unusual if John's wife, who raises funds for a living, didn't do his fund raising work! This is really what she does for a living. She's done if for charity's, political campaigns, PACs, etc for about 15 years. That's extremely important context that tends to be left out.

Indeed, that is important context that has indeed been left out of what I've read. In fact, what I've read is that she has no experience doing this kind of work. If you have some (non-biased/non-partisan) sources that explain her prior work, by all means, it's relevant and ought to be included.

Hope this helps. -- Sholom 22:00, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anon IP Foxfall Pusher

You may wish to start watching Cold War Victory Medal. There is an anon ip address user who is cutting massive amounts of text from a website called Foxfall medals then sating that the article is copyrighted by them. Clearly ridiculous. I bring this up since you had noted this in a copyvio notice. I am reverted and watching at present. -Husnock 03:53, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Racewalking

hey J. So, your stepdad competed for the US team in the 70's? What's his name, did he ever make big news? (or however "big" can be considered, given that no one in the US knows what Racewalking is)
James

Ashley Furniture

I'm always suspicious of new business articles (and bio articles), as they're very often vanity. I wasn't sure in this case, which is why I added then notability template instead of a nomination for deletion. Upon looking over the article again, I think you're right. The article is short and has only one external link besides the official site, which are sometimes red flags, but in this case it's because the article is a new stub and not because the subject matter is non-notable. The way I see it, adding the notability template is like asking a question, and you've answered that question, so thanks! --Icarus 19:37, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response. Sorry for my tone... :( ---J.Smith 19:42, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: John Gibson (media host); David Faustino; Full page; WCWM; Attack Poodles and Other Media Mutants; Certified Management Accountant; Eric Alterman; Fred Barnes (journalist); KMGH-TV; The Kids Will Have Their Say; Tony Snow; Tetrastigm; Robert Luskin; Marc Maron; Elementary mathematics; Roger Ailes; Harry Julian Fink; Michael Jackson (actor); Alison Sealy-Smith

Cleanup: B-movie; Ezine; List of autistic people
Merge: Management accounting; American Airlines Flight 924; Cost accounting
Add Sources: Not Invented Here; Bhaskara; Nudity in science fiction
Wikify: National Audit Office; Mervyns; Arizona Territory
Expand: E!; Street food; Spheres of Chaos

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:41, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spam

Hello J smith,

I am sorry you thought my post was spam... my sincerest apologies. However, as you stated in your message about it's relevance - I am no way trying to mask my identity... I could have easily began a bum account to add the links.

I will reassess my actions, and hope it doesn't result in a ban!

John --Blackvault 23:45, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Reply:

Hello J. Smith,

Yes, I have been on Coast to Coast as a guest quite a few times. You may have also seen some of my television programs I wrote and produced on History Channel (not self promotion of gloating.. just wanted to add that so you knew I wasn't some quack promoting my personal webpage :) ) My site has become quite large, and a resource that is used widely. It was not my intent to spam, or the editing taken as such. It was simply an addition that I felt users researching the topic may find useful.

There are many elements of my database that is very noteworthy, not for my own personal gain, but for learning. How would I get them put into Wikipedia? To name a few: UFO documents from every agency in the U.S. Government, the entire collection of Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) reports from the entire history of that agency, FBI Files on people many do not realize have files... and the list goes on.

Just wanted to share this information :) How would the appropriate way to do that?

Files are'nt the only thing the govt. is doing. Ever hear about the Robertson Panel, Project Grudge ? In both of these, the govt. ridicules people who have had encounters with UFOs and/or aliens and spies on all UFO/Alien organizations. Part of this "ridicule" campaign, is to have people declared "mentally unfit", i.e. crazy, insane and the like, since shrinks are used in the campaign. Martial Law 17:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC) :)[reply]

First, they mock, later, when you and I see on TV and other media about alien battleships blowing up the planet, other alien contact, guess what happens next ? The crowds will think that those who had these experiences, are interested in forbidden matters brought the aliens here and will start killing people. There are those who think that, to be on the safe side, that nearly everything is "Of The Devil", so they'll cause trouble, as will people seeking vengeance for being ridiculed and mocked. That is why one of the contingency plans, according to Linda Moulton Howe and others, will be to have Martial Law declared w/ the cover story that terrorists have came into the US with a nuclear bomb, should aliens attempt a take-over(Also explains the new nuclear capable "bunker busters" that can go through several feet of material to take out bunkers) OR that the UFO/Alien, related info. becomes public knowledge. The alien abductees,contactees are to be rounded up, placed in "concentration camps", maybe to be exterminated. One alleged target for a nuclear armed bunker buster is Dulce, New Mexico, where there is a alleged alien base. The latest bunker buster weapons can allegedly go through several feet of granite. Martial Law 18:18, 14 April 2006 (UTC) :)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks, J Smith, good talking with you, and thanks for the clarification!

Re:your comments on Martin's Page

I think you need to see some context. I was asking Martin for advice and PSYCH, who was wikistalking me, decided to promulgate his attacks there. Since PSYCH came back to wikipedia a month ago he has dedicated his efforts to disrupting me. As such I think your comment about wikipedia not being the right place for me was unfair. Xtra 07:31, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome

--VKokielov 17:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Invoice

Hello, thank you for your question. An Invoice is a source document, it is not accounting. Cordially SirIsaacBrock 20:30, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, my suggestion would be to create a subcategory called Category:Source documents (accounting) and then add the primary +cat Category:Accounting to that sub +cat. If we do not do that we will have hundreds of source documents going to the main +cat and it will overflow. Let me know what your think. Cordially SirIsaacBrock 18:10, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need to use the {{category}} tags... that brings in the entire page to this page and makes your comments unreadable. I've replaces them with the wikilink-tags.

I'm not sure that there are 100's of source documents in accounting. Are there? If it's really like 5-10 then being under accounting is no problem at all. If it really is 100+ then we can think of merging... but I'm doubting there's actually 100 different types of source documents that deserve there own article. (for example. Credit Memo is a type of Invoice, and is covered there) ---J.Smith 18:21, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A source document is any input document used to create a journal entry, it is more like 1000s than 100s. I believe that a sub +cat would be the way to go, it is just determining the best name. Cordially SirIsaacBrock 18:43, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you!
Hello J.smith. Thank you for your support in my RfA! It passed with a final tally of 91/3/5. I am quite humbled and pleased by the community's show of confidence in me. If you need help or just want to talk, let me know. Cheers! -- F a ng Aili ^說嗎?

Thanks...still learning to tag well

Are you aware of a page that has information on tags such as the 'hoax' one you just used? Kukini 05:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks much!!! Kukini 06:45, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for supporting me in my RfA. I really didn't think people appreciate my work here that much, but it's nice to see you do: my Request was closed with 66 supports and 4 opposes. I'll do my best not to turn your confidence down. If in any point in the future you get the feeling I'm doing something wrong, do not hesitate to drop me a line. --Dijxtra 11:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PSYCH

I noticed your comment that was on PSYCH's talk page and it is incorrect. If you do not only look at the names of the pages edited, but rather the substance of the edit, 100% - that is every single edit - since PSYCH came back has either been about me or altering something that I have done. Xtra 13:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

shrug* now your splitting hairs. ---J.Smith 14:36, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rob Arnie and Dawn

Things of purely local interest aren't normally considered notable enough for Wikipedia entries; a radio show normally has to at least have quasi-national syndication status. For what it's worth, anyway. To be honest, I couldn't really be bothered to pick a fight over it. Bearcat 16:38, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No personal attacks

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy: There is no excuse for personal attacks on other contributors. Do not make them. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that you may be blocked for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thanks. --- 16:00, 14 April 2006 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.172.194.15 (talk • contribs) .

I'll just let the fact that this was from an anon/unsigned user stand for itself. ---J.Smith 07:54, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great Job!!!

Saw your work on Paranormal Watchers and love the template! Mahogany -wanna chat?

Guidelines for Conflict Resolution in BDSM

Hi J. Smith, thanks for the pointer to WikiBooks. I've created an entry there and modified my entry here to refer to it.

Could you lend a hand with next steps? Is there some way for me to pro-activly delete the Guidelines page I created, or is it best to just leave it there and wait for a bot or human to come along and nail it?

Thanks, Steve.

Hi J. Smith, I'm a newbie to using Wikipedia, but an experienced person in the BDSM world. So, my apologies if this message isn't in the correct place or format.

It was a welcoming thing to see the first substantial posting I've made (aside from small edits) be treated with a request to delete it within a few minutes of my posting it! :-)

My hope was to use the Wiki page as a community write-board where people in the BDSM community could work on developing consensus on conflict resolution on issues specific to our community. In fact, I sent out the link to that page to over 1000 BDSM participants so they could chime and and we could hammer something out.

So, what do you do in Wikipedia land when there is no published research on a particular topic because there's aren'y many publishing venues which might address the issue. Most published work on BDSM is in medical journals which aren't covering community interactions. In the few books that are published, they don't cover these types of guidelines.

Or, is the basic premise that wikipedia can't be used in this sort of way. Much of the material in the BDSM section is vague and open to interpretation because of inexact wording and expectations of the reader, even if it's been published somewhere.

Any suggestions on how to proceed, or do you just not care as long as it's not on wikipedia?

Thanks, Steve.

Paranormal Project

Hello J. Smith,

Thanks for inviting me to the Paranormal Watchers. I truly appreciate it. Since my joining of Wikipedia, I decided to create a project (wiki) for not only Paranormal, but related genres as well. I have expanded it to include the subject matter that I research and that is archived on The Black Vault, and is becoming more and more popular.

Since the information in Wikipedia is open source, I did use some of the information here as a base... (giving credit to Wikipedia per the policy) and hope that in time, more and more people will take part in the project.

I am getting organizations like MUFON involved (who already love the site) and it will include a one-stop-shop for researchers to come.

I hope that you may check it out:

http://www.blackvault.com/encyclopedia

I am in no way trying to "compete" with Wikipedia - but find that a more resourceful, and open source for people to contribute articles was necessary. I attempted to contribute a few things (legitimate research and documents) and was deleted for 'spam'. Although I do see the point - I offered legitimate and verified sources, and was deleted anyway.. hence this new project.

I hope to have you and your contributions aboard. It looks like you are very knowledgable yourself, especially on the Wiki platform.

Revert wars

If a user were revert warring over anything that isn't blatant vandalism, for example let's say User edits, you revert, User reverts, I would follow these steps:

Revert to version before if the info is obviously incorrect, otherwise it can help to leave the other users changes
Start discussing the changes with the other user, on their user talk page, or leave a note on their user talk page inviting discussion on the page's Talk page.
If they continue reverting without discussion, give a 3rr warning: {{3RR2}}
If they still continue post to WP:AN3

The most important thing is always to assume good faith. As of now Heah has responded to your message on the noticeboard. Happy editing!

Prodego ^talk 14:25, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

star sonata

yes, I've looked into his edits and you are right, that guy is a vandal. I'm going to keep an eye on his contribs and start blocking him accordingly; drop me a note if you see him up to anything. --He ah? 18:03, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked him for 48 hours. --He ah? 07:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Hi J.Smith,

Thanks for the comments on the site. I thought I did do it right, but realize I didn't :) Many of the pages have already been changed to reflect the Copyright and link to the past history page! I appreciate your input in this regards.

If you have any other suggestions, I would appreciate it. Take care, and keep in touch!

--Blackvault 20:54, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent

I must admit the edits on the project you've done certainly amaze me and I'd like to say to get to the point Great Job!!! Mahogany -wanna chat?

EVP

Sorry, but you should use the correct link for the benefit of those who stumble accross the page and don't know what you're talking about. Jim62sch 23:55, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]