User talk:JBW

Please post new sections at the bottom of the page. If you don't, there is a risk that your message may never be noticed, if other edits follow it before I get here.

Haven't followed up on Poledlimps' talk page

I am 2601:589:4e00:5dd0:71e8:c982:8a25:8b3e and 69.160.112.226, and I have followed up on Poledlimps' talk page, this time with a registered account, and I do not plan to revert my edit(s) this time. Please respond. Redappleone2 (talk) 22:12, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't really know what it is that you are asking for. Can you clarify your request? Are you the person who used the account "Poledlimps"? JBW (talk) 22:36, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes! I was the person that used the account! https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:Poledlimps is the link to the account's talk page, and in one of your replies, you said, "In view in what I have seen that seems improbable, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for now." I was confused by that response because I didn't know what you saw that made it seem improbable. Redappleone2 (talk) 17:24, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't know why you would choose to come along and tell me that this is yet another of your block-evading sockpuppets, unless it's a kind of trolling, but so be it. I also note your gaming of autoconfirmed status. JBW (talk) 17:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

Message I left in an edit conflict at User:Vlioos

Oh good, I thought I'd neglected to check some box or another. Same result in the end!-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:27, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Yhang Mhany

Hi JBW, I saw that you blocked a sock of Yhangmhany earlier today, but there's always another one coming – Abodomah recreated Draft:Yhang Mhany just now. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 15:57, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Ima tag for deletion and block. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:08, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Too late -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:09, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

@Bonadea and Deepfriedokra: Sigh... 🥱 By now he must know that it's just going to lead to block & delete, so why continue doing the same? As far as I can see it amounts to trolling. JBW (talk) 16:15, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

My "thanks"

Hey, JBW. I just want to mention it wasn't for blocking Allenogs1 that I "thanked" you (thanking people for blocks would be kind of crass) — but for the good way you put it. I wanted to block them myself, but couldn't figure what to say. Bishonen | tålk 16:42, 27 January 2025 (UTC).

@Bishonen: What??? What??? Bishonen at a loss for words??? Surely not! Actually it's good to see someone who actually thinks it's worth considering what to put in a message to an editor; there are far too many editors including many, perhaps most, administrators who just slap some templated message on the user's talk page, and if there isn't a suitable one then they just use a totally unsuitable one. Sigh... 😕 JBW (talk) 17:01, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

You are correct, good Sir! (Bishonen perhaps give too many of her words to her eloquent Zilla.) bishzilla _ROARR!! pocket 17:18, 27 January 2025 (UTC).

Guided Studios

Appears to be a disruptive editor using the name of a studio in an attempt to seem legitimate. Your thoughts, JB?   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

@Skywatcher68:

1. Using what at least looks like the name of a studio in an attempt to seem legitimate; yes. (It always amuses me to see new editors doing that, because (a) if they knew about the conflict of interest guideline they would realise that it does the opposite of making them seem legitimate, and (b) it calls attention to them, so they are more likely to be subject to scrutiny.)
2. "Appears to be a disruptive editor"; hmm. Certainly their editing so far has not been constructive, but I'm not sure whether its mainly a matter of a good faith new editor who just needs a little experience and some advice, or whether there are bigger problems. One to watch, I think, and for now I've given them a note sbout unsourced editing. JBW (talk) 19:58, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Quick note on User talk:Allenogs1

Thanks for your edits to User talk:Allenogs1.

Can you consider nuking the pages that were created by this user? I see one inappropriate use of a template sandbox (G3), and two U5 creations. I am not sure if this is some sort of AI bot or what. It could be a spammer, idk. Awesome Aasim 19:43, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

@Allenogs1: I really didn't know what to make of this when I saw it, but having thought sbout it and checked the editing history again, I think it looks like SEO. I hadn't thought of it being some kind of AI bot, but now you've suggested it, I think it could well be. As for deleting the pages, I wasn't going to bother, because they seemed trivial and harmless. However, prompted by your message I've had another look. I see that there is spam-like content not visible in the current versions of the pages, either because it was posted in the original version of the page and then removed or because it was just in an edit summary, not in the page content. Experience has taught me that those are two tricks commonly used by spammers, probably because, not knowing enough about how Wikipedia works, they mistakenly think it will achieve SEO. In view of that, I've deleted the pages. JBW (talk) 20:26, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Brian Solis

Hi JBW, thanks for your review of my draft Brian Solis. Unfortunately there's no way for me to improve it if nobody is willing to help and explain what makes it an advertisement or provide any examples from the draft. I spent hours on this and I don't know what to change exactly. Most of my sources are from academic journals, authoritative writers (Chris Brogan / Andrew Keen / Keith A. Quesenberry) or known newspapers and sites (Los Angeles Times / Financial Times / El Comerico Peru / Atlanta) I'm simply saying what they are saying in different words. I'd be very thankful for some more detailed feedback and help. Thank you JJelax (talk) 14:47, 30 January 2025 (UTC)