User talk:NoisyJinx

If you start a conversation here, I will answer on this page and notify you by Talkback note on your talk page.
If I start a conversation on your talk page, I will watch it and reply there.
If you are an anonymous editor, I will simply reply here (and hope that you eventually read it).
If you'd rather discuss something privately, you can send me an E-Mail, but please leave a short notice here.
Always try to behave.

Thank you!

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, NoisyJinx, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! —SpacemanSpiff 07:25, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your speedy deletion tag to one of the articles.

I wouldn't mark your speedy deletion tag as G1. Gibberish text is more like jehfkaeifkklbfeilbrgvl or something like that. I would mark it as A1, which means that this article is too short to be considered encyclopedic. Minima c94 (talk) 17:51, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I interpreted A1 a different way. Thanks for clearing that up NoisyJinx (talk) 17:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, NoisyJinx. You have new messages at Shirik's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 00:21, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment in the RfC (article: ejaculation)

Hi, thanks for your brief comments, however if there are seemingly interminable discussions about pictures in other articles - this is not the place to mention them. The whole purpose of this is to reach a resolution. "This side of the atlantic" - which side are you refering too, nobody know where you live - please be clearer I am almost absolutely certain this particular video is not used in schools anywhere on the planet - please show me if I am wrong in this.DMSBel (talk) 01:58, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This side of the Atlantic (from my point of view) is Europe. And you're right, this particular video wasn't shown when my teacher came up with that topic years ago. Suffice to say that what he actually DID show was very explicite. People reading WP are how old? Twelve and above? Just my two cents, but at that age I knew what ejaculation is and looks like (no first-hand experience, though), and if some twelve-year-old kid doesn't, it's about time he or she learns it. Which is, and I stress this, a subjective opinion. _noisy jinx ^huh? 02:49, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again - I agree kids of that age know what ejaculation looks like, they may not know the right word but how many of them need a video, and the text explains it. In my school we saw an "internal ejaculation video", ie within the womans body (not a so called "female ejaculation") but the semen being ejaculated within the vagina - apologises for explicitness - that might be better here. The censorship argument is totaly misused here, once the page is unlocked the video will be deleted pretty soon again (not by me though) - the text needs work to improve it that cannot be done, while the video is disputed. An INLINE LINK keeps the video available (until an improvement is found), and lets work continue on the article.DMSBel (talk) 03:06, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I know the video you're referring to. The BBC (I think, or some other British TV station) made that for an educational programme a while back, and it's very likely copyrighted. Anyway: This warring over explicit content has gotten out of hand, which I guess we agree on. Regarding the "how many [...] need a video" you brought up, we could also start to argue why many articles on celebrities need multiple pictures of the subject if one is clearly enough. While not all additional content helps the article, content that is on topic and factual does. I don't particularly like the video, it's somewhat gross, but that's again my personal opinion. But I think it helps the article. _noisy jinx ^huh? 03:18, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is gross too, but I don't think helps the article. It's not a matter of censorship it's a matter of discreetness in my view. Thats why teachers dont use porn to teach kids. Even that which is not pornographic can be inappropriate - kids (nearly everyone in fact) feel more comfortable when sexual matters are addressed discreetly.DMSBel (talk) 03:31, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because porn is usually not educational or even representative. I could rant about that for ages, actually. I agree with you on the matter of comfort. But actually that's no valid point in an encyclopedia. It's not about avoiding things that, while being accurate, might cause discomfort to people. We could start to delete thousands of articles if it was abour comfort here. The video is factual, arguably non-pornographic and shows the subject. Not more, not less. It is conform with WP's policy. The sole point is that some people don't like it. We could discuss this until doomsday. _noisy jinx ^huh? 03:43, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree, but there is a complete misunderstanding of censorship in this discussion. Or else a deliberate misrepresentation of policy. You seem reasonable. Correct me if I am wrong but censorship means "inaccessible". If something is censored it does not mean you cannot see it, it means you do not have the option of seeing it even if you wish. You see I am strongly for giving the user control here. That is why I advocate the image behind a link. Now no one can say that putting the image behind a link removes the option of seeing it. The correct understanding of censorship turns on that - correctly understood censorship removes the option of seeing. Linking maintains the option of seeing. Let me know if you understand this because I am so astonished at how some people here just do not get it - they probably spend more time in the policy pages here and are barely able to think straight.DMSBel (talk) 18:34, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Zoe Johnston and broken links

Thank you for noticing that two of the external links at Zoe Johnston were broken. I have replaced those links with ones to the archived versions of those pages at the Internet Wayback Machine at http://www.archive.org Whenever you encounter a broken link on Wikipedia, please try to find a new URL for the link. In some cases, a search at the old domain will give you the new URL. In other cases, you can find an archived copy of the page at http://www.archive.org – Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:30, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I keep learning :) Thx _noisy jinx ^huh? 03:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Northwestern Hotel Livingstone

Hello NoisyJinx. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Northwestern Hotel Livingstone, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article makes a credible assertion of importance or significance, sufficient to pass A7. Thank you. Acroterion _(talk) 17:01, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion declined: Great Danger

Hello NoisyJinx. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Great Danger, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Thank you. Nancy ^talk 19:51, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, are you refering to my warning to RevolveMaster?

I try warning based on the action. I may have jumed a little bit too quick here, but I consider adding deliberatly innacurate info which is hard to track (like number change) is worst than simple vandalism. Because those sort of deliberate actions may be unnoticed for a long time. Is there a general guideline, on the way giving warnings? -RobertMel (talk) 02:13, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sid Vicious

Hi, I have found a reference that may provide some evidence for Sid Vicious attending Clevedon Community School, previous pupils have confirmed that he attended the school and even a science teacher by the name of Mr Williams recalls teaching him. Just wondering if you could take a look at the link and read under the topic "Re Local Heros" where there is a discussion on him, hopefully this may be some kind of usable evidence or even a link to some definitive proof. Thanks again -User:anarchy111 http://www.knowhere.co.uk/Clevedon/Somerset/South-West-England/messages?start=3 —Preceding undated comment added 01:28, 14 June 2010 (UTC).

Yeah, seen that while superficially searching for sources. But it's not really reliable, someone who thinks he remembers something isn't a very good source. Virtually the only thing to cement the claim would be the original school records or some sort of official publication. _noisy jinx ^huh? 02:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Hi NoisyJinx!

I have put together a survey for female editors of Wikipedia (and related projects) in order to explore, in greater detail, women's experiences and roles within the Wikimedia movement. It'd be wonderful if you could participate!

It's an independent survey, done by me, as a fellow volunteer Wikimedian. It is not being done on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation. I hope you'll participate!

Just click this link to participate in this survey, via Google!

Any questions or concerns, feel free to email me or stop by my user talk page. Also, feel free to share this any other female Wikimedians you may know. It is in English, but any language Wikimedia participants are encouraged to participate. I appreciate your contributions - to the survey and to Wikipedia! Thank you! SarahStierch (talk) 05:29, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ditzy Doo

I have removed the CSD A7 tag you placed on this article and substituted a CSD A10 tag instead, as it appears to me that the page refers to a toy (My Little Pony, Generation 4), not a real animal. James500 (talk) 11:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UAA

Hi. Great to see you patrolling new pages. Please also report usernames you come across that violate the username policy which you didn't do with Facts computer software house (talk · contribs) after speedying the article of the same name (Twinkle has this option at ARV). Cheers and happy editing! — Abhishek ^Talk 13:11, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

October 2011

Hi. Thank you for your help with the vital work of patrolling new pages. I noticed that you are not marking some of the pages you've reviewed as patrolled. Please do remember to click the 'mark this page as patrolled' link at the bottom of the new page if you have performed the standard patrolling tasks. Where appropriate, doing so saves time and work by informing fellow patrollers of your review of the page, so that they do not duplicate efforts. Thanks again for volunteering your time at the new pages patrol project. →Σ τ c. 21:14, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Emkay Global

I have no problem with any thing that happened related to this. I "welcome" via the recent changes page and sometimes choose scenarios that may have some discord. I just have some general questions for my own education as a WP editor.

You may have noticed that I was the user's welcomer. I left him a message at the article talk suggesting that he use recent Random articles to see what a WP article should look like. When the article was deleted, so was the talk page and all record of it. What I notice is that there is no mention of my edit, specifically in personal "my contributions" page. Is it then safe to assume that when an article is deleted, all related "off-shoots' (like my Contributions)are also deleted?
In the future, is it worth the time and the effort to try some early education on the article talk page. Perhaps I should have communicated with the new editor on his talk page.

Thanks for your efforts at De-Tox and keeping WP free from the clutter. It struck me how unbelievably messy and unsightly WP would be without the continued efforts of editors like yourself. ```Buster Seven Talk 18:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page Curation newsletter

Hey NoisyJinx. I'm dropping you a note because you've been using the Page Curation suite recently - this is just to let you know that we've deployed the final version :). There's some help documentation Wikipedia:Page Curation/Introductionhere that shows off all the features, just in case there are things you're not familiar with. If you find any bugs or have requests for new features, let us know here. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 11:57, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWomen's Collaborative

WikiWomen Unite!

Hi NoisyJinx! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative.

As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:

Liking the WikiWomen's Collaborative on Facebook and share your tips, projects, and connect with other WikiWomen
Join the conversation on our Twitter feed
Reading and writing for our blog channel

Feel free to drop by our meta page (under construction) to see how else you can participate!

Can't wait to have you involved! SarahStierch (talk) 21:16, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well I did start a sockpuppet report for that one person.

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Afair00 Yeah so if you find anymore here is the link to the report. Good luck! Wgolf (talk) 02:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My Apologies.

  I was looking forward to using the edit option to hysterical laughter but I never had the time nor the thought to read the rules. May I please use at least 2 more and after 20-30 minutes you may remove the edits or I could either way, no real harm.

                       -Peace and Karrots,
                            Boo~  — Preceding unsigned comment added by BooBooBii (talk • contribs) 10:56, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Ad Orientem. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Jarir ibn Abdullah Al Bajali, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm G S Palmer. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Spetses.photography, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. G S Palmer (talk) 15:30, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle by default marks articles as reviewed when tagging them CSD. Usually no big deal, as they get deleted pretty quickly most of the time, but not ideal. _noisy jinx ^huh? 15:44, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess the author had removed the CSD tag. I've re-tagged it. G S Palmer (talk) 15:52, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

disruptive editing

please explain what you are editing in your edit summary, learn to respect the other editor, use civility and talk page for dicussion, dont just blindly revert other edits, Bioasia2013 (talk) 12:13, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PROD tagging

Did we tagged together? Probably, first time I ever had the notification "failed to notify the creator". OccultZone (Talk) 12:06, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Within seconds of each other... _noisy jinx ^huh? 12:07, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New deal for page patrollers

Hi NoisyJinx,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, NoisyJinx. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]