User talk:Ohnoitsjamie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


My Talk

Contents

[edit] Welcome to Jamie's talk page!

Please add new messages to the bottom of the page. If a conversation is started here, I'll respond here; if it starts on your talk page, I'll respond there.

[edit] Contacting me

I prefer to communicate via talk pages. Please only email me if there is a good reason not to conduct a conversation on a talk page. I usually do not respond to emails unless there's a valid reason why the question could not have been posted on a talk page.

[edit] Why did you remove my external links?

If you've come here because you want to know why I removed some external links you've added, please read Wikipedia's policies on spam and Wikipedia external link guidelines first. Because of Wikipedia's popularity, it has become a target for folks looking to promote their sites, which is against Wikipedia policies. If you read WP:SPAM and still feel that your link(s) does not violate those policies, let me know.

One common argument I hear is But so-and-so link is on that article, and it's commercial! WP:EL doesn't explicitly forbid In links to commercial sites; it depends on the notability of the link, its content, and if it's a reference or a notable pro/con argument on a controversial subject, etc. On the other hand, I think that many Wikipedians would agree that there are way too many commercial links at present time, so feel free to "prune away" if the link doesn't meet guidelines in WP:EL. Incidentally, if you've come here to complain that I've deleted links to your blog (especially a blog with advertising), don't bother. You'll have to find free advertising somewhere else. A good Google search will reveal plenty of places for that sort of thing.

Vandalism and insults left here will be recycled in the bit bucket. Remember: be nice!

[edit] Talk archives

PLEASE LEAVE NEW COMMENTS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE.


[edit] New Project

Myself and several other editors have been compiling a list of very active editors who would likely be available to help new editors in the event they have questions or concerns. As the list grew and the table became more detailed, it was determined that the best way to complete the table was to ask each potential candidate to fill in their own information, if they so desire. This list is sorted geographically in order to provide a better estimate as to whether the listed editor is likely to be active.

If you consider yourself a very active Wikipedian who is willing to help newcomers, please either complete your information in the table or add your entry. If you do not want to be on the list, either remove your name or just disregard this message and your entry will be removed within 48 hours. The table can be found at User:Useight/Highly Active, as it has yet to have been moved into the Wikipedia namespace. Thank you for your help. Useight (talk) 17:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

I was asked to post an image of my penis, because if you check talk a few people agreed the existing photo is unaesthetically pleasing. JoshS18 (talk) 04:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Vandalsim

Sorry, you might have entered the wrong address or something, but i never edited that page. If someone used my computer to do so I apologize —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.149.121.131 (talk) 21:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I did not enter the wrong IP address. You're probably on a shared IP. If you're concerned about future warnings due to vandalism from other folks on your IP, create an account for yourself. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:07, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Afd Help Pearl necklace

Thanks for your help. The discussion page and article page look the same. Is this complete (aside from notifying others)? I'm having a difficult time following the steps for some reason. DeeKenn (talk) 15:43, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mumbo Token

I do not understand why the Mumbo Token article was deleted under the "patent nonsense" criterion. It clearly is not patent nonsense, as it has helped many people find all the Mumbo Tokens in Banjo-Kazooie. Articles should only be labelled as "patent nonsense" if they are NONSENSE.

However, I do agree that it wasn't in a suitable format for Wikipedia - but that can be improved via copy-editing, which I was leaving to other people to do.

Thirdly, the copyright of the article is owned by ME. I wrote the original document, and have all previous versions on my computer. If proof is required, I'm sure it can be provided, but if you email the address on the document (no matter where it is found online), you will reach me.

I hope this can be resolved quickly, because quite frankly, the article being deleted because it is "patent nonsense" is insulting. Avengah (talk) 15:44, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

It's also a pretty clear violation of original research, and even if it wasn't speedied, it easily fail an WP:AFD nom in it's current form. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide either. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:26, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
I agree with some of that, but one of the points on the AFD page says that an article should be improved rather than deleted, if at all possible - which is what I meant when I said people could copy-edit it. It's not original research, because things learnt by playing a video game don't have to be cited as per Wikipedia policy, and the article is on GameFAQs, IGN, Supercheats and several other places. Finally, we had a discussion on Rare Witch Project whether this should be on Wikipedia or not, and people voted YES by a margin of 5 to 2. Avengah (talk) 16:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
See WP:Reliable sources. If you post the article again, it will be sent to AFD. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dean Barron

Just for note, I've put a final warning tag on this user's page to back up an ARV report if necessary. Which I suspect will happen. Cheers. Booglamay (talk) 20:21, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Page deleted (again), user indef blocked. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:22, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
Just seen it - seems like you were over on their page as I was on yours! Nice one anyway! Booglamay (talk) 20:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Justin Dormandy

OhnoitsJamie, wow you definitely act fast ;-) Anyways, you recently removed a link I added to the social network page as spam. If you really feel it is spam I completely understand, and I wont argue the point. The link was for collaborationboard.com and yes, I will admit it is a bit of a plug for my project. However, I do think it would be useful for people interested in different types of social networks and the ambitions of my project don't resemble any other social networks I have seen yet.

If your interested, please at least take a look at the site. I have no intentions, at least not at any time in the near future, to turn any kind of profit from the project. However, if you still feel that adding the link to wikipedia would be considered spamming I respect your decision and that was not my intention.

Justin534 (talk) 04:49, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

There is also the conflict-of-interest issue. If your project becomes popular and achieves more notability, I imagine someone else will create an article for it. Regardless of whether the project is for-profit or not, you can imagine who saturated the page would become with links if everyone could add links to their own projects. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie Talk 04:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. I hope you understand I wasn't intentionally trying to spam wikipedia, but I am curious how on earth did you catch my edit so fast? I have always heard it is a major issue that anyone can wreak havoc on wikipedia entries - but you caught my edit literally less than two minutes after I made it. Just curious. Well at any rate I guess I will see if I can contribute to various articles on social networking. I noticed the article for business networking isnt currently linked to any other entry - maybe I'll have to fix that ;) Do you know how I can best introduce myself to writing and editing articles on wikipedia. On the left navigation pane I dont see anything that might resemble a user guide for new wikipedia editors/authors. Thanks. Justin534 (talk) 07:09, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for being cool about it. I added a welcome template to your talk page that has lot of handy links; hopefully that'll help. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie Talk 07:13, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dave Spector

Thank you for your advice, I am really a new user. To me, however, the page as it is is a disguised attack page. There must be a huge amount of neutral info on what this guy's past, what he has done, what he has said on TV, etc, besides these comments to critique his hair or desire for money, otherwise he would not be in my living room every night. That is why I put the attack tag in there as it says on wiki attack page advice. The says little about him in a biographic way and I think should be a stub until someone can write it properly (not me). Your advice please.Dberger (talk) 05:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Per our WP:BLP policy, I removed two unsourced statements. The rest seemed reasonably objective or sourced (though you or others may disagree). If you have further concerns, try posting them on the talk page of the article or adding other improvement tags. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie Talk 05:30, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Recent AfD related deletions

You might want to make sure you close them when you delete the article. I have just closed two discussions (here and here). asenine say what? 06:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Didn't notice they were up at AFD. Thanks for catching that. OhNoitsJamie Talk 06:46, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] BL listing

Thanks for helping out - appreciated. However can you please make sure you log any additions as is says on the page along with some rationale. Finding anything about it in a months time will be hard & in six months will be effectively impossible. Many thanks --Herby talk thyme 07:14, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem, will do. OhNoitsJamie Talk 07:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Regarding Punctuation

I am of the opinion that the word "zoophilia" is pronounced "zoo-o-philia" and therefore should be spelled "zoöphilia". How is this not so?

This is an English-language Wikipedia. No dialects of English use umlauts. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:08, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Mantis Evar

I was under the impression that I was allowed to remake this page. Could you read [this conversation] and explain why it's been deleted? Ryan.rogalski (talk) 16:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

You can recreate it, but I will send it to WP:AFD if I don't feel that it meets the reliable sources and non-trivial coverage criteria of WP:MUSIC. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:48, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why did you delete "Hesamuddin Seraj"?!

In fact, "Seraj" is one of the few famous traditional Persian singers. He has millions of fans. But you simply delete the entry! Why do you do this!?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marashie (talk • contribs) 16:30, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Because the article did not assert WP:MUSIC notability !?!?! OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Phalanxman (talk) 21:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)Phalanxman

Hello i'm a new user posting in wikipedia so it's kinda hard for me to make a new article. Still you deleted my debut article (a biography on Antonio Güell Ortega) twice. I'd like to ask you for advice to improve my article in order to make it good enough for wikipedia, please. By the way i'm sorry bout the previous postings that didn't go to the bottom of the page, it's just that i wasnt sure of how to post there. Im so sorry if I caused you any trouble.

Just read your answer on my talk page and I wanted to say thanks. So basicly what i have to do is to demontrate the importance of the projects this guy made and find some web evidence about him working in those projects right?

Essentially, yes. WP:BIO lists the notability criteria (as well as more specific notability criteria for some areas, likes academia and the arts). Also see WP:Reliable sources for info regarding good sources. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] That dog animation

I think it fits in that paragraph as it shows that humans find dogs amusing and loving. But the main purpose of my adding it is that it will add more interest in reading the article in the minds of the dog lovers (or the person who is reading the article). If an article has something interesting which is related to it then its good. Its not necessary to add only serious information to an article. After all humor is also important if its encyclopedia or a blog etc. Everything is information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harryroger (talk • contribs) 23:25, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, humor is not really appropriate for an encyclopedia (unless it's in your userspace). A blog is another story. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: sockpuppetry

OhNoItsJamie, I am a completely new user (run the Check user tool), and decided to make my first contribution to Wikipedia in an article on the Qingdao International Beer Festival because I had so much difficulty finding information elsewhere and wanted to gather my findings for others to look at if they were interested in information on this event. The link you referenced in your message provided the only English website with information on the event, so I tried to cite the information. All other information came from Chinese language (which I am a student in) websites. I am new to Wikipedia, and I hope my contribution is considered helpful. I may have tried to add an undesirable link (of which I have absolutely no affiliation to), but I'm not feeling the love of the Wikipedia community on my first attempt to help out. Thanks for your time. -Jeff007s

Hi Jeff. I appreciate your kindness. I wish you well in your endeavers to explore China, a country that I would certainly like to visit someday. That said, you've apparently had no trouble gleaning information relative to your trip without the aid of Wikipedia. I'm sure you can enjoy your trip regardless of whether thatsqingdao.com and related sites are permantly blacklisted from all wiki sites. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bimini bay

Hi! I saw your !vote agreeing with my stance on Bimini Bay. However, I now realise my position was flawed, and have changed my !vote accordingly. As it could look like you are agreeing with my new vote, I thought I had best let you know and give you the opportunity to modify your stance. StephenBuxton (talk) 11:53, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Hershey sign.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hershey sign.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Hershey statue.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Hershey statue.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:23, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kobe Bryant Sexual Assault Case / Name Redaction

Hi, I've been a wiki lurker for quite some time before I began editing. One thing I've noticed is that often, names are redacted to protect the privacy of little-known people. One example is the star wars kid page (please forgive my lack of wiki-fu). After seeing the use of name redaction on that page, I decided to apply that to the above-mentioned page. However, you reverted my work explaining that redaction was not appropriate. I am confused about how BPL applies in what I thought were two similar situations, and to be a better editor, I would like you to explain how name redaction is appropriate in the star wars kid page but not in this page. Thank you! BigScaryGary (talk) 06:24, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I didn't know that it'd been redacted from the Star Wars Kid page. I agree with the other posters that her name has become an integral part of the case, and is verifiable via online sources. OhNoitsJamie Talk 06:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
So then what you're saying is that in neither case, it would be appropriate? If so, it makes a lot more sense. Thanks for your help! p.s. what would be an example of appropriate name redacting, if any?BigScaryGary (talk) 06:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not aware of any appropriate cases for "redacting." On the other hand, if Farber's name were only known via blogs or hearsay, it would be omitted on the basis of lacking a reliable source. I'm not sure why the Star Wars kid's name was redacted; could have been the result of an WP:RfC on the matter. Having just looked at the talk page for The Star Wars Kid, I see that someone mentions the following from BLP: Caution should be applied when naming individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed (such as in certain court cases), it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. When evaluating the inclusion or removal of names, their publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories. It is argue that policy could apply to Bryant's accuser. However it looks dumb to replace her name with [REDACTED]. Replacing her name with "accuser" or something similar is more elegant. OhNoitsJamie Talk 06:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
If this could be put on the talk page for the article, it might spur multiple editors to discuss whether removing the name is appropriate. Most importantly, I appreciate your assistance.BigScaryGary (talk) 06:51, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] priory-of-sion.com website

Hello, in what way does the website priory-of-sion.com fall short of reliable source??? It contains material used by authors and documentaries and was used on WP for years. It only got blacklisted through politicial reasons, not content. Thanks, Wfgh66 (talk) 14:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

It's self-published. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:17, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Phalanxman (talk) 22:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC), yes again

Sorry to disturb you again with this but i havent found much evidence on web about Antonio Güell (i'm writting a biography about him). All i've found is a page that gives information about a conference the guy will give about his participation at his most important project and it's in spanish. Thats not accepted as enough evidence right? i'll leave the page to you so you can send it to someone that speaks spanish and tell me ok? http://www.universia.edu.ve/home/prog/display_noticia.php?cod=195&img=si also i've found blog pages where he's named but thats not good enough either right?

No, blogs usually are not considered to be reliable sources. There are plenty of engineers (from all fields) who speak at conferences; most of them are not notable. To pass our notability criteria, you should be able to find non-trivial references to him in major media publications. OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lexus Override controversy

Jamie-

I looked and cannot find a definite reason why the link to LexusOverride.com was removed. If it was the Lexus postcard, perhaps a direct link to the Lexus Owners' comments might be acceptable? The purpose of the site is to educate car shoppers about the limitations in the Lexus Nav system before they buy their car, so that they do not share the frustrating experience of the owners who leave comments on the site.

If the comments page is acceptable, then this is the link: http://lexusoverride.com/comments.php

Thank you for your time. 74.62.26.51 (talk) 04:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] What is the problem with links?

I'm not sure why you deleted my external links -- I think having information about a person's official bio is significant and useful. Someone could click on the links I have added if they are looking for information about how to contact someone for a lecture at their school or organization. Please stop deleting. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcochs (talk • contribs) 18:39, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I've already given the reasons on your talk page. If you continue to use Wikipedia as an advertising medium, you will be blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:42, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to disagree, but Mcochs arguably improved the article on Hanne Blank, fixing a non-working bio link that was already there (apparently the old link moved) with the currently working link. I'll leave it to you whether you want to unrevert your revert of that edit because it's not my purpose to get into a revert war with anyone, but it might serve Wikipedia's purpose best to unrevert at least that edit. --216.152.101.66 (talk) 11:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ninja Conversation

There's a section in the Ninja talk pages called "historical accuracy??" which is where I originally proposed my change, which you recently reverted. I'd like to discuss my changes there please. Pmw2cc (talk) 14:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

See our policies regarding WP:Verifiability and WP:NPOV. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] my RfA - Ta!

Gwen gleans, wending keen by the wikirindle.Thanks for supporting my RfA, which went through 93/12/5. I'll be steadfast in this trust the en.Wikipedia community has given me. Cheers! Gwen Gale (talk) 01:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Gwen gleans, wending keen by the wikirindle.

Thanks for supporting my RfA, which went through 93/12/5. I'll be steadfast in this trust the en.Wikipedia community has given me. Cheers! Gwen Gale (talk) 01:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Question

I noticed a new image was uploaded recently. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Bighen.jpg

To me it appears scanned (possibly from a magazine - have a look at the bench pressers' white shirt, see how the image from page behind it bleeds through?). Then I noticed the exact image on the subject of the article's website. http://www.bigjameshenderson.com/images/pic6.jpg

Obviously we're to assume good faith here, but how in general would an admin verify proof that an individual does indeed own the right to distribute a picture? I'm just curious. Thanks. --Yankees76 (talk) 16:57, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I see that you have vandalized my page by deleting my image and giving false reasons for doing so. Good for you. Did you get off on it? Here is what we are going to do. We are going to take this to the next level. Now, since I am new here, I am requesting that you, as an administrator, instruct me. What do I do with an asshole like you? I have a conflict with you, and I want the people who gave you admin privys to know what you have done without any regard for due process. It is in your best interest, if you want to keep your little admin title, to now take a step back and point me to the right direction for my complaint.Jeffrey Pierce Henderson (talk) 10:35, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Continue your incivility and you'll find yourself blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Any reason you reverted Crate training page?

The version you recreated is terrible - full of how-to, pointless language, attributing feeling to the dog, terms like "going potty." C'mon. If you have a probelm with the rewrite, change it, don't go back to the terrible version. Thanks Bob98133 (talk) 02:22, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Not sure how that happened, probably trying to figure out which IP the spam originated from and accidentally reverted to an old version. Should be fixed now. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:54, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why was my last entry on your talk page removed?

I am a new wikipedia user, I am not sure what I did wrong with my last talk entry on to your page. I apologise for any mistake and would be grateful if you would respond to my points. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Susievet (talk • contribs) 19:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

It was removed because you didn't follow directions (new comments are to be added at the bottom of this page, as noted numerous times). As I noted on the House rabbit talk page, Wikipedia is not a vehicle to promote a website you are affiliated with that sells pet insurance. Please do not add the link again. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Jamie, Sorry about the incorrect entry. Thank you for your feedback. Vet Help Direct does not sell insurance, we have an insurance directory which is our only form of advertising on the site, there is not a ban on links to sites that have reasonable levels of advertising as far as I am aware? Vet Help Direct fulfills the following criteria: • Is it accessible to the reader? • Is it proper in the context of the article (useful, tasteful, informative, factual, etc.)? • Is it a functional link, and likely to continue being a functional link?

I feel a reference to Vet Help Direct could help as this paragraph is not a comprehensive list of symptoms that require veterinary attention:

Rabbits should be taken to the vets if ill or injured.....etc

It is not possible to write comprehensive lists of symptoms that require veterinary attention. Vet Help Direct should be added as a reference under the following Wikipedia guidline:

Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons.

Would it help if I added the references for Vet Help Direct to provide evidence that it is a credible site and the only site on the web to do this job? References would include: The Veterinary Times 16/10/06, The Veterinary Review 04/07, Miles Mendoza 16/1/07, The Times 4/10/06, Country Life Magazine 13/12/07, Dogs Today March 08, Your Dog Magazine Feb 07, British Horse Society E-News December 07, Your Horse Magazine 6/12/07, Horse and Pony Magazine3/12/07. Vet Help Direct is supported by the British Horse Society and is working with the Kennel Club.

If you really don’t think it should be added in the content maybe I could add a sentence to say this not a comprehensive list of symptoms that require veterinary attention and put the link in the external links section. What would you think of that?

Look forward to your reply,

Susievet (talk) 09:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

I wanted to apologize for making bad edits to cat. I will do it to dog instead.

You'll win a free vacation if you do. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

i need contexts JeanLatore (talk) 20:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

i was talking about context for the quote. I don't think you understand how to quote the great authors properly. JeanLatore (talk) 20:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

The current version if fine. I think I've been around long enough to know how things work here. Your talk page speaks for itself. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:53, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted Image?

how is that copyrighted? I know the person who drew that. JeanLatore (talk) 20:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Knowing a creator does not give you legal rights to that person's works. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:04, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

So you are admitting that you had no idea of the copyright status of the image when you deleted it. JeanLatore (talk) 02:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

It was an obvious copyright violation. Period. Please don't do it again. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:44, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

How is it obvious? I told you I know the person that created that image and he gave me permission to use it. But i'm more interested why you think that it was "obvious." JeanLatore (talk) 02:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I guess you don't know why it is "obvious." That's what I thought. JeanLatore (talk) 15:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

If you re-upload it without providing proof that you have rights to do so, you will be blocked. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:43, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

First of all, so you admit that it wasn't obvious. Second, i will upload it with a note from my friend saying its ok; thanks. JeanLatore (talk) 22:37, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

I still say it's obvious. A note from your friend is not sufficient proof, unless your friend is Robert Iger, the president of The Walt Disney Company. You obviously snagged the image from here, where it is clearly marked as being copyrighted by Disney. I think that fits the definition of "obvious" pretty well.OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of list of online pharmacy

Jamie, can you tell me why it is okay for Wikipedia to have a list of pharmacies that has been posted for months or longer, and not ALSO have a list of online pharmacies? It doesn't make sense to allow one, if not the other, or, for that matter, to allow lists of any type if you are going to not permit one type of list? What gives? If Wikipedia is going to have rules, it should follow them throughout, not pick and choose when it will enforce them. Myk60640

Wikipedia is not an advertising vehicle. Online pharmacies, if they meet notability guidelines, are listed along with other pharmacies. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:34, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright

This is to request from you that if you ever see my user page, please don't revert it to its old, ugly version:). Cheers, --Gulmammad- 03:34, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Why?

Why have you given threathening message to me?--203.81.202.148 (talk) 13:33, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

If you look at the timestamp of the messages, you'll see they were in regards to vandalism edits from August of 2007. The warnings were directed at whoever was using the IP at the time. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:42, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] homeschool entry

Dear Jamie: Thanks for you concern- by referencing the Colfax book published 20+ years ago I was not interested in promoting it in any way; I don't know them and have no interest in this; however, it is a famous book on the subject of troubles that home schooled student face when making application to college; without that as a citation, documentation is difficult, since each college makes it own choices and has its own policy. In a revision I simply referred to the book, but that see as "promotional" was not liked either!!! Any suggestions? Snow555 (talk) 15:06, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I guess it wasn't so much that book, but focusing on two subjects of the book that made me suspect a conflict of interest. However, I see that you're actively engaging in discussion on the talk page on how to improve the article, I'll drop that suspicion and leave you and the other editors to work out article improvements. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:49, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vagina image

Jamie, I noticed you restored Image:Vagina-anatomy-labelled2.jpg. My objection to this image isn't one of prurience, but that it's unprofessional and inaccurate in the extreme: it has spelling errors. I submit that having no image at all is better than having an image that is actively wrong. Can't we find some other image that at least doesn't contain outright errors? Nandesuka (talk) 16:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

That's fine....I just noticed that the one I posted has the same spelling error. I'm not too picky about the photo, as long as we have at least one for each anatomy article. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Chat Box

I was not aware of that, i removed chat box from my user page(User:Jainsarthak), but please don't remove the convocation list 207.171.180.101 (talk) 19:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Userpages are not to be used for non-Wikipedia purposes. Period. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I removed it and you still blocked my account, can I ask an explanation for this?122.167.96.89 (talk) 16:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

You put up a redirect link that's unrelated to Wikipedia. I already explained that Wikipedia is not free web hosting. Do it again and I'll block this IP. OhNoitsJamie Talk 17:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok understood now. :-) 122.167.96.89 (talk) 18:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Steven Levitt

Hi, why did you revert this entry? As far as I know it is true that Levitt worked on the Economy of Prostitution. Was this just a mistake or do you have conflicting sources? Greetings --hroest 03:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

My reversion was mostly a function of other problematic edits the editor made around the same time period. I didn't see prostitution mentioned elsewhere in Levitt's article. Though I see the Levitt has done research on prostitution, I haven't seen any evidence that he is best known for that. In most countries prostitution is a crime, and crime was already mentioned in that section. OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Well the interpretation can be difficult, he definitely has done work on prostitution but also work on crime that was unrelated to prostitution. I would agree that he is NOT most know for his work on prostitution (although that is hard to judge) but it is definitely an omission if his work on prostitution is not included in the article. So probably somebody should work on that in order to include it. Greetings --hroest 03:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree that it's worth mentioning in the article. Perhaps someone who is much more familiar with his work could say whether or not it's worth mentioning prostitution in the lead. Cheers,OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] American Mastiff listed under See Also on Mastiff page

The fact that they are still mixing in other purebred dogs makes them NOT A BREED, that, along with the dual registration of a single dog as multiple breeds and the non-existence of form and function. Their lack of recognition by ANY reputable Kennel Club is real, but secondary. Cockapoos are not breeds either - no matter how much their owners wish they were. Furthermore - the reality is that they have nothing further to offer the Wiki entry of the Mastiff. There is no reason for them to be listed under the "see also" section (expect for the AMs benefit)...The woman that created this mix has done a huge disservice to the Mastiff breed and the link only goes to serve her continued marketing of this mix based on her bastardization of and claims against the Mastiff. If you were to list all the breeds (real or not) that claimed to include the Mastiff in the mix the list would be endless - that is not a basis to list them there. Furthermore, The AM is not listed on the Anatolian page - the other dog that is "said" to have been part of this mix (I'm sure the Anatolian people would not be happy if it were) - so why here? Mastiffowner (talk) 19:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

As I said before, you are incorrect to assert that, like cockapoos, parents are different breeds. American Mastiffs have been bred long enough to breed true. As I'm sure you know, many breeds started out as hybrids. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, you are the one that is incorrect in this instance. The use of Mastiffs as recently as 2 and 3 generations back prohibits the AM from being any real BREED...nevermind BREEDING TRUE. To be a recognized breed you also have to have form, function, and recorded/documented history. If they were a breed, there would be no need to register a Mastiff as an AM and use it in the breeding program. Again, I ask, what purpose does the AM reference serve on the Mastiff page? See also why? If it's b/c they are said to be made up of the Mastiff why aren't they listed on the Anatolian page? You seem a little biased on this subject. There is no reason for them to be listed as a See Also Reference on the Mastiff page - unless the purpose is for their favoritism to link them to the Mastiff breed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mastiffowner (talk • contribs) 20:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] you removed my edit of Monsanto

b/c you said that it was not referenced, but it was... it was a direct quote from a washington post article (and i referenced the article)... i might have violated some sort of formatting rule, but the reference was there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshuga (talk • contribs) 21:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

It's not sufficient so say where it's from. You need to provide a full citation for the reference, including a link to the article. You may also want to read our policy on neutral point of view, which your additions also violated. OhNoitsJamie Talk 21:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

i provided the date, author, newspaper and said where the quote started and ended. the only sentences that were mine were the first one (that said they dumped PCBs in a river in Alabama for decades) and the last one, that said solutia was created to assume Monsanto's debt from various litigation and that it subsequently went bankrupt. both of those are plain facts (the fact that solutia was created to assume monsanto's debt is already on the monsanto wiki entry, and the the fact that solutia went bankrupt is on solutia's wiki entry)

i know that my formatting wasn't perfect (i don't know how to add citations well) but i followed your links regarding citations and it said that others would help me format them, if i didn't know how to get the formatting perfectly... i thought maybe this is where someone like you would come in to help (rather than delete my entry)... google Monsanto, PCB, Alabama... what i am trying to add is a plain and simple fact, they were found guilty... the little bit that is currently there regarding PCBs in topsoil in Alabama is completely insufficient. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshuga (talk • contribs) 21:56, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

by the way, here's the link to the washington post article... can you help me to reference it correctly and improve my edit of Monsanto's page? if you think it's biased, help me make it more neutral, but it's tough to be neutral about what they did. internal company memo's show that they had knowledge of the high toxicity of PCBs for decades and that they continued to dump them in those Alabama waterways simply for financial gain.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A46648-2001Dec31


from the link you provided on citations: "If you don't know how to format a citation, provide as much information as you can, and others will help to write it correctly." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshuga (talk • contribs) 22:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see now. Almost all of the text you added is cut-and-paste from the Post article. That's a copyright issue. Quoting a few sentences here and there is OK, but it's rarely a good idea to quote multiple paragraphs, even if you provide the source. That proper way to add this content would be to start out the section with something to the effect of, "In 2002, the Washington Post reported that Monsanto had hiding the fact that...etc. etc." From there, you'd provide a brief npov summary of the article's allegations. Quoting a sentence or two would be fine. If Monsanto reponded to the allegations, it would be appropriate to include their response. The Monsanto article has lots of good examples of how to present this kind of information. I'm not trying to "censor" bad things about Monsanto; many large corporations have their share of negative press. It is important to adhere to the principles of undue weight and not let the article degenerate into a "let's bash Monsanto" free-for-all. I know the WP:CITATION article is quite long, but near the bottom there are plenty of examples that should make it easy to construct proper references. It took me awhile to memorize how to write references. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:46, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

it's true... i deliberately went with cut and paste b/c i did not want to seem biased. i figured if it was npov enough for the washington post, that it would be npov enough for wiki. I also figured that a direct quote would be the best way to assert that these were real facts. Thanks for your help, i'll spend more time on it when i get a chance and try to get it up to standards. I do think that i put it in a good place (under crimes, near the UK dumping stuff) b/c it was around the same time 60's 70's and the same toxic substance (PCBs) and I do think it's a relevant part of Monsanto history that deserves mention in their wiki entry. I was not trying to plagiarize, and as far as I know, you are usually ok with quoting published material (even if you do so for several paragraphs) as long as you credit your source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshuga (talk • contribs) 22:55, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

There isn't a black-and-white rule about how much material you can quote, but it's generally a good idea to summarize and selectively quote. The Washington Post is certainly acceptable as a source. Oh, and keep in mind....just because it's coming from the Post doesn't mean that it's NPOV! There are plenty of circumstances where you could find two major media articles about a given topic where each would take an entirely different stance. (Some pulications regularly are accused of being liberal, others of being conservative, etc.) The important thing is to try to be balanced. If you're going to quote Michael Moore's opinion on a topic, it might be appropriate to balance that with an Ann Coulter quote, etc. In either case, the reader is aware of the source, and can take that into account when forming an opinion. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


thanks so much for all your help... at first i thought you probably worked for Monsanto or something, but now I see that you are simply trying to maintain a high standard. by the way, when i get a chance to try again on the Monsanto entry, what is the chance that I'll be dealing with you again (as opposed to some other editor)? I feel that it might go more smoothly dealing with you since you are already familiar with the content that I'm trying to add.

Best, -joe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jshuga (talk • contribs) 23:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Hard to say. There isn't anyway for me to tell who has it on their watchlist, or who might look at it at any given time. If you'd like feedback or are having problems with it, just message me again. I don't have time at the moment to sit down and try to add a new section myself, but I'd be happy to help you fine tune your version. Cheers, OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:21, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image

Hi, can you please tell what may the copyright status of this image? Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 18:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, I know that US government photos are usually public domain, but I don't know if the same goes for photos taken by the Pakistan military. Your best bet would be to contact the ISPR and ask; I couldn't find any info on that site about copyrights. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:28, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Featured Article review of San Francisco, California

San Francisco, California has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Raunak

hi
i was going to repair the sports section of India.
Pl. see india talk page for details.
I am no spammer!
I want to become a major editor of Wikipeda
--Raunakroy (talk) 18:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)--Raunakroy (talk) 18:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Please learn how to use templates properly before posting them. OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:59, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shocker (hand gesture)

Hi. I would like to include references to our use of the Shocker in the page. We have used the shocker since 2004 and have promoted it for a lengthy amount of time. I find our inclusion as relevant to the article as College Humor is. Anyway, I am not trying to spam, or introduce trash into Wikipedia but I would like to make some kind of reference. Please let me know if this is possible without being considered vandalizing the article. Thank you for your time. --Swampedalive (talk) 23:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Per WP:COI, I don't think it would be appropriate. OhNoitsJamie Talk 00:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] My Rfa

Thanks, Ohnoitsjamie, for participating in my recent RfA, which recently passed with 81 support and 1 neutral !votes. I appreciate all the support and constructive criticism offered in my RfA and I thank you for taking the time to !vote in my nomination. I feel so honoured to be trusted by so many of you and please, if you have any advice, comments or complaints about my actions as an administrator, leave a note on my talk page.

I would also like to thank Acalamari, Rlevse and Nishkid64, for their nomination statements.
Thank you again.
AngelOfSadness talk 23:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)