User talk:Jeffrey O. Gustafson/Archive4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the fourth talk archive. See the main archive index here.

Don't add to this page (not that you can, actually). For the active talk page for Jeffrey O. Gustafson go here.

Contents

Hulk 2

I thought I requested that you don't remove the Hulk 2 article without first talking to me about it.

You did not request a thing of me, you made a general request, which, in service to Wikipedia, I have ignored.

The film's future existence may not be entirely sure,

Stop right there. Read that again. 'Nuff Said.

...but with all the information I've heard about it, as well as all the websites that are devoted to it, it's safe to say that it is very likely to come out. Besides, why not just put the information that was used as a backup for deleting Hulk 2 into the article? If the film does come out (which is likely), then the page will just be created again! Scorpionman 21:39, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, when the film has been announced in the press, the deals have been signed, and whatnot, then a page will be created, because then the future will no longer be unsure, the info presented will be verifiable, and the page will have actual content. Until such time, as the page has been speedied thrice and had one solid AfD in favor of deletion, the page shall continue to be unceremoniously excised from Wikipedia for the good of all. To whit and whatnot. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:03, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Jerome Barber

renegade68 I have been attempting to start a page for Dr. Jerome Barber [1], a martial arts instructor associated with the modern arnis page. For some reason you locked it. I admit that I am very new to wikipedia and am unfamiliar with the protocols. Dr. Barber is noted as having the only accredited college program in the said martial art, is listed in the Black Belt hall of fame and is the founder of his own independent Arnis association which hosted the first world wide modern arnis symposium. [2]

I cannot understand why his name will not be allowed. If it was do to my ignorance of the rules here please dont let Dr. Barber be locked out of entry on my account.

The lock was because a user or users had in quick succession created pages on Proffessor Barber, which did not state the importance or significance of the subject. I have unlocked the page, but beware that the aricle will still be subject to deletion, or at least a vote thereof. Thanks for your contributions and good luck. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 02:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

renegade68 Thank you for your quick response. I will do the best I can.

XBIZ Deletion

You deleted the stub for Xbiz (a thriving webmaster community), and I ask you to be fair and also delete this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xnations

And that is a good candidate for speedy deletion, and has been deleted. In the future, if you see something that fits the criteria, feel free to tag it with the appropriate speedy template and an administrator will attend to it right away. Not all deletable articles are speedyable, and that is why we have AfD. Feel free to continue to contribute to The Project, just make sure material meets our standards of inclusion. Cheers. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:47, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Deletion

  • Has established a tradition or school in a particular genre. (guerrilla folk punk)
  • Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style (guerrilla folk punk) or the local scene of a city (as in the salt lake city folk punk scene); note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability.

is that enough? Bombsandbeatinghearts 18:17, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Dave Moulton

Just wanted to let you know that I've made some improvements to the Dave Moulton article (bicycle builder) that you nominated for deletion. Please take a look, and see if any of your concerns have been eliminated. Thanks. Crypticfirefly 06:49, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

VECTRAX

Hi this is vectrax, i cant be bothered figuring out how to use the bbcode again at the moment to seperate this properly but you deleted my contribution, GhostFinders. Why? And you didn't even send an email or anything??

First, about talk pages. They do not use any type of bulletin board code of any sort, just normal wiki code. See this page for more.
Second, the GhostFinders page was deleted as spam (A4, AKA Attempt to Contact). Whether or not it was your intention to write it as an ad, that is how it read, and deletion was called for. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:28, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

WP:FARC

Thanks for your forbearance with Roy Orbison, despite the end result being the same. I hope that, one of these days, the people who enthusiastically vote "remove" on FARC are going to help to fix the problems that they identify rather than just objecting to them. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:13, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

William "Duke" Procter

I think that the argument for non-notability is somewhat arbitary and speedy deletion may not be justified in this context. The page was linked from Deaths in 2005, which are supposedly notable deaths. The references included in the article included a reference to material from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, which I think views the death of remaining World War I veterans in 2005 as notable. --Big_Iron 18:07, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Being in Deaths in 2005 is irrelevant; anyone can add to that whether or not the subject is notable (not that they should...), which is certainly evidenced by the amount of redlinks in the article. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 23:18, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
One more thing, there are now only three remaining Surviving veterans of World War I from Canada and he would certainly have been the last one from British Columbia at the time of his death. --Big_Iron 20:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Read WP:BIO: The most basic test is "has the person made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in the specific field?" Having served in WWI is not inherrantly notable, and neither is being one of the last survivors from a given region. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 23:18, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, on an unrelated matter, according to Veterans Affairs Canada, he was also "the oldest horseshoe player to ever compete in the Canadian Championships, participating in the Championships in 1997 and 1998." He seems to pass the Google test. --Big_Iron 10:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I think that you may be missing the point here. First, the entry in WP:BIO refers to "people who have been dead for some time" (time frame not clearly defined). Secondly, in this case, I believe that, to some degree, his death was considered notable and newsworthy in Canada exactly because of the timing, because it represents the end of an era. Thirdly, despite the statement, there are numerous entries in Wikipedia for people whose main point of interest is their death rather than their life. --Big_Iron 12:02, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
If there's enough question on a deletion to warrant discussion, it might be a good idea to list it on Afd. That way more people will participate. Friday (talk) 16:27, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm back. Okay, two things: there is still zero assertion of notability anywhere in the article and it still fails WP:BIO. Looks like Friday Simon recreated it, so I have AfD'd it. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 19:39, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Place articles style guide

I'm looking for guidance on proper formatting for articles on geographical places (particularly their titles), but haven't found it in anything I've read yet. For example, a mountain might be listed simply by its name ("Mount Kearsarge"), or it might also include its state in parentheses (Mount Kearsarge, New Hampshire). If WP is truly international, shouldn't it also include the place's country? To compound this issue, the example I've used is the name for two separate mountains in NH. Suggestions for disambiguation?

Thanks for the welcome note. FrostHeaves 14:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

WP:FARC/Christmas

Whatever your decision about this, it would be better if you made it before December 25th, so as to avoid a huge revert war. — 0918BRIAN • 2005-12-23 18:59

  • Nevermind. Raul has changed the December 25th Main Page article to Ido. — 0918BRIAN • 2005-12-23 19:12
    • Why on earth should there be (have been) a "huge revert war", any more so that for any other main page featured article? -- ALoan (Talk) 19:34, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
      • Revert wars happen over even the most minor of things. I wouldn't rule it out. — 0918BRIAN • 2005-12-23 20:07

Request you withdraw your AfD nomination

Google has over 26,000 hits for the phrase as expressed this way [3]. Per my edit comment when I first saved, I am having computer problems and need to reboot frequently. The article has already grown and includes three citations including National Public Radio. My new articles have appeared on "Did you know..." three times in the last six weeks. Please withdraw your nomination. Durova 01:40, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

No. Let the AfD decide its worthiness. Additionally, using quotes, the better method, with the phrase you provide, gathers zero hits. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:44, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Im David Morose

Hi there I just finished uplopading my Producer info etc. and you deleted curious why? My email is [-] please shed some light so I can get my info up.

Yours Truly David

Please read WP:VANITY, WP:MUSIC, WP:BIO. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:44, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

David Carroll

You recently removed relevant information from the first entry I made, David Carroll I admit the link "Nook Schreier" was not to the same person, but that really was his original name, so I added that information back, minus the Wiki link.

Re: Brandt

Yes, I'm afraid keeping him here is not going to accomplish anything else. At this point, I'll leave it up to you to either block or unblock him (and I know which you'll do). It's out of my hands now. Linuxbeak (drop me a line) 12:20, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SourceryForge

This was a "When in doubt, don't delete" closure. I saw 4 delete votes and 2 keep votes (excluding the "fun name" vote, but including the very keep-oriented comment by Jcuk). That gave me the 2/3 consensus to delete, but the delete votes did not say much beyond "nn", so I felt very uncomfortable closing it as delete. In any other day, I would have closed it as delete, but I was being extra cautious that day, so I closed it as no consensus (mostly due to the lack of debate). But go ahead and relist it any time soon, or DRV it. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 19:11, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: RfA

Yes, I know. And my honest answer is, "I'm still thinking about my answer", because I just don't know. Will post it when I work it out. Rob Church Talk 20:41, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

FARC

A quick request - which is more by way of reducing your workload than adding to it! - when you are archiving nominations on WP:FARC, and removing {{farc}} and {{featured}} templates, please would you avoid also deleting the {{mainpage date}} templates (like this) - although the articles may no longer be featured, they did once appear on the front page, and I can't see a reason why the talk page should not continue to record the fact. It also explains the usual and otherwise bemusing spate of anon edits in the article's edit history. Thanks! -- ALoan (Talk) 23:30, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Discuession on Quadell

Quadell's RfB isn't the first place I clashed with NSLE (talk • contribs). He's been promoted recently and I take these debates in stride, but have to be careful because I'm only yearning to be on His level. -- Eddie 09:29, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

And I just so happen to have this page on my watchlist, too much of a coincidence. I have my reasons, and would be willing to provide it to any admin... NSLE (T+C+CVU) 09:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Reasons for what? Do you mean Eddie's alleged bad faith? If so, admins like you and I should not be the only benefactors of such knowledge - this is not a cabal, after all, and accusing someone of something and not providing anything to back it up right away is just poor ettiquette. Additionally for clarification, I have no opinion on you or Eddie, and my involvement here is entirely related to the RfB on Quadell. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:37, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Only reason admins only is because it's on a deleted page, and I have no intentions to repost the page. NSLE (T+C+CVU) 09:40, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Doesn't mean you can't explain it. Also, so I can have an idea of what you are talking about, what are you talking about? (Link?). --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Just put simply, I've been following Eddie from the start (his two failed RFA selfnoms), his sockpuppet scandal and everything. Recently I notice a gradual change with him being more obsessed about a third RFA, and his edits have started bordering assumed bad faith, including two threats, one from me and one from Karmafist, to block over WP:HA. I'm just saying that, while I could be wrong, I'm totally convinced he's not necessarily acting in good faith. Let's leave it at that, I'm not going to comment further on this. NSLE (T+C+CVU) 09:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Feel free to talk to Me about this. I outgrew all the crazy things NSLE (T+C+CVU) mentioned and if third RfA is to be successful I have to make sure no one suspects My acivities are "in bad faith". -- Eddie 10:04, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello Jeffrey O. Gustafson/Archive4,

I wish to thank you for your vote on my RfA. It has passed with a final tally of 59/0/0. If I can ever help with anything or if you have any comments about my actions as an admin, please let me know! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 04:12, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Protections

Hi there. I see you have quite a list in your protection log of {deletedpage}s, but many of them are missing from the list at WP:PP. I know it seems bureaucratic, but it does help to have a list of them around that is broadly up to date. Could you go through your log and either delete those that have probably gone home, or list them at WP:PP in the relevant section? Thanks. -Splashtalk 13:51, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I've deleted all the old and newish DPs. The only active protections that remain are my user pages, indefblocked user pages, and a recently main page'd image. I'd forgotten about WP:PP - most of my protections come off re-re-redeleting garbage on newpage patrol. Thanks for the reminder. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 01:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Middle Korea

Middle Korea is not a hoax. I hate it when you people delete pages you know NOTHING about. Why was there not an afd??!? I demand that you put it back and give me the right of due process. If you arn't sure about it LEAVE IT ALONE! Leave my pages alone! There are so many power freaks on this site I don't want to stay here anymore. Why can't you people accept stuff that isn't completly netered and normal? *breathe* Put the page back please. Kilroy Collins

Sorry no. Not only is it a nonsense/hoax, it is a recently failed AfD as well. This speedy was deserved. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

How is it a hoax? What the heck do you know about Middle Korea? I have noticed a pattern with all the people that have challenged you: You never admit you are wrong. Are you god? Can you make no mistakes? PUT MIDDLE KOREA BACK! It is a real and growing micronation that has no basis in fantasy or delusion. What do you have aganist it? I request that you never touch a article about a micronation again. This article has no resembelence to the failed one. Did you compare them?!? Kilroy Collins 14:37, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

SHAAZAM!

Wow, that's memory! I think you are giving away your age if you are old enough to remember that! I fondly remember watching the Shaazam/Isis hour (mostly Isis with that short little skirt hehehehehe). I can't remember the name of that actress though. GestaltG 16:52, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

J.R. Benson

Hi Jeffrey, you deleted this article yesterday with comment "A7 with bits of nonsense". Presumably then you may be referring to A7 and G1. By A7, WP:DVAIN has some application, and suggests, "Only those articles where there is no remotely plausible assertion of notability should be considered for Wikipedia:Speedy deletion." I argue that "underground cult legend" and "founder, main event wrestler and creative force" are plausible assertions of notability, even if they sound a little silly and hoax-like: hoaxes do not fall directly under WP:CSD. If you consider it nonsense, WP:NONSENSE does not, so G1 certainly does not apply. I will not undelete the article or take this up further, I would just suggest that AFD would be more appropriate in this case, like it or not. jnothman talk 02:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

What I've found is useful in cases like this is userfying the page. This gets it out of article space, but in a way that's (usually) less controversial than outright deletion. A note left on the user's talk page generally keeps them from becoming upset or confused about it. Just a thought. Friday (talk) 16:15, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Healing Wikipedia

I wonder if there is a way to heal the issues and differences that DCV's arbitration has brought to the foreground? In some ways, this entire affair has been bad for racial relations here at Wikipedia. Those who don't like how DCV acts have said that their actions are solely in response to DCV not being "nice" (so to speak). Those who don't like what has happened to DCV (like me) see the affair as being driven by racism and bigotry. The funny thing is that there is overlap between the two sides. A number of those pushing to sanction DCV admit that some of actions against her have been wrong and haven't helped racial issues here (and that some of the users pushing the issue against her are doing so for possibly racist reasons). Almost all of us opposed to the actions against DCV admit that she is abrasive and has violated Wikipedia guidelines and should be more civil in her discussions here. What we see, though, is a double-standard at work, with users appearing to gang up against non-minority editors like DCV for being less than civil but not doing the same to white editors. If this subject interest you, I'd encourage you to post you thoughts here on a special talk page I created.--Alabamaboy 21:41, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Francs2000 RfB

Hello Jeffrey O. Gustafson, could you please provide a proper and better explanation under your vote of oppostion against Francs2000's RfB as many are awaiting your answer. I don't see why we don't need any more bereaucrats disqualifies him from being a bureaucrat. SWD316 talk to me 05:09, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

re:subst

Subst is a server thing to substitute the code into the actual document instead of the regular way of using templates which just pulls up the code from the template every time someone requests the page. JtkieferT | C | @ ---- 20:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

 Hi,
I just want to say thanks for supporting me on my request for adminship! It passed by a 58/3/0 margin, so I am now an administrator. If you need me to help you out, or you find that I'm doing anything wrong, please don't hesitate to contact me. --Idont Havaname (Talk) 19:41, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Inactive bureaucrats

You are correct in listing Cimon and Secretlondon as "other" (inactive) bureaucrats, but before listings others, be aware than a couple of the bureaucrats rarely promote but are very active in renames, which is also a bureaucrat function. -- Cecropia 02:51, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I was going to also list Angela (don't kill me wikicommunity) and Ilyanep too, but put it up to discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Bureaucrats. Are they active in renames? --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 02:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

From the department of answering other people's questions

Hey, I noticed your question over on User talk:Jtkiefer and figured I would answer since I dont believe he has yet. The reasoning ive heard repeatedly (and which makes sense) is that every template call requires more strain on the servers, so using subst: where possible reduces strain on servers substantially (i.e. if you load my page, you only call my page, not my page plus every single template seperately). I suppose you could also make a good case for this approach by saying that since talk page adds are supposed to be YOUR comments, you dont want changes to templates retroactively changing what you said, right? -Lanoitarus (talk) .:. 06:32, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Merge of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz--Sources and Meaning

Hi, Jeffrey. I noticed that you put a merge notice on The Wonderful Wizard of Oz--Sources and Meaning. That article, although clumsily named, was created in response to a discussion at Talk:The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, which resulted in a consensus supporting a split. The information about the political interpretations of the book (almost all added by one contributor with a bit of an idée fixe on the subject) was creating a problem of undue weight, so the new article was the best solution. If you don't mind, I'm going to take the merge notice off again. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I stumbled upon it on Newpage patrol and was unaware of the history behind its creation. If anything, the page NEEDS NEEDS NEEDS to be renamed. I haven't read through all of it, but if it is just as the akward title asserts, containing "meaning," (and it was largely written by one contributor), it might have POV issues that'll need to be addressed. Just my two cents, and thanks for the clarification. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:21, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, it needs renaming badly. I'm hoping for a move to Political interpretations of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz or something similar, but I'd like to wait for input from the primary contributor before the move. I got involved in the split by coming from an RfC, which should give you an idea of the level of tension between the contributors. So I want to go easy on User:Rjensen (the main author of the page), who just bit the bullet and split his own material out of the main article, in accordance with the consensus but against his own previously expressed wishes.
As you say, there are also POV issues with the article, but Rjensen is correct that there is a fair amount of scholarly discussion of the topic so I don't think the solution is to merge it back in — what needs to happen (after the dust from the split has settled) is for opposing scholarly views (rejecting the political interpretation) to be given air on the page. Whatever its name ends up being. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 01:29, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Random new user comment from someone named Duke

Hey You edited My Uss capodanno page.......THANK YOU it looks much much better

De nada. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 08:15, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Jack Skellington

Yeah, it was my mistake. I've have noticed this before you informed me. I thought Jack Skellington's name was actually Jack Skeleton. Anyway. thanks! --SkinnerIJA 08:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Many thanks for your support on my request for adminiship, I'm sure you'll be glad to know the final result was 92/1/0. I am now an administrator and (as always) if I do anything you have issue with, please talk about it with me. --Alf melmac 08:54, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Victoria Francés

What on earth do you mean this article "lacks information on the importance of the subject matter"? There's what she does, her birthplace and bibliography. All the appropiate links have been made to related articles. It explains more than most stubbed articles, and displays all information known about her by the public (she only became a notable artist recently). I hope I have made my point, lest the article will be deleted again. - 09:28, 8 January 2006 (UTC) The Great Gavini art post

No, that isn't even close to good enough. Read WP:BIO. We have standards of inclusion which this is failing to meet. I have put it up for AfD. It still needs more info to prove importance. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:30, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
In the unlikely instance that you want to be informed about anything regarding anyone else's article, I'll try and spruce it up a bit with the tiny specks of information that are available, or else delete it entirely. However, it won't magically redeem itself overnight. - 09:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)The Great Gavini art post
The next tiome you make a snarky personal attack against anyone again, I'm blocking you without warning. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 09:45, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I meant that if you want to keep being informed about article and/or have information regarding Francés, you're welcome to contribute to the article. I'm only looking for information! - 09:57, 8 January 2006 (UTC) The Great Gavini art post

[Removed rediculous nonsense per the warning at the top my page - Pay attention people]

1) It was a personal attack, chief. 2) Try and find one single bit of vandalism by me anywhere. Go ahead. Try. 3) Complain about me to whomever you like. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 11:44, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure why you deleted my last post ('rediculous nonsense'?), but anyhow, I'm supposed to make contact and resolve the matter with a user [4] before trying to get their SysOp privileges removed. I was being serious in my last post here, and deletion of it indicates to me that you have no respect for my opinions. Attempts to intimidate me made in your last post have concerned me, and I will take appropiate actions (ie. 'complain to whomever I like'). - 11:55, 8 January 2006 (UTC) The Great Gavini talk
It's not deleted, it's still in the history. Second, there is nothing to "resolve," unless you want to get taken to task for making personal attacks and accusing users of vandalism without any proof. Please complain to someone. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 11:59, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
If you think there's 'nothing to "resolve"', then that's this where this matter ends. Bye. - Greatgavini 12:11, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
THANK you! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 12:13, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

cleanup

hi, i wrote up character summaries and added lots of excellent pics, etc. for my favorite characters from the sopranos and oz. why are you tagging them with cleanup icons. the summaries are SUPPOSED to be graphic because the shows are graphic. Otherwise, they wouldn't be summaries. and if you think that's harsh, check curses and sexual orientation, etc. on wikipedia, that stuff shows up as well. there's nothing wrong with giving detail to the character's storylines in the summaries. i wrote them up quite well. the following characters were done by me: Brendan Filone, Matthew Bevilaqua, Sean Gismonte, Mikey Palmice, Ronald Barlog, and Nikolai Stanislofsky. What is the problem with my excellent summaries?

I don't care about the content of the summaries (painful flaws aside) - Look at the pages versus our other similar pages. They need to be wikified, and the images need to conform to our standars. You mentioned on one of the talk pages that it is how you wanted it - but this isn't your personal webspace, it is an encyclopedia with standards. DO NOT REVERT THE CLEANUP TAGS AGAIN until actual progress has been made on these articles. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:30, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Warning to Zedkatuf

EXTERMINATE!
EXTERMINATE!

Hi, I think this warning was a little over-the-top, the user is evidently new, and I looked through your delete log and couldn't see any sites linking to his personal website. Talrias (t | e | c) 16:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

It was entirely warranted - see and you didn't look hard enough:
  1. 08:13, 8 January 2006 Jeffrey O. Gustafson deleted "Dezso futak" (fake dab; A4)
  3. 08:13, 8 January 2006 Jeffrey O. Gustafson deleted "DezFutak" (fake dab; A4)
  4. 08:12, 8 January 2006 Jeffrey O. Gustafson deleted "Dez Futak" (fake dab; A4)
  5. 08:11, 8 January 2006 Jeffrey O. Gustafson deleted "Dfutak" (fake dab; A4)
  6. 08:10, 8 January 2006 Jeffrey O. Gustafson deleted "Dez futak" (garbage)
You can see for yourself the content of the pages. This was Spam, period, hideously (and poorly) disguised at that. I do not make such warnings lightly and without cause, thank you. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I can, all it says is "you may be looking for" and then a link to his Wikipedia page. How is that spam? Talrias (t | e | c) 00:23, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
A completely innapropriate use, by the way. And going to his user page shows external links to his personal projects. This user has no other actual productive edits outside his user page. It is spam, period. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I think it's a simple misunderstanding of namespaces. Plenty of users have redirects from other userspace articles to their username. And plenty of users have links to their websites on their userpage. Talrias (t | e | c) 00:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
"Users," sure - but this guy has not made one contribution outside his userpage. And his attempts at redirecting have been deleted by others in the past. I'm sorry, but this is still a no-brainer for me. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jeffrey. I have to say that I agree with Talrias. I believe you used {{spam3}} straightaway with that user. While I understand your frustration, it would be better in the future to be very sure of not biting newcomers and giving more warnings than a final warning. Cheers, [[Sam Korn]] 18:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to have to agree with Sam. It is very important that we extend extra patience to new users; he may not have found anything yet that he is comfortable contributing to. If it is the case that he has misunderstood the nature of Wikipedia, a polite note letting him know how we operate is much more likely to turn him into a productive contributor. From his userpage, it looks like he could be useful to us, so lets try to convince him to stick around and make useful contributions. Threatening bans (on the first warning, no less) isn't going to make him a productive contributor. -- Essjay · Talk 18:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I've given it some further thought, and I have decided to file an request for comments on your actions. Thanks, Talrias (t | e | c) 20:27, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

deletion of WP:LEGAL

Hi, if you are going to delete a page that's listed for deletion, like the above, listed at WP:MFD, could you please close the discussion as well. I just closed the discussion and deleted the page, not realising I'd been redirected. My own fault I know, I really should be in bed and that's where I am going now, but you didn't do me any favours there either. Anyway, I have that off my chest and now I retore to bed. Steve block talk 00:51, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

That is all thanks to my infamiliarity to the MfD process. My bad. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I am frankly a little surprised you nominated and performed the deletion. You are aware it's bad form to mix those two actions? Sorry if I'm coming on a bit strong here, but your actions have raised my eyebrows slightly. Perhaps it's that you are a longtime contributor, and it seems a basic error. Still, no harm done. My apologies if I have offended you in any way.Steve block talk 12:07, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

It all becomes clear...

I'd been scratching my head for the last thirty minutes... but now I see. I would never have guessed such ananchist tendancies lurked under there. Good for you. - brenneman(t)(c) 03:10, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Not necessarily anarchist, but I believe the arbcom has become such a complete and utter disaster that it needs to be destroyed or overhauled so completely that it is unrecognizable. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 12:21, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

John Kay (economist)

Hi, can you clarify why you deleted John Kay (economist) [5] please? Kappa 11:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I deleted it because of the big ole copyvio tag you put on it. Copyvio shouldn't be here, even in the history of a page. New copyvio pages without a history should be deleted as quickly as possible in all cases. If he his notable, someone will write a page about him. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 12:25, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Don't you think you should try to get some kind of consensus for actions like that instead of taking them unilaterally? Kappa 11:34, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Excuse me? It's called POLICY: Actually read the copyvio page before accusing someone of working unilaterally. All new copyvios MUST be speedied. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 13:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
That's not my interpretation of the page. Perhaps you could point out which part of it supports your contention? Kappa 13:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Interpretation? I mean, did you read it? At all? The FIRST thing you see in the link I provide is, quote, "Blatant copyright infringements of commercial sources may now be speedied." --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 13:35, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Well it goes on to clarify that a commercial content provider is "someone engaged in directly making money off the content". The website [6] doesn't make money directly from the content, as an enclopedia or magazine does, its purpose is to provide information about the topic. Any money it causes to be made is indirect. Secondly the link you gave requires that no assertion of permission seems likely. In this case the author of the page appeared to be the copyright holder and thus there was every chance that he would give permission. Kappa 14:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
There is still commerical potential, which is nevertheless irrelevant - all copyvio, no matter the source, must be removed. Period. The only concession is if it is GFDL/CC/PD, which this aint. I am having trouble trying to figure out what your problem is. You tagged and blanked the page. Nuff said. Copyvio. Nuff said. Policy adhered to. Nuff said. Conversation over. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 14:28, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Compromise on DCV and an apology

In recent days I have grown disgusted with Deeceevoice's comments and actions. As a result, I am withdrawing my support of her. That said, Justforasecond has behaved very poorly throughout this entire affair but more so in recent days, placing comments on DCV's talk page merely to stir up trouble. As such, I am proposing that both DCV and JFAS be placed on personal attack parole for a year at [7] Perhaps this is a compromise that a majority of the parties involved could agree to. Please check it out and see what you think. In addition, as a side note to this I am apologizing for my use of "lynching" to describe this RfAr. Best, --Alabamaboy 20:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Francs2000's Bureaucratship

Thanks for your constructive comments on my request for bureaucratship.

The final outcome was (70/5/0), so I am now a bureaucrat. If you have any queries, suggestions or problems with any of my actions as a bureaucrat then please leave me a note. -- Francs2000 22:16, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
PS: Just to let you know that we might be related - my great grandmother's last name was Gustafson and she was from your neck of the woods. Have you traced your ancestry at all? -- Francs2000 22:18, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
OK probably not then. Looking at the family tree her father was from Sweden and I imagine it's quite a common Swedish name. -- Francs2000 13:03, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

John Kay yadda blah blah

Hi Jeffrey. It's per the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_problems#Speedy_everything.3F -- I would have mentioned this to you when I restored the article, except I saw from your talk you'd already been made aware of it. I don't think this is a clear enough candidate for speedy deletion, so the standard WP:CP process should be allowed to run its course. --Nick Boalch ?!? 16:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Userpage protection

Hi, I noticed that some of your user subpages are protected, and have no recent vandalism. Protection policy says to avoid leaving these protected unneccessarily. Please leave any replies on my talk page. --Phroziac . o º O (♥♥♥♥ chocolate!) 01:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/e/f/User_talk%7EJeffrey_O._Gustafson_Archive4_c802.html"