User talk:Smith Jones/Archive02

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents 1 My Talk Page 2 Further discussion 3 Rules & regulations 4 Personal information 5 Hello 6 Speedy deletion of Graphoarchive1 7 You created another archive in the namespace?? 8 Request 9 I thought it strange 10 Warning 11 Re: Barnstar 12 Note 13 Terry Goodkind 14 Question 15 Detente bala 16 Edits to Magic (paranormal) 17 Your Barnstars 18 Your edits 19 You Should Apologize 20 You Should Apologize 2 21 Regarding your most recent edit 22 Urgal 23 Ellesmere Island 24 "Gnoming" 25 Edit to Eragon (video game) 26 Your edit to Dragon Riders's rating on the assessment scale 27 invitation 28 welcome 29 Consensus on Vet Homeopathy 30 Jan Scholten

My Talk Page

Further discussion

Rules & regulations

Personal information

Hello

Hello Mr. Jones. I am not an administrator. I am only writing this so that you know. Some people have been finding that your... contributions have not been... well... up to standered. You have added edits to quite a few pages and I am now coming to see that you are not properly adding content to this encyclopedia. Please stop adding unhelpful information to the site. -- Cheers! :) Zazzer 23:15, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S. : Don't forget to check spelling and grammar as well. It is also becoming a nuisance. -- Cheers! :) Zazzer 23:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Graphoarchive1

A tag has been placed on Graphoarchive1, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

talk archive mistakenly created in main space

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Metropolitan90 19:50, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

• I think what you meant to do was create an archive of the talk page at Talk:Graphology/Archive 1, but Talk:Graphology isn't long enough yet to need to be archived. --Metropolitan90 19:57, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

is there away to change ti back then? Smith Jones 19:58, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

• I already did change it back. --Metropolitan90 20:37, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

You created another archive in the namespace??

here 12431321234123412342134 Since you don't seem to understand how to archive correctly, I will restore your talk page. Danski14 19:59, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

yes i creatated that archieve wihat is wrong with it?!????? Smith Jones 20:00, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

you're suppose to create archives as sub-pages.(WP:SUBPAGE) I see that you might be archiving to hide prior vandalism or warnings. I will be nice, and create it for you. Danski14 20:02, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I beat Danski14 to it. I moved your archive to User talk:Smith Jones/Archive01. For the next time, you can read the page here Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page for instructions how to archive. Cheers, Garion96 (talk) 20:05, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

haha, ok, well now you have two archives.. there is also one at User talk:Smith Jones\archive1. I guess I will tag mine for deletion as a duplicate. Danski14 20:07, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

you fcan leave it i can use your article as archive2 when this page gets too big. Smith Jones 20:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, if you wish... but the name, which says archive1 may be confusing for editors, so you may want to retag for deletion. Danski14 20:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

its okay i can do it when the time comes Smith Jones 21:37, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Request

SJ, please e-mail me. I don't understand you one bit and would like to change that. Thanks, AvB ÷ talk 01:06, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I had overlooked it in my in-box. Will write to you tonight. AvB ÷ talk 19:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

In the future I would apreciate it if you could provide more detail in your edit summaries, especially the ones that don't seem to make much sense (e.g. your recent edits to Gavrilo Princip‎) --Michael Lynn 01:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I thought it strange

I noticed that you have copied a large portion of my user boxes including some personalized ones. Of course anyone is alowed to use the stock user boxes (and even personalized ones) but some of these do not pertain to you...at all. I was wondering wether this was an accident or you are trying to make some sort of point. NeoFreak 20:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I also just noticed that you have several Barnstars and other awards on your userpage that were not given to you. It would behoove you to remove them and very, very soon. NeoFreak 20:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Warning

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Terry Goodkind; this is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. NeoFreak 21:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: Barnstar

Yay! My first barnstar. Thanks a lot man. =) – Lantoka (talk) 02:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

your welcome you deserve it.

Note

Your edit of the Ra'zac talk page ([1]) was supposedly to remove Vandalism. But in my books, that wasn't removing vandalism. First clue is that it had sat there without question for over two months. Secondly, many people put drafts of what they will/could add to the main article. Just look at some of the other Talk Pages for the Inheritance Trilogy. For example, Talk:Derivative natures in the Inheritance Trilogy. UnaLaguna 06:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Terry Goodkind

Hey Mr. Jones,

Re: your recent comments on the Terry Goodkind page, watch the incivility. Just a friendly warning - as the tags at the top of the page state, Terry Goodkind's biopage is a source of much contention and regular contributions can require a cool head.

Thanks,

WLU 20:31, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The Terry Goodkind page is a long source of screaming and over-reaction by everyone working on the page, including myself. The reason why the reaction was so over the top is because of that particular page having an intensely acrimonious history. The hard thing is taking a step back and listening, which you managed to do and I never seemed to, so you're one-up on me. Cheers and happy editing, don't take it personally. WLU 04:08, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Question

Hey man, I was just wondering, how old are you? NeoFreak 04:07, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

So was I. If it helps, I'm 51 (or at least I was at last count). AvB ÷ talk 20:30, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Detente bala

• I've removed the speedy tag. Please provide your views on the talk page. I did not find any criteria under which the article should be speedied.
• Please stop removing all wikilinks and references to Detente bala from the encyclopedia. I have restored the links you've deleted so far.
• Please stop adding speedy tags to articles as long as you do not understand the speedy process. I will ask an admin to restore Opifex so that editors can check if the deletion was warranted.

AvB ÷ talk 20:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Edits to Magic (paranormal)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. As a member of the Wikipedia community, I would like to remind you of Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy for editors, which you appear to have violated at Magic (paranormal). In the meantime, please be bold and continue contributing to Wikipedia. Justin Eiler 03:41, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Smith Jones. I hate to bring it up again, but the passage you added to Magic (paranormal) is not relevant to the article--your passage deals with fictional magic, which while it does have a clear parallel to the article, does not actually discuss the topic. That's why I removed it the first time.

However, I am only one voice: if you still feel that the passage should be in the article and would improve it, I welcome you to bring it up on the talk page. Cheers. :D Justin Eiler 02:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Smith Jones. Yeah, it's a great example in fiction ... my big problem is that it is a fictional example. But that's why I suggested bringing it up on the talk page. :D Justin Eiler 02:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, remember to put chat comments on the discussion page, not in the actual article! Fuzzypeg☻ 00:30, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

This was the edit I'm referring to. You wouldn't expect to find text like that in an encyclopedia, would you? Fuzzypeg☻ 00:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

It seems like you are what we would call here in Auckland a "freshy", as in "fresh off the boat". You're completely new to Wikipedia. Welcome! Now, there are some things you're going to need to learn quite quickly to make decent edits here. Firstly, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, intended to be a high quality, scholarly work that will stand the test of time. There are quite strict policies that any information must adhere to if it is to be added to an article. Certainly a recommendation to buy a book is NOT acceptable content. To get started, you should probably check out the following pages: The five pillars of Wikipedia; How to edit a page; How to write a great article; and the Manual of Style.

Here are also links to Help and a tutorial, if you need them.

Remember only to sign your name on the discussion pages, not in the actual article. Again, welcome, and have fun. Fuzzypeg☻ 01:02, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Flatulrie will get you-know-where. Fuzzypeg☻ 02:18, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Your Barnstars

I notice that NeoFreak has already mentioned your barnstars to you. You gave one of them to yourself (which, although it is inappropriate, isn't a terrible offence), but you have copied other peoples' barnstars from their pages while keeping the signature of the giving user intact. In other words, you are saying that people who didn't give you barnstars did. This is disingenuous. I am going to remove the barnstars you copied from other pages in the next day or so if you don't remove them yourself. It's not right to claim that a user gave you acknowledgement when they did not, especially without their consent. Leebo⁸⁶ 14:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edits

Your edits are appallingly bad, and I notice you are doing some quite questionable things like altering the edit time in your signatures and generally trying to mess with the Wikipedia infrastructure. When you archived Talk:Magic (paranormal), for instance, you took all current discussions, including the most recent comments, and replaced them with inanities and grossly mis-typed text. I noticed something very similar when you "awarded" me a barnstar; I felt like you were actually trying to mock me.

At the moment I'm assuming you're not malicious, just very bad at typing and not having much idea of how to do things yet in wikipedia.

Therefore, I will request that you not attempt any administration-related activity like archiving talk pages, editing time-stamps, moving pages, or any complex editing of templates etc.; please limit yourself to editing articles and discussion pages. There are plenty of other editors who are competent at making these edits should they need doing, and there's no need to attempt this yourself, until you're a bit more experienced.

Please play nice on the discussion pages, and don't alter or split anyone else's posts. Also, please don't create excessive numbers of headings; if you're starting a completely new discussion subject then create one heading, and then continue the discussion under the same heading.

And please use a spell-checker before you post your edits or comments. Your typing is atrocious. Sorry if I'm not complimenting you, but you really need to know that your edits so far have not been helpful. Fuzzypeg☻ 00:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm replying to your recent post on Talk:Magic (paranormal): We are of course making efforts to be polite. We're not setting out to needlessly offend anyone. However we're also trying to make sure that Wikipedia runs smoothly, and if we have an editor who's making a lot of questionable edits requiring substantial clean-up, then of course we're going to discuss that editor and their actions. The fact that you have a history of vandalism makes it even more likely that your edits will come under scrutiny, because many of your recent edits could also potentially be interpreted as vandalism. Whether or not they were intended as vandalism, the result has been the same: a mess is created and other editors have to spend time cleaning it up. It's not a great problem, since reverting edits is relatively easy in Wikipedia, but ideally we'd prefer not to have to do it.

New editors often need their work cleaned up, and we're perfectly happy to do that for them; if you follow my suggestions above and read the welcome pages that people have posted here, then you should be able to improve the quality of your edits and become a productive member of the community. I assure you, Wikipedia is vastly more rewarding once you figure out how it works and can start actually making tangible improvements to articles. Fuzzypeg☻ 22:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

You Should Apologize

I have no idea why you accused me of vandalism, but I hope you have the decency to apologize. -- Mgunn 03:52, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I reverted to your version of the psychic article. If you believe that's vandalism, then you have an exceedingly strange definition. -- Mgunn 03:54, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

You Should Apologize 2

Neither Mgunn's nor my edits were vandalism. Please read up on vandalism before you accuse people of vandalism again. You have been doing it a lot. Thanks. Martin^phi _{(Talk Ψ Contribs)} 04:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your most recent edit

Don't edit what other people have written on your userpage, even if it is just the title. These Wikipedians know what they're talking about, and they don't need the person they're addressing to mess things up and make them seem more spiteful than they actually are. All you need to do is read what they're saying and follow any advice given. What you're doing is the same as re-writing letters to yourself. I don't know about you, but I and most other Wikipedians have the sense not to. Neofreak has already mentioned this here. Even if it's your own talk page, it's still vandalism. UnaLaguna 06:20, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Urgal

Head over to the talk page. We need to discuss what we should do with the "language" section and that seems like a better place to discuss it than here.

Ellesmere Island

If you look at Category:Queen Elizabeth Islands you will see that it's a sub-category of Category:Canadian Arctic Archipelago, Category:Islands of the Northwest Territories and Category:Islands of Qikiqtaaluk Region. The last is a sub-category of Category:Islands of Nunavut. So by having it in "Queen Elizabeth Islands" then it is in all the other categories (without the clutter) and it's with other islands in the same cluster. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

"Gnoming"

What is "gnoming", and why does it look like vandalism? is it so messy? Please review your edits before submitting them. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 01:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Edit to Eragon (video game)

I agree that there isn't much positive stuff in the Critical Reception section of this article, but I wouldn't say your edit [2] helped. In fact, I went as far as reverting it. Poor spelling aside (Firefox has a built in spell-checker if you're in the market for something to help), the fact that "many games can bee enyjoyable" is, you guessed it, unsourced. If you want to add something positive to balance the argument out, which I think would be a very good idea, then find a positive review from a reputable source (user reviews don't count: professional ones from, for example, IGN and Gamespy, do) and mention that. UnaLaguna 09:00, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Check out the talk page for details regarding your most recent edit to the page. UnaLaguna 06:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi there you are the King of the Copy editors?!!!!. Please could you sort out the very rough translation for Harry Piel. Cheers Smith-Jones ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 10:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Cool thanks. He is quite a notable German actor of the 1930s and 1940s I think so should have more detail. It is a tad lazy of me but I am very occupied!! with devleoping the List of films. List of Austrian films etc. Cheers for the favor. I really appreciate it ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 20:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I know I just made a few improvments too -I saw you r changes earlier in the recent changes and had some spare ime to check it!. There was still a few minor awkward phrases but reads much better now!!! Thanks for your help. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"I've been expecting you"} 22:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to Dragon Riders's rating on the assessment scale

Have you actually read anything on the subject of assessment? Have you ignored the big bold link to the Assessment page next to the thing you edited? As I understand it, you're not meant to wander along to an article and say "What ho! This article is definitely A-class!" and change it yourself, without discussing it with anybody else. It's meant to go up for assessment first! Something you didn't do. I reverted your edit to the talk page, and it's back to B-class.

Additionally, I don't think Dragon Riders complies with the A-class criteria in the first place. I don't think the lead is satisfactory, some of the heading aren't punctuated properly, it deals with the subject in an in-universe style (ignoring any criticism or the like from the real world), and has no references. An A-class article needs all of these things fixed. None of these are. Again, if you'd followed the big bold link to the Assessment page and read it, you'd have noticed this.

So please don't wander off and edit the talk page to change the rating. I noticed you did it on the Eragon article, changing the importance of the book on the Wikiproject literature section to "high", presumably without prior consultation. If Wikipedia operated in the way you're going about and messing with Article Ratings, we'd have far too many A-class articles. UnaLaguna 07:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

invitation

You are invited to join the Homeopathy WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Homeopathy. Please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Don't delay---the first 25 members will receive this beautfiul toaster  !!!

Abridged ^talk 14:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

welcome

Welcome to the Homeopathy WikiProject...Enjoy your free gift!

Abridged ^talk 22:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Consensus on Vet Homeopathy

Hi. Can you please seek consensus before taking such drastic steps as page moves? People had objected to the merge on Talk:Homeopathy. Cheers, Skinwalker 19:42, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Jan Scholten

Thanks for starting this page! I copyedited it in response to skinwalker's comments. I am taking out "Dr" because there is a Wikipeida policy for biographies that says not to use honorifics. Please come back to do more on the article. Abridged ^talk 13:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)