Template:Vandalcount

Hello. I am the creator of this page. And you have nominated twice now this article for speedy deletion. I respect your right to nominate any article for a deletion, however I do not believe it fits the criteria for an Article destined for Speedy Deletion. I would like to know your reasoning for this, and I would like to dispute any claims to the best of my ability. If my page truly is not wikipedia material, and after a debate on the subject material, I will agree to have it deleted. Nonetheless I would like to contest any arguments you have declaring it not appropriate for the online encyclopedia Maelstromlusby (talk) 04:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First, you appear to have a conflict of interest. Second, the relevant guideline is WP:BAND. Going through the points there, none of them appear to apply:

1. I would characterize your footnotes as follows (none of which are reliable sources):

• Heather, Fred. "PJMA CEO blog". {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help): a blog on a website of an alliance which promotes bands; qualifies as self-published
• Heather, Fred. "PJMA Awards to 2009 BOB". {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help): a website of an alliance which promotes bands; qualifies as self-published
• "Maelstrom Myspace page including biography".: self-published
• "My Brothers Place Venue". {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help): a page which does not appear to support the text "The band performed covers of artists such as Anthrax and Black Sabbath. In 2007, the band underwent a line-up change and played with the name Hail False Heroes, performing originals all across Southern Maryland attracting the most fans at a Waldorf, Maryland venue called My Brothers Place" (and if it did, it would still be a venue promoting the band, which would qualify as self-published)
• "Southern Maryland News, including Maelstrom concert advertisement". {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help): a listing of nightlife for the weekend beginning Friday, Jan. 22, 2010 in Calvert County with a one-word mention of "Maelstrom" as scheduled to play that night at Southern Community Center in Lusby, no doubt as provided by said Southern Community Center in concert with the band, which would qualify as self-published
• "Jaxx Schedule of Events". {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help): a listing of dates and bands for one club with a one-word mention of "Maelstrom" as scheduled to play in the future at the club, as provided by said club in concert with the band, which would qualify as self-published
• "Park Rock 2010 Festival Schedule Of Events". {{cite web}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help): a listing of dates and bands for one park with a one-word mention of "Maelstrom" as scheduled to play in the future at the park (with no mention of having played there in the past), as provided by said park in concert with the band, which would qualify as self-published
• Heather, Fred. "PJMA ad for the Sandybottom Studio".: a website of an alliance which promotes bands; qualifies as self-published

1. No indication of any singles or albums having charted
2. No indication of any records having been certified gold
3. No indication of any international or national concert tour
4. No indication of any albums released by a named major label or named more important indie label
5. No indication of any notable musicians
6. No indication of being one of the most prominent representatives of notable scene or the most prominent of a local scene (not even any indication of having been booked as a sole act)
7. No indication of any major music award
8. No indication of having placed in a major music competition
9. No indication of having performed music for a work of media that is notable
10. No indication of having been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network
11. No indication of having been the subject of a half-hour or longer broadcast across a national radio or TV network

Please feel free to point out where I may have been mistaken. Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 06:01, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not make a clear distinction of what is and what isn't a "Major Music Competition". And by self-published, are you claiming that I am the author of the citations given in the article? I would like to have my article authenticated by legitimate "reliable sources". Would that be sources such as a magazine article printed about the band, or perhaps a review of their Demo CD? Both of which I am told they have, as Maryland Music Magazine featured them in an issue. How would I go about citing a real world publication that is not online? Maelstromlusby (talk) 06:16, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A "major music competition" is not well-defined, but you could ask at WT:BAND. By self-published regarding the footnotes, I mean published by the band, its promotion people, and its venues (anyone with a vested interest in the band doing well, as opposed to the listening pleasure of the public, all those exceptions in WP:BAND criterion 1). Yes, magazine articles and reviews are the types of reliable sources Wikipedia likes. To cite them, please see {{cite}} and its children {{cite magazine}} and {{cite newspaper}}.   — Jeff G. ツ 06:30, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well its a little too late; User:JamesBWatson deleted the article without so much as a word to why. I still believe this band has thoroughly made a cultural impact on the Maryland musical scene. There are indeed magazine reviews about the band and their recently created Demo CD. However it is a useless endeavor as the tireless editors of wikipedia have deleted a valid article before allowing others to give it reinforcement. I cannot argue this case further, as I am sure to meet a wall of resistance from said editors. Thank you for your time however Maelstromlusby (talk) 17:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can appeal the deletion at User talk:JamesBWatson or WP:DELREV, once you have citations for at least two reliable sources, or one that corroborates another reason for inclusion under WP:BAND.   — Jeff G. ツ 23:14, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can also work on the userfied copy at User:Maelstromlusby/Maelstrom (band).   — Jeff G. ツ 21:02, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You for salvaging the remnants of this page for me to work on. I will work on it, and when the time comes, ask for you to review it to see if it is Wikipedia-friendly Maelstromlusby (talk) 05:59, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ 06:40, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You posted "Level 1 warning re. Council of Canadian Academies" on my bot talk page.

I don't think Lightbot ever added external links. I tried to check but I can’t find the edit you mention. Nor can I find the page you mention. Nor do I know what a "Level 1 warning" is, it sounds unpleasant and I don't want to suffer from whatever sanction you can impose. Can you allow me to see the edit and I'll investigate? Regards Lightmouse (talk) 16:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My problem was with this edit (now deleted), probably due to addition of a MySpace, Facebook, blog, or other self-published page in violation of WP:ELNO. I'm sorry, but I don't remember exactly. Perhaps an admin or someone else with access to deleted pages or revisions can shed some light on it.   — Jeff G. ツ 23:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lightbot didn't add MySpace, Facebook, blog, or other self-published pages. Do you have any other information such as when the alleged edit took place? Lightmouse (talk) 08:15, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a mystery. Any idea what month this occurred, Jeff? Tony (talk) 08:32, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to trying to lock the barn door looooong after the horse has bolted – Lightbot's last edit was in April 2009. I had assumed you were an admin and were in a position to dig up more relevant details of the edit, but it seems that you are not. If you're seriously all that bothered about something like that, whatever it was, I suggest that you find that horse yourself before you start slapping on warnings, because it does you no credit. In all probability, it's a case of mistaken identity. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 08:37, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked the deleting admin for help at User talk:Fastily#Council_of_Canadian_Academies.   — Jeff G. ツ 17:03, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm completely baffled by this claim. I think you may be mistaken and it may be in part due to the use of a tool such as Twinkle. Do you think it's possible you made a mistake? We all make mistakes from time to time. Lightmouse (talk) 22:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I may have been mistaken. Pending additional information, is it possible that you used your Lightbot account to add or restore any of the references visible at User:Jeff G./Council of Canadian Academies?   — Jeff G. ツ 23:52, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you're right, I was mistaken. I have fixed the problems and restored the article to Council of Canadian Academies.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. I see now that Lightbot delinked [[December]] [[2004]] and changed it to December 2004. It was operating as intended and was a reasonable edit. I appreciate you investigating and correcting your mistake. Thanks for removing the warning from the Lightbot page. Regards Lightmouse (talk) 19:49, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey you filed a WP:AIV report against DC Fan 5 yesterday, I believe this user is a sock of the banned account 1989 Rosie. You may which to comment on the sockpuppet investigations. Thanks. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 19:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I commented, thanks for the notice!   — Jeff G. ツ 23:25, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment on this SPI. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 20:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ 01:23, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar (or two) for your help with the creation of this version of The Ways of White Folks:

		The Wikilink Barnstar
		For responding quickly to an IP's request to edit the {{editsemiprotected}} article on Langston Hughes.

		Red Link Removal Barnstar
		for fulfilling the bonus request that accompanied the editsemiprotected request, which enabled an IP editor to create The Ways of White Folks.

Thanks. 68.165.77.91 (talk) 08:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, and thank you for the barnstars!   — Jeff G. ツ 17:09, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also Cora Unashamed.   — Jeff G. ツ 03:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your suggestions and warnings--all are welcome; I do not have any intention of breaching any set rule of editing in the Wikipedia; if unknowingly,I've done so, I apologize for that.

When citing references should I do like this? Example:tota Roy Choudhury as Dr.Romit Sen[2]

For newspaper articles, should I write what is written in the article and then put the link in the References?

Do please help me out.

Regards

Smitmuks (talk) 05:33, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:CITE and the {{Citation}} series of templates. Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ 17:36, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just wanted to let you know I'm working on a rewrite of WatchlistBot. The new version will include many new features, and I'd be interested to hear your feedback on what I have so far. Also let me know of any features you would like to see included; I'm always open to new ideas. Thanks! --Chris (talk) 07:26, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification and your work so far. I left a request at User talk:Crazycomputers/WatchlistBot/New#Fault_tolerance.   — Jeff G. ツ 18:49, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[1] was not blanking or deleting anything, as you saw fit to warn Δ here. Please be a bit more careful with your warnings next time. Regards, –MuZemike 20:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The user deleted a whole section without explanation.   — Jeff G. ツ 20:26, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was two external links and nothing else. That is a very poor reason, not to mention in poor taste, to template an established user with a final warning. –MuZemike 20:31, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. FYI I've restored the IP's edit to that page. I provided a source, but on a second look the previous ref did actually verify what he or she wrote.

That said, I see a lot of very good reversions in your recent contributions, with extremely few false positives reported. Keep up the excellent work! Regards, --WFC (talk) 00:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ 00:28, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The thing about peaches is not only obvious in the song (and not even referred to as such, which is incomprehensible), but an obvious thing in popular cultura/language as well. If you don't want to leave it there, or simply can't find a source yourself -- one that fits Wikipedia's standards as you know them better than me -- then, alright, leave it a partial information. Whatever... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.59.190.184 (talk) 01:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please block 142.104.215.130? Mr. R00t ^Talk 01:59, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why is a link to an interview/promo done by Darren Young saying his own nickname considered "inappropriate" or "vandalism"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.164.248.206 (talk) 02:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestion, but if you plan on pointing out lack of citation to me, please examine the that all the other artist line-up information of previous years for the Nerdapalooza page do not link back to anything either. As such, the official website has all this information, as was all information about the previous artist line-ups. Thanks.--Amari42 (talk) 02:45, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you reverted an edit on the Carrie Underwood article that said Mike Fisher was her spouse. Well, that's true. From what I've heard, she got married last weekend. But before I put that back up there I'd like to discuss it with you, so as to avoid an edit war. Thoughts? The Raptor ^{Let's talk}/_{My mistakes; I mean, er, contributions} 03:00, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch! You've used a template to send a message to an experienced editor. Please review the essay Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars or maybe listen to a little advice. Doesn't this feel cold, impersonal, and canned? It's meant in good humour. Best wishes. ~~~~

--WFC-- (talk) 03:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You note in your page that the first Margaritaville was in Orange Beach, Alabama. In Fact it was in Gulf Shores Alabama. On the corner of Hwy 59 and Hwy 180, I know for a fact because I was the DJ there.

Stephan Zakrzewski 954 675-5597 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zakdj27 (talk • contribs) 05:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the support, but I don't think you're supposed to leave your signature with a {{prod-2}} tag. Erpert (let's talk about it) 05:48, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• You're probably right, sorry. She deleted it anyway, so I used a {{subst:prod blp}}, which you might want to consider in similar future situations.   — Jeff G. ツ 05:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even though the article should be deleted, there is no point in leaving unencyclopedic material and nonsense in the article. This all could have been avoided if the speedy deletion tag had been left in place. Taroaldo (talk) 06:43, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• and just as I clicked 'submit' on the above comment, the article was happily deleted. Cheers. Taroaldo (talk) 06:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

HELP!!!!!

KEVIN MANN ARTICLE NOT FA BUG WHAT IT IS PLEASE HELP JEFF WHALE JIM IS CRY —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.112.225.187 (talk) 07:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I noticed you gave a level 4 warning to Δ apparently for an edit he made to Zero-turn mower. I raised concern about the appropriateness of this warning at User talk:Δ, but has not been responded to by you. Δ, myself, and Jack Merridew feel the warning was inappropriate. Based on comments there, I checked your level 4 warnings to registered editors and found another inappropriate level 4 warning given [2] to Hamiltha over the addition of a wiki internal link to a non-existent article at Photovoltaic micro-inverter [3]. You conduct a lot of user warnings; about 350 in the last 5 days alone. Please be more cautious in your use of these warnings and apply them correctly. I also recommend you read Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars.

Also, at User talk:Δ a concern was raised that your signature violates Wikipedia:Signatures, in particular the "<font size="4">" element in your signature. Wikipedia:SIG#Appearance_and_color advises us not to use such markup as it can disrupt the way the surrounding text displays. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 19:35, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ya, I know about:

• User talk:Jeff G./Archives/2010/May#Signature,

You blew it off. See WP:SIG#Appearance and color and change the <font size="4"> to a "2" or otherwise make your sig complaint. You've been asked before; time to listen. Jack Merridew 23:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you picking on me? My signature is not the tallest.   — Jeff G. ツ 22:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not 'picking on you'. Your sig has been discussed before, and you've blown it off. Just adopt a reasonable sig, ok? I've been tighening sig policy for a long time; getting rid of images, for example. And, ya, I see a HUGE one in the next section. That should be addressed, too, of course. You've been here a while and should know better. Jack Merridew 02:39, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And I just looked at his recent talk posts and it seems a one-off, or a first instance... tbd. Jack Merridew 02:44, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the userpage revert! GainLine ♠ _♥ 18:13, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome!   — Jeff G. ツ 18:19, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Same Here! I forgot to check those files. quazgaa 19:54, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It has been discussed more than once and users have supported keeping it out of the info box, I cited WP:BRD asnd I find your continuation of the reverting very disappointing indeed, having some citation is not a guarantee to insert affiliations to living people, imo if you support the addition you should have opened a talkpage discussion. Off2riorob (talk) 19:59, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your claim that it is cited, where is it cited, he has said he doesn't believe in God and then he has said since then that he is more of an Agnostic, this has been an ongoing issue and we have previously discussed and the consensus was to keep it out of the infobox, I would like you to self revert your addition and move to discussion. Off2riorob (talk) 20:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the inconvenience - I was a bit late reverting my edit. I have warned Georgereev118118 with {{uw-3rr2}} and asked him 'Why is it so important to you that the infobox on Nick Clegg show "Atheist"?'. Re sources, I saw these in the article for the statement "In an interview on BBC Radio 5 Live on the morning after his election to the leadership, Clegg stated that he does not believe in God, but that he has great respect for people of faith":

• "Clegg 'does not believe in God'". BBC News. 19 December 2007. Retrieved 19 November 2007.
• Hurst, Greg (19 December 2007). "Nick Clegg says: 'I don't believe in God'". The Times. London. Retrieved 20 November 2007. Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrats' new leader, has defied political convention with a blunt admission that he is an atheist.

  — Jeff G. ツ 20:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the press ,,you gotta love them, blunt admission..there is the other cite that the agnostics all cite where he says, actually I am more of an agnostic, the discusson came to the conclusion that it is actuallu not very important to him and that we would leave a few comments in the article but not affiliate him to any specific group either in the infobox or in cats. The atheist cat actually stated that a clear declaration and understanding the subjects position are required to labal the person as this or that, all Clegg has ever said is no I don't believe in God and when poshed about it he said in another interview, actually I am more of an agnostic than an athiest, all very fluffy indeed and thats why it is better to simply keep it out of the infobok and personally I have removed atheist and agnostic from there, of course it is always open to a new discussion on the talkpage. Thanks for reverting . Off2riorob (talk) 20:34, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Clegg actually I am more of an Agnostic its a google search but his openess and his apparent undecided and uninterested comments are too strong to easily label him Off2riorob (talk) 20:53, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Issuing a level 4 warning for removing a speedy deletion template to a new user who has only made two edits seems to constitute biting a newcomer. New users commonly remove speedy templates because they are not yet familiar with the workings of Wikipedia. A little bit of good faith on your part would seem to be required in cases like this. Taroaldo (talk) 22:11, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle chose the level.   — Jeff G. ツ 22:23, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Users are ultimately responsible for the scripts they use. Taroaldo (talk) 22:45, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff,

There appears to be a conflict of information contained in these two pages:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haast%27s_Eagle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_loading

In the "Size and habits" section of the Haast's Eagle's page, the last sentance of the second paragraph states, "it represents a departure from the mode of its ancestors' soaring flight, toward higher wing loading and increased maneuverability". This is in direct contrast to the last two sentances of the opening paragraph of the Wing Load page which state, "The high wing loading also decreases maneuverability. The same constraints apply to birds and bats."

I have not been able to determine which page to edit, as neither fact has been cited. Nevertheless I have a feeling that the Haast's Eagle's page is in the wrong.

Best Regards,

Adterzo (talk) 23:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and have changed it in this edit.   — Jeff G. ツ 23:30, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's Template:Sec link auto about? gz³³ (talk) 02:03, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Huggle got into a race condition. :(   — Jeff G. ツ 02:06, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thought it would be something like that. No harm done, but I'll be watching you... (but not really) gz³³ (talk) 02:25, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In editing the song Thriller, I have both the 2001 special edition Thriller booklet and the 1995 HIStory booklet (which contains production information on all the songs from the album), and in both cases, it shows that Michael Jackson did NOT produce the song "Thriller". He only sang the song. Quincy Jones was the sole producer for that song. Even the 2003 Number Ones booklet and the 2005 The Essential Michael Jackson booklet both credit Quincy Jones as the sole producer of the song "Thriller". I will be sure to include this explanation in the "Edit summary" section from now on. In every "Personnel" section there is on Michael's songs, if the album booklet says that Michael CO-PRODUCED it (NOT produced it), I try to include the differentiation in the personnel editing.

I also have the 2001 special edition booklets for the albums Off the Wall, Bad and Dangerous. They show specifically who wrote, composed, and produced what song (in a specific order) AND who co-produced a song. In many other Michael Jackson articles, the order of songwriters (and producers) of a song is out of order from what they are in the album booklets. I always wanted to list the names of the songwriters, composers, and producers in the same order as they appear in the album booklets. This is what I was trying to change by editing Thriller, as well as many other Michael Jackson articles. I meant absolutely no vandalism whatsoever, and I apologize for not explaining my changes in the Edit summary. But I have noticed that with music albums (in the infoboxes), there is a section for the "Producer", but there is no section for the "Co-Producer". I really do wish there was a separate category for Co-producer in ALL music albums and singles for Wikipedia, just so that the differentiation could be clearly displayed for everyone (and if there IS no co-producer, that column can simply not show up, like with other categories). I just think the producer and co-producer, even though they are both helping to produce the song, have a slight, but still significant, difference in roles. This is why I wish to have that extra category in music infoboxes, but unfortunately, I am not skilled enough in Wikipedia and so I don't know how to properly propose one. This is why I always try to include "Co-produced by Michael Jackson" in the producer section of many of Michael's albums and singles, instead of labeling him as the producer, before Quincy Jones' name, just so people understand the differentiation (Example: the 2001 "Bad" booklet) clearly lists all the songs on the album as "Produced by Quincy Jones for Quincy Jones Productions" AND "Co-Produced by Michael Jackson for MJJ Productions." (This co-production credit is also given on the songs on "Off The Wall" and "Thriller" that Michael wrote. This mistake keeps appearing, though, on many of the pages for Michael's songs. (According to the album booklets for "Off The Wall", Michael Jackson did NOT produce "Rock With You", "She's Out of My Life", "Off the Wall", or "Girlfriend", yet he is frequently listed as producer, before Quincy Jones, even though the album booklet says that these songs were solely produced by Quincy). Again, I mean absolutely no vandalism, and from now on, I will be sure to include and "Edit summary" for every edit I make. Thank you for letting me know.

Another request I have: for some of Michael's Double-A singles (such as Scream/Childhood and HIStory/Ghosts) appear to have cluttered infoboxes, due to having to include information about both songs in one infobox. There have been many requests (which I support) to give each song (even songs from double-A singles) their own page, to make things slightly more organized. If this cannot be done, my other suggestion is that Double-A singles be on one page, but each individual song is given its own infobox, so that there are two organized, neat looking infoboxes instead of one cluttered one. Again, I am not skilled enough in Wikipedia, so I don't know how to create this myself, or how to properly propose this idea to the Wikipedia editors. Please let me know if these changes are reasonable and possible. Thank you. Luminoth187 (talk) 02:15, 22 July 2010 (UTC)Luminoth187[reply]

You're welcome. Have you considered using the A-side and B-side parameters for Template:Infobox single?   — Jeff G. ツ 03:17, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

everyone else erases stuff on the kinmundy page. I put that illinois hall of fame basketball coach gary shirley is from there and it was erased. who even knew that lady existed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.107.239.66 (talk) 02:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think you are King of the Internet? What I have put is fact. Go ahead and look it up. Ok are you back. Good. Maybe if someone checked the accuracy of pages like you watch for "comedy" then I wouldn't have changed that page. You want to ban me...Ban me if that makes you feel better. You still are going to be a loser when you wake up in the morning, banning me won't change that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.107.239.66 (talk) 02:38, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that incorrect info on pages should be allowed to be made fun of as I did on the KTVI website. If it's already wrong then what is the harm of adding commentary to incorrect info? I think that the moderation of these entries should also be as strict about the accuracy on the pages themselves rather than the commentary added to them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.107.239.66 (talk) 02:46, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No "making fun of" is allowed in mainspace. If you remove something, please write why in the Edit Summary. If you add something, please add a source inline, in the references, or in the Edit Summary. Thank you.   — Jeff G. ツ 02:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff, Thanks for looking over my fansite article. Is there anything you can do to help me save the page? Any edits that could save me? Please?? The_X_Factor_Fansite --Robtencer (talk) 03:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, nothing I can do would help you save that page. Please see my !vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The X Factor Fansite. However, you may continue to work on your userfied copy of it at User:Robtencer/The X Factor Fansite.   — Jeff G. ツ 03:13, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your assertion that my edits to "A Simple Plan" are "disruptive" is baseless and without merit. Please be somewhat more considerate of others before throwing out aggressive warnings. If you vehemently disagree with my edits then feel free to discuss them. I'm all ears. 173.28.165.76 (talk) 04:29, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition of 2154 bytes of synthesis to that page without a visible reliable source is without visible base. You (or someone else using the IP Address you are using) have been warned for addition of unsourced info to articles four previous times in this month alone.   — Jeff G. ツ 04:34, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff I am new to the wikipedia editing and have been attacked constantly, instead of helped. While I understand I have been given 7 days to edit the article properly, the admins are piling up against me for removal.I have seen my articles removed within an hour with speedy deletions, and let me tell you, it scared me. What recourse do I have, what can I do to satisfy the pack of angry wolves? I mean you no harm, and I only care to contribute in a positive way to wikipedia. Who can help me besides yourself? I saw the wikiproject X factor members, and was trying to appeal to them for assistance, I was pleading for help. and you may not have seen it like that. Just so you know.

Please Help Me Jeff, --Robtencer (talk) 05:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've done all I can for you. Good luck!   — Jeff G. ツ 07:18, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just checking to say "hi". Thanks setting on the right track in Wikipedia. I couldn't have turned into the man I am today without your sagacious wisdom and untiring guidance. So, thanks! By the way, I was wondering if you would like to collaborate on a project with me, on Wikipedia! Just get back to me whenever you tin can. In fact, drop me a line on my talk page :) Well, time for me to sleep now (my roommate is already brushing his teeth). Sorry if this message is a little long.

Love, Hugo

PS. Hope you don't mind some color... (1 picture = 1,000 words)

• 
  Statement: My name in a state
• 
  I rode and ate one (actually, they were two different living beings)
• 
  Animus revived

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.112.225.187 (talk) 06:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hi.   — Jeff G. ツ 07:17, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. I improve a wikipedia article and the vandals come immediately to undo what I did. Wikipedia is worse than I thought! You can't improve it's quality without being reverted? Please stop warning me like I am a vandal! 188.80.59.174 (talk) 01:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is "rconfidence"[4]? I didn't even edit Confirmation bias today (if ever).   — Jeff G. ツ 01:08, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry i didnt communicate the website before... i'm going to erase a few lines and write some others with the intention of help on the understanding of what is the Focolare movment...

thank you have a good day Henrique