User talk:EdJohnston

happy holidays from PPI

Hi EdJohnston, you previously assessed articles with [WikiProject: U.S. Public Policy]. Your input is appreciated, and contributed to the research in the [Public Policy Initiative]. The project has been pretty exciting; there are over 25 university classes signed up for spring semester. This project is about more than public policy; it is about using Wikipedia as a teaching tool and recruiting (and hopefully retaining) college students as editors. If you are still interested we will be starting more rounds of assessments in the new year. I am the research analyst for the project, feel free to contact me. If you already responded definitively, I apologize for not following up properly, I just had a baby and have been a bit overwhelmed. Happy holidays, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 01:38, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

User talk:PraxisConsensus

I've placed their latest unblock request on hold in an attempt to daw a more specific response out of them. Notifying you as blocking admin. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:13, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Replied there. I share your hope for a more specific response, to be sure that he won't continue the war. EdJohnston (talk) 17:52, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Help wanted

Would you please take a look at the section on my talk page with the heading 'Hey'? I would be willing to log this but I see a couple of warnings on the offending editor's talk page by me, and we have edited the same article. I think the editor should be notified, they are relatively new and probably don't know about the Arbitration case and the personal attack seems sufficient given the area they are editing in. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 17:44, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 19:31, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Bambu

User Nahome keeps reverting the Bambu paper page to a version which was edited by a neutral editor Jonathanwallace. Why am I unable to revert these changes? And why is this user being given opportunity to slander a brand and revert changes from an established editor? This does not seem to make any sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.164.114.50 (talk • contribs)

Please sign your posts and please talk about this on the Bambu talk page. There needs to be references for every item. I am not slandering anyone, I am only removing ad-text and re-inserting referenced items that seem to be contrary to your brand (sorry). See you on the talk page! Nahome (talk) 15:49, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Ed I need your help again. The IP user has switched back to their other apparant alias, ArnaudMS and is re-posting their promo text on Bambu rolling papers. Can you give the pages a full block for a couple months to help stop the ad text from going up? Nahome (talk) 16:05, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello Ed. I do not know what the user is talking about switching IPs. I made an edit to the page which made it more organized and clear. I removed facts which were completely incorrect about factory which produced Bambu, and other Brands. User Nahome suggested R. Abad made pay pay, which is incorrect.. I even used the Links which Nahome placed on the website. As well, I used the trademark search website to look through the other brands to determine there "true" establishment date.. From use of the trademark registry alone, not one of them has the same date as what they claim. Rizla, Zig Zag, Smoking.... all of them are far later. And infact, Bambu has the earliest. You can check yourself.. I am not trying to go after a page with unsubstantiated facts, if you can see my last edit-- which was further edited by user Cliff-- It is organized with a History Section, Arts and Music as well.. Nothing promotional. The current verious is all over the place and has the tone of a court proceeding. sincerely,--ArnaudMS (talk) 16:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Arnaud/71.164.114.50/Lostsociety, if you would take the time to read the article before trying to revert it to your promo laden version you would see that the part you gave actual references for was corrected. Whenever you post facts with references, it is given weight by the Wiki community and often edits will ensue. You agree that R Abad invented Bambu yet you fail to say how he could have been alive in 1764 when he apparantly was born in 1890? The text in question about Paypay was removed. You are trying to go after a page with unsubstaniated facts and say that your brand is from 1764. If it is then PLEASE give us actual hard references. Otherwise the books written on the subject should stand and 1907 is a very good year - one you should be proud of! This means your brand is 104 years old - that is amazing and something you should promote. Please though, stick to the FACTs Nahome (talk) 16:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

My minor reverts

Hey Ed, Thanks for checking out my request for AWB, Ive been researching why this was happening, As I use huggle the program makrs all reverts as minor by default, and unfortunately these settings can't be changed, I have tried to uncheck it many times, and have changed the setting and configuration at User:Frankie0607/huggle.css, however every attempt has failed. Looking at Wikipedia:Huggle/Configuration states that "Note that reverts will always be marked as minor edits.". Thanks again --Frankie0607 18:45, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Reverts should only be marked as minor if they are reverts of vandalism, or in a few specific situations. Reverts that are part of a content dispute must not be marked as minor. If you can't make Huggle do the right thing, try asking a question at WT:HUGGLE. I don't use it myself. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 19:02, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Ive fixed my preferences on Wikpedia to no longer mark all edits I make as minor, so from now on in my contributions it will only be reverts in huggle that will mark my edits as minor, hope this solves any issues and we can proceed with my request to use AWB, Thanks again --Frankie0607 19:35, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Done. Welcome to AWB. EdJohnston (talk) 23:55, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much Ed, Much appreciated --Frankie0607 03:11, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

You Have Mail

Hello, EdJohnston. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Posted on behalf of a blocked user on IRC. Robert Skyhawk ^{(T C B)} 18:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

I have replied by email and at User talk:Lihaas#Comment by blocking admin. EdJohnston (talk) 20:02, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

per block

now that i can post id just like to know your reason so as to learn for the future? as far as i though the whoel thing was resolved with the reporting editor (who was a new editor). then what was wrong?(Lihaas (talk) 01:01, 3 January 2011 (UTC)).

The main dispute was between you and JPosten, so far as I could tell. JPosten did not state that the issue was resolved. The edits by the reporting editor Khips were not much of a problem. If I counted correctly, you were the only person to make four reverts in 24 hours. If 2011 Alexandria bombing was not an In The News article and being rapidly developed full protection might have been done, since it was a complex edit war. EdJohnston (talk) 01:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

the conflict was with the reporting editor obviously.

Also you may want to cehck that page as the coptic user is clearly warring.(Lihaas (talk) 07:08, 3 January 2011 (UTC)).

AN3 - question

I'm not familiar with AN3 - how does one determine that a topic has been closed?
On further study, I'm guessing that it's when the h2 contains "(Result: something)"
Are there other ways to tell? Thanks in advance, Pdfpdf (talk) 05:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the header is one way to tell. Generally an admin will have left a signed comment stating the outcome. Still, if you believe the admin made a mistake you can reply, even if it seems closed. EdJohnston (talk) 05:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Good information to know. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 06:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

A favor

I have reason to bar Cresix from posting unmandated posts to my talk page, and I have documented them and consider your suggestion as non-binding and inconsequential. I also strongly suspect you blocked me for only two reverts,(which of course is your prerogative) since the alleged 3rd and fourth were shown to accommodate contrary views, and in affect are what is the now agreed version of events. In the 48 hours following your block I see the version of the Clapton article now entirely to my liking. Nonetheless I will keep in mind that some admins are prone to hasty decisions and realistically allow for them to being possibly imperious. BTW, if you could post a reply here, I will see it. The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous (talk) 04:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

The definition of a revert is given in WP:Edit warring: 'A revert means undoing the actions of another editor.' I am open to the possibility that I made a mistake, but if so, you would need to convince people that your #3 and #4 were not reverts. Your defence to the 3RR complaint stated "The 3rd and 4th diffs instead clarifies the context, clearly establishing that the praise is from Little Steven, and the 53rd greatest designation is very much RS's." This is an argument that you were right on the content, but this is not something admins are supposed to decide. We are supposed to merely count the reverts, unless your edit falls under one of the eight exceptions listed in WP:EW, such as reverting vandalism or defamation. The claim that you were improving the article might well be true, but it does not exempt your edits from being counted toward the three revert limit. My advice still stands, that you should remove your comment about Cresix, but it is only advice. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 05:11, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

Hello, EdJohnston! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 04:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Dear EdJohnston..a very happy new year 2011. Regarding articles..i can only say that I swear to Supreme God that my all edits so far are True and Authentic..now its you/administrators/wiki team to take care of reality..thanks..Bigbrothersorder (talk) 06:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

                          Hi

can u please move this page to protection so only autoconfirmed users can edit it. thanks in advance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricardo_Quaresma — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bianconero1903 (talk • contribs) 12:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Raulseixas

Hi Ed, you recently placed a 24 hour block on Raulseixas for vandalising the Ronaldo page. I thought I would tell you that following his block the first thing he appears to have done is returned to that page and vandalised it again. Regards Footballgy (talk) 14:34, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Clarification requested

See this. Best, NW (Talk) 15:18, 4 January 2011 (UTC)