User talk:JBsupreme

For your consideration: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people/Content.

EVENTUALISM IS NOT AN ACCEPTABLE ROUTE FOR WP:BLP CONCERNS

DUCK TUNNEL

Welcome to my talk page!

Welcome to my talk page. Please respect Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. PLEASE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE, NOT THE TOP. Thank you.

---

Welcome...

Welcome!

Hello, JBsupreme, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia

How to edit a page

• Help
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Bash Kash (talk) 20:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

A FEW WORDS ABOUT BLP

I regularly remove uncited information, negative or otherwise, from WP:BLP and related articles. You may here to discuss that. Before you begin, please review the following and familiarize yourself with our Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy. Thanks!

• Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.
• However in many cases the appropriate use of administrative tools such as page protection and deletion is necessary for the enforcement of the biographies of living persons policy.
• If the entire page is substantially of poor quality, primarily containing contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced, then it may be necessary to delete the entire page as an initial step, followed by discussion.
• In order to ensure that information about living people is always policy-compliant (written neutrally to a high standard, and based on good quality reliable sources) the burden of proof is on those who wish to retain, restore, or undelete the disputed material. Editors adding or restoring material must ensure it meets all Wikipedia content policies and guidelines, not just verifiability of sources.

I can NOT emphasize this enough.

There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative "I heard it somewhere" pseudo information is to be tagged with a "needs a cite" tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced.

— Jimmy Wales [1]

I haven't reviewed the specifics of your recent article deletions, so I can't vouch for each and every one of them of course, but I wanted to fully endorse the principles that, as I understand it, you have used in your deletions: unsourced BLPs that have been around for several years are an easy and obvious first target, and your deletions, while unconventional and a bit exciting for some, were carefully considered and I consider this a valid application of WP:BOLD. You have my support.

— Jimmy Wales [2]

Rick ross (rapper)

On the Rick Ross (rapper) page you changed the links at the bottom back after i had edited them?. The so called official rick ross trilla website is not anything related to rick ross any more its been used for advertising for a while now.--Front2back (talk) 18:33, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

You are correct and I have fixed that link. JBsupreme (talk) 20:41, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

noble dru & phashara pages

please advise on the corrections that should be made to prevent the pages from being marked for deletion. Kirkout (talk) 16:40, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Lil Wayne

Stop deleting the facts about gillie and lil wayne. I dont know if your mad that its true or what but i think people deserve to know the truth. So stop changing it. I am not taking sides, i just believe people need to know the truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smokingintherain56 (talk • contribs) 15:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

GZA

It'll expire later today. If the idiots start up again, I'll put it to semi. DS (talk) 17:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Michael Potts: AfD dialogue

Please revisit Michael Potts article (of which I am the principal author). Contrary to the assertion that Google News features only one link to "michael potts" +"rocky mountain institute," I have provided a link showing that in fact, there are eight links. For example, I have just added to the article, under External Links, a Denver Post interview with Michael Potts on March 31, 2007, in which he speaks about his personal and business philosophies. Thank you for your time. I do appreciate your help in strengthening this article.Jhutson64 (talk) 15:44, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Software

Hello JBsupreme. You have been invited to join WikiProject Software, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the Software-related articles on Wikipedia. You received this invitation due to your interest in, or edits relating to or within the scope of the project. If you would like to join or just help out a bit, please visit the project page, and add your name to the list of project members. You may also wish to add {{User WikiProject Software}} to your userpage and {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Software/Announcement-u}} to the top of your talk page with the heading ==WikiProject Software Announcement==. If you know someone who might be interested, please pass this message onto others by pasting this code into their talk page {{Software invite|~~~~}} with the following heading == WikiProject Software ==. Thanks, Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (Talk ● Contributions) 09:19, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Spider Loc & Young Buck controversy

Hey boss, what is the issue you have with the Spider Loc and Young Buck controversy that you keep deleting the entire paragraph after numerous users have updated and added content to it? Are you not recognizing the beef as factual? Check out Spider Loc's homepage or MySpace page or any one of a thousand websites (including MTV) that have covered the controversy. I think at the very least, there needs to be a section for this controversy considering Spider has released several diss tracks on mixtapes and has confirmed that the primary diss track "Lean On Me" will be appear on his next album. I wont re-edit the page until I hear back from you, but please consider the addition as I think it adds a lot to the page. Thanks. (209.87.194.21 (talk) 14:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC))

It just needs a cite from a reliable publication, see WP:RS - otherwise it falls under original research which is generally not permitted, especially so for WP:BLP articles. JBsupreme (talk) 19:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Whut up homie?

Why did you delete my information on the butterfly? Rob was not the "lead" in the story, plus you deleted the info on his kids, why? I take it you are a Juggalo, right? Then you sjould know how important that story is. I have been a down with ICP for 12+ years and know there history, matter of fact I am sitting here with Joes book in front of me. I am goin to go ahead and put back my stuff you deleted. MCL.

Butterfly

I went ahead and put the chapters up on the Behind the paint link, wich the first chapter is the citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1WickedClown (talk • contribs) 02:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Joseph Bruce

I understand your edits. Thanks for your patience. But there is a problem with the user 1WickedClown. He seems not to listen, and even became angry with me when I tried to explain that he is writing information that is not necessary. I'm not sure what to do with him. It seems he does not care to even listen to the rules. Maybe you can do something? Juggalobrink (talk) 04:47, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

There isn't much I can do, other than try to explain it the same way you did. He appears to be a newly registered editor and does not understand how Wikipedia operates yet. JBsupreme (talk) 04:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Well thank you anyway. Juggalobrink (talk) 04:51, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

That means F.T.F.O--1WickedClown (talk) 09:23, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

WP:TABOO

Hi. Interested in your thoughts on this. Peter Damian (talk) 18:31, 22 July 2008 (UTC).

Jake Gyllenhaal

Hey,

I noticed you recently reverted someone on Jake Gyllenhaal and asked them to cite their sources. I thought you might like to know that the info is already in the article, well sourced and well written. :) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:09, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For your excellent job with reverting vandalism and challenging unsourced information in the Travis McCoy article, I hereby award you the RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar. Keep up the great work! Royalbroil 14:28, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you about requiring strong sources for any information in the article. The article is a magnet for vandalism and unsourced speculation, and just reverting the vandalism / speculation has put it in my 5 most edited articles. We need to keep being aggressive in removing all unsourced additions to the article to keep the article in compliance with WP:BLP. You've been doing a great job! Royalbroil 14:28, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Cavlan

Greetings, JB. You !voted to delete the article on Michael Cavlan due to absence of "evidence of non-trivial coverage by multiple, reliable publications". After a few minutes of research, I found such coverage and added it to the article; would you care to revisit your comment? Thanks, Skomorokh 23:43, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

A little confusion

Hi there, I noticed you removed an artist's entire discography besides albums, as you did in this edit. If you read Wikipedia:WikiProject Music/MUSTARD/Discography, it states: Pages on performers should have discography sections. These should be subdivided into albums and singles, or other simple systems as needed. Because Tyga's discography is small, it is appropriate to have the subsections of singles, guest appearances, and so on. Removing something per a talk page, in this case Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians, is incorrect. Just thought I'd point it out. DiverseMentality^{(Discuss it)} 05:02, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

No I would have to disagree with you on your point of guest appearances and would be willing to discuss that with you on a more appropriate talk page, such as the relevant article talk page or the WikiProject talk page. JBsupreme (talk) 00:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Possible Socks of Jkliajmi on Template:Regions_of_the_world

There are two IPs within range of eachother that keep making the same edits as this banned user (78.146.17.244, 78.146.70.120). I am suspecting that they are the same as Jkliajmi. What should be done to check?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Regions_of_the_world&action=history

Thegreyanomaly (talk) 20:53, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Re:Leon Jackson

Since you've given the IP a "blatant vandal" warning, I can block it after the next vandalism. Thanks for letting me know. ... discospinster _talk 01:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

OK it's blocked. ... discospinster _talk 01:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

My bad

--Blehfu (talk) 05:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Original Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For endorsing many of my never-ending prods. Thanks for the support! DiverseMentality(Discuss it) 01:45, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

AFD spam

Could you please take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pink's fifth studio album. I have added (the newly released) confirmed release date and I have expanded the article and added sources. If you still feel the article needs to be deleted, no problem. However I would be grateful if you'd take a look. Regards, --Cameron* 16:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I did not see this sooner I've been signed off for the weekend. If there is something I missed could you please present it to deletion review? I cannot do much more since I am not an admin. JBsupreme (talk) 04:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

One Be Lo

I have requested here that User Hoponpop explain what he/she/it means by stating that the article Fails to meet criteria for a music article on the talk page. If you can provide an explanation to help others improve the page, I encourage you to do so. --DerRichter (talk) 07:03, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I still have received no response from you, JBsupreme, or hoponpop59 about the reasoning here- was it a mistake that you seconded it for deletion? Thanks --DerRichter (talk) 19:36, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi JB

Thanks for the nice welcome back message. Let me know if I can assist you with anything, and I will try. Happy editing! Dave --David Shankbone 15:27, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy db-repost

Hi JB. Just double-checking that I was not missing something with this... The latest AfD was "no consensus", was it not? Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 03:21, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

...that is correct, sorry about that. Never mind.  :-/ JBsupreme (talk) 03:30, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Lupe Fiasco

Hiya JB! You recently undid some edits to the article on Lupe Fiasco. For the majority what you did was right (like the Influece section, that was just ridiculous), but along with it you also took out some minor constructive edits. I've incorporated your edits into my latest revision. Kind regards, --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 14:29, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

RFC: Clarifying "notable single"

As a frequent contributor to articles related to music, you are invited to review this RfC and comment, if you see fit! Best regards, --Winger84 (talk) 18:11, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit summaries for PROD nominations

Just a friendly reminder to use an edit summary when proposing deletion for an article. Edit summary usage is always good, but it is especially important that edit summaries are used when proposing deletion. The reason for this is that articles proposed for deletion that later have the {{prod}} tag removed should not be proposed for deletion again, but rather sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. The only easy way to check if an article was previously proposed for deletion is to look at the edit history and the edit summaries people have left before. Thanks! --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 18:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Daddy X page

i want to thank you for deleting all the information on his page. i think there where just to much personal information on his page that people don't need to know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfpachomie (talk • contribs) 18:34, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Jha Jha

You might want to check out the other members of The Diplomats as well. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 00:28, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

• Try DRV. I have no idea how Jha Jha was kept either. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 02:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD setups

Hi JB. I've mentioned this to you several times before, but I will remind you again. Please be sure to follow all the steps at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to list pages for deletion when you nominate an article. I fixed this one for you. Thanks. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:00, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

CSD Taggings

Hello, when marking pages for speedy deletion, please be sure to use proper criteria. "uploader has a NASTY HISTORY of uploading images with FAKE LICENSES!!!" is not a valid reason to delete something and could constitute a personal attack. If you notice a user is repeatedly uploading images without copyright information, give them a warning to inform them of the situation, and contact an administrator if the situation continues. For more information on how to tag these photos, please see WP:IFD. Thank you. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:25, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you check their upload history first. I would also counter that it damn well is a valid reason to speedy delete something. If you don't like it, sorry. JBsupreme (talk) 02:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

PeanutButterWiki Deletion Vote

Hi. I noticed you voted for the deletion of the PeanutButterWiki article, claiming that there were "hundreds of other wiki farms just like it", but I'm not sure you'd find this statement to be true if you had researched it. I would challenge you two find one that hosts more private wikis (over 300,000 are hosted at PBwiki) and as far as we're aware, only one provider (WetPaint) hosts more wikis (we host ~600,000 wikis, WetPaint just crossed 1m last month). We're prominently cited in a Newsweek article this week alone and have been dozens of major press publications. So I'd like to ask you to please ensure that votes you place for articles for deletion contain factually correct statements. And yes, I am the founder and chairman of PBwiki, Inc. Dweekly (talk) 08:06, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message! JBsupreme (talk) 08:07, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Misuse of associated acts

The only way this can be done is manually, unfortunately. I doubt there can be a bot delicate enough to know who belongs in the associated acts section. Just abide by the template and clear out the section whenever it needs to be. DiverseMentality^{(Discuss it)} 05:44, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Lackthereof

Re: Proding of Lackthereof - you might as well grab all of that band's albums while you are at it. They are listed among the articles that link to the Lackthereof article. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 03:56, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lackthereof

You didn't provide a reason in this deletion discussion. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 11:57, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah -- my internet dropped before I could provide rationale and add it to the daily page.  :-/ JBsupreme (talk) 14:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Lady Luck (rapper)

Could you check out the AfD on this you started? The article has been improved. Thanks, Hobit (talk) 03:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Prods

Howdy. FYI, if an article is tagged with {{prod}} and it is then contested, you aren't supposed the tag the article with {{prod}} a 2nd time.--Rockfang (talk) 05:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm aware of that. Can you please tell me where I made this mistake? I will list it on AFD as appropriate. Thanks! JBsupreme (talk) 06:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Here and then again here.--Rockfang (talk) 07:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

AfD protocol

Hi JBsupreme. When you nominate an article for AfD, it is important that you follow the steps at WP:Afd#How to list pages for deletion. You did not provide the necessary summary for ILLmacuLate, so I have taken care of that with a dummy edit here. I note that this is now the fifth time I have come to your page asking you to follow those instructions, and I have not been the only one. I am asking you once again: please follow the protocols of our deletion policies if you wish to continue to nominate articles for Prod or AfD. Thank you. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thalía

Dear JBsupreme,

You deleted a section that I added to this article, could you please give a reason for it? I just wrote down what many people think and say, something that I think belongs to the truth. Now I've put it back, but if you think you can delete it, but please give a reason. Thank you. --El Mexicano (talk) 10:58, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reverting the false block added to my userpage. DiverseMentality^(Boo!) 21:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my page

JBSupreme -- as it says, thanks for reverting Lopezmexican's bizarre "you have been blocked" addition to my user page. No clue why he chose me... -- dcclark (talk) 21:02, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Deletion?

Hello JBSupreme, I am new to the whole wikipedia website and would like to know why is my article in the process of being deleted and is there anything I can do to prevent it from being deleted. All the information and citations are very valid and from well credited sources. (HipHopDoc (talk) 18:33, 9 October 2008 (UTC))

Layzie Bone

Hello. I am providing a WP:3O on Layzie Bone. Please do not make any edits for today. Contrary to stated belief on the talk page; I have been able to vastly expand the article, with correct verification and reliable sources. The person is clearly notable and passes WP:MUSIC. I agree that the article was poorly written, but have significantly improved it to meet our guidelines here at Wikipedia. Please do not continue to engage in edit warring on this article, I'll have it in place within two hours. Thank you, have a nice day! fr33kman -s- 18:01, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I am now finished with the article. It clearly meets WP:N and passes WP:V. Please be constructive and expand the article rather than impose you WP:POV on it. If you simply revert it or redirect it without seeking community consensus, you will be reported immediately. Thank you and Happy Editing! :-) fr33kman -s- 21:25, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Tylerdotcom13

Given that all of the stuff had taken place today within a 2 hour period, I tended to give the benefit of the doubt. I've watched the user page, and if there's one more warning after the 48 hours, I'll make it permanent. Thanks for keepin' an eye out :) SkierRMH (talk) 07:16, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

My dog

Well,since he was a Beagle,and was sad being cooped up in our apartment,we gave him to a hunter.In fact,he's going hunting today :D --Fireaxe888 (talk) 09:24, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

AfD

Since you've taken an interest in gang articles, I was wondering if you'd take a look at this AfD? [[3]] Niteshift36 (talk) 13:29, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Re. Proposed deletion of Bossman

I have deprodded this. firstly, the prod was invalid since the article has survived a previous AfD (as noted on the article's talk page). An allmusic bio and other coverage was easy to find. Please take the effort to look for sources to determine notability and improve articles before trying to delete them. Thanks.--Michig (talk) 19:05, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Edit summary usage

JBsupreme, you need to start using edit summaries; you barely ever use them at all. This is especially important when you are nominating articles for deletion, such as here, just now; it is time-consuming and annoying to have to check every single one of your edits to see what you've done, especially since you tend to make large-scale changes in one edits; large trims or additions of PRODs or AfDs. I realize that you'll probably just remove this message as you have all the others, but your lack of edit summary usage of any kind, even just to say "trim" or "AfD", is testing the patience of many members of the community. Thanks. GlassCobra 16:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm trying to make it a habit to mention the article is pending deletion, if I overlook this please feel free to add a null edit summary on my behalf and point it out to me when I forget. Thanks. JBsupreme (talk) 23:36, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Improperly sourced edits

Am I within my right to remove improperly sourced edits from a BLP-related article? I formally stated my objection on the talk page of the offending article, and explained in detail to the offending user (JJJ999) why his changes violate WP:VERIFY and WP:NPOV. Following a request for comment, a neutral editor (DGG) also voiced concern that the material is improperly sourced. User JJJ999 seems to beleive that editors are not allowed to undo his changes, and that they must correct the offending material for him instead, even though I believe it is low quality and beyond repair. Dynablaster (talk) 17:03, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Without looking at the article in question, the answer in general is a resounding yes. The burden of proof is on whoever added (or restored) the unsourced edits. JBsupreme (talk) 04:58, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Yo Majesty

Please check out my work on Yo Majesty. I think it's heavily cited enough now that I removed the references needed template. Hope you agree.--Larrybob (talk) 20:00, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Agree. JBsupreme (talk) 03:32, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Criminal organizations list

First thing's first, good work cleaning up that article, getting rid of some of the more pointless stuff on there (wannabe gangbangers trying to rep their "set"). I have to say though I disagree with your removal of the Piromalli 'ndrina (a sourced article) and some of the yakuza clans. Dojin-kai and Goto-gumi are both sourced (I haven't bothered to check the rest, if they aren't sourced I'm sure they can be). Nicknackrussian (talk) 15:21, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to restore anything that is sourced, although I did not see the sources you're referring to when I was cleaning them up. JBsupreme (talk) 17:14, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

I've restored the Piromalli 'ndrina (since it was already extensively referenced in-article) and yakuza articles, about half or so of which I've managed to provide in-article references for. The other half, well that's work for another day. Give me a shout if you disagree. Nicknackrussian (talk) 23:22, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

$100

No bet Dlohcierekim 07:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

LOL JBsupreme (talk) 07:42, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to have been unclear

When I wrote this I should have been more clear in that it was 37 strong and cogent opinions toward keeping and 30 strong and cogent opinions toward deletion. Not a vote. An effort at reaching consensus. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Gangland (TV series)

I reverted your unexplained edit to Gangland (TV series) the result of which was simply to mess up the table. Also in reviewing your edit history, you have a habit of not using the edit summary, making many of your edit very suspect. Please note that unexplained edits with no apparent reason can be reverted as vandalism. It would greatly help other editors to understand what you are doing if you made use of the edit summary to explain why you are deleting a link or any other edit that is not self evident as to why the edit is being made. Thank you Dbiel ^(Talk) 19:16, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Jak3m

I warned him about this specifically ... he hasn't been blocked in over a year and despite all the image notices, he hasn't been formally warned as policy requires. If he does it after this, he can be blocked. Daniel Case (talk) 01:59, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced dates of birth

Hi JBsupreme. Regarding this edit: Unsourced dates of birth are typically not removed from BLPs unless there is some reason to believe they are incorrect. Was there a reason in this case? Or it could be that there is something in WP:BLP that I am missing or understanding differently. Thanks in advance for any clarification. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 17:58, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

If you have a source please reinstate it. I've seen many instances where we are perpetuating wrong dates of birth and this makes Wikipedia look unreliable. This problem specifically affects hip-hop biographies to a greater degree. Hope that helps you. JBsupreme (talk) 18:02, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, yes it does. I had not realized that this had been a problem with hip-hop biographies. IMDB lists Rocsi's date of birth as agreeing with Wikipedia, but IMDB is not a reliable source. I've just found a 2005 article in the Chicago Tribune which says, "she refuses to give her exact age", so it's probably best to leave it out of her biography here. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 18:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Masters of Destruction

FYI, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masters of Destruction (2nd nomination). ·:· Will Beback ·:· 00:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, left a note. JBsupreme (talk) 05:25, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Cum shot

Just wondering why you removed the topics in the 'See also' section? They are closely linked.

Horoshi1820 (talk) 17:22, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I explained why in my edit summary. If they are closely linked then you can link to them within the body of the article using prose and wiki links. JBsupreme (talk) 17:23, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Question

(removed non-free image which was disruptively uploaded to commons)

what was disruptive about uploading this image to commons?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lil_Wayne.jpg

Ohthislife (talk) 06:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

fake licensing dude. JBsupreme (talk) 06:30, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I am the author. I own the copyright. What is fake about this? Ohthislife (talk) 07:50, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for confirming this with OTRS helpdesk. JBsupreme (talk) 21:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Will be kind enough to place it back up please? Ohthislife (talk) 01:41, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

List of fictional governments

For your attention, a recent AFD you were involved in has gone up for a deletion review here. Ryan4314 (talk) 21:10, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

		Merry Christmas!
		DiverseMentality is wishing you a Merry Christmas! Hope you have a great Christmas day and a happy holiday season. Stay safe! DiverseMentality 08:39, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Rojas (2nd nomination)

My apologies. I assumed that a proposed deletion would count as a previous nomination, and therefore I used the afd2 template. Thank you for adjusting. Delaque (talk) 08:59, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

You got it. JBsupreme (talk) 22:34, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Article on Miss Pooja

Hi, Thanks for keeping an eye on this article. You reverted my contribution to this article, by saying that these contain unreliable sources. Please reconsider it, as i added the content and links by carefully searching the info and strongly feel that these were reliable sources. If you feel this is not the case, Please tell me how to differentiate between reliable and unreliable sources. Quality check 15:44, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Yaki Kadafi

Deleting blatantly unsourced content is good and all, however, you might wanna get in the habit of removing following categories too. I have saved you the bother this time, but I won't always be sorting through categories. Is it possible that you've done this "mistake" on other articles? Please reply on your talk page, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 18:19, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

You are the yin to my yang. JBsupreme (talk) 22:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

You mean that in a good way? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:19, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I think so!  :) JBsupreme (talk) 04:14, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

~

lindsay lohan

what about the already existing screenshots of lohan in parent trap and antother world Anywhere But Home (talk) 16:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

and what about christian bale's article......he has a picture of him in the movie Equilibrium.....and anothe one in the movie The Machinist .......and he is a living person......why is it ok for his article and not for lohans.......Anywhere But Home (talk) 16:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

if u dont reply i have no choice but to revert........Anywhere But Home (talk) 16:57, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

congratulations on your second block this month JBsupreme (talk) 05:50, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

deletes

were you implying at the Jackley Budden afd that for the dozen or so other articles today & yesterday where I've said delete, that you want to keep them? (smile)DGG (talk) 22:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for Bezgovo cvrtje

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Bezgovo cvrtje. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedy-deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

debby gibson

why did you take off the link for videos? all the websites has ads and affiliated links. Its very disrespecting to the small website owners. You start a website put any content and promote it then you will know the pain. No we don't do that we just destroy the other website by deleting the external links for no reason and help the greedy corporate world. If you want to remove that link you should delete all the website that has ads and any other affiliate links. Debby Gibson is not popular like Britney spears . so im trying to spread the word for the artists i like. and you guys keep deleting if they are not popular. there is cnn.com, imbd.com and many other links that has ads. why don't you remove them? so wiki runs this website with their own money? they get donations from other websites. Where do they get these donations? from all of us its a team work we are like a family. so don't delete the link. its extremely unfair. If you invest some money and run something then you will know what it feel likes and what a business is. Ediing something on wiki that you may have no idea is not appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jag666 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

WP:EL JBsupreme (talk) 14:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

spam??

How can you say its spam? you allow webpages that has cookies ans steel your information. Its very ridiculous. I didn't do anything that to get blocked. In case if you want to do it tell them to block me. People don't come to your site. You don't have genuine reason to remove the links i posted. You can put myspace, youtube , IMDB and many sites. Im telling you one more time everyone runs their websites with affliate ads. No one runs with their own money. Im a promoter for indie artists and many artists know me. don't let teh bad word spread that your going against small websites and indie artists. They will come and complaint on your editors .

Jag666 (talk) 17:49, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Anne Frank

Are you not supposed to wikilink terms that are part of quotes? I still don't know everything. Belasted (talk) 20:58, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Bushwick Bill

The interview was conducted in Hazlehurst, MS and is not posted on the internet. What do I need to do in order to have this published. The information brings up to date the biographical information of the artist. TraceySoup —Preceding unsigned comment added by Traceysoup (talk • contribs) 02:55, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Well it needs to be published somewhere, otherwise it isn't really verifiable. Can you read WP:RS for me and make your best judgement on whether the source you're referring to is actually "reliable" ? JBsupreme (talk) 07:07, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kawran_Bazar

Would you please reconsider based on addition of references and content? --Ragib (talk) 18:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Cake decorating

Hi JB. I see you did some cleaning up on this article. For the content removed in this edit [4] though, I didn't understand how the change improved the article. The content needs better citations, but seem to be pretty valuable. Am I missing something? ChildofMidnight (talk) 19:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes you're missing sources which corroborate what is being written! Fix that please, if you can. We can't keep unverifiable content around forever, sorry. JBsupreme (talk) 06:05, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Did you try looking for sources? You might try Google News and Google Books. Those are two good places to find citations. ChildofMidnight (talk) 16:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes I did. I did not find sources that specifically corroborated this content. Did you? JBsupreme (talk) 16:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Back to the Future: The Ride

Please do not remove images, especially images of the attraction's exterior, without explanation. If you have a problem with the image, please begin a discussion on the talk page for the article before reverting it.--Snowman Guy (talk) 16:03, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

You already have a message on your talk page. You are violating copyright and our fair use policy. Stop doing that. Stat. JBsupreme (talk) 16:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

No, my message concerned the potential deletion of the image, yet images on articles (even tagged ones) should not been removed unlkess a valid reason is given on the talk page. Once the image is deleted, it will be safe to delte it from the article seeing how there is no longer an image there.

Also, you may have violated Wikipedia:Civility with multiple editors in that you have been impolite to them. Please do not breach this.--Snowman Guy (talk) 16:38, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Stop stealing images. Thanks. "The website is down" doesn't mean we have permission to violate their copyright. JBsupreme (talk) 16:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but the ride which the image displays has been closed for two years, and cannot be replaced with a free variant.--Snowman Guy (talk) 16:52, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

In response to your edit summary comment, it is not an opinion; read this article: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/09/03/america/NA-GEN-US-Theme-Park-Ride.php --Snowman Guy (talk) 17:22, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Les Henderson

An article that you have been involved in editing, Les Henderson, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Les Henderson (2nd nomination). Thank you. --WeatherFug (talk) 23:09, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Rand Paul

Rand Paul has been overhauled. This may affect your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rand Paul. This message is being copied to 8 people. JJB 07:51, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alésia Glidewell

Please expand your nomination reasoning per my comments on the AFD. On second thought they seem a bit harshly worded, but I'm confident your skin is thick enough to take it. Apologies anyway. I'll be happy to retract the comment once the issue has been resolved. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Edit summaries

I won't belabor a point that has, I see, been made before, but I am compelled to note that even if one doesn't care to use edit summaries generally, he should at least use them when affixing an XfD template to a page (see, e.g., Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#How to list pages for deletion). 68.249.0.104 (talk) 20:38, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

April 2009

Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit of yours to the article United Bamboo Gang has an edit summary that appears to be inaccurate or inappropriate. Please use edit summaries that accurately tell other editors what you did, and feel free to use the sandbox for any tests you may want to do. Thank you. - Kingpin13 (talk) 08:32, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

sock

Hey JB. re: this. You have anything in lines of a discussion, consensus, policy, RfC or anything that would somehow equate dab to self-reference? I looked and didn't see anything, but if you're familiar with how and why a disambiguation would be a self-reference I'd like to read up on that. Not trying to argue at all here .. just curious. — Ched :  ?  16:28, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes I do. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SELFREF#Community_and_website_feature_references -- Hope this helps, its a fairly old rule of thumb. Think of it in terms of derivative works. It is a good idea to avoid wiki-linking beyond article namespace within an article. I am just one person though so if you want broader input perhaps bring it up on the Village Pump or Admin Noticeboard? JBsupreme (talk) 16:31, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I thank you sir. (assumed gender .. lol). I'll read through that, seems like a good start. I asked JHunterJ for input too, he seems to be pretty active in the dab area. I'm not really looking to start any major discussion on it, just kind of looking around and trying to get a feel for what is and isn't right for dab. Appreciate your time, and have a good day/night ;) — Ched :  ?  17:12, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:ANI

There is currently a thread on WP:ANI concerning your edit summaries found here. — Σxplicit 20:35, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Edit summaries again

JBsupreme, the rough consensus at the thread on ANI is that your edit summaries are still not acceptable. They've improved considerably in the past month or so, but they're still laced with gratuitous profanity [5] [6] in some cases explicitly directed at others [7] [8] [9], even if not directly describing them, as was problematic before. Really the problem is not profanity per se as much as it is incivility, but the former contributes to the latter.

Given the tepid response of admins at ANI, I hesitate to say that you'll be blocked if this issue continues at its current level. So, my suggestions are two-fold. First, despite the messages above, not using any edit summaries would be the lesser of two evils (it's rarely disruptive to leave it blank, although it's a bit discourteous). If you can't resist cursing in edit summaries or typing them aggressively in all caps, then just don't use them! If you can write them more neutrally, then all the better. Second, if you need page protection, go to WP:RFPP to request it. That will work better than asking for it in edit summaries.

Something that went unsaid at ANI is that many of your edits (including those at issue) are enforcing the WP:BLP policy. That is hugely important and we need all the help we can get with BLPs. I understand that the poor sourcing and intentional defamation can be frustrating to deal with. I encourage you to work with others on the BLP Noticeboard or to contact me directly on my talk page to get some help with difficult BLPs. A helping hand, especially one with admin tools, could make it easier.--chaser - t 05:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Andy Samberg article

Why do you have keep deleting the impressions section of the Andy Samberg article? It is useful information that is properly cited, and an impressions list are fixtures of other SNL cast members' pages, such as Bill Hader and Darrell Hammond Nobody else has any problem with that addition, and I would note that there are numerous complaints of your unnecessary deletion of articles and sections of articles in this talk page. And quoting from WP: Other stuff exists article in response to your last reason for deletion,

In an article's deletion debate, an editor unfamiliar with guidelines may vote to keep an article solely because articles similar to it exist. Another contributor may respond simply by saying that just because other stuff exists does not mean that the article in question should be kept. While perhaps a legitimate response, the automatic dismissal of such a statement is just as lacking in rationale and thus the second user has provided no reason to delete the article.

Angry, Purplebackpack89 (talk) 20:57, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

You are adding tons of unsourced trivia. Your WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument holds no water. I cannot stress this enough. It is a list of trivia. It does not use prose. It does not cite THIRD PARTY PUBLICATIONS which would show evidence of its specific notability. It is original research. Get it? Good. JBsupreme (talk) 20:58, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Please stop confusing Wikipedia as a fansite. It is not intended to be one. JBsupreme (talk) 21:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

If my WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS holds no water, neither does your WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, per my quote. I would note that it does cite a source. Your attack borders on vandalism. And where did anything about fan pages come up? Purplebackpack89 (talk) 21:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Wait a minute...you just deleted the Bill Hader impressions--something NOBODY ELSE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD had a problem with--just to deflate my argument. You are using Wikipedia as your own personal power tripPurplebackpack89 (talk) 21:08, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Wrong. You are using Wikipedia as a fansite and a dumping grounds for trivial data. Stop it. Please. JBsupreme (talk) 21:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

A) I didn't put the Bill Hader impressions there, only the Samberg one, which I see you deleted again without the edit summaries everybody on your talk page begs you to write B) You act like you're God. You're not. The Hader impressions page had been there for months, then you go around deleting and ruining stuff for EVERYBODY ON WIKIPEDIA. I feel like reporting you. I know I'm a snark, but you've peeved me Purplebackpack89 (talk) 06:47, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Dude. Why do have this feeling you are stalking my every move? By the way, I would note that I am not the only one displeased by your deletions Purplebackpack89 (talk) 03:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Try not to make personal attacks which violate WP:NPA policy and I won't have to remove them. Its unfortunate that some people are displeased with my "deletions" as you put it, but fanboys and fangirls are inevitably bound to be displeased when trivial and unsourced information is removed against their wishes. I think I've over-explained this situation to you in several different forums by now. Feel free to respond to any one of them. JBsupreme (talk) 03:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Dude, it's like you check those articles every five minutes. And this is hypocritical; you've accused me of being a fanboy 5-6xPurplebackpack89 (talk) 06:11, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Paul "Coy" Allen

I just did a bit of an overhaul on this article. I don't have the time or desire to work on it any further, but I improved the tone and style of the article. Cleaned it up quite a bit. I thought that, perhaps, considering your areas of focus, you may be interested in working on this article, getting the information referenced and balancing the tone. If not, disregard this. لennavecia 20:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Necro

Why do you keep on un-doing my contributions to the Necro page? The acting info is all true as its listed on Necro aka Ron Braunstein's myspace page, go check: www.myspace.com/ronbraunstein1 maybe you didnt know, now you know, he acts now, and he has been making announcments to the fans about it through myspace as far as the touring, its evident he is on Rock The Bells, go check their website their is 100 articles stating Necro is on the tour, and if you check youtube, their is proof of Necro performing all over the world, in every country so I dont understand why you are editing what I added can you please stop because you are wasting my precious time everytime you do that thank you Knowledgeofself777 (talk) 05:02, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

This guy has a history of deleting large portions of articles for inexplicable reasons, as numerous talk posts point out. You should report him for this. I did Purplebackpack89 (talk) 18:10, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Myspace should never be used as a source in this encyclopedia. Full stop. JBsupreme (talk) 03:27, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Who are you to decide that myspace should never be used as a source? I happen to know that it's Necro aka Ron Braunstein's page, and the info is correct You seem to be a on a power control kick, but you should really stay away from Necro's page, because you have nothing to contribute, all you do is erase things, get a life man I am gonna keep un-doing what you keep messing with, so if you wanna play that game fine but I have a right to add relevant information as much as you, not that you add anything, you just mess with other people's add ons, stop being annoying PLEASE! Knowledgeofself777 (talk) 06:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

He's right as far as WP:SELFPUB goes. But I haven't looked at the article, so Knowledgeofself777 should not take that as any kind of endorsement of whatever he's doing. Oh, and repeatedly undoing somebody's removal of negative unsourced material is the fastest way to earn yourself a 3RR block. I'll come back and look at this tomorrow when I have more time. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.--chaser - t 02:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

[10]. Cheers.--chaser - t 21:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

FYI

Hello, JBsupreme. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. PhilKnight (talk) 18:49, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. I know I have been curt in the past, but beyond that I think this is a matter which may need some sort of dispute resolution, as mentioned on the noticeboard. What steps should I take if that is indeed necessary? JBsupreme (talk) 01:20, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Blog?

Can you read the non-English portions of http://dactrung.net/baiviet/noidung.aspx?BaiID=4bQIsJnb4X9da02SdaBlKw%3d%3d ? --Ronz (talk) 01:42, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Invisible pink unicorn

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Invisible_Pink_Unicorn&action=history I just thought it was strange to have an external links label, with no external links. I went through the history, and found there used to be quite a few. So I just had a quick look through the links. They seemed fairly relevant, so I copy and pasted them back in. That's all. -OOPSIE- (talk) 05:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:911ct supporters

Template:911ct supporters has been nominated for deletion by Ice Cold Beer. As this TfD nomination includes objections to the same list of people that is currently in use in Template:911ct, I am inviting you to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. (I am sending this message to you as a current or former editor of Alex Jones (radio host), following the guideline on multiple messages.) Regards —  Cs32en  08:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

There may be hope for us yet

Check out this discussion. Why it even got closed is bizarre, but the AFD is going again. Cheers.--chaser (talk) 03:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Re: Stop adding people to Muslim categories

Ok, I understand. But can I keep categorizing if there are any reliable sources to claim this? DaDopeboy (talk) 20:30, 6 May 2009 (JST)

Ok. I appreciate your announcement. DaDopeboy (talk) 1:17, 7 May 2009 (JST)

Protection and vandalism reports

Again, this isn't going to get the article semi-protected. Ask for protection at WP:RFPP and ask to get vandals blocked at WP:AIV. That'll be faster and cause less stress.--chaser (talk) 16:11, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Your Edit Summary on Knowledgeofself777

I realize that it is frustrating having any of your userspace vandalized as mine has been vandalized before, but I just wanted to comment that your edit summary on Knowledgeofself777 made me laugh out loud and for that I thank you. :) Cheers, --ThoseStarsBurnLikeDiamonds stargaze 07:08, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks ThoseStarsBurnLikeDiamonds, its a little frustrating when someone doesn't get the message and keeps reinserting WP:BLP violations. I haven't had that much to drink tonight so I'm doing my best to hold back and maintain.  :-/ JBsupreme (talk) 07:19, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Understandable, but you're doing a good job. Just keep on truckin' and enjoy this glass of whisky!  :) Cheers, --ThoseStarsBurnLikeDiamonds stargaze 07:25, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

ANI

Hello, JBsupreme. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 14:03, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi there. Regarding Khia's "My Neck, My Back"...

Hello. So I just saw that you reverted my last edit to the "Early Controversy" section, as my edit deleted the unreferenced section tag you added and instead I replaced it with a source. The source I replaced your tag with simply redirected to the charts section of the article. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming the reason why you added the tag to begin with is because none of the chart positions in that section were sourced? However they are sourced, just not in that section, but rather, in the chart section itself. If you were adding the 'unreferenced section' tag because of another part of that section, it's best to add a "" tag to the content in question instead. Thanks. Percxyz (Call me Percy, it's easier) 19:06, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

No it is not best to add a fact tag. I'm not sure where you ever heard that. Jimbo Wales disagrees. JBsupreme (talk) 19:55, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, why are you citing a diff? Do not cite another Wikipedia article as a source, and definitely do not cite a diff. If you have a valid source for something, just cite the actual source. JBsupreme (talk) 19:56, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

No no, I didn't cite another article, nor did I cite a diff. I cited the charts section within the same article. I figured that since you felt the need to add an unreferenced section tag, I'd take it out and, instead of re-adding the sources from the charts section, add one source that leads to the chart section itself. Either way, I ended up citing the chart positions within the Early Controversy (now Backgrond) section without citing the article itself, so I hope that clears it up. Percxyz (Call me Percy, it's easier) 21:54, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

That's more like it, thanks Percyxz. JBsupreme (talk) 23:22, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Dwele

I was wondering if I can quote the artist himself on his birthday without you deleting it. Thanks skiguy06880 15:45, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

In short, no you cannot. JBsupreme (talk) 16:43, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

By the way, celebrities/musicians/actors lie about their age all the time. So do the people who handle their publicity, for various reasons. Please find and cite a trusted and reliable source (in the form of an unrelated third party publication) or don't mention it at all. JBsupreme (talk) 16:44, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Necro (rapper)

I've protected the article indefinitely to end the edit war. Please discuss any disputes on the article's talk page. I realize Knowledgeofself has been less than cooperative, but I will take that into account if he doesn't attempt to amicably resolve this. Oh, and please let me know if you see any outstanding BLP issues on the page. I will remove them quickly or you can drop a note at ANI.--chaser (talk) 12:49, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

FYI

Deletion of Bilateral relation pages despite ongoing merging effort Ed Fitzgerald _{t / c} 08:30, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Maravilla

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Maravilla. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maravilla (4th nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:41, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Maino

Did you delete most of the information on the Maino page because it was sourced mostly by his personal site? I did this mainly because of the fact that there are not many other "reliable sources of information". I do realize that this does not excuse the article from meeting the wikipedia standards, but perhaps you could contact me with some possible reliable information sources that I could extract data from. Any help is appreciated. DroKIDCASH (talk) 01:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)DroKIDCASH

Steppin: The Movie

I just did a quick copyedit at the article. While it still needs to be adequately sourced, I think with respects, a withdrawal may be in order to allow it to further be improved. The cast alone shows its gonna get coverage, as it was finally released only 8 days ago. I was able to cite it being the both the directorial debut and last film for Michael Taliferro. It might be best to see where this one goes. Maybe? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:37, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

OTOH, I also added my opinion over at the AFD, with a very different conclusion. There's no proof this film was ever actually released. Dori ❦ (Talk ❖ Contribs ❖ Review) ❦ 03:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

IP

I unblocked the IP 73.93.78.209 because amid all the vandalism there was a single sincere and productive editor who was trying hard. The unblock let him register an account, and I hope he will become an asset to Wikipedia. I will be happy to schoolblock the IP now that that's done: there's no need to shout. It's a useful reminder that IP blocks can prevent both the good and the bad from editing. Acroterion _(talk) 22:22, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I particularly like the edit summary the 99% left us earlier today: "EXCUSE ME I'M A GENEOUS." You can't make that stuff up. Acroterion _(talk) 22:25, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

:-) JBsupreme (talk) 22:37, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Red Bull Cola

"Lets be careful with what we add to the Red Bull Cola article. Every report I've read so far (and yes, I've read them all quite thoroughly) seems to contradict itself or say that the ingredients used by Red Bull are de-cocainized. There is no WP:DEADLINE here so lets wait until this has been fact checked by another reliable agency before we go around proclaiming Red Bull has cocaine in it, trace amounts or not. There are legal issues here at stake and there is no reason to intentionally cause harm to the reputation of Red Bull or put Wikipedia in any type of danger. Is there? JBsupreme (talk) 00:49, 28 May 2009 (UTC)"

Every article I've read says .4 microns. I don't care about the Red Bull corporation. They won't sue us for reporting a fact, just like they haven't sued any major news corporations. Do you know how I know there's cocaine in it? It's being banned for having cocaine in it.

The information stays up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PÆonU (talk • contribs) 01:01, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

And yet it is still on the shelves right this very minute everywhere else. LOL. You should not be allowed to edit Wikipedia. JBsupreme (talk) 04:52, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I have blocked KiddFann

I noticed his most recent funky edit and decided to check out his contributions. Every one of them is some sort of date-changing or number-changing vandalism except for a few that are a slightly different kind of vandalism (e.g. to Hallmark Channel). Thanks for your vigilant vandal-fighting. --Richard (talk) 01:04, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

West Coast hip hop

Sorry about the West Coast hip hop edit. I just noticed that the previous version which had numerous amounts of information had been replaced by 3 sentences. Can we get some more information on the West Coast page including stylistic attributes including origins and ties to East Coast? Thanks. Gobberpooper (talk) 04:30, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

We sure can! But we need to cite sources for any content we add. WP:CITE Wikipedia has a strict policy which prohibits original research WP:NOR. So long as it is verifiable through a reliable third party publication, lets go ahead! JBsupreme (talk) 06:05, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

that page was pretty good before - shame all that stuff got cut out of it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.193.81.47 (talk) 22:30, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

A favour?

Could you possibly help me? I can't revert an edit on the Bill Verna article due to WP:3RR. I noticed that you saw what I saw about reliable publications. Look at the history and you'll see what I mean. And look out. The user who is reverting me has a habit of issuing arbitrary warnings first (which I've taken to ANI just FYI). TaintedZebra (talk) 06:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it, I'm used to arbitrary warnings from people who cannot comprehend our editorial policies. That said, I'm only making edits that I feel are absolutely necessary and I will only be making them once. Thanks for the note. JBsupreme (talk) 06:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Source issue

I know you have been active on several articles about street gangs, so I wanted to get your input on using streetgangs.com as a source. Personally, I don't think it meets the standards of being a reliable source. The problem with the gang articles often if lack of reliable sources (and vandalism by wannabe's). Sometimes I'm willing to give the source a pass if it's being used in a very limited role, but when it is being used for important parts of the article, I'm less inclined to turn a blind eye towards it. I kind of wanted to see if I'm the only one thinking this way before I made an issue of it in some of the articles. Any input would be appreciated. Thanks. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:37, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Ryan Ross

Hi, you removed several paragraphs from Ryan Ross, without an edit summary, was there a reason for this. There seems to be several attempts to reduce the size of article recently. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:23, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Unsourced WP:BLP. -- I have reinstated the redirect as per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brendon Urie (2nd nomination). If the best we can come up with as a community is two meager sentences then there is no reason to overturn this. Lets see if the growth can happen organically in the parent article before we go about creating dozens of microstubs. JBsupreme (talk) 04:40, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that, at least it is not an anti Ryan Ross bias. I will now leave it alone. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:13, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Reliable source question

I'm sure you are a lot more informed on the reliable sources in for the rap genre than I am. I was wondering if you'd take a look at the sources in the article Cashis and tell me if you'd consider rapbasement.com and dashadyspot.com as WP:RS or not. Also maybe give the article a look and see what your opinions are if you have time. Thanks. Niteshift36 (talk) 04:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Questioning Sources

I am curious as to why you have considered The B.O.S.S. Board a WP:RS for Crooked I information. Have you contact both Crooked I and Treacherous Records before making such a claim? I think that before discrediting a source you should definitely examine it's background. EFFeX2K9 (talk) 20:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Who are you and where did you come from? How in the world is it a credible source fit for an encyclopedia? JBsupreme (talk) 21:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I run that site for Crooked I, that's why it's a reliable source. EFFeX2K9 (talk) 19:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.9.36.172 (talk)

Umm. You might want to read this. WP:COI. JBsupreme (talk) 05:00, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Strong Medicine

I gave it a week of semi-protection per your edit-summary "request":) Looks like it's just periodic flare-ups of vandalism, so that should quench this spate of it. DMacks (talk) 08:37, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. JBsupreme (talk) 17:24, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I have a suggestion. Go to Special:Preferences, then the "Gadgets" tab and click the box for "Twinkle" under "Editing gadgets". Twinkle adds, among other things, a tab to request page protection. Alternatively, add the WP:RFPP link to your userpage so you have it handy.--chaser (talk) 23:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Michael

I have sourced and cleaned up Andy Michael. The multiple sources posted by Ap3253 (talk · contribs) prove that Andy Michael passes WP:BIO, so the article should be kept. I hope you take another look at the article and the newly-discovered sources and re-evaluate your vote at this AfD. Thank you, Cunard (talk) 19:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Undid revision on Music of Detroit

I'm relatively new to WP as an active editor so possibly I'm missing something "obvious". However, you made a revision to Music of Detroit for which the edit summary says merely, (Undid revision 302171444 by Dfjhsdf39 (talk)).

It appears to me that that revision consisted of little more than the addition of "Big Herk, K-Deezy," to the list of Detroit rappers. However, your change (a) removed the entire paragraph listing all of those rappers (from previous edits as well), (b) removed five entire paragraphs from another section, and (c) added more text (about 20 words) still elsewhere. (It's rather confusing, since the summaries don't match the diffs shown by WP.)

I'm wondering if you meant to make all those changes or if some of them were inadvertent. If you intended them, your mods aren't really well covered by the simple "undid revision" summary. (Seems to be a problem you've been working on, from other notes on your Talk page.)

Also, the paragraphs you removed were all in one section (1980s), so you removed the whole section, but now the article has a big jump from the 1970s to the 1990s. Hey, I didn't like the music of Detroit in the 80s either, but the article shouldn't have that hole.

I'd be inclined, even as a novice editor, to revert your change as obvious vandalism, sneaking in extensive edits under the guise of some simple reversion. However, you appear to have been around a long time, and seem to edit in good faith, even if your edit summaries aggravate people. So I'll just leave this note, and hope for some clarification here, but please add back the 1980s section. Thanks! –JohnFromPinckney (talk) 12:27, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Please add sources for said section. JBsupreme (talk) 16:32, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

It appears this has been an issue for 8 months now, so I will be challenging a few more sections full of original research as well. JBsupreme (talk) 16:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, JBsupreme. Thanks for taking another look. Sorry, I don't expect to be adding any sources, as I've never heard of a lot of these claims or even many of the performers. It looks like your tagging activity has provoked one SmackBot into action, though, so maybe things are looking better already. (The page has truly needed work. No wonder it was already tagged.) Three other minor things:

(1) I notice your most recent mods don't have any edit summary at all. Is that usual for WP editors?

(2) I see you changed the Article issues-expand tag at the top of the article to an original research parameter, but you left the date as November 2008. Isn't that misleading? Or how does the dating on those work?

(3) Last and indeed least: You changed the title of this section. I know it's your Talk page, but why did you do that?

Thanks for the welcome to WP, and I hope we can work more together. –JohnFromPinckney (talk) 06:13, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't both making edit summaries for every single edit I do, if it becomes a hard and fast rule that its necessary then a change should be made to the software. The article has had original research issues prior to 2008 and we need sourcing before we need expansion. The expansion tag is mostly useless IMHO. Take care and thanks for stopping by JBsupreme (talk) 06:18, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Miss Pooja

eh, i got sources for the tour in Canada, and I tagged it, plus a new photo so clear it and let me edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.204.53.235 (talk) 16:56, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Two things. 1. Mpnew2009sswhwrw.JPG looks like an obvious copyright violation. 2. We do not allow sourcing to OTHER wikis for WP:BLP articles. JBsupreme (talk) 17:11, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Godfather Of The Ghetto

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Godfather Of The Ghetto. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Godfather Of The Ghetto. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:24, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Stacks on Deck Entertainment

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Stacks on Deck Entertainment. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stacks on Deck Entertainment. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:04, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Brad Hanson

Hi, I removed the {{db-repost}} tag from this article, because (if I've figured correctly) this is not the article which was deleted, but a different one (and a completely different person, in fact. Let me know if I made a mistake, though. -- Deville (Talk) 00:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I cannot view deleted revisions, but it seems (to me) to be the same person, but maybe I'm wrong. The lack of sources is also problematic and violates WP:BLP so maybe I'll just nominate it for deletion the old fashioned way?? What do you think should be done? JBsupreme (talk) 00:39, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Axialis IconWorkshop

Hello JBsupreme, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Axialis IconWorkshop has been removed. It was removed by WikiLaurent with the following edit summary '(app is notable - added ref)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with WikiLaurent before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 23:06, 3 August 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Kevin Park

Thank you for following up by nominating the article for deletion, and for deleting the related mentions in other articles. Much appreciated, 99.149.84.135 (talk) 21:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Ice-T

I agree with your edit on Ice-T regarding his residence. I was simply trying to play peacemaker and avoid a revert war by trying to tone down the editor's blatantly unencyclopedic tone. Thanks. --Manway (talk) 22:53, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Its cool I know you were only helping. JBsupreme (talk) 22:55, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Gangs list

I undid the edit you made to List of criminal organizations. Along with deleting a huge chunk (the "Other groups or mafias" section) it also brought back some of Bobmack89x's dubious edits (if we start including public sector organizations we dont like, what's next? If I was left wing I could put the Bush Administration next to the drug dealers, mobsters and street gangs making up this here list). Thoughts? 80.229.27.35 (talk) 02:26, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Archiving

Would you like me to archive your talk page for you? :) --Scythre^Talk_Contribs 09:28, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thats okay, but thank you for asking. Who has the biggest talk page of them all? I wonder. JBsupreme (talk) 09:29, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

That's what I did

I tried to fix it multiple times. I wasn't whining. I was just letting people know that subst:afdx didn't work the way that it should. Pointing me WP:SOFIXIT was pointless. Maybe Michig should have been pointed to that. Joe Chill (talk) 15:34, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Oops. Sorry. I just noticed that was who you were talking to. Joe Chill (talk) 15:35, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Hammer and "it's all good"

Why would you revert the erroneous statement that "It's All Good" was "the first and most successful song" with that title? It may have been the most successful but it was certainly not the first. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MC_Hammer&diff=next&oldid=305768621 ] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.142.156 (talk) 03:50, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

List of Puerto Ricans

Gloria Velez's name was removed from the list because the "header" clearly states that all additions must provide a reliable verifiable source, per Wikipedia policy, which cites the person's notability and/or the person's link to Puerto Rico, no exceptions. If you can provide said source, feel free to add the name once more. Thank you. Tony the Marine (talk) 07:52, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tony. I have no intention to add the name back, but thank you for your note. JBsupreme (talk) 08:14, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Asian Boyz Gang

Hello JBsupreme, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Asian Boyz Gang - a page you tagged - because: never AFDed and there are 100+ GNews hits for this. Take it to WP:AFD if needed. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. SoWhy 09:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Related AfD

You've been a regular contributor to the article on the Crips. Would you mind giving your opinion on this WP:Articles for deletion/Eight Tray Gangster Crips? Thanks. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:35, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

West Coast hip hop

What's going on, JBsupreme? You up for working on the West Coast hip hop page? I've actually been working on it for a little bit myself at my page. It's not much right now but it's obviously more than what's on the page at this point. If you want to see the work I've done thus far, click here. Let me know. WikiGuy86 (talk) 01:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Inquiry

An editor commenting on the genre/subgenre issue of the article Straight Outta Compton is interested in advice for a resolution. Do u mind checking it out? (See Talk:Straight Outta Compton) Dan56 (talk) 03:36, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Joris Jarsky

I sure wasn't happy with the unsourced one-sentence stub someone put up as an article... nor with their removing the AfD template (since returned)... but after bit of research I began to find some decent sources. So... I have begun improving the article. I am not through by any means, but please keep an eye on it as I continue. Your opinions are always welcome. Thanks, MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 04:16, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Found 4 articles specifically about him. Did some slight expansion and added the cites. Also added a partial filmography. I have found him in numerous one of two line mentions in dozens of other sources... but I only added the ones that were significant. Its beginning to look like a suitable stub. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 07:39, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Howie Day

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the article which you can see at Talk:Howie Day/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:18, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Red Rooster (drink)

Hello JBsupreme, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Red Rooster (drink) has been removed. It was removed by DGG with the following edit summary '(product of major company, prob. notable, look for sources.)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with DGG before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 21:06, 10 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)

Hey, regarding your edits to Sorority Row

No, no. I dare not accuse a reg. user of vandalism. I just wanted to stop by and say, firstly, thanks. Not many editors/wikipedians seem to be paying this article ANY mind, especially on a regular basis. And, yes, ya got meh. I mispelled "minutes"; it happens.

On the flip side, though, I would ask that you:
A. Try to alter the general tone of your edits. They seem...snarky and dismissive.
B. Perhaps, just perhaps, do more to improve the article directly, rather than just making minor edits and slapping on templates/warnings. Every little bit helps. but big edits help even more.

G'day. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 17:16, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Red Bull

Red Bull originated from an energy drink from Thailand called Krating Daeng.

There is already a link to Krating Daeng, the brand "Red Bull" as described within the article was developed by an Austrian businessman who fashioned his product after Krating Daeng. To say the brand Red Bull itself originated from Thailand is misleading, as that would be false. JBsupreme (talk) 17:46, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

ATTN Redirect

Great call on this edit. I just fixed the other similar redirect pages. —Notyourbroom (talk) 17:14, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you sir. JBsupreme (talk) 19:16, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

The recent accusations of bad faith against you

Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:Tothwolf. I have used your interaction with Tothwolf as evidence in a civility notice about him. You may be interested in followup. Miami33139 (talk) 19:24, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, JBsupreme. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Last One (Aqua Teen Hunger Force).
Message added 23:16, 27 September 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

warrior4321 23:16, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Deleting a bunch of stuff on the Del page

Hey,

I know the Del page needs to be cleaned up a lot, but wouldn't it make more sense to put a bunch of "citation needed" notices instead of deleting multiple paragraphs of info? I think that a lot of that stuff could be backed up if people just took the time to cite it. It seems counterproductive to me to just get rid of it all. I know you could just pull it back from the history and cite it, but people may not know to look. What do you think?

Thanks,

Orblivion (talk) 22:09, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I would maybe post something on the talk page. Actually, I'll do that later on tonight. If we cannot source it then WP:BLP dictates it does not belong in the article. JBsupreme (talk) 05:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Cool. Actually, most of it should be pretty easy to source (this DVD came out here, this CD was supposed to come out but never did, etc). And the whole last paragraph containing the long quotes, I looked them up, and were copied verbatim from a record label's website, so it should be rewritten anyway. I'll copy that stuff to the talk page since you haven't gotten around to it yet. Orblivion (talk) 12:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Tothwolf

Tothwolf started an ANI report about his assumption that Miami, you, and I are meatpuppets. Joe Chill (talk)

He has been tossing around bad faith accusations for weeks. Shrug, he's not worth my time. JBsupreme (talk) 05:39, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

CSD-A7

Hi there,

Please be aware that CSD #A7 is "An article about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools), or web content...", and specifically does not apply to software. I'm removing the tags you placed on software articles.

Thanks. kmccoy (talk) 08:34, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: ERC (IRC client)

Hello JBsupreme, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of ERC (IRC client) - a page you tagged - because: A7 does not apply to software. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Closedmouth (talk) 08:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Template:Latest stable software release/ccorp-irc

Hello JBsupreme, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Template:Latest stable software release/ccorp-irc has been removed. It was removed by Closedmouth with the following edit summary '(rm invalid prod)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Closedmouth before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 20:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I hope you don't mind my asking

I'm sorry about our disagreements, what do you think I'm doing wrong, and how can I do better? --Tothwolf (talk) 23:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Hood 2 Hood: The Blockumentary

An article that you have been involved in editing, Hood 2 Hood: The Blockumentary, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hood 2 Hood: The Blockumentary. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Niteshift36 (talk) 08:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

We are being proposed for blocking at ANI

And neither of us have been notified of the proposal under some assumption that we follow ANI. I do, it is not apparent that you are. Miami33139 (talk) 17:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

It is pretty obvious that A) Wikipedia needs a lot of house cleaning and that B) the parties on ANI proposing such things have a clear conflict of interest. If someone wants to ban me for doing necessary house cleaning around here, be my guest! JBsupreme (talk) 18:00, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 October 2#Bullshido.net

Since you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bullshido.net (3rd nomination), which was closed as "no consensus", you may be interested in a subsequent DRV. Since I disagreed with the close, I contacted the closing admin, who responded, "To be honest, Cunard, I would tend to agree with you, but I am not sure if the balance of things heads to delete rather than no consensus. Listing it at DRV might be a good option here; I won't endorse or oppose the close and will allow the DRV community to decide it. Therefore, I have listed this article at DRV; if you would like to participate, please see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 October 2#Bullshido.net. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 21:12, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Hood 2 Hood

What you got against Hood 2 Hood: The Blockumentary? Portillo (talk) 11:44, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

• I thought he was pretty clear....that it's the same reasons I nominated it. The film isn't notable. It's been out for 4+ years and there is almost no coverage of it (We can't discount that one small circulation weekly newspaper). A nobody director made a film nobody cared about and distributed it thought a company that is non-notable. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh i didnt know it was you that nominated it. It may not be that famous, but its a part of the growing number of reality documentarys, you know about gangs, street fights etc. Portillo (talk) 05:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

• Being part of a growing number doesn't make it notable. There are a gorwiing number of computer programs, but all aren't notable and many get deleted. So do bands, albums, politicians and actors....all deleted because of lack of notability. The fact that this movie came and pretty much left without the media seeming to care indicates a lack of notability. Niteshift36 (talk) 11:49, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

WikiReader

Hi JB. I just left this comment on the WikiReader AFD you started --

"Actually, that's not correct. The earlier AFD was for something completely different -- Wikipedia:WikiReader, which was a wikis-to-print initiative that was the predecessor of Wikipedia:Books. This is a piece of hardware, developed by a completely different group. I'm not seeing the "self promotional spam" part, either; article was written by people unconnected with the project. Request withdrawal of AFD, based on faulty information."

I was around for the earlier WikiReader project (I have some of them!), and I am pretty confident that I'm right about this :) best, -- phoebe / (talk to me) 22:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

agree with phoebe, the first afd was from 2006 and does not refer to the device being currently called WikiReader. Having an afd tag affixed to the article chases away potential good edits, hoping for nom withdraw please kindly thanks good sirriffic (talk) 22:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evelyn Pepper

I made some comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evelyn Pepper which you may wish to review and respond to. -- Eastmain (talk) 22:44, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Agraceful

WP:BAND states: "Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network." I have provide proof of this. GaudiumInVeritate (talk) 17:05, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Sources

Although from a technical point of view you were right, it would have been a lot more helpfull if you would have looked for some sources yourself. Debresser (talk) 15:48, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I have been looking, and myspace.com and blogspot.org should never be used as a source in any article ever. Please remove them on your own. JBsupreme (talk) 15:49, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I disagree principally with removing information that is true, even if the sources are not good. Especially when, like in this case, the bad source comes together with a good source. If you are one of those who are more stringent in following these rules, that is not my business. I am not very interested in this article anyway. I came there in the first place just to fix some error messages. Debresser (talk) 16:02, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

It is just general Wikipedia practice not to cite our encyclopedic content to social networks (myspace, facebook) or twitter or blogs. For good reason, too. JBsupreme (talk) 16:17, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I know. But when the information is widely known and available, and alongside another, better source. Anyway, do with it whatever you deem necessary. Debresser (talk) 16:33, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

'closed as speedy keep'

i don't think 'speedy keep' was the correct close only after 1 day and limited votes. in fact, i suspect some sort of (probably IRC) collusion based on one of the SPAs who voted. i wonder if this should go to DRV? Theserialcomma (talk) 21:33, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

It probably should if the closer was not an admin. There was nothing really that warranted a speedy closure, and there is no point in cheating the entire editing community on a discussion just because they don't edit every 24 hours (or specifically check AFD every 24 hours). JBsupreme (talk) 22:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

It did run 5.5 days, not 24 hours, and what justified the snow was the unanimous support for keeping during that period. I often support DRVs of early closures, but this one seems fine even by a non-admin. DGG ( talk ) 10:42, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Hummus

Thank you for reverting nsaums edits to hummus. His pro-israel and pro-jew pov pushing at this, and many other articles, has been most troublesome. Its disgusting. Lactating goat (talk) 18:15, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Question

How do I add an article to the Proposed for Deletion list? I'm trying to have an advertisement article deleted and the prod tag was removed, so I need to add it to the list, but can't figure out what to type. How do I do it? PÆonU (talk) 07:34, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm probably the worst person to ask that since I always fuck it up (pardon my French ;)) but the instructions are apparently listed at WP:BEFORE, which is what you'd want to follow after a proposed deletion has been contested. Good luck to you! JBsupreme (talk) 05:35, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Cappadonna

Please stop removing Cappadonna's aliases and removing Theodore Unit from Cappadonna's page. Those are all correct. I don't want to have any revert wars with you, but why do you keep deleting them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lolipopz99 (talk • contribs) 03:31, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

It appears that you're "new" to Wikipedia, or at least your user account is. I don't care if they're correct or not, that field is not intended for nicknames and is not to be cluttered. I've added the appropriate standard note to the field to clear up any confusion on that. JBsupreme (talk) 05:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Well can you at least compromise and stop removing Theodore Unit? That's Cappadonna's Side project.--Lolipopz99 (talk) 06:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

That's fair. Inline sources are needed for that article, though. Please let me know if you need technical assistance in adding them. JBsupreme (talk) 06:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks! --Lolipopz99 (talk) 21:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

What can we do if ALL verifiable sources are false?

Regarding the discussion of Thalía's year of birth, what can we do if all verifiable sources on internet have the false information? Unfortunately, this is quite frequent in biography articles. For example, see Laura Zapata. Every source you can find claims that she was born in 1956... and I do know that she was born in 1952 and not 1956. Of course, you will ask how I know it. Well, I have a Mexican lawyer friend who has access to the Mexican Telephone Subscribers' Database and she looked it up once for me. And also it is an evidence that between her and Thalía there are 19 years of difference (according to several Mexican biographical magazines). However, you will not find the correct year of birth anywhere. This was just one example, and I would just like to call your attention that Wikipedia must handle also this problem. What is more important, the verifiability or the authenticity of an information? Obviously the second one. Regards, --El Mexicano (talk) 18:58, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, according to Wikipedia WP:V policy: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". That is open to some interpretation of course. To be honest though I really don't know what the best solution is in the case of Thalía since there are so many conflicting sources available. I think the earlier suggestion to report on both years of birth is best for now. Shrug. JBsupreme (talk) 19:05, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I've done it so. Please review it, as I don't speak English very well. Thanks. --El Mexicano (talk) 19:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Gwen Shepherd

Hi - I've rewritten the article since your "delete" at the AfD, and the nominator has withdrawn. It's been relisted for a second time, though, since there are still a couple of "deletes" on it. If you'd consider changing your "non-vote" it could just be closed already. --Paularblaster (talk) 11:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Naga Jolokia

I'd like to ask you why you renamed this article without any discussion on the talk page. ► RATEL ◄ 08:04, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I don't know, because that's how every single cited reference refers to it, not to mention Google hit counts are 2:1 for that name? I felt empowered to be bold. Please do let me know if you disagree, but this definitively is the common English name for this particular subject. JBsupreme (talk) 08:07, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Sun Clocks

Hi

US Government publications are in the public domain unless they claim otherwise. physics.nist.gov is one of those US government publications, so the material is public domain and does not need a CC or GFDL tag. The user also announced that they were the original author of the text. We could ask them to prove this, but it is actually unnecessary as it is public domain. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:39, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

What

How exactly was my edit to "Lil Jon" vandalism 128.211.198.168 (talk) 17:11, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for writing. I won't bother to comment if this was vandalism or not, but please do not cite wiki / user-editable websites for WP:BLP articles. If you have a good source for your changes please feel free to add it back. JBsupreme (talk) 17:45, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Hoshizaki Castle

hi there,

the information is based on the memorial stele which stands on the site of the former castle. I have uploaded some of the images on the Commons, they will require some stitching, etc. but once that is done I intend to reference the article to it[11]. Thank you for your concern. Gryffindor (talk) 22:22, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

❤

❤ - Allie ^❤ 06:55, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Alison.  :) JBsupreme (talk) 06:56, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

You weren't sure if that was vandalism

That was. I 4im-vand-ed him Purplebackpack89 (talk) 20:58, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

tmux deletion

In the archive of the deletion discussion (I didn't even know the thing had been brought up for deletion until today), you suggested someone might mention some "significant" references to tmux on your talk page. Here are some mentions I've found in the space of about three to five minutes surfing around the Web:

• tmux, a BSD alternative to GNU Screen
• tmux vs screen questions on openbsd-misc
• Replacing window(1) with tmux -- in the NetBSD base system, suggesting it is at least considered notable by the NetBSD community
• Scripting tmux
• tmux(1) in base -- it looks like it might make it into the FreeBSD base system, too
• Migrating to tmux from GNU/Screen
• Screen vs tmux at WikiVS

I'm curious about the reasons tmux is considered non-notable while GNU Screen, splitvt, and Twin (windowing system) are considered notable. There really isn't anything more notable about GNU Screen, as far as I can tell, other than the fact it has received more coverage by simple fact of having been around a lot longer. The actual notability of any instances of independent coverage of it do not seem greater, it does not serve any earth-shattering purpose that tmux does not serve just as well, and so on. It seems that either tmux should be undeleted or GNU Screen should be deleted (along with probably 98% of the other software articles on Wikipedia), especially since I'm not aware of any operating system maintainers talking about adding GNU Screen to the base system such that even on a non-GUI system there would be a terminal multiplexer.

I look forward to your response. Since I don't actually check other pages on Wikipedia very often these days, please feel free to ping me on my own talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Apotheon (talk • contribs) 23:32, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Monochrome BBS - a million eternal curses upon you, you deletionist swine!!!!

No, but seriously ... in the end I think that was fair enough really. I honestly had thought it would be rescuable but, goodness me, where were those articles I thought must exist? Perhaps dozens of them, well-referenced and of high scholarly quality?? Hmmmm, well, not anywhere very obvious, that's for sure. I even asked people who I think ought to have known things, but nothing was forthcoming. I guess as well as my previously-favoured theory (notable, but material difficult to find) I have to face the possibility that, er, it really wasn't that notable, or that the material never existed to support the idea of notability, or something. And because I am a (mostly-ex but longstanding) user of Mono I sort of wanted it to be notable, as well as honestly believing it was! I'm sorry that I got a little hot under the collar at one point. WP:TEA and all that!

Oh well, old news, and there's plenty more encyclopaedia to worry about. And if I do ever find half a library's worth of beautiful citeable material on it, buried in a dusty stack somewhere, I can always have another go! :) With best wishes, DBaK (talk) 10:45, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from 2.5D (machining)

Hello JBsupreme, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to 2.5D (machining) has been removed. It was removed by Wizard191 with the following edit summary 'rmv prod; added ref'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Wizard191 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 19:30, 27 November 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 19:30, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia game

I find your criticism of the wikipedia game impossible to understand. However, I will smile disturbingly at you. Jonny4026 (talk) 10:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello JBsupreme, Jonny4026 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

RZA

You don't understand the meaning of stage name in this case. Do you have a copy of the Wu Manual?

Book One, First Chamber: The RZA’s aliases include The Abbot, Bobby Digital, Bobby Steels, Prince Rakeem, the RZA-recta, the Scientist, Prince Delight, Prince Dynamite, and Ruler Zig-Zag-Zig Allah. (His birth name, for what it’s worth, is Robert Diggs.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brau0300 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Do you have a copy of Template:Infobox musical artist/doc ? Scroll down to where it says "Alias". JBsupreme (talk) 18:07, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

You are wrong in this case. Just because you are an experienced editor does not make you infallible. How is RZA's stage names, explicitly recorded in a published book, written by the Wu-Tang clan not irrefutable evidence that these names meet the criteria for Alias? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.168.116.236 (talk) 01:22, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Dude if you really just read the infobox documentation and still believe all those names belong there, I really can't help you. Try asking for another opinion on the RZA talk page. JBsupreme (talk) 06:51, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Hip hop WikiProject Roll Call

Hello, fellow Hip Hop WikiProject members!

This message is being sent out to let all listed members of the project know to re-add your name to the members list, as all current names on the list have been erased in order to find out who is still active on the project. WikiGuy86 (talk) 18:04, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Future possible collaboration

Did you have anything in particular in mind? Cirt (talk) 09:01, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

There is no Wikipedia:WikiProject_Bacon yet. JBsupreme (talk) 09:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I thought you meant on an article, I see you like music, perhaps you could help to expand the Reception section of the article The Road to Freedom? :P Cirt (talk) 09:08, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Note

Hello! I apologize for posting on your talk page, but I do not know if you have the discussion watch listed. Anyway, please note that I am undertaking a significant revision here using sources found on Google Books to add definitions of the characters as well as academic analysis of the concept in general. Thank you. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 18:54, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

punchball

many thanks--Epeefleche (talk) 19:31, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

List of unusual personal names

Hi, I created this article, but I think you are right and it should be deleted. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) ^talk 13:09, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Ta bu shi da yu, that means a lot to me. JBsupreme (talk) 15:46, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm interested in your opinion...

In recognition of available sources growing on an almost daily basis, and in recognition that the first effort at the article might almost have been a keep at its AFD, and realizing that the scond version was entirely unsuitable as an article, I wrote a new version of the article and placed it at Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Fred: The Movie. I'd appreciate it if you might look in and give me your opinion, as I expect it may well be returned to mainspace in a month or so. Thanks, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:48, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

It looks good so far! JBsupreme (talk) 22:33, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for looking in. Happy Holidays, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

RS reporting

One RS reported the fellow in the manner that the article mirrors. It's appropriate to include that reference in the article. Even moreso as it is attributed. The fact that he didn't make another RS's top-whatever list does not mean that it is innappropriate to reflect what another RS said.--Epeefleche (talk) 23:18, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

It is contradictory. Are we going to mention that Forbes makes no mention of the person? JBsupreme (talk) 23:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm not going to. You are free to I guess (though some might call it independent research, or non-contradictory unless you somehow infer that each must have the same standard for what "one of the richest" means ... it could mean to 10 for one, and top 100 for the other), but you might want to indicate how deep the Forbes list is.--Epeefleche (talk) 23:22, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

WP:AN

I have mentioned thee. Go thou and see if thou desirest. 86.44.47.43 (talk) 10:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Ayttm

You PRODded this article on 22 Dec, and it was deleted: user Siddheshp (talk · contribs) has requested undeletion, so per WP:DEL#Proposed deletion I have restored it, and this is to notify you in case you wish to take it to AfD. For information, this edit was added to the request for undeletion. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:24, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Young Hot Rod

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Young Hot Rod. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Young Hot Rod (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:14, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Valhalla Vineyards deletion review

You asked to be informed, so here goes: Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 January 6 — Sebastian 20:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Mass Effect

Regarding this diff. While that doesn't need to be cited any more (the game's citation enough), my experience has shown that, with a lack of a reliable third-party source, forum posts and blog entries are acceptable as sort of placeholder citations if they are made by one of the game's developers or a community manager or something similar. However, they are meant to be replaced as soon as possible. Though, as you can see, some of them do have a tendancy to stick around. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 00:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes I see that. I think this is okay per WP:SPS and WP:SELFPUB given that the material is not self serving or related to living person in any way. What I do worry about though is WP:UNDUE, or undue weight given to a topic because it is mentioned in a blog (or tweet, or myspace page) which has a huge potential for fan material to creep in. That said, I suppose a balance should be made. If you feel that this is in balance with the remainder of the article and that it would eventually be covered by a reliable third party publication I would not object to the information remaining in tact. Does that seem reasonable and fair? JBsupreme (talk) 00:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I agree with the removal in this instance, just not the edit summary. The game has been out for over a year now and serves as all the citation needed for that simple section. However, Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age: Origins, I believe, still use forum posts from BioWare for sources when the game itself doesn't cover them (development etc) or no game sites have. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 00:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Shibboleths

I notice that you have contributed to List of shibboleths; i have made a [suggestion] on the talk page that you might be interested in commenting on. If that article no longer holds your interest, i apologise for intruding, and return you to previously scheduled programming. Cheers, Lindsay^Hi 08:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

inre your abstention

I ask that you might please compare the original that was first sent to AFD and compare it to what it is currently before revisiting the rather leangthy and winding discussion at thge AFD. I do hope that your concerns have been addressed. Best regards, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Are you notable? ;-)

See S-Preme. I'm not familiar with the press that covers this kind of music, but you apparently are. Pcap ping 08:33, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Maybe I am but S-Preme is probably not. :) JBsupreme (talk) 17:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Cornerstone Christian School (Camarillo, California)

You archived the discussion about the article (which I carry to cover the subject of notability of High Schools in general) and said the result was Keep but the article still has the AFD notation on it. Shouldn't that be removed in the same step?

Having established a precedent--which I hope this does--can we go forward and establish a policy of Keeping all legitimate High Schools, so that people do not drift outside the bounds of SCHOOL policy to place the bounds of ORG policy onto future High School articles (causing unnecessary discussions like this, over and over)?Trackinfo (talk) 17:39, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

SCHOOL is not a policy, it is a list of projects, guidelines, and proposals which never reached consensus. I think you're looking for OUTCOMES. JBsupreme (talk) 17:54, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

BR Class 152

Hello, you placed a !vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BR Class 152, a deletion discussion which I closed because the nominator had blanked the redirect minutes before listing the page at RfD. I have created a new RfD discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2010_January_18#BR_Class_152; however, I have not copied your !vote from the AfD because it appears that the article's blank state was a significant factor in your !vote. If you are so inclined, please opine again at the new discussion page. Thanks! —KuyaBriBri^Talk 18:45, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Toby Rogers

Hey JB, I think you cut a bit too much from that article, and I restored some of the content you deleted--about a half a sentence. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toby Rogers, and feel free to weigh in. Toodle pips, Drmies (talk) 04:00, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Drmies... What is your opinion, is he notable? JBsupreme (talk) 04:08, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh no, far from it! He should go--but I wanted to be fair, and so I added the one single source before I marched it off to AfD. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:22, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Holy moly, these unreferenced BLPs take up HUGE chunks of time: two hours of work, and I've tackled only nine. Maybe mass deletion is the answer! Drmies (talk) 04:24, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

;-) JBsupreme (talk) 04:36, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Cashis

I see an editor tried restoring all the unsource, poorly sourced and BLP violating stuff in the Cashis article. Might want to keep an eye on it. Niteshift36 (talk) 05:27, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

WP:BLP

The long-standing stable version of the BLP policy says that "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable—should be removed immediately"

This is also the standard applied at WP:V.

Removing reams of valuable factual neutral material -- for instance about academics' career progress and research interests does not help our readers, and looks like disruptive editing.

Readers can see whether paragraphs are sourced or not, and draw their own conclusions. But removing vast quantities of material without even trying to look for sources just impoverishes them, and goes directly against the guidance at WP:BLP.

In future, please judge more carefully what is and what is not contentious. Jheald (talk) 12:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm also concerned that in a great number of cases you have also removed material which is implicitly verifiable by its very nature. If an article says "X wrote a book Y, published in 19xx", the book Y itself is a reliable source for that statement. Similarly if the article says "X writes mostly in Portuguese", and the list of X's books are all written in Portuguese, then again that statement is verifiable quite implicitly -- just look at the books. Please be much more careful -- and thoughtful -- in future. Jheald (talk) 13:57, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

FYI, I've opened a topic on the subject at WT:BLP, WT:BLP#Implicit sources. Jheald (talk) 15:23, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Jheald for your message, all three of them in fact. Please feel free to restore any content which you can provide a reliable third party source for, and be sure to cite said source in the process of your restoration. The summary motion provided by the Arbitration Committee in regards to WP:BLP strongly endorses these actions. JBsupreme (talk) 17:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Please see [12], in case you were thinking of going in a removal spree. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:58, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

(personally, I like more the idea of stubbing than the idea of deleting or of prodding.) --Enric Naval (talk) 19:02, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Defending your actions using the ArbCom motion is inappropriate. Arbcom has explicitly stated that their endorsement applies only to the initial deletions, and only then on the basis that they were a good faith attempt to jumpstart action on this issue. Several arbitrators have stated that further actions along this line is disruptive and wholly unsupportable in the face of community discussion. You are invited to participate in the discussion on this matter and work to help align an updated policy to more closely mirror your desired version, but I would ask that you stop blanking non-contentious material from articles in the meantime, as there is no community consensus to do so and attempts to change the existing WP:BLP policy along these lines are contested and therefore do not represent a valid defence of these actions. Resolute 17:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism on oatmeal

EXCUSE ME for taking this so personally - but how on earth do you need an encyclopedic third party to document the fact that oatmeal porridge is eaten in Scandinavia? I mean, this is complete rubbish. Thanks for using the explanation box the second time, but it's still complete and utter bollocks. Do you need an encyclopedic third party to document that they eat oatmeal in America? Or that horses have four legs and chef's knives tend to be sharp?

I grew up eating oatmeal for breakfast. My father did, his father did, and basically a WHOLE LOT of other Norwegians did. Exactly as the section in the article said. I'm not even the one who put the section in there in the first place - I have been involved in editing and making it better - but removing it?! What you do is you put a CITATION NEEDED tag on it; instead of simply removing all that text. That was a stupid, childish move; a part of your private editing war trying to make yourself look like a cool and indepentent user who could recognise "unnecessary" or "undocumented" material.

The fact remains that oatmeal is, and for centuries has been, a traditional Scandinavian breakfast. It's one of those well-established facts that don't even need a fucking citation. Just like horses having four legs.

I'm not sure if I'm supposed to be this angry about your silly little vandalism, and I'm quite sure I shouldn't take it so seriously, either. And I'm not going to start an editing war, because no good'll come of it. Just wanted to tell you you're a load of crap with your self-esteem level screwed up a little too high..

Nimloth250 (talk) 13:27, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

You are wrong. Either provide sources for the content or remove it. I have nothing further to discuss with you. JBsupreme (talk) 17:48, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Martyn Jacques

Hello. You have delinked Martyn Jacques in Struwwelpeter and in Tiger Lillies, with no edit summary. Why? Mgnbar (talk) 14:36, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Hearing no response from you, I relinked them. Mgnbar (talk) 16:03, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Notification

This is to inform you that you have been added as a party to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#BLP_deletions.--Father Goose (talk) 21:18, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I was going to add myself. Thanks for saving me that step. JBsupreme (talk) 21:52, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

From WikiProject Opera

Hello there. WikiProject Opera is working flat out to address these concerns since this mass deletion drive started.[13] The references I'm adding are not "mysterious". They are from my hard copy of The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Opera, Oxford University Press. Obviously the articles will require better referencing but they are not unsourced BLPs any longer. At the moment we are concentrating on those singers who have encyclopedia entries in respected sources. Thanks for your patience. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 22:53, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I understand, which is why I made a switch from {{BLP unsourced}} to {{inline}}. By mysterious I meant that the content is still in question as none of it is citing a source directly. Cheers, JBsupreme (talk) 23:09, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Your edits in Abdur Rahman Bishwas

Regarding this edit, should I assume that you made a test edit? When placing a fact tag on a sentence containing a citation, you could, at least, read the provided reference. Once again, I assume it's an honest mistake ... I know about the discussion on unsourced BLP, but randomly mis-tagging sourced statements is not a very good thing. --Ragib (talk) 07:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

LOL... yes, thanks. JBsupreme (talk) 08:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Stacey Adams

An article that you have been involved in editing, Stacey Adams, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stacey Adams. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. I referenced what you deleted, but there wasn't much even after. So, deciding I wasn't a knee-jerk inclusionist ... :-) --GRuban (talk) 14:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. JBsupreme (talk) 18:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Reverts

FYI, I have filed a statement about my actions and the sequence of thoughts behind them at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Statement_by_Jheald_.28involved.29

You're correct, the quotes you identified have would benefited from citations.

Though for interest, you might (or might not) be interested to know that they do appear to be accurate, even if more digging might be required to find sources that satisfy WP:RS to the letter.

• "Willy Northpole released his debut album titled Tha Connect on June 23, 2009. Unfortunately, the album had mixed reviews and barely sold 2,500 copies in its opening week. The debut flop was blamed on poor promotion [...]"

The album's first week sales were 2896. It was released the week after Michael Jackson died, and as a result all its heavy promotion, timed to coincide with the BET awards, was pulled.

• "mixed reviews"

from the first two relevant hits on Google,

"just manages to surpass average - but not by much" -- hiphopdx.com [14]

" Hope that someday soon Willy Northpole will put together an album worthy of his skill... Unfortunately, that day is not today. -- DjBooth.net [15]

• "The video for "#1 Side Chick" was banned from BET due to the controversial sexual subject matter."

BET Bans Willy Northpole's "No. 1 Side Chick" Video, "'Every Girl' Can Get Played & We Can't? SOHH.com

• "On September 4, 2009, at PHX Nightclub located in downtown Phoenix, Arizona, Willy Northpole physically assaulted rapper Tajji Sharp."

Or at least, that was the story according to Tajji Sharp's publicist, on Mr. Sharp's official blog [16]

So, potentially contentious? Yes. Should have been sourced? Yes. But also content that our readers would have gained from. Jheald (talk) 17:32, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

If those sales figures are true, I wonder if the chart figure claims in the corresponding album article are false. The links are dead, I'm still trying to find them. I am uncomfortable with blogspot.com and some of the other sources cited (I personally would not use them, nor would I encourage others to use them) but my primary concern right now is that we cannot be blindly restoring text until it can by satisfactorily sourced. The debate as to whether djbooth.net [17] et al constitute a reliable source is for another day. JBsupreme (talk) 18:57, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

blp-prods

Hi: I'm going to assume you don't want to be notified when I remove your prods after adding sources, since you've done a good many of them. If that's not the case, please let me know (here or on my talk). Ray^Talk 20:14, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Please do notify me. I'll review them individually. JBsupreme (talk) 20:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thus far I've de-prodded Gregory H. Adamian, Daniel Allen Butler, Andre Riddick. More to come - I'll list them here as I find sourcing. In the case of Butler, I suspect the bio might not survive AFD, but he has a case for WP:AUTHOR. The other two are pretty clear on WP:BIO and WP:ATHLETE, for Adamian and Riddick respectively. Ray^Talk 20:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

• Marie-Célie Agnant Ray^Talk 23:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
• Mohammad Aslam Bhutani Ray^Talk 23:53, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Please be a little more careful with your prods. An author with books published by major publication houses is clearly not "non-notable". Guettarda (talk) 16:33, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

• Dumitru Dediu Ray^Talk 00:49, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
• I've redirected Ron Matthews to the band name. Ray^Talk 17:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
  • I considered that as a redirect, but did you notice there is no mention of a Ron Matthews in the band article? JBsupreme (talk) 17:46, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
    • Good call. Maybe List of Iron Maiden band members instead? I've set that, but if you think the band is better or some other target, feel free to do as you will there. Ray^Talk 17:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
• David Merage He actually seems to be a decently prominent businessman and philantropist. (Gnews search). I sourced it and removed a copyvio which had been introduced some point in the past. Ray^Talk 17:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Aliya Wolf

Regarding your edit to the Aliya Wolf article, doesn't the appearance in the magazine serve as it's own source that she appeared in that magazine? It's like needing a source saying that Orson Welles was in Citizen Kane. He was in it. The movie is the source. Do we have to have a source saying that he was in it? Dismas|^(talk) 23:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm don't mean to pester but I see you've been active and do really want to know your opinion on this. Could you please reply? Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 22:51, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

[18] You're comparing apples and oranges. We're not talking about a simple appearance now are we. Furthermore, since I don't have that issue of Playboy you are citing, I cannot even confirm if what you're citing is true or false. Could you please cite the page # for this statement: "Wolf tried out for Playboy scouts when they were in Texas searching for models for The 50th Anniversary Playmate Hunt."  ? Thanks for following up on this, I do appreciate it. JBsupreme (talk) 22:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Short answer: Yes, it needed a source. JBsupreme (talk) 23:01, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, we are talking about a fairly simple appearance. The women pictured in the spread were some of those who tried out. Period. One became the 50th Anniv. Playmate (Colleen Shannon), some became Playmates for other months/years, and some didn't become Playmates at all. I don't see how this is that much different from a movie or television show.

I realize that you likely don't have the issue. Are you just barely assuming good faith? How am I supposed to be taking that comment? Thank you for telling me that I forgot the page numbers. I've now added the page numbers for the full spread. The specific page for the Wolf info is 93. Would that somehow change your opinion as to whether I'm being truthful?

And just to summarize, I see how the info about where she tried out would need a source. But I still don't see how her appearance in the magazine needs one. You still haven't explained that. All you've given me is the rather smarmy "...now are we" comment and the "short answer". Dismas|^(talk) 13:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Prodding you again for a response. Dismas|^(talk) 03:21, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

If you've added the page numbers then all is well. JBsupreme (talk) 22:39, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Fine. Ignore all my concerns and questions. I'll just leave you alone now, your majesty. Dismas|^(talk) 00:55, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

'your majesty' should be capitalized, "Your Majesty". tedder (talk) 00:59, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Please use edit summaries properly, especially when you are proposing deletions

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to Rubem Alves. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also useful when reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:07, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

I have to concur. With all the stuff going on with BLPs, edit summaries are really important right now. Gigs (talk) 21:05, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I think I'm doing a fine job with edit summaries, but feel free to let me know when I slip up or if that's too much work go ahead and make a null edit in the history yourself. Cheers, JBsupreme (talk) 21:12, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

AfD for Luni Coleone

Hello, JBsupreme. You may want to reconsider your AfD nomination for Luni Coleone. I didn't do a separate search for the pseudonym "Lunasicc" after I searched Billboard for "Luni Coleone," but I should have. As Lunasicc, Coleone has had four charting albums [19]. I'm sorry if my sloppy research has imperiled your editorial reputation. You can add the reference yourself if you think it will help illustrate that you were merely misled by my bad scholarship. Otherwise I'll add it myself in a couple of hours. Yappy2bhere (talk) 21:28, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

So, should this page be moved? JBsupreme (talk) 22:38, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tothwolf

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above.

• User:Tothwolf is subject to an editing restriction for six months. Should Tothwolf make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, Tothwolf may be blocked for the duration specified in the enforcement ruling below.

• User:JBsupreme is warned to refrain from incivility and personal attacks.

• User:Miami33139 and and User:JBsupreme are reminded to observe deletion best practices when nominating articles for deletion, including the consideration of alternatives to deletion such as merging articles or curing problems through editing.

• The parties in particular, and other editors generally, are reminded to observe at all times Wikipedia's policies and guidelines on dealing with harassed editors and on handling conflicts of interest.

• Should any user subject to an editing restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be briefly blocked, up to a week in the event of repeated violations. After five blocks, the maximum block shall increase to one month. All blocks are to be logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tothwolf#Log of blocks and bans.

For the Arbitration Committee, Dougweller (talk) 21:34, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Doug. JBsupreme (talk) 21:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Unsourced content in BLP articles

Hi JB I was not expecting to have to give you a vandalism warning, so instead of a template I will warn you with typed text. Removing non controversial text from an article is definitely unhelpful. I expect that if you asked the people whose articles you removed text from, they would be very unhappy to see what you did to the article about them. Articles I have seen include Bill Forwood the Victorian politician and Nicola Lewis the Welsh Netball player. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

To be quite frank, I could care less if it makes them happy or not. If you don't like unsourced content being removed from WP:BLP articles, I strongly suggest you source it. Don't waste your time typing things out to me. JBsupreme (talk) 20:34, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore, if you don't know what the difference is between vandalism and removing unsourced content from a WP:BLP then you have no business issuing such warnings in the first place. Full stop. JBsupreme (talk) 20:35, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

removing unsourced content wantonly without any attempt to source it is disrupting the encyclopedia . Whether one chooses to call it vandalism is a matter of wording. For those articles where you have been doing it in areas where I have some knowledge, it has generally been possible to source all or most of what you have removed. I remind you that it the RS guideline accepts material in official CVs and the like as RSs for routine uncontroversial facts of a person's career, though not for opinion about it. If you do not like that guideline, the RS noticeboard is the place to discuss it, but I think it has been upheld every time it has been questioned. I have been restoring material that i think is appropriately sourced; please do not remove it again without discussion according to BRD. DGG ( talk ) 03:29, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

I'll do my best. :) Everyking (talk) 23:44, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Mass AfD for all tracker software

I suggest we do just that. As far as I can tell, all articles in Category:Audio trackers are no more notable than Scream Tracker. Some may get more mentions than others, but even for those often mentioned as "well-known" there isn't much coverage because not much can be said about them. Most articles in this cat appear written mainly from the primary sources at best (program documentation), or personal experiences. Pcap ping 20:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

While I agree with you regarding the status of their notability, mass nominations never seem to end well. JBsupreme (talk) 20:13, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully the AfD for Scream Tracker can be used as benchmark. While WP:OTHERSTUFF is generally an argument to avoid, for closely related articles, WP:OUTCOMES applies. Also, Category:Tracker musicians seems inhabited by guys who mostly release demo tracks, so they fail WP:MUSIC by a long shot. Pcap ping 20:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

OUTCOMEScan only be reasonably seen to apply where there is a stable and consistent outcome over a period of time. I have no knowledge or interest in the subject, abnd, while it has often annoyed me that ikipedia does not go by precedent, such is the case. DGG ( talk ) 03:24, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Nipsey Hussle

I've declined your speedy deletion nomination of Nipsey Hussle. You should read the AFD. If you read the discussion it pretty clearly stated that the result was "delete without prejudice against recreation if and when this artist eventually meets the notability guidelines." You'll also notice that WP:Music is asserted as the artist is signed to the Epic label. A quick google search shows a pretty fair amount of hits from at least moderately notable sources like the OC Register. Had you looked at the article's talk page would have shown you {{findsources}} and would have seen these sources.

Further, I've reverted your wholesale blanking of that page and I don't think those edits were entirely helpful. While the material you removed may have not been of the best quality and didn't have footnotes, the article did site a WP:RS. Please be more careful. Toddst1 (talk) 07:47, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Its late yes, but I do not see the source cited you are referring to. Furthermore that image you just restored was a copyright violation. Don't even get me started on the WP:BLP minefield you're jumping into here, either. JBsupreme (talk) 07:49, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

The BLP Barnstar

		The BLP Barnstar
		For your tireless defense of the WP:BLP policy - one of the most important jobs around here. Keep up the superb work! Toddst1 (talk) 17:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

our friend

While the interest seems to be more aimed at griefing than anything else, they are still allowed to remove warnings on their talk page.

BTW, your talk page is unwieldy in terms of size- especially when viewed on a small screen. tedder (talk) 22:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm trying to get it to become so large that it crashes the iPad. I think I have another 4 months to work on it. JBsupreme (talk) 22:33, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Heh! Shouldn't be too hard. In any case, just reviewed some of my comments in reply to yours, and I want to make sure they don't come off as condescending in a WP:DNTTR type way. They weren't intended to be so- more than anything, they were replies to you with extra information to explain it to all the Tosh.0 fans that are apparently busy on the page. tedder (talk) 22:36, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

edit summaries and prod

Please don't forget to add an edit summary saying you;ve placed a prod or other deletion tag. DGG ( talk ) 03:14, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I try my best. Please don't forget to add sources when you restore unsourced content.  ;) JBsupreme (talk) 22:35, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Your eyes...

Inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gatchaman (2011 film) you made a special point to state the only coverage was "speculation by a bunch of blogs". I invite you review the AFD discussion where I have shared multiple reliable sources (not blogs) speaking about the film's production for over 5 years. This length of coverage specifically meets the caveats of CRYSTAL, and the article and project will greatly benefit from expansion per the multiple available sources. The stub can be made to nicely serve the project. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:03, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

I still feel that there is too much speculation after reviewing those over, but at this point I guess I would not be opposed to a merge. At least until the film is actually released. What do you think? JBsupreme (talk) 22:34, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, actually... I believe there is too much history of the project that can be shared to pre-emptively consider a merge... and it is just that "speculation" (being) covered and explained in the article, that I am expanding and sourcing even now. Its the coverage that lets it meet GNG and CRYSTAL. I'll just keep plugging along. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:22, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, I have revised my motion on this article. JBsupreme (talk) 01:13, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I do what I can. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:11, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

AN/I thread about you

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. It's here --thommey (talk) 00:28, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks thommey. I have commented there, the article talk page, the AFD page, etc. JBsupreme (talk) 00:44, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Your sig

Amusing, I thought your userpage had been deleted. I've not seen that prank pulled before. Fences&Windows 00:49, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

There are some days when all I see is red. JBsupreme (talk) 00:50, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Incidentally, if you want the actual redlink colors, #cc2200 is for unvisited redlinks and #a55858 is visted ones.--Father Goose (talk) 09:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

JBsupreme, would you please stop formatting your signature to imitate redlinks. Especially the red talk link posted at XfD is disconcerting, even "disruptive"(!). The presence of redlinks in these discussions is, and should always be, a cause for concern. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:41, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

If you are concerned about red links in a signature you really need another hobby. JBsupreme (talk) 22:54, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I have a sugestion...

Please review this diff. Now that this has become THIS, I think a title change might best reflect that the film itself is in production hell and yet better serve Wikipedia as it is the ongoing problems that has casued the topic to meet WP:N. If or when the film is ever released, we can work toward incorporating some of the current content into Imagi_Animation_Studios#Setbacks and then work on expanding an artcle about the film itself with its (then) release date... whatever that might ever be. Sensible? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 22:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes that seems sensible to me. JBsupreme (talk) 23:16, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

I like being sensible :) ... and I figure this compromise would appeal to both the keep and merge opinions, specially as the focus of the article has shifted from the film to its ongoing problems. By the way, using Google Chrome, the image you have at the top of this page is HUGE... Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:57, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, the 2011 title was probably going to be problematic in the long run, but fingers crossed. JBsupreme (talk) 01:43, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

the duck on your talk page

The duck on your talk page is huge lol. it made me laugh

andyzweb (talk) haz givn u Cheezburgr! Cheezburgrs promot WikiLovez and hoapfuly thiz one haz made yore day bettr. Spreadd teh WikiLovez by givin sumone else Cheezburgr, whethr it be sumeone youz hav had disagreementz with in teh past or a gud frend. Hapy munchins!

Spredd teh goudnesz of Cheezburgerz to all lolcat buddiez by addin {{subst:Cheezburgr}} to their talk paj with friendly messuj to all.

andyzweb (talk) 23:50, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

See? I really do give a duck! JBsupreme (talk) 23:53, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Oooo, pretty fish button...

Whack!

You have been trouted for: Having way too long a talk page and removing my {{archiveme}} notice I placed.

So, I'll help out by making this page even loooooonnnnnnnnnnngggggggggggeeeeeeeerrrrrrrr. ;-)

Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:19, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Fresh trout? Let me get my grill!!! JBsupreme (talk) 04:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Ha, Ha Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:30, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

i'm all about turtles. there all like slow and stuff but there gona take over the world someday —Preceding unsigned comment added by TurtleDefender (talk • contribs) 20:12, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nikollë_Nikprelaj

Care to change your !vote? As you are the only delete left, the nominator reversed himself. Thanks. Ikip 03:23, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I have done the same, thank you for your note! JBsupreme (talk) 05:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Ewa Gorzelak-Dziduch

Inre: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ewa Gorzelak-Dziduch. Is actually a quite notable Polish actress. I've begun expanding and sourcing, as there really is lots [20] available to work with. Maybe withdraw the nom? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment at the AFD. I will see about struggling with google translate... and will hope Polish-reading Wikipedians assit. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:28, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Terra group nomination

i would suggest you inform task force or group projects to know about this nomination.Bread Ninja (talk) 16:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Email

Hey JB sorry to intrude but do you have email enabled? Ottawa4ever (talk) 23:09, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I do now. JBsupreme (talk) 23:13, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I think youll find that picture of a DUCK much bigger than the one you have on your page ;) Ottawa4ever (talk) 23:28, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

LOL. Yes. That makes sense. Thanks, JBsupreme (talk) 23:28, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Soon they too will meet the duck tunnel (OF DOOM). JBsupreme (talk) 23:32, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, JBsupreme. You have new messages at Victor falk's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ultimate Soundtracker

You added a NPOV tag, but I see no beef on the talk page. Pcap ping 15:28, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

what does this imply? that we should discuss whether something is npov before tagging it npov? that seems a bit anti-wp:bold. (apologies if you were making a different point and i misunderstood) Theserialcomma (talk) 19:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

LOL. If you're going to claim to be the "grandfather" of something you better be able to cite sources to that effect. ;-) JBsupreme (talk) 19:04, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

it also seems a bit bureaucratic and obstructive towards building a collaborative encyclopedia to expect someone to wait for 'beef' on a talk page before it's safe to tag something as NPOV. come on, yo. WP:SPADE and WP:BOLD are good things. Theserialcomma (talk) 19:30, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

If anyone besides Pcap would bother to look at the {{NPOV}} template itself, it directs users to discuss the matter on the talk page. Absent the person who placed the tag starting such a discussion, an editor who was looking for the issue to fix it would have to go through edit summaries. If the mere absence of citations for a specific claim is the issue, or if the tagger doesn't desire to start such a conversation, NPOV is probably not the optimum tag. Jclemens (talk) 02:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Good work on the Collins source by the way, its looking a lot better. JBsupreme (talk) 05:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Unseen University

The snark involved in the nomination, combined with the complete and utter disregard for WP:BEFORE are not appealing combination. Really, if you're going to call something "fail to the extreme", it is incumbent upon you to do your homework first. Your actions are disruptive, and future such impolite and unfounded deletion nominations may be grounds for a block. Jclemens (talk) 01:58, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I could care less if it appears in novels. Has it received non-trivial coverage in a third party publication of any sort? This isn't a fan site or trivia guide for every single location that happens to appear in a novel. JBsupreme (talk) 02:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Go look at the sources I added to the AfD from a cursory search through Google Books. Jclemens (talk) 01:24, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Enlighten me

Since you seem to know something about this, how is a tracker different from a software sequencer in general? From tracker (music software), the specific difference seems entirely based on some non-essential GUI choices. Pcap ping 08:02, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not really sure, but (besides the structural differences in file formats) I think a tracker uses a specific sample set whereas a sequencer uses MIDI instruments, which can vary slightly from sequencer to sequencer. I could be wrong. JBsupreme (talk) 08:05, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I found the answer here (3.1 and 3.2). Basically, Ultimate Soundtracker was the first GUI program to imitate a piano roll, which made it easier to program the multi-channel sound chip of the Amiga; the C64 also had a 3-channel chip, but all the music was done in straight assembly language. Obviously, with only fanboys writing the demoscene stuff here, nobody bothered to explain what the main innovation was... Pcap ping 10:53, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

By the way, it looks like LSDJ is actually notable, see 4.6-4.7 in that paper. The correct name to google for was Little Sound DJ. Pcap ping 11:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Nipsey Hussle

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Nipsey Hussle. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nipsey Hussle (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Participation at my RfA

Thank you for taking the time to weigh in on my RfA. It was successful, in that the community's wish not to grant me the tools at this time was honored. I'm taking all the comments as constructive feedback and hope to become more valuable to the project as a result; I've also discovered several new areas in which to work. Because debating the merits of a candidate can be taxing on the heart and brain, I offer this kitten as a low-allergen, low-stress token of my appreciation. --otherlleft 14:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Oscar van Dillen

An article that you have been involved in editing, Oscar van Dillen, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oscar van Dillen (2nd nomination). Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Jubilee♫clipman 04:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Letting you know since you made the first nomination. --Jubilee♫clipman 04:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Isabel Bloom

Hi JB! Just letting you know that Isabel Bloom, an article you proposed for deletion, has been restored due to a request at requests for undeletion. Feel free to nominate the article to AfD if you feel it is appropriate. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 04:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD of Migrationism

I found and added two references for Migrationism. You may want to revisit the AfD. – Eastmain (talk • contribs) 00:46, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay. JBsupreme (talk) 23:15, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isabel Bloom

I added some references to Isabel Bloom. You may want to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isabel Bloom. - Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Zengzhi Li

An article that you have been involved in editing, Zengzhi Li, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zengzhi Li. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Rapido Realismo Kali and Isagani Abon

Hi! Please post your thoughts regarding these two non-notable articles related to Henry Espera. Cheers! User234 (talk) 03:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

I apologise it was an honest mistake

I know I made mistakes with the AFD procedures when asking for deletion and maybe I should not done it all in one go. I don't understand what happens all the prods have been removed but no article has been improved or had additional sources put in the respective articles.

Dwanyewest (talk) 16:42, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Moondog

Then might I draw your attention to {{unreferenced section}}. This has the advantage of identifying just what is lacking in references, so that there's a chance it might get fixed. Secondly it avoids incorrectly categorizing a referenced BLP as an unreferenced BLP and thus exposing it to summary deletion. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:57, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

No one is looking to delete that article. It simply needs valid referencing. JBsupreme (talk) 14:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

There are (at least!) two groups of editors using scripts to "improve"_sic unreferenced BLPs, in ways that have recently raised eyebrows. The risk is too great to feed them any more articles that don't deserve it. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Block threat

I am mystified as to why you threatened that I would be blocked. Would you show me one single edit where I have added data in violation of WP:BLP. --Pontificalibus (talk) 17:36, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

You are continually adding misinformation about a living subject to this article. Retitling the article does not solve this problem. Please stop. JBsupreme (talk) 17:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Note that I did not create the article or add such information to it. Again, would show me the edits where I have added data in violation of WP:BLP? --Pontificalibus (talk) 17:45, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

You see, I have argued for deletion so much recently, I thought I'd try saving something for a change, although this one was a tough cookie . --Pontificalibus (talk) 19:58, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined on KFC Core

Hello JBsupreme. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of KFC Core, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The artist's article does exist, so it doesn't meet CSD A9. Try a PROD or AfD instead, I don't think it'll be contested. Cheers, XXX antiuser ^eh? 18:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

That's okay, I think what happened was the original article was deleted and then later restored, so it no longer meets CSD A9 (for the time being). JBsupreme (talk) 18:03, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

DRV Update

Hey, JBsupreme, I hope you are doing well. Regarding your comment at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2010 February 15 [21], perhaps you did not realize that the article has now been corrected, in a userspace draft at User:Cirt/Paul Carrigan? Cheers, Cirt (talk) 19:11, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I will update my comment, thanks for the note. JBsupreme (talk) 19:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much! And no worries, Cirt (talk) 19:17, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Please Assume Good Faith

In this comment on Theserialcomma's talk page, you accused Tothwolf of wikistalking you and only logging in to bother you.

The only point of congruence of his edits and yours seems to be Comparison of Internet Relay Chat bots.

Reviewing his contributions - the number one article topic he focuses on editing the most is various IRC and related chat program articles. He has made approximately 40% of his total edits to that topic, going back 500 edits, into early December.

This was immediately qualitatively obvious on checking his contributions history.

Wikistalking and harrassment is a serious problem. If it is happening, it's entirely appropriate to raise it as an issue and to attention. However, making false acusations of wikistalking is also a serious problem. Assume good faith is not just a good idea - it's a fundamental principle of Wikipedia, and a formalized guideline. If you believe someone is stalking you, it's unreasonable to go around publicly accusing them without taking the 30 seconds to minute to briefly review their contributions history and see if the edits that concern you are unusual, or in fact their area of focus of Wikipedia contributions.

Please remember AGF and be somewhat more careful in the future. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 19:40, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi George. Thanks for your note, but this person exhausted my good faith months ago when he started making wild accusations against any editor who happened to disagree with him. That he now focuses his efforts solely on antagonizing the very people he once accused speaks volumes. I stand behind what I wrote. JBsupreme (talk) 19:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikihounding / stalking is specifically someone following another user to article space they don't usually participate in, to harrass or intimidate. If someone has been participating with 40% of their total edits in that topic area over long periods of time, many months before you started editing there, it's extremely hard to make the case that they're stalking you by continuing to participate there.

If one wanted to argue that he was WP:OWNing articles in that topic area, that could be argued - I think not, he's not dominating edits of any one of them over long periods of time, based on quick review. But it's aligned with policy.

If you do not like them, but continue to edit in common areas that they have been editing for a very long time and continue to regularly edit, then complaining that they're stalking you is not appropriate. You're trying to describe their normal behavior as something abusive and focused on you.

If the specific changes made were individually problematic, then asking for further opinions on article talk pages, or asking for uninvolved admins to review, would be entirely appropriate. I reviewed all the changes and this looks like an entirely normal content dispute, with policy supporting either interpretation. If you want others to review as well, please feel free to do so.

In making the claim of stalking, however, you exit the realm of reasonable response and cause a problem yourself. It's uncivil and violating AGF.

I have no problem with you finding more opinions on the content dispute. But continuing to claim that it's stalking is poking Tothwolf with a stick. Please don't do that again. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 20:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

George it is plainly obvious why Tothwolf is hanging around Wikipedia. Its a free world if you disagree, but you need not explain semantics to me. Thanks. JBsupreme (talk) 20:02, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

george, stop being a hypocrite. if you were concerned with people falsely claiming 'wikistalking', you should probably warn tothwolf for linking this diff [[22]] on the top of his soapbox talk page. but you didn't warn tothwolf did you, even though arbcom has restricted him from making such claims. i guess linking a diff on a soapbox page is sufficient gaming of the system to absolve someone of their restrictions. it's like saying, i am not calling you a dick, i am just going to link you to where i called you a dick previously, so in that case it's not a personal attack. sure. and stop watching my talk page. Theserialcomma (talk) 20:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

tothwolf also wont' stop wiki-emailing me. i think he's trying to elicit a response so he can hilariously fail to out me again [[23]] based on my email address. of course, i wouldn't respond to his email because i have no interest in talking to him. regardless, he's harassing me via email. Theserialcomma (talk) 22:41, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Have you asked Tothwolf to stop emailing you?

Wait, he asked you not to post on his talk page.

Do you want me to ask him to stop emailing you?

Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 23:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

i do not want any further emails from tothwolf. please ask him to stop attempting to contact me off-wiki. i am uninterested, and i consider it harassment Theserialcomma (talk) 00:05, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

tothwolf's violated his arbcom restriction on your talkpage

he writes [| Theserialcomma, I've already told you several times: Leave me alone. This means on-wiki and off-wiki. This also includes contacting people I know off-wiki.] for him to claim that i've contacted him off-wiki (he contacted me via wiki-email twice and i never responded), or that i've contacted people he knows (Please) is a direct violation of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tothwolf#Allegations_against_other_editors . i think this is both a violation of the spirit and letter of his restrictions, but i was wondering if you agree Theserialcomma (talk) 00:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)