User talk:Jayzel68/Archive1

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!

I have answered your query on the talk page. I hope the links above will be helpful. And, I welcome your contributions; with a bit moer work you can write an excellent article on Chinese espionage efforts. Derex 18:28, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AOL autoblocks

You're being affected by what are known as "autoblocks". Any "autoblock" block message you see is not intended for you, but rather for another person who happened to use the same IP address or ISP as you.

Autoblocks are a particularly severe problem for AOL users, due to the way that Wikipedia's software handles blocking and the way that AOL makes all users (vandals and non-vandals alike) share the same set of IP addresses. Some AOL vandals even intentionally take advantage of this to engage in "denial of service" attacks against their fellow AOL users.

Unfortunately, there's nothing that administrators like myself can do about this: it may happen again in the future. At some point, developers might be able to modify Wikipedia software to prevent this problem or AOL might change their policies to allow Wikipedia to more effectively filter out vandals using AOL, but at the moment there is no solution to this problem. If by any chance you also have an additional non-AOL Internet account, the autoblocking problem should be much improved. -- Curps 06:56, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: FAC

I will reply on the nomination page soon. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 17:21, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I'll reply on the FAC page. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice; I'll take a look when I go through all the FACs again. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 02:03, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FAC removed?

(crossposted from my talk page) I like the edits you made... but... ummm... your article seems to have been removed from WP:FAC... Fieari 23:14, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

China scandal

Good work and nice start on Wikipedia. Best, Tfine80 16:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but since you've created several different redirects for this page, perhaps you should start looking through the "What links here" page and eliminate double redirects as there seem to be a few of those. JHMM13 (T | C)

20:11, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I took care of it. Nice article, JHMM13 (T | C)

20:24, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1996 Campaign Finance Scandal

Per your request, I have restored Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1996 Campaign Finance Scandal to the FAC. Raul654 02:27, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the templates at the top - the links are red. They should not be - redirects should be created.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 03:17, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Links to FAC and PR discussions, at the top of the talk page.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 03:28, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Created - sorry for the mispelling. When the page was moved, the FAC/PR nominations were not moved and still have the old name. Best thing to do is to go to them and move them to reflect new name.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 03:41, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Glad it's OK now; a quick glance at the history didn't reveal any vandalism. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:18, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope

Not a one. Just change the ref-notes to Cite.php - review my recent changes to Cat for an easy how-to. Hipocrite - «Talk» 16:36, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Image Tagging Image:Wang.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Wang.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. feydey 13:41, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Riady.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Riady.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. feydey 13:42, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please add the exact name/location of the video so Your claim, that these images are screen caps from videos released by the U.S. White house can be verified, thanks. feydey 14:03, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Series and iterations

Forgetting the dispute over the actual meaning of the word iterations, it shouldn't be in the article for the simple reason that it's uncommon to the point of being jarring. The article should be accessable to most readers. This isn't a commonly used word -- at least in my area of the world.

As for the use of series', my bad! I was looking at the sentence and reading it as "first in the series" as opposed to it actually refering to first of videos. Ciao! --Jayzel 19:24, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... I often see the word in journalistic and literary sources, in use beyond its precise meaning. However, I will accept for now that it is not accurate enough. Don’t fret over series, we're both just trying to make the prose more easily understood. -- WikidSmaht (talk) 19:46, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates/2004 Democratic National Convention

At this FARC you expressed concern that the sub-par article on the Democratic Party makes Wikipedia appear "leftist". However, I believe this particular example shows Wikipedia's American leanings, not left v. right leanings (the Democrats are considered right-wing internationally, though they are to the left of the Republicans). Anyways, if you really are concerned about countering these percieved biases please review and consider participating in Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias. This WikiProject can provide you with an outlet for participation in making Wikipedia more comprehensive and balanced. They could use an excellent editor like yourself, no matter what areas your specialties or interests are. --maclean25 07:39, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Biting Newcomers?

I take offense at your comment re: Rush (Aly & AJ song). I was wishing the nominator well and trying to hint to the other people commenting that the article was submitted by an apparently very young person. Their criticisms were rather harsh and I was trying to point the person's age out to them. As for your comment: "I suggest you read Wikipedia:What is a featured article". No thanks, I don't need to. One of my articles was just named "featured". See: 1996 U.S. campaign finance scandal or just click my name. Ciao! --Jayzel 01:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I apologize if it wasn't your intent; I misinterpreted your remarks (especially "long, boring grown-up topics") as condescension. I referred you to "What is a featured article" because you expressed the belief that only certain subject matter can qualify for featured status, but this is not the case. The featured article criteria on that page say nothing about the actual subject of an article, only the manner in which is it written. The fact is that Rush (Aly & AJ song) could in fact become featured were it not for the fact that there are probably not enough editors of sufficient quality interested in improving it. I'm certainly not. Congratulations on your featured article, it's great to have editors working though the FAC process. I know how difficult it can be, I've worked on a couple myself. Again, sorry for the accusation, and I look forward to seeing more of your work at FAC! Pagra shtak 01:37, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Abu Ghraib

Anyhow, these count-counterpoints can go on forever and, unfortunately, we only have limited time on this planet, so why not use it toward more important things like fixing up the article together. Deal?

Spoken like a true wikipedian. Deal. My only concern is that, since we seem to have differing personal standards on what "torture" is, it would be best to decide on an outside, NPOV source for that definition, to avoid locking horns in the future. I'd suggest the Geneva Convention.

As for the article, I'm not sure if I wholly agree with trimming too much. I understand that that is the FA policy, but I personally disagree with the policy in that case. To my mind, an article should be exactly as long as it needs to be to properly treat the subject, no longer or shorter. When it comes down to it, I'm less concerned about getting FA than I am about making sure the article is good by my own standards of quality, even if that would make it longer than other wikipedians would prefer. So, definitely, if I see redundant info, or things that would be better off in other articles, I'll make the cuts, but not just for the sake of trimming a few kb.

Anyway, I'd like to apologize for jumping down your throat in our first exchange. I misunderstood your first comment and thought you were denying that there had ever been any wrongdoing at Abu Ghraib, which made me see red. Thanks for remaining polite with me. -Kasreyn 07:44, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Riady.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Riady.jpg. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to indicate why we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies under Wikipedia's fair use guidelines, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you want the image to be deleted, tag it as {{db-unksource}}.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you have any concerns, contact the bot's owner: Carnildo. 08:28, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]