User talk:Jab843/Archive 3

Dermagraphic

Please see article talk page where this was proposed for to years as I stated in the summary. Lettsby Avenue (talk) 18:16, 8 November 2011 (UTC) topic = Dermagraphic[reply]

AWB

Your request for AWB access was not properly formatted, please re-post your request. Thank you. Mlpearc powwow 12:38, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

is it correct now? should I change anything? Jab843 (talk) 03:17, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Section on my own home page

How is my section under my user page irrelevant when it is my own data? How can you justify that page not being worthy of existence, when you have pages such as User:Skier Dude/My Sandbox/Film toolbox? Or your pageUser:Skier Dude/Books that has no data of any sort? I was working on a list of my favorite articles. I am still firm in my belief that the page I created under my user space User:Jab843/Favorite sites is no more meaningless than your own pages. I do hope we can come to an accord on this.Jab843 (talk) 14:07, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I just realized I hadn't made it under my user page.Jab843 (talk) 14:09, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wirth Research

Please explain why you are removing the redirect? I saw a page briefly that was about the company but can no longer find it, what do you intend for the replacement to be?Jab843 (talk) 15:34, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The original page was about Nick Wirth, which has now been placed at wikipedia.org/Nick Wirth instead. I've removed the redirect so that the company Wirth Research and the individual Nick Wirth can have two separate pages. I will link between them after I've updated Nick's biography at his request. — Precedingunsigned comment added byWestwood3d (talk •contribs) 16:02, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ACC

I have submitted a request for the ACC interface, and I would really enjoy the opportunity of using it, hope this is the correct format.Jab843 (talk) 04:43, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arte Libertino Magazine

I am wondering as to why you stated in the XFD section that my request for CSD under A7 is considered a 'hoax.' I requested a A7 because of WP:NN. And the fact that the magazine lacked any notability. It is nice to get a few tips as I am trying to get more involved in Wikipedia again. For reference, the XFD isXFD Discussion. Jab843 (talk) 05:01, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't decline any speedy deletions under A7. At the time I was involved, the speedy deletion request was for G3 (blatant and obvious hoax) and A10 (failed to significantly expand upon an existing topic). Mikaey, Devil's advocate 05:16, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification, I was a little taken aback by your comments when you refereed to denial because of G3 or A10. Was A7 the appropriate category? Jab843 (talk) 17:10, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Was A7 the appropriate category? Probably not. If you read the A7 criteria, it says that it "applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works." (I'd consider a magazine to be a creative work on par with a book.) I think AfD was probably the right route to go here. Mikaey, Devil's advocate 23:33, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit] A barnstar for you!

Thank you very much! I will make sure it gets a nice place in my tiny galaxy, along with the rest of the stars, microbes and cookies :)Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 21:45, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiAlerter

I am very interested in participating in the beta. Jab843(talk) 22:50, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November 2011

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! I edit here too, under the usernameChzz. I noticed you made a change to an article, but you didn't provide verification for your edit. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! Wikipedia articles are written by people like you and me, and we care a lot about the quality of the encyclopedia. Please help us make it better. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Thanks,  Chzz  ► 14:00, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You left me a 'talkback', but I don't see a message here?  Chzz  ► 14:02, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please provide an article for this? I was editing with huggle at the same time, did you mistakenly make this warning on my page? I have been editing for over 5 years, and have not merited receiving such a warning. So I have no idea what you are referencing please explain here.Jab843 (talk) 14:05, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've found it; [1] – it would appear that we both tried to undo that at the same time, and hugglewarned you, by mistake, instead of the user who had added it. That seems to happen, very occasionally. I was trying to actually remove the information, and warn the IP user for adding unreferenced info. Sorry about that; of course just ignore the warning. Chzz  ► 14:09, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ACC – Taken

Hi there – not sure if somebody has already pointed this out to you, but if it looks like a user has self-created their account after they submitted the request, then the usual practice is to Drop the request rather than to decline it as Taken. Declining as Taken is likely to confuse the user if they have already created the account. Use of the 'Taken' option is usually restricted to perfect matches on other wikis (Section 4.1.1 of the Guide). Hope this helps! Mato (talk) 19:10, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It does help thank you for input. Jab843 (talk) 20:51, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My thought behind that was. In what situation could a user need to request an ACC then be able to create the account on their own? Jab843(talk) 20:53, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It happens sometimes that new users don't realise that they can create an account themselves and instead think that the Request an Account is the standard procedure for getting an account (probably as a result of googling "How do I request a Wikipedia account" and then failing to read the Request an Account page properly). Some people then realise and create the account themselves before a tool user assesses the request, but most probably don't realise. Many of the requests we deal with could probably have been created by the user themselves; they were just unaware of this. Mato(talk) 21:15, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Or, an IP block expires (they're often just for a few hours), or their dynamic IP changes, or they get bored and swap computers/create it elsewhere. Chzz  ► 23:55, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes those too! Mato (talk) 01:54, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response to your Sonic Underground Edit

The American Sonic Cartoons use A Dr. Julian Robotnik, who is no relation to Dr. Eggman from the Sonic Games. He is not Egg-shaped, has no egg-references, is never called "Eggman", and has no egg-themed robots. No eggs, no Eggman. — Precedingunsigned comment added by75.191.176.246 (talk) 21:46, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hydraulic diameter for an annulus

The situation is two pipes, one inside another; the fluid is flowing in the space between the small pipe and the big pipe. The fluid is thus touching the outside diameter of the inside pipe and the inside diameter of the outside pipe; this is the wetted perimeter P in the definition for hydraulic diameter.

The outside perimeter of the outside pipe and the inside perimeter of the inside pipe are not touching the fluid. Fluid cannot magically sense how large the outside diameter of the outside pipe is; it could be as big as the visible universe and the fluid would still only be aware of the inside diameter that confines it. Likewise, the inside diameter of the inside pipe could be zero(solid rod) and the fluid would never 'know'.

Please stop reverting back to the erroneous version. — Preceding unsignedcomment added by 85.227.186.69 (talk) 22:44, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and that is why I removed the warning and reverted to your version...Jab843 (talk) 23:10, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NFCC

Hello Jab, I'm writing to you about your usage of File:BMW Logo.svg onyour userbox and userpage. I'm afraid that image is not free content and as such should not be used outside of mainspace, as you can read at WP:NFCC point 9. I know how nice it is to have the exact image you want for your userbox, but I'm afraid it really can't be used like this :( It would be great if you could kindly remove it, comment it out, or replace it with another, free image. Happy editing,SnowolfHow can I help? 16:01, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok taken care of, and have now read up on fair use of image rules.Jab843 (talk) 13:48, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request #70170

I was wondering why was this request was deferred to CheckUsers ? Mlpearc powwow 18:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was for the same reason that Hazard dropped the request. I wasn't aware if the requesting individual might of had a sock puppet account, that was tied to their IP address. Jab843 (talk) 18:12, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IRC cloak request

Hello Jab843. You recently applied for a Wikimedia IRC cloak, but it looks like you forgot to register your nickname first. Could you please log on to IRC and do:

/msg NickServ REGISTER <password> <email>

where <password> is a password of your choice and <email> is your e-mail address? After you do that, please follow the instructions that are e-mailed to you to confirm your e-mail address. When you're done with that, I just need you to confirm your cloak request:

/msg MemoServ send wmfgc IRC cloak request

After you finish all of that, I'd be happy to get you a cloak. :-) If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my Meta talk page. Barras talk 18:45, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

pink panther AFD necromancy.

User is contesting the redirect of the panther articles, claiming consensus was only for aardvark and inspector articles. I renominated if you care to comment.Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pink Pest Control#Pink Pest ControlGaijin42 (talk) 1:56 pm, Today (UTC−6)

The Show Must Go on (McLeod's Daughters)

I noticed that you reverted the redirection of The Show Must Go on (McLeod's Daughters) to McLeod's Daughters (season 8). I am not entirely sure why this was considered nonproductive. It was a redirect of an infobox-only episode article to the appropriate list of episodes-by-season, and was done as an editorial means of closing the AFD for the individual episode. I'm going to go ahead and revert that article back to the redirect because I believe that the redirect is the correct state for that article; should you disagree, however, I will not revert a second time absent discussion over your concerns. Thanks! Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 16:02, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Renaissance architecture

Hi Jab843! I'm just reminding you of the necessity of checking the history of an article, after you've reverted. There was two separate lots of idiocy on that page and the other needed reverting as well. I urge all editors to check the state that they have reverted to, because sometimes the less obvious vandalism, particularly deletions of entire sections, changes to dates etc, get buried under a reversal of a minor vandalism and can stay unnoticed. About 1/3 of the Fra Angelico article was deleted, and the problem wasn't discovered for three months. Keep up the good work! Amandajm (talk) 03:24, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Un Refugio para el Amor

Kudos for reverting the edit in Un Refugio para el Amor. The telenovela hasn't aired yet in Mexico, and that guy wants to "guess" without providing sources. Platinum Star (talk) 19:00, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User_talk:Kennedy

Hello, thanks for your message. I am actually User:Kennedy therefore created a redirect to my own pages. I know why you've undone reverted my edit but I don't think there should be a problem with having a redirect. I've not undone your edit yet, will wait on your response. Kind regardsNormandie 12:52, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have appreciated a response to my comment here, especially as you 'warned' me using a templated message. But hey-ho never mind. I've undone your revert. Regards, Normandie 13:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It was my understanding that you were going to revert the edit unless I responded. Jab843 (talk) 15:10, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, no, hence "I've not undone your edit yet, will wait on your response." – This being the reason I was looking for a response. It's bad form to template regulars, and to use rollback in this manner.Normandie 15:31, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You actually undid my edit just over an hour after I had made the revision. Given what you did, I saw that your actions spoke more than what you wrote, and as such left the page as you reverted it. Jab843(talk) 15:42, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
After checking your contribs and noting you ignored my message I undid your revert. You're not responding to my comments adequately therefore I will leave this discussion with the following: please engage with users, especially when you warn them and use rollback on their edits, even after the edit was explained in the summary. Don't template regulars and don't use rollback in instances like this. Thanks, and kind regards, Normandie 16:07, 9 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion converted to PROD: Dongseongno

Hello Jab843, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I have converted the speedy deletion tag that you placed onDongseongno to a proposed deletion tag. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow to protect the encyclopedia, and do not fit the page in question. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Bmusician 02:44, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for joining WikiProject Georgia Tech. The only GT-related projects I've been working on lately have beenG. Wayne Clough (which I nominated for GA), and Glen P. Robinson(which is in its second run through FAC). Disavian (talk) 03:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

William Månsson

I declined your speedy for nonsense as it was actually quite coherent – but in Swedish. (I then deleted it A7, as there aren't very many notable 12 year old footballers...) Cheers. Peridon (talk) 10:37, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am still learning how to use the various csd templates, it is good to receive feedback and I thankyou for it. Apart from having read the page on csd, do you have any other tips? Jab843 (talk) 10:48, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Nonsense is "Quasi aardvark serious germane oil filter" or "uytcuyuyuyiu yrcuyyvk" – but make sure that what is obviously not English is not something like Upper Slobodian by dropping it into a Google search (without brackets). If it comes up all in a piece, it's probably a copyvio; if it comes up in bits, it's Foreign. (Then you try Google Translate, or if that fails, look at the domain endings.) A7 is a minefield for beginners to patrolling. Basically, if it's got people (or named animals like Fido the ninja hamster from Bloggsville) in it, it can be A7ed. That includes companies, churches, underwater knitting circles, charities etc, but not species like Hamsterus ninjatoides. For some odd reason any web content can also be A7ed, but not software. If you use it online, yes. If you download it to use at home, no. Hoaxes are usually blatant and can interact with A7. "Josh is aawwweeessssoooommmmeeeee!!!!" is both a hoax and A7. Some are subtle,but can be got away with at CSD. Others take a lot of research to nail, and are possibly better at AfD. Context and content are confused often. Content is something less than a stub, and probably is just 'Hi!' or a URL. Context is a bit subjective, Some might regard an article titled "Smarties of Death", with "An expanded metal band from Bloggsville." as its sole content, as coming under context. Others mightn't. That would be subject to A7 anyway. Definitely an article titles "Squishy Tarts" and having the content "Awesome" would be context. Steer clear of the housekeeping category until certain. Test page covers a multitude of things, from an obviously abandoned failure to a polite way of saying 'will someone please bin this crap'. almost anything with 'we' (etc) in it is spam. Also, things with no paragraphs and occasional blue words or phrases (that are external links in the text) are usually spam too. If it's neutrally worded, try A7 if A7 would fit. Spam is wider in that it encompasses products, beliefs and theories as well as companies. Copyright is a minefield. There are a lot of mirrors that copy us – and don't always say so. Facebook etc can be copies of here – or here can be a copy of there... Look at posting dates. Also, look at the history – is it a new alteration to an old article that can simply be reverted? Most of the rest of the categories are either obvious or rare. That should keep you going – one other thing that I told someone this morning: if a new article is by someone with a contribs list showing regular work over two years, they probably know what they are doing. When I was patrolling, I worked on contributions by new accounts. I used to pick up a lot that was missed by the Huggle users, and learned about the tagging by watching others at work. (You can find this lot by going to your own contribs and resetting the thing at the top to 'new accounts'.)Peridon (talk) 11:26, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited List of Beagle, Harrier and Basset Packs of the United Kingdom, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation pageHarrier(check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles.Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot(talk) 10:48, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Khiladi 420

Hi, I saw that you reverted my edits on Khiladi 420, but the edits I made were right according to this [2]source. I'm not sure why you reverted that. Here's the text which you reverted[3].Torreslfchero(talk) 11:20, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ConfirmAccount extension

Hey :). You're being contacted because you are involved in the ACC process, or participated inthe original discussion in '08 about theConfirmAccount extension. This is a note to let you know that we are seeking opinions on switching this extension on, effectively making the ACC process via the Toolserver redundant. You can read all the detailshere; I would be very grateful if people would indicate how they feel about the idea :). Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:15, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Wikipedia Loves Libraries Atlanta event – November 17

Hello Jab843: I wanted to give you a reminder for the Wikipedia Loves Libraries event that is scheduled for November 17. If you are interested, please visit the meetup page and confirm your participation. I look forward to seeing you there. — Ganeshk (talk)05:05, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Meetup

Hi Jab843, the next meetup may be at the Athens-Clarke Co. Public Library in February/March time frame once they complete some renovation. It has not been finalized yet. — Ganeshk (talk) 21:13, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Jab843. You have new messages at DeltaQuad's talk page.
Message added 21:14, 27 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

-- User:Riley Huntley/You missed!Cheers, Riley 21:14, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied again, sorry for taking so long. -- User:Riley Huntley/You missed!Cheers, Riley 22:54, 27 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Beckah Shae

It appears that the anon editing the Beckah Shae article is the subject. Perhaps a bit of latitude with the new editor may be in order.--Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:32, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Understandable, I have read the comment made on your page. I would like to figure out a method in which we can provide more outreach to individuals that would then assist them in their initial edits. Thanks for the heads up!Jab843 (talk) 02:36, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Navy

Hey there, about the modification to the Royal Navy page. I didn't realize I wasn't logged in, sorry about that. Anyway, are you saying retiring the Harrier wasn't disputed? Or are you saying it's not neutral to say it was disputed? Because it was discussed bitterly at the time.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/4448256/Harrier-dispute-between-Navy-and-RAF-chiefs-sees-Army-marriage-counsellor-called-in.html As one might expect since it leaves the navy with no fixed wing capability and only the promise this will be restored in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wreckless61 (talk •contribs) 22:43, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks The dispute is also mentioned on the Harrier page:BAE Harrier II#Rundown "The decision to retire the Harrier was controversial, with some senior officers calling for the Panavia Tornado to be retired as an alternative.[61]" 

Wreckless61 (talk) 22:54, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Jab843. You have new messages at PhantomTech's talk page.
Message added 00:54, 8 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

PhantomTech (talk) 00:54, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you for giving me the courage to fight more vandalism! Cmckain14 (talk) 03:23, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A pie for you!

Thanks for the recommendation and I also just requested reviewer right as well. Cmckain14(talk) 03:31, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Barrie

Hi, what type of vandalism is that? The person is known for outsourcing. Thank you. Naughtybabe24 (talk) 06:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Answered, turns out to be a mistake I reverted the edit and struck through the warning on your talk page, if you wish to, you can remove it but that is up to you. Once again I apologize, I am only human. Best wishes!Jab843 (talk) 07:00, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Burn in hell

You do no deserve to be alive

Lee McCulloch

Yes there is a lot of vandalism on Rangers Football Club related pages due to their past financial troubles. Rival fans change these pages to try and make out that it is a new club. Current consensus is that it is the same club. I was not intending to 'scare' off a new user it's just that I normally have to revert a lot if vandalism. I have asked IP to take any issues to talk page.BadSynergy (talk) 16:50, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification, I was not aware of the situation. It would seem as though they might want to have sources to back up their claims if this is true. Jab843 (talk) 16:52, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
problem is that they are right and they are wrong at the same time, the faq on the main rangers page answers a lot of these questions, the problem reside with teh fact that news sources even now still refer to it as new club but at the same time the sam news sources say it the same club, its a debate that been going on for ages but there isa consensus that it is the same club until new evidence is brought with sources to support the new club saga these users are using wikipedia as means to have fun at the expense of there rivals, so it is vandelism just not your typical type. i will have to take this to the highest level of wikipedia to havea enutral decision on it made but first i will finish tagging the 300+ plus articles relating to itAndrewcrawford(talk -contrib) 17:10, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the clarification! Glad I looked for resolution on this issue as it did not seem like the typical issue and I decided to reach out. If I can help resolve this matter please let me know. Jab843 (talk) 17:14, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you can get news sources to say one or the other and not both, but the bigger problem is getting user to realise wikipedia isnt a playground and wikipedia policies guide how articles are wqritten but the users find it fun there no talking to them and without the article getting fa it will be hard to prove the article is correct as far as sources go as fac will mean it gets seriously reviewed but i am some months off getting it there best help you can give is monitor the page and revert and changes relating to a newq and old club and advise to bring it to talk preferable the main talk:rangers f.c.page which has a lot of the answers to these qyuriesAndrewcrawford(talk -contrib) 17:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Should you request for page protection? Jab843 (talk) 17:33, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
since its a content issue it means it requires full protections it not jsut ip editor who do it, registered users do it as well, semi will stop the ip and newly registered but it better without most of the articles off the main one only get it now and then so it better doing it manually obviously if ther eenough recent vandelism then it should be protectedAndrewcrawford (talk -contrib) 10:01, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

dude.

Chill out.184.98.113.148 (talk) 22:59, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hell yeah

We should meet up together and have a beer. I was editing those pages because I wanted to make people laugh about the gay stuff in life, ya know? We should make it funny here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by184.98.113.148 (talk) 23:04, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but that is not how wikipedia works, this is an encyclopedia, please do not make test edits. If you feel you need to test something out, please do it here WP:Sandbox. Any further questions please do not hesitate to ask.Jab843 (talk) 23:06, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

where do you live?

? — Precedingunsigned comment added by184.98.113.148 (talk) 23:07, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not in AZ, sorry Jab843 (talk) 23:08, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • YOU KNOW WHERE I LIVE? HOLY ##$$#@ Lol jk. Do you have a runescape or something we can chat on? I'm so bored. My email is

Also, I still have a runescape, its if u want to play. =)

Sorry, but I am focused on wikipedia editing atm. I recommend you find another avenue for engaging others. I don't really take time to play runescape much any more :( those days are kind of gone. BTW, you are editing anonomously with your ip address.... so yeah anyone could find out where you live.... and please do not post personal info. I hope you find something to keep you interested! Please take your time to constructivly help with Wikipedia you might find it fun!! You can go here for further communications#wikipedia-en connect, I will be monitoring it.Jab843(talk) 23:15, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Jab, you seem to attract the kooks. Toddst1 (talk) 23:14, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah.... other people get flames I get a slightly different group of people.... lol. Better than the alternative! :) Jab843 (talk) 23:17, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're in good company: User:Toddst1#Notable Quotations: #2. I'm glad we're a rare breed. Toddst1 (talk) 23:43, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Be aware

of this message (which may or may not signify anything at all). Thanks for the eyes on Drizzt.BusterD (talk) 01:07, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry Jab843

I only edited the cat scratch disease page to be able to print it that way and give it to a friend as a joke. I knew it could, and would be reverted otherwise I wouldn't have. I hope I have not offended or upset you in any way, as that was not my goal. Thanks and have a great day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Catscratch fever-001 (talk • contribs) 01:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No harm done! But in the future... please use either WP:Sandbox or better just hit preview, print out the page, and then cancel the pending change. No offense! You seem like an eager and intelligent individual I strongly suggest you to become more active in positively contributing to wikipedia! Look forward to seeing you on the right side of the rules next time!Jab843 (talk) 01:11, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regina Lynn undos

I'll rewrite to make things more clear, but also more factual, as opposed to the current fluff piece/advertisement that it's written as. The article mentions she uses humor to discuss her area of self-declared expertise; humor is subjective, so I added "alleged humor". I'll change that line to 'attempts to use humor'. Thanks for the corrections and advice. — Preceding unsignedcomment added by 74.138.206.125(talk) 03:44, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad you are being proactive about this and not just ignoring the messages! I highly recommend you make an account. Anyhow, the issue was about the spelling and issues with neutrality. Please make yourself familiar with policies. I will post a welcome template to help you through this. But please post here with further questions. Jab843 (talk) 03:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Football records in Spain

Hi thanks for the message. the edit is not a mistake. i checked the reference and the record does not exist there. i had given an edit summary before but it seems one user(copquidragon) is consistently removing and reverting it. please kindly restore the edit i made. Thanks! — Precedingunsigned comment added by49.244.25.6 (talk) 11:38, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please mention which article? As this is the only edit your ip address has made. Thanks, Jab843 (talk) 17:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You had removed a significant amount of information without leaving an edit summary. I don't think it is a coincidence that your ip was blocked for evasion. Anyhow, please make an account if possible so we can get around this issue. If you wish to be anon, please leave edit summaries.Jab843 (talk) 18:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is the mistake?

What is the mistake about reporting facts? (Lowkeyvision(talk) 12:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]

you changed was to wahs.... if this is a legitimate change.... then I should have not made the revision; however, this can be viewed as vandalism... what was the reason for the change? Jab843 (talk) 17:56, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the talk page, if you wish to discuss about Nova. (Lowkeyvision (talk) 03:24, 10 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Emeli Sande

No you have made the mistake. You've converted it back to English born British singer, so you are more or less taking away her Scottish indemnity but replacing it with British and keeping her English identity intact. I think you have made the mistake. English born Scottish singer made more sense.90.217.213.31 (talk) 18:13, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

... um yes after re-doing my research and spending more then 10 minutes on this, she was born in England, grew up in Scotland, but went back to England for university. I did not find sources that say she is referred to as a "Scottish" singer. Infact most say British as in Brittany, as far as I am aware saying British includes the entire island, so Scotland and Wales are included. So infact, British would be the best version to stick to. You can post here with further inquires. Jab843 (talk) 18:26, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, well if you want references that prove she is a Scottish singer here you go. And also your research is wrong as she went to the University of Glasgow. And your correct, British, however, why have you kept English in? Your taking away her Scottish indentiy, but not her English? Hmmm....

Sources:

90.217.213.31 (talk) 19:56, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, whilst just on the matter, if Scotland and Wales are included then so is England. If there is one thing I've noticed, there's always a UK or British added into Scots articles, but never English....90.217.213.31 (talk) 19:58, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then please go right ahead, add your references, and change it to Scottish. I am not trying to prevent you from making these changes, I just want to ensure that it is supported and accurate. Cheers Jab843(talk) 20:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Heber C. Kimball

I don't know why you think the removal is unexplained. I clearly gave a reason in the edit summary and also referred to a fuller explanation on the talk page. 92.25.21.108 (talk) 01:48, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

your good, by the time I went to undo my change, you had proceeded.Jab843 (talk) 01:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Solomon

I simply edited the fact that his page stated the Greystne Park Psychiatric Hospital is in New York State, it is in fact in New Jersey which is what I changed it to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by24.188.217.65 (talk) 04:02, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not disagreeing, but could you please cite a source to verify the reason why you are changing what was already existing if possible.Jab843 (talk) 04:04, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's no citation for the incorrect location and I don't know what to say other than its a very well known fact and could be found on the page for the hospital I assume if there's a citation there. — Preceding unsignedcomment added by 24.188.217.65 (talk) 04:07, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sounds good! Jab843 (talk) 04:11, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't really know how this works, and you can change my edit if you want, but your description is incorrect. It leads first to right heart failure and THEN left heart failure, which are significantly different in the medical field. — Precedingunsigned comment added by68.55.216.117 (talk) 21:11, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you have made a mistake by deleting my edit of the Seabee article. RED HORSE and Prime BEEF are the common acronyms used in the USAF to describe the Rapid Engineer Deployable Heavy Operational Repair Squadron Engineers and Prime Base Engineer Emergency Force respectively. The acronyms are used much more often than the official names. —Preceding unsigned comment added byPwrproretaf07 (talk •contribs) 23:30, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

um... you didn't make the edit..... so... sounds good...Jab843 (talk) 02:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]