|
User talk:JameselmoPlease don't break the links to the song articles by changing "Third" to "3rd" or stripping away the question mark on the title track. Thanks. Torc2 (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2008 (UTC) Hey, nice edit to the Hendrix article. Two things you should be aware of when you make great edits like this. One, briefly describe the changes you have made in the edit summary before you click save. That helps other editors see what you are doing in the recent changes and watchlists. Two, get in the habit of using sources. You write, "but Eddie Kramer the engineer on the session says Hendrix bought a secondhand recorder from a street vendor and used this", but the reader has no way of checking up on this. Where did you hear it? If it's a liner note, interview, or whatever, say so and I'll help you add the right reference. Thanks, and keep up the good work. —Viriditas | Talk 02:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
<ref>{{cite book
| last = McDermott
| first = John
| coauthors = Eddie Kramer
| title = Hendrix: Setting the Record Straight
| publisher = Warner Books
| date = 1992
| pages =
| isbn = 0446394319
}}</ref>
—Viriditas | Talk 13:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC) Edit summaries Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:
The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature. Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field - please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. —Viriditas | Talk 08:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC) References in Jimi Hendrix articleThe way you have inserted references to four books like here is not adequate. Please read WP:CITE on how to cite properly. You are essentially just mentioning four book titles again and again over and over. Readers should instead be able to see where particular information can be verified; e.g., though page numbers in specific references. The way you have done it is simply not detailed enough.--HJensen, talk 14:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC) Hi friendWelcome to Wikipedia, it might be a good idea to read WP:MUSTARD if you haven't... most articles/user pages have a discussion page... this is your discussion page. Feel free to reply to this here. By the way, when discussing things on an article's talk page, you don't need to start a new header every time you write something. If you want to reply to what someone has written on a talk page you just put this symbol before the first word of what you write : - I hope this helps. If you have any questions please don't hesitate to contact me. ScarianCall me Pat 21:49, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Edits to Hendrix articleHi. I haven't read your new edits yet, but I noticed that you inserted a lot of <wiki>[citation needed]</nowike> tags. That is fine, but I don't think you need to have square brackets around the text you think need to be cited. It makes the article appear even more of a draft that it does already. Also, you may want to use the sandbox when editing (or copy the text into another editor). This will enable you to come off with fewer, but larger edits (remember edit summaries) thereby making it easier for other editors to assess what you have been doing (compared with now where you make numerous small edits within short time). Happy editing --HJensen, talk 21:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC) Hi der mr Jensen the square brackets are there to clearly point out extremely contentious and often unproveable assertion in this article (regardless if they are supplied with references)that are embedded in an otherwise acceptable text. Basically someone needs take most of this out as it brings the article into extreme disrepute and propagates myths and mis-information that has unfortunately, through constant repetition become regarded as fact, despite (relatively) recently researched and publicised, more accurate information. I have no desire to puff up this article, most of my earlier large edits were just my way of explaining the various mistakes in the previous article (not knowing how else to communicate at the time) hence the frequent "or"s a device to juxtapose the less hyperbolic or more rational explanations and sometimes the actual facts to some wild speculation and/or hyperbole. I naively asumed that the many Hendrixc fans at wiki would rush to check out the recent info and when they found it to be verifiable would incorporate said entries into the article. As this suff is quoted (for some unknown reason) on the BBC site etc. it should be a priorty edit. February 2008
Your recent editsHi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. On many keyboards, the tilde is entered by holding the Shift key, and pressing the key with the tilde pictured. You may also click on the signature button
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Trackrecs.jpgThanks for uploading Image:Trackrecs.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page. If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC) NotePlease don't start a new section heading on the Talk:Jimi Hendrix article every time you have something new to say. And please do not type in capitals in section headings; it is considered "shouting". Please remain WP:CIVIL at all times. ScarianCall me Pat 10:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC) March 2008
In this one case - "Christ"gau, a different site -, I may have strayed into uncited personal opinion in passing (two words only!). How about instead of the wilfully exaggerated "Your edits" and "have been" you restricted yourself to "Your edit" and "has been". If adding two words of possible personal opinion (I think I could come up with a few cites to support this definition) to an article in wikipedia can be condemned as "vandalism" and you apply this universally across wikipedia you have a very busy time ahead of you - eternity springs to mind.Jameselmo (talk) 02:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC) All of my edits are well researched and usually come with pertinent 'Refs'/'cites' from well respected publications on Hendrix, frequently from the man himself or those close to him,(all will eventually and "soon" compared with stuff that's been here forever), I have included many recently and far more than appear to have been to many of the innacurate or misleading statements still left) NOT from record companies slavishly puffed handouts, uneducated opinion and sensational, lazy rock magazine fluff, they are only corrections to the blatant vandalism, plagiarism, hyperbole, inaccuracy, trivial nonsense etc. etc. in the Jimi Hendrix article, in no-way can this be construed as "vandalism". Jameselmo (talk) 02:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Jimi Hendrix problemsPlease read WP:MOS in order to get an idea on how to write on Wikipedia. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. ScarianCall me Pat 13:41, 4 March 2008 (UTC) I am contacting you now. Please tell me precisely, what your percieved problems are with my edits and in comparison with others that have not been commented upon, but are uncited, riddled with verbalise, plagiarism, innacuracy and other nonsenseJameselmo (talk) 00:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC) Re:Jimi Hendrix talk pagePlease don't remove the comments you've left there. Please WP:ARCHIVE them instead. Thank you. ScarianCall me Pat 15:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I want my stuff off here. My reasoning? I wrote it, I want it off, simple.Jameselmo (talk) 02:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC) Copy-and-paste page moves Hello, Jameselmo. Concerning your contribution, Stepping Stone (Hendrix song), a page move cannot be done by simply copying and pasting the contents of a page into a new location, as such a process does not transfer the page's edit history and therefore violates the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). As a violation of the page move process, Stepping Stone (Hendrix song) needs to be temporarily deleted under the speedy deletion criteria so that the page you intended to move may be properly moved in a way that will preserve its edit history. Stepping Stone (Hendrix song) has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If not, please refrain from editing either the page you intended to move or Stepping Stone (Hendrix song) until the latter has been deleted according to Wikipedia's speedy criterion G6 (non-controversial housekeeping). If you did not intend to make a page move, then please insert the {{hangon}} tag right below the {{db-copypaste}} tag in Stepping Stone (Hendrix song) and state your intentions on Talk:Stepping Stone (Hendrix song). An administrator will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do. Thank you for your contributions. Daltxn (talk) 19:26, 2 April 2008 (UTC) Rainbow bridge (film)Hi. This edit consists of erroneous information and I've reverted it as a result. The area is nowhere near Dairy Road, is accurately called "Upcountry", and the volcano has not been considered active since 1792. I don't know where you are getting your information or why you are making these changes, but they are wrong. Unfortunately, I'm considering removing the rest of your additions to this article based on this pattern. Viriditas (talk) 09:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
August 2008
RE: JIMI HENDRIX BUDDY GUY ETC"tHERE IS AMPLE RECORDED AND PHOTO IMAGE OF HOWLIN WOLF INFLUENCE ON JIMI ONE OF HIS MOST FREQUENT COVERS THROUGHOUT HIS CAREER (66-70)IS 'KILLIN FLOOR' HE NEVER TALKED IN INTERVIEW OR RECORDED ANY SONGS BY GUY ALTHOUGH HE IS ONCE FILMED NODDING HIS HEAD DURING A JAM WITH HIM, WHERE HE LATER JAMMED (NOT WITH BUDDY GUY)SO GET REAL AND GET IT OFF THIS WELL RESEARCHED SITE.Jameselmo (talk) 22:56, 7 September 2008 (UTC)"
Hi. Your recent edits to Jimi Hendrix appear somewhat confused. You accidentally mess up the style (in terms of inline citations), and make up new templates as you go along ("cite LP"). It just doesn't work. The article is enough of a mess in terms of citation styles already. Please try out your edits on a test page beforehand. Cheers. --HJensen, talk 11:43, 8 September 2008 (UTC) Personal attacks"who are you to threaten me, are you the "the king of Wiki" where is the vandal? you are the vandal, you have no knowledge of the subject and are adding cites from totally bogus sources, when I have time I will provide ample well sourced evidence to refute your disruptive nonsense as I have continued to do for - well check it out yourself."
kellgren "puff"this is a totally verifiable quote which i'd be happy to fax you. the article was even cited. but although "other people have taken credit for the record, about ninety percent of it was done in Studio A in New York with Gary and Jimi." [Chris Stone] [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.43.32.86 (talk) 19:19, 30 September 2008 (UTC) HendrixYou reverted a change I made because no source was provided for the change. Please explain. I cannot revert back because of 3RR, but I will do so later if the information is not sourced. Thank you. Ward3001 (talk) 19:31, 15 November 2008 (UTC) Hendrix, again
Don't threaten me, who are you, you've contributed nothiing to this and I've more or less single handed dragged this article out of the gutter of misinformation, complete bullshit, and rampant 'rock journalese'Jameselmo11:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Blah blah blah blahJameselmo (talk) 15:39, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Whilst your use of caps lock here almost convinced me otherwise, there is such a thing as British English. Please do not add your own personal opinions to articles, or remove sourced material. Thank you. Hadrian89 (talk) 23:31, 31 May 2009 (UTC) OK, knock it off now please. Hadrian89 (talk) 23:55, 31 May 2009 (UTC) Personal attacksLook, edit summaries like this are really not helping anyone get along. A simple, short, and concise edit summary will be fine in the future. Thank you, Matty (talk) 08:47, 25 June 2009 (UTC) :) ANI report about youHello, Jameselmo. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Jameselmo regarding problems with your editing. The discussion is about the topic User:Jameselmo. Thank you. -- Viriditas (talk) 09:29, 25 June 2009 (UTC) June 2009
Vandalism detectedPlease see Talk:Alexandra Kollontai#What the heck does "served himself lavishly" mean?. Wilful vandalism is not tolerated on Wikipedia. I see you've had some issues (above), including some warnings about being blocked. Don't make it worse for yourself by engaging in these sorts of childish and destructive practices. This one was done on 1 July, six days after the last block warning, so you really don't seem to taking any of this seriously. Don't say you weren't warned if this results in a block. -- JackofOz (talk) 11:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC) It means he, as all the others "served himself lavishly" with huge portions of the nations cash while the huge majority lived in extreme poverty.Jameselmo (talk) 10:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC) CommunicationHello Jameselmo: Could we possibly communicate with each other via our emails?Gersracing (talk) 04:19, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Gersracing Get a users/talk page or whatevetr its called that appeaes to be where talk is done on wikiJameselmo (talk) 23:59, 6 December 2009 (UTC) Hello again: Jameselmo If we could communicate through e-mails I could send you some relevant information. ThanksGersracing (talk) 01:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)Gersracing
Hello Jameselmo: Could you possibly go to my user:Gersracing page and click on the six files I downloaded for you... hopefully we can talk....thanksGersracing (talk) 04:38, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
December 2009
The three-revert rule does not apply to Italic textself-reverts, reverts within a user's own user space, or reverts of obvious vandalismItalic text, banned users, copyright violations or libelous, biased, unsourced, or poorly sourced controversial material which violates the policy on biographies of living persons. Definition of edit warring Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of confrontational edits to win a content dispute. It is different than a bold, revert, discuss (BRD) cycle. Reverting vandalism and banned users is not edit warring; at the same time, content disputes, even egregious point of view edits and other good-faith changes do not constitute vandalism.Jameselmo (talk) 19:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC) gersracing is quite welcome to put up his claim - if he can put up a good source and reference, and doesn't remove the properly sourced and referenced material and rfrains from blatant POV. Getting himself a talk page would be a start.Jameselmo (talk) 20:02, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
March 2010
Jameselmo, I just saw what you did to the article in February. Most of your edits were already reverted, and I just reverted the lot of them. I wanted to note that especially this edit and this edit are unacceptable: "blatant POV"? nonsense, it's verified in printed sources. You seem to have a dislike for Miles Davis and Alan Douglas--keep it to yourself, do not insert it into our articles. Finally, your revisions to the text removed a source and introduced unencyclopedic and highly ungrammatical language (note the many run-on sentences). Please be more careful in the future. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 18:02, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
SuggestionsI suggest you create a sandbox page if you would like to experiment. Do not blank an article. Someone might be reading. Here is an example for a sandbox page: Before saving your changes to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you didn't do before saving your edits to Nine to the Universe. Doing so helps everyone understand the intention of your edit (and prevents legitimate edits from being mistaken for vandalism). It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page.  Hi there. When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this: The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature. Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's header in the Edit summary field – please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. Joyson Noel Holla at me! 09:52, 31 May 2011 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for April 4Hi. When you recently edited First Rays of the New Rising Sun, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Loose Ends (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) 14:13, 4 April 2012 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for April 11Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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) 10:54, 11 April 2012 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for August 27Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Billy Cox, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Clarksville (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) 11:18, 27 August 2012 (UTC) September 2012
TBI have responded to you at Talk:Jimi Hendrix. You mislabeled edits as vandalism and should discontinue doing so. In addition, I suggest you add {{YesAutosign}} to your userpage or talk page because you apparently lack the ability to sine your edits. Finally, in the future, please provide a reasoning before making accusations, otherwise everything you say is baseless. Ryan Vesey 14:26, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Disambiguation link notification for October 4Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Elmore James, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Band (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) 14:08, 4 October 2012 (UTC) Main Page appearance: Jimi HendrixThis is a note to let the main editors of Jimi Hendrix know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 4, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 4, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:
UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 12 February 2014 (UTC) Hi,
|
