|
User talk:Jobas/Archive 1Have a look pleaseHello Jobas, I have updated the nomination Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Egg fruit with a new one in the set, kindly have a look, I have noticed that you have supported the image before adding the second image. DreamSparrow Chat 15:51, 7 July 2015 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for July 27Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Christian thinkers in science, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page John Eccles. 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) 09:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC) Interested to put in your input?Hi Jobas, I see you have been busy with the Noble Prizes stuff. Would you like to join in on the discussion on one source that is being discussed? Your input would be appreciated at RSN.Mayan1990 (talk) 18:37, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Hudson's Soap advertisementI've put up a restoration, could you review your vote at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hudson's Soap advertisement and state which version you prefer? Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:49, 4 August 2015 (UTC) Just to note, I did that restoration I promised. I just uploaded over. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:29, 9 August 2015 (UTC) Article for Deletion/KeepingHey Jobas, hope you are doing well. There is a page you have contributed to that is being considered for deletion: List of Christian thinkers in science. You are welcome to put in any input on the issues by going to the page and clicking on the link for that article. Mayan1990 (talk) 10:00, 15 September 2015 (UTC) Disambiguation link notification for September 25Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Casablanca, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page European. 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) 11:31, 25 September 2015 (UTC) October 2015
When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this: Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes) I noticed your recent edit to Gupta Empire does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history. Edit summary content is visible in:
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. Thanks! bojo1498 talk 15:40, 1 October 2015 (UTC) Hi, IllumiNations Picture NominationThanks for your support on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Illuminations Picture! Elisfkc (talk) 17:48, 23 November 2015 (UTC) Merry Christmas!
An alternative image was added to the nomination 3 days ago. Could you indicate which version(s) you support? Thanks, Armbrust The Homunculus 12:13, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Wonderful holidays Merry Christmas and a happy New Year! --Tremonist (talk) 15:22, 23 December 2015 (UTC) Happy New Year, Jobas!
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!
Thanks again :) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 03:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC) Mother Teresa's Massacre in AdenSuch a decries, I have wrote this article Mother Teresa's Massacre in Aden, hope you are interested helping me building that article. YemArabSf (talk) 15:51, 7 March 2016 (UTC) A barnstar for you!
Islam by countryWhy did you revert my edit? I removed doubtful sources and replaced them by the most reliable source you can think of (Pew Research Center). One of the sources was a report on biotechnology (http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_341_en.pdf)). Why should that be cited in an article about Islam? Yes, it includes one question about belief, but this is clearly not the main topic of the survey. 2% of the respondents said that they considered themselves Muslims, and so someone must have done the calculation that 2% out of 80 million of inhabitants of Germany is 1.6 million. By the way, the percentage numbers were rounded - thus, 2% could mean 1.5 or 2.4%. This is poor data. Another source gives the number of Muslims as 2.1 million (http://fowid.de/fileadmin/datenarchiv/Religionszugehoerigkeit/Religionszugehoerigkeit_Bevoelkerung_Deutschland_2014.pdf). However, the authors specifically mention that this number only comprises the Muslims who express their belief in surveys. This may be of interest in an article about Islam in Germany, but not in this context, since it would make the table inconsistent. I am sure the numbers given for other countries were not retrieved by specifically asking whether these people actually believed in Islam. REMID gives the number as 4 million (http://remid.de/info_zahlen/islam/). But why not stick to the data of the Pew Research Center, as advertised in the article (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/17/5-facts-about-the-muslim-population-in-europe/)? This would be the most consistent way of presenting the table. Walahfrid Schwarzenberg (talk) 21:51, 7 May 2016 (UTC) Do you think we should nominate it for a GA review? --Bolialia (talk) 07:57, 9 May 2016 (UTC) Talkback Message added 08:11, 9 May 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Bolialia (talk) 08:11, 9 May 2016 (UTC) I've added an Alt; think it's only fair to notify everyone who's voted. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:21, 12 July 2016 (UTC) On the recent conversation"Many of these problems stem from the fact that scientific atheism was an ideology imposed on a population from official channels. Communists did not attempt to engage the hearts and minds of would-be converts but expected individuals to simply bend to patently superficial beliefs. In fact, communists forbid any active discussion concerning the weaknesses of scientific atheism even in the attempt to improve them." [1] Associate Professor Paul Froese [2]
I've added an alt here. Could you look it over? Thanks! Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:45, 16 July 2016 (UTC) Tendentious EditingI am becoming increasingly concerned by what appears to be a pattern of agenda driven editing on the part of Xenophrenic. I recall your recent and unsuccessful appeal to the 3RR noticeboard. When I first read your OP statement I thought there were so many issues being raised that it belonged more properly at ANI. If you choose to raise the issue again, I would suggest ANI as the best forum. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:28, 20 July 2016 (UTC) DiscussionHi Jobas. Hope you are doing well. There is relevant discussion on a recent article you edited ( forced conversion ). You are welcome to join and give your input on it since it does involve a few of your edits there.Mayan1990 (talk) 19:27, 23 July 2016 (UTC) Wikiversity Journal of Medicine, an open access peer reviewed journal with no charges, invites you to participateHi Did you know about Wikiversity Journal of Medicine? It is an open access, peer reviewed medical journal, with no publication charges. You can find more about it by reading the article on The Signpost featuring this journal. We welcome you to have a look the journal. Like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter. Feel free to participate in the journal. You can participate in any one or more of the following ways:
The future of this journal as a separate Wikimedia project is under discussion and the name can be changed suitably. Currently a voting for the same is underway. Please cast your vote in the name you find most suitable. We would be glad to receive further suggestions from you. It is also acceptable to mention your votes in the wide-reach DiptanshuTalk 05:53, 12 August 2016 (UTC) -on behalf of the Editorial Board, Wikiversity Journal of Medicine. BerbersGreetings! The ip on Berbers does not appear to understand that the Islam template is indeed for actual Islamic topics. Could you please keep an eye on it? Kind Regards-- Soupforone (talk) 16:40, 31 August 2016 (UTC) ConsensusHow do you wish to draw a general agreement? Mateoski06 (talk) 16:33, 1 September 2016 (UTC) Of Possible InterestEditor Xenophrenic's mass-scale disruption of Wikipedia: ban proposal currently at WP:AN -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:43, 7 September 2016 (UTC) Please use the preview button
 It is strongly recommended that you use this before saving. If you have any questions, contact the help desk for assistance. Thank you. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 07:27, 7 September 2016 (UTC) Per a comment on Commons, I've added a very slight sharpening to the original image. Can you please review your vote and make sure you're still happy with the image? Cheers! Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:49, 28 September 2016 (UTC) Hi Jobas- An alternate version (crop) of the image has been added. You supported the original, would you support the ALT as well? Many thanks.--Godot13 (talk) 20:34, 4 October 2016 (UTC) Europe 10,000 Challenge inviteHi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 09:14, 6 November 2016 (UTC) QuestionJobas you are an Arab, so Arabs in the article are not an ethnic group but a panethnicity?.--RabeaMalah (talk) 08:16, 16 November 2016 (UTC) ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open! Hello, Jobas. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC) طلبتحية طيبة أخي جوباس، لدي طلب من بعد إذنك: أرجو منك أن تخبر السيد باسم على صفحة نقاشه في ويكيبيديا العربية، بأن له رسائل على صفحة نقاشه في ويكيبيديا الإنجليزية، فهو نادرا مايطلع عليها. وسأكون ممتنة لك إن طلبت منه إعادة النظر في قضية منع حسابي. آسفة على الإزعاج، ودمت بخير--همسة صدق (talk) 13:33, 7 December 2016 (UTC) A barnstar for you!
Multiple edits?Just a question out of curiosity: Why do you make your Featured Picture comments over the course of 10-15 edits? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:37, 11 January 2017 (UTC) Accidental deletionSorry about accidentally reverting your other addition. I don't have an objection to it. Eperoton (talk) 03:12, 2 February 2017 (UTC) Trying to reach a decision at Religiosity and intelligenceYour comments would be appreciated at this thread. Others have argued that there is consensus to remove the Randy Olson comments from the article (if I'm understanding their views correctly). Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 16:50, 7 February 2017 (UTC) Blocked for edit warringI have given both you and Xenophrenic a block for edit warring. While so far no 3RR violation occurred on any individual article, the overall effect of the edit war between the two of you has the same effect. Xenophrenics block is longer because of your previous block history for edit warring. This doesn't mean that you can go to all the articles where you were edit warring and revert them to your version because he is still blocked. Fram (talk) 13:08, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 Jobas (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log)) Request reason: While I been blocked for edit warring, I should note that I did not break the 3RR violation and that I have been editing in this project for the last 10 years; to this date, I have never been blocked for edit warring. User:Xenophrenic emptied a category of all of the articles therein again without to discussing it; the CfD ended in "no consensus" and User:Xenophrenic was in the process of being topic banned for his actions. His edit summary stated: rvt insertion of unsourced, so I reverted some of his edit pending the current discussion initiated by User:John Carter that covers keeping or deleting all categories relevant to religious/atheistic persecution, but still I did not breach the 3RR violation and I never have been blocked. I would kindly ask to be unblocked, since I did not breach the 3RR violation and I never have been blocked for edit warning before.--Jobas (talk) 14:29, 15 February 2017 (UTC) Decline reason:
The block has expired.
Regarding "but still feel I have not been blocked in the first place, since I did not breach the 3RR violation": If you have a look at WP:EW, you will see that it says "The three-revert rule is a convenient limit for occasions when an edit war is happening fairly quickly, but it is not a definition of "edit warring", and it is perfectly possible to edit war without breaking the three-revert rule, or even coming close to doing so". Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:56, 15 February 2017 (UTC) If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
|
