User talk:Jax 0677
|
Archives |
|---|
|
|
|
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but for legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later."
You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here. You can also leave a message on my talk page.--PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:28, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Contents
[edit]
Template:Uw-navbox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 05:32, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Upcoming Slipknot album[edit]
Hi, Jax (please don't arrest me, TSA officials)! I like that you thanked me for my edit in 2019 in heavy metal music. That's really nice, you're welcome! See I'm trying to settle a conflict about whether of not the upcoming Slipknot album should be moved to the "August" section before its title is announced. I keep reverting it back to the "Artists with material in production" section but those unknown contributors keep insisting that it goes to the "August" section. So could you please help me and semi-protect this article until the upcoming Slipknot album title is revealed? Thanks, and I'll make sure to thank your edits....SirZPthundergod9001 (talk) 23:44, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
- Reply - @SirZPthundergod9001:, I am not in a position to protect pages. Please visit WP:RFP. --Jax 0677 (talk) 20:08, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Where tags[edit]
Care to explain this tag? Nothing that you tagged in that sentence seems to require a "where". Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:51, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- Reply - @TenPoundHammer:, it is helpful to list the nationality of the musician. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:05, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Jax, don't you think it would have been just as easy to add the person's nationality yourself (which I see you ended up doing) rather then add a tag that you later need to explain why you added it? I wish you would realize Wikipedia is a collaborative effort and not a place to make others do what you think needs to be done when you can be bold and do it yourself. There are many tools available to you where it doesn't look like you're policing articles with drive-by tags or templating editors with warnings. Some actual kindness and courtesy (such as personal messages on a user's talk page or explanations on an article's talk page when you add odd tags to the article) will go a long way in alleviating the complaints you receive. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:56, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- Reply - @Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars:, I was on a phone when I added {{where}}. The tags can be nominated for deletion if they should not be used. --Jax 0677 (talk) 20:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- There is nothing wrong with the tag when appropriately used. Drive-by tagging is inappropriate when one can easily find and add the information. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 14:55, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
- Reply - @Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars:, I was on a phone when I added {{where}}. The tags can be nominated for deletion if they should not be used. --Jax 0677 (talk) 20:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- Hi Jax, don't you think it would have been just as easy to add the person's nationality yourself (which I see you ended up doing) rather then add a tag that you later need to explain why you added it? I wish you would realize Wikipedia is a collaborative effort and not a place to make others do what you think needs to be done when you can be bold and do it yourself. There are many tools available to you where it doesn't look like you're policing articles with drive-by tags or templating editors with warnings. Some actual kindness and courtesy (such as personal messages on a user's talk page or explanations on an article's talk page when you add odd tags to the article) will go a long way in alleviating the complaints you receive. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 19:56, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Your edits[edit]
I would like to say again that I am letting your edit history get to me. I should definitely not be screaming and name-calling at you, or anyone else, in edit summaries. Your intentions are not lacking, but I find that some of what you do really does bother me. Your concerns about my editing and attacks are valid, and I would like to work with you to help us get along better. Would you mind if I offered you a few pointers to help alleviate some of my bigger concerns? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:58, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- Reply - @TenPoundHammer:, this is Wikipedia, and you can leave the pointers if you want. I will not always say yes, but more than likely I will listen. This is why I set forth guidelines about tagging. If the tags should not be used, then they need to be deleted. --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:21, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
- I would say some of the biggest ones are:
- Please do not tag anything that is inside an infobox or article lead. The purpose of infoboxes and leads is to summarize key points that are verified within the bodies of the relevant articles. The only exception is if you are absolutely sure that you've found something within the infobox or lead that is not repeated within the article. For instance, if a {{infobox musical artist}} lists a band member name, and you don't see that name anywhere within the article (which should be as easy as Control-F), then that would be a valid use of {{citation needed}} on an infobox.
- Please use {{blp sources}} instead of {{refimprove}} on articles that are biographical in nature. This includes articles on groups and bands that are still active or have at least one member who is still alive. This is because of the standards to which information on living people is held (WP:BLP) compared to other content, and it also makes things easier for people who specifically seek out biographical articles to improve (including me).
- If a discography has unsourced singles, albums, or chart positions, please feel free to run it by me. I have the Joel Whitburn books and access to back issues of Billboard and Radio & Records, all of which are of great value for something like that. Or in the case of a short article like Dylan Scott, check to see if they're verified elsewhere in the article (which should be as simple as Control-F for the single name). If the latter is true, then they don't need to be cited again in the discography.
- Can I get you to agree on these three points? I would really appreciate it, and I think it would make things go smoother between you and me. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:00, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
- Reply - @TenPoundHammer:,
- I will do my best to remember to "not tag anything that is inside an infobox or article lead".
- I will do my best to remember to "use {{BLP+}} instead of {{+r}} on articles that are biographical"
- It is quicker to tag poorly referenced articles than to run them by other people. If I follow the guidelines that I set forth, the tags should not become excessive. I will do my best to see if the information is somewhere in the article, however, looking for something all over a large article might not be reasonable.
Thanks! --Jax 0677 (talk) 12:57, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
WP:DTTR[edit]
If you enjoy editing here you may want to knock this shit off,
Sooner or later you'll either be blocked on the spot or you'll be dragged to ANI where you'll still be blocked anyway.... so do the world a favour and knock it off whilst you have the chance. –Davey2010Talk 16:08, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Reply - @Davey2010:, please post on my page in a civilized and professional manner. WP:DTTR is an essay, WP:NPA is a policy. The professionally written template post to which you linked above is in reference to an edit that was not written in a civilized manner. If the templates are not civilized, they need to be deleted. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:38, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- " please post on my page in a civilized and professional manner." - That works both ways, Posting newbie templates to
veterinarianveteran editors is not civilised or professional, - You've missed my point - The templates are generally for newbies, If you want to "warn" someone then leave a personalised message - It goes a long way,
- The templates don't need to be deleted, You just need to stop treating everyone like they're new and stop mass templating everyone. –Davey2010Talk 16:43, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- " please post on my page in a civilized and professional manner." - That works both ways, Posting newbie templates to
- Davey2010: RE
Posting newbie templates to veterinarian editors
: Yeah, you've got to watch out for those veterinarian editors. They might sic their dogs on you. [FBDB] -- MelanieN (talk) 17:28, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Davey2010: RE
March 2019[edit]
Constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, but a recent edit that you made to User talk:Floquenbeam has been reverted or removed because it was a misuse of a warning or blocking template. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. ——SerialNumber54129 16:32, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at User talk:MelanieN. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.
- If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
- If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. ——SerialNumber54129 16:32, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Reply - @Serial Number 54129:, the comment "maybe you could find time to explain to my grandma how to suck eggs" is not professional nor is it civilized, therefore, the npa template is not out of context for that type of remark. "User talk:MelanieN" is well over 75 kB, and does not have automatic archiving set up, so the archive template is not disruptive nor out of context either. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:09, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
I think I need to wade in here before things get out of hand. As Davy suggested, a personal message would be shorter, to the point, and more thoughtful. You may be interested to read User:GreenMeansGo/WP:Death by template. Now, I personally don't think MelanieN's talk page is too big; perhaps it's causing a slowdown on a mobile or a slow PC, but frankly WP:ANI is usually bigger and if you're concerned about archiving about anything, that's what you should focus your efforts on. I am absolutely positive that Floquenbeam was trying to calm the situation down a bit by using humour, since I think it's quite reasonable that an experienced admin knows how to archive their talk page, and that an experienced admin is not going to purposefully insult you (or at least not until you drop a template on their talk page that was, frankly, asking for trouble). You quoted the policy WP:NPA; a closer perusal of that policy says, "Sometimes personal attacks are not meant as attacks at all, and during heated and stressful debates editors tend to overreact.". Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:09, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Has my talk page become a cause celebre now? Geez, I can't leave the 'puter for a minute. 0;-D Anyhow, there were several responses to Jax's template at my talk page. All of them were various ways of pointing out (more in edit summaries than in edits) that it was pretty inappropriate for them to post a "let me teach you how to archive" template on my page; as someone pointed out, I already have 53 archives of my talk page. If I choose to keep my talk page content visible for a few months before archiving it, I don't think I am violating any policy. I wasn't offended by the template, more amused - especially by Floquenbeam's response, which was sarcastic but witty, and I sent him a thank for it; to call it a "personal attack" is ridiculous. As I say I wasn't offended, but several people did speak up in an attempt to teach Jax about when and whom to template. However, it appears that Jax is not open to this kind of education and plans to keep doing it. -- MelanieN (talk) 17:41, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- P.S. I just noticed that by using a personal attack template on Floq's talk page, Jax made a misstatement of fact. The template says that the post in question "didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed." False. It has not been removed from my talk page - and it had better not be. Yet another problem with using canned templates; often they are not only inappropriate but in error.-- MelanieN (talk) 17:46, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Reply - @Ritchie333:, @MelanieN:, I do not know the experience level of every editor on Wikipedia. However, I did warn a user multiple times to stop their personal attacks. It is the interpretation of the receiver, not the intent of the speaker which is of concern. The fact that the content is not removed is inconsequential. That being said, I will take WP:DTTR under advisement. --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:50, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Jax, I used to have the same problem - not knowing who people are, whether they are admins or not, how much experience they have - until a kind person pointed me to WP:Tools/Navigation popups. I have found this tool to be invaluable. If you hover your cursor over the signature or other linked name of a person, it shows you their user rights, their total edits, and how long they have been here - even whether they are male or female if they have identified as such. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:55, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- Reply - @Ritchie333:, @MelanieN:, I do not know the experience level of every editor on Wikipedia. However, I did warn a user multiple times to stop their personal attacks. It is the interpretation of the receiver, not the intent of the speaker which is of concern. The fact that the content is not removed is inconsequential. That being said, I will take WP:DTTR under advisement. --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:50, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
- I meant to leave an edit summary on EEng's talk, but clicked the wrong button in twinkle: you are not the talk page police. If someone has a long talk page and are active, another user who visits it regularly will likely tell them. You don't need to go around to experienced editors talk pages telling them to archive their talk pages. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:02, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
- Reply - @TonyBallioni:, sorry about that. I guess I will leave be the talk pages of experienced editors, albeit, I did leave a customized message. IMHO, there should be a rule about how long talk pages should be, but that is another discussion for another day. I was told here to use a customized message. --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:16, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
Nomination for deletion of Template:Los Caminantes[edit]
Template:Los Caminantes has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:30, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Aurora RFC Comments[edit]
User:Jax 0677 - No, in response to your comments at WP:AN. I am not declining to close the RFC because of observing the conflict of interest policy. I do not have a conflict of interest. I am observing an even higher degree of neutrality than the avoidance of COI. If COI were the only issue, I could close that RFC. As to closing or relisting, my point is that I am not indifferent to the distinction between closing and relisting. RFCs are not relisted. They are closed, even if they are closed as No Consensus. Please re-read the policies on Requests for Comments so as not to make any more good-faith but misinformed requests. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:08, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Country music songs[edit]
If you see a country music song that you don't think is notable, would you be willing to send it my way? I speak specifically of Talk You Out of It and Night Shift (Jon Pardi song), both of which I was able to expand after seeing you'd tagged them. This is a topic of interest to me, so please feel free to ping or message me when you see a country music article that needs work. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 16:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Reply - @TenPoundHammer:, I will try to do that, if I remember. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Lisa Lynn Masters[edit]
Thank you for creating Lisa's page. Thank you so much!
William
WilliamBenBrooks@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.17.46.79 (talk) 16:20, 6 April 2019 (UTC)