The Original Barnstar
	You are doing some very good work with Rick Ross, striking a good balance between respectful engagement and protecting our core values. Thank you for this. Guy (Help!) 15:49, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Jbh^Talk 16:13, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's twice now you've suggested I should be topic banned along with EllenCT at AE. The other couple of editors who suggested that have their own biases and an old personal stake/grudge involved here. I don't recall if we've ever had an interaction, but you didn't give any specific reasons why I should be topic banned (you did cite something specific EllenCT did at AE, and point out that mediation would miss the point here, which I appreciate). Are there specific, concrete reasons you think I should be topic banned as well, or was that just an understandable "pox on both their houses" first glance reaction that's common when someone approaches a blown up debate for the first time? VictorD7 (talk) 18:43, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@VictorD7: I am basing my recommendation on the way you have handled the AE request. I really do understand your frustration there but it seems very hard for you to disengage from the conflict. I admit there is a bit of 'pox on both their houses' in my thinking - that situation is toxic and a determent to the project. I considered using this last post to also say you should not be banned but I could not in good conscience do so. (That post was intended more as a 'don't force mediation' than a reiteration of 'ban them both' and I apologize if it came off that way) What it really came down to was the way you handled AE including the walls and walls of text you posted there, it was a mirror of EllenCT's behavior - whose behavior certainly requires a topic ban. Maybe she brings out the worst in you but what it showed to me was that you are over engaged in the dispute. Posting more stuff after the "evidence" was hatted really pushed that home for me.

In addition the mud slung by some of the other editors stuck enough that I can not see you as a 'victim fighting the good fight against EllenCT's POV war'. I do recognize that some of that mud was flung by editors you might have long standing conflicts with. (That "recusal" was one of the pettiest actions I have seen by an "un-involved" admin.) Nonetheless it gave a pretty firm impression that this is not your first rodeo.

It comes down to how you handled the conflict, the disruption it caused and my not being convinced that because of the ... maybe tenacity it the right word... you have demonstrated that the conflict and disruption will not spin up again if you do not take a break from the topic for a bit. I would support you if you committed to a 60 day voluntary, logged, topic ban that shows you can let go and allows things to settle out. You should also stay far away from EllenCT on economic topics even if not related to American Politics. Personally I think the whole trickle-down thing is going to blow up in the near future considering how it is being pushed. I think you are overall a good and knowledgeable editor who is involved in toxic situation and needs a rest from it before it spins further out of control.

In short I feel that there is enough blame to go around and untangling the precise rights and wrongs is a) far beyond AE and b) would cover neither of you in glory and would lead to the same result. I hope that answered your question. If you think my reasoning is flawed or you think this might help you, you are welcome to link this post at AE. Jbh^Talk 22:01, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the thoughtful response. For the record that final evidence was posted before I knew the section had been hatted, though I did request later that it be reinstated since I was replying to false, last minute accusations (even that last post didn't address all of them, since I didn't get to see all the new accusations thrown at me until after the hatting). I was reluctant to post the "walls of text" but thought it necessary to thoroughly refute the completely false sourcing/content claims EllenCT was making after they seemed to be gaining traction in the admin response. Another uninvolved editor later admitted to having been "lulled" (his word) into buying much of EllenCT's narrative at first glance, before striking his earlier comments and saying that a more careful reading of the situation shows my sources are sound and she's the one engaging in POV editing. A responding admin similarly struck his earlier comments to agree with this editor, thanking him for his patient reading. These revisions came after I posted my lengthy rebuttal, and presumably would not have occurred if I hadn't. So the "walls of text" were a mixed bag, making a positive difference with some respondents but maybe being tldr for others. I figure it's better to err on the side of correcting the record. My posting there only mirrored EllenCT's in length, not substance or accuracy.

I responded similarly to very dated, off topic, personal cheap shots taken by one of those aforementioned editors whose POV pushing clashed with me and other editors last year (EllenCT isn't the only tendentious editor on Wikipedia). In retrospect maybe I should have ignored those or been more concise, as they may have partly been attempts to bait me, but at the time I thought it best to contrast his vague assertions with specific examples highlighting the nature of our past involvement. Regardless, I don't think verbosity in an AE in reaction to baseless accusations is a real conduct violation, much less one warranting as draconian a sanction as a topic ban (on an unrelated topic to boot).

On the current issues, I haven't been the source of the toxicity you describe, and my involvement has introduced information and clarity over time. I don't think disagreeing with EllenCT should warrant a topic ban either. Without my long term involvement the odds are that either EllenCT's POV pushing would have run roughshod over Wikipedia, resulting in less overt discord but a lower quality encyclopedia that makes a mockery of its own stated core policies, or there would have been less informed push back at some point and an even more toxic environment. Now enough editors have become involved and educated that strong consensuses have formed against what EllenCT is trying to do. It's not so much a toxic topic as it is a toxic editor. Since she stopped editing the article or posting on the talk page things have been largely civil and quiet. At this point I see no need for action against anyone. I mostly endorse the status quo, so I'm not planning on doing much if any more editing in the topic areas (especially tax progressivity), if that puts your mind at ease, and if EllenCT resumes her misbehavior (e.g. edit warring) I'll be happy to let someone else report it so people aren't tricked into seeing this as a two editor quarrel. VictorD7 (talk) 00:03, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because Arbcom has repeatedly adopted the principle that undocumented aspersions and personal attacks on other editors will not be tolerated on WP, VictorD7 brief history on this page is sufficient evidence to support a TBAN or site ban. SPECIFICO talk 00:27, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Except between the two of us I'm the one who's documented my descriptions. I also didn't mention your name here. VictorD7 (talk) 00:30, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @VictorD7: I have clairified my comment at AE to better reflect what I explained here. I do not know that it will make a difference one way or the other. As I explained I can not bring myself to advocate against a topic ban for you but I feel less strongly about it than I do EllenCT's. Jbh^Talk 00:31, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your clarification. VictorD7 (talk) 00:34, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• If you all are going to argue please take it elsewhere. Thank you. Jbh^Talk 00:33, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Euromaiden" aside, can you help me expand the intro to the above topic? I.e. summarize that article concisely? I just need one paragraph intro; that's all. --Gh87 in the public computer (talk) 23:41, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Be glad to. I took a swipe at it here. Jbh^Talk 00:08, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I invite you to the latest discussion about ledes in general. --George Ho (talk) 06:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was quick - I've only just started writing the page!! A previous reviewer left some very helpful advice re. what needed to be added to make it comply whereas you've just deleted the initial content within the first few hours - is that really how this is supposed to work? I am confident that when the page is complete with all reference it will certainly comply with all Wiki guidelines - so not sure what to do next. I'm guessing I now work on the page without saving and, then when all is complete, finally hit save - seems really risky. You can tell I'm new to this, but I can't see another way of starting a page and saving as you go along without it becoming subject to patrolling before it's properly finished. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icmus (talk • contribs) 18:59, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Icmus: Yes, most articles are reviewed within a couple of hours if there are people activly reviewing. There are a couple of things you can do to make sure it is reviewed only after it is finished. One is to go through Articles for creation the other is to use the draft name space. I have moved the article into draft space for you. See Draft:The News from Nowhere Fellowship Symphony.

Please be aware that all articles must pass our notability criteria ie WP:GNG, WP:NALBUM, WP:NSONG. I could not find anything in my brief searches to show that the subject would pass those criteria and on closer inspection I see the name I redirected to was not the composer.

If I can be of any help please feel free to ask. Cheers. PS Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. Jbh^Talk 19:13, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

hey Jb,

thanks for the heads up. I have added some references to the article you mentioned. I hadn't realized that there were no references.

Jessica — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freakishlyauthentic (talk • contribs) 20:45, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Freakishlyauthentic: Hi, I looked through some of the citations you recently put in the article and a large number of them are not what Wikipedia considers reliable sources. Likely one of them will be good enough to remove the {{blpprod}} but I am concerned that the article subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. Specifically we require significant coverage in independent reliable sources. You should read the general notability criteria and the criteria for music biographies to see what the requirements are.

Also, please try to use an encyclopedic tone when writing the article rather than a promotional or conversational tone, see Beatles. I will keep the article on my watch list and, as I have time, look at the references if someone else does not get to it. Thank you for your contribution and welcome to Wikipedia! Jbh^Talk 21:33, 13 October 2015 (UTC) PS - Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp.[reply]

@Jbhunley: hey there Jb. You are right. im new at this and english is not my first language. in regards to reliable sources, i am confused as to what they should be. Did i code them in incorrectly? I love Wikipedia and contributing to it has been a lifelong dream. Would you help me write it better? Any suggestions on how i can make the text more like the Beatles entry? I have to say that the Beatles entry is probably one of the best i have ever seen. Meanwhile i will keep adding more citations and hopefully one day i can make my level go up more.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Freakishlyauthentic (talk • contribs)

@Freakishlyauthentic: I started going through the article. There are really no reliable sources discussing the subject. Just citing things to credits, blogs and press releases is not acceptable. I will do some searched later today to see of I can find something on this person but even if a single reliable source can be found to stop the BLPPROD I think it will likely be nominated for WP:AFD because it does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. Considering the lack of material cited on this subject I must ask where you are getting your information from? Jbh^Talk 14:06, 14 October 2015 (UTC) PS - Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. [reply]

@Jbhunley: Well, i am familiar with this producer's work and i own quite a bit of the records he has produced besides finding them online. I also speak portuguese and there are quite a bit of online articles about him in that language as well. have you done a search for his name? - you will find plenty of articles. Also i forgot to mention that i translated this producers page from portuguese. Did i do it right? He already exists in portuguese - under "jamba (produtor)" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freakishlyauthentic (talk • contribs)

@Freakishlyauthentic: Different Wikipedias have different inclusion criteria. Without WP:RS there can be no article on en.Wikipedia. We do not require that the sources be in English however they must meet the criteria set out in WP:RS. Also, now for the third time sign your talk page posts. Not doing so is considered disruptive and failing to do so after being asked is also rather rude. You also need to indent your comments. Please take a quick look at this brief tutorial on editing talk pages. Thank you. PS - There is no need to ping me on my own talk page, editors are automatically notified of posts on their talk page. Also {{ping}} will not send a notification unless you sign your post. Jbh^Talk 14:40, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jbhunley:Sorry! LOL! I am still learning - is this good? do you mean not write "ping" - what do i write? i never talk to nobody before. how do i sign - i think i created a signature. can you show me how?Jsousa is this how? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freakishlyauthentic (talk • contribs)

@Freakishlyauthentic: You can just type on the page. {{ping}} is used to send a notification to an editor rather than depending on them checking the page on their watch list but the owner of a User Talk page gets pinged automatically when a message is left on their page. To sign type four ~ (~~~~) at then end of your post just like I said above. Jbh^Talk 19:03, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments regarding best practice; thank you for these, however I am a bit puzzled as there are citations and links to other wikipedia articles... KKedit (talk) 01:54, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@KKedit: The problem is the article has a huge amount of detail about this person but, of the three references I can access, the only thing that relates to him is a statement in Enclclopedia Itanica that says "The project was initiated and founded by Dr. Fereydoun Ala and established by a parliamentary act". The link to the trust does not mention him and the other link is a nice biography of his father.

Where did you get all of the information you put in the article? It had to come from somewhere. You need to put those references in and cite where you got each bit of information. Otherwise, since this is a biography of a living person it is likely to be stubbed until references can be found. Jbh^Talk 11:36, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear JBhunley,

thank you for your edits to the Max F. Perutz Laboratories Wikipedia page. The User:MFPL Comms is the communications department of MFPL. So we have added the disclosure message to our user account as you asked. Best MFPL Comms — Preceding unsigned comment added by MFPL Comms (talk • contribs) 14:09, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@MFPL Comms: Thank you for adding the disclosure. You should read all of our policies on conflict of interest, particularly the part about limiting your edits to the article talk page. Please note that multiple user accounts and accounts named for business entities are prohibited on Wikipedia per the Wikipedia:Username policy. You should request a change of user name at Wikipedia:Changing username or the account will be blocked from editing. Each individual who edits needs to have their own account and each of those accounts must disclose their affiliation per our terms of use. Thank you for your understanding. If I can be of help please feel free to contact me on my talk page. PS - Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. You also may want to read this brief tutorial on editing talk pages Cheers. Jbh^Talk 14:19, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you have been too hasty nominating Smith's pharmacy winter haven, fl for speedy deletion. 1 minute after creation is not enough time. Give this sort of thing at least an hour. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:06, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett: Sorry. I thought I was working from the back of the queue - I did not check the time. Jbh^Talk 12:09, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Graeme Bartlett: There has been no further editing by the editor who created this article and it is the only edit by the user. I have re-tagged it since it is still a CSD-A7. Jbh^Talk 13:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly does an artist, band, or musical act need to achieve to be 'significant' according to the standards of wikipedia in general and this admin in particular? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel5981 (talk • contribs) 13:02, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel5981: please see Wikipedia's general notability guidelines and the notability criteria for bands. In general a subject needs multiple, non-trivial, articles/coverage in independent, third party reliable sources, not Facebook, not blogs - nothing with user contributed content - and not press releases or PR material but sources with independent editorial control and a reputation for fact checking and accuracy. Also, I am not an admin I nominated the article for deletion, the admin who deleted the article was Bbb23. You might consider going through the Articles for Creation process and reading this page on creating your first article. PS - Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. You also may want to read this brief tutorial on editing talk pages. Jbh^Talk 13:21, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And to whom falls the responsibility of checking these articles. Do I need to provide those out of my own interest, or does the admin perform a fact-check? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel5981 (talk • contribs) 01:50, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel5981: Admins have no special powers with respect to content. If the article is created through AFC as I recommend above, an AFC reviewer will check the sources. If it is created directly in main space a new page reviewer will check it. In that case if you have not provided sufficient reliable sources to meet notability requirement and the reviewer can not find any good indication of passing notability on a, probably cursory, search the article will likely be tagged for deletion. Remember no blogs, social media, sales sites, fanzines, PR material, links to recordings etc can be used to demonstrate notability. Only independent, third party reliable sources with significant coverage. not tour date listings or blurbs, at least a couple of paragraphs discussing the subject. Carefully read Wikipedia:Notability (music) and all of the blue links I have provided. They go into depth about each subject and what each term mean on Wikipedia.

Also you must remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~. I have mentioned this to you before and a reminder exists at the bottom of the edit window. You also may want to read this brief tutorial on editing talk pages to see how to properly indent talk page threads. Jbh^Talk 02:11, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I got your message saying that you suspect I have financial ties to Yellowstone Capital. I am not an employee of the company, nor do I have any financial interest in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by APetteys (talk • contribs) 13:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@APetteys: That does not fully answer the Paid/COI inquiry. Do you receive any direct or indirect compensation for your edits to those or any other article. For example are you being paid as a freelancer or as an PR person or do you work for an agency to make edits? PS - Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. Jbh^Talk 13:21, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, I do not. APetteys (talk) 13:27, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@APetteys: then please read Wikipedia's policy on neutral point of view and the general notability guidelines as well as the specific notability guidelines for companies and organizations because your articles are indistinguishable from advertisements and public relations material for the subjects. Continued creation of such articles may result in a suspension of Wikipedia editing privileges for using Wikipedia for promotion and not being here to build an encyclopedia. Thank you for your understanding. Jbh^Talk 13:35, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

hi. New to Wikipedia here and I guess I am kind of confused. I typed up the article for what strange stars that I think you deleted. im confused on how it's not notable enough for it's own article when other pieces of Avram Davidson's work apparently are. his collection or all the seas with oysters, the link right above strange stars on his page, does have it's own. im confused how one is notable and the other not. I have quite the old sci fi library and have found multiple authors who have mostly complete links but one or too stubs and I thought I would help complete there pages. Avram Davidson, CL Moore, John Brunner etc. I guess I don't understand perfectly, should I not expand the stubs? also I would not at all be surprised if I messed up citation, but im also confused how the book the article summarizes does not count as a primary source for a summary. Id love to help expand on these author's pages, so id really appreciate some direction or feedback on what I should do, Thanks Dillon Kreiser 14:53, 19 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DKreiser (talk • contribs)

@DKreiser: What I did, as I noted, was WP:REDIRECT the book's article to the author's page. For a book to meet our notability criteria it needs to have been have a minimum of two independent and significant reviews in reliable sources. Helping expand stubs is a great thing to do and the most important thing is to find sources. Just because an article exists on another topic does not mean it should exist. Every article must meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. I linked the most relevant ones on your talk page.

If you can find some sources for the article go ahead and undo the redirect and add them. If you do not know how to let me know and I will do it for you. If I can be of help please feel free to contact me on my talk page or {{ping}} {{ping|Jbhunley}} from any talk page. Welcome to Wikipedia! Jbh^Talk 15:05, 19 October 2015 (UTC) PS - Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. You also may want to read this brief tutorial on editing talk pages.[reply]

Hello again,

The problem with articles discuss the book lies with the guidelines. Like most of the Great Sci Fi writers of his time, his stories were published in Pulp Magazines. After a story was published, other authors would write in to discuss them. But the guidelines say you cant use a source that was used to publish the material. Even if I can get a hold of backlogs of the magazine of Science fiction and fantasy, they wouldn't count. But any one who would want to discuss his work would have done so there. But I believe he should qualify for the "5.The book's author is so historically significant that any of the author's written works may be considered notable. This does not simply mean that the book's author is notable by Wikipedia's standards; rather, the book's author is of exceptional significance and the author's life and body of written work would be a common subject of academic study" exception. few men are as lauded n the genre. He even became the editor for magazine of Science fiction and fantasy. I can try to get more sources, but since the article is chiefly a summary, and I could not find anywhere else on the internet that even listed the stories in the collection, Shouldn't it stand on it's own for the prosperity of the authors work?

Thank you for helping, I'm afraid I don't no how to reverse a redirect or even where I can edit the article now that it is moved, so if you could help me find it I will try to find more sources for it. in the mean time I asked DEsiegal to weigh in on if Avram Davidson is worthy of the 5th notoriety standard, he is on the Sci Fi project, has 10 years of editing history, and works at the teahouse to help nubes like myself. I figured he could give me a definitive answer. because if Davidson and a few others are "Historically Notable" I have a lot of work to do to help give their work a place here.

Thanks Again, I'm Learning :)Dillon Kreiser 16:30, 19 October 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DKreiser (talk • contribs)

@DKreiser: I have moved the article into draft space. You can edit it at Draft:What Strange Stars and Skies. Again Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. Also, you do not need to start a separate section each time you comment on my talk page, just indent as shown it the guide I linked for you previously. Remember, everything on Wikipedia comes down to having reliable sources - they do not need to be online so long as they are properly cited so they can be located in a library. Jbh^Talk 16:41, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article references to BBC news and an article from The Citizen ( a Tanzanian ) newspaper, apart from music festivals in Tanzania and World of Music, Arts and Dance which is an international arts festival. I am unsure as to why these sources are considered unreliable. Could you please clarify as to what is considered a reliable source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Irin.simon (talk • contribs) 18:12, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Irin.simon: The BBC article simply states he played at a festival. The article in The Citizen looks OK at first glance but it requires more than one article to pass the notability criteria. This discussion should be taking place either at Talk:Msafiri Zawose or Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Msafiri Zawose to get input from other editors. I have both on my watch list and you can also {{ping}} {{ping|Jbhunley}} from those pages.

Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. Also, please not that {{ping}} will not send a notification without a proper signature. Jbh^Talk 18:20, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, my page Sommer Nectarhoff was recently marked for deletion for lack of references. I have added more references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Writerlier (talk • contribs) 18:22, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Writerlier: Thanks for working to improve the article. In order for a WP:BLPPROD to be removed there must be a citation to a reliable source. Links to blogs, social media or sources published bu the subject or their publisher are not sufficient. A biography of a living person may not exist on Wikipedia without such reliable sources. Also, please note that even if one or two sources are provided it is still possible the article will be nominated for deletion at WP:AFD if it can not be shown to pass Wikipedia's general notability guidelines or the specific notability criteria for authors.

If I can be of help please feel free to contact me on my talk page or {{ping}} {{ping|Jbhunley}} from any talk page. Also, Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. Cheers. Jbh^Talk 18:52, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a geniune unbiase page worthy of being posted ! With direct links and articles as refrences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.232.101.55 (talk) 19:23, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.232.101.55 (talk) 20:10, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The page will be reviewed by an administrator to see if they concur with the speedy deletion recommendation. If they agree it will be deleted. If they disagree they will remove the tag. However, unless there is some evidence the topic meets Wikipedia's general notability guidelines it will likely be nominated for a more extensive deletion discussion at WP:AFD. PS - Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. Jbh^Talk 20:21, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot highlight the importance of this article and the topic in the Lebanese community, I followed all necessary steps I beg you take it into consideration and help me fix it up rather than tagging it to be deleted! please verify the content through the references , If the mere fact that its an autobiography bums you out I can have someone else write it.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abra1995 (talk • contribs) 22:32, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Abra1995: I have answered you here, at the article talk page and on your talk page. That answer will not change no matter how many times you post on my talk page. I have nominated the article, now an admin will decide if it meets the criteria for speedy deletion. If it does not it will likely be nominated for deletion at AfD. The only way to avoid this is to provide reliable sources to show how the subject meets Wikipedia's notability criteria. If you follow the blue links I have provided in my other answers you can see the text of the policies. If you wish to discuss this further please do so at the article talk page as I requested earlier.

Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. Also, please note that editing as multiple IP addresses as it seems you have been doing, as well as with your account is considered abuse of multiple accounts. Please edit using only your account. Thank you. Jbh^Talk 22:43, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. I've contested the deletion on the talk page, but won't comment further and will abide by whatever decision is made. Xeno of Citium (talk) 19:04, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Kethrus. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, PBtisk, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. --  Kethrus |talk to me  14:47, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unintentional. Sorted. --  Kethrus |talk to me  14:48, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Kethrus: not a problem. Cheers. Jbh^Talk 14:49, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JB, thank you for your correspondence.

I'd like your assistance if you do don't mind, I would like my article 'Blood & Glory (Film)' to remain on wikipedia for referencing, and I am the marketing manager of the film.

You mention that it reads a bit too much like a publicity article, however I re-wrote the article myself from a neutral standpoint as much as I can tell - im not promoting the film or telling anyone to go watch it - it is merely factual and synopsis.

Can you please give me further guidelines as to how it is contravening the rules so that I can amend it according to how it needs to be?

Thank you and kindest regards.

Mike Savage

Mikesavage86 (talk) 18:03, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Mikesavage86: Please note that Wikipedia is not for promotional use. I do not see adequate coverage in independent reliable sources to demonstrate that the subject meets the general notability guidelines or the notability criteria for films - without significant coverage an article simply is not permitted. Also please note that our terms of use require that you declare your paid-editor status on your user page, the article talk page and on each edit you make. You should use {{paid}} for your user page and {{Connected contributor (paid)}} for the article talk page. Please see WP:COIDISCLOSEPAY for more information. You should limit your contributions to the article talk page - supplying sources or making edit requests per WP:COI.

I will keep the article on my watch list or you can contact me on my talk page or {{ping}} {{ping|Jbhunley}} from any talk page. Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. You also may want to read this brief tutorial on editing talk pages. Please click through and read the blue links, they explain matters in more detail. Thank you. Jbh^Talk 18:16, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. -JG (talk) 17:55, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, could you please explain what we did wrong? We do not want our page to be eliminated. User talk:Josescheuren From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cut/paste from editors talk page
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Contents [hide] 1 October 2015 2 Recent edit to WITS Academy 3 Josescheuren, you are invited to the Teahouse! 4 Speedy deletion nomination of Cinemat Inc October 2015[edit source] Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to WITS Academy has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG. ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again. For help, take a look at the introduction. The following is the log entry regarding this message: WITS Academy was changed by Josescheuren (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.876745 on 2015-10-20T11:38:58+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 11:39, 20 October 2015 (UTC) Recent edit to WITS Academy[edit source] Information icon Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that you made a change to an article, WITS Academy, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 11:51, 20 October 2015 (UTC) Josescheuren, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit source] Teahouse logo Hi Josescheuren! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Samwalton9 (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:22, 20 October 2015 (UTC) Speedy deletion nomination of Cinemat Inc[edit source] Hello Josescheuren, I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Cinemat Inc for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top. You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. JbhTalk 18:34, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Josescheuren (talk • contribs)

@Josescheuren: from what I can see in my logs the article Cinemat Inc was deleted because the article violated Wikipedia's policies on promotion and advertising and made no claim of notability. All articles must pass Wikipedia's general notability guidelines and companies must pass the notability guidelines for companies and organizations. Please read those guidelines before attempting to recreate the article. Also, please read our policy on conflict of interest and WP:COIDISCLOSEPAY. If I can be of help please feel free to contact me on my talk page or {{ping}} {{ping|Jbhunley}} from any talk page. You also may want to read this brief tutorial on editing talk pages. Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. Jbh^Talk 18:48, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my proposal to speedily rename:

• Category:1st century Physicians to Category:1st-century physicians Hugo999 (talk) 00:27, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Hugo999: I have no objection. I did not even think of '-' vs ' ' when I created it. Jbh^Talk 00:33, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See Francis Collins (October 29, 2013). "Basic Science Finds New Clue to Bipolar Disorder". National Institutes of Health. The image is commonly used for the topic. QuackGuru (talk) 05:07, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@QuackGuru: Thank you. I replied at Talk:Bipolar disorder. It looks like the image has become iconic so I have no further objection to its use. Jbh^Talk 13:35, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I included a reference with the image but you deleted the image along with the reference.[1] I can include more references to help resolve the dispute. I'd appreciate if you try to find another image before deleting the useful image. Images are beneficial to our readers. QuackGuru (talk) 17:05, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@QuackGuru: Please keep the conversation on the article talk page. It is hard for me to follow two threads on the same topic and others are participating on the talk page. Thanks! (PS are beneficial only insofar as they are an accurate depiction or representation - see the more in depth thread at of painting] where this started.) Jbh^Talk 17:13, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jbhunley, Just wanted to say a quick word of thanks for your comments at WP:RSN. Appreciate it. - Ryk72 ^'c.s.n.s.' 20:51, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Ryk72: thank you. Jbh^Talk 20:57, 28 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to re-edit the lead to make it less of a biography, but it's not easy with applicable sentences. Will you help me? --George Ho (talk) 01:24, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@George Ho: Glad to! I will take a look tonight and see if I can come up with something in my free time tomorrow. Cheers. Jbh^Talk 01:48, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jbhunley, please help me fix the issues with the page Jack Vathsan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Statisticallyhigh (talk • contribs)

@Statisticallyhigh: I will take a look at it as I have time today and see what I can do. Cheers. – Please remember to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ which will insert your user name and a time stamp. – Jbh^Talk 12:27, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Statisticallyhigh: I searched through the web and other resources I have for material on both "Jack Vathsan" and "Janck Watsan", which seems to be an alternate spelling. I also looked under his given name. I could find nothing other than blog posts and social media. I fear that he does not meet our general notability guidelines or the specific criteria contained in WP:MUSICBIO or WP:FILMMAKER.

If you can identify or provide a few independent third party reliable sources to demonstrate notability I will be glad to help you put an article together. If, on the other hand, no sources can be located within a reasonable time I regret the article will likely face deletion. I will continue to look for material but the best chance of finding something lies with someone who is familiar with the subject and the Indian media, which I am not. I am sorry I could not be of more help. I will keep the article on my watch list so if you locate some good reliable sources please post them there. You can also ping me {{ping|Jbhunley}} from the talk page which will notify me even if I have not logged in for a while. You need to sign your talk page posts with ~~~~ or the ping will not work. Cheers. Jbh^Talk 16:17, 29 October 2015 (UTC) Added note Jbh^Talk 16:28, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jbhunley, This person originally worked with the name Jackson Srivathsan, I gues you are right Jack Vathsan is his a.k.a.

Also, There is a Hindu Article which is on the page. Plus I have added the IMDB link.

• IMDB
• Jack Vathsan on The Hindu

Also, If I am not wrong this page was already up for speedy deletion. I think you or someone cleared it upon the Hindu Article. This person is notable and an upcoming celebrity with a few projects lined up. I shall wait for them to apprear in news or news and then add them. I'll delete the upcoming projects for now...

Statisticallyhigh (talk) 06:57, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Statisticallyhigh: The single article, which is a bare mention, is enough to have kept the article from immediate deletion, much more is needed to show notability. IMDB is not a useful source for notability because it can be edited by users. Being an 'upcoming celebrity' does not make a person eligible for a Wikipedia, they must already be a celebrity, one with a lot of coverage in reliable sources. Otherwise Wikipedia would have hundreds of thousands of articles about people 'trying to make it big', or important in their home town or other small area only etc, and it would be impossible to make sure those articles complied with out policy on biographies of living persons. Cheers. Jbh^Talk 12:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jbhunley, Thanks for your input. I really appreciate it. The Hindu article has appreciated Jack and explained all the songs in detail. Please find some more Citation.

• [2]
• [3]
• [4]

I'll keep this article as it is. I'll make sure anything I update further has strong Citation. Is this ok? Statisticallyhigh (talk) 17:45, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• • @Statisticallyhigh: The article has been nominated for deletion by another editor. You should comment in the deletion discussion ongoing at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Vathsan. Jbh^Talk 19:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jb! User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/deletionFinder.js is a very useful script, try it. Best, -- Sam Sailor ^Talk! 21:41, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Sam Sailor: Thank you! Jbh^Talk 22:07, 29 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rape during the liberation of France – Small article and should have just one expanded paragraph in intro.

Rape during the occupation of Germany – One or two paragraphs; you decide.

Rape during the occupation of Japan – Very short intro; should have concise intro.

Comfort women – Intro should have no more than four paragraphs; it's currently... short.

Unlike other requests, I am not involved in either above article. --George Ho (talk) 16:43, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@George Ho: Great! I will see what I can come up with as time allows. Cheers. Jbh^Talk 17:14, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@George Ho: just letting you know I have not forgotten. Jbh^Talk 20:45, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you have time on this. I made some edits on the lede, but I think you can do a better job than I. --Georgie says "Happy Halloween!" (BOO!) 14:23, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I took a swipe at tightening up the lead here [5]. Bio's are relatively easy particularly when there is good stuff to start with. The above WWII rape articles will be harder. I think I can do something with Rape during the liberation of France and Rape during the occupation of Japan. The others look to have pretty active editors but I might give the a try if I'm feeling adventurous :) Cheers! Jbh^Talk 14:46, 31 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]