User talk:Jomasecu/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Jomasecu. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Demographics of Atheism

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I left a response to your comments here. AzureFury (talk | contribs) 10:22, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Signature

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I see you signed my comment for me on Talk:List of schools of philosophy. I saw that I had left the comment unsigned, but figured the system would catch it. Is the bot down? Thanks. Kjaer (talk) 04:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Don't know if the bot's down or what; I just noticed it had gone unsigned for about an hour so I figured I'd do it. Jomasecu ^talk _contribs 05:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

In almost every prior instance when I've gone back to sign such a post I get an edit conflict with the bot. Again, thanks. Kjaer (talk) 06:10, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

RfM

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Ayn Rand, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 02:04, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted.
You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Ayn Rand.

For the Mediation Committee, Ryan Postlethwaite

00:26, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Request for Arbitration

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A request for arbitration has been filed with the Arbitration Committee that lists you as a party. The Arbitration Committee requires that all parties listed in an arbitration must be notified of the aribtration. You can review the request at [[1]]. If you are unfamiliar with arbitration on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Arbitration. Idag (talk) 01:11, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

New Arbitration Request

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A request for arbitration has been filed with the Arbitration Committee that lists you as a party. The Arbitration Committee requires that all parties listed in an arbitration must be notified of the aribtration. You can review the request at [2]. If you are unfamiliar with arbitration on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Arbitration. Idag (talk) 22:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ayn Rand

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ayn Rand/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ayn Rand/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Mailer Diablo 00:32, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		This is a little something to say thanks for your AIV report. So thanks :). Keep it up, if you can! ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 22:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! :D Jomasecu ^talk _contribs 22:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

star - Seconded. Sorry for my mis-edit of Lizard. 212.188.108.250 (talk) 20:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Are you sure Carlito's Way and After Hours are not two names of the same novel...Please reply on my talk page Thanks Jon Ascton (talk) 10:39, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Why you got reed of Nabil Rastani

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello its secthayrabe here I just wanted to ask if you could restore the artical I will work as hard as I can on it thank you for your time if their is anything you want to know please ask on my talk thanks Secthayrabe (talk) 12:13, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I nominated the article for speedy deletion because it was about a real person and did not indicate the notability of the subject (WP:CSD A7). A 13-year-old who plans to publish books is not notable. To have an article, a topic should have received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject.. Jomasecu ^talk _contribs 18:28, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

retired

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

By the way read my userpage it says I am retired from Wikipedia anyway/86.3.88.117 (talk) 18:37, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jomasecu/morebits.js

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Done. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 21:13, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

templates for the quinolone class

Latest comment: 15 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The information IS available. What I am trying to do is make the pages for this class consistant to make it easier to include the information that already been compiled for the other drugs. I had used levaquin and cipro as the model and as I was comparing the two I saw that with other edits that folks had made they were no longer the same. So I was attempting to make them the same before I added the content. You reverted this before I could add the data that was already written to be placed under those headings. The revisions that others had made improved this template so I was attempting to adapt their changes as I thought they were good changes. Now I'm back to square one trying to make them the same so I can add this data that had already been written. Just wasted hours of work.Davidtfull (talk) 01:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I removed blank section headers from one article; that hardly takes hours. I'm not sure why exactly you those instead of adding the content and section headers at the same time, but my edit can easily be undone. Keep it civil. Jomasecu ^talk _contribs 01:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I realize that they can be undone. But your comments made sense so rather than do that I decided to follow your advice and add the headers as I add the content. The time spent was comparing the two articles, looking at the changes being made and why they were made, and determing what headers to keep in and to keep out. The actual adding of the headers took seconds. Determining which header was best to keep, which was best to remove, etc., and the proper order they shoud be in is where the time was spent. Sorry if you felt I was chastizing you, or not being civil. In fact I was accepting your rebuke as being valid and indicating my willingness to follow it by not doing any reverts, and then discussing what I was doing on your talk page.

Sorry if this did not come across that way. I was just trying to explain what I was doing and the time spent doing it is all. It was my intention to leave those headings blank for no more than an hour or two while I cleaned up the text to be place there. It was not my intention to leave them blank for others to fill in which I assume to be what you thought was going on. No harm done and I will simply add the headers and the content of the headers at the same time. It was just easier to do it the way I was doing it as I could see both articles side by side on two different monitors as I was working on them. And then be able to determine if proper balance was being achieved or was I giving too much weight to something and needed to make corrections. Or if I was inadvertantly adding OR, if the article was getting too bloated, too many headers, etc. I apologize if you thought I was being rude here as this was not my intentions at all.Davidtfull (talk) 02:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Truth, justice, and the American way.

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Thank you for your support with regard to my recent lame behavior. While another's misdeeds can never justify my own, it was nice to know that at least one person recognized that there were two people at the edit war dance. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 02:32, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Please don't add back improper categories

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

like you did with Category:Eponyms to Asperger syndrome. The category is for naming things after people and some residual lists of eponyms, which really belong to Category:Lists of eponyms. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 22:47, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ayn Rand

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The above-linked Arbitration case has been closed and the final decision published.

TheJazzFan (talk · contribs) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year.
Stevewunder (talk · contribs) and Kjaer (talk · contribs) are banned from editing Ayn Rand (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and related articles (broadly construed), including talk pages, for one year.
SteveWolfer (talk · contribs) is banned from editing Ayn Rand and related articles (broadly construed), including talk pages, for six months. TallNapoleon (talk · contribs) is banned from editing Ayn Rand and related articles (broadly construed) for six months, but is free to constructively contribute to talk page discussions.
Snowded (talk · contribs) and Idag (talk · contribs) are banned from editing Ayn Rand and related articles (broadly construed) for three months, but are free to constructively contribute to talk page discussions.
Brushcherry (talk · contribs) is reminded that article talk pages are for content discussion and encouraged to broaden his content contributions.

In the event that any user mentioned by name in this decision engages in further disruptive editing on Ayn Rand or any related article or page (one year from the date of this decision or one year from the expiration of any topic ban applied to the user in this decision, whichever is later), the user may be banned from that page or from the entire topic of Ayn Rand for an appropriate length of time by any uninvolved administrator or have any other remedy reasonably tailored to the circumstances imposed, such as a revert limitation. Similarly, an uninvolved administrator may impose a topic ban, revert limitation, or other appropriate sanction against any other editor who edits Ayn Rand or related articles or pages disruptively, provided that a warning has first been given with a link to this decision.

Both experienced and new editors on articles related to Ayn Rand are cautioned that this topic has previously been the subject of disruptive editing by both admirers and critics of Rand's writings and philosophy. Editors are reminded that when working on highly contentious topics like this one, it is all the more important that all editors adhere to fundamental Wikipedia policies. They are encouraged to make use of the dispute resolution process, including mediation assistance from Mediation Cabal or the Mediation Committee, in connection with any ongoing disputes or when serious disputes arise that cannot be resolved through the ordinary editing process.

For the Arbitration Committee, Mailer Diablo 03:35, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Unsubscribe · Single-page · Full edition »

— 16 March 2009