User talk:Jpgordon
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "User_talk:Jpgordon".


content
This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 30 days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps are not archived.


For older history, check [1] as well as the archives.

Contents


About bad translation in Oingo Boingo

I just trying to translate fron English to Italian...I'm sorry for this occurence.--ElisirDiLungaVita 17.16, 24 september 2008.


User:Allknowingallseeing

I came here to inquire if you are aware of the relatively newly created identity, Allknowingallseeing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). I only noticed the account tonight when he made similar edits to Paul Watkins (Manson Family and Bobby Beausoleil that the various socks of User:ColScott have made. In looking at his list of articles edited, and the verbage and tone of the arguments he's made on pages such as Alan Moore, it seems very sure. Meanwhile, he created Torso (2009 film), coincidentally a film produced by Don Murphy, who was confirmed as being User:ColScott. As an aside, it's curious that when a ColScott sock turns up, this user is generally not far behind. I've seen speculation about that relationship. I brought this here because Murphy launched a personal outing campaign on me back in May, and looking back, I noted he did the same to you and I would really prefer not to stir that up again. Is this something you can deal with, or is there something else I should do? Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:24, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Question

Just to verify, is this this this account you? (the account and/or the anon)? Mr.Z-man 17:18, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

  • I'm not an admin over there, so I don't know what was on the now-deleted page. But yeah, that was mine before SUL -- I'd forgotten about it, actually. Should be merged into jpgordon. What was the vandalism? I can almost guess. (Whoops! Edited logged out! From the Sportsmen's Lodge in Studio City, CA, no less!)--jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:52, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
    • It was some vandalism from an anon trying to impersonate you (66.162.207.31). I redirected the userpage. Just wanted to make sure the account wasn't started by the same anon. Mr.Z-man 02:10, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Multiple Accounts

Josh, thank your for your last message. It is good to see that admins are actively trying to improve Wikipedia. I think you have come to a natural, yet incorrect, conclusion. Dharma6662000 and I are not the same user; we do however share the same computer: we share the same flat/apartment. I can only assume that you have discovered that both users have the same IP addresses and have come to the conclusion that we are one and the same person. This is not the case. What is true is that we cannot afford another PC, and that a friend has come to the defense of another friend. I am not sure how this can be resolved. I found your comments to be slightly too forceful. Admins are supposed to be wise and forgiving guardians of Wikipedia. You have not issued any advice, or a warning, you have simply said that you will delete/block one or both users. Isn't Wikipedia policy to issue warnings and wait for repeat offending before such heavy action is taken? We have a genuine misunderstanding here. I can see that two accounts from the same IP address may look a little suspicious, but hey, what can we do? If you're willing to buy us a second PC then I'd be more than happy to accept it. Neither account should be deleted/blocked. I'm sure that you can see the difficulty in this situation. If you have any advise as to how to resolve this problem then please let me know. I could suggest that we agree never to comment on one another's articles and/or comments. This would make any kind of misbehaviour impossible, but it would also remove some of the level of review quality from the process. What do you think?  Declan Davis   (talk)  22:31, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I see that the Dharma6662000 account was originally opened using my name. I have been less than professional in allowing that account to be adopted by another user. Whatever the explanation the bottom line is that there are two accounts registered with the same name and that represents a conflict of interest; whichever way you look at it. I would ask you to block the Dharma6662000 account. But will Raul still be able to register an account with the same IP address?  Declan Davis   (talk)  23:08, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

You've got email!

Just an FYI, I sent you an email via the Wikipedia email system. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 00:55, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Block of User:Filthy Ice Cream And Hot Chocolate Syrup

Hi, I'm wondering about your indefinite block of User:Filthy Ice Cream And Hot Chocolate Syrup as a VoA. I also noticed that no block message was left on the user's Talk page. Could the block have been an error? Of the user's 13 edits, only one could be construed as vandalism, and that looks more like a new user who misunderstood a template. The rest are pretty routine edits, and I don't see any deleted edits. I can't imagine what would warrant an indefinite block, unless this is related to an ArbCom case, SSP/checkuser investigation, or similar. --MCB (talk) 17:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I suppose it's possible that he's not the same person as:
  1. User:BLOCK ME PLS
  2. User:FOXY MAMA 8: THE FIERCE, THE NAUGHTY, THE WIKIPEDIAN or 8 other Foxy Mamas
  3. User:I Raped Terri Schiavo
  4. User:Naughtylittlepenguinwhore
  5. User:The Bitch You Love
  6. User:Citrus2
among the three dozen or so abusive accounts on that one IP (and matching in all other ways Checkuser can identify.) Anything's possible; at least once, I've found an entirely abusive IP with a single non-abusive editor. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 18:29, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I figured it was something like that. Best, MCB (talk) 07:35, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

TV spot edits

I respectfully submit that my edits to the pages of members of Congress that cut TV spots for a Federally-indicted governor are relevant, neutral and well-sourced. If Republican politicians were cutting testimonials for Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), that would be relevant and notable. When a sitting public official endorses the reelection of another officially accused for corruption, that is highly relevant to the reader. My edits were entirely factual, devoid of point of view and sourced by the reference to You Tube. I would request that you discuss your opposition before taking further action. Thanks. Pr4ever (talk) 10:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

FYI, while revisiting the edits you'd removed, I eliminated from several a few phrases that were unnecessary in communicating the facts and which could be considered less than neutral. Thanks. Pr4ever (talk) 11:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

  • No need to discuss; it's obvious to any informed editor that your edits did not adhere to WP:NPOV. No idea what Stevens has to do with anything. I didn't even bother to check to whom you were referring in your copy-and-paste paragraph; no need, since the paragraph so blatantly violates NPOV and OR, besides being sneeringly unencyclopedic. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:30, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
© jGames.co.uk 2007 (some content from Wikipedia under GDL ) !-- ValueClick Media 468x60 and 728x90 Banner CODE for jgames.co.uk -->
Your Ad Here