User talk:Jc37/Archive/08: Difference between revisions

Pages worth reading:     Fighting is boring Logical fallacies of relevance Three Men make a Tiger The Blindmen and the Elephant The Last Commandment The Golden Rule and WikiLove

CAT WP:CAT WP:NCCAT WP:CLN WP:CFD WP:OC WP:OC/U WP:USERCAT Help:Category Help:Categories Readers' FAQ Editors' FAQ Categories (Tree)

Motion

Memorable comments from discussions I've been in:

• I flipped a three-sided coin, it came up "no consensus". --Kbdank71 (talk) 20:32, 13 November 2006 (From a talk page discussion)
• Outline my position, which is actually built on a big pile of marbles in a game of kerplunk and the straws are slowly being pulled - Hiding (talk) 08:49, 17 November 2006 (From an edit summary)
• While the essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS may be useful for other XfD discussions, it isn't as useful for CfD, due to a commonality of consistancy due to prior consensus. The guideline WP:OCAT is an excellent example of this. And the same seems true for WP:ALLORNOTHING. - jc37 17:12, 9 April 2007

  Due to a what of what due to what? Please rephrase for us simple folk. Picaroon 01:23, 12 April 2007 (From a WP:DRV discussion.)

• I think I was more involved with the fiction MOS when it was started than I am now, I have kind of given up on those sort of pages, no sooner do you get it all straight, have a few drinks to celebrate, put the chairs on the table and start mopping up than a whole new crowd walks in ready to get it all straight again. - Hiding 21:03, 2 November 2007 (from a talk page discussion)
• But in my experience, every talk page of XfD closers seems to be filled with vehemence about disagreement of a closure. Nice to know that you've managed to (mostly) somehow avoid that. ("somehow" - you'll have to loan me your special medallion sometime : ) - jc37 00:11, 6 March 2008

  It's a medallion of troll-protection +4. I looted it from a [contentious] AfD along with a masterwork ban-hammer +1, a mop of template sweeping, and 103 gold pieces. IronGargoyle (talk) 05:39, 7 March 2008

• Enjoy reading this text in context : ) (From a talk page discussion starting on 23:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC))

I cant see a link to your user talk archives. Could you add one so people can easily find the previous discussions hosted on your talk page. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 02:18, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The links are on User:Jc37. For convenience, here you go: Talk sub-pages  : ) - jc37 02:20, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to your comment at Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 51#RFD/W. --Cyde Weys 17:26, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. Legoktm (talk) 12:17, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• User_talk:My76Strat/Archive_8#Your_RfA

You and Scotty both left kind messages on the candidate's page, and I wish that both restore his spirits. Sincerely, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 18:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hope so as well. Thank you for the note. - jc37 19:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion has been opened again on Category:Colonial people. Your comments/ideas on the issue would be appreciated.John Pack Lambert (talk) 22:57, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. - jc37 22:59, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work at looking to "arbitrate" a compromise by the way. Hm, I wonder how that skill could be put to wider usage ... Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:08, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

+1 --Kbdank71 20:13, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a few...

It takes a while to find a good place to grab, and sometimes there isn't a good place - I'll look at the others you mentioned when I have some more time.

I don't think the shot of "BJ riding away on the motorcycle with the closeup obscuring "some stones" exists, but it damn well should do - I may have skipped over it or you may be better at dreaming the movie than they were at filming it, I'll look again later. You had me convinced, but I didn't see it in a quick fast forward...

I'll probably just watch the whole thing with a beer or three tomorrow or day after, now I've found it - seems like a plan, it's outstanding viewing...

Enjoy... Begoon ^talk 05:30, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2012#Results

User_talk:AGK#Well,_while_we're_waiting

User_talk:Kbdank71#Results

Hey man

Sorry to see the results of the elections did not go in your favor. I voted for ya!  :) Better luck next time, if you decide to try again. BOZ (talk) 18:53, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you : )

And - Wow. You and bunch of other people. I expected far worse and all things considered, I am actually very happy with the results : ) - jc37 20:34, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It requires a special kind of (mildly insane) dedication to have even considered running. Thanks for stepping forward to help the project, Jc37. — Coren ^(talk) 22:28, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nod, and so it was repeatedly suggested to me by others who I had asked about their running, before I was nudged into it myself. And thank you. I hope it was helpful. - jc37 22:38, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Hi Jc37 sorry for the results. I did support. Good luck for the future. TheSpecialUser ^TSU 02:20, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  No worries, and thank you for your support. (Reminds me of Bartles & Jaymes : ) - jc37 02:36, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• I believe I voted for you as well. Oh well. Next time perhaps.--Amadscientist (talk) 03:03, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  (orange user talk bar was surprising timing) - Anyway, perhaps. I dunno yet if I want to again. But since it's a year away, I have plenty of time to decide. Regardless, I do appreciate the support. In my experience at RfA, support is typically not given lightly. - jc37 03:10, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• You stepped up and jumped in when it looked like there wouldn't be enough choices for the community to have a real choice, and had the guts to stick it out once everyone else jumped in. I think those are admirable traits and worth noting. I do think you will be happier on this side of the iron gates. I can't imagine you with the shackles of Arbitration, having to limit your participation in the real work, for fear of recusal or involvement. Like a caged bird. Besides, there are too many worthwhile projects on this side of the fence that benefit from your attention to detail. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 03:16, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Very kind of you to say. Though I will admit that I don't view arbcom in that way, I find your metaphors interesting, and worth thinking about... - jc37 03:24, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hahc21

• I gave you my support too (Although that was obvious in my guide) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 23:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, and thank you : )

  If you don't mind my asking, what were the the determining factors for you? While several others placed me at neutral, as you did initially, how did you decide I wasn't evil incarnate or at least clueless about policy, etc., as several others seemed to? - jc37 04:16, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Oh, I thought you'd never ask. Actually, I have seen that you are a user that is always willing to improve the 'pedia, and that you are very knowledgeable in many aspects of it. A new mind willing (and able) to bring changes is what ArbCom was (and is) needing in these rough times, and my best bet for that change was you (and Worm). Most of the other candidates (with the exception of Worm, which, in his own merits, is a very bright and welcoming addition to the committee, and Yolo and Count for obvious reasons) were already related to the committee, and they were keeping the status quo approach of it. Yes, I saw several good proposals, but none of them were going too far from what is established now: they weren't taking risks. Maybe people considered you were too dangerous for the job, but I believe that clueless about policy is a no-no. You're an administrator, and administrators are not clueless about policy, and less one like you, who is constantly involved in policy-related stuff (as far as I've seen). I remember when I saw your name for the first time, it was a long time ago; you were proposing something at the village pump that (if I can completely recall what was it about) didn't make it, but it was a clever proposal. Since then, I have a sincere trust in you. I guess that, what happened, is that community thought you may not be ready for the existent committee, although the fact that you achieved more neutral votes than opposes and a 35% of approval is a sign that people were inconclusive about your proposals but not completely against them. My experience in ArbCom elections statistics tells me that being successful at first is hard, and Worm can tell you about it. You only have to polish yourself, and you will be successful ina not too distant future. Regards. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 04:42, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  You know, out there in the world outside Wikipedia - Nod there really is such a place : ) - I've so often seen people being aggressive and adversarial and negative and so on when in a store or other business. When I encounter someone is doing a great job, I like to let them know, and find a comment card or some such to let others know as well. There is so much negativity and selfishness out there, I think a bit of reinforcement of the positive is a good thing. I've tried to follow that on Wikipedia as well, though I'm sure I don't do it as often as I perhaps should.

  And when listening to/interacting with others as an admin, and honestly even as an editor, on Wikipedia it's become almost necessary to have a thick skin as it were ("water off a duck's back"). But I'm of course human. And I have to say it feels good when someone says such positive things. I've re-read the above several times now, and I just wanted to say I appreciate your comments. Thank you very much. - jc37 05:06, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  You're very welcome :). We learn from our mistakes, and we all make mistakes, but asking for the head of a person or reaching premature conclusions for their mistakes is not the way to go (Yes, I have read the case about Bishonen and I was very interested in community's reaction to Jclemens' and Elen's debacle). Communication and understanding are the most valuable ways of resolution, and usually, we go and avoid them as long as we can, which is a big mistake. That said, I hope you are having a good time editing, and I expect to see you soon again in the future. Regards. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 05:27, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!!

For all you do!! Have a wonderful HOLIDAY!!

Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Merry Christmas!

BOZ (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Be well, be happy and be safe!

Hope you are having a great holiday season and that the new year brings great comfort and lasting joy to you and your family!--Amadscientist (talk) 00:03, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!

TheGeneralUser (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hello Jc37! Wishing you a very Happy Merry Christmas :) TheGeneralUser (talk) 13:03, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2013

Belated Happy New Year with a Toast!

	Here's a toast to the host Of those who edit wiki near and far, To a friend we send a message, "keep the data up to par". We drink to those who wrote a lot of prose, And then they whacked a vandal several dozen blows. A toast to the host of those who boast, the Wikipedians! - From {{subst:TheGeneralUser}}

~TheGeneralUser (talk) has bought you a whisky! Sharing a whisky is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a whisky, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Enjoy!

Spread the good cheer and camaraderie by adding {{WikiScotch}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Message received at ~~~~~

~TheGeneralUser (talk) — is wishing you a Happy New Year! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the New Year cheer by adding {{subst:New Year 1}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

A Very Happy (belated) New Year to you Jc37! Enjoy the Whisky ~TheGeneralUser (talk) 23:39, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you have a lot of experiance with working on policy pages. I wondered if you could look at the discussion that took place on the talkpage of Wikipedia talk:Verifiability. There was an extensive discussion in regards to changes that some felt were needed. After a long discussion a bold edit added some text that appeared to have a good consensus although refining took a few more steps. After a discussion of the removal of some wording it seemed to have reached an almost natural end, until this morning when an editor who was helping refine the text after the bold edit reverted it all back to the form berore the discussion. Could you read through the discussion and see what you feel is the consensus of editor and if there is any version that should be in place or if you feel the right move is to leave it as it was prior to the bold edit and subsequent refinements (before the whole discussion itself).--Amadscientist (talk) 23:24, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, that editor was me. I've commented on the talk page in question. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:29, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JC37 may well agree with you Typtofish, or may not even want to get involved. But I sought their assistance as they would be an uninvolved admin eye....and are not on any side. Heck....I may get a wet trout for the whole thing.--Amadscientist (talk) 23:45, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand that. But no need for a trout, I understand where you are coming from, just wish that it didn't blow up so much. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:47, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(several edit conflicts later : )

I gave it a quick once over, and I'll take another look in a minute, but I think I'll leave my admin hat on for this. (Which also means I, as you note, won't be picking "sides".) Atm, I don't see much of a consensus yet, though the discussion appears ongoing. And several of you have agreed to give this some time. Which I think is a laudable agreement as it follows the spirit of "There is no deadline". - jc37 23:50, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Like--Amadscientist (talk) 00:20, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Johnpacklambert

Appreciate your comments in the RFC/U. I don't know my way around there with the whole process, but I wanted to say my piece. :)Benkenobi18 (talk) 15:24, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:RRA
• User_talk:Bibliomaniac15#WP:RRA [1]
• User_talk:Ruslik0#Protecting_a_proposal [2]
• User_talk:Snowolf#Protecting_a_proposal [3]

How are you? I thought of you, - look for "pain" on my talk, taken from literature ;) (second occurence, quoting the first) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:05, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've decided to call for a consensus discussion regarding a matter being discussed here, but in the meantime, could you look through the discussion, and the related edits, and let me know if you agree that SPhilbrick's behavior (reverting the article instead of calling for a consensus discussion, while stating, "it would be nice to have a larger number weighing in" and "I don't see any way any reasonable person can conclude that there is a consensus in favor of the first photo") constitutes edit warring? If you agree, can you offer a polite word to him as an uninvolved admin? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 02:13, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Another editor who does not seem to understand that you cannot add material to an article that has nothing to do with that article's subject got into a prolonged discussion with me in which he argued why the material should be included for "context". In the article on Bill Biggart, whose notability is that was the only photojournalist killed while covering the 9/11 attacks, the other editor, Crtew, wants to include a list of all media-related deaths (not in the 9/11 article or a related 9/11 death list article, but in the article of just one of the victimn, Bill Biggart), because he argues, the passage that clearly states that Biggart was the only photojournalist killed while covering the event creates the false perception on the part of readers that Biggart was the only "media-related death" during the attacks. I tried to explain to him that this wrong, but he wouldn't budge. He agreed to a Third Opinion, so I called for one, and the person responding to provide a Third Opinion obviously agreed with me that that material does belong in the Biggart article. Nonetheless, Crtew reverted the article anyway, and is has now tried to start another discussion on the same issue further down on the talk page, completely ignoring Third Opinion, and the two other editors who have disagreed with him, which I believe is a blockable offense. Even if he wants to start a consensus discussion in order to open the matter up to more than three people, then he's still reverting during a discussion, which is definitely a blockable offense. When I criticize him for this, he accused me of being "disrespectful", and lobbing personal attacks against me by saying, " seriously cannot believe you are an administrator and you treat people like this", as if he's some kind of victim for merely being criticized for violating policy. I've warned him that if he does this again, he will be blocked from editing, but I need an uninvolved admin to keep an eye on him and do the blocking if it comes to that. Please advise. Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A question for people who commented in the RfC at "Probationary Period" and "Not Unless". (Or feel free to reply on my talk page, if you prefer.) - Dank (push to talk) 19:57, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It occurred to me that I hadn't seen the insight of your thoughtful comments and I wanted to say hello. I hope that you are well, and that goodness and grace remain at your fore. My76Strat (talk) 15:57, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, jc, I'm glad this page is still on my watchlist and Strat made it pop up. I can't compete with his eloquence, but I can damn well echo his sentiments.

Where are you, and why don't you ever phone. Your mother and I have been worried sick about you. You never write, you never call, and you'll probably just show up wanting money or someone to babysit. It's not good enough.

That probably wasn't funny - so I'll just say that Hawkeye, BJ, Mrs. Klinger, the chicken and the rest of us hope you are well and happy. Weather is dreadful - wish you were here. Begoon ^talk 16:08, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Jc. I received this message on my talk page from User:173.248.212.69. I already warned him twice for such behavior. Can you keep an eye on him and block him in case he makes another violation? Since I was the target of his talk page message, I might be considered "involved". Thanks, buddy. Nightscream (talk) 22:53, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can by to see what you were up to and saw you haven't edited in three months. Good riddance because the way you and Townlake behaved on my talk page in Oct 2012 was appalling. You should be ashamed on both a personal and admin level. But I'm sure you're not. But that is okay because karma will get you and I won't have to do a thing. PumpkinSky talk 16:38, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]