User talk:JzG

←

Your assistance please...

Your edit summary, when you courtesy blanked blanked this discussion, your referred to an OTRS ticket.

I left a note on the talk page of another administrator, who closed a related AFD, with a closure that said the subject's request for deletion was the clinching factor. I thought, if they were aware that the subject requesting deletion had had their identity confirmed via OTRS, the closure should have said the request's authenticity had been confirmed, via OTRS.

A few years ago an individual who had recently joined the OTRS team confirmed something I had been worried about. They told me that they had found that some of their fellow OOTRS team members had an alarming track ecord of naivette over how easy it was to create new email ID at sites like hotmail and gmail, and had accepted emails from Joe.Blow@gmail.com as sufficient to confirm their correspond had proven they were the real life Joe Blow. But that is another issue.

I know it was ten years ago. You don't happen to remember the ticket number? I know it was ten years ago. You don't happen to remember if the OTRS seemed to be thoroughly conducted?

There were certain hints in the latest AFD that the individual claiming to be Nusbacker was a wikipedia contributor. OUTING, I won't mention their wiki-ID, six letters, starts with N.

I looked at their (short) contribution history. I don't know what I expected from a Professor history. It fell short.

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 21:04, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

I don't recall it, but I have always had a low bar to courtesy blanking, it's often the only thing we can offer someone who is both angry and wrong. Guy (Help!) 15:57, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Welcome back!

So nice to see you back. I missed you! Jytdog (talk) 15:52, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

I will not be very active for some time. I am under ridiculous pressure at work. Guy (Help!) 15:56, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

I hope that is the good kind of pressure. Thanks for saying hi in any case. See you when you can be around :) Jytdog (talk) 05:46, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

It is very not the good kind. I suffered a relapse of PTSD symptoms earlier this year as a result of it. Guy (Help!) 10:24, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Shit i am sorry. I had a time where i was waking up at night in sweats over work-things i wasn't able to get to during the day, where a fuckup meant irretrievable damage, so i sympathize. Hopefully dealing with the usual malarky here is much less stress-inducing and perhaps even relaxing. :) Jytdog (talk) 00:20, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

I have to second that sentiment. Sometimes the craziness here us almost a laughable reprieve some days when in the real world you've got experiments failing on you, but all of a sudden a switch flips and adds to the burden instead. I've developed a rule of thumb that if I'm not sleeping due to work worries, my Wikipedia bookmark stays untouched. Hope things stay frosty for you now Guy. Kingofaces43 (talk) 01:55, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Welcome home, Guy. A Train^talk 20:04, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm very glad to see you back. GAB^gab 01:01, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Ding-dong...mail delivery

Hello, JzG. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is lost email?.
Message added 00:04, 12 November 2017 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Resent ^{Atsme📞📧} 00:04, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

^{That is re-sent, not resent. 😂 Atsme📞📧 00:05, 12 November 2017 (UTC)}

Got it. Thank you, that was a nice thought. Guy (Help!) 00:08, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Walter Horn

Hi there, just wanted to give you a heads-up that your edit at Walter Horn broke a citation. I'd fix it myself, but I couldn't tell at a glance exactly which parts you'd meant to remove. Thanks! Jessicapierce (talk) 04:02, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Oops. Will fix. the issue was a citation to Stormfront, the neo-Nazi website. Guy (Help!) 07:30, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Q Methodology

I've just seen that you did delete in 2016 2 sections in the Q methodology article, dealing with QM software and some link sites. I would easily admit that some of the links were not up-to-date but, as I am working on this subject for one year now, I know that most of the pages outside Wikipedia listing these softwares are etiher largely false or completely outdated, rendering the rask of finding useful tools rather hard for a rookie. May I know why you did remove this information? YvesRoy (talk) 13:03, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

None of it has reliable independent third party sourcing. It's trivia. Oh, and at least one of the sources that was used, is now blacklisted because it's only ever added by the site owner. Guy (Help!) 13:42, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

A cheeseburger for you!

Welcome back. Drmies (talk) 15:42, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

I CAN HAZ CHEEZBURGER? Guy (Help!) 16:01, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Question regarding edit

Hi! Regarding this edit: it was added to remove a Refimprove: should that be re-added? Namnatulco (talk) 09:24, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Probably. That entire article reeks of WP:SYN anyway. It's a monograph by Tilmann.Bruckhaus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Guy (Help!) 10:21, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Please do not remove dates from book citations when an OCLC # is present

Please do not remove dates from book citations when an OCLC # is present. Please check the OCLC link first. This is just plain due dilligence.

OCLC and Wikipedia have a mission alignment and a mutual benefit. Let's make use of that!

Peaceray (talk) 23:44, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

I didn't remove dates. I removed the entire cite because the publication date and the copyright date displayed in the linked document don't match, plus if the cited OCLC date is correct (actually it may not be, per the flyleaf) then the link is a copyvio. Guy (Help!) 23:49, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Huh? This edit shows the citation remaining, minus the URL & the date. 1998 is the year shown in the text of the PDF in the URL & 1998 is the year shown in the OCLC record. The fact that the PDF properties show a February 2003 date is immaterial. A scan of a book is almost always considerably after the book is published. The publication year of the book here is accurate. If you are using an automated tool, then you need to adjust it so that it does not remove the date for book citations. Peaceray (talk) 00:11, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Ah, OK, I remember now. So: I checked the link, the image has a date of 1921, so the 1998 date is in conflict with that. Faced with conflicting data, I removed the date. Guy (Help!) 00:16, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to beleaguer this, but are we talking about the same link? http://bigfiles90.angelfire.com/HawnSovDoFactsMatterTTS.pdf I don't see a 1921 date associated with the document (1998 in the PDF, 2003 in the document properties). I am mindful that as someone who is an admin with a an edit count several magnitudes more than my, you are pretty busy (& thanks for all your work!), but I am just trying to understand what happened here. Peaceray (talk) 00:29, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

"Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Twigg-Smith, Thurston, 1921- Hawaiian Sovereignty: Do the Facts Matter?"

I am an idiot: that's his birth year! So it's just an apparent copyvio. Guy (Help!) 00:31, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Deletion review for Conso International Corporation

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Conso International Corporation. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. KDS4444 ^(talk) 01:04, 17 November 2017 (UTC)