Jouster. I will no longer post links to my website(teraproofs) on wikipedia. At the time I did so, I was unaware of the rules against dong so. I have read the wikipedia rules, and will comply with them.--Leiding 13:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jouster. Edits from 209.145.83.6 have now been reattributed to you. Regards — Kate Turner | Talk 03:21, 2004 Sep 4 (UTC)

Thanks.  :)

Why did you remove the reference to the Angel paintball gun from Angel (disambiguation)? Barring reply, I will add it back. Jouster 15:44, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I deleted it because it had no article, but I won't object if you re-add it. Tregoweth 22:56, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

hey man all that i said was true go to viewloader.com and see what im talking about and you call yourself a angel paintball tech liar.no offense.dorito43.

Thank you for your well thought out comments on the noob's DRV, unfortunately they are too late and not only is the deletion endorsed, but the noob page is protected from ever being re-created. Feel free to help me improve the article at User:Timmccloud/The_noob so that one day we might have it relisted, but for now we lost. If you feel strongly enough, you can also comment at the Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Sir_Nicholas_de_Mimsy-Porpington_2 where we are taking the original closing admins decisions to task. Timmccloud 00:30, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Posted here for my own reference:

Canadian judges ususally take a more neutral stance compared to their American counterpart. In the States, many local judges are elected. While this may sound good on paper, it does interfere with judicial independence.

When sentencing the judge must appeal to the public, which is mostly ignorant of how crime theories work. Also he or her must raised funds to campaign for their local election, and that can be a potential source of corruption. Canadian judges on the other hand, are appointed by either by the province premiers or Prime Minister under a list drafted by a special judicial nominating council.

An average joe would simply demand the government to "get tough on crime" as it is happening here in Canada. The British criminal code in the 17th century was known as the "bloody code" for its brutality, yet crime at that particular period was the highest in British history. The "get tough" approach assumes the classical theory, which says people commit crimes out of free will. The entire classical theory does not take psychological, physiological and social factors into consideration and thus is no longer used alone.

This judge election system partly contributed to the large number of prisoners in U.S. Since the public normally wants to put offender in prison, judges must take that into their consideration to appeal the voters. While U.S. has only 0.45% of the world's population, it houses half the prison population in the world. It has the highest incarceration rate in the world and leaves even China and Russia in the dust. The average cost to house an inmate for a year in an institution is 70 thousand, multiply that by the 21 million prisoners and you got a disasterous bill to cover.

Anyways this is beginning to look like an essay. But correctional staff in U.S. has realized the problem with their judicial nominating system and are putting foward ideas to reform it.

Lawrence Ding

Jouster 04:16, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weeee! Jouster(Talk) 20:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blahblah. Jouster  (Talk) 20:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And more. Jouster  (talk) 20:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Beepbeep. Jouster  (talk) 20:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsig test. Jouster  (User Talk:Jouster) 20:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect. Jouster  (whisper) 20:42, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the jewel you wrote on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). It was the perfect way to conclude the many dry, technical posts there. I trust the userboxen will behave themselves now they know who they are dealing with! -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For reference: [1] Jouster  (whisper) 05:23, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded to your query that you asked at Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace#uw-vandalism2 not working right?. Templates are complicated, but they're fun once you get the hang of 'em :) Cheers, Gracenotes^T § 19:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it because most people we view it as misrepresenting yourself. I'm not sure about membership in the cabal, it's hard to know the rules of something that doesn't exist. John Reaves (talk) 22:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jouster, wasn't sure if you saw what I wrote on my talk page in regards to the semicolons userbox. Feel free to make the changes you suggested on my userspace. Thanks! T_im.boun^ceback - TaLk 13:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Rereading over the userbox in question I just realized how silly my mistake was. I did exactly what it said I shouldn't: ended a sentence with a preposition. I try to use correct grammar, but sometimes it alludes me.

Although I understand your choice of words for the userbox now, looking at the edit history it appears I'm not the first person to make this mistake. It might be grammatically correct, but in my opinion it doesn't read right. Most people who read the box will likely miss the irony it presents and assume it as wrong regardless of whether or not it is.

Either way, it's okay. I was trying to find a few userboxes for my userpage, stumbled across the one in question, edited what I assumed to be a mistake, and moved on. As my assumption was incorrect, I apologize. I'm new to the whole concept of contributing to Wikipedia and am doing my best to figure things out one step at a time. Vayne 06:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(1)The way I edited the template was in a manner that was still grammatically correct (2) I see no citations posted by other users who have edited the same template (3) How is my edit considered vandalism and (4) Could you please restore my edit.  ~Steptrip 01:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me like "up" as used in the template was an adverb, although "up" could be a preposition in some contexts. As for the {{subst:uw-vandalism1|Template:user prepositions: no}} template, when a user makes a mistake, just type what the mistake was and that you reverted it, as that template is used mainly as a vandalism warning (even though it basically says the same thing, it's just used in that manner).  ~Steptrip 10:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's an easy mistake to make, Steptrip. I'm sure I'd do that at some point. ;) I do agree with Steptrip about just typing a message, though, but I'm sure that I've broken that rule at some point... --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 21:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Up was indeed being used as an adverb. Up tells "where?" the action took place, which is one of the four questions an adverb answers (trust me, my class just completed our adverb unit, and I passed the trimester with a 98% overall). Not using the up is a good idea, though, as users may think that it is being used as a preposition in the sentence. --Cremepuff222 (talk, review me!) 20:59, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your input. I will add a citation to the userbox in question in the hope of preserving it in its current form, but I need no longer be quite so concerned if the consensus of the community is to change it. Jouster  (whisper) 21:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I put the logo there because if I put it on the right side, then it would cover up messages. The nuts-and-bolts of why I have it there is because I wanted a link back to my userpage, but since I already have one that causes no interference with the monobook skin, it will be removed shortly.  ~Steptrip 21:47, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know that 1 and 2 go there. I am going to, right after I remove my logo, put the header on every page in my userspace that is intended to be visited by other users. If you were wondering why it was on my user talk page, that is your reason.  ~Steptrip 22:05, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Free Republic: A case involving the actions of DeanHinnen, BenBurch and Fairness And Accuracy For All on the Free Republic article and elsewhere. The parties have alleged incivility, personal attacks, and biased editing, among other misconduct. Remedies have been proposed, with the support of seven arbitrators, affirming the community ban of BryanFromPalatine, banning Fairness And Accuracy For All for one year, and placing Free Republic and Democratic Underground on article probation.

(my emphasis) Jouster  (whisper) 14:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Made of win: [2] Jouster  (whisper) 19:20, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To prevent a forest fire, I've replied to you at User_talk:Xaosflux#Unprotection. Thanks, — xaosflux ^Talk 02:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've compiled a list of rather amusing blocks upon which I've stumbled:

Essjay blocks
Angela blocks
This is the funniest one
Voice of All blocks

Tell me how funny you think they are.  ~Steptrip 16:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The change was part of a more comprehensive rewrite that attempted to get the AFD cover page back to a very thin discussion - one that would again have been watchable for vandalism directly. We originally moved it to a separate page when the discussions themselves were linked in. You are correct that the history was very hard to sort out back then. That's less the case now. We really can and ought to be watching for vandalism on the page as a whole and I don't think the template is any more or less vulnerable than the rest of the page.

Unfortunately, my efforts on that page were rather summarily reverted this morning. The revert did not properly undo the other efforts so now the page is even more confused and fragmented than how we started.

Frankly, I'm tired of trying to clean up after people who ignore the page's history and purpose and who seem remarkably quick to assume bad faith (or at least, that I'm incompetent). Everyone on Talk agreed that the page desperately needed cleaning up but the only changes that are upheld are incremental increases to the page - a classic example of the problems of well-meaning but ultimately self-defeating instruction creep. The page is so long and confused that people ignore it.

I've tried to do my good deed for the day. It's somebody else's turn to clean up the page. Revert the template if you must. Rossami (talk) 18:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for venting at you earlier. I'm having a bad day. By the way, I was not saying that you assumed bad faith. On the contrary, your comment was very polite. Some of the other reactions were less so.

On a related note: When I checked earlier, the in-line version was reverted but the template was not put back. In my opinion, that was even worse than what we had before. Someone needs to fix it. But as I said before, it's someone else's turn. Maybe I am being a bit defensive but I'm tired. Thanks for listening to me. Rossami (talk)

Wow, I noticed that you became more active since the {{User prepositions:no}} situation, which I started. I'm glad to see that you're contributing more actively to the 'pedia. See ya, ~ Magnus animum _{(aka Steptrip)} 22:55, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note indicated resources are needed about the Times Beach addition to the page on dioxin. There are plenty on the wiki itself, see the section on Dioxin titled "Historical Perspective". however if you feel you need more, try: http://www.legendsofamerica.com/MO-TimesBeach.html I admit, I am new to editing wikis, however I feel that my addition does not warrant an undoing. --69.76.118.11 April 27th, 2007 12:55 (CST)

Sorry, just being paranoid. :-) I noticed a lot of odd reverts on some legal articles recently, such as this one, Total permanent disability insurance. His edits were NOT a specific problem. I thanked the other editor for the help. Thank you for noticing and caring. I'm still new, but am enjoying WP very much. Bearian 00:35, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jouster, thanks for dropping me the note. I agree that it was rather "bold" of me to move it without consultation, and I apologize for any toes I may have stepped on. I agree that the matter should be discussed further -- perhaps it should become wikiproject policy. Thanks for making me more aware of my need for tact in these sorts of decisions. I'm going to start discussions both in the article and on the WP page. --Donutmonger 06:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

k i removed that catagory thing from my tamplet production area so tell me if it worked =) Maverick423 Says Im in ur science steeling ur gravities 00:08, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't stalked anyone! I noticed a user with the name "Andrew Kliman", who was an author of a book I once read. I posted on his talk page asking if that was the case, and giving my 0.02$ relating to a recent post on WP:AIV. He mentioned he had been having a dispute on another page, too. I went there, to see what was up, and noticed that it needed a re-write, and a fresh start. I haven't "followed anyone around whatsoever, and I deny any assertion to the contrary. --Haemo 09:06, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For my own reference: User talk:Haemo/Archive 2#Re:_Stalking. Jouster  (whisper) 16:54, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know. There are 2 things on this site which can potentially overlap with my header: (1) The sitenotice (which is the overlapping text in your image) and (2) The anon notice ("Your continued donations keep Wikipedia running!"). However, the anon notice can not be hidden, but the sitenotice can. ~ ΜΛGиυs ΛΠιмυМ ≈ √∞ 15:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of curiosity, what web browser do you use as that may be causing the display problems. ~ ΜΛGиυs ΛΠιмυМ ≈ √∞ 18:37, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rest assured, I have seen the essay you put on my talk page. ~ ΜΛGиυs ΛΠιмυМ ≈ √∞ 00:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's perfectly fine to be left on my talk page. You can move it to a page in your userspace, if you wish. It's just that I feel the message was a bit of a violation of WP:POINT. I have chatted with some other users, and they all agreed that — please don't take this the wrong way — pointing out other's errors is counterproductive, and that anyone who wishes to improve the encyclopædia does not have the time to do so. Please do not take this the wrong way, ~ ΜΛGиυs ΛΠιмυМ ≈ √∞ 00:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contribution to the discussion on that page. I have taken the time to lay out research which I think meets your objections and put it on that page just below your comment. Please take a look at it. As you point out, we're trying to come to a consensus. I think my response may help get us there. Noroton 17:31, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you again, Jouster. I've taken your advice. I reviewed WP:SOCK and related pages. Since the three anonymous single-use accounts have all used their single edits to edit this straw poll and come down on the same side, and given User 69's history, I initiated a complaint at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets against User 69. The complaint is here. (I put this same note under yours at Talk:List of people from Ridgefield, Connecticut Noroton 02:56, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The person who has been harassing the page Talk:List of people from Ridgefield, Connecticut is at it again. This is ridiculous. The user is skirting 3rr issues and disrupting the page. Please help stop. --SpyMagician 15:42, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jouster, thank you for your comment on my talk page, you linked to my edit citeing that it removed something from the text, I have been looking over it and I can't see where I went wrong. Could you be more specific as to what I did and where? Thanks again for sorting it out. -- Richard Slater (Talk to me!) 19:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have proof? ~ ΜΛGиυs ΛΠιмυМ ≈ √∞ 15:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course he has proof! ~ ΜΛGиυs ΛΠιмυМ ≈ √∞ 15:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please be quiet. ~ ΜΛGиυs ΛΠιмυМ ≈ √∞ 15:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NEVER!!! ~ ΜΛGиυs ΛΠιмυМ ≈ √∞ 15:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jouster. I had to remove your comment at the bottom of Magnus animum's RFA. You must refrain from disclosing personal information about this user, otherwise oversight might have to be requested. Please remain WP:CIVIL, avoid creating unnecessary battlegrounds, and please use common sense. Thank you. Regards, Húsönd 00:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at my edit summary. If you feel that I biased my copying (which I did not), feel free to modify it. « ANIMUM » 02:09, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jouster. Thank you so much for the sorting out. I'm relieved. --Oda Mari 09:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Drop it. I think your position is clear and you're not going to win anyone over by continuing the silly bickering.

My was referring to the author of the CSS (myself) to which all derivative works should be attributed per the GFDL (of course, there would have to be over 100 works published, but my argument is more the attribution required for derivative works to be published). « ANIMUM » 21:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jouster: In connection with your candidacy for the Board of Trustees, it is necessary that the Office verify your identity (unless this has been done already in a prior election). Please e-mail Cary Bass (a/k/a User:Bastique) as soon as possible for instructions on how this is to be done. If you have any questions, you can e-mail me or any other member of the Election Committee.

In addition, please immediately activate your Wikipedia e-mail function either here or on Meta or preferably on both. Thank you. For the Election Committee, Newyorkbrad 18:55, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jouster, once that is done, and you have a statement up, sure, I'll endorse you. Bearian 19:56, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Doing..., there's some weirdness on my email server ATM, give me a sec. Jouster  (whisper) 21:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done on both enPedia and Meta, sending m:User:Bastique an email now. Jouster  (whisper) 22:07, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! First, I found where you had placed a {{prod}} tag on Template:User:Jouster/candidacy. Technically, only articles, user pages, and user talk pages can be prodded. However, what I interpreted that you meant was to place the {{db-author}} tag on the page, where you request the speedy deletion of a page you have created. Accordingly, I have deleted the page. —C.Fred (talk) 01:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All done. Best of luck! Noroton 02:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! My name is Ral315, and I'm the editor-in-chief of the Wikipedia Signpost, a weekly newspaper on the English Wikipedia. I'm sending out an optional questionnaire that I hope you'll respond to. These questions will be published in next week's issue, and hopefully translated into many languages and copied to the Meta-Wiki prior to the election. (So, if you speak multiple languages, it'd be fantastic, though certainly not required, if you'd be willing to translate your answers into any languages you speak fluently.)

There's no word limit on any of these questions, but I suggest that brevity (maybe about 300-400 words per answer) is best. If at all possible, answers should be submitted by 16:00 UTC on Monday, June 25 (though late responses will also be accepted).

I'm posting these to your talk pages because they don't really fit well on question pages (since many will repeat questions you've already answered). You can reply to me by e-mail, or at my English Wikipedia, English Wikinews or Meta talk pages.

Thanks again for answering these, and good luck in the elections.

Sincerely, Ral315

---

1. Do you have any other usernames or pseudonyms?

1. What current or former user rights or positions do you have, and on which projects? (i.e. administrator, bureaucrat, arbitrator, developer, steward, board member, etc.)

1. Outside of Wikipedia, what do you do for a living?

1. What languages do you speak?

1. Why do you want to join the Board? What qualities do you feel you can bring to the Board?

1. About how much time do you think you'll put into the role?

1. Ideally, where do you see the Wikimedia Foundation in 5 years?

1. As a board member, how will you ensure a balance between openness and necessary privacy in board matters?

1. Recent discussion has centered around the Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. How do you feel the Wikimedia brands should be used, or changed?

1. Wikimedia projects in developing nations are growing in popularity, but still lag far behind the more popular projects. What steps would you suggest to improve the quality, readership, and number of editors on smaller wikis?

1. What do you feel should be done to increase participation on non-Wikipedia projects?

1. As a board member, what strategies would you consider to raise money for the Foundation?

1. What else do you want to say to voters? (This is a good place to answer a question specific to your candidacy that you think should be answered)

If you want to move them, that's okay with me. I think eventually if they're translated into a few languages, I'll move them to Meta completely, anyway. Ral315 » 14:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jouster. I'm sorry but I cannot help you. I've been here for only two months.Oda Mari 14:54, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're the best candidate! You don't talk as if you knew the answer to everything, you're humble and you seem to understand the total lack of importance of edit count. I hope you make it. A.Z. 22:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to see you didn't get enough endorsements to qualify. Better luck next time... sincerely, heqs ·:. 11:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just now noticed it, a month after you awarded it. It was totally unexpected (I didn't even know such things existed in here), and felt really good to see.Grammarmonger 23:17, 26 June 2007 (UTC)_talk[reply]

Since you asked someone to let you know when AMiB answered question 5b on Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/A Man In Black, I figured I'd drop you a line. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have new messages (last change). —« ANIMUM » 18:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jouster. Thank you for your comment regarding my RfB. Honestly, I kind of assumed bad faith when I saw your oppose on my RfB (and I very seldomly assume bad faith). But maybe I simply misjudged your character. I hope that we may just forget the incident that caused us to butt heads, and peacefully work together henceforth. Thank you for wishing me better luck for the next time. I hope that I'll merit your support then. Best regards, Húsönd 23:51, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it isn't done already, I'm going to remove it. I wanted to build a larger history section around it, but I think even that is too contentious right now. Thanks for the advice. Noroton 15:32, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jouster, not sure if you were already aware of this, but in the Frisian language, a Jouster is someone from Joure—or something from Joure: if you check the article, it includes a picture of the Jouster Toren (the Tower of Joure).

Having visited there only last friday, I felt like letting you know. Cheers! Phaunt 17:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How did you get User:Jouster/open/1 to write backwards in the edit field? ~ Wikihermit 20:23, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heya, Jouster. Thanks for putting so much effort into making that change (I'm presuming you worked hard on it! :) ). Animum reverted the change, but quite honestly (and I'm sorry if this makes you feel bad) I don't really care how easy it is to edit (again, sorry). I'm not going to get anymore involved in the matter, but please don't talk to Animum about it. Also, just to clarify, Animum and I are not real-life friends. Thanks again for the changes; if I receive any complaints on the editability of the page, I'll know who to turn to. Have a wonderful day! :) *Cremepuff222* 23:31, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sir. Your concern is appreciated. *Cremepuff222* 01:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thank you for the offer. I suppose there's no harm in you giving it a go. I really appreciate the help, the only experience I have is basic HTML/CSS. =D Thanks! --Theunicyclegirl ^talk 21:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh! Yay! Looks great! It looks like some of the divs need a little padding though. Or is that just my browser? Thanks a ton. I owe you. --Theunicyclegirl ^talk 01:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, okay. Thanks x ∞!!! --Theunicyclegirl ^talk 01:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, it looks incredible! The drop shadows are no big deal, don't worry. Thanks a ton!!! --Theunicyclegirl ^talk 21:23, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Excellent Userpage Award
		I hereby award you this user page award for your awesome job fixing all of my spastic work on my own user page. I am eternally grateful. Thank you!!! --Theunicyclegirl talk 21:40, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't read that before, but yeah: since the image links back to the original source (or thereabouts—it's hard to not find anyway), I'd guess it's fine. Thanks for the heads-up, though. (: Octane ^{[improve me]} 28.07.07 0010 (UTC)

This scenario defused easily, just as you thought it would. I found no malintent involved. Just two clashing communication styles, and a beginner's normal lack of knowledge of Wikipedia's help resources and how to use them. His frustration went away once the issue he was dealing with was properly researched, and Wikipedia's help resources were laid out before him. The case was handled here, here, and here. If you run across any cases in the future you would like to throw my way, feel free to message me the links. The Transhumanist 21:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey you! That wasn't a spelling mistake, that was a minor flaw left unnoticed after writing that message at a late hour, a flaw thus resulting from drowsiness rather than from carelessness (or whatever excuse you'd be willing to buy). Hehe. :-S Húsönd 15:42, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the props! Haha it's finals time around here and my attempts at changes were really just a combination of procrastination and OCD. But yes - the content was quite good, so I didn't see a need to mess with a good thing. Cheers, --Donutmonger (talk) 09:32, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how the indications on the picture caption got swapped; maybe it was uncaught vandalism. That's clearly Jean Bartik (née Betty Jean Jennings) on the left. It was also wrong on Jean Bartik. The caption on the image page gives a bogus surname for her (Bryant?)... Robert K S (talk) 05:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know this may be asking a lot out of both of us, but could we put our history behind us for the good of the site and atmosphere? After reading through the discussions I've had with you in the past (June-July), I can only say that I am astounded at how poorly I handled them; you were right in most of them. Best regards, —Animum (talk) 02:30, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jouster, thanks for the barnstar! I feel that my efforts are rather modest, but I appreciate the recognition. Marco polo (talk) 15:39, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I acknowledge my mistake in not noticing that my change had unintentionally broken that link. But I object to the scolding tone of your message. Colonies Chris (talk) 10:51, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just a little advice from a time noob (to you, an editcount noob). I would recommend not replying to every oppose or support with a diatribe. It tends to make things go downhill faster than might otherwise happen. Personally, I liked question #4 and I'm surprised it's getting opposes. Just friendly advice from an early supporter. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 20:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, my oppose was on the basis that I don't really like the idea of specialist admins. I'll change it based on other questions if necessary but that was a stinker of a question. Sorry. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} ^{aka john lennon} 23:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have rephrased my RFA comment, if you would like to read it. Regards, _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN} ^{aka john lennon} 19:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, there are so many things eligible for wiki that aren't meaningful in my reality lol. Unless games are from 15 or more years ago when I played them, I can't take them seriously:) Also, no hits on google news. I also think there are too many RPGs, science fiction societies and such like on wikipedia, but I think they have lots of fans here so would probably all be kept. Special Random (Merkinsmum) 22:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning Jouster! First, thank you for responding to my question on your current Requests for adminshi. As you probably noted, I did express an oppose opinion. Hopefully, the explanation was concise enough to express my concerns that the oppose was not a judgment of your editing ability or a question of your character. But, rather a manifestation with concern to your lack of experience and knowledge with regards to policy. I believe that an individual, who does hold the position of Administrator, have more than a basic understanding, not necessarily in all parts of Wikipedia policy, but at least in several areas such as Afd, Speedy Deletion and Copyright to be considered for the extra buttons. From my standpoint, this should be extremely easy for you to overcome! Give it 4-6 months, with a broader involvement in other areas of Wikipedia, this will be beneficial to both you personally and to Wikipedia as a whole and you will have moved an oppose opinion to a strong support, mine. Good luck to you and if you have any questions please feel free to drop me a note. Shoessss |  Chat  13:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to inform you that I have closed your RfA as unsuccessful. I hope you are not too disheartened and will take onboard the concerns raised by those opposing and will consider running again in the future when you feel you have addressed them. Best wishes, WjBscribe 18:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That was a good catch on the ridiculous nature of this article. Please review my edits and let me know if there is anything remaining in the article that is OR or blatant bias against the "sect" by people using Wikipedia to promote their agendas. --Blechnic (talk) 19:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No where near as funny as your The Truth, but does it deserve to be deleted? -HarryAlffa (talk) 21:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, I finally responded to your comments at User talk:EVula/opining/RfA ramblings from March. Dunno if you still care, though. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:26, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to comment on the following RfC:

Talk:Monty Hall problem#Conditional or Simple solutions for the Monty Hall problem?

--Guy Macon (talk) 22:16, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Over at Talk:Monty Hall problem#Conditional or Simple solutions for the Monty Hall problem? I assigned Abstain to your comments. If this is incorrect, please indicate "Proposal #1", "Proposal #2", or "Neither". Thanks! --Guy Macon (talk) 20:43, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Unicycle Layout.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:54, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Editrequest-footer.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 20:53, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jouster,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged BlackMesh for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can , 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. Vrac (talk) 03:19, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:BlackMesh-logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:14, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for message. I deleted your article because

• it did not provide adequate independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Although you gave references, they were generally of low quality for one of the following reasons

• They were affiliate or self-editable, like LinkedIn.
• They were reputable, like Bloomberg, but were just repeating the company claims
• They were reporting interviews with company chiefs rather than providing independent comment
• The were low quality sites of dubious provenance, blogs or forums

• it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.

• I can see no financial or employment data, which would help to establish notability, it's just about what you are trying to sell, rather than factual data
• Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: high-performance private cloud infrastructure underlying this solution (not in the reference).. provide custom, personalized services" to enterprises he saw as being "ignored" by other providers (quoting the chairman is hardly an independent fact) and BlackMesh launched a new service to offer developers (sales talk for they sell)

I'll restore the text here shortly for you to fix Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:55, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Thue-Morse Squares.PNG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:08, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:NASCARFan24 User Page Issue.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 21:16, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Wikiweirdwy7.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 21:29, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jouster. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "BlackMesh".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 (talk) 16:04, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jakun, can you please create an article on Rochester Institute of Technology Alumni Association / RIT Alumni Association. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.123.22.193 (talk) 05:50, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]