Hello Jeff Song, welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Our intro page contains a lot of helpful material for new users—please check it out! If you need help, visit Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Rubinkumar (talk) 23:47, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:03, 30 December 2010 (UTC) thank you[reply]

Jeff, I found a few possible refs/bibliography at http://www.mecatronica.eesc.usp.br/wiki/index.php/Kanguera_Project. I added them to User talk:Jeff Song/Kanguera for ease of reference. – ukexpat (talk) 23:19, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, I'll see if I can use those, when I have some time. Jeff Song (talk) 19:51, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission has been declined, and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kanguera was not created. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer, and please feel free to resubmit once the issues have been addressed. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia!  Chzz  ►  02:13, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for submitting an article to Wikipedia. Your submission has been reviewed and has been put on hold pending clarification or improvements from you or other editors. Please take a look and respond if possible. You can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Kanguera. If there is no response within twenty-four hours the request may be declined; if this happens feel free to continue to work on the article. You can resubmit it (by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article) when you believe the concerns have been addressed. Thank you. [CharlieEchoTango] 06:24, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kanguera, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

• The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see what needs to be done to bring it to the next level.
• Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider

Thank you for helping Wikipedia! [CharlieEchoTango] 19:49, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Take your time. Hcobb (talk) 02:44, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The dictionary definition is to reduce drastically, but that is a moot point. The word "decimate" was not used in the article you provided as a source, and the article itself was not specific to the F-22. Jeff Song (talk) 18:21, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jeff Song. You have new messages at CharlieEchoTango's talk page.
Message added 19:52, 10 February 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from RPM Package Manager. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 23:36, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I thought to drop you a note just in case you're unfamiliar with the WP:BRD process. According to the process, when a user feels a need to change an article, he can edit the article to reflect the change he wants to make. If another editor disagrees the edit is an improvement, he'll revert to the previous version and discuss the issue, during which discussion the previous version of the article remains. After the editors reach consensus on changing the article, the change is made, not before. In this case, the note in the box has been in place for at least a month, making it the long-standing version from the perspective of the discussion we're having on the talkpage. You're suggesting to change the article, so the version that was up before you made your intial edit should remain until we agree. Since agreement seems to be very close, this may be a bit academic, but I thought to let you know. If you persist in "warring" the edit, you may even receive a formal warning or temporary block. Cheers, --Dailycare (talk) 19:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look at the article draft, and its sources look much better than the first ones you provided at Articles for creation. I'd say notability is established; that's more than just a few passing mentions. Good work! Huon (talk) 21:29, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jeff Song. Please see the result of WP:AN3#User:Jeff Song reported by User:Dailycare (Result: Both warned). EdJohnston (talk) 13:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. I will not revert again unless there is consensus for it.

A tag has been placed on Mellanox Technologies, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. MikeWazowski (talk) 17:15, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jeff Song. You have new messages at Huon's talk page.
Message added 20:12, 28 October 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Huon (talk) 20:12, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Meteksan Savunma requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. andy (talk) 17:19, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of VXS, and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://vxsimaging.com/.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 19:56, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--Bot is confused here. Jeff Song (talk) 20:28, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Saba Software, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Amazon (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:28, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Calling other editors "shady character" is, as you say, a personal attack. But my irritation was real and well founded as you can see here. This is no excuse however and I will not repeat it.

Calling a living person "shady" in an article may contravene Wikipedia policy and I will be more careful in the future. In this particular case Elhanan Tannenbaum it did not seem to be an overstatement. He was a senior officer in the Israeli army and has admitted that he had contacts with Hezbollah and traveled secretly on a fake passport to Dubai, a country technically as war with Israel, with the purpose of buying large quantities of illegal drugs. This is not what you would expect from an ordinary Israeli officer/businessman.

You deleted not only my offensive term but also an important paragraph about his military background. I will restore my changes to the article but I will not call him "shady" again.

Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 10:36, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

you were displeased with my edits on the habib elghanian article and after YOU followed me to the dieter gerhardt page...and, stop edit warring on this page. next step will be ANI.--Severino (talk) 20:32, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By all means, go to ANI. I would like to discuss your edit warring on the Gerhardt article there. Jeff Song (talk) 20:33, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i have reported ya.--Severino (talk) 21:38, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This RfC discussing the above issue may be of interest to you. Dpmuk (talk) 16:44, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK? What did I do? Nazareth is a Palestinian city in Israel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nassiriya (talk • contribs) 20:40, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Protalix BioTherapeutics, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Springer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

By any chance, are you able to update BioLineRx? The article's probably getting smashed with traffic now, but I'm browsing from a phone and it may be several days before I can edit from a computer.—Biosketch (talk) 20:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look. Jeff Song (talk) 17:20, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks dude.—Biosketch (talk) 18:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Cpplint has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not meet notability criteria. Fails WP:GNG due to lack of reliable sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 03:58, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did one revert yesterday, not two.

--Perplexed566 (talk) 15:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, you did 2:

• this, at 15:21, 6 March 2012 , reverts this
• this, at 21:03, 6 March 2012 , reverts this.

Reverts don't have to be of the same material. Please take more care in the future.. Jeff Song (talk) 17:28, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added CU check request as I think its appropriate to check the connection between the users--Shrike (talk) 11:23, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I decided to write here concerning my read of the 1968 Rabin interview in Le Monde. Out of curiosity, I dropped by in a library to read the original interview from microfilm. Here's what the text said (I jotted this down so it may not be word for word):

Rabin: Je ne pense pas que Nasser voulait la guerre. Les deux divisions qu'il envoya dans le Sinaï, le 14 Mai, n'auraient pas suffi pour déclencher un offensive contre Israël, il le savait et nous le savions. (...) il bluffait (...) nous connaissions le strategéme puisqu'il l'avait dèja utilisé en 1960 (...) [en 1967] il à éprouvé le besoin de donner plus de crédibilité à son bluff. (par demander le retrait des forces onusiennes).

Concerning the seven divisions, there Rabin is answering in the context that Nasser didn't want war, and saying that he didn't believe Israel would initiate any hostilies without "soutien des puissances étrangères", i.e. Western support. Rabin surmises Nasser sent those divisions to the Sinaï as Israel might consider the Aqaba closure an act of war - i.e. he was sending them in case Israel nonetheless attacked. Nowhere in the entire text does Rabin as much as hint that Israel would have been expecting an invasion in June 1967. So I fully understand why all the sources we've seen use the interview the way they do, which as far as I can see is entirely correct. Cheers, --Dailycare (talk) 19:55, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is a pretty idiosyncratic reading of the interview. Rabin is clearly stating that after Nasser closed the straits, he expected war. Your interpretation, and that of the sources you use, is selectivity quoting a part of the interview out of context, to convey a misleading idea, that the situation on the eve of war (June 4th) was remotely similar to that 3 weeks earleir. Jeff Song (talk) 23:09, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What he says was that "judging by" the divisions moved to the Sinai, Nasser knew Israel would consider the closure a "casus belli". As I write above, nowhere in the text does Rabin as much as suggest that Nasser was about to invade Israel. To the contrary, he says he doesn't believe Nasser wanted the war. The interviewer even repeats this point and asks for further clarification, which Rabin gives. And that is also how the sources read the interview. Cheers, --Dailycare (talk) 14:53, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Talk_page#Technical_and_format_standards we are supposed to keep responses to postings in chronological order and not interrupt people's responses to posts with ones own responses reiterating what the person said, especially when someone already has responded to the original post and dealt with the issue. You did it repeatedly at Talk:Foreign Agents Registration Act‎ and just trying to find something and follow the thread, I found it very difficult. A new user coming to the page would find it ever more frustrating. Just a heads up since you are a relatively new user. CarolMooreDC 22:01, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You don't understand the instructions there. The chron order recommendation refers to adding new topics, whereas what I am doing is called threading the response, with indentation that indicates who I am corresponding to. That is covered in the 3rd bullet. Jeff Song (talk) 23:05, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While it seems this used to be addressed on that guideline page - maybe somewhere else - generally you only insert something threadwise that is some extraneous point you want to slip in that others aren't likely to address. Not something that is directly related to what the last person - me - wrote. Of course, I just noticed your response came two minutes after mine, so it's possible somehow you missed mine entirely. In that case I should have just answered you below my relevant post, so I do take responsibility and have to be more careful myself. CarolMooreDC 23:44, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's not the way threaded discussions work. Have a look at any randomly chosen thread that has more than 2 participants, and you'll see what I mean. Jeff Song (talk) 23:53, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While certain editors in the I-P arena are culpable of gross misconduct, from my experience, Sean Hoyland is one of the more reasonable and well-intentioned ones. Though your comments may not be misplaced, it is sensible to extend WP:AGF to such editors.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 16:52, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I might have extended AGF, but did you see the verbal abuse he hurled at me in response? The lady doth protest too much, methinks. Jeff Song (talk) 16:54, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did. I must add I am notoriously bad at AGF myself and am no role model.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 17:07, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Jeff Song (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I ask to be unblocked, and it is not clear to me what has happened here. I have been editing for about a year and a half now with no incident, I have 1600+ edits and created several new articles. I am not a sock puppet. Jeff Song (talk) 15:42, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

T. Canens has emailed me an explanation of the behavioural evidence he used in making the decision to block here, and I have also made independent checks of the accounts' edits. It's very obvious that this is a NoCal100 sockpuppet account. Nick-D (talk) 11:54, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Reviewing admin: If you are considering an unblock, please contact me by email first. T. Canens (talk) 18:15, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this block. I've just emailed T. Canens per the above. Nick-D (talk) 08:27, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any indication that he is NoCal sock this editor have american IP before that it was claimed that some editor from China is NoCal User_talk:Two_for_the_show the only similarity between those two editors that they share the same POV.I find it troublesome that are editors are blocked without any real reason given --Shrike (talk) 19:27, 7 April 2012 (UTC) Now that it was established he is a sock of NoCal.As he made some useful edits beyond I/P area its best for him to try and take the WP:OFFER.--Shrike (talk) 12:24, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• No evidence was presented that he is sock at all.
• This user edits in beginning are similar to new user for example he posted in Wikipedia:New_contributors'_help_page/questions.
• The user has revealed his ip [1] the edit was suppressed only after I pointed to him that he can suppress edits I don't think sockpupperters that have many socks like NoCal reveal ip so easily.
• Maybe some check user can compare him to the last sock by Nocal User:Two_for_the_show--Shrike (talk) 17:41, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The main issue is that no evidence had been cited other than editors share a similar POV. Surely it it is necessary to supply reasonable grounds for a block to ensure that no abuse of privilege is taking place. As of yet, the decision has been unsatisfactorily explained, check user has not been employed, and the admin responsible requests email contact with other admins that will review this issue. I am surprised at the lack of transparency and hope that this will be rectified.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 19:17, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite normal for admins to keep evidence used to detect prolific block evaders such as NoCal100 off-Wiki so that the person doesn't learn how they're being detected. This is valid even in cases of mistaken identity (note that I haven't started reviewing this block yet). Nick-D (talk) 08:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is reasonable enough and T.Canens responded in similar fashion. Can you just ensure that the reasons provided are valid as this editor has not displayed classic sock symptoms and has been editing for a while.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 09:42, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even though I have had the opportunity to review the evidence, I don't feel that I know enough about the case to act on the unblock request. I do know, however, that the blocking admin is very familiar with NoCal100, and I trust that he has made a good block. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:23, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How someone in this situation can prove that he is not a sock?Does it possible at all?--Shrike (talk) 05:17, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I must say I am very surprised to find out this user was blocked as a wp:sock. I "met" him on occasion in articles such as Mellanox and he alway struck me as a cool-headed professional. Just my $.02 Ottawahitech (talk) 16:29, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:

• Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
  • Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
  • If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 20:46, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Journal of Robotic Surgery has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This scientific journal as a topic does not appear to meet the criteria for inclusion per WP:NJournals and WP:N.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Steve Quinn (talk) 03:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 15:40, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Mellanox Technologies (logo).jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:57, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]