^{User talk:}Jimfbleak

Please add your message to the bottom of this page, give it a heading and sign it using four tildes ~~~~.

January music

Happy new year 2025! Today, pictured on the Main page, Tosca, in memory of her first appearance on stage OTD in 1900, and of principal author Brian Boulton. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:58, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda Arendt Happy New Year to you to, and thanks for the link Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:52, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! - Today I have a composer (trumpeter, conductor) on the main page who worked closely with another who became GA yesterday, - small world! To celebrate: mostly flowers pics from vacation ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:14, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Gerda, I didn't realise he had died! Just back from a few days birding in Norfolk. Pretty successful, yesterday alone we saw three species of owl and common cranes, as well as visiting friends near Cambridge on the way back. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:16, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for sharing! - I have more vacation pics to offer, and today's story of Werner Bardenhewer. I took the pic, and it was my DYK on his 90th birthday OTD in 2019, in both English and German. He spent the day in Africa, and after his return said - chatting after a mass of thanks he celebrated at Mariä Heimsuchung - that we'd have to talk about these articles. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gerda Arendt just out of idle curiosity, why is africa action lower case in both German and English? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:34, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's their styling, - a name is a name ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the entry about 'Raphael Delouya'

hello, I thank you for your attention to my draft. However, I must tell you that I am not the subject of the entry, and there is no conflict of interest here. If you think there is a tendency towards non-objectivity in the entry, I would be very happy if you could explain me. Thank you very much! סנסן ליאיר (talk) 15:14, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on user talk page Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:46, 27 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Heading

Takanori Kashino (talk) 22:01, 27 January 2025 (UTC) I recently noticed that my wiki page was deleted without any prior discussion or notification. I understand there might have been valid reasons to remove the page. However, I would appreciate it if you could consider implementing a more transparent process or template to notify and communicate with users before proceeding with deletions. Not only would this help us understand the reasons for the deletion, but it could also provide an opportunity to correct any misunderstandings or improve the page’s content. Thank you for your time, and I look forward to hearing your thoughts.[reply]

Replied on user talk page Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:37, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. I’m sorry—perhaps I should have posted that on my wiki user page instead. My apologies for the inconvenience; please feel free to delete it. Takanori Kashino (talk) 21:33, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Crex has been nominated for merging

Category:Crex has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:45, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Entry about 'Sergio Álvarez-Teleña'

Hello!,

I am writing to you because I noticed that the article about Sergio Álvarez-Teleña was deleted, as it was considered self-promotion. I would like to clarify that this is not the case, as I am not personally connected to Sergio Teleña in any way. There may have been some confusion since I sourced the information from his LinkedIn profile, which likely included references to his personal life.

I am interested in starting to contribute articles to Wikipedia, and I am quite involved in the field of Artificial Intelligence. I have come across several interesting papers and publications by him, and I believe he may be a person deserving of a brief Wikipedia article. Perhaps I included too much information and links directly from him, along with adjectives that may have been inappropriate, which I understand led to the article's rejection.

I have limited experience in creating Wikipedia articles, so I would like to ask: if I create a shorter, more concise article, entirely objective and based solely on information from external sources, would that be acceptable?

I would greatly appreciate any advice or feedback you could offer, especially given your extensive experience with Wikipedia.

Sergio is a moderately well-known figure in Spain, having been featured in several magazine articles, podcasts, etc. He also founded a company years ago, which has been growing significantly in recent times. If you wish, you may inquire about him through ChatGPT.

I look forward to your response and thank you in advance for your time and consideration. Kind regards. Tomoperator (talk) 09:39, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on user talk page, self-sourced fan page Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:07, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities

Hi Jimfbleak, I just wanted to follow up. I was working on cleaning up / responding to edits from a review of a page I submitted. One section of the page was flagged for puffery and then another for including too long a list. I removed the puffery and reduced the list, so that the page was more similar to peer pages. Part of this is my fault for being inexperienced at wiki pages—I am more familiar with academic pages that include such language (unlike journals), but did not realize the number of pages that get rejected until after I submitted—in fact, after I submitted I was in the process of addressing that section anyway. I was wondering why you subjected it to speedy deletion. As I understand it, criteria for speedy deletions include "test pages, vandalism and hoaxes, nonsense, blatant copyright violations, empty pages or ones lacking sufficient context, articles in defined areas that do not credibly assert the importance of the topic, and pages on topics already covered under another title." To that end, I was hoping you could provide any advice beyond the above for creating an appropriate page. The page was Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities. Yes I have a conflict with the page, but that's simply a reflection of the fact that our peer journals all have pages, and we would like to have ours represented on wikipedia, too. To my mind, the page was qualitatively different (at least in name) from the other pages you deleted in the past two days. Looking forward to hearing from you and any advice, FormaleAnzeigeFormaleAnzeige (talk) 16:41, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on user talk page Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:59, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply and your time. I really am trying to create a viable article here, and I would like to address all of these in a corrected page, even if it is stripped down substantially, perhaps even approaching the austerity of the Yale Journal of Law and Feminism page, or another page if you have a preferred "go by" for an academic journal. I believe most of the errors are fixable and resulted from reasonable misunderstandings about the purpose of some components of a page. For instance:

I did not realize that other law journals (I mainly modeled on JReg) were posting alumni on the suggestion that their achievements would not have been accomplished if not for the Journal. That is my error and I can remove the alumni list; claiming their achievements stem from their law school work would be unjustifiable—I only meant for the list to describe the alumni community of the Journal.

Additionally, my intention with the 'vision and purpose' section was not self-promotion but further to "describe the organization [and] help readers understand how this organization is unique," in particular by spelling out the range of material covered and methodological angles taken. FormaleAnzeige (talk) 21:14, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FormaleAnzeige, I think it's bound to be slimmed down once you only use independent sources. Describing the organisation if fine, and necessary to show notability, but straying into opinions less so. On the alumni, you could try leaving that in and seeing what a reviewer makes of it Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:55, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: Rafael Deloya

Hello!, About a week ago I wrote a draft about Rabbi Rafael Deloya, and there was a comment that I had to provide sources for the information presented there, as well as provide sources from websites that are considered reliable. I worked on the draft, and I would be happy for you to review it, thank you very much! סנסן ליאיר (talk) 19:38, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

סנסן ליאיר I'll have a look when I get the chance Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:31, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Hey, Jimfbleak. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! Ned1a Wanna talk? Stalk my edits 00:05, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Jim	Talk	Contribs	Sandbox	Logs	Blocks	Deletions	Protections	Scripts	Bird talk	Commons