User talk:AJona1992/archive 1

January 2010

We like and strongly encourage helpful changes to Wikipedia, but "Selena" was directly copied and pasted from the main English Wikipedia. Please do not do that, as such articles are usually too complex and may have templates that do not exist here. Thank you. Lauryn Ashby (d) 01:44, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

New message

You have a message at User talk:Lauryn Ashby fr33kman 02:59, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

This is the only warning you will get for your disruptive comments. If you make another personal attack on another person, you will be blocked for disruption. Talk about the changes editors have made, not the editors. I wouldn't threaten me again if I were you. Lauryn Ashby (d) 19:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I was not threatning you so go ahead do what you want to do cause I will contact wiki about you.

• I'm curious: who exactly will you contact? "Wiki" is the name of a kind of software, and the sites which use that software. This Wikipedia is one Wiki - there are many others, not all connected with Wikipedia.

So, do you mean you are going to contact the people who run this Wikipedia? Well, it is a community: all the users (editors, admins, bureaucrats) "run" it.

Do you mean that you are going to contact the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF)? They won't get involved in something like this - basically, you are saying "Oh, the page I created has been deleted, please do something about it" - but they won't - all Wikipedias are tun independently, and it would be very unusual for the WMF to get involved, and they would never get involved over the issue of whether an article should be present or not.

If an article you have created does not belong in this Wikipedia, it will be deleted. If you do not like this, you are welcome to buy a hosting package with a domain of your own, upload the wiki software, and create your own wiki - then you can do whatever you want.

On this Wikipedia, though, you need to follow the rules - one of which is to be kind to people. Saying "SO DEAL WITH IT. LAST WARNING." and "this page gets deleted oh trust bae I will contact wiki about this" and "IF YOU DELETE IT OH TRUST HONEY I WILL CONTACT WIKI ABOUT THIS THANK YOU." are not example of being kind.

Issues with Selena

The source you are using (www.sing365.com) is not what Wikipedia would regard as a reliable site (see "about us") - they are not music professionals.

Also the source they use for the information was a geocities website. Again, this is not what Wikipedia would count as a reliable source - anyone could create a website at Geocities and put up anything they wanted to.

What you need to do is to find some reliable, independent sources for the information (you might want to read Wikipedia:Reliable sources)

Another thing that needs to be changed is the language used. This is the Simple English Wikipedia, not the English Wikipedia. Here are some guidelines which might help:

• Wikipedia:How to write Simple English pages
• Wikipedia:Examples of simpler English
• Help:Translate English into Simple English

Some particular issues with the article:

• Who called her the International "Queen of Tejano music"?
• Who said that Tejano music was disliked by the children?
• Where is the evidence that she won/was nominated for Grammys?
• Where is the evidence that she released 8 singles which got onto the Billboard charts?
• Where are the news stories about her murder?
• "Selena's murder had major reactions in the Latino world and internationally" - what were those reactions, and how do we know?

I feel that Selena is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia, but the article needs a lot of work - and since you are so passionate about this article being here, I think it is only fair that we ask you to help with improving it. As it stands, it uses far too complicated language, and there are no reliable sources. I am happy to help with finding sources, but I would like to see you doing something about it too.

Regards, -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:09, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Great Job!

Great job in the "Dreaming of You" or something like that article! You added over 71,000 bytes of work on there! Wow...! Reverter (talk) 18:21, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Awww thanks! I'm glad I can help out :) AJona1992 (talk) 18:23, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

And, if you hadn't made the edit, the page would have been a small, wimpy page like the Nazi Party page... Well, at least it's fixed. Reverter (talk) 18:33, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

...and the page is now up for deletion. It's basically a copy-paste from the English Wikipedia, with no simplification and no attribution. This is both inappropriate for our wiki and it is also a copyright violation. I suggest you either revert or fix it ASAP. Also, Reverter, don't 'congratulate' for copyvios. Goblin 18:35, 7 May 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Chenzw!

The page is not a copy-paste page. They are both identical, however, I used Simple English to the words not English grammar. AJona1992 (talk) 18:37, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

First, I want to point out the article, although a mess, is a perfectly good article that shouldn't be deleted. It plays a large role, is over 80,000 bytes, and was transformed into a very good article nominee. Why would anyone want to delete it? Instead, just edit and fix it. This reminds me of how User: Peter Symonds deleted my subpage... Reverter Reverter (talk) 18:40, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

You've just said exactly why it needs to be deleted. "Although a mess". If it's a mess, how can it be perfectly good? Hmmm. Goblin 18:41, 7 May 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Fr33kman!

Alright, that sorta made me laugh a bit... Anyways, it's a mess but it's an interesting one. I mean, it may not be the best article ever, but at least AJona1992 is making the wiki bigger. I mean, would you want a 1-word page about Germany or a 100,000-word page about Germany? If it's a big article, the person reading it can choose what they want to read. If it's small, then they have no choice and are missing lots of the information. Reverter (talk) 18:45, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Please do not engage in personal attacks as you did here. Please comment on content, not on editors themselves. There is no need to resort to name calling or aggression when in a dispute. Just act calmly, speak rationally, and do not attack other users. Thank you, Either way (talk) 12:13, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Looking above, I see this is not the first time you have been warned of this, so please consider this a final warning. Either way (talk) 12:14, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

I am sorry if, what I said, was a personal attack. I was just angry that you had voiced an opinion about the song, rather then tell me what I can do to enhanced the article. I see that a lot of editors on here, only vote with their opinions and not being professional about it, either. AJona1992 (talk) 16:05, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

QDing and RFDing of articles

Hello, I have noticed that you have QDed or RFDed a fair number of articles lately. Some of these appear to have been done without a full understanding of our deletion policy. Please read our deletion policy before deleting more articles. Also, note that you have recieved "final" warnings before, and the fact that you are blocked on EN could mean you could be blocked here for only minor violations of policy Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 17:09, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey there, I did read the deletion policy and I did not intend to be breaking any rules. Please forgive me thanks, AJona1992 (talk) 23:42, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

ISBN

What is "ISBN spacing"? I saw you mention it here but I don't know what it means. I thought all ISBNs should be without spaces. But, I know, I'm wrong! :) Please could you help, thank you. DJDunsie ^(talk) 17:35, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

I had this being asked a lot of times at GAN. Simply add - to the numbers. Example, 0316693782 ---> 0-3166-9378-2. Its a WP:MOS issue. I hope this explains it :) Best, AJona1992 (talk) 18:36, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Final warning

Hello AJona,

Please consider this message a final warning before I initiate a ban discussion against you at the Administrators' Noticeboard per our reciprocal bans policy, noting that you are indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry on the English Wikipedia.

Despite repeated warnings from myself and other users across the project that this wiki does not operate in the same fashion as others, you have continued to apply practices relevant to those wikis and attempted to alter how our processes operate without due discussion (Such as voting and overt-bureaucracy at the P(V)GA process) which is considered as project disruption.

For the final time: I strongly recommend that you read and re-read all relevant policy pages before partaking in any further processes to make sure that you are acting within how this wiki works. As a courtesy I am including the welcome message below which will link you to most of the required pages without having to dig around for them. Please also see this page.

Thank you,

Goblin 00:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Microchip08!

So you want to block me because I was blocked on English Wikipedia for sock, even though clearly I have not done that here? Secondly, where is a guideline for GA reviewers? All I see is a bold text explaining that reviewers must read the article and make sure it meets criteria. Nothing there says the community comes together and vote. Thirdy, I am not here to disrupt Simple at all. I just wanted to help out and I did not know that the rules are different from English Wikipedia. However, you also warned me about "voting" even though it was similar to the one above. Also, are reviewers allowed to write WP:POV comments such as yours on John McDouall Stuart? If there was a guideline page for reviewers, I wouldn't have been asking these questions so I'll kindly discuss this on the talk page so new users, such as I, can have a better understanding on what you mean and what needs to be done. AJona1992 (talk) 15:24, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to the Simple English Wikipedia

Hi, AJona1992/archive 1! Welcome to Simple English Wikipedia! Thank you for your changes! If you need help, check out the Help section of Wikipedia, or leave a message on my talk page. Whenever leaving messages on talk pages, please remember to sign your name by typing four 'tildes' (like this: ~~~~); doing this makes your name and the date show up. Also, it helps if you write something in the box that says 'change summary' whenever you change an article. Below are some useful links to make your time here simpler. If you make a short article please mark it with {{stub}}, our guideline is here. Happy changing! Goblin 00:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Microchip08! 00:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC) Getting Started How to: change a page • How to write Simple English articles Getting Help Administrators • Leave a message for administrators Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Can this be checked? Saying where the idea came from • What Wikipedia is not Copyrights • Using images and Pictures • How to copy from another Wikipedia Spam • Vandalism • Deletion policy The Community Assume good faith • Be kind Community Portal • Simple talk • TASERING Announcements • IRC channels • Mailing lists • Simple News Things to do Peer review • Cleanup • Editor review • Did you know? Other Useful templates • Stubs

Your input requested

As one of the people who commented on my recent proposals to delete some disambiguation pages, your input would be welcome at Wikipedia:Simple_talk#Disambiguation_pages. I am sending this to all registered editors who commented on those proposals who have not already commented at Simple Talk. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 04:14, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this. Thanks, AJona1992 (talk) 22:34, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Peer review and article talk pages

Hiya, I just wanted to tell you that I will review all articles that are in Peer review, and you have quite a lot of articles in there. I just want to warn you to keep an eye on the peer review page, because I will tell you when I am finished, and the review will be on the article's talk page (e.g. If I do a review on Como La Flor, I will put it on Como La Flor's talk page). Orashmatash (t • c) 17:56, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Alright. Well thank you SO MUCH for the reviews :). I have an appointment that I need to go to, I'll be back to fix ALL problems. Thanks again, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 17:57, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Message of thanks

Hi, thanks for supporting me against the admins here who are obviously pretty full of themselves. I am currently reading policies and have a help request in with Jimbo. I'm hoping he sorts Goblin out, because at least Pmlineditor had the common decency to apologise. Oh well, thanks again, I really appreciate it. Regards, Orashmatash (t • c) 19:40, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Like that's going to happen. Jimbo won't get involved and there really isn't anything to sort out. All I care about is the stupid amount of overcomplication that is being introduced to this wiki, which is completely against our ethos. Content comes first, and easy to use content that can be got to a good standard without a stupid amount of red tape. There's a reason we got rid of it about two years ago. (However, I do admit that not everything got documented at that time, and much of it is still 'unwritten'. I will get round to codifying it all... soon [but have been saying that for two years since I re-wrote it...]). Goblin 19:47, 29 September 2011 (UTC) I ♥ PeterSymonds!

Sorry Goblin, I overreacted, I was already pretty stressed, I had over an hour of homework to do tonight, and it affected my mood quite a lot. But let's be honest, you could have been a bit more polite when explaining to me. Orashmatash (t • c) 20:08, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome :) I hope that now users can be more polite to each other. As for Goblin, after he had asked me several times to keep reviewing the rules because voting was no longer allowed, I stopped reviewing GANs. However, like you said back at DYK those rules are not there. Considering that people still vote as 'support' or 'oppose', there's no rules against it. I even proposed to have a handbook-type of guideline for reviewers. Of course it was declined because people didn't feel like it would help the community. @Goblin, the PR backlog was nothing "complicated". I even simplified the rules and you still removed it without a discussion. You even went by doing it out of bad faith. Maybe you should ask users why and how. These can help you better understand why they did it and how it can help. Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 21:16, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I've addressed most of these points before, and have no intention of doing so again. However, to summarise some:

• It clearly says on the P(V)GA pages that this is no longer a vote, or words to that effect. Pretty clear, really.
• I never asked you nor told you not to review. Reviews are more than welcome and extremely helpful. It is the extra bureaucracy and complex bits that were being added that only made the process more difficult to follow. There are reasons we got rid of voting and other things and I'd oppose any move to go back to that, as it was a net negative - read the ST archives for more.
• PR is dead. It is a pointless process and is always backlogged. Things will not get reviewed in seven days - fact. The changes were pointless and to be honest I'd support an archival of that process as it's underused and redundant on this wiki to (V)GA. Like everything, it goes through flurries but will die again. The wiki has a cyclical nature - PR is never one to ever get much momentum. If you want reviews, you genuinely are better to take them straight to GA and/or VGA, as those guidelines are also rather liberal.
• I make no actions in bad faith - see my rationale in the section above.
• I don't do polite. End of. I speak straight as that's the only way things get done around here. Molly-coddling has only ever worked against the wiki - in my experience at least. If you don't like it, tough.
• The crucial guidelines that are required the most are there on all three of the main community processes, as these were updated as a priority at the time. A few, minor points are missing, though these more relate to the clerking and finer points of the system rather than anything else. The majority will be picked up quickly if you stay around and what not, and the stuff that is crucial is written down. Just forget everything to do with the enwiki processes, and as DJSasso has said elsewhere, we very much follow the spirit rather than the letter - a reason why there's never been a rush to fully codify things.

Final point on the matter: you're (both) not the first and won't be the last to try and 'bring' enWiki over. Don't take it personally and keep contributing as there's some good content and reviews appearing, all of which is helpful and positive. Just remember that it's a completely separate entity and we have our own ways. We're very receptive to change, but some change (and it's the things that appear time and time again) is not in the interests of the wiki and will get shot down. Any questions, please reply on my talk page. Thanks, Goblin 00:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC) I ♥ PeterSymonds!

(1) I checked again, and nor does it say anywhere on the WP:PGA and WP:PVGA that "this is no longer a vote". (2) I understand, however, with the little miss attitudes I was given, I was not going to tolerate it, so I left the reviewing process. If I would've stayed any longer, my ADHD would burst on everyone and I'll be blocked. (3) Me and Orashmatash are willing to help out at WP:PR. I know it was dead, but it can be very helpful to Simple. The same reason why its on enWP, it can help users identify problems beforehand. Why would they want to go to the nomination process to hear "heh? no..." or other comments that aren't constructive for improvement? (4) the bad faith edits you had made had to do a lot at WP:DYK. You're not the only one either, several editors vote on POV rather then helping to find an different interesting approach on the hook. When Enamorada de Ti was nominated, it was taken off by a user after one oppose. How is that good faith? Lastly, you're comment "you're (both) not the first and won't be the last to try and 'bring' enWiki over" first of all who said anything about enWP? or even said we got ideas from there? It could be arWP, frWP, esWP and all the other multiple digit Wikipedias. I'll agree that most IPs or newbies took ideas or came from enWP, but that does not mean everyone is from there. Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 00:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

1. Taken from the top of the nominations section: "This is not a vote, so please do not use comments such as "Support" or "Oppose" etc." - at least attempt to look.
2. Could have been avoided by taking the advice first time round, or asking a more experienced user for clarification. No need to quit outright from reviewing.
3. It waxes and wanes, always has done and always will do. It is completely redundant and is why we have a three week P(V)GA process. There is no need for articles to have already been peer reviewed and an article will never be 'closed' at P(V)GA until it gets community input - within reason. A much better option (which does work) is also to informally ask individual users for reviews - or just ask TRM, basically for an article to pass it's kind of an unwritten rule that it needs to have had a TRM review, they're that thorough. For the amount of input given at PR an article had might as well go straight to P(V)GA, and the requirements to list an article really aren't that stringent and a lot of them tend to be waived - though that's more because we agreed to remove them but then never actually did. A clerical issue that I've raised elsewhere.
4. Again. No bad faith edits; I'd appreciate seeing an example or two, please?
5. enWiki tends to be used interchangeably to mean other Wiki. Certainly not everyone comes from there, but even a small amount of research shows that you are getting some influence from there, so my point remains valid.

Goblin 00:50, 30 September 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Yottie!

(1) oh wow now I found it below the lead of the project. Anyways, you need to scream at your own self look who is "supporting"? Is there a rule that states new users can not vote? Because clearly TRM, who I see happens to be your friend here, does it too. He's not the only one, User:Macdonald-ross, User:Juliancolton, User:Peterdownunder, User:Gotanda, User:Albacore, User:SEPTActaMTA8235 and User:Belinda had used "support" within eight months here is the archive of those. Secondly, you only warned User:Albacore, who happened to be a new user at the time about this. All the others were not warned. (skipping to 3) actually, I still see potential in WP:PR. Until attitudes changes around here, I still would vote (yes vote) support for it. Why? because, editors at WP:PGAs will vote "oppose" even though rules clearly states not to. Their votes will be counted on by you, even though rules clearly states otherwise. Another reason why it would be helpful is that they are getting positive feedback, these feedbacks will help fix problems that will be brought up at WP:PGA or WP:PVGA. If they just nominate the article over there, then users will vote "oppose" and then their article will be closed as not promoted by you. It has been done, (see the link to the archives). Until you can give me a valid reason why WP:PR should be demoted from here, I'll agree, otherwise no. At least over there its a more healthier and kind environment then the crazy "I don't know what to do vote or not?" at the WP:PGA and WP:PVGA. Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 01:32, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Lots of new articles about people!

I'm impressed with all the new articles you're creating! I wanted to let you know about something that might make it a little easier. It's the default sort. When you put categories in an article about a person, instead of typing "last name, first name" for each category, you can enter it just once, like this:

{{DEFAULTSORT:Smith, Mary}}

The defaultsort is usually placed with the categories. It's helpful on stub articles, because there isn't a way to specify a sort key on the stub tag. I hope you find this helpful. Cheers! --Auntof6 (talk) 03:40, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, just got bored so I went by the "most wanted pages". Thanks for the tip, I'll surely use it! Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 03:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Reviewed template

Hi, I see you like my Reviewed template. I'm glad that it isn't just me that's using it, and I'm actually glad I made it because since the both of us are doing reviews at PR, it will help us out a lot. I appreciate you using it. :) Orashmatash (t • c) 15:47, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it is very helpful and useful then the {{done}}. Thanks for reviewing, I'll go ahead and fix the problems :) Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 15:49, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

No problem, I really enjoy helping others. I want to make sure PR isn't demoted, it gives me something to do in my spare time on Wikipedia. Since most of the articles that are on the main PR page have been reviewed, I'm going to make a start on the backlogs. I will, of course, make sure all the articles on the main PR page are reviewed first. I could really use your help, I know you're busy creating articles and whatnot, but if you find some spare time, don't hesitate about writing a few reviews for PR. As I said before, I want to make sure it isn't deleted. Orashmatash (t • c) 15:59, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Me neither, If you had read the above comments (about Goblin) I fought for it to stay. I don't mind helping out, I reviewed two articles. One of them being very long :) Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 16:02, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thanks a bunch. I'm thinking about adding a couple of my own articles to PR, to see what others think of them. I will need to greatly expand a lot of them, but hey, it's only the first revision. Once I have got bored creating articles, I will expand the ones I have already created. If you want to see what articles I'm working on just now, click here. Orashmatash (t • c) 16:08, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'll gladly review them, of course I won't be biased since we are working partners :) I seen your work on there, I'm a talk page stalker :p. It looks nice (so far), you're missing a references section and the first para seems a bit large. In my opinion, I like to see short sentences (to the point) lolz. Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 16:12, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

I know, I put the references section in last. Always. It's just an (annoying) habit I have. I will make the sentences short, sweet and to the point. I will work hard to get more information too, I usually always finish articles with just a 'History' section and nothing else. I'll definitely improve them all. Orashmatash (t • c) 16:29, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Alright :) What ever works for you then is fine. Happy editing! Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 16:31, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
You too AJona. Don't hesitate to tell me if you need help with anything, I'm an active user, and I am usually online. Orashmatash (t • c) 16:49, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, AJona1992. You have new messages at Orashmatash's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Replied. Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 17:06, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello, AJona1992. You have new messages at Orashmatash's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Patroller

I've reviewed your new page creations and they conform to standard so I've granted you the patroller flag. Here, on simplewiki, it only works for new pages. fr33kman 01:11, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I guess that's a good thing? lolz Thanks and best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 01:14, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

It prevents your pages ending up in yellow in the log and also lets you patrol other users new pages. :) fr33kman 01:20, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Nice :) Thanks for this, now back to creating more articles... Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 01:21, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

FYI: most people here don't use {{tb}} much btw, we tend to watch conversations where they started. Welcome!! :) fr33kman 01:23, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh ok, well thanks for letting me know. Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 01:31, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Sandbox

Hey man. Just saw this edit. You don't need to revert edits to the sandbox. It's there for that kind of random stuff. We don't really mind whats there as long as it isn't personal attackish. Thanks!--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 04:20, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, telling everyone to "enjoy their life" is somewhat attackish. The IP clearly stated between those lines that we at Simple Wikipedia do not have a life because we choose to edit/save articles. That to me sounded like one. Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 04:23, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

He said enjoy life, not get one. :) --Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 02:26, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh ok. I must have taken it too personal :) Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 02:33, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

72 hour block

Well, see what happens when you gloat? fr33kman 01:50, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

I understand why I am blocked but why not Goblin? He treats everyone horribly. Like I said I am not the one I'm blunt but I keep it nice. He doesn't, if he is not warned or not blocked temporarily then I don't want to be here. Its too un kind, I try ignoring it multiple times but here I constantly get attacked and nothing is done. Maybe if you guys were more kind to us then people wouldn't be trying to delete Simple. Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 01:57, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

This wiki is actually known as one of the nicest wikis because we let people with past problems edit here even through they have caused trouble on other wikis such as yourself. Its actually because we let people with these problems edit that we are often pointed at for deletion. Perhaps if you would have taken on the advice before the situation escalated instead of ignored it then your time would have been smoother so far? -DJSasso (talk) 02:00, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Actually its not. First of all I am not blocked on enWP and secondly the moment I stepped on here I was attacked. I would admit that it was my fault the first time I did came on here. Goblin gave me no link to verify his claims and everyone follows him and does what he says. (sorry if this is an attack) but, he tells new users that we can't vote, yet his "friends" who are old here are allowed to vote. He says we don't use GA-Templates but his friends do it and are not warned. I had every right to scream and jump up and down to him because he does it to us. How does that justify his actions? Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 02:04, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

I know you have been unblocked but when you started here you were blocked. You know what I meant. People actually rarely do what he says or follow him. If you knew his history here you would be aware of that. No one should be voting. But people do slip into it. Should they stop, yes they should. But he was trying to instruct a new editor on the proper way. Its easier to stop a habit before it happens that to try and stop it later. You choose instead of calmly discussing to fight with him at every chance. He is by no means innocent don't get me wrong. But just because he is acting a bit rough doesn't mean you have to do likewise. -DJSasso (talk) 02:09, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Well because User:The Rambling Man, User:Macdonald-ross, User:Juliancolton, User:Peterdownunder, User:Gotanda, User:Albacore, User:SEPTActaMTA8235 and User:Belinda have all voted "support" or "oppose". He only targets new users. I see where you are coming from, but it would be nice to know that he is not only being nice to his "friends". Every time he does log in, its to only promote or demote articles that were not properly given any reasons on why it should pass or not. And if its not for that he seeks new users and slips his way out of being blocked. I was just blocked for being "unkind", well what about him? I sent him a message at a nice tone asking him politely if he can add the template to promoted GA articles. His response was to give me an attitude. How does that justify his actions again? Another thing, who gave him the right to even promote or demote GANs? The whole process is a train wreck, there's editors who go against the rules, the rules are not being strict upon users who participate, there's no where in the project that states who promotes the articles when it is time, it does not give a helpful guideline on how to review an article, and so much more. I still do not think that its right to block someone for being unkind while he didn't start it. Goblin keeps slipping, when will his actions finally be enough to block him? How is this even a community if they allow him to bite newcomers? This is just ridiculous, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 02:22, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, right now you are committing another offence by misusing your talk page during a block. The only reason you can use your TP during a block is to ask for an {{unblock}}. BG7 had his rollback taken away, that was the reaction for his offense. You were blocked for gloating and that was the reaction for what you did. Gobby has been blocked before and if he misuses undo, or does something else similar then he'll be blocked again. No one gets special treatment here. If you have a specific complaint to make against BG7 then wait until your block is up and raise the matter on WP:AN. Attacking the project and the people who edit on it will win you no friends at all. btw: do not even consider trying to evade this block. We have checkusers and nine stewards on this project, you will be caught. As for how you were "greeted" here, you reap what you sow. fr33kman 02:34, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

I am certainly not. I'm confused on how I got blocked because of what you said "unkind" and how Goblin had first made an attachish remark to me and was not blocked for it. What are you even talking about? I have never used sock on here, I am shocked that you even brought it up and used that against me. What a smart move. Anyways, I already had stated that was my fault, if u had read all the comments here as I stated. I still was not given a justification for Goblin to react in such ways, I do believe that I should contact Wikipedia in general and not Simple. Clearly, people here are extremely mean and unkind here and aren't too welcoming. If this keeps up, you guys really lost an editor who created around 140 articles in a month and helped out at the Wanted Pages and really have done a great job around here. Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 02:42, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

I have given you a way forward by advising you to report problems you've had with any user to the admins on WP:AN. If you want to contact the Wikimedia Foundation Philippe is the head of reader relations. fr33kman 02:50, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

• While I agree that Goblin ruffles feathers from time to time, I don't think it's right to bring nice and uninvolved users like Belinda into this Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 19:27, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind if I jump in, but I agree with Purplebackpack. Belinda is a lovely user, and so is The Rambling Man and Albacore. No need to get them involved in this. Also, Goblin can actually be nice, I have sorted out my issues with him, and suggest you do likewise AJona. It will make everything a lot better. Goblin is an editor with bucketloads of experience on the processes of this wiki. As he himself said, he doesn't do polite. While that's not everyone's cup of tea, I suppose you can't try to change people. Orashmatash 16:10, 5 October 2011 (UTC) I like... Chemistry! 16:10, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Comment I wasn't "bashing" those users, simply was proving a point/backing my claims up about how the process at WP:P(V)GA is being handled improperly. Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 01:51, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Unblock request

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators said no to this unblock request. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not unblock the user without a good reason. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

AJona1992/archive_1 (contribs · deleted contribs · block log · filter log · global contribs)

---

Request reason:

I feel as though I was blocked for the sole purpose to lower tensions that were beginning to build between me and Goblin. I kindly left a message to Goblin first, he then replied in a attackish way which brought out the worst of me because I do have ADHD. I agree that because of my disorder that it was no way to retaliate in such matter. However, I never got a justification on why Goblin goes around here and attacks everyone and everyone is supposed to be happy and cheery. Simple English Wikipedia isn't really a welcoming place. I get treated awful here because I was blocked subsequently on enWP. How does this make it right to attack me at my good faith edits? I am no longer blocked from enWP, because they gave me another chance. I am not sure if I will be unblocked because here it is a different rational. All I know is that blocking someone who did not start the battle is not right, and the admin who did it had one purpose, which was to end the battle. Like I said I am blunt (100% real) and won't hold anything back, I'm very feisty (aggressive) but I keep it chill (kind) until someone pushes the wrong buttons. I already contacted Philippe about this matter with Goblin and the overall bitty situations here on Simple. Hopefully someone will hear me and do something right to help the newcomers who clearly has no one to look upon. Even if we stand up for ourselves, we get blocked. Exhibit A (me). If and when I do get unblocked, I'm going to get WP:BOLD on WP:P(V)GA as no one seems to know what to do since rules clearly aren't taking serious and articles are passing without a proper understanding on how things works. Of course its being promoted by Goblin even though he warns and throws his attitudes around to only new users. Yet no one has the guts to do anything, not even warn him. He says "I have an attitude with everyone", why do you guys even allow him to bully and misuse the WP:P(V)GA process? I think you guys need to seriously work on fixing him up and not me. I have not done anything bad to the community (since I came back in August). Real talk (seriously).

Decline reason:

You were blocked because of extremely uncivil remarks towards BG. Yes he probably could have been nicer but you crossed a line he didn't cross. To be honest you made one of the most ridiculously uncivil comments I have ever seen on here or en and that is saying something. Your unblock request rational is filled with further attacks showing that you still just don't get it. So you are going to need to sit out your block to think about how you might better get along with people in the end. You have been giving off an attitude to a great many people. Perhaps think about how that might be curtailed. -- DJSasso (talk) 17:18, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Only comment on the matter is that if you do get 'bold' with anything with P(V)GA I will revert and force a discussion on it, so little point wasting your time in the first place, to be honest. Goblin 17:00, 4 October 2011 (UTC) I ♥ Fr33kman!

I meant bringing a discussion to WP:AN/I... Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 17:01, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

To clarify; calling mines and User:Orashmatash's reviews "a joke" is not being kind either. Of course no one will do anything about it because no one clearly cares about others. How was I being EXTREMELY UNCIVIL? Show me the diffs to back yourself up. Where in this does it show how uncivil I was? Was I uncivil enough to ask Goblin nicely about adding something that I DID NOT KNOW WAS NOT ALLOWED ANYMORE? Clearly not. Was I the uncivil one reverting good faith edits? Clearly not. I was uncivil after this. I had every right to, Goblin was attacking me about how he is perfect at WP:GA and I shouldn't correct him. Seriously? rules does not state that one can not vote, it says so on the main project (at the very top bottom). However, Goblin chooses to promote and demote articles with the community not understanding the rules. Goblin states that GA-Template(s) are no longer in use. Then tell me what is this? And tell me where does it state so in GA? Lastly, provide me the links where I was uncivil to those (post-August 2011) users. I was nothing but nice and helpful to Simple. Of course until Goblin stick his nose into something that he clearly needs to get out. Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 18:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

None of that is relevant to this block. This block was made because of your post to his talk page. Argue about any of that other stuff when you are unblocked but that has nothing to do with your action which was blockable. Talkpage access has now also been removed since you have decided to continue abusing the access while you are blocked. -DJSasso (talk) 18:57, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Creating requested articles

Many thanks for creating the articles listed on Wikipedia:Requested pages! You did a good job. Racepacket (talk) 07:37, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome :) I'll be back on there, hopefully the page will be empty soon. Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 01:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Goblin

What is your problem with Goblin? You obviously don't get along, but why do you continually bring it up? You know with your comments on WP:ST it could be construed as you goading him. There are no "Goblin rules" - We don't all follow him. Its been pointed out to you before that in most cases its actually quite the opposite. You'll see that the majority of people currently want PR to go, so its not just him. Basically, your attitude towards him is not helpful to this Wiki. Please stop or you could actually be blocked again. Your work here is appreciated though, don't get me wrong, so I hope you stay. Just keep clear of Goblin and most importantly, don't mention him in your comments. Kindest regards, Normandy ^(talk) 15:39, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

If you read the reason why I got blocked in the first place and the full text of that statement you took that sentence off, you'll know why I don't get along with him. I also stated there that I am staying away from him and the process that he hails upon. Thanks for you're kind words, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 15:43, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I do know why you got blocked and frankly I agreed with it entirely. I know the full context of your disagreement and believe you brought it on yourself. By saying you're keeping out his way but commenting against one of his proposals means that you're goading him. Should he respond? If he does its giving you ammunition to say that you were "trying to stay out of his way" but he instead commented on your reply. You see where I'm going with this? I'll be honest they were not supposed to be kind words, they were meant to make you think about changing your actions. Normandy ^(talk) 15:47, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

So if you don't then why are sending me a message? To simply warn me about not talking about him or his affiliations? I only brought up his name on a reply to announce as such; I am not going to talk to him or fight in the nomination process over there. He did replied, however, I am not going to respond to it. Anyways I am done with this message, I don't like to continue to talk about somebody I clearly do not get along with. Bye, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 15:54, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

A suggestion

I suggest that rather than nominating 5-6 articles for good/very good status at the same, that you focus instead of getting one or two articles to pass at a time. None of your articles seem to be close to passing at this time. If you nominate just a couple, it will allow you to concentrate on getting those up to standard rather than trying to spread your resources/others' times around. Only (talk) 03:07, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Yea I know, since there's no WP:PR I couldn't know if they were of good quality. Oh well. Thanks, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 13:47, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Lake Jackson, Texas

Hi AJona, just a quick reminder, as i'm sure you're aware, here, we don't name sections "External links", we do it simple and name them "Other websites". Thanks, --Orashmatash 19:14, 10 October 2011 (UTC) I like... Rollback!

By the way...you know what would make the article better? How close it is to Houston Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 19:24, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

@Orashmatash, I knew that, I just had forgotten about renaming it when I had saved the article. @Purplebackpack89, I'm not quite sure how many minutes/miles it is away from Houston. Considering that CC is in South-east Texas and Houston is more towards the north-west or central part of Texas, it would be an hour or two? Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 19:44, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Music singles

Hi Ajona1992, please check the guidelines on notability for music articles, especially on singles. For example the guidelines state "Most songs do not meet the guidelines for notability for their own article." Even where the album is notable, there does not need to be separate article for each song. For example, there probably does not need to be an article for the Massari song, Smile for Me. The couple of lines on the stub should have been made into a paragraph on the album article. If the information about an individual song starts taking up too much space then it could be used to create its own article. I would much rather you spent your creative effort on a good album page, than lots of trivial stubs. Articles which do not meet the notability guidelines can be deleted.--Peterdownunder (talk) 07:20, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I know the guidelines well :) I'll expand the articles soon, just wanted to get the articles I wanted to create done fast. Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 18:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Peer review

Hehe, Hi. Your articles have practically flooded New pages! You're a patroller too, right? Check it out if you don't believe me. (Click "Hide patrolled articles" and then click "Oldest") --Orashmatash 16:15, 11 October 2011 (UTC) I like... Chemistry!

Not sure why you choose that heading. Anyways, yes I am and I guess this is a compliment? So..thanks Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 18:36, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Me either, I was going to make the topic about Peer Review but changed it at the last minute. And yes, it was supposed to be a compliment. So... You're welcome. :) Orashmatash (talk) 18:40, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh ok, so what were you going to say? Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 19:00, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

I was going to say that I was sorry about the redirect, but decided not to. Orashmatash (talk) 19:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Jay Brannan

I was looking at this article. Do you have a reference for Brannan being openly gay? I don't see it in reference #1. For very personal, potentially inflammatory, or potentially libelous things like this, we should make sure we have a reference, or else remove the statement. I may very well just be missing it in the referenced web site, though -- if I am, please point me at the relevant text! Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:11, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done I'm sorry about that, I added two sources from google.news. Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 13:53, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Looks good, thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 21:24, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome. I decided to expand it :) we enough stubs :) Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 22:14, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Importing articles

Hi AJona1992, when you simplify an English Wikipedia article, or even parts of it, for example in the Spongebob articles you have created, please credit the source on the talk page. I use this template: {{Enwp based | url= (add full address here) }} The other thing you can do is add the message "Based on Enwp article" in the edit summary. This keeps everybody happy. --Peterdownunder (talk) 04:07, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh ok. Thanks for the heads up :) Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 14:20, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

October 2011

Talkbacks

Hello, AJona1992. You have new messages at Orashmatash's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, AJona1992. You have new messages at Orashmatash's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for one week in accordance with blocking policy. Edits like this and this serve no purpose other than incivility, and are after your first block. Albacore (talk · changes) 20:46, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

block endorsed fr33kman 21:48, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Unblock 2

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators said no to this unblock request. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not unblock the user without a good reason. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

AJona1992/archive_1 (contribs · deleted contribs · block log · filter log · global contribs)

---

Request reason:

Is this a joke? this is seriously a joke gone bad. Dear admin(s) I was not being uncivil at all. Goblin had said the same thing to me and he was not blocked. Secondly, I did not disrespect anyone in those statements. I am being blocked again from the wrongful use of being an admin from User:Albacore. Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 20:52, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

So you are accusing an uninvolved and disinterested admin of "the wrongful use of being an admin". Well, that's a personal attack, so I'll just extend your block for a month then. Yes, BG7 has been uncivil at times. If you look at his block log you'll find he has been blocked on multiple occasions and is no longer an admin because of that. On simplewiki we tend to use the "net benefit" or "net negative" in determining a block or a warning. You do a lot of good work on this project, but your interactions with people here negate all of that. I'll tell you what I tell everyone; "it's just a website!" It's not the end of the earth. N.B.: I have removed your talk page access, because, once again you are abusing it. fr33kman 22:02, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Unblocked

As a group, the administrators have decided to accept your request for unblock here on Simple English Wikipedia. However, with a bit of advice thrown in. Firstly, you have a completely wrong understanding of WP:IAR. This is a very old thing going back to the early days of Wikipedia. It is designed to to overcome needless bureaucracy or other obstacles that have the effect, but not the intention, of placing a guideline or a policy in the way of an improvement to the project. It is specifically not intended for use to push a person's singular opinion regarding a process on simplewiki. Ignore all rules should also only really be used in the modern context of WP in conjunction with other members of the project; never where someone else objects. It's something I think I've used (or even seen used) a handful of times in the time I've been here. So, you have to stop relying on it in day-to-day interactions. Secondly, please watch the tone of your interactions with other users. Behind every keyboard is a real live human being with thoughts and feelings. Remember that please. Simplewiki has had a reputation as being soft on rule-breakers but that has largely changed. So it is suggested that you read the rules and even check out the archives of talk pages, including ST, to see if something you want to changed has been discussed before; many things have. Reading archives is something I suggest to every new user btw, it's a really good way of getting to know people and the project. Regards, fr33kman 01:42, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks :) I'll surely read it. Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 17:44, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Como la Flor (song)

Hey AJona, just letting you know that you will need to withdraw the nomination of Como la Flor (song) for GA by yourself. It's really quite easy, just type:

Withdrawn - your reason here ~~~~ Orashmatash 15:27, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Well thanks for closing it. Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 18:45, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I closed it for you anyway... :D Orashmatash 19:01, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Frankie J

I have tagged this article as a hoax, because nothing in it is substantiated and it doesn't seem to match the enwiki article. Why did you base it on a version from 2005? --Auntof6 (talk) 21:45, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Because I didn't want one that was too complex or similar to the current version. Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 01:40, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm. For this article, I think it should be either updated or deleted -- your choice. For other articles, this might not be a good idea. Some article updates are done for a reason -- information in older versions may be inaccurate or outdated. Would you rethink using old versions to base articles on? --Auntof6 (talk) 02:12, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

What about merging it to A.B. Quintanilla III until I have time to really simplify his article? And yes it does, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 02:33, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

That would work for me, as long as the language you add is simple. Then you could make this page a redirect. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:43, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Please stop copying from En without simplifying

Hi, I notice you copied and pasted over several articles recently from older versions of En Wikipedia pages. I've tagged two for quick deletion. These articles are shorter than what is currently on En, but they aren't simpler. The vocabulary isn't simple--just run them through any online checker if you don't know. [This] is one of the best. Also, the sentence structure isn't simple. Sorry to have to tag them, but they don't belong here. Gotanda (talk) 07:30, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Mass copying of articles without simplifying them to meet SEWP guidelines is a disruptive form of editing. Another editor has marked all these articles for quick deletion. Both the disruption and the QD requests are currently being discussed at simple talk. --Peterdownunder (talk) 08:33, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for updating this, Peter. Got home from work and realized I needed to mention of Simple talk too. Apologies for the delay Jonayo. Gotanda (talk) 10:27, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Its alright. I'll head over there, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 12:26, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

WP:POINT

The full name of this guideline is "Do not make problems to prove something". Unless you can give me a diff in which I was trying to prove something or I was making problems, I'm not going to believe that I am violating WP:POINT. And when you go trying to find something, please remember that stating your opinion, or supporting something, is not in violation of WP:POINT. Nowhere in any discussion have I tried to prove a point, or make problems on purpose. Thanks, Orashmatash 09:21, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

You wanted all of my supposed "transwiki" articles deleted, even though a user simplified them. So your proving a WP:POINT by stating that all the articles should be deleted because they were in violation of WP:RULES. Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 15:07, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

You're missing the point here - I did not make any problems there. Nor did I try to prove a point. Therefore, I am not violating WP:POINT, nor am I violating the rules. As I said, the title of the guideline is "Do not make problems to prove something", which I did not. Also, that was opinion, and everyone is entitled to their opinion. If you don't like it, just tell me. You don't need to accuse me of violating rules that I am not. Also, that comment was for the articles that were currently transwikied. If they are simplified, then they aren't transwikied, so I'm afraid the articles that Racepacket simplified do not apply to that comment. Orashmatash 15:15, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I think the basic idea is "work together as friends." It is fine to disagree. Nobody is right 100% of the time. But we can be friendly while we disagree. WP:POINT says we can talk directly about our concerns rather than making traps for others. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 15:29, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Editing restriction

Having read over the topic on WP:ST, I am placing you on an editing restriction. You can not copy and paste an article from another Wikipedia directly into the mainspace. You must firstly place the page into your userspace and work on it from there. You must comply with all of the instructions on this page. You also, can not move an article into mainspace from your userspace unless the article has been worked on by at least two other editors or have the article passed by an admin. This editing restriction is in place for a minimum period of two months. After this you may approach any admin to lift it. Regards, ... fr33kman 18:39, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I will agree and will follow this. Thanks, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 18:41, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

As part of this restriction several articles has been moved from the main space to your user space for you to continue work on them. These are:

• User:AJona1992/Electronic dance music
• User:AJona1992/Latin music
• User:AJona1992/Music of Puerto Rico
• User:AJona1992/Music of the United States
• User:AJona1992/Music of Scotland
• User:AJona1992/Portuguese people

All these are notable topics and should be on this wiki. Bringing them up to our standards would be a great help. --Peterdownunder (talk) 20:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I will simplify them and expand them further. Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 14:20, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Your template {{Infobox artist discography}}

This template is a duplicate of one that already existed, {{Infobox Artist Discography}} (upper case letters instead of lower case). I have changed the one you created to redirect to the one that already existed. Please be careful not to create duplicate templates. If you'd like help determining whether there is a template for something you need, feel free to ask me -- I've been doing a lot of work with the templates and could probably find it for you. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 04:04, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I didn't know that. Sorry. When I had tried using it, the code was not showing up on the article itself so I had thought creating a new one would be better. But my apologies, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 14:19, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Please stop spamming/canvassing

With regards to your numerous posts today to talk pages encouraging users to visit Simple Talk and participate in the "project" discussion: please stop. What you are doing is in violation of the canvassing policy. If you continue to do so, you may find yourself blocked from editing. I highly suggest you revert your previous messages. Only (talk) 22:09, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I am not canvassing, as I was only sending messages in NPOV not POV. Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 22:13, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

No, you are not sending NPOV notices. Your notices say that the "project that could help users who have disabilities." That is your POV on what the project is. Additionally, it violates the spamming clause. I'll paste it here for you:

Indiscriminately sending announcements to editors can be disruptive for any number of reasons. If the editors are uninvolved, the message has the function of "spam" and is disruptive to that user's experience. More importantly, recruiting too many editors to a WP:dispute resolution can often make resolving the dispute impossible. Remember the purpose of a notification is to improve the dispute resolution process, not to disrupt it.

You are sending these messages "indiscriminately" to "editors [who are] uninvolved" so the messages function as spam. Again, stop. Only (talk) 22:20, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Stubs about musicians or music groups

I see you're hard at work creating more music-related articles! I just wanted to tell you that on a stub that's about a singer, musician, musical group, etc., you use {{bio-stub}}, not {{music-stub}}. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 03:19, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry about that. I'll keep this in mind during my next mass creation. Best, Jonayo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 03:28, 29 November 2011 (UTC)