Jump to content

User talk:Jeepday

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Shoessss (talk | contribs) at 04:58, 28 March 2008 (→Notability of International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators: Funny, that’s where I ran across the piece. FYI, I rewrote the opening sentence and added a small bit of other information an). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
I will respond on this page to comments, unless you ask that I respond on your talk page.
Please click here to leave me a new message.
The Signpost
14 May 2025

iRMX page

Not sure what sort of additional citations and external references are needed to consider this page meeting "general notability guidelines." I work for TenAsys, who are the current keeper and developer for iRMX and INtime. The owners are former Intel employees that worked on iRMX a long time ago.

The INtime page is not yet developed, and the iRMX page was pre-existing. I substantially updated the iRMX page in order to bring it up-to-date. Have not had time to provide a similar page for the INtime RTOS, which is a derivative of iRMX.

Given that I represent TenAsys, who is the exclusive licensed vendor for iRMX, and that TenAsys is a valid "Company," according to the definition given on the "notability page," isn't that sufficient? The sources provided at the end refer directly to our web site. All current iRMX documentation is published and maintained by us. —Preceding unsigned comment added by XMNboy (talk • contribs) 18:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please review again, external references have been added. XMNboy (talk) 00:43, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks much better, good work. Jeepday (talk) 01:03, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How does one fix the entry point of the article so it is actually for "iRMX" and not "RMX" and simultaneously make sure that all references to RMX become references to iRMX? The article as originally written was placed under the name "RMX" which is common usage, but would be more correctly listed as "iRMX." XMNboy (talk) 19:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Due to technical issues it is not possible to have the first character lower case, so "iRMX" is not possible. The article can be "IRMX", which already exists and redirects to the page "RMX". Because a number of people have edited the article, and there are some RMX systems that are not iRMX (like DOS-RMX} the correct thing to do is post on the talk page a recommendation to move the article to "IRMX". Depending on the outcome of that, we can move it. There is nothing urgent here, so post the move suggestion and if there consensus or no comment in a month or so let me know and I can help with the move. Jeepday (talk) 01:17, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

About the AIV thing

Please take a look at this. He is a persistent vandal who's supposed to be blocked on sight, even without warnings, and I was told to take it to WP:AIV to report any socks of him. He was also blocked anyway. Either way, please reconsider next time. Thanks. --AAA! (AAAA) 14:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: What's this about?

Ah, crap, I forgot to rm the AIV report, didn't I? Man, I'm such an idiot...sorry! Two One Six Five Five τ ʃ 16:56, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Sock

I would like a second opinion on this, based on This Checkuser request, he is known to be at that same article. Momusufan (talk) 22:37, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I filed the checkuser request Here. Momusufan (talk) 23:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks. That seems like a good idea. Jeepday (talk) 23:06, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I figured I follow up on that checkuser case againest FCBarsalona to see if it was Beh-nam who is banned, well according to the Checkuser Case FCBarsalona is a confirmed sock to Beh-nam. Momusufan (talk) 14:40, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the follow up. Jeepday (talk) 00:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can I get a ruling on these two issues?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Patriarch_Alexius_II#Sotnikova_Controversy

And this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Patriarch_Alexius_II#Quote_from_Preobrazhensky.27s_ever_forthcoming_book

Frjohnwhiteford (talk) 01:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested and given. Jeepday (talk) 02:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Page Content

I had a page that I wasn't able to finish before it got deleted. I can't remember how much content I put on it, but probably minimal. I then went on an extended business trip and found the article deleted when I returned. No problem. I intend now to put the whole article together offline and then upload the whole thing when I get it done.

The article was called, Heritage Christian School of Northern Colorado. It was deleted because it had no context. The fact was that it had little if any content.

Thanks, Dreeser (talk) 20:05, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Re: Evanston Township High School

Greetings Jeepday!

I just restored a boilerplate which you removed from this article. The fact is: there are some pretty substantial claims being made, none of which are supported by any references. If there was a reason you removed it, and I am not aware of it, please let me know, and I will be happy to remove it again. Have a great day! LonelyBeacon (talk) 05:57, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for dropping me a note. The reason I removed the {{Unreferenced}} is because they are some references on the article, it is only for articles that are completely unreferenced. I often work the project Wikipedia:Unreferenced articles where we remove the {{unreferenced}} and replace it with {{refimprove}} after adding a reference, or just changing the templates if there are references on the article. Evanston Township High School already had the {{refimprove}} in the reference section, I simply removed the one that was not correct. I personally like to place the either of these templates at the top of the article, but placing them in the reference section is an accepted option, so instead of moving the {{refimprove}} I just left it where it was. You could move the {{refimprove}} to the top of the page and remove the {{unreferenced}}. It is also appropriate to remove text to the talk page if you have question it's authenticity (with a note on why). The Burden is the editor who wants to include text to supply references if the content is challenged. Jeepday (talk) 15:04, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That all sounds good to me. Sorry for that. I will remove the boilerplate, and move the improvement boilerplate to the top. Thank you for educating me on this. I will be more attentive to this in the future. LonelyBeacon (talk) 17:10, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marc KJH

I think I have the freedom of speech. Marc KJH (talk) 13:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Freedom of speech doesn't equal freedom to move articles against the consensus or to make unfounded allegations of vandalism against me. Thanks for your help Jeepday. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The article should be restored to "Romani people" not to "Roma people" since the initial move to "Roma people" was made even without a discussion. The user that first made the move to "Roma people" is also a vandal. AKoan (talk) 14:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DungeonLegends

Hi, yesterday, my article DungeonLegends was deleted. Can you send a copy of it? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hucki (talk • contribs)

Your note

Thank you for the offer, but I just wouldn't have much use for admin tools here. I kind of like not feeling responsible for anything but my own edits when I am over here. If I were to find more time/motivation for doing administrative or problem-solving tasks I would use it over at the English Wikisource where I am a b'crat. Frankly I don't think someone with no enthusiasm for using the admin tools at en.WP will pass an RfA and I would rather not waste everyone's time.

On another subject; I think the {{clean-up}} category will soon overtake the {{unreferenced}} category. Then we can declare it the clear-cut worst backlog on Wikipedia.--BirgitteSB 04:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I respect your feelings for freedom and I would hope that the community would support an RfA for you based on trust. In my own RfA under the question "What admin work do you intend to take part in?" I said in part "while in theory a successful candidate for adminship could answer "None", I have not see it. I beleive that you are a candidate that could answer "None" and succeed. While some individuals make choices based on personal views the majority make good decisions based on wikipolicy, and there is nothing in WP:ADMIN that requires an editor to use the admin tools. Jeepday (talk) 12:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually I changed my mind. Go ahead and nominate me. I have an interview that will be in the Signpost either next week or the following one and is probably fairer to do this now before it runs; than to do it next month. I am also letting User:TimVickers know since he asked me some time ago to inform him if I ever changed my mind about this. One request: please don't respond to opposers. Just let them have their say, or if something is inaccurate I will clarify it.--BirgitteSB 17:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators

LOL- the only participation I had with this article was to remove the copyright violation tag. There was no violation. With regards to Speedy Delete, I am not so sure about that. If you do a quick search on Google News you are going to get some pretty impressive coverage of the organization, as shown here. [1]. My advice would be to remove the tag and see if you can improve the piece with the information I just provided. If you still feel it should go, nominate at Afd and let consensus guide you. If you need any help, drop me a note and will be happy to give a hand. Good luck. ShoesssS Talk 03:27, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually it is a copyvio as every word in the article is copy and paste from http://www.iaato.org/about.html but short quotes are generally acceptable, so I did not delete it for the copyvio. {{db-bio}} does not address if the subject is actually notable only if it has "content that does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject". Jeepday (talk) 03:34, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • My apologies on the copyright - your right when I first looked I though a free use page but than dug deeper and found this on one of the sub-pages: "Copyright &Logo Use All items on this website are licensed for use under the U.S. copyright law and the sole property of IAATO. Any use of the information, images, text or graphics is strictly prohibited without the written consent of IAATO". Images may be used for personal and non-commercial publication only. To be honest, if you are going to delete under speedy, I would go with the copyright violation. The organization it self, again you are right, the author did not make the claim of notability, but a case could be made. Let me know which way you are going to go. I think I could do a stub in a couple of days, once I clear my platter of some other articles, but will not worry about if you are going to delete. Thanks for point out my near sightedness today. Time to change my eyeglass prescription :-). ShoesssS Talk 03:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Funny, that’s where I ran across the piece. FYI, I rewrote the opening sentence and added a small bit of other information and cited the sources. I’ll work on it on over the next couple of days to see what happens. In the mean time I did place a {hangon} on the piece, so that should give me a couple of days to see if I can improve. Thanks for the help. ShoesssS Talk 04:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jeepday&oldid=201509311"