User talk:Jumpman Jordan

MJ making a dunk


Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #101

Speedy deletion nomination of Elizabeth Adeney

A tag has been placed on Elizabeth Adeney 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 a person or group of people, 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, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, 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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Fre h ley 23:59, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...

             u" uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu "u
           u" u@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@u "u
         u" u@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@u "u
       u" u@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@u "u
     u" u@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@u "u
   u" u@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@u "u
   @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @
   @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @
   @ @@@" ... "@...  ...@" ... "@@@  ... "@@@ @
   @ @@@u `"@@@@@@@  @@@  @@@@@  @@  @@@  @@@ @
   @ @@@@@@uu "@@@@  @@@  @@@@@  @@  """ u@@@ @
   @ @@@""@@@  @@@@  @@@u "@@@" u@@  @@@@@@@@ @
   @ @@@@....,@@@@@..@@@@@....,@@@@..@@@@@@@@ @
   @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @
   "u "@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@" u"
     "u "@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@" u" 
       "u "@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@" u"
         "u "@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@" u"
           "u "@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@" u"
             "u """""""""""""""""" u"
               """"""""""""

Talkback

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

Fre h ley 00:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

May 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Chaka Zulu, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Chaka Zulu was changed by Jumpman Jordan (u) (t) blanking the page on 2009-05-21T00:22:36+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 00:22, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page User talk:TigerShark/Talk Archive 16th May 2009. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Willking1979 (talk) 00:32, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to User talk:TigerShark/Talk Archive 16th May 2009. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Willking1979 (talk) 00:33, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to User talk:Willking1979. Willking1979 (talk) 00:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. -- Menti fisto 00:40, 21 May 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

all the edits that were claimed to be "vandalism" were not vandalism, I admit maybe my first edit to TgerShark's page may have been vandalism, as I was critisizing another user, but i made no vandalism to Willking1979's talk page. I only defended my actions that i commited on TigerShark's talk page. I told him to reply, or state how i had made any vandalism. He then simply deleted the request i made on his page. After that, told him to man-up and give a reason for all the times he reported me for vandalism, and then somehow im blocked for that, i dont understand at all... Please remove this block as i did not commit vandalism.

Decline reason:

Let's see...you were blocked for personal attacks and harassment, not vandalism. Looking at some of your edits, though, this is vandalism, as is this, and both were repeated a number of times. This and the following edit are personal attacks, and these two are a combination of personal attacks and harassment. Understand now? Declined. —Travis ^talk 02:33, 21 May 2009 (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.

and if you take a look at my Chaka Zulu edit, i corrected it already. I do not believe my edits to Sucker Punch (film) are vandalism...cuz the redirect does not mention anything about the film...--Jumpman Jordan ([[User

ok travis, you need to learn something. Chaka Zulu is the manager for Ludacris!!! He has nothing to do with the Shaka get that in your mind!

talk:Jumpman Jordan#top|talk]]) 02:46, 21 May 2009 (UTC) what????how are the ones from willking1979's talk page vandalism??? i was asking him to give a reason...? plz reply travis...--Jumpman Jordan (talk) 02:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where did I say that the edits to User talk:Willking1979 were vandalism? I said that they "are a combination of personal attacks and harassment." The two edits to User:TigerShark's archive were personal attacks against another editor (and admin), User:Gwen Gale. The two edits I called vandalism were, if not pure vandalism, somewhat ill advised. Both edits were repeatedly made by you and reverted by a number of different editors. When your edits are repeatedly reverted, you should take that as a sign that you are doing something wrong. (See this handy guide.) —Travis ^talk 03:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please note the very first line from the Shaka article: Shaka (sometimes spelled Tshaka, Tchaka or Chaka; c. 1787 – c. 22 September, 1828) was the most influential leader of the Zulu Empire. That is why the redirect is in place. —Travis ^talk 03:04, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

umm...i still don't understand how my edits to willking's talk page was vandalism. I was trying to get him to tell why he reported my edits as vandalism. He was being highly unreasonable and just deleting off my requests. I do not believe any of my edits are personal attacks, or harrassment. He wasn't providing any details on why he marked my edits as vandalism (he marked my first edit to his page as vandalism..., so technically i shouldn't be blocked)...plz reply again--Jumpman Jordan (talk) 03:15, 21 May 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

ok, now i understand why my first edits on tigershark's talk page were vandalism, but can someone if not unblock me, at least explain how my edits to willking1979's talk page were vandalism. I was trying to ask him to give me a reason why...

Decline reason:

I think saying "Now I understand why you weren't made an admin" counts as a personal attack. — Daniel Case (talk) 03:56, 21 May 2009 (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.

lol that's a personal attack??? hahaha, some people need to learn how to cope with phrases like that, i mean come on... whatever wikipedia is way to strict then... LMAO!!!!!--Jumpman Jordan (talk) 00:26, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

and how does this edit constitute vandalism??? I'll display it below cuz i don't know how to do all the links...

"+ ==lol...== + why dont you stop reverting my edits on TigerSharks talk page. IT IS NOT VANDALISM!!! I'm supporting him, and i'm sure he has no problems with what I said.--Jumpman Jordan (talk) 00:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC) " where is the vandalism in that??? exactly nothing you can say to that...--Jumpman Jordan (talk) 00:30, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assessments

Please do not arbitrarily change the WikiProject Croatia importance assessments to "High" without discussion or explanation. GregorB (talk) 16:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

Please do not use talk pages such as Talk:AdventureQuest for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. Megaman en m (talk) 14:38, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

November 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia! I am glad to see you are interested in discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Jay Cutler (American football) are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Jauerback^dude?/_dude. 04:18, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Tre' Newton

The article Tre' Newton has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

College running back does not seem to meet WP:ATHLETE. No significant coverage I can find other than the usual player bios and game recaps.

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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Glenfarclas (talk) 02:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive comments.
The next time you make a personal attack as you did at User talk:Glenfarclas, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 02:55, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Tre' Newton

I have nominated Tre' Newton, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tre' Newton. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 12:07, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Flansburgh Circle

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Flansburgh Circle requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and 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.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Tchaliburton (talk) 20:00, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]