User talk:JAYFAX

Hi, Derick1259. I noticed that you are a member of the Animation WikiProject and wanted to share a proposal with you. There have been several times that I have wanted to award an Animation Barnstar to a fellow editor, only to be disappointed that one still doesn't exist. The closest thing that we have right now is the Film Barnstar, but this is only applicable in certain situations, since animation can be found in both film and television. I would like to see an Animation Barnstar become a reality; especially since one already exists for the sub-topic of Anime and Manga. In order for this to become official though, a consensus will have to be reached.

If this is something that you would be interested in supporting, then please let me know on my talk page, as I am sending this message to all of the members of the Animation WikiProject and will not be adding each editor's talk page to my watchlist.

I am also looking for someone who would be able to provide a design for the barnstar. If you have any ideas for this, then please do not hesitate to share them with me. :) --Jpcase (talk) 01:44, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is "mediagraphy" even a real word? If so, do you have anything supporting that? And even further, is the word being used correctly →here←? - ^theWOLFchild 19:06, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Mediagraphy" isn't an outrageous term. "Media" suffixed with -graphy, a catalog media. The Monty Python article which catalogs various media (used to be) described as a mediagraphy page, that's where I picked it up from. My advice for the titling of the page is such that in encompasses beyond the film productions, such that it it takes into account of the vast wades of media the Peanuts franchise produced.

I don't intend to to play a tug of war on the titling of the page, so I welcome your concerns. If one believes that there is a term that is much more better to the extent that it qualifies another change of name, then it shall be openly discussed before doing so. --Derick1259 (talk) 12:16, 7 March 2014 (UTC)Derick1259[reply]

Can https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/177.207.241.167 just be banned already? They keep adding false info to the Jelly Jamm page and it drives me insane. I left a message on their message wall and they didn't stop vandalizing with the same false information. Please just ban them! SalmonCat (talk) 23:52, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for semi-protecting the Jelly Jamm page! I really appreciate it and I will help to clean it up when I have the time tomorrow morning. SalmonCat (talk) 23:58, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

	The Half Barnstar
	Thanks for the tips on film plots. The tip about the Jaws write-up was enlightening! (hope I'm doing this Barnstar thing right...?!) Dr Greg Wood (talk) 18:04, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you're doing it right, thank you! :)

I recently added a ton of more songs that lack music videos to the page. I also added a couple of more music videos to the table. I intend on expanding the page more with info about his reality videos (billwurtz.com/reality).

Thanks for contributing to the page. You added a musician infobox. There you state that Bill's origin is Long Island. Do you have a source on this? Would be needed. BoatyKappa (talk) 17:20, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: Thanks for responding and adding a source to the musician infobox. I appreciate it! I also don't mind your approach of cutting back on detailed information about Bill's Youtube presence, it's probably for the better since he is an independant musician first and foremost. Also, feel free to restructure the list of works section. I just did the somewhat grindy work of actually listing all his songs, but of couse it could be structured better.

Next I'm thinking about adding a section with more information about his website. I feel the article in its current state doesn't properly explain the importance of billwurtz.com as a central hub for all of Bill's content creation. The site includes achives of songs, lyrics, videos, the questions page, the reality page, the anagram page, improv page etc. All of this should at least be mentioned in a section to give an accurate representation of bill's work. As you pointed out, Bill primarily makes content for his website which he in turn also happens to upload to other platforms like Youtube. BoatyKappa (talk) 07:14, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I saw you recently combined h3 podcast citations on the Bill Wurtz page. Sadly, this means all of the timestamps to different sections of the episode are lost. I often tried to cite timestamped links when I used the podcast as source for a specific point or quote. (e.g. "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_fMuWm5vVA&t=2655s" for revenue streams). Not having timestamps doesn't render the source useless, sure. But it definitely makes it harder for a reader to find where in the podcast a certain thing is said, since every link to it now starts from 0:00 (that's even before the sponsorships).

Personally I'm not a fan of removing these timestamps, but if you think it's fine (i.e. you feel timestamps to long youtube videos aren't necessary on Wikipedia) then I guess we don't need to revert the change. I just wanted to alert you about this in case this happened by accident.

BoatyKappa (talk) 07:19, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for acknowledging my efforts! I'm glad that someone else has recognized how ludicrous it is that the article for an Internet staple like 4chan can be so neglected on *Wikipedia* of all places (the dating in the meme section is particularly hilarious, as I am sure it is for most readers).

I gave up on my plans for a overhaul of the page not for lack of content, but for lack of manpower; I settled on just trying to fix up the lead and and the parts that are clearly outdated. I’ve collected several primary sources and written histories by anons (with timelines, archived threads, screencaps, etc.) in anticipation of a future rewrite, and personally have much to relate regarding the site’s culture and history. Please keep me posted on your project's developments on my talk page when you get around to it -- I would be glad to have a hand in your efforts.

Question: When you say “directing efforts”, do you mean exclusively your own, or do you have other editors besides me interested? I believe that this is a project that would benefit hugely from an organized team, especially considering the depth and readiness of relevant information, if you can find the right people. -- Goszei (talk) 03:52, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Derick1259:: Thank you for upgrading the article Bluey (2018 TV series) to a C-class article. I have made some additions to the page; specifically a "Themes" section, and other subsections. Would you be able to let me know how to request a B-class review? Thank you. SatDis (talk) 11:26, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	Thank you for your hard work on the Bill Wurtz article! The way you cleaned up the citations, and continuously keep track of all the details to ensure the highest quality makes all the difference. I sadly can't spend as much time keeping track of the article as I used to, so your help is very valuable :-) BoatyKappa (talk) 19:10, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Derick1259,

Thank you for creating Peanuts animated specials.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Thank you for your new article on the Peanuts animated specials, but I recommend finding additional reliable sources to indicate that this history qualifies for its own article. I am not quite sure that this article adds much that could not be included in the "Adaptations" section at the main Peanuts article.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Doomsdayer520}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 02:38, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Doomsdayer520: Heya, thank you for looking at the page. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the edit history of Peanuts, but I in fact entirely wrote Adaptations section (copyedited by other editors though). I hope you recognise that the section is well referenced, in fact it represents a portion of an effort of mine to get the page as a whole to GA status. Now, as for Peanuts animated specials, the contents of that article was the Adaptations section of the Peanuts article - before I rewrote it. I moved it into its own article to consolidate a few issues, 1. It's way, way, wayyyy to long to be present on an article that should only really be about the comic strip. 2. It doesn't have any reliable sources, but it felt too bold to outright delete it all; so I gave it its own page. Now with that being said, I almost (almost!) wouldn't mind if that page was outright deleted given I have no ego over the written material there. However I believe it needs to continue existing because as the page history of Peanuts demonstrated, there has been a history of editors who are interested in covering Peanuts animated specials in great detail, rather than the comic strip proper. are also entire books written about the animated history of Peanuts, so it is a notable topic! It was my hope that this history of editors would take over the newly dedicated animated specials page, while I work on the main page, but alas few people has taken interest so far.

To conclude. I guess from my perspective, what you're telling me is: "Yo, that page you factored out a while? No one is maintaining it, so uh, I think you should step up" which I must say... okay! :P I'll see what I can do, it wasn't my plan to multi-task between my rewrite effort of the main Peanuts page and maintaining that page but I guess I'm gonna have to now. I'll see what free time I can cease over Christmas. Again, thank you for your comment. Derick1259 (talk) 08:43, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit here [1] changed the number of newspapers from 9 to 7, but there are 8 listed in the article? Theroadislong (talk) 11:56, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Theroadislong: Heya! There are 7 newspapers described, not 8. I have enumerated them in this screenshot for clarification: https://files.catbox.moe/avuurs.png. Are your eyes inadvertently scanning for the number of wikilinks(?) In any case, I appreciate your interest in getting this right; the 9 newspapers that were listed previously were marked as {{cn}}, so I'm correcting it with a cited figure. I am happy for you to look at the source material if you have any more concerns, the footnote makes clear that it's available to borrow on Open Library. I plan to actually rewrite significant amounts of the rest of the history section later this year, a lot of verified material is missing. Thanks! JAYFAX (talk) 13:20, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I need to learn how to count! Theroadislong (talk) 13:24, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am unclear why you did this recent edit at the Peanuts article. Much of what you did went against WP:NOTBROKEN, which indicates "It is almost never helpful to replace [[redirect]] with [[target|redirect]]." You also undid reasonable capitalization fixes ("greatest TV cartoon of all time" is descriptive, not a proper noun being used,; it's capitalized in the tile of the original version of the source because that's title case; the phrase appears nowhere nowhere in either the original or the current version of the source), and changed "an Emmy" to "an Emmys". About the only fix in that mass edit that seems correct is capitalizing First Class.... but really that phrase should have been done away with, as the Snoopy stamps work on any consumer class of mail (although the price was the the right one for shipping a standard First-Class Mail envelope.) The source mentions nothing about First Class. If I didn't have a WP:COI with regard to Peanuts, I would simply undo your edit. As I do, I'm asking that you review the edit carefully and consider undoing all or part of it. --Nat Gertler (talk) 23:26, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@NatGertler: Heya Nat, appreciate your careful review of my edit. I've carefully reasoned through everything (hell, was planning to refute you point-by-point) but actually you're right actually. I especially got WP:NOTBROKEN backwards in my head. Will revert, and take a few actions on a few things - like, it's come to light that that TV Guide thing is just a listicle and not an actual formal honour, and the bit on the first class. Thanks JAYFAX (talk) 00:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi my fellow music-loving editor! You were such a valuable contributor to my B-class and FA nominations of Bluey (2018 TV series) and I was wondering if you might be able to provide some comments for my current FA nomination? It's based on another Australian children's project, the musical group Hi-5. I would appreciate even just a few comments. Thanks for your time! SatDis (talk) 00:00, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of When Marnie Was There (novel) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! DigitalIceAge (talk) 08:55, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	For your work on When Marnie was There. From the basic stub I created in 2018, you've turned it into an absolutely fantastic article containing so much background and context for understanding the work. Amazing! MarchOfTheGreyhounds (talk) 13:31, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MarchOfTheGreyhounds: My pleasure! I've enjoyed researching and discovering what I did about Marnie throughout 2021, and I hope to continue and GA status (or even better). Thank you for what I recall being an incredibly accurate and easy to work with stub. JAYFAX (talk) 21:31, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! I currently have Hannah Montana up as a Featured Article Candidate. If you are able to, I would appreciate your comments on the nomination, and thought you might be interested in the topic. It was excellent having your feedback on my previous two Featured Articles - Hi-5 (Australian group) and Bluey (2018 TV series). I always appreciate any of your feedback, but I understand if you are unable to. Thank you! SatDis (talk) 06:39, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article When Marnie Was There (novel) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LEvalyn -- LEvalyn (talk) 20:00, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article When Marnie Was There (novel) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:When Marnie Was There (novel) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of LEvalyn -- LEvalyn (talk) 16:41, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You do not need to be an administrator to place a speedy delete template. I have reverted the page to your tagged version. Jay (talk) 06:31, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jay: Oh, thank you. JAYFAX (talk) 09:36, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On 12 March 2022, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article When Marnie Was There (novel), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Joan G. Robinson felt that through writing the novel When Marnie Was There, she "faced the truth and found understanding" about her emotionally distant relationship with her mother? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/When Marnie Was There (novel) 2. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, When Marnie Was There (novel)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pabsoluterince (talk) 22:36, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pabsoluterince: received it from David Firth over email, by asking him. His email is on https://fat-pie.com/ (at "contact"). If you're on the VRTS team, you should be able to see the full chain of email — the release of copyright, the attachment, the standard statement, and the email matching the one on his website. Hope this explains. JAYFAX (talk) 08:50, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that explains completely. No I not on VRTS. Not to suggest you did anything wrong or anything but I was just wondering if there was any COI, but I don't think there is! Thanks, Pabsoluterince (talk) 11:08, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. As we have previously collaborated on article nominations, I would like to ask if you are able to leave any comments here at my FA nomination for High School Musical: The Musical: The Series. Any small amount of comments would be appreciated, but I completely understand if you are too busy or uninterested. Thanks in advance. SatDis (talk) 06:35, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]