User talk:JFHJr

Most posts have been archived: Archive 1 (2005–2023) Archive 2 (2023–present)

Happy First Edit Anniversary JFHJr 🎉

Hey @JFHJr. Your wiki edit anniversary was 3 days ago, marking 20 years of dedicated contributions to this Wikimedia project. Your passion for sharing knowledge and your remarkable contributions have not only enriched the project, but also inspired countless others to contribute. With over 17,653 edits, your dedication is an inspiration to the community. Thank you for your amazing contributions. Wishing you all the best for the year ahead :) -❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 14:15, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gnoeee, thank you! Looking forward to all that's in store! JFHJr (㊟) 16:22, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense closure

This closure [1] makes no sense: I am not asking about BLP issues in the (already deleted) draft titled after a person, I'm asking about the associated BLP issues in a differently-titled draft and in an edit to an existing article (as you probably could have figured out by reading what I wrote). I have reverted you. --JBL (talk) 21:18, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that! Thank you for the revert. I misread. Facially, yes, it's eligible for an attack page WP:CSD. The current version appears to be substantially an attack article regarding the same WP:BLPCRIME. JFHJr (㊟) 21:25, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No harm done; thank you! --JBL (talk) 21:55, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And it's all gone now. Along with another copy. I won't be closing this even though it's now deleted, since multiplicity is apparently an issue here. Cheers! JFHJr (㊟) 21:59, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia SPA's

Hi JFHJr, according to WP, about 1 of 3 WP articles are about single persons, that is a substantial number and there is basically nothing wrong with that. Obviously living subjects should be interested in having the article improved or corrected. It should not be a problem if the talk page is used. When the article about Djan Khoe was launched, there was a banner requesting for improvements. So that was what I did. Newcomers make mistakes. Cheers, Djan Khoe Khoe0005 (talk) 20:18, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The closure

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I'm confused as to why you closed the topic on WP:BLPN. Are you not familiar with WP:CONADMIN? I opened that topic because the other party has made several comments on that talk page that indicate they are trying to protect the subject for ideological reasons, which is why I asked for a neutral third party, not a drive-by non-admin closure to try to stifle any discussion whatsoever. I got enough of that on the actual talk page where the other party refused to engage in any meaningful way. Archon785 (talk) 18:53, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BLPN is not subject to CONADMIN. It is *not* an admin forum. Are you familiar with either CONADMIN or BLPN? At any rate, you can undo my closure if you want. But the talkpage is still certainly your forum. JFHJr (㊟) 19:08, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with what you said (even if I disagree), but I did take an issue with the closure. Thank you for agreeing that I can undo it. Archon785 (talk) 19:10, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All my edits are eminently undoable. I will not EW. But please expect similar from other BLPNers. Also, your characterizing my closure as a driveby is the kind of comment you complained about on BLPN as a PA (but wasn't). So please watch the lines you draw. If you're thin skinned and pass out driveby comments, it won't go well once you're actually in CONADMIN land. Cheers. JFHJr (㊟) 19:17, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the advice and will keep it in mind. Archon785 (talk) 19:18, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Maria Caruso

Seems pretty clear I am actively working on this page, and have already made substantial progress. The refs were a mess but they are not "fake" , it's just going to take some time to wade through them and see what is usable. I tired to automate the process but I'll probably have to do them individually.

No point in reverting and speedy tagging the repeatedly. It might belong at AFD though. Beach drifter (talk) 04:21, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The urls you provided are indistinguishable from AI hallucinations. JFHJr (㊟) 04:24, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

God Jul!

Hello JFHJr: Enjoy the holiday season and winter solstice if it's occurring in your area of the world, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:29, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings}} to send this message

Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:29, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, friend! Here's to longer days and good times. Cheers! JFHJr (㊟) 22:15, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]