Open main menu

Wikiquote β

User talk:Jni

Leave comments below, new ones at the bottom of the page. I refactor this page if I feel like it and will archive old contents occasionally. Any vandalism and trolling will be deleted immediately.

For continuity of conversation, I will most of the time respond on this page. If you are here to discuss a specific article, put your comments on the article talk page. Leave me a note here if you want to make sure I notice your edit.

Remember to sign your comments. Please add new comment threads in a new section (Post at your own risk!).

Archives: 0 1 2

im sorry i was stupid before... i love you

how did you get so cool - ya mums a man

Hi thank you for your notice. I blocked a vandal. Revertin' is easier with sysop functions, so please feel free to be back to your own work ;-) Cheers, let's keep our project up! --Aphaia 17:12, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I was the other person reverting, BTW. Cheers for blocking him. (Didn't realise this place had separate accounts from Wikipedia, though thinking about it I'm not at all sure why I'd think they'd share an account database...) Andrew Walkingshaw 17:18, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you Andrew, but your misunderstand, If I may call it, is not so rare, I suppose ... it is a bit weird we have to have separate accounts, though we share one DB server. ;-P And thank you again for Jni, specially for your quick reports on English Wikipedia and other places. Please take this flower as token of my appreciation: WikiThanks.png
I am happy to work here with you two ! ;-) Thank you.

--Aphaia 03:35, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Hi Jni, would you like to request for adminship here? --Aphaia 21:59, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Eventually yes, but I currently feel I haven't participated enough to the day to day activities of this community. People would likely end up opposing me bacause of that. I have lots of experience warding off vandals from English Wikipedia, but Wikiquote still has areas I'm not familiar with. My intention is to increase my contribution here and in some other Wikiquotes and help with the multilingual coordination. I won't oppose if someone nominates me for adminship after a month or so, until then I guess I'll just bug you or some other admin when need arises. jni 06:25, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I see. Thank you for your consideration. --Aphaia 07:58, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Jni, I really appreciate your recent work on Wikiquote infrastructure. We can really use the help. I'd be happy to support your nomination for adminship when you're ready. I doubt there would be any opposition; most Wikiquotians still seem to be comfortable letting a very small number of folks make sysop-like decisions without input. (I'm hoping we can change this; I hate contributing to the Cabal mythology. ☺) — Jeff Q (talk) 08:41, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind words. In en-wp, the drafting of policies, VfD and request for adminship processes have recently been somewhat politicized and one typically sees all kinds of mud slinging, old rivalries and just plain trolling there. To me, Wikiquote seems to have a more relaxed atmosphere to work, lets eschew the cabal myth and hope it stays that way for as long as possible! jni 09:42, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Protection before deletion?Edit

Hello Jeff, just a quick unimportant question: why do you consistently protect a page before deleting it, for example Yasunari Kawabata today? I understand the need to protect the pages that cannot be deleted because of the block-compression bug, but I don't see any need to protect it for few seconds before deletion. Such protection does not even protect against re-creation, as far as I know. Is there some subtlety I'm missing? jni 07:58, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'll give you first a simple and then a thoughtful answer. The simple reason is that I do it because that's what I read in Wikipedia:Deletion process, which offered no explanation of why this is done. (It rather illogically put this instruction under Block revision deletion errors, as if sysops knew beforehand which deletions were going to fail. If we're supposed to, I haven't seen an explanation of how.) But as I started doing deletions, I believe I saw some likely reasons. One could protect the page after a deletion failed, but it's quite easy to forget a step that only occurs occasionally, whereas it's easy to remember a step that always occurs. (I've spent decades of my life observing the use of and contributing to the creation of process automation, and I've found that this is a common issue in any well-defined but manual process.) Second, I don't know all the details of how wiki software operates (as if anybody could, even the developers), but any complex process that involves resource locks is rife with potential for unexpected failures and bugs. Protecting the page may just be an extra measure of problem prevention. Since the protection step only takes a few seconds, I highly recommend training oneself to follow it in all cases. I haven't bothered to bring it up with the other sysops, though, because we all have enough on our plates, and I think that I've been making too many suggestions already, which is especially nervy as I'm the most junior wikian in the crew. ☺ — Jeff Q (talk) 08:43, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The section "Block revision deletion errors" in that page is intended to be followed only when the delete-button reports the bug exists with the page in question. I guess the wording and placement of that section could be confusing to someone who has not processed deletions before the warning message about the bug was coded. I hope the software gets updated soon so everyone can forget about that extra complexity. About possible race-conditions: since none of en-wp's 400+ admins does the extra protection, it could be that it is you who discovers a new bug related to timing of protection and deletion operations... Hope you bear with me and my odd questions while I adjust to Wikiquote way of doing things. Cheers, jni 10:00, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether to be amused or worried that I'm doing something unique. ☺ I certainly haven't discovered any bugs yet. Do you know of any reasons I shouldn't be doing this (other than perhaps a slight waste of time)?

From what you say about the WP deletion process page, it sounds like it's a great example of one of my pet peeves in my professional field — instructions written for those who already know most of what they're doing, rather than clear, concise instructions intended to show a reasonably intelligent person what to do. I offer two examples of what I'm trying to accomplish in bringing pages over from Wikipedia and Meta — Help:Transwiki and Wikiquote:Proposed Votes for deletion. Both give a step-by-step process of how to accomplish tasks, without getting bogged down in details (which can be on separate reference pages). Both try not to use terminology that Wikiquotians who happen to find their way there aren't likely to know, and try to provide links to any term that may be unfamiliar or confusing — whether it be defined on WQ, WP, Meta, or even Wiktionary. (There's still work to be done, and I'm hoping people will either correct my omissions or at least point out things I've forgotten so I or someone else can fix them.)

As far as adjusting to "Wikiquote ways", I think we're inventing many of them as we speak, so your insight and assistance is quite valuable already. I'll try not to bite your head off like I did poor Eustace Tilley, who has been trying to catch WQ up to Wikipedia practices. — Jeff Q (talk) 10:34, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

No, there isn't any really compelling reason, other than redundancy and unnecessary entries to Special:log/protect, to not protect the pages you are deleting. I just happened to spot that curious practice when viewing RC (my main navigational tool nowadays!). I'll try to help you and others with the infrastructure and processes, although I'm not the best person to write waterproof instructions; I have already internalized so much arcane MediaWiki details and WP everyday sociology that I cannot look through the eyes of a newbie any more. There are several gray areas in WP where the policy and instruction pages differ from what is actually done, I'll chime in if I see Wikiquotians adopting things by rote. jni 12:11, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Sorry for late, and thanks thousand times! And now, I truly say to you, would you like now to request for adminship here? If I recall correctly, you are one of most involved and dealing with WoW vandalism on this project. I know you are skillful in many things, I think if you get sysopship here, it would be very helpful not only to fight against him. --Aphaia 08:16, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick responce and acceptance. Please see WQ:RFA#Jni. I convince you will be a good sysop also here. Cheers! --Aphaia 09:14, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations! You are a now an administrator here at Wikiquote. ~ Kalki 01:25, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Also congrats from me. I replied you on my talk ;-) --Aphaia 16:29, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations; VfD tagEdit

Congratulations on becoming an en:Wikiquote sysop! I'm glad you've joined the team, especially as you were already stringing for us anyway. ☺

I noticed in your recent VfD nominations that you've been adding some div-blocked text and explicit category tags to mark the VfDs. Might I recommend the use of the {{vfd}} tag, which produces the same text and categorization, but doesn't obscure the article content as much, is easier to remove later, and permits a more useful deletion log entry after "content:"? — Jeff Q (talk) 04:10, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I used {{subst:vfd}} instead of {{vfd}}, as is the Wikipedia custom. I can switch to use the latter, no problem. In WP we use the subst form just because it is harder to remove, at least for vandals and newbies who feel they can remove the tag willy-nilly. jni 07:06, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Again he came ;-X And thank for your recovering very much! --Aphaia 12:12, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

You'r welcome! BTW does the quiet rollback work from diffpages also? Also, I tried to use &bot=1 with this vandal today but got "Rollback failed" message about potential session hijacking (probably because I had left my browser open for the night) even after several page reloads. It worked after I removed the bot flag. Have you seen this before? jni 12:26, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Meade skeltonEdit

I was curious about your comment in the VfD for Meade skelton:

I wonder who keeps creating this, with bad title and all.

Has this article shown up here before? Or has it popped up in other wikis? I don't recall running into it before. — Jeff Q (talk) 15:20, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

I have seen "Meade skelton" before, not counting the one deleted incarnation in its page history, except I can't remember right now where that was. Maybe in Meta or some other totally inappropriate place for it. At the time I wrote that comment, I searched this from WP and couldn't find it there, not even a deleted revision. However, today they have w:Meade Skelton and w:Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Meade Skelton. Looks like a tirade of on-going nonsense. jni 06:24, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

George Bernard ShawEdit

Since you seem to be on top of the double-redirect/article/talk-page problems that the AP vandal caused, could you look at George Bernard Shaw and its talk page? My attempts to restore these two pages got so scrambled that I managed to restore the pages while losing the page histories. I freely admit that I'm sufficiently intimidated by this new aspect of his attacks that I'm not going to try to fix them in the future unless I can see a simple mechanism to do so. He's won his battle against this sysop at least. — Jeff Q (talk) 20:44, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

I can't see anything wrong with the GBS and its talk page, the history of both is there and only things in deleted revisions table are the redirects you (unnecessarily) deleted. I have heard rumors of bugs that can cause the history be lost, but that doesn't seem to be case here. It should be impossible to "rip" revisions apart from history and re-merge them into a history of a different page, losing part of the history in process. And reviewing your actions from RC, I don't think you broke anything in the process. (As you should know, doing a history merge is the second sysop operation that cannot be undone, except by developers, but you didn't screw up that badly ;-) ) I don't think this was very serious attack, I have seen much worse in WP. A procedure for next time: 1) block infinitely 2) click the undo links in RC for every vandal move 3) delete the redirect your undo action caused, that is the target of the original vandal-move. For multiple vandal-moves in a row, you need to follow the chain of moves to the original article. You only need to delete a redirect vandal created in that case he (or someone else) saved a new revision atop of the redirect. Hope this helps, time for me to go to bed now. jni 21:03, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
My problem with the page histories was that they are apparently cached like ordinary pages, which I hadn't realized. When you told me they were fine, I went back and forced several reloads before I got a good one. After getting tangled up in redirects of redirects, I was inclined to believe I'd screwed up. I really hate this guy. — Jeff Q (talk) 02:45, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Belated move protectionEdit

I've protected your user and user talk pages against moves. Aphaia initiated this practice as a result of the persistent (and still active, as you know) efforts of one or more vandals to disrupt Wikiquote administration. Sorry for the delay in doing this for you. — Jeff Q (talk) 06:51, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I think that my pages have been moved only about five times so far, I would have protected them myself had the moving vandalism we have reached a more severe level. jni 07:27, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)


Thanks for the welcome.

Can you please delete Talk:Freddie Mercury. It's the only remaining "bad edit" from the imposter still in my contribs, and it's not relevant as a Talk page by itself. -- Netoholic 17:48, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • I deleted it. It seems to me a proper speedy candidate; enthusiasm from a fan and not relevant to the article. --Aphaia 18:48, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)


He is an Ass pus vandal, perhaps you've known it already ... --Aphaia 11:34, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Or could have been a poor imitation of the Ass pus vandal, just like the original Ass Pusser is just a poor copy-cat of Willy on the Wheels. Willy was considerable faster in his vandalism spree. jni 06:05, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My contributionEdit

'It doesn't matter who we are, but it does what we do. And that includes human beings'

So it doesn't matter who wrote this, what does matter if it could influence some one to do better.

Thank you for providing this pool of information. I also beleive that your website provides a smart way of presenting the info, allowing users to suggest for possible changes. Making it more appealing for every one of us.

My sincere appreciation for you and for all the people for their time in providing such valuable suggestions.

Regards, Chandra

Thank you for your kind words. Please note that this is not just my website, anyone can join to contribute and eventually be elected into a position of trust, like our present administrators. Although not mandatory, I suggest you create an account if you want to join us. Oh, and quotes by anonymous can be entered to Anonymous (as long as they are not vanity or invented by yourself). jni June 27, 2005 06:25 (UTC)

Juergen HeineEdit

I note that you have replaced the VfD tag on Juergen Heine. It was up for VfD and the unanimous vote was for deletion. Alan Liefting 10:27, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

You appear to be confused. I removed the speedy deletion tag, not the VfD tag. Speedy deletions are entirely different route to deletion than VfD, only to be used in small number of well specified cases. The article in question is obviously not a candidate for speedy deletion. Please note that voting for this ends in August 6th, after nearly one and half weeks from now. Deleting the article today would not be appropriate under current policies. BTW, you haven't even cast a vote of your own yet! jni 12:45, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

0waldo says =Edit

Hello mr. peer! we still need a few more yet make some more calls! 0waldo 16:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC) Come on down, don't be shy, listen to mr. self promoter cuz he's quite a guy :) 0waldo 16:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


Just wanted to say thanks for voting on my RfA! Essjay TalkContact 12:54, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I'll look forward working with you! BTW, if I am not entirely mistaken, you are currently the only WQ sysop that is also admin in Meta (at least until Aphaia returns from her wikibreak). Would you mind handling the occasional Meta liaison duties, mostly the need to edit the system wide spam blacklist if Wikiquote encounters a particularly bad spammer? I haven't seen any serious vandalism for a while, but last time we had one it took a while to retrieve a competent Meta-admin from w:WP:AN/I. Cordially, jni 16:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

No problem, that's what I'm here for! :-) Essjay TalkContact 16:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Walter MuncasterEdit

Ah! Thank you for adding the Category:Protected deleted pages I wasn't quite sure how to prevent that page from being recreated over and over, apart from repeatedly deleting it. Thanks for the help. ~ UDScott 21:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I think it is a miracle we have survived this far without any serious incident of re-creation vandalism. The Wikipedia solution I implemented should be sufficient for this twerp, other admins can device other schemes if this doesn't work. jni 16:45, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey JNI: I thought that wikipedia did not allow name calling: you just called me a twerp - can I call you a name now too? 0waldo 02:02, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

My RfAEdit

Hi Jni, thank you for supporting my RfA! I look forward to working with you and the rest of the sysops here. -- Robert 00:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

A copyright concernEdit

I recently added some quotations by Ludwig von Mises on socialism [1]. However, my source seems to be rather demanding on copyright issues, stating All rights reserved, including the right of reproduction in whole or in part in any form. Brief quotations may be included in a review, and all inquiries should be addressed to Liberty Fund. [2]. Does it mean that it would be better not to have these quotes on wikiquote page? Anyway, if not done by someone else, you might take the neecssary action (I'm myself not a frequent contributor). --Constanz 09:47, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back!Edit

Hi, Jni, welcome back to Wikiquote ;-) It's nice to see you around there. --Aphaia 13:53, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

It was a pleasant surprise to see you drop in again yesterday. Every little bit of help is welcome, whenever you feel like it. ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:35, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey thanks! I don't have much ideas how to improve the quote content here but I'll likely pop up to clean some miscellaneous stuff once in a while. Not sure if returning completely from my wiki-retirement or just visiting :) jni (talk) 21:09, 20 November 2012 (UTC)


Thanks for all the recent help, and the recent block. Hopefully, I will soon once again have the tools to more effectively fight against the vandals myself. ~ Kalki·· 15:51, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

I am happy to help. I hope too that you get the tools back, so you don't have to wait for someone else to deal with easily answerable vandal problems. jni (talk) 16:11, 24 January 2014 (UTC)


No matter how many times we delete its userpage, this IP vandal blatantly attempts to recreate it without any valid explanation or iota of remorse. I request that this user be blocked indefinitely, as well as any potential sockpuppets (such as, who vandalized earlier today). WikiLubber (talk) 01:11, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

We don't block IPs indefinitely, but indeed some penalty time should be awarded for this persistent "No"-campaign that has been going on for several weeks at least by now. Will monitor the situation. I did delete your userpage per request, and it can also be salted if persistently re-created by vandals. jni (talk) 13:04, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Much appreciated. WikiLubber (talk) 13:54, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
This vandal is just not going to stop as long as it is unblocked. It will never learn from its mistakes. I request it be blocked for no less than a month. WikiLubber (talk) 14:14, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Month is somewhat long for an IP, as it is not known if it is a static one or shared by multiple people. But you are right, this kind of nuisance editing must stop. jni (talk) 15:35, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
I know for a fact that this is not a shared IP, judging from its same nuisance edits over and over. WikiLubber (talk) 23:14, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
And the vandalism continues. WikiLubber (talk) 17:51, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
And now it vandalizes with a sockpuppet IP: A blatant attempt to evade any possible blocking. I request that it be blocked for the same period you give User:, and that the pages it vandalized be protected from IPs for a long period of time. WikiLubber (talk) 23:51, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
This vandal just will not stop, no matter what we do. I recommend it be blocked for no less than a month, and all pages it vandalized be protected for no less than a year. WikiLubber (talk) 00:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Jni".