User talk:Jerem43/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

KFC Vandalism

Hi, you might remember me from vandal fighting on articles such as Burger Kind. If you can, please add KFC to your watchlist as the level of vandalism has been increasing of late. Thewinchester ^(talk) 13:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Sure Thing...

Hi Jeremy,

looks like the Pizza Hut article is being heavily targeted for vandalism as well. IceManReturns keeps changing little tidbits in that article. Can you keep an eye on it or even tag the article as being protected? I already mentioned this to [1] as well.

Thanks, Toni S. 16:34, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

KFC

Hey, thanks for noticing! I ran across it (hrmm, I forget how I came upon it) and saw the mess the references were in, so I figured "Hey, I have nothing else to do this morning", lol. Making messy references all pretty and spiffy is one of my specialties, so I was happy to do it! Thanks for the kind words! Ariel♥Gold 17:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

WP Food

Jelly Merger

I dunno, honestly I was not in favor of this merger because there is a major difference between pectin set items and gelatin set items. Pectin is of fruit origin and gelatin is of pork or beef origin. I suppose the Jelly article is a good start, but it needs much more information on history, and an in-depth extension on cultural significance in different regions of the world, as well more referencing is needed for what is currently on there. So I am apt to keep it at Start for now. If I have time tomorrow I will look at it again and give some suggestions. I am getting ready for a culinary competition in Orlando, Florida for July20-24th, so I am going to be really busy, so please do not get offended if I do not get to it right away. Just as a note, an A article requires submission to a certain page, much in the same manner the Good Article and Featured Article status do. goto WP:GA and it will give you the criteria to bring an article up to that level, then take a look at French cuisine, Butter, and even the Food article to see some examples. The first being a GA, the second being a FA and the third a B level. I hope that helps you a bit for now. (These articles take quite a bit of work to get them to these levels)--Christopher Tanner, CCC 01:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I only glanced at it briefly, like I said extremely busy. If that is the case then, I think I would be fine with the way it is, but as stated as per wikipedia guidelines some of the relevant information needs to be expanded upon.--Christopher Tanner, CCC 01:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I'll add a suggestion real quick after glancing at the Fruit Preserves article then I have to get back to work. Try to avoid having single sentence paragraphs, the intro needs to be much broader and needs to give a summary of the whole article in 1-3 paragraphs, depending on the length of the article itself.--Christopher Tanner, CCC 01:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Did you mean Cook stove and Cooker?

The problem with a merge is that Stove also refers to a heating stove, not just a cooking stove. That is probably why there is a disambiguation at the top of the page to note the page Cooker.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 20:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah ya know what, I think you ment Cook stove, not stove. Yes that and Cooker should be merged, with a redirect from one to the other. Still need to do the merge tag first and have a discussion on the talk pages.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 20:46, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we need a disambiguation page for Cook stove and industrial stove? - Jeremy (Jerem43 21:39, 25 September 2007 (UTC))

Well I think the title Cooker needs to be merged into Cook Stove, while Stove should have the culinary stove information removed and a separate article as you stated be renamed Industrial stove with a disambiguation as they have two completely different histories and uses. The problem is that is "Heating stove" included under "Industrial stove" and that is perhaps what part of the debate should be.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 02:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use

Thanks Jeremy, it is starting to drive me nuts as I can tell from other people's pages with their pics as well who actually tag their pics properly and keep getting these messages--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 00:24, 27 October 2007 (UTC).

Oven merge

I'm going to let this one go for now, when it cools off a bit I am going to make the Oven article into a larger summary article which incorporates the other information, then I will do a merge proposal as there is no need to have all of these article as separate stubs which I know you agree on. I have to take a look at Stove again and I'll get back to you. How about that Chef article, I think after I am done with Japanese cuisine that will be my next project. I abandoned it for awhile as I had someone who wanted to edit war months ago. Certain topics get people riled up for no reason.

What company do you work for in the QSR industry?--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 22:32, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Take a wild stab. - Jeremy {22:33, 14 November 2007 (UTC)}

Oh geee, ummmmm Spike's, or maybe UBurger? lol--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 22:34, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Hooters, I look great in a tank and orange. - Jeremy (22:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC))

ANI thread

Hi, thank you for your concern with Korean-related articles such as Korean cuisine. I agree with you that some editors involved in the latest nationalistic battle should be blocked. However, my perspective might be a little different. I'd like to share my perspective with you so that you might understand about what's going on at a deeper level. Korean cuisine is simply a proxy battleground in the latest nationalistic clash involving editors who strongly identify with either C, K, or J. These editors aren't the slightest bit interested in this 'pedia project. They are here to right the wrongs of history and they don't give a hoot who or what gets in their way. This all started more than 3 years ago. The same group of editors (including some that have been evading indef. blocks) have torn their way through many many articles battling each other. You have just met a few of them. They are making a mockery of the Korean-related content at Wikipedia. However, they have been going at it steadily for three years and many of the uninvolved editors have become fatigued and dispirited and quit. These bad apples go from article to article and taking each one hostage as they go. They reduce it to rubble, scare away all the good editors, and move on to destroy the next article. They do this in the name of the honor of X (insert China, Korea, or Japan). They laugh at any and all wikipedia policies. I suspect that some of these characters were indef. blocked ages ago but have continuously returned (block evaders). There are even a few rogue administrators who have done despicable things and have never been reprimanded for their own nationalistic C-K-J bias, but that's another story that is a bit more complex. What perplexes me the most is that, in their zeal for 'righting the wrongs' of history, they show an extreme lack of respect for the ancestors of Goguryeo and other historic peoples of Korea. So much so that this group of editors and their disruption were profiled in an Salon.com article about wikipedia. They have created an environment that is utterly poisoned by bad faith.

In an ANI thread in October, Jimbo and another editor discussed patterned disruption and disruptors of Wikipedia articles. They weren't discussing this gang of bad apples, but they were talking about the need to get tough with exactly the kind of disruptions that we see in Korean-related articles. One editor (not Jimbo) talked about what happened at an online game outside of wikipedia. It seems that the administrators of the game decided to permanently block a large group of users who were continuously disrupting the online game. In one swath a whole bunch of bad apples were expunged. I think that this is a good idea for some of this group of editors (and several more that you haven't had the pleasure to meet yet).

Rather than indef. blocking Goodfriend100, I suggest that the editor not be allowed to edit any articles related to East Asia. The editor may be able to contribute positively if the editor is restricted to doing his GA-related work. Also, please take a look at Badagni's (sp) contributions. I realized you are annoyed with him, and this editor may be a little rough around the edges, but Badagni (sp sorry) is a top-rate Wikipedian. Phlegmswicke of Numbtardia (talk) 15:22, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Convenience food

You new lead look much much better than the POV one there right now. I say it looks like a no brainer, I'm sure the lead was written by one of the many people who use their POV to argue against "your cuisine" specialty, oh I'm too funny.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 02:11, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Glad you liked the article, it is an adaptation of a term paper I wrote.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 09:12, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Foodservice

Hey Jeremy, seeing as you and I are the only two active participants in this project, is it really worth keeping it separated from WikiProject Food and Drink? I wanted to get your opinion on the subject before I posted anything there for a remerger of the projects. The founder of the project hasn't edited since early August, two of the other editors haven't posted since July and the other one doesn't post on food service topics from what I can see on their contributions list. So it is just you and I, let me knw what you think.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 20:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Glad you agree, if we keep with this side-projects we are going to end up with WikiProject Chef, WikiProject Cuisine, WikiProject Fast Food, WikiProject Burger King (which you might like j/k), a few of these "sister projects" are pretty non-active and even with my updating their pages they haven't been invigorated as much as Food and Drink was when I first got there. On another note, thanks for going in an changing the edit on the Chef article, I needed a third party to come in and do it to avoid the three-revert rule.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC 01:55, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

ANI

I wish to state in the most civil manner possible that I consider your request for multiple users to be permanently blocked to be rather suspect, unreasonable, unrealistic and not in the best interest of wikipedia. You are proposing that certain editors who have made many decent edits be blocked forever, because of a petty dispute that could be solved with mediation and compromise. By all means request vandalism only accts to be perm blocked, even I, who have had many issues with most of the users who wish to be blocked, would not see the logic in blocking them. I am very curious as to who is pulling your strings, or pushing you in this direction. Sennen goroshi (talk) 17:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

That would be Me, Myself and I. This whole issue is a disgusting display of incivility that goes with out saying. I took a look at the issue and was nauseated. If you think I am a sock puppet or too stupid to formulate my own opinion then you really need to learn a thing or two about me.

Jeremy (18:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC))

Request for arbitration

A request for arbitration has been placed at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Korean cuisine. The arbitration involves not only the issues with Korean cuisine but the issues with editing the article South Korea and the civility of multiple editors.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 07:33, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration

I think you made a mistake in your last revision and deleted a statement by Akhilleus... Can you fix it? [2]

futurebird 21:52, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

As I stated in the ANI report, if I was wrong about you, then of course I apologise. I didn't actually think you were a sock-puppet (the pulling strings comment, although perhaps a little stupid, given the sockpuppet terminology used in wikipedia, was not intended to imply that you were a sockpuppet), I did however have a feeling that there might be something going on behind the scenes. If your request had been for the more serious offenders to be given temp blocks, then although I would not have wished to be blocked, I don't think I would have been annoyed/suprised/offended by your request. Maybe you and I are just a little different when it comes to our viewpoint on the severity of wikipedia punishments, I always thought mediation followed by more mediation is the best solution, whereas others seem to approve of removing the editors who causes problems. Anyway, lets wait and see what happens.Sennen goroshi (talk) 13:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey

I appreciate you chiming in on the discussion, give me an e-mail at tanner-christopher@hotmail.com I wanted to talk to you about a few things that I'd rather not post on Wikipedia.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 20:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Nope, removed all the information that I took from primary sources ya freak lol. The original paper was 25 pages, so much of the paper is missing, sadly because it could probably add to the intelligence of some human beings.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 09:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey 2

I'm not leaving until Monday though, give me an e-mail as I'll be around during the weekend if you want to hang out.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 20:19, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

KFC Vandalism

KFC

WP Food

June 2007

July 2007

August 2007

September 2007

November 2007

December 2007