User talk:Jadebenn

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to [email protected], so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at [email protected].

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jadebenn. I declined the technical move of two articles that you recently requested. There is a large number of launch complexes and we should probably move all of them to the shorter names, if this is really desirable. Also some templates might need to be updated. In addition, this move would be asserting that the

@EdJohnston: I kept your feedback in-mind, and I think I've come up with a nice compromise between conciseness and precision in my new move request. Feel free to weigh-in if you'd like. - Jadebenn (talk) 04:34, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At least that handles all the launch sites together. But what about Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39? Is the number 39 launch pad supposed to be part of the same series as the Cape Canaveral numbering? EdJohnston (talk) 04:42, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@

46 off the list. - Jadebenn (talk) 04:45, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm sorry to bother you, but it would be really helpful if you could state whether you find the current graph easy to understand or not. This is what we're trying to determine, but we have very little data to go by, as only two people who are not authors of the article showed up to comment. Tercer (talk) 11:07, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:United Launch Alliance space launch vehicles, which you created, has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 05:10, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jadebenn

Thank you for creating Multi-Payload Processing Facility.

Nice work!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 21:30, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jadebenn

Thank you for creating Multi-Payload Processing Facility.

Nice work!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|North8000}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

North8000 (talk) 01:39, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to notify you about a requested move on Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, since you were involved in the first one. Talk:Cape Canaveral Space Force Station#Requested move 30 April 2020 Garuda28 (talk) 03:51, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit War Notice

Your recent editing history at Space Launch System shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. – Moamem (talk) 12:05, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted it because you cited Wikipedia. That's unrelated to the other conflict. Please do not misapply Wikipedia policy. – Jadebenn (talk · contribs · subpages) 12:27, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure if Brightline(Virgin Trains USA) coach is a Venture design, it seems like Siemens mark their coach under Viaggio Comfort brand. Check out their official page: https://www.mobility.siemens.com/global/en/portfolio/rail/rolling-stock/passenger-coaches.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zsm5833 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Zsm5833: Siemens describes Virgin Trains USA as using Siemens Venture trsinsets on this page. – Jadebenn (talk · contribs · subpages) 17:12, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just be clear, you called this split

@RickyCourtney: Apologies if I offended you. I figured that if this was reverted it would've helped spark a more thorough discussion. I wasn't really seeing any reason to not go ahead with the split. Still, I didn't mean to come off as ignoring discussion. – Jadebenn (talk · contribs · subpages) 03:07, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jadebenn! The thread you created at the archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread . The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both talk) 19:00, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply ]

Hi, when I looked at the article

@Seelefant: I'm not sure what's going on there. Maybe it was a deprecated parameter that coincidently had the same parameter name? I'm fairly certain I didn't overwrite any already existing parameters when I made my edit. – Jadebenn (talk · contribs · subpages) 15:03, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, it was used wrong in that article since 2007 or so, with an author interpreting "cpl-year" as the year in which the "cpl" value was noted. -- Seelefant (talk) 19:27, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Seelefant: Ah. Then it sat dormant until I added a parameter which coincidentally had the same name, causing it to show up. That explains it. – Jadebenn (talk · contribs · subpages) 19:45, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jadebenn. It has been over six months since you last edited the

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Lapablo (talk) 12:06, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jadebenn You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove or change other editors' legitimate talk page comments, as you did at :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System

At this edit :

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Space_Launch_System&diff=967572895&oldid=967572433.

Anytime you want to edit other's comments please refer to :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#Editing_others'_comments - Moamem (talk) 02:29, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Moamem: Your edit was in violation of talk page guidelines. That's also not how RfCs work. – Jadebenn (talk · contribs · subpages) 02:37, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you are now in violation of the three-revert rule. from this. I won't template you but... aren't you as well? It isn't obvious vandalism if there's a RfC on the exact change to be made, no? Leijurv (talk) 03:27, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Leijurv: I am? I thought I was on my last revert. Was a different IP also, so I guess I messed up on the edit summary too. I do think that particular edit could be construed as vandalism though - user claimed to remove the material because it was "unsourced." It was emphatically not. Glad McSly got the page semi-protected.

Taking a break from the talk page. I lost my temper when I saw that things were once again disrupted immediately after your excellent comment. I feel like we've been at a standstill because the RfC process has been continually interrupted every time a discussion's gotten going. – Jadebenn (talk · contribs · subpages) 03:40, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

By my count you reverted 4 times from 16:52 UTC July 13 to 19:43 UTC July 13. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Very reasonable to take a break. That comment was almost-not-quite fun, but certainly very time consuming to write.

I actually found this from randomly reading

WP:ANI. The sheer number of deleted revisions in the history of the talk page was horrifying. Pieced some of it together though. Turns out (redacted). Neat; small world. It's quite jarring to scroll through the talk page and see the exact same stuff across many months in time. Hope I was able to add something new. Leijurv (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

@Leijurv: You should probably redact that, but thanks. Frustrating to see (what I consider) repeated blatant disregard of Wikipedia policy and consensus-building just because of a user's personal grudge against me. I probably should just refrain from further participation until the Arbcom investigation finishes. Probably is in my best interest, too. Would rather not get slapped down for incivility or an (unintentional) 3RR vio. Hopefully I didn't just shoot myself in the foot. – Jadebenn (talk · contribs · subpages) 03:56, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I should have let sleeping dogs lie. Sorry. Leijurv (talk) 05:27, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Leijurv: Not your fault, don't blame yourself. I've had to deal with this kind of behavior for a while now. – Jadebenn (talk · contribs · subpages) 05:31, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Deleting my comments on the Space Launch System Talk page by Jadebenn. – Moamem (talk) 03:56, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Moamem (talk) 04:47, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jadebenn

Thank you for creating Siemens Venture.

Nice work. Well described.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Whiteguru}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Whiteguru (talk) 07:21, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]