JPMcGrath

Hi!  Welcome to my talk page.

If I have left a message on another talk page and you want to respond to it, then please respond on that talk page and leave me a notification here using the {{Talkback}} template. Just add {{Talkback|Page name|ts=~~~~~}} to the end of this page. That way, the conversation is kept on a single page. For example:

{{Talkback|User talk:Jimbo Wales|ts=~~~~~}}

If you are not responding to a message I have left elsewhere and you would like me to do something, or help you in any way, or you have a complaint or praise (preferred), then please leave a message here.

Regards,

John McGrath

Aspen Dental

Hello: As you are a user who has edited the Aspen Dental page in the past, I’d like to solicit your input on sections that have been added to the page that lack citation, and potentially violate neutral POV. As a COI user I’d like to avoid making edits to the page myself, and so was hoping you could take a look. Here is the discussion: Talk:Aspen Dental. Thank you. - Amanda aspendental (talk) 19:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Joan Biskupic

I have put her in Category:Washington Post journalists.

I think categorizing journalists by some of their past papers is debatable, but I added her anyway. Maurreen (talk) 07:07, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't have a strong disagreement with that, but I noted several former journalists in Category:Washington Post people, so I tried to be consistent. One solution would be to create separate "current" and "former" categories, but that might be overkill. -- JPMcGrath (talk) 07:33, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I think there is potential for some "former" cats. A few weeks ago, I started a cat for former NYTers.

But later I saw that those are at least discouraged. Maurreen (talk) 19:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I am happy with either. I just want it to be consistent. -- JPMcGrath (talk) 05:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't feel strongly, but do you think it would be worthwhile to start a larger discussion, maybe at Talk:Journalist, to determine which way to be consistent? Maurreen (talk) 06:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I would think that Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Journalism would make more sense, since the issue does not really apply to the Journalism article. But then, the issue does not apply only to journalist categories. For example, Carly Fiorina is in Category:Hewlett-Packard people, Robert Reich is in Category:Harvard University faculty, and Ozzy Osbourne is in Category:Black Sabbath members. So maybe it would make more sense to take up the issue at WT:Categorization of people -- JPMcGrath (talk) 12:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

You are right, the discussion would be most appropriate at WT:Categorization of people. When we do it, we might also address freelancers and the like. Maurreen (talk) 06:29, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I started a discussion here. Maurreen (talk) 09:01, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you! Though in some of the pages you mention my participation is limited (or in the past in one of them). Magidin (talk) 20:13, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I felt it was deserved because of the accumulation of good work across multiple articles. And it's never too late to recognize a job well done. -- JPMcGrath (talk) 22:06, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Request for mediation of Gun laws in the United States (by state)

A request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to Gun laws in the United States (by state) was recently filed. As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. The process of mediation is entirely voluntary and focuses exclusively on the content issues over which there is disagreement. Please review the request page and the guide to mediation requests and then indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you would agree to participate. Discussion relating to the mediation request welcome at the case talk page.

Thank you, AGK 15:05, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Request for mediation rejected

The Request for mediation concerning Gun laws in the United States (by state), to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. An explanation of why it has not been possible to allow this dispute to proceed to mediation is provided at the mediation request page (which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time). Queries on the rejection of this dispute can be directed to the Committee chairperson or e-mailed to the mediation mailing list.

For the Mediation Committee, AGK 00:25, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
(This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.)

Re: Gun laws in the United States (by state)

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Rapier (talk) 23:47, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Warning

Dear JPMcGrath, this message serves as a formal warning regarding your editing and talk page behavior on Gun laws in the United States (by state). As you know, you were reported to WP:ANI with accusations of tendentious editing and content warring. While I don't see much evidence for a high level of tendentious editing, it is clear that there is local consensus and you are editing against it. You are welcome to seek wider community opinion by asking for a third opinion or even a request for comment, among other various methods. The warning I am issuing you is to hopefully prevent a WP:BLOCK of your editing privilege. Please read WP:CONSENSUS and thoughtfully consider your next steps. Sincerely, Basket of Puppies 00:08, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I do not believe that the charge is reasonable, and would like to respond to it. I do not see any mention of this at WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Where should I respond? — JPMcGrath (talk) 19:45, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

ANI threads are automatically archived after 24 hours of inactivity, but may be restored for further discussion. So, I've un-archived the thread, back to where it was at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive820#Tendentious editing by JPMcGrath on Gun laws in the United States (by state). Feel free to respond there. If no one says anything for 24 hours it will be archived again. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 20:11, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for Edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

—slakr^\ talk / 17:50, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

JPMcGrath (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I do not think this is appropriate. I was reverting the article to the status quo before Mudwater instigated an edit war. Immediately following an RfC that showed no consensus to remove maps from Gun laws in the United States (by state), Mudwater removed the maps and continally did so when reverted. I chose not to edit war and tried to discuss it with him. After he stopped replying completely, I re-added the maps. This led to a claim of tendentious editing at ANI, which was dismissed. I again returned the article to the status quo ante and warned Mudwater that I would report his edit warring. In response, this claim was made against me.

Decline reason:

The history of the article makes it quite clear that you were edit warring. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 19:17, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

Hello, JPMcGrath! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 20:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

US National Archives collaboration

United States National Archives WikiProject

Would you like to help improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to the National Archives and its incredible collection? This summer, the National Archives—which houses some of America's most important historical documents—is hosting me as its Wikipedian in Residence, and I have created WP:NARA to launch these efforts. There are all sorts of tasks available for any type of editor, whether you're a writer, organizer, gnome, coder, or image guru. The National Archives is making its resources available to Wikipedia, so help us forge this important relationship! Please sign up and introduce yourself. Dominic·t 15:22, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

New AfD of article you have worked on

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States journalism scandals (3rd nomination). BigJim707 (talk) 14:47, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 23:47, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 03:15, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

MOTD Needs You!

Hi there, JPMcGrath! Thought you might be interested in Motto of the Day, a collaborative (and totally voluntary) effort by a group of Wikipedians to create original, inspirational mottoes. Have a good motto idea? Share it here, comment on some of the mottoes there or just pass this message onto your friends.

MOTD Needs Your Help!

Delivered By Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 06:51, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

via AWB

File:George Pepper, baseball with pages.jpg missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

• File:George Pepper, baseball with pages.jpg

is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.

If the information is not provided, the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Theo's Little Bot (error?) 08:20, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:U.S. Congress external link templates

Category:U.S. Congress external link templates, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. 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. Ricky81682 (talk) 00:57, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Congress#Capitals

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Congress#Capitals. —GoldRingChip 12:51, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:2009 Brady Campaign State Scorecard

Template:2009 Brady Campaign State Scorecard has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 20:51, 31 October 2022 (UTC)