Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Thanks for uploading Image:HabanaHilton.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to Main Study. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates about 20 minutes. I chose you as a English Wikipedia user who made edits recently through the RecentChange page. Refer to the first page in the online survey form for more information on the study and me.cooldenny (talk) 02:24, 24 April 2011 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. For more information, see the FAQ or drop a line at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 12 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
James,
You revised the article on the 2011 film, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, and placed the following sentence in the "Sequel" section: "On Mar. 28, 2012, MGM stated that they budget the two sequels due a loss of 10% from the first film."
It is unclear what you intended to say with this sentence. I recommend revision. I would revise it for clarity myself, but I literally don't know what it says. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.73.62.249 (talk) 03:47, 31 March 2012 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, Jamesluckard.
You are invited to join WikiProject Hotels, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of hotels, motels and lodging-related topics.
Decaying is a POV word to use, especially without sources. Likewise describing the old hotel as a resort without sources is inappropriate. This also introduced 1919 as the year the old hotel was built, again without sources. So we have material added which is not sourced and rather subjective. Vegaswikian (talk) 23:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Your addition to Taj Boston has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. http://corporate.ritzcarlton.com/en/About/OurHistory.htmOlYeller21Talktome19:37, 12 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Academy Museum of Motion Pictures, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page May Company (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mihran Mesrobian may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
*[[The St. Regis Washington, D.C.|The Carlton Hotel]] (now [[The St. Regis Washington, D.C.]], 1926
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hotel National, Moscow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Manege Square (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hôtel Le Bristol Paris, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lanvin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Caribe Hilton Hotel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page San Juan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hotel Alex Johnson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rapid City (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grosvenor House Hotel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Park Lane (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mayflower Hotel may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
After [[World War II] it was sold to [[Hilton Hotels]]. Hilton, in turn, sold the hotel in 1956 to Hotel
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Knickerbocker Hotel (New York), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Charles Platt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Renaissance Cleveland Hotel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CIO (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Richmond Centre (mall), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hudson's Bay (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi, only alteration I made was to change was to were, if you want to use was then it should read "Much of the machinery was removed, including one of the two engine rooms, three of the four propellers, and all of the boilers. The other edit was a finger error on my ipad, Rollback is a one click action, which you will notice I corrected.--palmiped | Talk 19:04, 26 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited AC Hotel Bella Sky Copenhagen, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marriott. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 9 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
In the revert, you moved Park Central Hotel San Francisco back to Westin San Francisco Market Street. Your edit summary reads: Jamesluckard moved page Park Central Hotel San Francisco to The Westin San Francisco Market Street: name change has been cancalled, hotel will remain a Westin. Every source I have seen, including the Westin San Francisco website (http://westinsf.com/ ... which now forwards to the Park Central website) confirms the name/brand change. I am curious about the source you have which states that the name change has been cancelled. Can you please provide it? Thank you. SueDonem (talk) 04:05, 23 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for the reply, Jamesluckard. I read through the thread and I just don't see anything which would indicate that the name of the hotel hasn't changed to Park Central Hotel San Francisco. Even the vague comment from the alleged Starwood representative doesn't come close to insinuating that. "They're back in the fold." I would maybe take that to mean that despite changing the name of the hotel, Park Central Hotel will continue to honor the SPG program... but even that is stretch. However, even the transition website states that the "Corporate Preferred negotiated Rates will continue to be honored." Anyhow, it's now January 23rd... well almost in San Francisco. Let's wait and see if the hotel issues an official press release about the name change or not. Obviously, we need to get this right. SueDonem (talk) 07:15, 23 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
The Starwood rep on that thread has been posting for a couple of years, and is definitely legit. He has never been wrong with news like this, because he waits till it's officially announced. Also, the biggest news to me is the deletion of the wording from the bottom of the official page at the starwoodhotels.com website. I'm sure this was just a negotiating ploy by the owners. This actually happens more frequently than you'd expect. I should probably have waited tomove the page, in retrospect, until the actual name change, but I was swayed by the creation of a new website with the new Park Central name. My mistake. The same thing happened two years ago with the InterContinental Berlin. they went as far as removing the name from the building and aligning themselves with a small German chain for a couple of weeks, before returning to InterContinental as before and raising the old sign again. Anyway, the starwoodhotels.com page:
I just called the hotel. Looks like they went through with the name change after all. Must be lots of drama behind the scenes. I moved the page again and corrected the info.
Jamesluckard (talk) 21:56, 23 January 2015 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Westin Hotels & Resorts, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Portland. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Muehlebach Hotel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Carleton Coon. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 9 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion
Please note that our article about the Four Seasons Hotel Toronto is meant to be about the hotel as an institution, and not necessarily about the building that it formerly occupied — if the hotel moves from one building to another, then the article remains about the hotel, and follows it to the new building. If you want to create an article about The New Residences of Yorkville Plaza, then it needs to be a new article — it does not get to simply hijack the existing article about the hotel, causing the hotel to entirely disappear from Wikipedia at all. It's a new topic that gets a new article, and not a simple replacement of another article about a different thing. Bearcat (talk) 18:22, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply
Bearcat, I think you've misunderstood the work I did. There is already an existing page for the hotel as an institution in its new structure. It is located at Four Seasons Hotel and Residences Toronto. The page at Four Seasons Hotel Toronto was originally for the older structure which has been converted to condos. However someone revised it a while back to basically duplicate all the information on the page for the institution. As a result, there were two almost identical pages. When I revised the Four Seasons Hotel Toronto page to The New Residences of Yorkville Plaza I was making the page for the structure accurately reflect its new status. For example, look at the Wiki List of Tallest Structures in Toronto at the bottom of both pages, the link for the current Four Seasons Hotel in the Over 150 Meters section goes to the page for that structure and institution. However there is another link for the older, shorter structure in the Under 150 meters section. It would most usefully be under the structure's current name. Jamesluckard (talk) 23:31, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply
In addition, I should add that I wrote a fair share of the content on both pages and have no interest in seeing them vandalized. However it is thoroughly confusing to have two pages with different names both devoted to the institution. There should be one for each structure, with information on the institution on the page of whichever structure the institution currently occupies. That was how I revised it on Friday. Jamesluckard (talk) 23:36, 22 August 2015 (UTC)Reply
Even if that's the case, then the appropriate solution is still to start a new article about the Yorkville condo project, because the title Four Seasons Hotel Toronto is still more correctly a redirect to the other article about the hotel rather than a redirect to an article about the condos. And I also need to mention that you didn't provide adequate reliable sourcing to demonstrate that the condo project warrants a Wikipedia article at all — apart from a primary source citation to the project's own website (not a source that can confer notability on a topic) and a blog, the only reliable sources you added to the article were coverage of the hotel, which just namechecked the fact of the Yorkville condos while not having the Yorkville condos as their subject. The condo project might merit a Wikipedia article if it can be sourced a lot better than that, but it's not entitled to an article just because it can be verified as existing. Bearcat (talk) 16:36, 24 August 2015 (UTC)Reply
I'm totally fine with deleting the page for the condos if you want. I agree, it seems like it's not important enough as a structure to have its own page anymore. I only left that page because it's one of the structures in the list of "Tallest Structures in Toronto". If you agree, let's just make Four Seasons Hotel Toronto a redirect to the proper page at Four Seasons Hotel and Residences Toronto and then we'll change the name of the tower in the "Tallest Structures" list to
have no link. That sounds like a good solution to me, does that work for you? Jamesluckard (talk) 19:53, 24 August 2015 (UTC)Reply
Karl, I know that happens, but I'm not sure what else to do. The company's proper legal name includes the article "The", but there is already a page with that name, and a redirect. Can we somehow delete the page with the redirect, so we can move the full article there? When I tried just moving the article, it wouldn't let me because of the redirect page. User:Jamesluckardtalk05:45, 18 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I'm glad you've taken such an interest in this article. I know you're still working on it, but wanted to point out that using the hotel's own web site as a source is probably not appropriate under WP:Reliable#Questionable and self-published sources, as the source is being used to make self-serving claims (made to induce people to stay at the hotel) and claims about third parties (e.g., people who stayed at the hotel). The HowHeGotThere.blogspot.com site is clearly not a reliable source, as it's a personal blog. I'm sure you will turn the bare URLs into full citations per Wikipedia:Citing sources. Since the article is already using Template:Cite journal, under editing rules we should stay with that style of citation template barring a really good reason not to. I'm very happy someone else has taken an interest in this article!! - Tim1965 (talk) 16:57, 18 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
Tim, I'll admit I'm not very good with the detailed formatting for citing links. I can try to do it, but I may mess it up, so someone more skilled than me should probably have a look at them too. I will say though, that the new formatting actually makes it more confusing, as when I changed one link, it messed with all the links that follow.
Almost everything I cited from the hotel's website is just to do with dates, which they have no reason to lie about, as the dates won't make anyone stay there. I'm trying to re-source as many as possible from news articles just now though. The celebrities were also listed in some of the other articles too. If you want to challenge them, that's fine, but honestly everything else on the website seems accurate. Up to you though. Best, James Jamesluckard (talk) 18:19, 18 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
I found other sources for every fact except the Eisenhower breakfast. I believe the hotel website, everything else they said was backed up by other sources, but if you want to delete that fact, I won't argue. I'll look for other sources on the celebrities.Jamesluckard (talk) 18:46, 18 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Fairfax at Embassy Row, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Estee Lauder. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sony Tower, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Phillip Johnson. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 666 Fifth Avenue, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Stouffer. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Do not revert back when you have been reverted, that's edit warring and can get you blocked from editing. Instead, read WP:BRD and follow the philosophy there, which calls for the article to return and stay in the status quo ante while discussions go on on the talk page. I've returned the article to where it was, please don't revert again. And please read WP:OWN- it is notyour article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beyond My Ken (talk • contribs) 03:58, 14 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Steven Spielberg, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Kathleen Kennedy and Frank Marshall. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, Jamesluckard. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, Jamesluckard. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, the changes you made do not actually reflect the nature of the transition between Boscolo Hotels and The Dedica Anthology; the Boscolo Hotels brand is not dead but will remain to the previous owner and they'll probably keep using it. The page should be reverted to Boscolo Hotels (name and URL) and a text can be added, explaing that most (5 of 6) of the Hotel have been acquired by the new Hotel Chain The Dedica Anthology. I'll take care of creating a new page for DA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Offissapupp (talk • contribs) 11:16, 22 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
It's confusing, I agree, but www.boscolohotels.com now redirects to www.dahotels.com so it's clear that Dedica is the successor chain to Boscolo. There's still one orphan property under the Boscolo name in Nice right now, but Dedica didn't buy the hotels, Dedica is just a new name the old Boscolo hotels are being marketed under by the same company that bought Boscolo, Värde Partners. Hopefully there will be some news articles or press releases online to clarify the change soon, I can't find any yet.Jamesluckard (talk) 19:08, 22 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to Olive 8, without good reason. They need to have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. SounderBruce07:36, 4 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).
Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. ☆ Bri (talk) 16:24, 27 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
I apologize, but I can't understand why this message was left for me. I haven't made any edits to that page since February, when I changed a simple typo. I have zero connection to that company, I work in the film industry. Best, James. Jamesluckard (talk) 17:14, 27 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Roman Polanski into An Officer and a Spy. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied, attribution is not required. — Diannaa🍁 (talk) 20:11, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
No worries. I'm fairly sure all the text I copied was my own. I update the Polanski page whenever there's news about his films and I created and have regularly maintained the page for the book An Officer and a Spy. :) (talk) 23:04, 8 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello, Jamesluckard. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Jessica McClure, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. In addition, please make sure your source indicates not only that the reference to McClure exists, but that it is sufficiently notable to merit inclusion.TJRC (talk) 19:21, 10 January 2019 (UTC)Reply
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Niagara, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marriott (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)
I'm not sure I follow. I don't think I called the current building by that name anywhere in the article, but the hotel was originally named "The National Hotel of Cuba" when it opened in 1930, as shown in the advertisement I cited. It was renamed "Hotel Nacional de Cuba" in 1939. If you mean the photo caption that I changed, it's because the photo is from the period when that name was in use. User:Jamesluckard (talk) 09:31, 7 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello James- Below are a few editing suggestions to make it easier for you and others to collaborate on the encyclopedia. Please preview, consolidate, and summarize your edits:
Try to consolidate your edits, at least at the section level, to avoid cluttering the page's edit history; this makes it easier for your fellow editors to understand your intentions, and makes it easier for those monitoring activity on the article.
The show preview button (beside the "publish changes" button) is helpful for this; use it to view your changes incrementally before finally saving the page once you're satisfied with your edits.
Please remember to explain each edit with an edit summary (box above the "publish changes" button).
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Santa Barbara Biltmore, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santa Barbara.
The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Westin Washington, D.C. City Center until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
There is absolutely no reason to be so unpleasant and accuse me of being "disruptive." I added useful information to make both pages more current. The Clint Eastwood page didn't mention the project at all, and the page for the book still said that nobody had ever successfully made it into a film, even though it is shooting now. We're all trying to do our best to make Wikipedia as accurate as possible. Your edits to the Clint Eastwood page have made the text grammatically incorrect in English, so I'm going to fix that. I'll leave the page on the novel to you to do whatever you wish with. (talk) 19:02, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
I'd just like to add that I'm grateful to you for filling in the citations for the sources. :) (talk) 19:11, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Canadian Pacific Hotels, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scottsdale.
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Falkenstein Grand Hotel, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Marriott.
Sorry, which sources are you referring to? Most of the sources I used were newspaper articles, but I'm happy to use different sources for any that are objectionable. Which one is the Wikipedia mirror? (talk) 06:47, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
Also, the store was not called "Half Price Store," the official name was "1/2 Price Store," as I had originally. (talk) 06:50, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
I see which one was the Wikipedia mirror, it was the one about Carson's. As for the blog, do you mean the Department Store Museum.org page? I found a local newspaper article I can substitute for it.(talk) 06:59, 7 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
That was a bit of a clash on my part. Labelscar should not be cited in the blog. The Wikipedia mirror should not be used either. I would recommend newspaper articles. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?)03:21, 10 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:Azadilogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lucas Museum of Narrative Art, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deadline.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Galeria Karstadt Kaufhof, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Comr Melody Idoghor(talk)22:30, 5 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Dan arndt (talk) 05:37, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Dan arndt (talk) 05:37, 6 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Galeria Karstadt Kaufhof until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Latest comment: 1 year ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Hi. Since you've accumualted over 14,000 edits here since 2005, I thought I'd ask you to please not add information to artidles without citing a reliable source, as you did with this edit to Foothills (Fort Collins, Colorado). Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 01:19, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
I'm not sure I understand your complaint. It appears your issue is with the change of the mall name, but the official website for the mall uses that new name. Jamesluckard (talk) 01:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply
The fact that one character serves another with divorce papers is a plot point in the film itself, which is set in 1850. Wikipedia rules say that plot points in a film don't need a source to be cited, the film is its own source. My deleted text was simply stating that the plot point in the film was historically impossible. The source I cited specifically proved this, because it states the historical fact that no-fault divorce did not exist in the US until California introduced it in 1969. Jamesluckard (talk) 02:54, 26 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
Also, I should point out, there are no sources cited at all for any of the other historical inaccuracies listed in that entire section, except for one point about Pinkerton detectives. I'm not sure why you chose to focus on the one item I added, even after I added a source to validate the film's historical inaccuracy on that point. Jamesluckard (talk) 02:56, 26 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 11 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Latest comment: 9 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Robert Harris (novelist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page George MacKay.
Latest comment: 27 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hi, I noticed your edits to The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, in particular I saw a mass removal of content with no explanation as to why. I now understand by looking at your next edit it was simply refactoring, which is much appreciated.
Will do next time! Yep, there was information that was duplicated between two sections, so I combined it, clarified it, and added a couple of sources. :) Jamesluckard (talk) 01:44, 28 October 2024 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 days ago5 comments2 people in discussion
Hello, I've noticed that you are editing without using edit summaries. Could you please do so moving forward?
Edit summaries are an important part of the building of an encyclopedia. They alert other editors to the changes that have been made and are included in article history. This saves your fellow editors' time, especially those who are reviewers and patrollers. While it is not explicitly required, it is considered best practices and a courtesy to the community. Accurate summaries help other contributors decide whether the changes should be reviewed (and kept or not). Edits that lack summaries are more likely to be reverted because they include no rationale or explanation for the change, and could be incorrectly perceived as vandalism or promotion.
Also, if you look at my contributions page, you'll see I do make an effort to add a summary lately when I make any really significant or meaningful change a page. Many of the changes I make are just adding a couple of facts and/or a news article citation. Jamesluckard (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC)Reply
I'm not seeing many at all; if you are adding facts or citations, state that. It really is courteous to others to summarize changes. All it takes is to type a few words into the text entry field in the Edit summary box located near the bottom of the Editing page. The box looks like this in the visual editor and the 2017 wikitext editor:
Latest comment: 5 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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.
Welcome to Wikipedia. We welcome and appreciate your contributions, including your edits to Gattaca, but we cannot accept original research. Original research also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. -- Doniago (talk) 18:42, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Your addition to Taj Boston has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. http://corporate.ritzcarlton.com/en/About/OurHistory.htm OlYeller21Talktome 19:37, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to Olive 8, without good reason. They need to have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. SounderBruce 07:36, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Jessica McClure, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. In addition, please make sure your source indicates not only that the reference to McClure exists, but that it is sufficiently notable to merit inclusion. TJRC (talk) 19:21, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
