User talk:John from Idegon/Archive 39

Archive 35

←

Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39

Archive 40

Archive 41

→

Archive 45

Question

Hi John, you recently reversed one of my edits to Parkland High School's Wikipedia page. Some of the reasons I completely understand but others I have questions. You stated how I failed to explain what a Freddy is and completely understand and will make sure to make that clear next time. Further you stated that I am too close to the subject to remain neutral. However, I made a point only to report the nominations and recipients. I made sure not to include my personal opinion of the show or of the Freddy results, which is staying neutral. You also stated that you do not thing it is appropriate content, even though most high schools participating in the Freddys have these results on their Wikipedia page (many without explaining what the Freddys are) and furthermore, regional and local awards for sports are always there so why not awards for theatre? I do think that you made fair points and would like some suggestions so that I can prevent this from occurring again. Thank you. Dzdanster (talk) 21:22, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

• I am one of John's helpers. Please see how I linked to the Parkland High School (Pennsylvania) page in your Question above. It's usually very helpful to provide the link to the article you are talking about...then the other editor can quickly find the article...and answer your question instead of searching for it. Also, new threads always go on the bottom of the talk page, not on the top. Thanks, and happy editing. . Buster Seven Talk 21:49, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Hay Day

You what? You just restored a version complete with a link to some SEO spammer's blog - marking the edit as minor. Pinkbeast (talk) 07:44, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

my fat fingers hit the rollback button while scrolling recent changes. sorry. I reverted it. us old farts haven't the skills with tap typing you youngsters have. trust me I wouldn't knowingly edit a video game article if my life depended on it. Tata. John from Idegon (talk) 08:04, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, although I suspect 1975 models no longer qualify as youngsters. Pinkbeast (talk) 10:47, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Edit warring

• Here, if you want to "verify" my source: http://www.cduniverse.com/search/xx/movie/pid/5680308/a/black+oak+arkansas+-+the+first+30+years.htm--Robbstrd (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Question

Hi John, you assisted me in the past, and hope you can direct me on how to have an old exclamation box removed from the top of a wiki page I authored. I've done serious editing on it for over three months to fix all questions, but the box remains. I've asked on its talk page to have it re-checked but am not sure of the process. TL001 (talk) 21:32, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you. I'd be happy to help you if I only knew what article you needed help on. If you want help, it is always nice to make it as easy as possible for the person you are asking help from to give it. A wikilink to the article in question would speed the process up greatly. If you don't know how to wikilink, here is an example: If you want to wikilink Idaho State Highway 71, you would type [[Idaho State Highway 71]]. As always please reply here, so the discussion is all in one place. Looking forward to hearing from you. John from Idegon (talk) 18:22, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Question

Hi John, You messaged me in regards to the removal of links to Surfline.com that I added to the corresponding beaches on Wikipedia. The Surfline pages gives you up to date info on the beach along with safety reports. I feel these links are in the best interest for the user as they keep people safe. I would appreciate it if we could have those links back up for people who might be traveling to these beaches and need some real time information. Also, I made an edit to the PTSD page referring people to an article about delayed onset PTSD right after the wiki article talks about the condition. I feel all these edits are good for the users. I want to help make Wikipedia a great reliable source of information however if all my references are going to always be removed, It is not worth my time to find the best information on the web to help the users. I look forward to hearing back from you. User: Brookssean — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brookssean (talk • contribs) 21:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

You added a link chock full of ads as a reference to the name of the city Newport Beach, California. How do surf conditions serve to reference the name of the city? Wikipedia is not a travel guide or a random collections of links. It is an encyclopedia. As such, there are lots of things that are linked, but only to serve as verification of the facts that they are tagged as referencing. The link you provided on PTSD was to a website whose title banner says "Anxiety.org Healthcare Brands" (emphasis mine). Again, spam. We do not ever link to social media, much less as a reference, as you did at Ron Swanson and Workaholics because they are totally unreliable since they are user generated. Same with user created websites like the one you added to King Magnus' Halt. Generally, in a properly written article, there are no references required in the opening paragraph (known as the lede) as it is supposed to be a summary of the rest of the article and the references are down in the body of the article. Although now after looking at your total contributions, I doubt you are maliciously spamming, but you are being quite clueless as to what the encyclopedia is and how to contribute to it constructively. I will leave you some links to help with that on your talk page. Please remember that an encyclopedia is a summary of the information available on a subject in already published reliable sources. You have yet to use one single reliable source in any of your edits, and none of your links that you inserted as references actually referenced anything. John from Idegon (talk) 23:26, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your message but I have no clue ...

how to reply to you. Is this how? How will you know what article I'm referring to? This is quite confusing. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filius1 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

ebrington manor fruit farm shootings

wonder if you can help with feedback and advice about the speeedy deletion of the article I wrote about the 'ebrington manor fruit farm shootings'. I'm fairly green to wiki editing and don't really know the mechanics of how to add newspaper article references etc or whether they would have helped give article creedence. Assistance please if you can. 92.29.134.95 (talk) 11:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

The article about a shooting incident at Ebrington Manor was written by User:Vegibagger. This occasional editor is well known to me, I have confidence in its accuracy and that he was one of the victims. Being an only occasional editor, he was not aware of the need to include verifiable references in his article, and even if referenced, there remains the question of whether it is appropriate. As a reviewer of new articles, you may be able to provide good advice on that. Thanks in advance. Viewfinder (talk) 18:19, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

I've made my viewpoint perfectly clear at the Teahouse and I stand by what I said there. John from Idegon (talk) 23:35, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 May 2015

• News and notes: "Inspire" grant-making campaign concludes, grantees announced

• Featured content: The amorous android and the horsebreeder; WikiCup round two concludes

• In the media: Guggenheim image donation; Wiki campaign gets advertising award

• Special report: FDC candidates respond to key issues

• Traffic report: The grim ship reality

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:00, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

About thread on B.B King talk page

I usually reserve comments in talk sections to issues dealing with the actual content in articles, however, I thought that this occasion might be an exception, in light of his recent passing. I did not realize that it would inappropriate to do so. Garagepunk66 (talk) 23:12, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

I understand. What would be appropriate would be a memorial on your user page, as long as it is temporary. He was an awesome musician. He was also a pretty cool guy. I used to be a hotelier, and I had some pleasant conversations and a couple one tune private concerts with the man. Great memories! John from Idegon (talk) 23:23, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

You were truly lucky to have had the opportunity to meet him and hear him ply one-on-one. That must have been awesome!!!Garagepunk66 (talk) 18:47, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2015

• Foundation elections: Board candidates share their views with the Signpost

• News and notes: Swedish Wikimedia chapter organizes simultaneous Wikidata contests

• Traffic report: Round Two

• In the media: Grant Shapps story continues

• Op-ed: What made Wikipedia lose its reputation?

• Featured content: Four first-time featured article writers lead the way

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:45, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2015

• From the editor: Your voice is needed: strategic voting in the WMF election

• In focus: The awful truth about Wikimedia's article counts

• Traffic report: Inner Core

• News and notes: A dark side of comedy: the Wikipedia volunteers cleaning up behind John Oliver's fowl jokes

• Featured content: Puppets, fungi, and waterfalls

• In the media: Jimmy Wales accepts Dan David Prize

• WikiProject report: Cell-ebrating Molecular Biology

• Arbitration report: Editor conduct the subject of multiple cases

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:52, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Reverting of my Jack Ruby edit

Hi John

I would like for us to have a chance to discuss this matter just between us before involving other editors, etc.

I can understand how you might feel that going into any detail about Jack Ruby's legal drama might be off topic.  But here is the reason I made the edit:  to say that someone was convicted of a crime, and then completely fail to mention that that conviction was reversed (assuming of course that that was the case) is downright misleading.  It would be better to just say something like "the man who killed presidential assassin Lee Harvey Oswald."  (Ruby himself admitted doing the deed.)  Or something like "... previously owned by Jack Ruby, the man convicted (conviction later reversed) in the murder of presidential assassin Lee Harvey Oswald."

I don't feel that Jack Ruby's legal history needs to be mentioned at all.  But I feel very strongly that, if you're going to point out that he was convicted, then it also needs to be somehow pointed out that the conviction did not hold up on appeal.  That can very easily be accomplished by adding literally no more than three words to the article ("conviction later reversed.")  Would you be agreeable to my suggestion?   
Richard
Richard27182 (talk) 07:50, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Elkhart, Indiana

Hello;

I just wanted to inform you that my edit on Elkhart wasn't advertising the company, just stating that Elkhart is headquarters of automotive manufacturer, Midwest Automotive Designs. Seqqis (talk) 05:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

I wasn't attributing any motivation on your part but the fact is unless you have a reliable independent source describing the company's importance to the economy of Elkhart, it is promotional.

More importantly, if someone removes an edit you make with an explanation, you are not supposed to replace it without gaining a consensus for its inclusion on the article's talk page.

I reverted your edit while patrolling changes. I did notice that the entire section is pretty much a pile of poo. The entry for Elkhart Brass looked like it was written straight off a press release. This happens frequently with Economy sections in settlement articles. I mostly edit from my phone these days and doing extensive rewrites is next to impossible for me. The best practice for sections like this is to boldly establish a criteria for inclusion, and then forming a consensus for it if there is a dispute. The most common criteria is number of employees if there is a source for it (most commonly either the city, its EDC, or the state dept of labor) or notability of the companies listed (ie, only including companies that have articles on Wikipedia). I am going to again revert your edit. I am not able to rewrite the section at this time (perhaps next month) but I would encourage you to. I'll be glad to advise you in any way I can. Feel free to copy this discussion to the article's talk page if you like. Copy paste is something I can't do on this tiny little phone. John from Idegon (talk) 06:38, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Something bugs me, when you said "only including companies that have articles on wikipedia", what about articles that were created, but got deleted and merged with another article? Like a article I made SportChassis is nominated to be deleted or most likely merged. And if merged, wouldn't that mean that the work thats tranferred from the deleted article be removed later on by another user because there isn't a existing article about the company? Seqqis (talk) 07:16, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I am not getting your point. John from Idegon (talk) 07:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Say there was a article about a company, but it got deleted and had its non-falsified content and references merged with another article relating to it. Than another user removes the information because there isn't a existing article about it, despite all of the proven content added. That's the confusion i'm seeing. Seqqis (talk) 07:48, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Sherman Oaks Center for Enriched Studies Question

Now that the Robotics team from SOCES has actually won the national championship in the Mini Urban Challenge, it seems that you still want to continue to delete this accomplishment? This is the pinnacle of accomplishment for this event and you still insist on deleting the addition of legitimate accomplishments. I do not understand your motivation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.77.111 (talk) 04:55, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Homestead High School (Fort Wayne, Indiana) logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Homestead High School (Fort Wayne, Indiana) logo.png. 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:20, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello again!

So I have just finished telling this other user that I have completed the promise I gave you and him, so now we can be friends again! It had to do with my past unintentional disruptive but nevertheless harmful tendencies a few months back, which I made up by fixing STEM articles. Right? Dandtiks69 (talk) 06:59, 25 May 2015 (UTC).

WP:NOTFACEBOOK. John from Idegon (talk) 07:27, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your past (and future) help

Hi John.
   Thank you for your reply, and all the information you provided. I intend to look over all of it, but obviously that will take some time. I very much appreciate your offer to help me with Wikipedia questions I may have. I'm sure there will be several times in the future when I'll be asking for your help. As a matter of fact, I am currently dealing with a problem concerning my personal sandbox. I posted it at the Wikipedia Help Desk (Wikipedia:Help desk#Problem involving my personal sandbox) and so far I've received one answer. But I'm still kind of confused. When you get a chance, would you take a look at it. Thanks. And happy Memorial Day!
Rich
Richard27182 (talk) 09:53, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Brian Edwards

Hi John. You may wish to comment (again) at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Edwards (author). Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 03:49, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Magnolia! Sorry it took so long to get back to you. I need to do further research into that award. It may actually give him notability. The guy's statement that he knows nothing of the other article is quite transparent IMO. The book is published by a Vanity press, albeit a good one. Archway is Simon and Shuster's vanity imprint. Yess you too can spend a grand and get your book published. It says nothing about notability. If you are on good terms with any admins, you might want to ask one if they would email you the old article. It seems from memory that except for the award and the book, to be a pretty straight copy of the deleted article, making your initial speedy not that far off base. Time is short for me IRL these days, so I don't know how much I will be able to do here. John from Idegon (talk) 18:18, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Also

That editor from Louisiana sure does create a lot of cleanup. It seems beyond competence. It's been to ANI once, and there was a sock involved as well. I can hardly made sense of their edits. Magnolia677 (talk) 03:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Admin Intervention

There is currently a discussion at noticeboard of discussion regarding Zacmann08's repeated disruptive edits. The thread is Zackmann08 Making Several Disruptive Edits.The discussion is about the topic Zackmann08 Making Several Disruptive Edits. Thank you.

The Signpost: 27 May 2015

• News and notes: WMF releases quarterly reports, annual plans

• In the media: Scrubbing Parliamentary biographies; Wikipedia's invisible history

• Discussion report: A relic from the past that needs to be updated

• Featured content: When music was confined to a ribbon of rust

• Recent research: Drug articles accurate and largely complete; women "slightly overrepresented"; talking like an admin

• Traffic report: Summer, summer, summertime

• Technology report: MediaWiki blows up printers

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:21, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Would you advise me about a proposed article edit?

       Hello John from Idegon.  I would like to ask your advice on something. I'm considering making a change to an article.  It wouldn't be my first change to an article, but it *would* be the first time I remove material as opposed to adding or slightly altering material.  I've started a discussion on the article's talk page.  If you have time and if it wouldn't be inconvenient, perhaps you could take a quick look at it and give me your opinion.  The discussion is at Talk:Kinescope#Removal of "fluid" look does not make a great deal of difference????.   As always I appreciate any help or advice you give me.
Richard27182 (talk) 10:45, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

The discussion seems to be going smoothly. It appears you have a consensus fir your second version with a cn tag added. be bold--just go ahead and do it! Personally, I would have just made the change and started a discussion only if it was reverted. John from Idegon (talk) 13:57, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

The Center Line: Spring 2015

Volume 8, Issue 2 • Spring 2015 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features Route description 101 The nitty gritty of in-depth research	State and national updates Editor updates In other project news...
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 12:14, 31 May 2015 (UTC)