User talk:JonRidinger/Archive 15

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Tenants

Re: your assertion that "Championship games aren't tenants; they're events, even if regularly held", is this based on an existing guideline somewhere?

It's based mainly on precedence. It's also from the reality that if we include every championship game and notable event (Wrestlemania is another item often listed), then places like the LA Coliseum, Superdome, AT&T Stadium, Rose Bowl, Hard Rock Stadium, etc. would have tenant lists with dozens, possibly hundreds of items, making it even more difficult for readers to identify what teams actually play there and just making the infobox unwieldy. The understanding I have of the tenant list is that it's for organizations (usually teams) that are headquartered at a specific facility (or near it), which is why bowl games have typically been listed (with the Rose Bowl Game as the prime example) since bowl games are often managed by the stadium itself or are local organizations. The organizations that hold championship games and tournaments (NFL, NCAA, conferences, etc.) and things like Wrestlemania aren't headquartered at a specific stadium and usually aren't even in the same city or region, nor do they typically have any kind of rights to a facility that a formal tenant does, like scheduling or making any permanent changes. I'd love to see a better policy or guideline written out, but that's how I've seen it interpreted by other regular editors too. Biggest problem is the main wikiproject over venues (WP:ARENAS) isn't all that active; most of the regular editors for facilities seem to come from the various sports-related wikiprojects like WP:CFP, WP:NFL, WP:CBBALL, WP:NBA, and others. --JonRidinger (talk) 03:55, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. That's what I thought, but I wanted to see if you knew of a guideline somewhere that spelled it out, so I could cite it if needed in the future. - BilCat (talk) 05:49, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, nothing specific, but similar to the issues with putting a future date for the end year, like recently with the Georgia Dome. No concrete policy on that specifically, but in terms of WP:CRYSTAL and simple accuracy, that's why consensus seems to be to wait until "present" is no longer accurate. I've found usually when the basic concept about tenants is explained, editors understand, plus most of the editors who add events to the tenant list aren't your regular editors. Closest we have to specifics is Template:Infobox venue#Usage. For tenants it says "Insert the teams and any other parties who use the venue as their home stadium or arena. Use the format: TeamName (league/organization) year–year". Yeah, it's vague on what is defined as "home stadium", but the interpretation seems to be organizations that keep a physical presence at a stadium, not those who come in once a year to stage an event and then leave. --JonRidinger (talk) 07:01, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Reference errors on 15 February

[[ File:Information.svg|25px|alt=|link=]] Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the PPG Paints Arena page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:28, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the edits on the University High page

I am not as knowledgeable as you on procedures and rules, but your supervision of the article would be appreciated, I don't think it would harm to protect the page either. Thanks Henrywissmiller (talk) 16:19, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

@Henrywissmiller:, thanks! I have the page on my watchlist, so if it continues to get vandalized, I'll see about getting it protected. Many high school articles have issues with the alumni lists, but if this is persistent, I'll see what I can do. --JonRidinger (talk) 18:16, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Kent, Ohio

See Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Patch Media. TimothyJosephWood 16:44, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

@Timothyjosephwood: Thanks. See my comment at the noticeboard. Basically, the mention of Patch at the Kent article places it into perspective (i.e. no longer a news source) and includes a third-party source about the change to more of an online bulletin board when it happened. That change doesn't mean the site can no longer be mentioned, especially when several stories from Patch (when it was still a local news outlet) are used as reliable sources. --JonRidinger (talk) 16:50, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Kent State Promotion In-Line

Hi! I noticed you undid my revision and cited an inappropriate tag at the Kent State article. How should that be tagged? Was it inappropriate to tag the heading? Is there an article that has the general rules for this type of tagging? Thanks! Beta7 (talk) 00:25, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

@Beta7:; Hi there! First, you need to make sure the section actually warrants a tag. Stating facts isn't promotion, per se, unless they are extraordinary and/or contain WP:PEACOCK terms like "exceptional", "top-notch", "excellent", "high-quality", etc. or are otherwise taken out of context. In other words, it's trying to make the school or program look good (or bad) instead of just presenting information. The section you tagged as promotional, Kent State University#Performing arts, just lists the performance ensembles at KSU. That in itself isn't promotional. Yes, it needs a source (and more content), but finding one for that isn't difficult, nor does the section contain any extraordinary claims or otherwise questionable information.

Now, if a section does need to be tagged as being promotional or needing additional sources, use the section header templates instead of the inline templates. The section header templates will put a box underneath the header, such as you did at Kent State University#Student government. An example is {{Template:Refimprove}} which can be placed at the top of the article or in a specific section. Another one is {{Template:Advert section}}. The tag you used should be in article text (for a specific sentence or statement), not headings. Headings should not have Wikilinks or any kind of tag or citation in them.

Along with that, part of improving Wikipedia is more than just tagging problems, but trying to fix them. If you can address the issue, that's more welcome than "drive-by tagging". Like the student government section, it takes just as much time to tag the section as needing additional sources as it does to do a simple web search for Kent State student government and place the appropriate link in a citation template. When I tag an article (usually for references or tone), it's because the fix is something that takes too long for me to deal with at the moment, or I don't have the connection to make the improvement (like access to certain information or unable to find something). But if it simply needs a source that is readily available, I'll usually make the effort to put one in. What we're after is improving the articles. Tags are to help that, but should be used sparingly and when absolutely necessary to draw attention to issues. Be sure to read WP:TM, especially where it says "Before placing templates on a page, it is worthwhile to cast a critical eye over the page to determine whether or not you can make the improvements easily, thus eliminating the need for a tag.").

Any other questions, feel free to ask! --JonRidinger (talk) 01:35, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Good lord, I need to warn you for editorializing! Lol thanks for the answer. I know how to tag sections in some circumstances; in fact, the one you pointed to as appropriate was my edit, I think. I also understand that the best course of action is directly improving the article when possible, but tagging is also acceptable.

I tried the Advert template and I didn't think it fit, so I didn't use it. That's why I went with the promotion in-line. In the section at hand, though, I have to agree that upon taking another look, that particular section probably doesn't meet that merit. I think the word "numerous" continues to throw me as being over the top, maybe I'll just take that one word out. Thanks again! Beta7 (talk) 01:46, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

The Center Line: Spring 2017

Volume 9, Issue 1 • Spring 2017 • About the Newsletter

Departments

• • Assessment roundup
• • Portal selected articles and pictures

Features

• • Commons and Wikidata revamp
• • Route logs for junction lists
• • Finding friends at the DOT
• • This space for rent

State and national updates

• • State updates
• • In other project news...

Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 on 01:04, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Ohio Wikimedians User Group - Invitation

Hi Jon,

I'm Kevin, one of the founding members of the Ohio Wikimedians User Group. Created in July 2016, we're working to be a central group of Ohio Wikimedians who organize and support offline events, promote the Wikimedia movement in Ohio, build connections throughout our state, and above all, support each other. We already have a handful of members and have worked to support multiple events, including Wiki Loves Monuments in the United States and several Art+Feminism edit-a-thons at universities throughout Ohio.

I wanted to reach out to you and invite you to join the Ohio Wikimedians User Group. Being a part of the user group will allow easy communication between active Ohio editors, notifications of upcoming events in the Ohio area, and, if you're interested, the opportunity to help organize events such as edit-a-thons or workshops. Some notes:

• All members receive a monthly newsletter with recent happenings, upcoming events, and more. Check out our April newsletter here.
• This Thursday at 8:30 EST, we're having our first online meeting. Check out our meeting page here for more details, an agenda, and a section to sign up if you'd like to join us. Topics will include introductions and brainstorming for future projects.

Right now we have a Wikipedia Takes Columbus photo event going on, a Wiknic coming up this summer, and opportunities to attend the upcoming Ohio Private Academic Libraries Conference. If you're interested in joining us, feel free to add your name here - and feel free to reach out to me (or post on the user group's talk page) with questions or discussions. Thanks! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 07:28, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Solon, Ohio

Hello,

I'm a councilman for the city of Solon Chamber of Commerce. This is a city committee, not a private committee. The committee I'm on focuses on retail and dining zoning in Solon, Ohio.

The Solon, Ohio Wikipedia page has been reverted many times after my council and I edited the page, adding a retail and dining section to the city page. I ask that you please reconsider and review if your revert was actually necessary.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark612 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Mark612: You need to read the reasons why I and other editors like Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) have reverted your changes. Whether your changes are done as part of a committee or on private time is irrelevant; they still need to adhere to Wikipedia standards of content, specifically those related to US city articles (see WP:USCITY). Most of the issues have been in regards to WP:PROMOTION, WP:NPOV, and WP:SYN, which are all common problems when we edit articles we have a close connection to. Wikipedia articles are not the property of their given subject, so things you may feel are "important" are either not all that important (considered excessive details) for the article or could be completely inappropriate for a neutral article. You also need to be careful not only about the quality of sources you use, but also making sure the sources specifically state the information they are there to support. For instance, your repeated attempts to add mentions of Solon's diversity have been problematic because the sources don't ever say what you have written in the article. Articles that just show the city's general demographics don't support statements like "Solon is known to be one of the most diverse cities in the Cleveland area." That would require a reliable source (most likely multiple sources) that specifically compare Solon to other neighboring cities. The source articles provide some statistics but don't make any comparisons to other neighboring cities in the region. Further, the article from Cleveland.com was about the school district, not the city itself. Yes there is overlap, but it's not a perfect overlap, on top of the reality that the school district accounts for only about 25% of the city's overall population. In order for that source to be mentioned, it would need to be mentioned in the context of the school district enrollment, not as a source for the entire city's demographics. The best practice is simply to state statistics supported in the source and to note any obvious deviations from the state or national averages; let the reader make their own deductions for other items unless there a reliable sources that specifically highlight and discuss those pieces of info.

As for commerce, like I said at User talk:Malik Shabazz#Editing on Solon, Ohio Page, most of what has been reverted is purely promotional or otherwise insignificant. Again, check out Kent, Ohio. Not only is it well-sourced, but it had to go through a lengthy review process to make sure it adhered to every aspect of Wikipedia policy in addition to making sense as an article. There are whole sections on economy, demographics, and culture that can act as a guide in setting up similar sections for the Solon article.

In the end, in order for your committee to be successful in regards to improving the Solon article, it has to understand and follow Wikipedia policies for style, sourcing, and appropriate information. It is also important to understand Wikipedia's policy relating to conflict of interest. It doesn't mean you can't edit the article, but you need to be careful in doing so. Again, I'm always open to helping where I can, such as evaluating information and sources. Be sure to use the Talk:Solon, Ohio page too. --JonRidinger (talk) 21:45, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

Chesterton High School

Why did you remove my edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hooshawk (talk • contribs) 01:57, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

@Hooshawk: Hi there! I'm assuming you're speaking of this edit, made on May 17 and my edit shortly after. Any edits I do are based on the article guidelines for school articles, which can be found at WP:WPSCH/AG. First, for the basketball section, there were two issues: first, sectional titles aren't significant. Significant accomplishments would be state championships, state runner-up, or at least a state final four. Second, specific names of students should only be listed if they are notable, whether in the article text or in the notable alumni section.

Wikipedia has a policy for defining notability, which is also why Matt Nover was removed from the notable alumni section. "Accomplished" or "successful" doesn't necessarily mean "notable" and something being properly sourced doesn't automatically mean it should be included either. When adding names to a notable alumni list, the name should always link to an existing Wikipedia article. A school article isn't the place to determine or prove notability. He very well may meet the criteria for notability found at WP:NBASKETBALL if he played in specific leagues overseas, but simply playing professionally doesn't automatically mean someone is notable. One place to start is Wikipedia:Requested articles/Sports#Basketball, where you can request an article on that person by providing evidence of notability.

Be sure to read those article guidelines when you have a chance and look at high school articles that are rated as Featured articles or Good articles as models to use in improving and expanding the Chesterton HS article. The main idea to think about is an article should be a thorough, but still general, discussion of the topic (the school), not a detailed account of every little thing that has ever happened or happens at a given school. Any questions, feel free to ask. --JonRidinger (talk) 03:29, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	You're a better man than I. John from Idegon (talk) 16:10, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: thanks! --JonRidinger (talk) 16:15, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

NIU articles

You've been edit warring and broken WP:3RR on a number of articles. Is there a reason why you shouldn't be blocked? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:46, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

You are correct. It's mostly because I considered it an issue of WP:V based on the discussion, not simply a personal preference, but even so, it's most definitely a 3RR violation (my first in 12 years of editing!) and I was definitely getting frustrated when I first removed the statement. The source in question used does not state that the teams are "officially known as the NIU Huskies [insert team]", on top of the obvious discussion that was/is ongoing. That's why I stated in my edit summaries "not supported by source or consensus" (or something similar) and in some of the articles, other editors also removed the same statement. That said, if you feel the need to be fair, I understand. I have simply lost patience with AnneMorgan88 after spending far too much time trying to explain and work with her (and not just today either) only to have insults thrown back at me. --JonRidinger (talk) 22:31, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

All right. Just be more careful in the future please (consider this the standard 3RR warning). --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:57, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, I'm usually pretty good at knowing when to back down, but for whatever reason, didn't pay as careful attention as I normally do. --JonRidinger (talk) 23:11, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Re: Oakland Athletics links on Cashman Field page

Hello, JonRidinger. You have new messages at NetWitz's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sea of blue

Thank you for noting that I had been accidentally dropping the (NCAA) from the lede on several NCAA athletic programs. As for your comment about the lack of need to include ref cites in the lede... yes, there are people who tag same with { { citation needed } } if not cited, which is why they are now being added by members of some WikiProjects... GWFrog (talk) 14:01, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Unless there is consensus to add citations in the lead for fairly basic information like that, or if there are instances where the division level and conference affiliation isn't clear (like when a program initially changes divisions or leagues), I would advise against it. Editors adding "citation needed" in the lead for basic info likely don't understand the purpose of citations. Again, refer them to WP:CITELEAD --JonRidinger (talk) 16:13, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Lede

Using the lede as more than a short summary of what is to follow is known as "burying the lede." Stating detailed information that is again given within the body of the article defeats the purpose of summarizing— the summary is buried by the detail. I'm sorry, but your repeated restoring "earlier version for clarity" when you wrote the earlier versions seems like an attempt at claiming ownership of the articles. GWFrog (talk) 21:03, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest

Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, JonRidinger. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year!

Happy New Year!

Hello JonRidinger: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a great New Year! Cheers, Corkythehornetfan 20:47, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year snowman}} to people's talk pages with a friendly message.

I see you haven't edited since October. Hope all is well with you! Corkythehornetfan 20:47, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

@Corkythehornetfan: Thanks! Yeah, I took an extended break for my own mental health (got tired of dealing with so much minutiae), plus I just didn't have much time to devote to editing with my new teaching job. I think I'm ready to ease back into editing again, but we will see how much. Thanks again and happy 2018! --JonRidinger (talk) 03:02, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Good to hear! Everyone needs a little break from time to time – health is the most important thing. Corky 08:05, 7 January 2018 (UTC)