Open main menu

User talk:John from Idegon/Archive 50

The Signpost: 1 April 2016

April 2016

John, Please help me understand why my changes to the Boerne, TX page was considered spam? Jolene Navarro is a published author. Look her up on Amazon.

--Cowboyken20 (talk) 21:30, 3 April 2016 (UTC)Cowboyken20

Hi, Cowboyken20. Firstly, when you post on talk pages, new posts go on the bottom, not the top. Also, please use a descriptive title, not the month and year. There are several automated editing tools (TWINKLE, HUGGLE, STIKI) that make reverting vandalism easier. When they leave a warning, it is headed month/year. Us people try to be more descriptive. :) Thanks.
I will offer a qualified apology for that. I honestly didn't see you had added her to the "Notable residents" section. That in and of itself is a problem, but I'll talk about that in a bit. What I did see was your addition of a reference to her personal website to the entry for the county courthouse in the "See also" section. What I refered to in my edit summary was "refspam". That is when someone (usually an unscrupulous PR person) adds a link to a commercial site as a reference to a totally unrelated topic, which is exactly what you did. This is done to drive search engine results and is a whole new field that has popped up in the past few years. Using Wikipedia as a PR tool is a huge problem here and it is usually done by "red link" editors (a new editor with no user page) like yourself. I am defiantly NOT saying that was your intention. By enquiring it is obvious you were editing in good faith and made a newbie error. I have made plenty of them and sometimes still do. Just offering an explanation as to why I called it spam.
I have had a gripe with the motto here for a long time--"Wikipedia, the encyclopedia anyone can edit". It really should be "...anyone may edit" or perhaps "...anyone can learn to edit". There are more rules here than on the railroad (The Union Pacific's rulebook is more than a thousand pages). Editing here is fun, educational and interesting. What it isn't is easy. It takes a while to get the hang of it. I will leave you some links on your talk page that may help and a link to a Q&A forum just for new editors where you can ask questions. I am also willing to help in any way I can. Just drop by here and ask!
Now onto the subject of the author. The word "notable" in its usage on Wikipedia probably does not mean what you think it means. Notability is what we call our standard for inclusion. In other words, if a subject is described as notable, that means it qualifies to have an article. That stems from what any encyclopedia (not just Wikipedia) is: a tertiary source. That means that every fact is supposed to come from published secondary sources. We write about what others have written about (or made note of, hence the term notability). Simply being a published author is not enough to meet even the lowest threshold of notability. The basic notability standard can be found at WP:GNG. The standard for biographies can be found at WP:ANYBIO. Authors have a specialized standard that can be found at WP:NAUTHOR. To be included in a notable people's list in a community or school article, a person must either have a bio on Wikipedia or qualify for one. If the latter, you must prove it with references. Obviously, the author's own website does not do that.
Please don't let this tome scare you off. I meant all I said above. Editing Wikipedia is fun, and challenging and even somewhat exciting. And people (most) are helpful here. Getting your edits reverted happens all the time. It will happen less as your experience grows, but it will always happen. It's part of the process here. Don't worry about it. You did exactly what you are supposed to do when your edits get reverted. You started a discussion. I have not done any research on the person you were trying to add. Her name cannot be there without a link to her bio or sources showing she could have a bio. If you want help reviewing sources to try to write a bio on her, holler. I don't write bios, but I sure can help you sort thru sources. Glad you are here....happy to help. John from Idegon (talk) 06:16, 4 April 2016 (UTC)


Wauwatosa West High School

I would appreciate if you paid closer attention to an edit before sending threats, something I know only too well from past experience you love to do. I cannot see why you reverted my edit, as in your summary, "References clearly state he was the associate principal.", you have clearly made a mistake, given that the opening to the paragraph to which you refer begins "On December 1, 1993, associate principal, Dale Breitlow,...". So I am reverting it back to its improved state. And I trust you won't turn this mistake of "yours" into a vendetta like last time. 82.30.110.20 (talk) 04:21, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it is

Re: [1] I'm not sure what's going on with that character. This and this led to the impersonation of another editor, overwriting my talk page comments, and wikistalking all my edits from today. I think somebody needs to get back on their meds. I did file an ANI report, but of course, no one takes IPs seriously.32.218.40.85 (talk) 05:39, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Come on, seriously John, are you still reverting to asking for help from your alternate accounts? It certainly explains how this contributor, who apparently only started today, knows his way around Wiki, using the same tactics you still use. 82.30.110.20 (talk) 05:51, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Addiction

is certainly the right word for it. I, too, am addicted. I know you deserve it but I will respect your wishes. I'm working on a mass mailing with User:Isaacl to generate some new nominations and some visits to congratulate the weekly winner. I always get worried when we get below four in the Que. Eddy has a good record of continuity and I want to maintain its high level of Awardees. Ergo, your nomination. Hope all is well with you and yours. Best, Buster Seven Talk 14:09, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

 This user wishes to give up life to live in Wikipedia.


Naperville Riverwalk 2016

Hello, it's MZLxo7 again! I just wanted to know how my edit on the Naperville, Illinois article about the Naperville Riverwalk was "off topic". I was adding some new developments about the riverwalk and I thought it was important to include. Also, should I make a separate section for Naperville Riverwalk so it isn't off topic? Thanks, --MZLxo7 (talk) 21:39, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

It's a commercial development. The section is on parks. Planned commercial development is not normally discussed in settlement articles. As a matter of fact commercial development is not usually discussed at all unless there is something about it that attracts attention from outside the area. This is an encyclopedia not the local newspaper and its purpose is to inform a world wide audience. Do you think it would matter to Bennie in Bhopal that they are building a new hotel in Naperville? John from Idegon (talk) 21:48, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
While part of the Water Street District project does include a commercial development, most of the development is being conducted by the city's Transportation, Engineering, and Development (TED) division. According to the city: "The Naperville Riverwalk is made possible through a cooperative partnership between the City of Naperville, Naperville Park District, Riverwalk Commission, Riverwalk Foundation, Millennium Carillon Foundation and residents." Part of it is also being developed in conjunction with North Central College: http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20150707/news/150709276/

With this in mind, I truly believe that the Riverwalk is a flagship destination, paid for by the city's residents, and developed mainly by the city itself for parks and recreational events. The development has allowed people to begin calling downtown Naperville "one of the most unique suburban downtowns in the country." All things considered, the Riverwalk thereby deserves more information on the Wikipedia article. I'm going to go ahead and revert my original edits, and add a little more detail. Please let me know if you still have issues with this.

Sources: http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20150707/news/150709276/ http://www.positivelynaperville.com/2015/02/20/construction-poised-begin-water-street-new-parking-facility-downtown-naperville/39242 --MZLxo7 (talk) 20:41, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Discussion about polls?

Hi John. I noticed you mentioned here that there is a discussion about polls going on. I went looking for it but couldn't find it. I'd like to add my $0.02. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:50, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Oops. It may be at WT:USCITY. If it is let me know please. It could also be at the Village Pump. Had to comment there on another silly attempt to change the notability standard for schools. Making dinner will look after while. Ttys. John from Idegon (talk) 00:58, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Ambridge, Pennsylvania

Hello,

I understand your suggestion to remove my edit to the Ambridge page based off of your thinking that an article on blogspot is not reputable, but please explain why the entire Industry section is allowed to stay without any sort of Citation. For example, the two preceding sentences "American Bridge attracted thousands of immigrants who came to fulfill their dreams of work, freedom, and peace. The steel mills became the focal point of the town. Most of the employees were relatives of relatives and the small town grew, with wards separating the town into ethnic sections." do not have a citation. Why is this allowed to stay?

Also, below under the Current day section, there exists: "Vendors line the center of Merchant Street as thousands of attendees – locals and tourists – enjoy Italian, Ukrainian, Greek, Polish, German, Croatian, and Slovenian cuisine".

All I wanted to add were two sentences which add to the fact that Ambridge had (and still has a few) ethnic clubs and churches. This is part of the history of Ambridge, and I believe my two sentences briefly summarize this. I ask that you reconsider my Edit to stay, regardless of whether you believe the reference is reputable or not. Thank you. Bpwargo (talk) 06:14, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree that the referencing is caca on the entire article. But just because the dog has pooped in the living room doesn't suggest that the solution is to go shovel up some turds in the yard and put them in the bedroom, does it?
It is not my opinion that your source was not reliable, it is a matter of policy. reliable sources are sources that have policy and reputation for fact checking, like newspapers, magazines, books and academic journals. Very little (outside of online material from the previously mentioned sources) on the internet is usable.
I am also not doubting the truth of what you are adding. I grew up in another US Steel company town (Gary, Indiana) and completely believe what you say. I can swear in about 10 languages due to the strong familial ethnic heritage of my childhood friends. It is just that as an encyclopedia we write about what others have written about. That is true for all encyclopedias. Here it is a pillar policy (Verifiability). There are over 5 million articles on English Wikipedia. Unless someone takes an interest in one (you?), most stay more or less static. Many editors however monitor changes to articles. That is why I noticed your edit.
My suggestion would be to find the sources that the blog used and use them. Sources do not have to be available online, but you do have to provide enough information so someone could search them out if they wanted. That is to say, for a newspaper you would need the name of the paper, the title of the article, the date of the issue and if available the page number and author. Books need title, author, publisher, year and city of publication, page numbers and if available, the IBSN number.
If you want to try to clean up the article, I will be glad to help. I cannot do much research (I live in a small town and someone checked the book out of the library), but I can help you with style, policy and technical stuff. Ambridge is a richly historical city, with much importance to organized labor (My dad worked for the United Steelworkers of America).
Please don't take being reverted to heart. It is part of the process here (see WP:BRD). It happens to everyone. Discuss when it does and you will be fine. I am always glad to help. The Teahouse, which I left you a link to, is another great resource. Thanks for bringing your concerns here and I hope my reply helped. Look forward to hearing from you. John from Idegon (talk) 07:44, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Ok, obviously you want this debate to go to a 3rd grade level, but I am not going to follow you there. This is, I'm afraid why people do not want to participate in wikipedia.

If you look at the link I provided, you will find there are names and addresses to the clubs and churches. If the reader wanted to verify this information, then they can look up said churches and clubs (as I said some of them still exist), you can look them up on Google Maps, you can find them on yp.com, etc), or find them on http://diopitt.org/, do I really need to list each place as a link? I can certainly do that.

The main reason for me coming to the Amridge, PA and wanting to participate, is that it IS difficult to find information online about it's past. I grew up there, and I am trying to add whatever I can to the Internet about it's history in a positive way. You seem hellbent on trying to stop me, and for what reason I do not know. Maybe you get your kicks for picking on the new guy.

The link I provided IS reputable, and the content I am providing IS relevant to the page. If you want to add similar content to your page in Gary, Indiana, go for it, I'm not going to stop you. Someone that IS from that town may try to, and that is their battle to fight, not mine. Bpwargo (talk) 17:05, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Ok. If you keep adding content without reference or with unreliable references (again, not my opinion, policy) it will keep getting removed. I am trying to help you. If you don't want the help that is fine. This isn't a blog or a bulliten board. Its an encyclopedia. When you do something new, it isn't uncommon that a person doesn't get it right the first time. A wise man listens to those who have more experience at it. Read the links, the words in blue. You cannot drive down the left side of the road. If you insist on doing it your way and not listening, you won't be happy editing here. The only blogs we use for sources are blogs written by and hosted by newspapers and magazines. That is the way it is. Butting your head against policy will not help you get what you want. If you want to improve the article, I'll be happy to help you. Adding content sourced to blogspot is not doing that. Sorry you feel like you are being picked on, but you are not. If you can't grasp that, getting your own blogspot account may be the best way for you to go. John from Idegon (talk) 17:25, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

I just added some reference links. This are reputable links. I am adding more as I find them. Thank you for putting me on the straight and narrow Bpwargo (talk) 17:33, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

In the future, I would suggest adding a "citation needed" as most people do before just removing content seconds after I post it. Give the person a chance Bpwargo (talk) 17:34, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 April 2016

Request

There is an important discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention about possibly finding a way to salvage Single-purpose editors and transforming them into positive WP collaborators in the general mainspace. I'm sure you run in too many of them in your work with schools. I'm also sure that every now and then one of them rises above the crowd and seems worthy of more of your time and effort. Your personal insight and experience would be appreciated. WP:WER has become a relative ghost town (and I may be the only ghost left in town) and User:Robert's idea may be just the boost the Project needs to revitalize. It's an opportunity for the Project to actually do something beyond handing out awards. I think Dennis Brown would like it. Buster Seven Talk 13:56, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

Grant High School

What was wrong with these external links I added to Grant High School (Portland, Oregon)? I read through the guidelines on external linking but I couldn't find anything wrong with these. Margalob (talk) 14:25, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

WP:ELNO, #11 - no fansites would seem to eliminate the use of the athletic site and the theater site. If the magazine is published by the school, you could use it as a reference in the section that discusses publications. If it is an alumni magazine, both what the school article guidelines say about tangentally related links and what WP:EL says about reliability and neutrality seem to apply.
That being said, remember that content guidelines are just that, guides. They are not mandatory. The final say on content (with some obvious exceptions like libel and copyright issues) is determined by consensus of concerned editors on the article's talk page. Discussion can be held there using reasoned arguements based on facts shown by specific references and citation to applicable policies and guidelines until an agreement can be reached on what to include.
Content guidelines are all purposely nebulous. So no, I cannot point to a place that says "Don't put the football team's website in an article". However, as one of the coordinators of Wikiproject Schools, I can tell you from experience editing thousands of US high school articles, we generally do not put things like athletic websites in the external link section. I don't think there is any chance you will reach a consensus to include the theater and athletic websites. The magazine is a little less certain, altho if it is an alumni magazine I will continue to oppose it unless a pretty good arguement for its inclusion is proffered.
Always happy to see new people editing school articles. Please stop by again if I can assist you in any way. John from Idegon (talk) 16:26, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Church of St. Albert (Albertville, Minnesota)

Because creator is a new editor, I'd like to encourage him with a redirect/merge to the Albertville page.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:02, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I do not really see how it is helpful to do that. I get that the editor is new, but unless you can help him find some suitable sources other than the church, there is nothing really to merge. If the structure is nominated to the state registry, then and only then would a redirect to the settlement article be appropriate. Including content on a single church that does not have any apparent notability in a settlement article is not a good idea. It creates editing conflicts because if we are discussing one church, why are we not discussing them all? A better plan for encouraging a new editor IMO would be to find a subject that is regionally interesting to him and can be included in the settlement article (or another one) and help him research and write some good content on it. It doesn't help a noob to get an unrealistic view on what it takes to have something covered here. Most new editors do not understand that there is a lot more that can be done here than write articles. John from Idegon (talk) 17:44, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps you do not often edit church articles. Fact is, towns and neighborhoods regularly have sections of churches, I was editing such a section at Hudson Heights, Manhattan just yesterday. Large, long-established churches can virtually always be sourced for a mention, even though only some can be sourced to have articles like the one I wrote yesterday for Fort Washington Collegiate Church. A locally knowledgeable editor can certainly be guided to source this as an appropriate, one or two sentence addition to the article on this small town.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:03, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Help me watch

Greetings John: I saw a pile of IP edits on Humboldt Film Festival which will happen soon. Apparently someone from HSU thought it would be cool to list every film ever shown at a student film fest. I've reverted that, but I don't spend a lot of time on en:wiki doing mostly Commons these days. Could you help me watch this page? I just have the feeling that anon-IP will restore it all. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:39, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

I've watchlisted it....no activity. Thanks for all you do, Ellin Beltz! John from Idegon (talk) 07:02, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Lexington Catholic High School

The edit war you referred to on the LCHS page is the effort of the school to remove information that is not positive. If you do a simple google search: "lexington catholic" in news.google.com you will see tons of news. news.google.com search for lexington catholic Kashykkian (talk) 21:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

San Ramon Valley High School

As a culture hockey is particularlyThexumaker (talk) 05:54, 22 April 2016 (UTC) fond here, and if you want to reject our hockey culture, but you may not discriminate a group so diverse

Hammond City Court - Hammond, Indiana

In Indiana, a city judge is an elected office and that office becomes vacant upon resignation or death. By statute, "a vacancy in the office of judge of a city court shall be filled by the governor." See IC 3-13-8-2 at http://iga.in.gov/legislative/laws/2015/ic/titles/003/articles/013/chapters/008/. The reference to the similarity of this vacancy to Justice Scalia's death and his seat's vacancy on the Supreme Court is comparable. In that case, the vacancy is resolved with a justice who is appointed after being nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. By statute, "a city court is not a court of record" and neither are town courts. See IC 33-35-5-7(a) at http://iga.in.gov/legislative/laws/2015/ic/titles/033/articles/035/chapters/005/. All orders issued by him before his death remain in effect but no new orders can be issued by the Hammond City Court until the vacancy is filled. Likewise, those with pending court appearances cannot have their cases resolved until the vacancy is filled. The phrase "currently vacant" is factually correct and will be used. You have also been given adequate references to support that your assertions are without knowledge of court administration in this state. Any further reversions will be considered vandalism. 69.209.228.196 (talk) 16:43, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah, ah. No need to get nasty and threaten a concerned editor. I would guess the situation is one that requires secondary sourcing. You might look into that and collaborate. Buster Seven Talk 17:37, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
The use of the word "current" in an article that is not DATED is nothing short of ignorance. It is utterly meaningless. Listing a minor official such as a city judge is not all that important anyway. You are fighting a pointless battle. Just leave it blank. An encyclopedia's job is to report. Who exactly is served by reporting a nothingness? This is not the city's webpage, it is an encyclopedia directed at the entire English speaking world. Why bother reporting a situation that will be resolved shortly? Will it matter to Bert in Boston or Benny in Bhopal? It doesn't matter if it matters to Hal in Hammond. He is not the target audience. And what YOU consider vandalism is irrelevant. This is a cooperative venture. Vandalism has a definition. Until you are willing to discuss this reasonably I'm done. You do not have consensus for your changes. That means that until you do, you cannot make them. Please take your discussion to the article talk page. Bye. John from Idegon (talk) 19:13, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 April 2016

Return to the user page of "John from Idegon/Archive 50".