User talk:Jacobkhed

Disambiguation link notification for March 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bruker, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Varian (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.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

February 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Santa Ana winds 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:

atmos.ucla.edu/~fovell/ASother/mm5/SantaAna/winds.html|author=Fovell|publisher=[[UCLA]]|accessdate=<May 3, 2013}}</ref> It is often said that the air is heated and dried as it passes through the [[
*[http://meteora.ucsd.edu/cap/santa_ana.html University of California, San Diego, Meteorology Dept. ''

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:53, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Jacobkhed. 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)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Jacobkhed. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Wilbur Braithwaite for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Wilbur Braithwaite is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wilbur Braithwaite 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.

SportingFlyer T·C 17:16, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Katie Millar

I hope I am not going over some line. Reviewing the issue, I think the article on Ms. Millar is not really passing GNG. The big issue is that winning Miss Utah and competing in Miss America are not two separate events, but one event over time. Miss Utah is the qualifying round to Miss America, all Miss America competitors for the last 80 years or so are winners of competitions in the 50 states, DC or Puerto Rico. If we have a Subject guideline, people should not be deemed notable for coverage of actions that are covered by the subject guideline, unless they get especially good coverage. So coverage in papers published in the state in which they win never qualifies. Thus at best we have one article that might add towards a passing of GNG, but that is disputed. However since GNG requires multiple sources, no matter how we interpret the one AP story, it is not enough on its own to show that Millar is notable, and publications in the state that she was a state level winner in are not going to be enough either. I figure posting this on your talk page is removed enough from direct editing on a subject that might in some way be considered related to religion that it is doable. Basically I think to qualify for notability we either need reliable source in-depth coverage in indepdent publications outside the issue of the beauty contest totally, or multiple independent, in-depth stories created in newspapers outside the state where the state level win was, and the later need to be coverage that does not run into not news problems. I just realized I was also the creator of the article on Kayla Barclay, and the person who nominated that article for deletion. To be fair Millar did receive a slightly small amount more coverage than Barcaly, but unless there are some publications that discuss her more than has been shown, we do not have enough to show notability. I think you made the right call on this.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:08, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your insights. I like your summary of qualifications for notability, it is a template that makes sense and I can follow. I didn't catch you were the creator of both pages. I just noticed what seemed like an inconsistency. Speaking of inconsistency, for some reason more Miss USA than Miss America contestants from that year have Wiki pages. I haven't checked but I would guess the same situation is going on for other Miss USA and Miss America contestant pages, with the subjects not meeting GNG not only for 2007 but other years as well... Jacobkhed (talk) 01:01, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are a lot of these. At one point people got frustrated with me for trying to nominate in their view too many for deletion too fast. There have been some arguments that being Miss whatever in some states makes one notable. However no one has shown sustained coverage over time for this fact. On the other hand I can show that winning Miss America not only leads to much more wide spread coverage, but for example the Encyclopedia of Latter-day Saint history chooses to have articles on the two members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who won the Miss America pageant, but does not choose to cover any just state level winners. Oddly enough that is not even one of the listed sources for the article on Sharlene Wells Hawkes. I suspect that article could be a lot more robust.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:21, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For starters Wells Hawkes needs to be put in Category:American expatriates in Mexico. The article explicitly states that was one of the places she was mainly raised. Even if I did not have some of the topic blocks I currently have, I would probably hesitate in editing this article since I personally knew her brother, sister-in-law, and at least one of her nieces. I do remember an article in the BYU newspaper in about 1999 discussing the decision of the university to stop having home coming queens, and siginificantly quoting from Wells Hawkes about this decision. Not the type of thing that would add towards passing notability, but if findable it might in some way be incorporatable in the text.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:35, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sheri Dew wrote what appears to be a biography of Wells after she won the Miss America Pageant. [1] As far as I can tell this book is not even mentioned in the biography of Wells, let alone incorproated in the article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:37, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

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.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]