Jump to content

User talk:John from Idegon/Archive 95

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 90 ← Archive 93 Archive 94 Archive 95 Archive 96 Archive 97

Broadcast Center

Hi John, hope you had a good Christmas and Happy New Year. I came across the above named article, what to do with this? It's completely unsourced with one paragraph and picture, and tagged with the schools project but has University and college categories. If you could take a look I would really appreciate it, thank you Steven (Editor) (talk) 23:38, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

User talk:GlottalStop777

I started to leave a lengthy, explicative review. Then I decided if I stop feeding him, he'd go back under his bridge and eat some goats.-- Deepfriedokra 20:03, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Hey, I'm a troll, at least according to people from the UP. And a good grilled goat is yummy. John from Idegon (talk) 20:09, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

That's a relief

Glad to see it was self-requested. Hope you're doing well. Meters (talk) 04:21, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Wishing you well John! I saw that you were blocked and I was quite alarmed, but I see its self imposed. I hope you're doing well, I've always valued your work on the project, and appreciate seeing your signature around. Take care of yourself!

Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 06:42, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Wishing you speedy recovery

Hi John, I also noticed the block and was thinking "what, hang on a minute, John is blocked? Am I seeing things?" then I noticed it was self-requested and the reason why. I hope you're ok, wishing you speedy recovery Steven (Editor) (talk) 23:49, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Get well soon

Hope you're feeling better soon! Magnolia677 (talk) 00:01, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

I am done with the medical procedures. I've been sick for a long time with this (pancreatic stones) and was told I'd need multiple interventions to clear it up. This was #2, and it appears they got them all. I couldn't be happier. The block will time out soon, and within a few weeks, I should be able to resume all my duties here. Praise God. John from Idegon (talk) 02:13, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
Glad to hear the good news. Meters (talk) 02:47, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
Me too 🙏 Steven (Editor) (talk) 04:16, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you all. Steven (Editor), you're currently working on an article I have an interest in, so please bear that in mind. I should be leveled out enough to join in tomorrow sometime. John from Idegon (talk) 04:20, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Welcome and absolutely, in this edit I'm not making any changes to the content in History section which needs a check on, I'll leave that to you if that's ok? Steven (Editor) (talk) 04:30, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
I asked our anxious friend to hold off, but I kinda said it in Wiki-ese, so he probably didn't get it. There's something there, but not that much. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 04:34, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
So glad to hear the positive news. I truly hope your recovery goes smoothly, and that you return to editing as planned. Take care. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:25, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
My best wishes for you, John. Cheers, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 04:58, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Rohit Reddy

Hi John, Hope you are fine. I would like to ask you how can I improve the Rohit Reddy Article and add more neutral content to it. Currently, I added some more information to it to improve it and make it look more neutral. Request you to please take a look and suggest your inputs.Suvidhagp (talk) 15:12, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi John, Sorry to bother you again. I have shifted the article to draft again and made a few edits to it so that it doesn't look promotional. Request you to please watch it and let me know whether I can move it to the normal state and how?Suvidhagp (talk) 15:56, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Why am i here?

because i wanted to have an account well i techanlly dont know Combo Panda (talk) 12:09, 15 January 2020 (UTC)Combo Panda

Your draft article, Draft:Minden High School (Louisiana)

Hello, John from Idegon. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Minden High School".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Lapablo (talk) 13:15, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Please

Take it to the article talk page. John from Idegon (talk) 21:01, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Wikipedia asks editors to be civil. How is your message of "Perhaps in the future, you'll refrain from reverting good edits by experienced editors for reasons you pull out of your ass" to me civil in my small effort to keep some consistency in elected officials listing among the articles for cities in Eastern Washington? Funfj (talk) 19:36, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Apparently my hopes were misplaced. There is no policy or guideline on keeping the style for communities located near each other similar. There is a guideline on keeping all settlement articles consistent. You'll find it at WP:USCITIES. When one makes up a reason for doing something, that's called "pulling it out your ass". If you think that's uncivil, sorry. If I'd have called you an ass, that would be inappropriate. I didn't. You, however, edit warred to keep your preferred version after two editors reverted you. Follow WP:BRD. To not do so is highly uncivil. John from Idegon (talk) 19:59, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
I minorly reverted the previous edit to conform to what is listed for the neighboring cities. Please help me understand why the information for Pasco should not include who is the Mayor, but the neighboring cities should have this seemingly non-controversial fact. I'm not trying to start an edit war; I'll let the community come to a consensus. Thank you. Funfj (talk) 20:11, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
So you start a discussion on the article talk page and ping both the editors that reverted you. It's up to you to convince the opposition that your proposed change is an improvement. You do this by arguing from reliable secondary sources and Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Again (and I do wish you'd drop the stick and back away from the deceased equine), consistency with other articles on nearby settlements is not a reason to do something. Since Wikipedia is completely run by volunteers and is evolving constantly, precedent is not considered a good reason to do something. See WP:OSE. There is a lot of poorly written crap on Wikipedia. It gets fixed when it gets noticed. Just because something exists in another article is not a reason to add to the article in question. There is a meta discussion going on now about the level of detail included in Template:Infobox settlement. This too is evolving. John from Idegon (talk) 20:33, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Also please figure out what you are going to write before you type a message. It's really annoying edit conflicting with your corrections when trying to reply. John from Idegon (talk) 20:33, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
I do apologize for the multiple edits. That said, we're having this discussion because I added back who is the Mayor to conform to what is suggested in WP:USCITIES. Again, please help me understand why you believe this shouldn't be part of the article. Also, when you lead with an insult, especially for someone who is relatively new to the community, don't act shocked you hear about it again (and again). Thank you. Funfj (talk) 20:53, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

January 2020

Information icon Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Herriman High School. It appears Todd.quarnberg's edit was correct and in good faith, I don't think you provided them the most welcoming Wikipedia experience. —FormalDude(talk) 18:23, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

@FormalDude: Maybe it's not my place to comment on this, but every editor consents to the conditions outlined by Wikipedia before they can edit, and "verifiability" is not buried deep on the list. Every IP editor also gets a message prior to editing which states "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable". The editor you are referring to (if it really is the person their user name implies) created a Wikipedia account so they could make two unsourced edits about a place they are employed, and appeared to have no concern for rules they had just consented to. It's certainly important to assume good faith, but so often when I am driving and I observe the behavior of others on the road around me, I find myself saying outloud "are you freaking blind?" Magnolia677 (talk) 20:44, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
(talk page watcher)​ I'm not sure why you suddenly felt the need in January 2020 to warn John (particularly using a bland template warning) about an edit he made in August 2018. If you take issue with the edit summary which John left, then it might be better to just try and raise your concerns in a more personalized way. While template user warnings can often be helpful, adding them more than a year after the fact usually isn't and they can generate more unnecessary heat that a simple post might not. Finally, adding such a template here at this point makes about as much sense as going back and adding {{uw-unsourced1}} or {{uw-coi}} to User talk:Todd.quarnberg. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:56, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: You're right, thank you for the direction. I was probably in a hurry and did not see the date. Either way, this certainly could've been communicated better on my part. Thank you for letting me know. ✓I've Learned. —FormalDude(talk) 00:04, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Brandon Academy Private School

Many thanks for your work here! Jacona (talk) 20:04, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/QEDK

I think you asked a question on this RFA that you meant to ask on Nick's RFA. You might want to fix that. Interstellarity (talk) 19:34, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Wondered where that went. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 19:40, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Your RFA question to me

Just a short explanation to say that I'm afraid it will still be a while before I can fully respond to your question 10 to me at RFA. I've had a very exhausting day, just sat down at my computer and dealt with a couple of things I thought would be quick (a humourous note to Cullen328, and some feedback to someone at WP:ORFA), and now I need to reply back to an off-wiki email I sent to an editor offering support after she'd expressed some concerns. Obviously can't go into details. I feel my priority must be to support them with a reply and by then it'll be near 1am here and I'm already folding. I will respond as soon as I am able, but it might be another 24 hours, sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:48, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
No worries, Nick. You have my support no matter. Just tried to give you a question that would give you the chance to offer an explanation like you give our noobs at Teahouse daily. That is what impresses people about you, Nick. You have a unique ability to explain things so noobs understand and old heads don't feel "talked down to". I'm not all that generous with praise, Nick. You are impressive and I think one of the best to step up since Jim (and it took two years of begging to get him to step up). Thanks for all you do, and blessings on all you will be doing soon. John from Idegon (talk) 00:11, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
Thank you John. Don't take this the wrong way, but coming from you that actually means an awful lot to me, and I thank you for it. I'm also incredibly grateful to Jim for encouraging me to contribute to the Teahouse. I find it most rewarding, and it is a good feeling to be able to help others, and also to learn new stuff. Best, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:33, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks guys. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:35, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Richfield, Minnesota edits

First, I do apologize. It was not my intent to be disruptive. I do not have the deep knowledge you have on how to handle editing conflicts. I will research it more with the article you provided. I was pointing out there was little to no rational given and it appear that you gave a very generic description that appeared to make little sense (to me) in the "Briefly describe your changes" section. I have run into vandals (not you) that simply delete changes to be disruptive. However I do request that in future communications that you take a more professional less sarcastic tone. I understand the multitude of individuals that vandalize or otherwise try to game the system, but please understand that was never my intent. I do look forward to better and constructive communications with you. Myotus (talk) 03:27, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Archbishop Carroll High School (Washington, D.C.)

Dear User:Gab4gab, User:John from Idegon, and to whom else it may concern,

I have a few questions on your reasoning, I understand why you have deleted the class types offered because of perceived bias (I would not have added it if the category was not even included in the infobox template dedicated to schools), I understand that. But not including the educational system for this specific school’s Wikipedia page, while keeping the name of the educational system for other schools in the system and the region is unfair and disingenuous. Plus adding the former names and the names of the other schools that merged is a valid decision and makes it much easier for a reader looking for the predecessor schools.

Here is more information on how the other schools in the school system and the region are portrayed (you can make the decision to treat all equally or you can overhaul each page, just be fair)/this is not an exhaustive list:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Seton_High_School

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgetown_Preparatory_School

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgetown_Visitation_Preparatory_School

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzaga_College_High_School

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodrow_Wilson_High_School_(Washington,_D.C.)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anacostia_High_School

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballou_High_School

Llakew18 (talk) 19:00, 19 January 2020 (UTC) Llakew18 (talk) 19:40, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Llakew18, we are talking about this article and this article alone. WP:OSE. Please make arguments based in reliable WP:SECONDARY sources and Wikipedia policies and guidelines on the article's talk page, and please follow WP:BRD. The article in question is not for the school and although people connected to the school are allowed to edit it, per our policy on WP:COI and WP:PAID, you are required to declare your connection and it is strongly suggested that you not edit the article directly but rather make edit requests on the article talk page. I fixed your signature. To indent in Wikimedia software, type a leading colon for every space you wish to add, but none is needed there. There's a guideline for that too, WP:TPG. John from Idegon (talk) 03:15, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Kentucky article

That is not all I objected to. Start a discussion on the article talk page and gain consensus for your changes. They seem quite WP:WEIGHT for the top level article, especially when we have an entire article to link to. John from Idegon (talk) 11:26, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


I can agree with your reason for the capitalization of the word colonel, but do not believe you read the consensus reached on the Kentucky Colonel (talk page). When referring to a person who is a Kentucky colonel and referring to the "title" are two different issues, but I will let your oversight stand. However to revert and rollback all of the edits I made is inconsistent with my view of good editing ethics and responsible oversight. So I will remake my additions to the article without capitalizing the word colonel. Problemsmith (talk) 11:17, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited American High School (California), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page 1988 Olympics (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:31, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Houdini Article

Hello, Thank you for your feedback. In your message to me you said that my recent edits to the above mentioned article(https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Harry_Houdini) did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy. My understanding of the verifiability policy, and supported in your message to me, is that it is in reference to articles referring to reliable, reputable print or online sources or other reliable media to support edits. Which is as it should be. However, I only simplified the language in my edit, I didn't change the tone or meaning of the article, nor did I quote anything. Instead of saying "England, Wales, Scotland" I simply changed it to "Britain," in that England, Wales and Scotland are constituent parts of both the Island of Great Britain as well as constituent countries of the United Kingdom. It just seemed simpler to have one thing instead of three when it is effectively saying the same thing. I'm just wondering how in future I should cite changes of this nature in order to conform to the verifiability policy? Thank you again for your feedback and I look forward to hearing from you. (HHTCC2002 (talk) 19:55, 21 January 2020 (UTC))

The island's name is Britain, the consolidated country is Great Britain, and Great Britain is not equivalent to England, Scotland and Wales. There is at least one other former country that is part of it (N. Ireland) , possibly more (Isle of Man). That being said, unless you have a copy of the source, we need to assume good faith and believe that the original author accurately paraphrased the content. Otherwise, you'll need to find a different source or quote the original source showing that the source used the term "Britian". On the US side of the pond, there isn't much percieved difference between Britain and Great Britain. Therefore, the edit I reverted to is clearer to a sizable number of our readers than your preferred version, which isn't more clear to anyone. John from Idegon (talk) 23:16, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Your input is requested

at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Community view before Friday.

Only 100 or so words. It should be fun and serious at the same time.

All the best,

Smallbones(smalltalk) 00:11, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

WHAT??? I added links to several of my informational and heavily-researched articles on glass and you had them deleted. I have had information online for 16 years,( including articles written on Louisville glass in 2005, published hardcopy as well as on the web, widely cited) and have many of my webpages cited for several years and by hundreds of other sites/pages/archaeologists. Just for an example, my information on the New Albany Glass Works, which you deleted the link to, contains accurate information correcting misinformation posted by others who had blithely quoted so-called "reliable" sources. Just plz do some research using such keywords as 'cited' and glassbottlemarks.com and see. I guess I will have to post edits anonymously (deleting my account with Wikipedia) as I have done before in years past. Thank you! David Whitten "daverwhi" Daverwhi (talk) 15:16, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Please read our guidelines on reliable sources, and particularly the section on self-published sources. Also, please see the guideline on citing yourself. With very specific exceptions, blogs are not acceptable sources to use in Wikipedia, even for external links. If you have reliable sources that support what you say in your blog, then you may cite those reliable sources when adding content to Wikipedia (which I have done, for example, at Juan Ortiz (captive), reworked from my blog at Juan Ortiz and the Legend of the Princess), but you may not cite your blog as a source. - Donald Albury 18:14, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 January 2020

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:09, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

First of all, why are you editing/cutting this page to such an extent? You seem to be a new editor of her page, so what do you gain from doing this? Please look at Ivo van Hove's page and compare it to what you have cut from Anne Bogart's page. Your cuts give no information to anyone researching AB. I am not being paid by Anne Bogart to edit her page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben 1979 (talk • contribs) 19:27, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Thicker skin

It is amusing that the incident that started off a spate of namecalling was someone whom I agreed with in a dispute name-calling someone who disagreed with us. So perhaps I am indeed oversensitive, but it's amusing how people thought I was aggrieved here, but I wasn't. Elizium23 (talk) 20:53, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

So, you filed that report for what, shits and giggles? THE SINGLE MOST UNCIVIL THING YOU CAN DO HERE IS WASTE PEOPLE'S TIME. I should re-open that section and append your comment here to it. That is absolutely bullshit. Stay the fuck off my talk page, and confine your time-wasting to your own userspace, where others can ignore it. John from Idegon (talk) 21:08, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
I... didn't file any report. I asked two admins for revdel. I don't know what I did to deserve this abuse. Elizium23 (talk) 21:10, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
And therein lies the problem. STOP WASTING MY TIME. I have no desire to engage in idle chitchat with you, and it is doubtful any other editor does either. NOW GO AWAY. John from Idegon (talk) 21:13, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
For a non-admin closing threads on an administrator noticeboard, you sure are abusive to someone who was trying to protect other people from personal attacks. If you feel we are a waste of your time, then stay off ANI and let the administrators handle administrator business? Elizium23 (talk) 21:16, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Elizium23, consider this a formal warning from an administrator. When you have been asked to stay off an editor's talk page, stay off. The only exception is a notification required by policy. Cullen328 Let's discuss it
Elizium23, you didn't come here for WP:ADMINACCT, which I would have gladly supplied. You came here to engage in pointless idle chit-chat. I don't have time for that. Respect is the first step in civility. Respect other volunteer's time. No need to reply. John from Idegon (talk) 22:06, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:John_from_Idegon/Archive_95&oldid=940811381"