User talk:JTSchreiber

Welcome to the Wikipedia user discussion page for JTSchreiber.

To discuss a new topic on this page, click here.

• Please keep discussions on the page where the discussion was started (my page or yours).
• Thanks for any positive feedback or constructive criticism.
• No thanks for any destructive criticism, such as personal attacks. I'll delete that stuff.

Sign your post using four tildes ( -- ~~~~ )

The Cosby Show DVD

Stop removing my edit. There are many people complaining about the fact that the Season 1 DVD of The Cosby Show contains the syndicated versions of the episodes. It is a verifiable, neutral fact that can be backed up by reading the user reviews on amazon.com. I just don't know how to put the references on there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.36.120 (talk) 10:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

I would be happy to help you add a quality reference, but user reviews on Amazon.com are not acceptable sources for a Wikipedia article. It would be different if you had a newspaper article describing a large letter-writing campaign to First Look Studios, or if media critics at the BBC, Entertainment Weekly and Time magazine had all written articles complaining about the first season DVD. See WP:V and WP:RS for more info on acceptable sources in Wikipedia. JTSchreiber (talk) 22:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

wikilinks

Hi, wikilinks can be used in each section of an article in addition to a lede. I think this is done as the lede should be a stand-alone summary of an article; in addition often someone will link to a section in a large article so it's fine and quite helpful to repeat a wikilink in that way. It's discouraged to "overlink" the same wikilink more than once within a section. I've also added an infobox to the barber article if you can fill in any more of the sections go for it! Benjiboi 15:23, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I have read the rule about one wikilink per section, but I believe that is mainly intended for long articles. I don't think that the Janette Barber article will be long anytime soon. I have seen editors delete wikilinks that are duplicated between sections on short articles like this using some automated tool, like TW. The tool apparently determines which articles are long enough to have links duplicated between sections. I'll leave the new links alone, but don't be surprised if someone else deletes them. JTSchreiber (talk) 04:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes, the twinklers, lol! Benjiboi 22:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Red links

Hi! Please see Wikipedia:Red link. Thanks! —David Levy 05:05, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. JTSchreiber (talk) 04:22, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

please add Azma.com to AirQuality Wikipedia

we do calculate a 4 day forecast every day and this site will help people reading about Air Quality as it is the only site of its kind to make a forecast map and running 30 day history

Azma.com, calculates a 4 day forecast of air quality trends by zip code based on a proprietary formula that takes into account five major air pollutants, including ground-level ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide.

can you list our site on the wiki page for Air Quality? 207.106.86.85 (talk) 14:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, adding that info would violate Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. To justify the addition, you would need reliable sources that verify the usefulness of your site. Azma.com is a self-published site which cannot be used as a source for this verification. JTSchreiber (talk) 05:08, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Frolovs Respiration Training Device

Hello TSchreiber,

you removed my post regarding Frolovs Respiration Training Device. I do think that information about it relates to asthma because this is another breathing method that goes from Russia, like Buteyko method, and which is now much more popular in Russia than Buteyko (I am from Russia myself this is why I am certain). Please let me know the best way to post information about Frolovs device in asthma section - if you suppose that it looks promotional, please help editing it so that it does not look promotional. Thousands of people in Russia cure their asthma with the method, and I do not think that it is fair to remove the post about it.

Regards, Folki —Preceding unsigned comment added by Folki (talk • contribs) 11:42, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I am new to editing wiki. Might be slightly out of the design requirements. Please excuse for that and help to post the comments correctly.

Folki (talk) 11:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)Regards, Folki

To justify the addition, you would need reliable sources that verify the information about that device. The preferred sources for a medical article would be peer-reviewed medical journals and medical school text books. Sources should be in English if at all possible. Corporate promotional web sites are not considered reliable sources of medical information on Wikipedia. JTSchreiber (talk) 05:19, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Police

There is a difference between a source and a wikilink. I'm assuming, perhaps optimistically, that the linked article is properly sourced. Therefore, a reader wishing to verify the assertion could follow the link and verify the source there, and it does not require a citation in Police. Or should every assertion in every article have its own separate citation? I think not. --Rodhullandemu 12:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. WP:EGG says that Wikipedia articles should try to accomodate readers who are looking at hard copy versions of articles, and so cannot access the wikilinks. Having the reference directly in the article would help those readers. You could complain that the current reference shows up as just "[2]", which is of no use to a hard copy reader. I'll try to fix that. JTSchreiber (talk) 04:45, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Understatement of the year

Your comment "I don't think so" when removing Kelgar The Barbarian as a recurring character on The Mary Tyler Moore Show. Very good...subtlety is a often a lost art. :-) PoughkeepsieNative (talk) 12:35, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks -- JTSchreiber (talk) 04:53, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Feedback request

Hi JTSchreiber (JT?). Thanks for your patient help with the Tension Myositis Syndrome (TMS) article. I'm incredibly busy right now, so it may be a couple of days or even a week or more before I can add the material that we were discussing, but I'll eventually get to it (though don't let me stop you from adding it if you feel the urge).

In the mean time, I was wondering if you might be willing to share your Wikipedia know-how in another way. Specifically, I was wondering if you might be willing to share your thoughts about a couple of pages in the wiki I started (tmswiki.org).

Let me explain: I've read an awful lot about Wikipedia because I believe that the best way to think of a wiki isn't as a Website, but rather as a community. And what allows that community to exist is the culture and norms surrounding participation in that community. For example, as watchers of the TMS article know, it is precisely references to Wikipedia's policies, guidelines, essays, and special pages that prevents the editing of controversial articles from breaking down into anarchy. I figure that one of my jobs as the wiki's founder is to help build up a constructive culture for the TMS Wiki.

The best way to do that that I know of is by copying and customizing Wikipedia's culture. Clearly our culture will need to be different (in fact one of the reasons why I started the wiki was because I knew that there was an awful lot of terrific material about TMS that simply wouldn't be allowed in Wikipedia, and I wanted to make "our own wiki") but I feel like there is an awful lot that we can learn from Wikipedia and Wikipedians. For example, one thing that I have already learned from Wikipedia is the importance of citing sources in a wiki.

If I were to mention a couple of pages for you to look at, would you be willing to give me feedback on them in terms of how they measure up on the quality scale that Wikipedia uses? Obviously, standards would need to be different on the TMS Wiki, but if you bore that in mind, I'm sure that we could have a very interesting conversation about it. Forest4Trees (talk) 03:33, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome for the help. It's fine to call me JT. I haven't decided yet whether to add the Weil and Oz material myself, or wait for you. I would be willing to look over a couple TMSWiki pages and give you some feedback. My response may or may not be prompt, but it doesn't sound like you're in a big hurry. -- JTSchreiber (talk) 20:54, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

"Death of MJ" article

In current format section "Circumstances" has only "Health" as subsection, which is grossly misleading readers to think that health actually has relation to Jackson's death -- while no related sources point to that and while "Personal physician" is what actually directly part of circumstances of death.

Now this subsection is buried down and readers even have no idea that he charged the murder until they get there, which is ridiculuous. Murray's actions, according to authorities, is the key circumstance of Jackson's death. DenisRS (talk) 10:36, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I copied your comments to the article's talk page, so that others can also provide feedback. Please see my response there. -- JTSchreiber (talk) 05:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

dr john sarno.physica

i am not inacurate, you are. from mind over back pain: p.92: "The teaching begins in my office at the time of the consultation, is continued in the formal lecture/discussions and reinforced by the physical therapist who administers physical treatment. A well trained physical therapist can be very important to a successful outcome, for he or she can answer many of the patients questions as treatment progresses. My submission may have been biased, but it was not inaccurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.75.250.149 (talk) 13:50, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Mind Over Back Pain was published in 1982 and reflects what Sarno was doing back then. He has long since stopped the use of physical therapy (PT), as stated a few times in his 1991 book, Healing Back Pain. For example, on page 81 he says, "...I did not stop prescribing physical therapy until twelve or thirteen years after I began to make the [TMS] diagnosis. It took that long for me to fully break with all the old traditions in which I had been schooled." He then explains that one of the reasons he stopped using PT was that "some patients had put all their confidence in the physical therapy (or therapist) and were having placebo cures..." -- JTSchreiber (talk) 02:47, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of The Mary Tyler Moore Show opening sequence

I have nominated The Mary Tyler Moore Show opening sequence, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Mary Tyler Moore Show opening sequence. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Sottolacqua (talk) 12:51, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Obviously, we disagree about this issue. -- JTSchreiber (talk) 05:25, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

ref help

Thanks there! :) JoeSmack ^Talk 01:01, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! -- JTSchreiber (talk) 06:16, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Ratings

I am contacting you because you are one of the only non-IPs who has over twenty edits on Home Improvement (TV series) and who has edited the article in the since October. I do not understand why the article is showing in Category:Nielsen Ratings winners. I added a link to 1993–94 United States network television schedule, but the article does not support the claim that the show is a former number 1 show.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:27, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Please comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television#Template:TopUSTVShows.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:56, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I added a comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television. -- JTSchreiber (talk) 04:36, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Community of Wikipedia

controversial statements about a living person? I know it was wrong but a controversial statement? little bit extreme, don't you think? (Nintendostan (talk) 04:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC))

First, I don't understand how you could consider an edit that's wrong to be non-controversial. Second, the purpose of a person's photo description in that article is to describe what's most important about that person in relation to the Wikipedia community. To have the entire photo description be about Sanger's enjoyment of his weekends is to imply that Sanger has done nothing important in relation to Wikipedia and that any opinions he has about Wikipedia are irrelevant. That's not controversial? -- JTSchreiber (talk) 05:28, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I was not jabbing Sanger I was jabbing at Rebecca Black's Friday. Can I ask how Sanger enjoying his weekend is bad? Maybe once and a while you can enjoying your weekend? No? I was experimenting with Wikipedia. Testing it's reliability. Seamed to work. (Nintendostan (talk) 09:40, 28 March 2011 (UTC))

I'm not familiar with that song, so I wouldn't understand that reference. Even though you did not intend to take a jab at Sanger, many will still interpret it that way because of the context. As I stated before, "the purpose of a person's photo description in that article is to describe what's most important about that person in relation to the Wikipedia community. To have the entire photo description be about Sanger's enjoyment of his weekends is to imply that Sanger has done nothing important in relation to Wikipedia and that any opinions he has about Wikipedia are irrelevant." -- JTSchreiber (talk) 04:06, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the patient, helpful response to my Talk:2011 Virginia Earthquake edit. I've been a "lurker" for years, and am only now getting around to really contributing. I like what I'm seeing so far!

AGF warning

Hello. You are hereby warned regarding this edit and the statement it sounds like you do not intend to follow WP:WEIGHT. You must assume good faith. I will not run to anywhere to complain now, but you are hereby warned to assume good faith and not try to read the mind of other editors and speculate about future actions. History2007 (talk) 02:39, 19 May 2011 (UTC)