[[User:Antoniusmaximussavo|Antoniusmaximussavo]] ([[User talk:Antoniusmaximussavo|talk]]) 01:49, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
[[User:Antoniusmaximussavo|Antoniusmaximussavo]] ([[User talk:Antoniusmaximussavo|talk]]) 01:49, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
:You are correct that contributing to the discussion will be seen as a conflict of interest. If there are any in-depth articles or columns from ESPN/Sport Illustrated/Billboard/Daily Variety/major (non-MMA in focus) media outlets ''about'' '''you''', that would be the best way for broad notability as a sports/music person to be established for the subject. Almost all of the coverage is from MMA-focused outlets and some of the coverage you mention above is a listing of names, and does not speak to the notability of the subject. I do think it is entirely possible that the article might be deleted by consensus (as you can see the majority of the various posts at present are not for "Keep") but am hopeful that the content will still be preserved as part of the Coalition Fight Music article. [[User:Shearonink|Shearonink]] ([[User talk:Shearonink#top|talk]]) 02:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
:You are correct that contributing to the discussion will be seen as a conflict of interest. If there are any in-depth articles or columns from ESPN/Sport Illustrated/Billboard/Daily Variety/major (non-MMA in focus) media outlets ''about'' '''you''', that would be the best way for broad notability as a sports/music person to be established for the subject. Almost all of the coverage is from MMA-focused outlets and some of the coverage you mention above is a listing of names, and does not speak to the notability of the subject. I do think it is entirely possible that the article might be deleted by consensus (as you can see the majority of the various posts at present are not for "Keep") but am hopeful that the content will still be preserved as part of the Coalition Fight Music article. [[User:Shearonink|Shearonink]] ([[User talk:Shearonink#top|talk]]) 02:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
== response ==
Thank you for your timely response.
Would a link to an article in a major national newspaper quoting me as CFM's CEO/Producer suffice?
Also, I have links to coverage by USA Today's UFC Media Group and can provide scanned copies of articles written about me/CFM in print magazines.
Please advise, thank you again for your time and energy in this matter.
Tony savo [[User:Antoniusmaximussavo|Antoniusmaximussavo]] ([[User talk:Antoniusmaximussavo|talk]]) 03:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Revision as of 03:24, 27 March 2012
Welcome to my talk page.
Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page.
Sign all your posts with ~~~~.
When possible, cite the page that you are referring to by placing the title in brackets like this:
Useful links thingy(users' talkpages)
Here are some useful links that should help you create your article:
*[[Wikipedia:Your first article|Your first article]]
*[[Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners|Referencing for beginners]]
*[[Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)]]
*[[WP:IRS|Reliable sources]]
Hope this helps,
EMERGENCY E-MAIL addresses:
emergency@wikimedia.org
legal@wikimedia.org
trademarks@wikimedia.org
Code on how to use editing toolbar
== Adding references is easy ==
[[File:Wikipedia- Using Cite option from toolbar.jpg|thumb|450px|Just follow the steps 1, 2 and 3 as shown and fill in the details]] Here's how to [[WP:REFB|add references]] from [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] for the content you add to Wikipedia. This helps maintain our policy of [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiability]]. Adding well formatted references is very easy to do.
#While editing any article or a wikipage, on the top of the edit window you will see a [[Help:Edit toolbar|toolbar]] which says "'''Cite'''".
#Click on it.
#Then click on "'''Templates'''"
#Choose the most appropriate template and '''fill in as many details as you can'''. This will add a well formatted reference that is helpful in case the [[URL|website link]] becomes [[Wikipedia:Link rot|inactive]] later.
You can read more about it on [[Help:Edit toolbar]] or see this video [[:File:RefTools.ogv]].<br />
Hope this helps,
Code for DONE or YES(when answering an edit request)
{{done}} or {{y}}
How to hat/answer an off-topic question at ref desksfound here How to import a non-EU vehicle from the U.K. to Poland and register it in the Polish vehicular-traffic?
{{hat|request for legal advice, please contact (whatever authorities). [[Wikipedia:General disclaimer]]}}
I want to know about how to import a non-[[European Union|EU]] vehicle from the [[United Kingdom|UK]] to [[Poland]] and register it in the [[Poland|Polish]] vehicular-traffic?
((Off-topic text deleted))
:(Answer to the unsigned-OP) I am sure you can ask the [proper authorities for this issue] - they can provide you with all the information you need, or point you in the right direction. This is an encyclopaedia, not a law firm.
::I have closed this on the basis of [the statement above].
{{hab}}
HOW TO CONVERT A TALK PAGE FROM ClueBot III to lowercase sigmabot III
For an example look at: this edit on Chicbyaccident's talk page
Used Template:MonthlyArchive
It had been:
<!--{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|archiveprefix=User talk:Chicbyaccident/Archives/
|format=Y/F
|age=2160
|archivebox=yes
|box-advert=yes
}}-->
{{User:ClueBot III/Archive Box|advert=no}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(90d)
| archive = User talk:Chicbyaccident/Archives/%(year)d/%(monthname)s
| archiveheader = {{Talkarchive}}
}}
REMOVED:
{{User:ClueBot III/Archive Box|advert=no}}
PUT IN:
{{MonthlyArchive| root = User talk:Chicbyaccident/Archives}}
NOW it is:
<!--{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|archiveprefix=User talk:Chicbyaccident/Archives/
|format=Y/F
|age=2160
|archivebox=yes
|box-advert=yes
}}-->
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(90d)
| archive = User talk:Chicbyaccident/Archives/%(year)d/%(monthname)s
| archiveheader = {{Talkarchive}}
}}
{{MonthlyArchive| root = User talk:Chicbyaccident/Archives}}
If I want to have a Table of Contents without having to make the posts left be a 4, then put __TOC__ after the headers
To find out how old some accts are, search their archives
TO QUOTE A POEM OR EPITAPH AS IT APPEARS IN THE ORIGINAL, use {{poemquote}}
as in this section from Henrietta Lacks:
Henrietta Lacks, August 1, 1920 - October 4, 1951
In loving memory of a phenomenal woman,
wife and mother who touched the lives of many.
Here lies Henrietta Lacks (HeLa). Her immortal
cells will continue to help mankind forever.
Eternal Love and Admiration, From Your Family[1]
The following NOTES on cycling List need to be sourced
Notes 1, 7, 8, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 26, 27
1...<ref group = "Note">"Pacemakers" in this sense were [[Motor-paced racing#Pacing by motorcycle|motorcyclists]] who rode motorcycles as a team mate in front of and for specific professional cyclists. These motorized vehicles provided an additional boost of speed to the cyclists behind them via their slipstreams (as in Andrew Horman's ''Life in the Slipstream: The Legend of Bobby Walthour''.)</ref>
7...<ref group = "Note">There appears to be some confusion over the year of Taylor's death, reported in various [[WP:IRS|reliable sources]] as occurring in either 1903 or 1902. Any references to his death occurring in 1901 seem to be in error since he placed 3rd at the World Championships in 1902.</ref>
8...<ref group = "Note">The June 18 date seems to be the date of the accident. Dangla apparently lingered in a coma before dying of his injuries on June 24. ''See'' "ATHLETICS(Note by Amateur)".</ref>
10...<ref group ="Note">The accident took place on November 14, Brecy died on November 25 after lingering for 11 days.</ref>
11...<ref group = "Note">At least one commentator has a different date of death - 18 October 1908. See ''Opgevouwen op zijn fietsje de dood tegemoet ("Folded to death on his bike")''.</ref>
15...<ref group = "Note">Per ''Cycling Archives'', this race is also known as the "Inter Clubs Championship" and took place in Uccle, Belgium.</ref>
16...<ref group = "Note">When Walter Rutt (the former world champion) wrote to the "American Bicyclist and Motorcyclist(Volume 71)" published in 1950, he referred to this race not as the actual Six-Day Race but as a 'team race that was run before' it and that this team race was of a 'A Thousand Laps'(150 km) variety.</ref>
17...<ref group = "Note">There were two Berlin Six-Days run in 1951. Van Beek died while racing the March 1951 Berlin Six-Day and Mirke died during the December Six-Day.</ref>
18...<ref group = "Note">Metze's month of death is variously reported as being either in May(Velo Gotha) or in July.(www.cyclingarchives.com)</ref>
20...<ref group = "Note">Jim Taylor was a fellow cyclist riding in the Tour and was also hit by the bus that killed Mockridge.</ref>
21...<ref group = "Note">The circumstances surrounding Simpson's death were controversial. The autopsy report said that drugs (amphetamines) were found in his system but judged the cause of death as being a combination of heat-stroke, oxygen depletion and physical exertion. Notwithstanding the drugs in his system the temperature that day was at least 42 degrees Celsius and the fact that Tour officials limited riders to two bottles of water a day was most probably a contributing factor.</ref>
22...<ref group = "Note">Wilcockson refers to the race as "a kermesse race at Retié".</ref>
26...<ref group = "Note">Espinosa's accident occurred during a team time trial ("el Criterium de Fuenlabrada") for the Fuenlabrada race, not the race itself.</ref>
27...<ref group = "Note">The date of McLean's death is reported as both September 3 (The World almanac) and as "early today" September 9 or 10th (News from the Outside World).</ref>
How to fix things at List of cycling...
If you have time some feedback please
I am thinking of nominating List of cyclists with a cycling-related death for FLC sometime this fall. I've never nominated a List for FL before so if you could take a quick look to see if there's anything obvious that jumps out as being WRONG it would be very helpful. Just for a reference, this is what the List looked like when I first happened upon it back in July 2010. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 21:36, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"and since 1994 a number of professionals have been killed in accidents with motorized vehicles while training on public roads." - given that presumably this happened before 1994 as well, this reads strangely
The "Cyclists who died due to a race" / "Professionals who died during training and other cycling related deaths" section titles are overly verbose, and duplicate the table headers
The name field is sorting by first name, not last name- consider the {{sortname}} template
The 85% text size thing is a bit odd; especially since for me usually the thing that's stretching the rows is the image, not too much text in the notes field
You use "&" a lot in the notes, which should be written out
Notes field is inconsistent on using full sentences, and whether or not fragments get a period at the end
You're going to need to justify why the first section gets a table but the "not in a race" deaths don't
Some of your notes seem to be trying to imply a source; you'd be better off just putting a reference in them (there's a couple ways, but easiest is to switch to using the {{efn}} template, and then you can just stick a ref tag in the note
Some of your citations are wonky and I'd recommend looking through them all- e.g. "Møller, Pages 467-468", which should be "Møller, pp, 467–468" to start with but also needs the full book or whatever listed because you don't have a sources section for that to be referring to. Also e.g. "Der deutsche Radfahrer, 23. März 1937", which has the same issue plus a non-standard (and non-English) date format. --PresN03:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Question re: the sorting by last names...does that mean all the 120+ names in the table will have to be converted from their present plain state into "sortable by last name"? For instance
Will the plain name within its table cell of Pierre Froget have to be converted to {{sortname|Pierre|Froget}} (and so on...)?
@Shearonink: Yes, it would- 120 is a lot, but it should be fairly quick if you just run down the list adding "{{sortname|" to the front, and then the pipe, and then the closing }}. --PresN14:31, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ah thanks - just wanted to make sure. I didn't used to be a coder of any stripe, so these types of things are not intuitive for me and I have to ask lots of questions to make sure I understand.
Wanted to mention the actual different sections and the titles of the sections have been discussed on the talk page - here, here, and here - these latest versions are the best we could come up with at the time. I'll try to think of some better ideas and propose them on the talkpage.
About the sort-name code...there are several names linked to their associated En.WP articles plus two names linked to German WP articles (Louis Mettling & Ernst Feja). If I run into issues getting the sort-coding to stick I will be coming back here and asking about how to do that.
I figured out the coding for the names without articles (and with!) but I am going to need an example of what to do for names that are linked to other Wikipedias - I'd like to take care of the coding myself, that's the only way I'll learn so if you know the right way to do the sortname thing for Louis Mettling ([[:de:Louis Mettling|Louis Mettling]]) & Ernst Feja ([[:de:Ernst Feja|Ernst Feja]]) that would be a big help. Thx, Shearonink (talk) 17:34, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The way sortname works in the backend is table cell wikitext that looks kind of like:
| data-sort-value="Last, First" | First Last
I personally prefer this way as it makes it clear that's what is going on underneath the hood, but it does add some duplication. In the case of foreign wikis, you might do something like the following, taking the above as inspiration, to work around not-great support in the template:
@Shearonink: Easiest way: Help:Table#Nowrap: "To keep an entire column from wrapping, use style="white-space: nowrap;" in a non-header cell on the longest/widest cell to affect the entire column." Looks like it also works to just make the nowrap template be on the outside of the sortname template: {{nowrap|{{sortname|Camille|Danguillaume}}}} --PresN15:12, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
PresN - I think I've fixed many of the issues you pointed out.
"and since 1994 a number of professionals have been killed in accidents with motorized vehicles while training on public roads." - given that presumably this happened before 1994 as well, this reads strangely. Edited this section, adjusted the wording
The "Cyclists who died due to a race" / "Professionals who died during training and other cycling related deaths" section titles are overly verbose, and duplicate the table headers. Adjusted this wording
The name field is sorting by first name, not last name- consider the {{sortname}} template. Yeah. This is SO fixed.
The 85% text size thing is a bit odd; especially since for me usually the thing that's stretching the rows is the image, not too much text in the notes field. Bumped up to 95%
You use "&" a lot in the notes, which should be written out. I think I've fixed most of these.
Notes field is inconsistent on using full sentences, and whether or not fragments get a period at the end. -->>Still working on this.
You're going to need to justify why the first section gets a table but the "not in a race" deaths don't. -->>I've been thinking about this.
Some of your notes seem to be trying to imply a source; you'd be better off just putting a reference in them (there's a couple ways, but easiest is to switch to using the {{efn}} template, and then you can just stick a ref tag in the note -->>Still working on this.
Some of your citations are wonky and I'd recommend looking through them all- e.g. "Møller, Pages 467-468", which should be "Møller, pp, 467–468" to start with but also needs the full book or whatever listed because you don't have a sources section for that to be referring to. Also e.g. "Der deutsche Radfahrer, 23. März 1937", which has the same issue plus a non-standard (and non-English) date format. -- -->>Still working on this.
Just waiting on some additional info from a collaborator with access to early 20th Century German-language references (hoping for some photos of some of the early cyclists, plus some specific referencing. If there's anything else that screams WRONG in the present version, please let me know. Thanks again, really appreciate all the help. Shearonink (talk) 21:51, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
How to get at the URL info in an Introduction to a book, with pages that are roman numerals
{{subst:TFAR nom
| article = {{subst:Bath School disaster}}
| blurb = The '''Bath School disaster''' was a series of violent attacks perpetrated by [[Andrew Kehoe]] on May{{nbs}}18, 1927, in [[Bath Township, Michigan]]. The attacks killed 38 [[elementary school]]children and 6 adults, and injured at least 58 other people. On the morning of May 18 - having previously murdered his wife at their farm - Kehoe set off almost simultaneous explosions at his home and at the Bath Consolidated School. His explosives destroyed the farm's buildings and ripped through the north wing of the Bath Consolidated School building. As rescuers began working at the school, Kehoe drove up to the schoolyard and detonated [[dynamite]] inside his [[Fragmentation (weaponry)|shrapnel]]-filled truck. The truck explosion killed Kehoe and several bystanders. During the rescue and recovery efforts, searchers discovered an additional 500 [[Pound (mass)|pounds]] (230 kg) of unexploded dynamite and [[pyrotol]] in the south wing of the school that was set to explode at the same time as the initial explosions in the north wing; Kehoe had apparently intended to destroy the entire school and kill everyone in it.
| image = Bath School disaster showing front of school.png
| caption = Front view of the Bath School building after the bombing
| promoted = March 29, 2020
| editors = {{u|Shearonink}}
| recents = No recent similar articles that I could find
| reasons = The anniversary date of the disaster is May 18. This is my first FA, so it would be my first FA to appear at TFA
}}
I have no interest in going in circles, we can look at policy. WP:CONTEXTMATTERS suggests to me that a RS's in house legal department making clarifications about the nature of their own content would be a reliable source in the context of the content in question. Can you think of a better source for whether or not something an RS said is an opinion or a fact, than a RS's own in house legal dept explicitly answering that, given that the issue of fact vs opinion is a significant aspect of law?Sandman9083 (talk) 22:20, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's an incorrect application of WP:CONTEXTMATTERS. The correct application is to recognize that although The New York Times(RSP entry) is generally reliable, statements made by its legal counsel (not its journalists) are unreliable because they are similar to press releases and "lack meaningful editorial oversight, or have an apparent conflict of interest", as described in the questionable sources policy. It is fruitless to use a questionable source to attempt to discredit high-quality academic sources. Since the consensus of factual coverage in reliable sources, including academic sources and news coverage, is that Project Veritas edited videos to mislead its viewers, that is a factual claim, and not an opinion. The vast majority of editors on this talk page have found your arguments unconvincing, and your best course of action would be to – as you say – "take a step back", respect the consensus here, and refrain from bludgeoning the process any further. — Newslingertalk01:44, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the page: User:Shearonink/Holiday. I created this "Card" 3 years ago but was looking at it today prior to starting to send it out and I realized - eek! - that there is no time-stamp. I am somewhat tech-averse, so I do not understand how to add a time-stamp (heh, or even if it is possible). If some of you tech experts could take a look at the code and tell me how to fix it I'd appreciate that. PLEASE do not go ahead and just fix it yourself. I know that is probably easier but if I don't do it myself in the future I won't understand how to fix similar situations. Thanks & Cheers! Shearonink (talk) 19:11, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Shearonink: I'm assuming you are going to subst: this places, if so you can add a line that is something like this: ~~<noinclude></noinclude>~~<noinclude></noinclude>~. There are other ways too, but that should be easy to understand (test it in your sandbox). — xaosfluxTalk19:19, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Five tildes (~~<noinclude></noinclude>~~<noinclude></noinclude>~) give you a timestamp without signature (as Xaosflux showed):
00:04, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
The noinclude code prevents the tildes from being parsed unless the page is substituted. There's also interesting stuff on mw:Help:Magic words but you probably won't need it for now:
{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>CURRENTMONTHNAME}} is here and {{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>CURRENTYEAR}} was very.. special? Greetings from {{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>REVISIONUSER}}.
December is here and 2020 was very.. special? Greetings from Alexis Jazz.
But maybe if you want to customize stuff. Here the "includeonly" will result in the magic words being substituted when you substitute the page, but not when saving the page. (because the substitution happens only when the page is included on another page) — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 00:04, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Shearonink: Instead of "the New Year 2021 will be an improvement upon the old of 2020" you could say "the New Year '''{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>#expr: {{CURRENTYEAR}} + 1 }}''' will be an improvement upon the old of {{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>CURRENTYEAR}}" as 1 + 1 is 2. Or with an exception for January (for slightly late wishes for a good new year), it could be written as "the New Year '''{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>#ifeq:{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>CURRENTMONTH}}|01|{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>CURRENTYEAR}}|{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>#expr: {{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>CURRENTYEAR}} + 1 }}}}''' will be an improvement upon the old of {{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>#ifeq:{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>CURRENTMONTH}}|01|{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>#expr: {{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>CURRENTYEAR}} - 1 }}|{{<includeonly>subst:</includeonly>CURRENTYEAR}}}}". Sure it's easier to just update it manually every year, but your card could live on forever! — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 14:10, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that you're adjusting and fixing up a lot of short descriptions using Wikipedia:Shortdesc helper. How do you find all these articles to fix up? Is there an automated process or do you just start looking in general at Wikipedia articles? Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 14:51, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Was wondering myself about the "and Jackson received schooling from two nearby priests" (especially that "nearby priests" part...) so I went hunting for when it was added to the article. It's been present in the Jackson article since April 2017 when it was added with this edit [2]. Does Wilentz's 2005 biography say *anything* specifically about Jackson's early schooling? If he did that could certainly be of interest...
The text & source are as follows:
Jackson's father died in an accident in February 1767 at the age of 29, three weeks before his son Andrew was born in the Waxhaws area. Jackson, his mother, and his brothers lived with Jackson's aunt and uncle in the Waxhaws region, and Jackson received schooling from two nearby priests.
The "two priests" part jumped out at me, too. Obviously that edit was made by a child or an ignoramus with no concept of the time and the place where Jackson grew up. In a small, tightly-knit, very Presbyterian community, sending a child to two priests - presumably Catholic - would have been like sending him to the devil. I followed the link within the source link to the Wilentz biography, which on page 16 says the young Jackson was sent to two clergymen - a very different thing!
In the following paragraph, however, Wilentz says he was sent to a "religious academy" but does not name it or say where it was. On page 177, a timeline of "Milestones" gives the names of two men who ran schools (plural) that Jackson attended in 1775-1780. It is not certain that these are the two clergymen mentioned before.
All this was too vague and nebulous for me, so I simply deleted the false claim. If you'd like to take the time to stitch these fragments into the wikiarticle, by all means go ahead. I was just there to find out his birth and death dates, really. Thanks for taking an interest. Textorus (talk) 02:36, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't see this nifty little reply link until I'd already replied to you on my talk page. Please take a look over there. Textorus (talk) 02:40, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, re the "priests" - made no sense. I do not have access to the Wilentz book. Can you put the names of those two men here? I can see if I can figure out if those guys are the two clergymen or not...little puzzles fascinate me lol, maybe I'll stitch it all back in at some point. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 14:59, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ACTUAL November 1813 LETTER that Brands slightly misquotes...
Page 444
CITATION - The Papers of Andrew Jackson, V. II, 1804-1813. Ed. Harold D. Moser and Sharon Macpherson. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1984.
To Rachel Jackson
Head quarters 10 Islands
Cosa river Novbr. 4th. 1813
In the hurry of the moment I have but a moment to write you-I detached Genl John Coffee with part of his Brigade of Cavalry and mounted
men to destroy the Creek Town Talus,hatchey, [1] he has executed this order
in elegant stile leaving dead on the field one hundred & seventy six, and
taking 80, prisoners, forty prisoners was left on the ground many of them
wounded, others to take care of them-since writing the above Genl Coffee
reports 1 80, found dead, and there is no doubt but 200 was killed [2] -I
have here forty two added to the thirty two heretofore captured & sent
on to Huntsville, in all 74-1 have been and is still badly supplied with
provisions, as soon as I can get a supply will proceed on to the heart of
the creek nation-Mr Alexander and Jack Donelson [3] were both in the
action are safe & behaved like what I could wish & expected, all friends
safe, Capt Hammond had 5 of his men wounded-all behaved bravely
and as I could wish-I send on a little Indian boy[4] for Andrew to Huntsville-with a request to Colo. Pope to take care of him untill he is sent
on-all his family is destroyed-he is about the age of Theodore [5] -In
haste your affectionate Husband
Andrew Jackson
ALS, MH-H.
1. See AJ to John Coffee, November 2.
2. Coffee's losses were five killed and forty-one wounded. The victory at Tallushatchee was the first major blow to the hostile Creeks in upper Mississippi Territory. For details of the battle, see Coffee to AJ, November 4.
3. John ("Jack") Donelson (1787-1840), brother of Alexander, was a lieutenant in Coffee's cavalry brigade and commanded a company of mounted infantry at the Battle of New Orleans. In 1823 he married Edward Butler's daughter, Eliza, and settled near Florence, Ala.
4. Lyncoya (c1813-28), a Creek infant orphaned at the Battle of Tallushatchee, reached the Hermitage in May 1814. He remained in the Jackson household until his death.
5. Theodore (cl813-14) was probably another Indian child at the Hermitage. Jackson and Rachel mentioned his death in their letters of March 4 and 21, 1814 (DLC).
THIS^^^letter is about LYNCOYA.
Incorrect assertion not backed up by sources added here on January 20, 2012 by User:Rockgenre Revision as of 21:00, 20 January 2012 (edit) (undo) (thank)
Rockgenre (talk | contribs) ->edit summary->(Jackson actually had another adopted American Indian son named Theodore.)
The ACTUAL TEXT DOES NOT SAY THAT THEODORE WAS ADOPTED, the WP-editor mis-characterizes the source, the actual letter is above, Brands MISQUOTES Jackson and leaves a slight impression that this "Theodore" is somehow adopted. BRANDS says:
"I send on a little boy for Andrew. All his family is destroyed. He is about the age of Theodore."
but Brands then goes on to say:
The young boy named Theodore had come to live at the Hermitage earlier, under circumstances lost to history. ... In Jackson's case, he pitied the Creek child—named Lyncoya—but he also wanted to provide Rachel another child and Andrew (and Theodore) a brother.
All of the above is found on Page 198 of Brands' Andrew Jackson: His Life and Times.
FEBRUARY 21st 1814 letter
Page 35
To Rachel from Jackson
say to my little darling Andrew, that his sweet papa will be home
shortly, and that he sends him three sweet kisses-I have not heard
whether Genl Coffee has taken on to him little Lyncoya-1 have got
another Pett-given to me by the chief Jame Fife, that I intend for my
other little Andrew [Jackson] Donelson and if I can a third I will give it
to little Andrew [Jackson] Hutchings [2]
My love I write you as often as time and convayences will permit, and
I have a pleasing hope we will with the protection and permission of him
who governs all, meet shortly-I wrote you a few days since, requesting
you would send the copy of the secratary of wars letter and the copy I had
enclosed to Genl Coffee of general Pinckneys letter which I directed to be
sent on with my letter to you-To William B Lewis at Nashville 3-If you
have not please to do it on the receipt of this, give my compliments to all
friends and believe me affectionately yours, &c &c
Andrew Jackson
ALS, MoSHi (3-0883).
2. Donelson (1799-1871) and Hutchings (1811-41) were, respectively, Jackson's nephew and grandnephew. Hutchings became Jackson's ward after his father, John Hutchings, died in 1817. The Indian children were probably Theodore and Charley.
3. See AJ to Rachel Jackson, February 17, and, above, AJ to Coffee, February 17.
“There Was Somebody Always Dying and Leaving Jackson as Guardian”:
The Wards of Andrew Jackson
by
Rachel Meredith
A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Arts in History, with Concentration in Public History
Middle Tennessee State University
May 2013
Thesis Committee:
Dr. Rebecca Conard, Chair
Dr. Mary Hoffschwelle
Charley was a Creek Indian child whom Jackson received from James Fife, and gave to Andrew Jr. in 1814.
Page 44-45
There is also evidence that another Indian child was already residing at the Hermitage when Lyncoya arrived. This child, Theodore, is briefly mentioned in a few letters. When Jackson was estimating Lyncoya’s age to Rachel, he said that he was about Theodore’s age. It is unclear what happened to Charley and Theodore.
Personally, sounds like a recipe for disaster. Lyncoya was a small child, no one knows exactly how old but maybe a toddler and Andrea jackson jr was born in 1809 so Jr was around 5 or 6 when Lyncoya showed up...a 5 or 6 year old expected to have a baby/toddler as a companion/friend? An aside...odd to me that Jackson called them "petts" in his letters.
James Fife aka Tuskena Hutka (Page 21, Volume III, Footnote by Editors) was a Creek allied with Jackson who gave Jackson another native child, Charly/Charley (Junior refers to "Charly" in his letter to his father dated APRIL 8, 1814
Lyncoya wasn't there until after April 1814, per page 60, Volume III
Charley/Charly was already there, he had arrived before Lyncoya, per page 60 Volume III, letter from Junior to Jackson charly/charley was given to Jackson from James Fifrean indian guide or chief
Page 59 of Volume III, Rachel's letter to Jackson, dated April 7, 1814, says
your Little Andrew is well Is much pleased with his Charley
CITATION: The Papers of Andrew Jackson, Vol. III, 1814-1815. Ed. Harold D. Moser, David R. Hoth, Sharon Macpherson, John H. Reinbold. Knoxville: University of Tennessee
Press, 1991, page 59, Page 60
CHARLY/CHARLEY
PAGE 60, VOLUME III
From Andrew Jackson, Jr.
Aprile the 8 [18 14]
My Dear Father no one will fetch my Lyncoia I have a thought of going
my self for him I like Charly but he will not mind me my mother thinks
highly of his understanding she treats him as well as aney purson on Earth
Could-write when you think you will be on your returne march and I
will Come and Hail you welcome oh the Sweete anticipation of the Long
wished for period of it oreflows my soule I must quit the subject for the
present-adieue my kindest and Dearest of friends
Andrew Jackson j uner
THEODORE was already there before Lyncoya, per Jackson's letter to Rachel, Page 444 Volume II.
The Native South: New Histories and Enduring Legacies, edited by Tim Alan Garrison & Greg O'Brien, 2017, Chapter 5 - Andrew Jackson's Indian Son: Native Captives and American Empire by Christina Snyder
December 29, 1813. Andrew Jackson to Rachel Jackson. In this letter,
Jackson inquires if Lyncoya, (the infant taken at Tallushatchee) had
arrived at the Hermitage and instructs his wife to "Keep Lyncoya in
the house," an indication that Jackson did not want him housed with
his African American slaves. (2:516)
VOLUME III
To Rachel Jackson
Head quarters Fort Strother
Decbr 29th. 1813 . ½ past 11 oclock at night
Please write me how my little andrew [is] and whether, his little Indian
Lyncoya was taken to him by Major Whyte 3 of Gallatine-if he has got
him how & what he thinks of him-Keep Lyncoya in the house-h
The African American Experience and the Creek War, 1813-14: An Annotated Bibliography Task Agreement NumberP16AC01696 Under Cooperative Agreement Number P13AC00443 Between The United States Dept. of the Interior, National Park Service Horseshoe Bend National Military Park and Auburn University
August 8, 2017
Report Prepared By
Kathryn H. Braund
Hollifield Professor of Southern History
Auburn University
As an admin who has edited "Bath School disaster", I need some advice re: Wiki-procedures...
In May a "merge from" template was placed at Bath School disaster to merge content from Bath Consolidated School into the main article. The discussion so far at Talk:Bath School disaster#Proposed merge of Bath Consolidated School into Bath School disaster has been all in favor.
I don't disagree with the template but... In looking over the School article it seems that there is nothing much there different from the main article so a true merge doesn't seem necessary. I've suggested a redirect but am not sure how to best accomplish it (for instance, I don't want to mistakenly strand the Consolidated School's talk page and so on). If you could take a look under the hood and mentor me through the process I'd be happy to take care of it. Yeah, I know it's kind of crazy that I don't know how to do it already but I'm like a cross between toddler around WP, yelling "ME DO!" while simultaneously being afraid I'll Wiki-break something in the process. (FYI - I've also asked for help from one other experienced editor who edited the article somewhat semi-recently on their talk page, figuring maybe one of you will be able to respond shortly with advice.) Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 16:19, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Shearonink, and thanks for the note. I took a look at the Merge Request and posted a comment agreeing that such a merge should be carried out. I will be happy to advise you how to do it. You will be able to carry it out in full; there is nothing there that calls for admin tools. And you don't strike me as a toddler, with your long experience here! You could look at this advice for help. Also see Wikipedia:WikiProject Merge. Basically, here is what I advise:
First, look at the information at the school article and compare it to the information about the school at the disaster article. If there is any significant information missing, copy it and any supporting references into the disaster article, and note in your edit summary that the information is copied from the school article. The format I use for the edit summary is something like this: "Material copied from Bath Consolidated School, see that article's history for attribution."
Next, replace the entire content of the school article with a redirect notice to Bath School disaster, and add the template {{Template:R from merge}}. In your edit summary mention/link to the merge discussion.
Then go to the school article's talk page, and replace the entire content with a redirect notice to Talk:Bath School disaster and template as above, and mention the merge discussion in your edit summary.
Remove the "merge to" template from the disaster article, and comment at the Merge Request discussion that you have carried out the merge.
The existing Pending Change protection at the disaster article will remain in place.
Done Feel free to check it all out, I don't think there are any dangling bits of code or orphaned pages... Thanks again. I must say, for me it was much easier to follow your step-by-steps than some of the "Help" pages. Shearonink (talk) 22:09, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work, Shearonink. Just one thing: although you added the appropriate template to the talk page and left the wikiprojects in place, you forgot to actually redirect the school talk page to the disaster talk page. I did that just now, although to tell you the truth I don't know if it is actually required. I just don't like to leave the talk page of a redirect behind; seems like kind of an orphan. -- MelanieN (talk) 23:57, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You can turn off the Vector 2022 skin in two ways:
From the left menu (sidebar), select the link “Switch to old look”, then select your preferred alternate skin (note: the previous default skin was Vector legacy)
Open the user menu from the button at the top right corner of the page, then select preferences. Go to the appearance tab on the preferences page and scroll to the Skin section on the preferences page
Another way to do linkage for articles
* {{slink|Lost Cause of the Confederacy|Song of the South}} gives the reader this instead of * [[Lost Cause of the Confederacy#Song of the South]] + this.
The bot's been adding and populating a date= parameter for sources with no listed publication date. There is no indication as to where the bot gets these dates from and no reason to think that they're accurate.
What should happen
The bot shouldn't add a publication date for sources that don't have one listed.
These dates are stated in the web pages' HTML. You can check with Ctrl-U or other method to view source in your browser. Nemo21:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The first one is coming from one of the items in the HTML source (Ctrl + U in Firefox):
(The bot should probably prefer the modified_time/updated_time if it is the source responsible, and if it's getting it from Citoid or other ext service maybe an upstream notification would be valuable.)
Hmmm. Well, this is interesting to me. Chiming in here as the person who originally added the cites to these articles. The dates that the Bot is adding to the cites would appear to be incorrect in that they are not published on the page with the source material. Also, the date that the Bot is finding would appear to be the date that the material was published onto the web but it might not be the actual date the material was written or the date that the material was published in print. In the case of the Archipedia material on the Ramsdell, that information seems to have originally been published in print in 2012. In any case, is a researcher/WP-editor expected or supposed to always to look up the html dates if material is undated on the page? Shearonink (talk) 16:57, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I usually check the date in the HTML if it's not stated, but one can be forgiven for not doing so. The date in {{cite web}} is usually the date of the web page itself. If the date of original publication of the work carried by the web page has some significance, you can instead use {{cite publication}} or other cite template with the date of the work, indicating that the URL is just one representation.
For the sake of WP:RS, I'd expect editors to know whether they're citing a website or some publication of which the website provides a copy, and ideally they'd use citation templates accordingly, but such details can be addressed if/when confusion arises. Nemo17:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I try to be SO scrupulous and careful when citing whatever reference... Does that "Control-U" thingy work with all laptops? (Yay yet another parameter to remember when info or a webpage "appears" to be undated...) I'd never heard about being able to see the date in the html before. Is it something that only works with PCs or Macs/whatever?... Shearonink (talk) 17:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On Windows in Firefox: Ctrl + U is how Firefox does it. It should work in other browsers but the specific key combo may be different. A second way: if you right-click on a page, also provides "View page source". The third way is to open console, which is F12 or also right click and select inspect.
There is no requirement to hunt down information in the page source, it is simply another way to get the date usually since indeed many pages don't have a displayed date (but of course they all have a publication date). I would suggest leaving the dates if Citation bot adds one, so long as you can verify at least in the page source that the date didn't spontaneously poof into thin air. Izno (talk) 18:47, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not a question about Citation bot but I am trying to understand the archiving of this particular page...
ClueBot III always confuses me, I usually use Lowercase sigmabot III. Anyway, in the archiving set-up for this page it states:
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis
|archiveprefix=User talk:Citation bot/Archive
|format= %%i
|maxarchsize=150000
|minarchthreads=1
|minkeepthreads=4
|age=2160000
So...what exactly does the age=2160000 mean? At Template:Setup cluebot archiving it states that
|age=
How many days old a thread should be before archiving. Default: 90
But that obviously isn't the case because of the 2160000...I've tried looking everywhere around here so I can understand this but am having no luck. If someone would post what the "age=" parameters are and where I can find an easy-to-understand explanation that would be awesome. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 22:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, yes, I kind of know what is supposed to happen but if that is true then 2160000 hours = 9000 days. And that isn't the archiving at this page, is it? The last 2 times ClueBot III archived this page was today when the bot archived a post that was posted earlier today and then the bot archived a post from January 26th...I just don't understand when and why the bot is archiving and the code that is posted way up there at the top...Teach me your ways O Wiki Mavens & Coders... Shearonink (talk) 02:58, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As AMWNP implies, you can set at least ClueBot up to archive based on wikitext patterns. (I daren't put the specifics in this section lest the bot archive it. :) Izno (talk) 03:27, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
Welcome and introduction
Hi, Shearonink. This is NOT some automated message...it's from a real person. You can talk to me right now. Welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed you've just joined, and wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us. The tips below should help you to get started. Best of luck! Chzz ► 22:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
ようこそ
You don't need to read anything - anybody can edit; just go to an article and edit it. Be Bold, but please don't put silly stuff in - it will be removed very quickly, and will annoy people.
Ask for help. Talk to us live, or edit this page, put {{helpme}} and describe what help you need. Someone will reply very quickly - usually within a few minutes.
Edit existing articles, before you make your own. Look at some subjects that you know about, and see if you can make them a bit better. For example, Wikipedia:Cleanup#2009.
When you're ready, read about Your first article. It should be about something well-known, and it will need references.
Good luck with editing; please drop me a line some time on my own talk page.
There's lots of information below. Once again, welcome to the fantastic world of Wikipedia!
Caffieinebooost (talk) has given you a cup of coffee, for taking the time to weather a dispute. Thanks for staying calm and civil! Coffee somehow promotes WikiLove and hopefully this has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a coffee, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or someone putting up with some stick at this time. Enjoy!
Spread the lovely, warm, bitter goodness of coffee by adding {{subst:WikiCoffee}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I just liked the photos of this chapel so much I just had to keep them around. All the time.
Picture of the Day: The interior of the Romanesque Chapel of St. John in Pürgg, Styria, Austria. The frescos date from the 12th century, probably around 1160, the crucifix from the 11th century. The exterior of that church
DYK 29 January 2020
These pics too - from one of the DYK articles for today...
Did you know ... that the bell of the Church of the Good Shepherd(pictured), one of New Zealand's most photographed buildings, commemorates photographer and explorer Edward Sealy?
This is the second attempt. the 1st time, I forgot to ref to my articles address, so when I went back in to enter it, when I saved it, I got an Editing Error. So, I'm redoing it below, just in case the 1st message got lost. Sorry for the confusion!
ADDED TOPICS: NOTABILITY & THIRD-PARTY SOURCES!
Dear Shearonink,(I tried Matthewrbowker but got no response??)
I've been trying to make my article more encyclopedic since 10/2/2011 with the help of 7 Editors, of which you are one. The article seems pretty much finalized as of Feb. 15 and I wanted to let you know and to Thank You for all your help.
The article's main objections have been about Notability and citing published Sources that are reliable and independent. Now that I have files (to attach to an email) that would prove that fact, I find myself wondering just how I go about doing that?? It doesn't look as if any attachment files (let alone 8 files) are possible with "User talk"?? Can you tell me what I should do?
Gregory L. Chester
(GregLChest@aol.com)
Gregory L. Chester 00:58, 23 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)
I NEED YOUR REF HELP AGAIN!
Dear Shearonink,
I'm really getting discouraged!
It seems that when I try to do the right thing and notify my Reviewing Editors or even ask a question, that I am only inviting Reviewing Editors (with ego & kingdom-building-problems) to just give me another citation or two or three and make my life even more stressful !!!!!! Its been 5 months and I'm about ready to throw in the towel.
Shearonink, you were nice enough to help me when I was having problems with my References. Now, I need your help again. Today, when I opted-out of the DLP bot, per your suggestion, I noticed that my article now has large red comments throughout my reference section and I don't know what to do about them. Can you lead me in the right direction? Not only did I get more headaches, but no one even bothered to answer my original question about: How do I get the requested information back to the Reviewers, so that I could possible solve and put an end to their Notability, etc. citations?
I almost forgot. Also, someone has removed my second Image??? How do I get it back?
Sincerely yours,
Gregory L. Chester 20:20, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
The image has not been removed, something seems to be wrong with the image-filename and has been wrong with it since it was added on February 14th.
Something is still wrong with the way you are signing your posts. Are you signing with the four tildes?
You cannot submit pdfs as proof of notability...there is no place to send them to. All references must be published, independent, reliable sources that have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy and editorial oversight. I am sorry you are having problems with your submission but there are no deadlines in Wikipedia, there's always time for improving submissions.
I would suggest that you not characterize fellow volunteers as having ego & kingdom-building-problems, especially if you want to work with them. Comment on the edit, not the editor. A Wikipedia article is open to editing and comment by all editors, that is one of the good/bad things about Wikipedia. None of us own articles we have worked on. The people who have edited your article or commented upon it are volunteers like yourself and are simply trying to make Wikipedia the best it can be. Shearonink (talk) 20:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Shearonink,
I realize my (non-directed) comment about the Editors (to someone I trust) may seem like bad manors (not knowing who did what), but I do realize that it may enlighten or turn the guilty person(s) off. However, being 71 (72 on St. Pat's Day) and a very principled person, I find it very hard to pull my punches. (Egotistical & grudging Editors have no place in a business like this!)
Please know, that I live by my favorite saying: "If the truth hurts, tough" and that I also try to be a very truthful & patient person (even after 5 mos. of helpful road-blocks). I'm NOT at all the type of person that gossips or talks behind people's backs, I usually confront the person(s) in more subtle ways, but I have being overloaded for the last two years & now recently frustrated, what would you think if:
1) You didn't hear anything from or receive any citations since 1/24 (almost a month);
2) You ask them a question on 2/20 and receive no answer to your question, but
3) You receive 5 citations the very day after the question is asked, and
4) NO ONE signed their citations!
5) Also, your article receives LARGE Red Mark-ups in the Ref section, the day after your question???
BTW, Thanx for your comment about DLPbots and PDFs, however my files can be ".com" files and after asking all the Editors, I still don't know how to present the "published notability facts" to any of the Reviewing Editors. Also, the picture of Image #2 was there a day or two ago and now recently was removed. Can you help me get it back or tell me what to do?
Shearonink - I've forgotten how to find the History for the last 5 citations! Can you give me the info for the Search Box/
Gregory L. Chester 01:42, 24 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)
Greg -
You're not indenting your replies so it's making it hard to follow the thread in order, but anyway...
You need to understand that almost everyone who edits on Wikipedia is a volunteer, real life sometimes interferes with our Wikipedia'ing. No one is being paid to be here, we're all here because we think an online encyclopedia is important. So sometimes it can take a while for answers to get back to the questioner.
The templates are never 'signed', you can look in the page's edit history and click on the 'diff' points to see who placed the tags on the article, but 'who' is not important, "why" is. Your draft was accepted, now it is being refined. Fellow editors see things that can be improved so they are editing it as well.
There are no large red markup in the references now, that kind of transient stuff can happen when an article is being cleaned up, everything looks fine now.
The reason the article is getting edited (and yes, sometimes that means 'tagged') is because it is an now an 'article, when it was a draft-version, when it was an Article for Creation, it didn't get as much attention. It has nothing to do with asking questions or not...it was accepted as an article. Now, that doesn't mean that other editors might not have an opinion or that other editors won't edit the text and the references...of course they will! That's what we do around Wikipedia, we edit everything that comes onto any Wikipedia page.
Wikipedia will only accept published sources. They do not have to be online. If you can cite the information into something like <ref> Article about SpiderGraphs, Whatever Magazine, Volume ?, Edition ??, Page ???</ref> that will be fine. I do not understand what you are referring to when you say you have "files", be they pdfs or whatever...if the sources are not published then they are not verifiable and if they are not verifiable they are unusable. For information to be presented in a Wikipedia article it must be verifiable.
Now, let me repeat this next statement again...
So far as I can tell, the red-lettered image has not been touched by anyone other than yourself. If you look back through the articles history, you will see that it has always been red-lettered. Something has been wrong with the file-name since it was added to the article. When I look at your Commons edits (the Wikipedia image-repository) I do not see this image-file name, I only see these edits: Commons edits for GregLChest. The image for "File:Hpqscan0002a = The Real Estate SpiderGraph - A Home-Buying Decision-Making Aid.jpg" does not exist, it was never uploaded.
If you wish to see who has edited this article, just click on the "view history" tab up at the top near Read/Edit.
SHEARONINK:
Thanks for clearing up some of the Citations, etc., but just to keep you informed: I sent Commons my permission letter for the Image Hpqscan0002a this morning and went back into the article just to discover that Mabdul have already deleted the image! I pushed "undo" and explained myself.
As for answering all my questions (NO!). Most of my problems have been about Notability & Reliable 3rd party Sources! (Omitted my question regarding my sending "files" to the Reviewing Editors.)
Thanx again,
Gregory L. Chester 21:47, 24 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)
SHEARONINK:
SORRY for my confusion and Thanx again! Things happened to fast and when I came back into your User Page and Clicked on edit (All things began to look alike!) The Files that I mentioned are of the actual pages in Ref #5 & #15 in my article. (I just don't understand, that if someone researched a Handbook found in the Library of Congress, they could say it was not a reliable source??) However, in addition, one of the eight scanned pages is from the Programmable Controls' (trade magazine) "The P.C. Insiders Newsletter" section, that has a paragraph about me, entitled "PC pioneer weaves a comparison web." And overlaid on that page is a copy of another paragraph from Plant Engineering (trade magazine), entitled "How To Pick a PC." While they were published, Im sure no information on them can be found, since that was Jan. 24, 1985! (Sorry about not indenting, but when I hit "Tab" it doesn't work??)
Sincerely yours,
Gregory L. Chester 22:39, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
You don't hit TAB, you put -->.:<<-- in front of your post.
If you are in possession of these magazine articles, they can still be cited. They do not need to be online. Go to: Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners with citation templates, cut/paste the template that is there, add it to your article filling out the parameters for each reference.
Shearonink
Thanx for the TAB info! But since it's 4:10 pm, I'm going to break for Lunch! One question: Do you remember my misguided Ego comment about some Editors? Well, can you find out if Chiswick Chap has a HS diploma, he just cut my article down to a third of what it was and misconstrued its total meaning!!! Every paragraph has been revised?? and Notes, References,and even Alsos have been removed!!
I really need a break NOW!
Gregory L. Chester 00:20, 25 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)
911 SHEARONINK
I appreciated your help getting my article moved to the Public Wikipedia Website, but unfortunately, I went back to the article late yesterday and noticed that Chiswick Chap had made "Major work-over & removals," changing almost every paragraph in the article and removing several sections! "NOW THE ARTICLE IS AN ABOMINATION AND CREATES MORE CONFUSION AND INCORRECT INFORMATION, THAN THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE TRIED TO CLEAR-UP IN THE FIRST PLACE!"
The article is now an embarrassment to me and I'M BEGGING YOU TO MOVE THE ARTICLE BACK TO AFC! When you and the other Reviewing Editors read the article, I'm sure everyone will agree that the changes made, were not done following the spirit of the Wikipedia-Process to make an article better!
Respectfully submitted,
Gregory L. Chester 20:16, 25 February 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GregLChest (talk • contribs)
Hi Shearonink
I am new to Wikipedia & I have just created a noteworthy article "Shudra - The Rising... A Film" on the upcoming movie "Shudra - The Rising". You have wrote that this article is not "significant & important" enough to be added to wiki. I would request you to review it once again as this article supports to the existing topic of Wiki Shudra as a visual because the contents of shudra would be more liked by anybody in visuals & that is possible only when they are informed about such kind of movie & its links. This article has references of "Times of India" a leading newspaper of India, "Bollywood Hungama" a leading bollywood news site of Film Industry, moreover it has links on "IMDB" the international hub of movie database, we have our own website... there are hundreds of other links can be cited here, even if you just type "shudra" on any search engine or social websites (including google, youtube, facebook etc.) you will get the info of the film. As you have reviewed this article & found 'not acceptable' for wiki I wanted to ask you what else I should put in my article to get it accepted. I don't even know how to write on your talk page so I just edited one message on your page (plz don't take it as an offence) if this is supposed to be a message to you.
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.
Lubomír Hargaš
I have the information about Lubomír Hargaš, Czech track cyclist and three times vice world champion in tandem race, that he died on August 20th 1997, while training on the road. He had a crash with a bus. Unfortunately there is no source at all in the net, but I got the information from the Czech cycling association. I will try find an old cycling magazine with the information. --Nicola54 (talk) 13:12, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That would be be a big help to add a referenced name...so mauch of the information seems to get slightly lost with time. I still can't find anything on Georg Pawlack(1933), Hans Bachmann(1913), Hans Lange(1913) or Max Hansen(1913)...(looks like 1913 was a bad year for cyclists). Shearonink (talk) 06:26, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, good to hear from you. I am, too. My "agenda" is trying to have the academic consensus represented, so shoot me. New Year's resolution - concentrate on more positive work. Parkwells (talk) 13:31, 17 February 2012 (UTC)|}[reply]
Well...I'm abandoning the article and its talkpage to others' tender mercies, they can have at it. There's so much energy being spent on this *one* issue...I looked around and realized that there is so much at WP that really needs to be done. I'm trying to help out and do more AfC Reviews. Just call me biased with an agenda...Wooo-hooo!Shearonink (talk) 14:03, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ahhh....I see that you cracked under the pressure (lol). Myself?...I'm refusing to engage, it's a non-violent protest of a sort. I've been trying to help out at AfC and in -en-help instead. Shearonink (talk) 04:16, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's just I keep thinking something will penetrate - a Smithsonian exhibit might indicate the state of the field? Will get away again.Parkwells (talk) 10:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the feedback. I have added some more inline references (at least I think I did what you were referring to ;). I also removed the External Links section. Didn't think it read like an advertisement, I used other similar products as a reference (such as Shorewall, PfSense, and M0n0wall and only mentioned verifiable information. Please let me know if you still think it does and what specifically. Thanks! --DanGynn (talk) 19:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are two major issues with the submission at present.
First is that I see no clear claim of notability. Has this system won awards? Have there been profiles of it in WIRED or the Wall Street Journal or has it been profiled on a TV business news network like Fox Business or MSNBC? Has it been endorsed by a major player like Microsoft or Dell? Does it have a majority market-share among similar products?
The second is that the submission needs independent reliable sources. The majority of the sources for this draft are from the company itself, it needs more references like the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article, more articles/columns/stories that are about the company or product and how notable it is. In general, newspapers/magazines/transcripts of TV&radio interviews (or news shows) on media websites=good. Social networking sites/press releases/anonymous blogs= not so good. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, ideally it is a compendium of published information gathered from reliable independent sources that have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy and editorial oversight.
Also, I have not taken a look at your examples above but the problem with using the rationale of "these other articles exist" is that editors really need to look at "good articles do exist, what can I do to make my article better?". For instance, Wikipedia has over 3.8 million articles, some of them really aren't as good as they should be, so what we all need to do is look at the Wikipedia Good Articles for our examples. For PacketViper, the best articles to work off of would probably be the Wikipedia Good Articles about Software. Hope this helps, Shearonink (talk) 20:25, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Shearonink. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Vivid Racing
Good call, declining Vivid Racing at articles for creation. "Betty Merm" is an employee of the company responsible for marketing - which probably explains the tone of the article. --Biker Biker (talk) 21:16, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am sorry, you are mistaken. I did not accept this AfC, I declined it. I simply moved it from your userspace into Articles for Creation space, which is where it belongs for now. Please look at the Comments I left. Thank you.Shearonink (talk) 23:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. I'm pretty sure that the only sources you may object about their reliability are no more than 3: i.e. the references numbered
5, 7 and 12. Instead the main problem of the article is actually its notability. So, to be sure, I would like to ask a simple question you may answer with yes or no:
Do you have considered the notability issues I've reported in User_talk:PCMorphy72/Syd_Barrett_genealogy?
(there you may also understand why you shouldn't have to consider the Ancestry.com source, numbered 4, as "user-edited").
PCMorphy72 (talk) 09:33, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ancestry.Com is an user-edited site & their Licensing agreement says that the information cannot be republished.
Late Night Syd Barrett Discussion Room is a discussion board, therefore it is also an user-edited site.
Find A Grave(discussed at the above site) is also an user-edited site.
MyHeritage.Com is also an user-edited site.
Flack Genaology is copyrighted...do you have written permission, sent to OTRS, to use information from that website?
Ref#1 only links to a book listing.
The descendants are not direct descendants, they are either stated to be collateral descendants or siblings. As such, they would not seem to have a measure of notability on their own and are not public figures, so to assert claims of notability and that this subject should be the object of a Wikipedia article, of an article in any encyclopedia, at the present time seems tenuous at best.
The neutrality issues brought up in other Reviews {"but the interviews was annoying for him") have not been addressed.
The notability of this particular subject as brought up in multiple Reviews has not been sufficiently addressed. Seemingly idle curiosity about the relatives of a public figure is not enough for a Wikipedia article. It might be enough for a discussion on a forum, it might be enough for a musician's fans to post about on some fan site, but in my opinion this draft has not explained why this particular subject should be in Wikipedia.
I declined this submission. In its present state I would decline it again. If you think that this submission will be accepted then submit it again, I will not review it a second time. Shearonink (talk) 17:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for comments. My reason for reverting the decline was the user is not a registered user so how seriously am I meant to take their opinion? I am happy to address the issues raised usually, but this one was unusual. If you are able could you take a quick look and let me know if you think their decision was okay. NealeFamily (talk) 20:53, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but what do you mean by stating that they're not a registered user? They might not have a "user page" but they are auto-confirmed since their account if over 4 days old (since January 8, 2012) and they also have at least 74 edits. Also, you might not realize this but recently Category:Pending AfC submissions has had anywhere from 200 Pending drafts up to over 600 Pending drafts at a single time. The backlog can be enormous, so almost any assistance from folks, even editors who might make mistakes (like me!) or editors who might need to learn more about Reviewing AfCs (like perhaps Princepesa01) is a good thing. I will take a look at your draft later today when I have the time. Shearonink (talk) 21:15, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Shearonink, I feel much happier about that now you've explained, don't bother checking - I'll treat it as genuine and see what needs doing NealeFamily (talk) 23:32, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
DC Wikipedia meetup #28 is on Saturday, March 10, 2012, from 7pm on at Capitol City Brewery in downtown DC. (11th & H St NW).
Join us for an evening of socializing, chatting about Wikipedia, discussing Wikimedia DC activities and the latest preparations for Wikimania 2012. (RSVP + details)
You're invited: Smithsonian Institution Women in Science Edit-a-Thon!
Who should come? You should. Really.
She Blinded Me with Science: Smithsonian Women in Science Edit-a-Thon will be held on Friday, March 30, 2012 at the Smithsonian Archives in Washington, D.C. This edit-a-thon will focus on improving and writing Wikipedia content about women from the Smithsonian who contributed to the sciences. It will be followed by a happy hour meetup! We look forward to seeing you there!
Hello,
I am the Wikipedia Regional Ambassador for New EnglandI've noticed that you have been involved in administration of some of the pages that students from that domain have been creating and editing. I would like to politely ask that perhaps some gentler and more welcoming tact could be used, even if you must take action on their articles for policy non-compliance. The Professors and other Campus Ambassadors certainly do their best to explain all policies beforehand, but not every student - like most new editors - get's it right the first time. The Education Program has been very successful in creating lasting editors, between 5-10% of students go on to be willing editors in their own right after they finish the program, which is significantly higher than the editor/readership ratio. Please then help us to further our joint mission of increasing editorship by trying not not biting the newbies, but perhaps guiding them. Maximilianklein (talk) 04:39, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Shearonink. You have new messages at Username's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Also, I am an avid AfC reviewer too. While your decline rationale for the submission is OK, I felt source would have been better "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable, independent sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified, and reliable independent sources are needed to establish the notability of the subject. If you need help citing sources, please see Referencing for beginners." Best, Bmusician06:09, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was interested in seeing what had happened to trigger that notice to the wrong editor, so I looked at that request at AFCHD and do understand the article-creator was having issues getting the draft submitted. I'm just saying that it doesn't appear that the system has a bug, that is all (and I see you've now found that "u" parameter and corrected it to User:Mokeller.) I've left some links for this editor as I often do after a Review. I've said to other AfC folks in IRC that it would probably make Reviewers' task much easier if the AFC Review template had multiple options for Decline instead of the single option it now has. That way we could notify these creators that it isn't just one aspect that is wrong with their draft, but multiple aspects that need fixing before re-submission. Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 15:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Shearonink, I haven't been around irc much lately but I'm sure you're cranking away. :)
I just finished a massive draft on our own very topical subject of paid editing on Wikipedia. I would love your careful assessment in checking it for neutrality, formatting, organization, reference detail, etc. I hope you can take a quick look. Cheers! Ocaasit | c12:24, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A cheeseburger for you!
Hey, just wanna say thanks for helping me out with my signature, I've sorted it now :) Yellowman94Talk • I am the yellow man. That's what they call me, cos that's what I am.01:15, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
History of Texas City, Texas
Thanks for your response to my AfC submittal of the above title. Late in February, I had started to add more information to the then-existing History section of Texas City, Texas. However, one thing led to another, causing the section to grow much larger. I decided that probably the section should be condensed by striping out many details, and that a separate History page is warranted. That's why I submitted the new article. Concurrently, I have created a new history section on my sandbox, which I propose to incorporate on the main Texas City page. Please review the AfC in that light, and let me know your thoughts. Thank you for your help. Bruin2 (talk) 01:18, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi--I am very grateful for any help. I have gone berserk with the Wiki "help referencing for beginners pages". They are not helpful to me. I'm perhaps unusual. I've been going CRAZY trying to make them even appear on a page. I know how to do this without all the wiki language but with it, I'm going insane.
The film itself fits ALL the wiki criteria-was reviewed by major newspapers (Village Voice) and won 10 film festival awards and has been heralded as a unique film about a totally different side of life, and a pageant that isn't usually covered.
I'm doing my best but all I seem to get from reviewers is that I'm not doing it right but no one really tells me what is wrong. The references are all accurate. They seem to be in the style that Wiki wants. I didn't add any quotes from the articles so as to make things more encyclopedic.
Please tell me what I can do to make this work. It is a terrific film and very significant! Thanks so much
Thanks a lot for your help with my submission "Solvency Modernization Initiative". I have added independent sources in my references as per your advice. Can you please take a look and see if it's ok now. Most of the independent references on this subject tend to be professional and financial/industry publications (you said that should be fine as it establishes notability. This is indded a huge issue in the US and internationally). News agencies like Reuters also reported on that (found it through Factiva) but on their subscription services for financial pros and others willing to pay.
Thanks again for your help
CIPR DK — Preceding unsigned comment added by CIPR DK (talk • contribs) 14:42, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for advising me on the additional permissions that are needed for the Patrick E. McGovern article, and I hope that you are able to provide me with access to it again for editing.
Hi Shearonink
My name is Tony Savo, I'm the subject of a wiki page being considered for deletion. [Tony Savo]
First of all I want to thank you for your diligence in researching the matter. You seem to be the only one approaching the matter from an unbiased perspective. The reason why my page is being challenged, in short, is due to a personal attack from an ex CFM band member.
I have several credible references (non-blogs) to prove 1. I do in fact exist 2. I am the CEO/Producer of CFM and 3. I have made several contributions to the sport of Mixed Martial Arts and pop music in general.
It is common knowledge that I am the founding member of CFM also the CEO/Producer and can be easily verified with a basic google search.
The reason for contacting you is obviously its upsetting to see people who are uninformed, trying to discredit my life's work and passion. I have multiple links to prove my accomplishments and would be glad to post myself but I think it could be deemed a conflict of interest or violation of terms at the very least.
In the interest of truth and fairness, I think I have provided sufficient proof of myself and my accomplishments and would greatly appreciate your help/attention in this matter.
Please let me know if I can do anything else to help establish that my page is accurate.
You are correct that contributing to the discussion will be seen as a conflict of interest. If there are any in-depth articles or columns from ESPN/Sport Illustrated/Billboard/Daily Variety/major (non-MMA in focus) media outlets aboutyou, that would be the best way for broad notability as a sports/music person to be established for the subject. Almost all of the coverage is from MMA-focused outlets and some of the coverage you mention above is a listing of names, and does not speak to the notability of the subject. I do think it is entirely possible that the article might be deleted by consensus (as you can see the majority of the various posts at present are not for "Keep") but am hopeful that the content will still be preserved as part of the Coalition Fight Music article. Shearonink (talk) 02:16, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
response
Thank you for your timely response.
Would a link to an article in a major national newspaper quoting me as CFM's CEO/Producer suffice?
Also, I have links to coverage by USA Today's UFC Media Group and can provide scanned copies of articles written about me/CFM in print magazines.
Please advise, thank you again for your time and energy in this matter.
.jpg)
Greg, please read "For what happened to that missing image...." at your talk page before posting about this issue again. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 21:56, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
