Jump to content

User talk:John from Idegon/Archive 16

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:John from Idegon

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by JPxG (talk | contribs) at 00:30, 2 August 2023 (Repair several decades-old busted links (via WP:JWB)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archive 10←Archive 14Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18→Archive 20

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SpaceTEC National Resource Center for Aerospace Technical Education‎

'The logo for the article: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SpaceTEC National Resource Center for Aerospace Technical Education‎, (== Orphaned non-free media (File:SpaceTEC-logo-with words, small.jpg) ==) was inadvertently removed during my editing. It's a legitimate logo for this use and adds value, but I don't wish to do anything now that might cause further issues. Also, I don't know how to add it back if that's an appropriate step to take.

Could you please advise whether you think it's worth putting back into the article and, if so, where I can find directions as to how to do that? Thanks for any help you can give. AMKJR 10:29, 4 June 2013 (UTC)' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alkoller (talk • contribs)

Since that is a "fair-use" exception to the copyright law, it cannot be used anywhere but in the encyclopedia, on the page it is intended to identify. Long story short, you can't put it in til the article goes up into the encyclopedia. Gtwfan52 (talk) 15:36, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Looking again at your article, it is going to be denied again. You still haven't shown notability. All of your references are either directory type listings, pages that publish press releases, or blogs, none of which would be considered reliable sources (WP:RS) and which do nothing to show notability. Wikipedia only publishes articles which meet notability guidelines, in this case WP:CORP. We only write about things that the world has made note of (hence the somewhat confusing term "notability". You will need to show that there has been substantial coverage of the subject in newspapers, magazines, TV or Radio news, or books. I think you may be confusing importance with notability. A subject (such as a facility that trains technicians for the space program) may be very important, but if it isn't written about in the media, it is not notable. A subtle difference, but an important one to understand. Gtwfan52 (talk) 23:07, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
OK; thanks for providing perspective. I'll try again - this time with focus on what I hope to be enough media coverage to be notable. If you have a moment, please give some of these are look. If any meet the requirement, I'll get some more like them. Thanks.

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20040920005186/en/SpaceTEC-RWD-Technologies-Unveil-National-Online-Aerospace http://www.umbc.edu/techcenter/news/092004.htm http://distance-educator.com/spacetec-and-rwd-technologies-unveil-national-online-aerospace-technician-certification-examinations/ http://www.thefreelibrary.com/SpaceTEC+and+RWD+Technologies+Unveil+National+Online+Aerospace...-a0122250874 http://www.certmag.com/read.php?in=970 http://daily-record-baltimore.vlex.com/vid/rwd-spacetec-aerospace-technician-certification-68692620 https://www.questionmark.com/us/casestudies/Pages/spacetec.aspx http://blog.questionmark.com/podcast-training-and-certifying-aerospace-technicians-at-spacetec%C2%AE http://www.podcast-directory.co.uk/episodes/podcast-training-and-certifying-aerospace-technicians-at-spacetec%C2%AE-13075259.html http://www.nasa.gov/centers/langley/news/researchernews/rn_SpaceTEC2011.html http://flhespectator.com/tag/brevard-community-college-spacetec-training-center/ http://www.ccweek.com/news/templates/template.aspx?articleid=153&zoneid=3 http://spacereport.blogspot.com/2013/04/april-17-2013.html https://programs.ccid.cc/cci/sites/default/files/CCID_Newsletter_Fall_2012_2.pdf, p8. AMKJR 01:23, 13 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alkoller (talk • contribs)

Please, please, read WP:RS. The only one of all those sources listed that has any merit for showing notability is Businesswire. Trade publications are generally not reliable sources, as they usually simply write from press releases from the organization that is the subject of the article; not a truly independent source. A reliable source is going to be a site that has some fact-checking procedure in place, or traditional media like newspapers, books published by reliable publishing houses (as opposed to "vanity" presses, which publish books for pay), magazines or TV & radio news websites. You must have some sources from that list that provide substantial (not directory listings or mention, but a good portion at least of an article) or the subject will not be considered notable. Company websites (like NASA and the community colleges you cited) are fine for referencing facts, but you must show notability. Businesswire is a step in the right direction, but you need more. Gtwfan52 (talk) 03:32, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 June 2013

A modest proposal

So we've been talking about Buster running for adminship, but it occurs to me that you would be an ideal candidate as well, particularly because of your work at the Teahouse, assisting newer users, your high percentage of article edits, and your overall happy disposition. I'd nom you too. You should consider it. Go Phightins! 19:35, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

And I would gladly second your nomination. You have exactly the demeanor to create collaborators instead of combatants. As WP develops into its next stage, admins that have a people-touch will be needed. You fit the bill! ```Buster Seven Talk 20:53, 8 June 2013 (UTC)
Guys, I am flattered by your confidence in me! However, from what I have seen of RfA, I do not stand a snowball's chance in hell of passing at this time. I have only created 5 articles, all stubs, and I won't have a year and a half in til the end of August. I feel I need to get at least one good article and several more lesser grade ones under my belt before I try. I have also had some significant run ins with some of the longer term editors here mainly centering on my commitment to making this a reliable reference. RfA would not be the place for me at this time. Maybe next March. Thank you both so much for your confidence. Gtwfan52(talk) 23:16, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Help with editing a high school wiki page

I was wondering if you could help me fix my additions to my high school Wikipedia page. I wanted to add a section about WATERFORDrama, the school's drama club. However, when I try to add it, it gets taken off. I read the rules and guidelines for editing a high school Wikipedia page and changed parts in my additions so that it meets the criteria. And yet my additions continue to be taken off. Could you help me to make my additions encyclopedia worthy?

{{subst:Help Me-ns}}

My Additions:

The current drama director Shane Valle started directing in Waterford in 2004 and originally only put on two shows per year. Gradually he has increased the amount of shows to about five per school year. Valle was the one to coin the name of the club as being WATERFORDrama. In 2013, Valle decided to end the school year with the spring musical Guys and Dolls, his 31st show directed.

Over 70 shows have been performed since the high school club started. These shows were not easy nor cheap to produce. The rights and royalties that must be paid in order to produce the shows can cost thousands alone. The shows are almost completely student run: lights, sound, set design, house crew, concession, and ushering are all done by volunteers and students. The money needed to produce a show is raised mostly through advertisements, ticket sales, and sponsorship donations. Waterford high school does give an initial budget for each show so that some important payments can be made before other money needed is raised. Of course, in show business one is lucky if they break even on the shows they put on, but especially with some of the smaller shows performed, there is occasionally a slight profit made that will go toward either the next show to be carried out or toward upgrading equipment such as spotlights or speakers.

Over the years as the show popularity increased so did the number of people who auditioned to be in the shows. More people would be casted in the musicals performed as opposed to the plays due to the fact that many musicals have large dance numbers which require a lot of people. Around 35 to 50 people are typically casted in a musical. The number of people who audition to be in the shows changes year to year so sometimes some sacrifices must be made to accommodate a smaller cast.

The most popular show performed by WATERFORDrama, judging by ticket sales, would be the 2012 performance of Les Miserables.

16mccormickl (talk) 14:12, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mc cormick. I'll be happy to help you later today. Thanks for your interest in doing it right. Gtwfan52 (talk) 14:39, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Stu Klitenic for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether if Stu Klitenic should be deleted or not. The conversation will be held at the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stu Klitenic until a consensus is held and everyone is welcome to join the conversation. However, do not remove the AfD message on the top of the page. Ashbeckjonathan 03:37, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

John from Idegon, we moved your Teahouse host profile

Hello Gtwfan52! Thank you for being a host at the Teahouse. However, we haven't heard from you lately, so our bot has moved your Host profile from the host landing page to the host breakroom. No worries; you can always just Check in and our bot will move your profile back. Editing any Teahouse-related page will do the same thing for you. If you would prefer not to receive reminders like this, you can unsubscribe here. Thanks for your help at the Teahouse! HostBot (talk) 03:50, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited New Hartford, New York, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages New Hartford, Native American and Race (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Help with publishing my first page

Hi, would you help me with publishing my first page? It's in my sandbox and I've worked hard on it for a few years to get accurate, and seek advice about how to move forward. Thanks! TL001 (talk) 17:38, 13 June 2013 (UTC)


Hi, it seems APerson241 rejected my page, wanting instead to park the Rip Chords underneath the Bruce and Terry page (rip_chords now forwards to that page) but that is very inaccurate from a historical perspective. What do you recommend I do next? thx. TL001 (talk) 20:44, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Question about references and notability

I was curious about the number of sources I need for notability. I have read through all of the Wikipedia documentation, and reliability and quality of the source should not be the issue. I am using Entrepreneur (major publication) and Smoke magazine (major publication) along with an interview of the owner and information from their website. Please let me know what I am missing so I can better craft an acceptable article.

Prpiranha (talk) 05:06, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Firstly, original research is not allowed, so any information you are sourcing to an interview has to go. Entrepreneur is a reliable source, as a magazine with a history of accuracy that exhibits evidence of consistent fact-checking. Smoke, on the other hand is published by Lockwood Publications, a publisher of trade journals. Trade journals are not considered reliable sources as they generally produce their copy straight from press releases issued by the companies they are covering.
Is the article you are citing at Entrepreneur online? If so, please provide a link. I will format that link and add it to the article and I need to read the referenced article in order to know if it vets notability.
References serve two purposes on wikipedia. Firstly, they are there to make the facts we report verifiable. But secondly, they also serve to show notability. Encyclopedias, by definition, are "tertiary" or third party sources. In other words, we only write about what others are reporting. In order to have an article published in the encyclopedia, you have to show that the world is talking about your subject through references from reliable sources, independent of the subject of the article. I will be denying the article again, and frankly, it is pretty rude of you to keep requesting review before you make any attempt to fix the issue. Good luck. If you need any more help, just come back here and ask, or ask at the teahouse, which you have a link for on your page. Gtwfan52(talk) 05:23, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
I found the Entrepreneur "article" online myself. It is not an article, but a caption to a picture in a slide show that talks briefly about the founder of the company. This is not in depth coverage of the company in WP:RS sources that is needed to show notability. And Smoke is not a reliable source. I fail to understand why you keep asking for advice and then absolutey fail to heed said advice. A Google News search turned up no hits on the company name. Without reliable sources discussing the company, you do not have an article. Also, are you getting paid for creating this article? Your username seems to indicate that you may be in the Public Relations field. If you are, you need to say so. Whereas it is not prohibited to get paid to generate content on Wikipedia, it is frowned upon and regulated. Gtwfan52 (talk) 05:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the information. I was not intending to resubmit without heeding your advice. I added multiple sources before resubmitting. Also, I am a student and not a public relations professional. Maybe in a few years though! Prpiranha (talk) 06:00, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

I was also curious about how the Xavier newsletter came in to play. I understand that this is just a newsletter, but a collegiate newsletter should be going through peer editing, not copying a press release verbatim, etc. I have it cited on the page, but the article itself can be found in the Xavier archives athttp://www.xula.edu/mediarelations/TMAX/tmax_april2010.php#king_cont. Not trying to be pushy here, just trying to gather more information as I learn. Prpiranha (talk) 06:31, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

That is an article about the founder of the company, not the company itself. Also, college newspapers are considered only marginally reliable. That is not important though, as the article is not about the company. Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:35, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Smoke, incidentally has been used as a source on other cigar stories in Wikipedia. So possibly it is a reliable source and I will give you the benefit of the doubt on that. Review in AfC is tough for a reason. If your article gets to the encyclopedia without being shown notable, it makes it harder to reject the next article that isn't notable. For the newer editor like yourself, rejection and mentoring is more likely to keep them around than putting the article in and then having it deleted thru one of the three deletion processes. Since that article is not online, and many if not most public libraries won't carry magazines about unhealthful activities such as smoking (I am a smoker, BTW), I am going to have to trust you that the article in Smoke talks about the company in detail.
A bit of further review for you. There are places where the article sounds very promotional..Firstly, if the company is well-known in St. Louis, why aren't there articles about it in the St. Louis newspaper? You should strike that. Also, discussion of charitable donations, when unreferenced especially, give the impression of promotion. I don't see what it adds to the understanding of the company. It only serves to promote them. That part should go. You should tone down the stuff about the owner, as this article is about a company, not a man. A mention that he founded the company is fine. Why isn't really important. Remember that encyclopedia articles are just supposed to report on facts that others have written about. They are not an essay or a story. Encyclopedias are supposed to be somewhat boring!Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:48, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

I believe I have made the edits you have requested, and hope the article is a better fit for Wikipedia. I appreciate the detailed feedback and time you are spending to assist me in developing my skillset. Let me know what you think. Prpiranha (talk) 07:10, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 June 2013

WP:Snuggle is live at snuggle.grouplens.org

The snuggle logo
The snuggle logo

Snuggle, the newcomer socialization tool I've been building, is finally ready for general use. All you need to do to get started is point your browser tohttps://snuggle.grouplens.org. Let me know if you run into any trouble. I'll be watching WT:Snuggle. Or you can also justcontact me directly. Thanks for your patience.

See also:

--EpochFail(talk •work) 19:51, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Henry deletions from Wayne, Illinois page

I can understand that some M. Henry information is about her and might not be suitable for a Wayne, IL town page, but deletion of the entire section including her holding birthday parties for "Misty" at Wayne School? I dont understand that. Otherbeach (talk) 21:45, 15 June 2013 (UTC) BJS

The significance is not a birthday party for Ms. Henry, but a celebration of Misty of Chicoteague - the party was for the horse, not for Ms. Henry. Does this make it more significant? You might argue that this belongs more in an article on Misty or Ms. Henry...but this is part of Wayne's history...the link to Ms. Henry and your deletion eliminated all the history...so Misty's history is ok for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chincoteague,_Virginia but not for Wayne? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Otherbeach (talk •contribs) 16:43, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

New article by 1ST7

Hello. I think there has been a misunderstanding regarding the new article I created that you tagged for speedy deletion. Please see here. --1ST7 (talk) 05:30, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, John from Idegon. You have new messages at Talk:Tony DiNozzo and Ziva David.
Message added 15:56, 17 June 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

CLAYCORD.com

Dear Gtwfan52, I made the edits. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Checkingfax#Claycord.com Checkingfax (talk) 01:42, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Can you Edit the Claycord.com page to get rid of this: "Changes made per reviewer suggestions"? It's down at the bottom of the page. There are also two comments in the Edit section at the bottom that seem to now be orphans. Thank you. Checkingfax (talk) 09:33, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 June 2013

I will not tolerate the use of profanity over a porn star on my talk page and I am reporting you sir to administrators

--WPPilot 05:58, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to User talk:WPPilot. --WPPilot 06:01, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Feel free. I have done nothing wrong. there is absolutely no policy violation in calling bullshit bullshit, so unless you are bullshitting, just do what you think you can do. I hate threats. Report me. NOW! Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:39, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
And by the way, it is a policy violation to use a signature that doesn't Wikilink. I am still waiting. Why haven't you reported me yet? Gtwfan52(talk) 06:41, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


Individual awards on school page

You recently reverted an edit to Prairie Grove High School stating individual achievements are not generally discussed in high school articles perWP:WPSCHOOLS/AG). For this particular award, I disagree based on WP:WPSCHOOLS/AG, which also states (in part):

  • Awards and recognition – A list of notable awards and recognition received by the school, staff, or students

The Presidential Scholars Program is the one of most competitive programs that any U.S. high school student may obtain, limited to 141 students per year, and a rigorous application progress Consistent with WP:WPSCHOOLS/AG, I did not divulge the students name, as it, as of yet, not encyclopedic content until the student issuitably notable. Djharrity (talk) 00:30, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I will file that away and feel free to restore that if you like. This is how discussions are supposed to go, unlike the one above. Happy Editing.Gtwfan52 (talk) 02:17, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Regarding "Red Links" in articles

Thats not the template I wanted to use. I left you a reply to your reply on my question at the teahouse.

Hello, John from Idegon/Archive 16. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 05:02, 23 June 2013 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Talkback
Hello, John from Idegon. You have new messages at Tattoodwaitress's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 16:00, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Regarding guidelines

If you can be level-headed regarding maybe trying to draft rough guidelines for some of the most problematic content we have, which is generally that which relates to subjects which are inherently opinionated, like religion, politics, pseudoscience, etc., I think we could use all the help we could get. The idea at least initially is for some editors to draft one or more proposals, which can then be submitted for review by the broader community. If you would be interested in that sort of thing, and would be capable of keeping a level head, I can't see any reason for you or others not be involved as well. John Carter (talk) 22:21, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, John (I too am John). I will look at what you have going so far and do what I can do. Gtwfan52 (talk) 22:40, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: Hoover High School (San Diego, California)

Re your message: No, I don't think so. The only recent vandalism was the edit you reverted. I think all of the other edits have been done in good faith, though rather misguided. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:13, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you ( regarding Daegu )

Thank you for informing the user[1] about the neutral point of view policy. As you implicitly mentioned, commentary and personal analysis do not belong in objective/fact-oriented pages like Wikipedia. Slee250 (talk) 07:18, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Emerson Middle School RfC

Hi. I have reverted your redirect of the Emerson article, in order to request an RfC on its talk page. Btw, I reference you in my summary of the dispute, but I don't know your gender, so would you mind my asking what it is, so I don't have to refer to you as "he/she"? And if you'd rather not reveal it, then that's fine too. Thanks.Nightscream (talk) 18:02, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

A belated welcome to Wikipedia. :-) RfC is a Request for Comment, which means we're requesting someone else outside our discussion offer their objective opinion. Listing a discussion for RfC requires the lister to write a brief summary of the dispute, which I've done. If you feel I have not accurately summarized your position or the arguments you provided for your position, then my apologies, and feel free to add your own viewpoint/clarification.
I left it unsorted because I didn't know which of the categories listedhere was the right one to place it in. Thanks.Nightscream (talk) 19:20, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
A company is generally distinct from the specific location or locations where its stores are located, or in the case of a single-location business, from the building that houses. I agree that if we were talking about a single-location business, your rationale would hold. The reason I think that Union Hill represents a unique situation is because of the "fuzzy" area therein: The building was one type of school named Union Hill, and now it is a different type of school named Union Hill. There is a unique history attached to that specific building, in part because it harkens back to the now-nonexistent town in which it once stood, and the evolution of the entity housed in that school. The two entities have a "shared" history at that building, which I don't think would be well-served by removing any and all mention of its current incarnation, or its name from the article title. I think it would easier to just regard the article subject by its current name and giving all of its history.Nightscream (talk) 00:37, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
It appears you may have some personal attachment here, and that is fine, I understand that. If your interest is to memorialize the now extinct town, you can always write an article about it. As a town, even a no longer existing one, all that is needed to show notability is the existence of a map, a census record or a former post office with that name to guarantee notability. If your interest is to memorialize the high school, that article is already written and under the title of the middle school which now occupies it. This situation is in no way unique. Towns are absorbed and schools merge all the time.
It might be beneficial to stop and remind yourself of why we write Wikipedia. Ir isn't so we can relive old memories. It is to provide a reference book for the entire English speaking world. Do you think if someone was looking for information on Union Hill, New Jersey or Union Hill High School, they would have the knowledge to look under Union Hill Middle School? (Hark, there already is an article on Union Hill, New Jersey!)
I feel my analogy was spot-on. A single school occupied a single building. That school merged with another school and now has a new name. All three are and were notable. A new, non-notable school moved into the building. Just because a notable school once occupied it does not make the non notable school now there notable. Neither Emerson or Union Hill is on the NRHP. No assertion has been made that either are on the New Jersey equivalent. And no assertion has been made that anything truly historic ever happened at either, or that there is something unique about them. They are middle schools that used to be high schools. Nothing more.
Referring back to my alma mater in Indiana, The entire school system was located in part of the building that was until 4 years ago the middle school. In 1959, the high school moved to a new building. The elementary school had moved to several buildings by then. Four years ago, the high school moved to yet another new building, the middle school moved to the high school's building and the former entirety of the school system was abandoned and is scheduled for demolition, the property to be sold off for development. None of that makes the middle school there notable. I really don't see any difference in Union City. By the way, that will at some time have to be DAB'd, as there is a Union City High School in Michigan. Gtwfan52 (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Just to clarify, Union Hill did not "merge" with Emerson, only their student bodies did. Union City High School is a brand new high school that replaced the former two high schools.

There was previously a discussion on the disambiguation issue, and it was decided that the Union City High School article would retain that title until someone creates an article on the other schools of the same name.

As for the rest of your message, I base on my position on the reasoning I have given above, and not any personal attachments. I do not have any desire to memorialize either the school or the town. I simply think that the article question should include all of that school's history, including its various incarnations, and should be referred to by its current name. My work on Wikipedia is driven by the site's mission to create an encyclopedia, and nothing else. Wikipedia is not a memorial (WP:MEMORIAL), nor a soapbox (WP:NOTSOAPBOX), nor a platform for editors to make a personal point (WP:POINT), and I've always opposed efforts by editors who violate these principles, most recently explaining this, in fact, to another editor who admitted that his inappropriate edits to another article were driven by a desire to memorialize back in March. Unless you have some evidence or reasoning that illustrates any agenda or bias on my part to the exclusion of other possibilities (like the motive I just expressed), I would appreciate it if you focused on my arguments, and not what you imagine my stated of mind to be. I have a feeling that we're pretty much at the Agree-to-Disagree Threshold, which is why I called for the RfC, and that's perfectly fine. We can acknowledge that we've reached an impasse without questioning each others' motives, per WP:AGF. :-)Nightscream (talk) 02:21, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Why did you label the following as vandalism and remove it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Disqus&action=history 

02:12, May 26, 2012‎ 158.38.46.137 (talk)‎ . . (17,393 bytes) (+7,174)‎

The text was overly long and cranky towards WP, I grant you, but the deletion bothers me because the IP user did have info in there. It wasn't just blathering. Plus, the version revised to was from a user with a stated COI, which makes me want to double-check things.

I'm chronically ill & my symptoms are a bit flared up today (you don't need to reply "I'm sorry" or something, I'm just mentioning a fact that affects my perception), so I might have missed something that seems obvious to you. My illness may or may not let me get back to you quickly, so thanks in advance.

--Geekdiva (talk) 09:58, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I have no revisions in the history you linked. Gtwfan52 (talk) 15:44, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Again, I might have missed something, but isn't the following your user name?
(cur | prev) 02:29, May 26, 2012‎ Gtwfan52 (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (10,219 bytes) (-7,174)‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit by 158.38.46.137 (talk) identified as vandalism to last revision by Thetylerhayes. (TW)). Thanks, --Geekdiva (talk) 07:11, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Gtwfan, he is referencing something that happened 13 months ago ... perhaps you've forgotten? Seems like a pretty errant talk page post, probably by someone with a COI. Go Phightins! 13:16, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
So something that happened over a year ago is important enough to send me a note at 4am? I don't know, and at this late date, I don't care!Gtwfan52 (talk) 13:25, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 June 2013


Comment on a CSD nom

Hey there, my article on Apostolic Thrones is intended to consolidate the information, presently scattered across wikipedia, about who sits on what apostolic throne (i.e. the throne of Peter, of Mark, of James the Just, of John, of Thomas) into one single page. When you reviewed it I was still in the process of creating it and sourcing references. I have now added references to back up each specific point of discussion. I appeal to you with humility and reverence, as a fellow Christian and also as a fellow Railfan (with a great love of passenger carriages, EMUs, tramways, funiculars, metros, and unusual railways), to not seek the deletion of the article, but rather to assist me in it. My knowledge of wiki markup is somewhat limited. If you could help me in a constructive manner by creating on the article a table listing each apostolic throne, the date of its foundation, the name of the current or last occupant, and the date the current occupant was seated upon it, or the throne was vacated (as is the case of the Apostolic Throne of St. John, canonically vacant since 1922, in Ephesus, itself a ruined archaeological site), I would be much indebted to you. May God bless you and grant you many years.

Patrick Manifold Wiki Page

Hello User:gtwfan52 It appears you have deleted the edits I did to a page about a basketball player Patrick Manifold saying it was not using sources and citation? I do not understand as I know the man personally? All the information is 100% true, I even emailed him asking to clarify certain information. I wanted to add a picture but I am not very good with computers and I did my best. I spent hours making those edits and now they are gone? I would love to make this page properly so it was a really good page but I do not know how to do this and I do not often have time to learn. Please help me, you are a great user and very good at Wikipedia, please help me gtwfan52, I will be so upset if the page gets deleted, I have spent so long on it. Thank you and I hope to hear from you very soon! Wgw2024 (talk) 02:41, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:John_from_Idegon/Archive_16&oldid=1168302227"