User talk:Alansohn

Welcome!

Suzanne Engo

I'm just letting you know that another user has all but blanked this article and is now attempting to have it deleted. 02:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)John celona (talk)

RacePacket

Racepacket (www.racepacket.com) is owned/operated by Robert Platt. 207.91.86.2 is the ip Address for Fleischman & Harding LLP in DC (http://www.fh-law.com/). One guess who works at Fleischman & Harding LLP.

Status at WP:NYCPT

Hello. I've noticed that you have registered as a member of WP:NYCPT. Please go to Wikipedia:WikiProject New York City Public Transportation/Participants and add or correct you status as an active or semi-active member, as well as if you are an admin, whay projects you work on, and a sample of the work you do in the NYCPT scope. Thank you. —Imdanumber1 (talk • contribs • email) 15:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Lori Rom

Hi! I recently added some info to an article about an actress called Lori Rom. Would you mind editing it? Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lori_Rom. Thank! Neptunekh (talk) 16:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Opinion?

Your opinion, please? Nyttend (talk) 16:49, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

DYK :)

Number 108

On 12 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Leonard Lomell, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Wow, you have got to archive your Talk page! I could barely load it to notify you :) Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:45, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Tournament of Champions (NJSIAA)

Created this tonight. Jrcla2 04:14, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Interesting HS sports source

As if you didn't have enough to work on, I know. But I just thought you might find this interesting. It served as the reference for my Woodbury & Paulsboro HS sports sections and might be of some use to you in future editing. Jrcla2 22:10, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Alex_DeCroce.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Alex_DeCroce.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 03:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly ^hi! 03:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:AlfredESteele.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:AlfredESteele.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 04:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Alison_Littell_McHose.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Alison_Littell_McHose.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly ^hi! 05:00, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:AnthonyBucco.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:AnthonyBucco.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly ^hi! 07:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Bill_Baroni.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bill_Baroni.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly ^hi! 04:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:BobSmith.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BobSmith.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 06:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Kelly ^hi! 06:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

User Gregchance324

Can you please block this user for a year or longer? Look at his history and edits - all he does it completely vandalize and rip apart TCRHS. He's a total waste of life. -Jrcla2 (talk) 07:07, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Census Bureau map of Maywood, New Jersey.gif

Image Copyright problem

Hi Alansohn!
We thank you for uploading Image:Census Bureau map of Maywood, New Jersey.gif, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 21:26, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Census Bureau map of Norwood, New Jersey.gif

Image Copyright problem

Hi Alansohn!
We thank you for uploading Image:Census Bureau map of Norwood, New Jersey.gif, but there is a problem. Your image is currently missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. Unless you can help by adding a copyright tag, it may be deleted by an Administrator. If you know this information, then we urge you to add a copyright tag to the image description page. We apologize for this, but all images must confirm to policy on Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks so much for your cooperation.
This message is from a robot. --John Bot III (talk) 21:30, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Need your help

Could you look at The Pillory (magazine) and try to fix the infobox in it? I don't know what I did wrong that makes the information drag out of the box like that and off the screen. -Jrcla2 (talk) 05:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks I'll try that later today. -Jrcla2 (talk) 14:32, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

The Seventh Coin

Hi! Would you mind editing a page called the Seventh coin? I added to that page recently? Here's the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Seventh_Coin Thanks!Neptunekh (talk) 00:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Cape May - Separating Wheat from Chaff

Hi!

I have to disagree with your decision to undo the rewritten lede on the Ocean Grove, NJ story. (I also have to apologize for not previously contacting you. This is my first Wikipedia contribution, and I still don't know how to do much of the procedures.)

I came across the article as I was preparing a beach weekend, and noted that the article was rated only "Start Class," and doesn't yet register on the importance scale. As a United Methodist clergyman and 15-year veteran copy editor at three different Pulitzer Prize-winning newspapers, I think I can help explain how the story suffers.

The justification for removing the attributed information had nothing to do with its level of attribution. The rewrite I gave it changed no facts, but simply put different ones in the first paragraph more important and interesting facts to draw the reader into the article. In newspaper parlance, you had buried your lede under a flurry of unrelated details that did nothing to build the foundation for the basis of the article. In my opinion, that is 1) What Ocean Grove is today, 2) How it was founded, 3) How the specifics of its founding affected its development, and 4) How the remaining effective specifics of its founding have created a unique community WITHIN a chartered, incorporated township.

The amount of legalese in your first paragraph, which reflects your depth of knowledge of NJ civics, is NOT INTERESTING unless it makes a larger point. The fact that Ocean Grove "is an unincorporated community and a census-designated place in Neptune Township" all could -- and in my opinion, should -- be in the Geography section. I left in Monmouth County as a way to identify the general location within NJ, but on reflection I believe I should have written that it is XX miles or a ZZ-minute drive south of New York City.

As for the word editing, please consider the redundancies of 1)Ocean Grove is on the ocean in New Jersey; that would be "on the Atlantic Ocean"; 2) on the ocean in New Jersey means it is located on "Jersey Shore"; 3) that means the Ocean Grove camp meeting site would be "on the New Jersey seashore"; 4) juxtaposing "Ocean Grove" with "Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association" is one too many references to Ocean Grove within eight words.

Factually, please consider that Ellwood Stokes' historical sketch on the Camp Meeting Association web site says:

1) The state legislature granted charter at the request of the newly formed ruling body of 13 clergy and 13 lay persons "under the following title: The Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association of the Methodist Episcopal Church." My understanding is that the "title" consisted of chartered ownership, NOT the name of the land owned. If so, then Ocean Grove would not have been founded as the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association," 2) Since the Camp Meeting Association was half clergy and half laity, the community could not be said to be founded by "a group of Methodist clergymen," 3) That Stokes organized the first re-creational outing in summer 1869 along with eight to 10 families; Osborn was a promoter of the camp-meeting movement sweeping the country in the mid- to late-19th century, and encouraged and worked with Stokes to turn the site of their outing into a camp meeting. Therefore, Osborn would not merit equal mention with - let alone top billing over - Stokes. Remember that it is Stokes whose statue graces the grounds, and not Osborn. 4) The state charter granted only six acres; subsequent additions were purchased (see below). But NO mention is made of the "square mile" so often referred to as Ocean Grove, but most certainly not granted by the charter as currently stated in article. 5) No reference to anything more than the 230 acres purchased by 1872 (a square mile is 640 acres). Information contained in the Geography section of the article mentions the community as only 0.4 square miles. The community still has the same northern and southern boundaries as those mentioned by Stokes (Wesley Lake and Fletcher Lake), so if the owned land has been cut to less than half of the claimed square mile it must have been chopped off the west by road development or eroded from the beach on the east. Was there ever one square mile? Or was that hyperbole?

So, a briefer and simpler description of what Ocean Grove is today and how it was founded could thus be established much more strongly and with much greater substance in the first two paragraphs.

As for how the camp meeting roots and control of the land affected development and created unique attributes of Ocean Grove, please consider: 1a) Stokes provides astonishing statistics for the growth of the community, none of which is included in the current article but should be. In two years it grew from six acres to 230, upon which 1,500 lots had been surveyed -- and "two-thirds of which are now sold." In two years, 1,000 lots were sold! and of those lots, over 300 already had on them cottages, "some of them very beautiful, varying in cost from one hundred fifty to over three thousand dollars...." (Need to translate those figures into 2007 dollars) That dovetails nicely with the subsequent decline into "Ocean Grave." 1b) What caused that decline? Hard question to answer with attributable information, but CRUCIAL. Again, the Camp Meeting -- this time with blue laws -- seems to be the key. And when talking about a real estate arc of some 140 years, statistics about the real estate market last year have NO MEANING. 2) The land of Ocean Grove being owned by the Camp Meeting Association was critically important and relevant to the reason Ocean Grove is listed on the National Register. How is it that Ocean Grove is noted for its abundant Victorian homes (I think "abundance of Victorian homes" is what you mean to say)? Where they came from seems to be linked to the meteoric growth of the community caused by the camp meeting. But the blue laws, perhaps inadvertently, had a profound effect on preventing widespread demolition of the prevailing architectural style. Again the history shaped the current form of Ocean Grove. 3) The ongoing incorporation struggles of Ocean Grove and how it can maintain its identity as a community (or "census-designated place") despite being part of another township are rooted in ownership of land by the camp meeting assoociation. 4) The extremes of Ocean Grove's blue laws are extraordinary! Banning commerce on Sundays is the usual application; closing the beach all day (or even the current half-day) on Sunday is unusual. Outlawing vehicular traffic on Sunday is very unusual. And forcing residents and visitors to REMOVE THEIR VEHICLES (buggies and wagons, then cars) from the town before sunset Saturday is unheard of!!!!!!!! This is interesting history, and foundation for the current restrictions of using the beach on Sunday morning as well as a shore resort being "dry." Both continue to shape the ethos of the community. 5a) A knowledge of Methodist history and bible is helpful in sorting out the names of streets and landmarks. For instance, "Pilgrim Pathway" is NOT a biblical name but a reference to the believers who journeyed to Ocean Grove to restore their souls; Mt. Tabor Way IS a biblical name, as is Beersheba (as mentioned) and Mt. Carmel (as NOT mentioned). Meanwhile, Wesley Lake is named for the founder of the Methodist movement in England; Fletcher Lake is named for his fellow Anglican priest John Fletcher, who evolved as Wesley's right-hand man and probable successor except that Wesley outlived Fletcher. Asbury Avenue is named for Francis Asbury, the only British preacher sent by Wesley who remained here during the American Revolution and who became the defining figure of American Methodism. Whitefield was, with John and brother Charles Wesley, a founding member of the Holy Club at Oxford that John later called "the first rise of Methodism." Webb is named for Thomas Webb, a retired British army captain and prodigious lay preacher based in New York who made a richly successful evangelistic journey south to Philadelphia and into Delaware and throughout New Jersey. Same with the meeting site itself. There is no "Bishop-Janes Tabernacle." However, there is a tabernacle named for Bishop Edmund S. Janes, who was consecrated in 1844 and was instrumental in founding congregations of slaves freed during the Civil War. 5b)And why is neighboring Asbury Park, featuring its own Asbury Avenue, also filled with Methodist names (Bishop Calvin Kingsley; historian Nathan Bangs; Bishop John Emory, founder/namesake of Emory University)? Because Mr. Bradley (first name unknown to me) who developed Bradley Beach to the south and Asbury Park to the north, was a devout Methodist!

Finally, the Civil Union civil lawsuit does not belong in an article about Ocean Grove. At the very least, it should be split into a parallel entry on the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association. More specifically, it belongs in a story about the white-hot controversies in denominations - including The United Methodist Church - on rights and responsibilities of gay and lesbian persons. I personally have the utmost sympathy for the plantiffs, but their story is not germane to the story of Ocean Grove. It is part of something much, much bigger, as suggested by WikiProject LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, Transgendered) studies at the LGBT Portal.

I would appreciate your thoughts in response to my thoughts as shared herein. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Circuit Hider (talk • contribs) 07:44, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Van Nest - Weston Burying Ground, Bound Brook

This cemetery is located in Hillsborough on the border with Manville. It is nowhere near Bound Brook. I tried to contact the author of the article, one Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), but he didn't reply. I think the article should be renamed, maybe drop the erroneous Bound Brook altogether. -98.221.133.96 (talk) 11:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Request for arbitration

I'm adding you as an "involved party" in a WP:Requests for arbitration about RAN's use of footnote quotes. RedSpruce (talk) 13:51, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

It's baffling that it should require arbitration to determine if editors can use a feature built into the system. If the only way to determine that there is no issue other than personal preference is by arbitration, then so be it. Alansohn (talk) 14:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Nothing baffling about it. All of the features built into the Wikipedia system are subject to misuse. Indeed, all arbitration requests are about using features that are built into the system. RedSpruce (talk) 14:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Engaging in insults like this one isn't useful, and is contrary to WP guidelines. RedSpruce (talk) 16:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

It is and was a clear, concise and accurate summary of your actions here. It would probably be more useful to come up with a defense for your actions at WP:RfAr and seek a resolution that minimizes damage to Wikipedia and to your future editing priveleges. Alansohn (talk) 16:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

When you post a comment in an arb request, you're supposed to include diffs that support your claims. You might consider using a spell-checker too. RedSpruce (talk) 16:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for the tip! I thought it more important to make sure that your half-truths were responded to, while making it abundantly clear that you are the person whose incivility and refusal to cooperate are the underlying issue here. Unfortunately, the machine I was on at the time lacks the automatic spell-checking I have elsewhere. When I have finished collecting and sorting through your accumulated policy violations, I will also go back and correct the spelling errors. If your pedantic responses here are intended as a demonstration of your problem-resolution skills, I'll probably include a few of these diffs in the RfAr, as well. Alansohn (talk) 17:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)