Jump to content

Talk:Philadelphia crime family

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Joseph Massimino)

Comment

[edit]

Was Lenehan an associate of the Philly family or the deCavalcante's, or both?

Delco Nostra

[edit]

It definitely needs some commentary on the so-called "Delco Nostra" operation in Delaware County —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.39.233.131 (talk) 21:15, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bruno and Atlantic City Gambling

[edit]

When I lived in Philadelphia from 84 to 96, I remember reading that, contrary to this article, Bruno had voluntarily relinquished control of A.C. to the Five Families, and that several members of his family conspired to kill him because of this as well as his decisions on narcotics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.60.254.242 (talk) 22:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Territory in New Jersey

[edit]

I removed this information from List of Mafia crime families.

"Philadelphia crime family - has had a very prominent presence in southern New Jersey, maintaining a strong historical presence in southern New Jersey's Atlantic City and the surrounding area (Ventnor City, Margate City, etc.) Other South Jersey cities with considerable Philadelphia family influence include Vineland, Camden, and Hammonton. Outside of southern New Jersey, the Philadelphia family has a small but historical presence in the cities of Newark and Trenton."

This information could possible fit into this article, but it needs to be referenced before its added into the article. --Vic49 (talk) 17:13, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Membership numbers

[edit]

An editor user two user names (It77fgj & It77fgh) is repeatedly adding unsourced membership numbers, contrary to our policy of [[W{V|verifiability]]. As I have no intention of violating WP:3RR, I am letting the issue sit for now, but will remove the unsourced info tomorrow, unless someone else removes it first or their is substantial discussion here to the contrary. Comments? - SummerPhD (talk) 03:52, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article does give sources for the 50/100 number. So I see no reason to change it, barring updated numbers. --Ted87 (talk) 02:09, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What sources are there on the Phili crime family out there?

[edit]

I cant seem to find any :s — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bkizzler (talk • contribs) 03:19, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Philadelphia crime family. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:25, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Philadelphia crime family. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Philadelphia crime family. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:59, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Current membership section

[edit]

Since User:Joefromrandb is unwilling to start a discussion per WP:BRD, I'll do it for you. You say these are WP:BLP violations, but they are sourced to WP:RSs including the U.S. Department of Justice, The Philadelphia Inquirer, CBS, etc. There are some gangsterreport sources that need replacing yes, but by in large, it is reliably sourced. WP:3RRNO: "What counts as exempt under BLP can be controversial. Consider reporting to the BLP noticeboard instead of relying on this exemption." We go by reliable sources, not what you think is "garbage". Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 01:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sad thing is I don't even think you're trolling, I think you actually believe what you're doing is acceptable. Competence is required to participate here, and you have an egregious misunderstanding as to the seriousness of making disparaging comments about living people, and the fact that the highest-quality, thoroughly vetted sources are required to be used when doing so. This is completely non-negotiable, not because I say so (although I certainly do), but because Wikipedia says so. The issues here are so ubiquitous I hardly know where to start — here's just one: You just restored the text: "Merlino continues to serve as the boss...", while inserting a source titled "Is Joey Merlino still running things in Philadelphia?". This isn't Jerry Capeci's blog; this is a serious encyclopedia. You have a source stating that law enforcement are wary of Merlino's claim to be retired, and are monitoring the situation. Instead of reporting this fact, you wrote: "Merlino continues to serve as the boss". This is no joke here. You cannot use Wikipedia's voice to state as fact that a living person serves as the "boss" of an extensive organized crime syndicate unless it's backed up by unimpeachable sources. Joefromrandb (talk) 15:59, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My last attempt to amend the prose about Merlino as suggested by User:EdJohnston on my talk page was reverted once again. Joefromrandb, you have no respect for BRD or to improve this article together, which dare I say it, is verging on not here, unfortunately. I don't think there is any "negotiating" with you on this and you will continue to edit war instead of offering how we can make the info you culled better. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 14:13, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Asserting that an editor with over 10 years' tenure and almost 40,000 edits is "clearly not here to build an encyclopedia" isn't "daring"; it's puerile heckling. Your repeated straw man arguments about my supposed lack of respect for WP:BRD bring nothing to this discussion. As it happens I do in fact have respect for BRD, but so what if I didn't? "Joefromrandb has no respect for BRD, and as such, I am entitled to ignore WP:BLP and freely libel living persons", is that your argument? Sure sounds like it. There is no BRD when it comes to violations of the biographies of living persons policy; it's R,R,R,R,R... You are correct that I will not negotiate about this. As far as edit warring goes, I promise I will stop edit warring if and only if you give me your solemn word that you will stop beating your wife. Joefromrandb (talk) 07:40, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Have you even looked at the Department of Justice sources? They literally give the names with the roles in the crime family. Tell me where the BLP violations are and I will look into finding more sources, but you have done no such thing. Saying there are BLP issues and pointing them out are two different things. I have added the info to my sandbox to improve it over the five days and will notify when it is done. As for the grossly insulting WP:PERSONALATTACKS that you sew into every single NOTHERE response to me are not okay. You have been blocked in the past for that and continue to add that unproductive rhetoric into your responses, while I am here trying to improve this article. I hope this is the final toxic response User:EdJohnston needs to block you. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 15:09, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well you go right ahead and hope in one hand, shit in the other, and see which fills up first. Joefromrandb (talk) 16:48, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do you truly not understand this? Cosa nostra is a secret society. Even someone as flamboyant as Merlino is not going to go around wearing a "Philadelphia crime family" shirt, with a nametag saying: "Joseph Merlino, boss". Taciturn old timers like Ligambi would likely die before even acknowledging that such an organization exists. You can say (providing it's properly referenced) that the Department of Justice identifies Merlino as boss, Ligambi as consigliere, and so on. You cannot use Wikipedia's voice to state as fact that Merlino is the boss, etc. Joefromrandb (talk) 17:09, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds like something you could've added instead of culling the entire thing. Stop with making these grandiose assertions of me. I'm not a fucking idiot. Of course I know that. That makes no difference in the slightest here. If the Department of Justice identifies them as such, a reliable source, that should be echoed by Wikipedia. But seriously, thanks for offering the first piece of negotiation—I will incorporate that. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 17:28, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it can be echoed by Wikipedia that the Department of Justice identifies them as such, not that they are such. I don't understand why this is so difficult for you. Joefromrandb (talk) 17:43, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dove il bue?? You're chalkchock full of this hiiiiiilarious rhetoric eh? Well, after edit warring by culling when that could've been an easy fix you could've implemented, and taking two days to offer that first suggestion, I'd say I'd find it in the reflection of your computer screen. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 17:50, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ROTFL! That was hilarious! Of course "bue" is one of those words that can mean different things in different dialects (and perhaps in some obscure dialects of English "chock-full" is indeed communicated using "chalk full" as a linguistic succedaneum); I was using it as "ox" rather than "ass", but that was wonderful nonetheless. I was attempting to break it down to nursery rhyme-level simplicity, and that's something we would chant as children to the cadence of "one, two, buckle my shoe": "uno, due, dove il bue?; tre, quattro, tutto fatto..." Joefromrandb (talk) 18:08, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also like to add that pointing out what a dickhead I am with each of your comments does not strengthen your argument. I am not a nice person. I am a no-good-son-of-a-bitch. I don't say that to boast; admittedly, it's a flaw, and I try daily to remind myself that there's a difference between refusing to suffer fools gladly and just being an asshole. Just like the BRD straw man, the fact that I'm an asshole has zero bearing on any of this. This is about BLP and BLP only. I remove violations of the biographies of living persons policy upon sight, and I do so with extreme prejudice. While I'm under no obligation to do so, it is in fact my preference to alter material to make violations BLP-compliant, when doing so is feasible. The key word here is "feasible"; the violations here were myriad and ubiquitous; gargantuan in egregiousness and vast in scope. Making this article BLP-compliant would be a Herculean endeavor, so it's both impressive and admirable that you intend to do so. At the same time, this is a volunteer project, and it's unreasonable for you to assert that I should have done so myself. That said, you're obviously very passionate about this article, and as you're clearly going the extra mile with your work, I will offer my help, to what limited extent my availability and ability allow. Joefromrandb (talk) 22:40, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now we're getting somewhere. Thanks. I've also solicited the help of User:Vic49, who is helping at my sandbox. After the current membership is taken care of, I'm going to try and tighten the prose of the body. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 01:27, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Philadelphia_crime_family&oldid=1212404624"