User talk:Jessicapierce

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A cup of coffee for you![edit]

Cup-o-coffee-simple.svg thank you for your advices!!! Al20dash (talk) 19:17, 1 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]


If you’re going to add kelis allegations to nas wiki you can at least add the fact that he denied all her claims, okay B.b.brown (talk) 20:14, 4 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Ms. (Jessica) Pierce ...

... This is Robert F. Frazier. I'm an "American Politician" & long-time trial lawyer (46+ years). Earlier in 2020 I tried to add all of my offices held in my career (My "Wiki" Article currently only.lists one.) with my own Edit. Later-on you removed all that I added with the comment "[It] looks like a CV".

Please allow me to assure you I wasn't posting a "CV"!! I'm going on 72 & am engaged in a 46+ years-long legal career (so far) & have completed (so far) a 53+ yeats-lomg political career in which I have held many elected & appointed offices. I assure you I'm NOT looking for a job NOR posting my "CV" ... ha, ha ... I would just like my "Wiki" Article to be accurate, & as completd as others who are designated "American Politicians".

Frankly, I was quite non-plussed when you designated my attempt to supplement the very spartan existing article (My Parents aren't even identified!!) as some sort of attempt by me to post my "CV"!! I'll be 72 this coming May 30, 2021. & I assure you I neither am looking to be hired nor do I need to be hired ... ha, ha!! I simply would like my career recounted on the same complete basis accorded to other American Politicians & Lawyers!!

Could you propose what I could do to avoid this problem (Your removal of my true & actual career details) & obtain a "Wiki" Article that fairly presents my career??

Looking Forward To Your Reply, I Trust I Am Yours Ms. Pierce ... (Hon.) Robert (F. Frazier, Esq.) RFFESQ41 (talk) 11:12, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Michael Olowokandi[edit]

Hi Jessica, I made edited changes with supporting references on Michael Olowokandi but you reverted it back. Melchizedek123 (talk) 22:34, 6 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

He played 36 games in the 2002–2003 season before sustaining an injury that forced him to miss the rest of the season. In his last year with the Los Angeles Clippers, he sustained a hernia and knee injury, which greatly hindered his ability after being listed as a top free agent prospect for the 2002–03 season. He finished that season averaging 12.3 points (on 42.7% shooting from the floor) 9.1 rebounds, 2.2 blocks, and 2.7 turnovers per game. During that offseason, he signed with the Minnesota Timberwolves. His time with the Timberwolves was marked by serious injury which resulted inconsistent play. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melchizedek123 (talkcontribs) 22:37, 6 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notable achievements from his best season was a season high 30 points vs the Chicago bulls on March 8th. "Olowokandi contributes to sweet Clipper win" Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).</nowiki> or this:<ref name>(citation details)</ref>

However, I'm not sure the content you added is actually contained in that reference. We're talking about the National Register pdf, right? I did a quick skim and I'm not seeing a lot of your content contained there.
In addition, your text had a ton of errors, such as misspelled words, incomplete sentence, and missing punctuation. These issues really need to be addressed if you'd like to re-add the content. Jessicapierce (talk) 22:42, 27 November 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Many thanks for editing my wiki page; Sandeep Sander[edit]

Hi Jessica

I just saw your editing of my Wiki-profile. Many thanks - my "Denklish" (Danish and English mixed) has been replaced by your proper English :-) Well done. I am curious to know if you are interested in doing more work. I have some important inout/contributions - and I need a "supporter" :-) Feel free to email me on Best regards from Silicon Valley Sandeep--SandeepSander 05:22, 3 December 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SandeepSanderSanderMan (talkcontribs)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you so much for the advise! I know that it must be painfully obvious that I am still figuring things out.Brially (talk) 06:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No worries whatsoever - looks like you got it sorted out! I did condense the duplicate citations (you can see my edit here, in case it's helpful to see how I did it). The formatting here can be tricky, and sometimes one wrong character can really mess things up, which is why I always encourage the use of Preview. Keep in mind that you can always test things out in your sandbox, too (link at top right). Have fun, and if I can help with anything else, just let me know! Jessicapierce (talk) 06:51, 4 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I ran across this article Cupid, in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting and was simply going to fix some cite errors. But a closer look at the revision history and the page of User talk:Guardian212, indicates there has been previous issues. If you scroll all the way to the bottom, there is this oddity - This is a user sandbox of Cupid. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user and is not an encyclopedia article. And then there is additional references and sources below the external links. And I also got a 90.7% on a copyvio detection, seen here, and also saw a previous copyvio in the revision history. I honestly don't know where the last clean version of this article is to roll it back to, could you please take a look and see what you think. I noticed your warning on Guardian212's talk page and it appears they have ignored it. Thanks, I certainly would appreciate it. Isaidnoway (talk) 05:00, 8 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you so much for letting me know. I have that page on my watchlist but didn't get a notification about those recent changes, which are not an improvement. I've reverted the page to what I think is the last good version (I'll take a closer look in a sec to make sure). Cheers! Jessicapierce (talk) 05:18, 8 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Abraham B.[edit]

Sorry about the confusion. I realized that I'd removed a cite, by accident, and was going back through my edits trying to figure out what it was. I became totally confused because you'd addressed the error that I was looking for already and I hadn't realized that anyone else was working on it. I was trying to eliminate the non-Bolden elements of the article about him, and left numerous cn requests, in addition to the deletions. Activist (talk) 03:40, 9 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you![edit]

Bubble Tea.png Thank you for being diligent in noticing and reporting an issue with KolbertBot, I went through the list of potentially affected edits and you seem to have fixed them all. Enjoy a bubble tea on me! Cheers. Jon Kolbert (talk) 23:14, 9 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you! It was pretty easy, they all showed up in search results on a ref error I was looking for. I did check a handful of other recent bot edits, but I didn't find anything weird. Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 23:28, 9 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question about redundant/unnecessary article[edit]

Hello, I'm unsure where to post about this, as this isn't something I've encountered before. I'm wondering why we need History of the Interport Police (whose title also apparently has a typo in the name of the organization), when we already have InterPortPolice. Shouldn't all the relevant content go there? If this needs merging/moving/whatever, I would appreciate it if the editor answering this question would do so, as this is pretty far out of my wheelhouse. Thank you for your time, Jessicapierce (talk) 23:42, 12 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jessica, usually the best place to start is on the talk pages of the articles in question. It's possible the history article was created as a college class project, but I'm not certain. I do think the articles should be merged, as the original article is still quite short. (I'm leaving your help request active so you'll get more comments.) - BilCat (talk) 00:06, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll run point for you in a merge proposal if you're uncomfortable doing that. Some aspects of Wikipedia still overwhelm or intimidate me, and I've been here over 12 years! :) - BilCat (talk) 00:08, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Any guidance you can offer on this would be great! It's only in the past few years that I've ventured beyond fixing grammar, and there are so many functional aspects of Wikipedia that are foreign to me. Jessicapierce (talk) 00:13, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Whoops, I got a phone call in the middle of typing and should have been more clear. I should have said "if you'll point me towards how to propose a merge, I'll be glad to try and navigate that, but if you'd rather just do so yourself, I would appreciate either form of help". Jessicapierce (talk) 00:15, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You could take a look at Wikipedia:Merging. If you feel capable of understanding and following the instructions, I don't want to take away the opportunity to learn. However, If your eyes glaze over after trying to read it from WP:TLDNR syndrome, or otherwise, then I'll propose the merge, though it won't be today.
Meanwhile, it looks like User:Mosterbur is the professor, and started the history article as a cut-and-paste of the original article. User:Scaloggero24 appears to be the students. How are you at personal interaction in problem situations? It's not really my strength. :) - BilCat (talk) 00:27, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you BilCat & Jessicapierce and my apologies for the delayed response (end of semester can be quite hectic). My student originally edited the InterPortPolice page and made the change to History of because he felt he had only really contributed to the history of the organization rather than its current efforts. He is learning and we both appreciate your assistance in that process Mosterbur (talk) 19:15, 13 December 2018 (UTC)MosterburReply[reply]
Thanks so much for the starting point. I will finish up a few (well, a lot) of things I'm in the middle of, and then take a look at that merging info. I'll get in touch again if it fries my brain. :) Jessicapierce (talk) 00:34, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just did a WP:BOLD merge - you don't need to formally propose a merge if one looks uncontroversial as in this case :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:09, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, thanks very much Galobtter! I'll read up on how to do this myself, but I do appreciate you taking care of it. Also, thanks to you and BilCat for being super helpful and friendly about this - I've been snapped at a fair few times for asking questions, so I always appreciate civility. Best, Jessicapierce (talk) 16:31, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, what I did was basically just copy the main part of the History of the Interport Police over to InterPortPolice. Also, it's unfortunate that your questions have been met with incivility; you can always ask me if you need any help - and I don't snap :) Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:05, 13 December 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Stettheimer article and your deletion and reply comments[edit]

Jessicapierce - you commented on my request for a senior editor due to a complaint about deletion of my EXPERT ADDITIONS on the Florine Stettheimer article. However when you directed me to your "Talk" page, there is no archived former comments by you on the Stettheimer article so I've had to start a NEW section "talk page"

As I spent 3 hours writing corrected FACTUAL information on Stettheimer, correcting completely UNTRUE information that was on her site, which you deleted two days aga, and wrote yesterday (at my request for a Senior Editor Review Dispute) that I must add valid PUBLISHED SOURCE MATERIAL..PLEASE PUT BACK MY DELETED MATERIAL AND I WILL BE HAPPY TO ADD THAT PUBLISHED SOURCE MATERIAL!!!!

I was in the midst of doing so, but the entire information I added was deleted.

I apologize but the format for working - the "language" necessary for writing on Wikipedia - is so complicated and difficult to learn, that it would take me a month or more to do so, and frankly I don't have time to become fully conversant with it enough to correct the information. I don't know how ANYONE who is not a trained editor by Wikipedia can understand how to do all the formatting you require. I would GREATLY appreciate it if I could write all of the correct, accurate, accurate biography and description of her life and significance, development of her work in the entry, citing all the many relevant sources of COURSE, and have a trained editor at Wikipedia assist with the proper formatting as it requires an expert, not a scholar in content, not Wikipedia format to do so. Is that possible?? Also I feel it is my duty, as THE scholar on Stettheimer who is the ONLY ONE who after 20 years of work on her life and work, the person who dated ALL her works for the first time, who wrote the ONLY biography of her life, actually spoke to/interviewed for my biography in 1995 the only surviving family members, her lawyer, her extant friends, all of whom are now dead, co-organzed the first full retrospective on her work since she died in 1946, and knows and can identify every building and figure in ALL of her extent paintings, I feel it is my DUTY to write a comprehensive entry on Stettheimer in WIkipedia for future readers and scholars/students to use.

The problems are:

  • as I was writing and adding a great deal of new and corrected information to the Stettheimer entry, I could NOT CHANGE AND ADD NEW SOURCES/FOOTNOTES TO THE ENTRY!!! or EDIT THE ONES THERE THAT WERE CITED WITH FALSE FACTS!! Your editing function on Wikipedia does not allow that!
  • Also after adding a certain amount of information, Wikipedia editing shuts down and doesn't let me add anymore.


--Barbarabloemink (talk) 20:01, 5 January 2019 (UTC)Barbara BloeminkBarbarabloemink (talk) 20:01, 5 January 2019 (UTC) January 5 2018Reply[reply]

Hello @Barbarabloemink:, I'm sorry it's taken me so long to get back to you. It looks like you've gotten help from various editors on the article's talk page. You mentioned not being able to find your own account's talk page, so just in case this is useful, you will find it here. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 17:05, 11 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi Jesse, I am Jwale2 and I edit here, I need your support. The reason why I need your is that I just want you to list yourself as a participant on my user page I tying to create a user group for my geographical area where i could train a lot more on how to edit on wikipedia but the unfortunate think is that members do no meet the standard requirement that would enable me get a user group for my community. Your support to my project of attaining a user group would key to develop members of my society and also ensure I promote the rich culture of my society. Thank you Jwale2 (talk) 15:41, 16 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edit on Lumberport, West Virginia[edit]

Jessicapierce, thank you for your time viewing the page of my small town. I did not realize that I had not listed my source when I added the information so thank you for realizing my mistake. On the account of errors in the page, I was mostly just typing whatever my source had written while adding my own play on words here and there, and seeing as how my source was over 40 years old and I am from an area with different ways of saying things, the source was just written for the view of whoever lived around the area. I appreciate your eye for these problems, while being a bit upset that all my hard work was deleted instead of someone just mentioning it on the "Talk" section of the page. Thank you.

Gouldilocks 53 (talk) 20:22, 25 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Gouldilocks 53:, and thanks for getting in touch. The reasons I removed your addition to the page were explained on your talk page here. These problems remain unaddressed in your recent contribution of the same text.
As I said on your talk page, while other editors can always fix minor errors, at some point you're asking too much of others. Your submission is thick with errors; I mentioned several specifics such as capital letters in subject headers, and incorrect punctuation, which you have not fixed. Also, it's still largely unsourced. You say in your edit summary that "a reference for everything up-to 1976 and from there is of my own accord of being raised in and living in the town." Your own experience is simply not considered a source; neither is "ask any citizen of the town". I'm seeing perhaps two references in this entire large history section. There are just too many claims made here, without any sources given, to be acceptable within a wikipedia article.
In addition, I'm sorry, but some of this content is simply not what wikipedia considers noteworthy, such as the closing of the local video store.
I hope you better understand why this text is not acceptable as it currently stands, and why I am removing it again. I am more than happy to work with you on improving and adding to the article, but please gain a better understanding of what wikipedia expects, in terms of writing style and content. Thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 04:39, 4 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I notice that you have reverted a number of my wikipedia edits on topics of which I am a scholarly expert. I am just wondering why Wikipedia prefers to cite non-experts and censor the work of actual experts on topics relating to sexuality? Some of my edits deleted refer to correction of inaccuracies and the editors have chosen to maintain the inaccuracies. I cannot continue to support Wikipedia if all my efforts to ensure greater veracity and expertise on it are continually sabotaged by its editors! Best, Dr Alison Moore, research historian at Western Sydney University Spidersquad (talk) 03:10, 4 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Spidersquad:, I'm afraid I will need some more information before I can answer your questions, as I have no idea which articles or edits you're referring to. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 04:39, 4 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, as others have mentioned on your talk page, I would really advise you against adding your own work as a source, as that's a conflict of interest and is likely to be removed. Please read the info about COIs posted to your talk page. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 04:45, 4 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Spidersquad, read WP:EXPERT. Read WP:Editorializing and WP:Synthesis. You have already been pointed to WP:COI more than once. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 14:37, 4 February 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Special Barnstar Hires.png The Special Barnstar
Keep up the good work! BilCat (talk) 22:03, 5 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]


hey, i need one favor from... Goutam kumar meher (talk) 07:17, 23 April 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A kitten for you![edit]

Kitten in a helmet.jpg

Hi Jessica, I haven't seen you editing in a few weeks. I hope all is well with you and yours.

BilCat (talk) 19:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @BilCat:, thanks for the message! All's well, I just decided to spend less time editing Wikipedia around the new year (it was helping me stay sedentary) and the habit sort of stuck. I definitely want to get back into it a little, if only to get rid of about a million notes to self. Hope you're well too! Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 00:50, 6 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem, I totally understand. I'm doing fairly well myself, thanks, except for allergy issues related to Spring in the South. - BilCat (talk) 01:00, 6 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hear you on that... I'm in Atlanta, and something in the air these past couple weeks has been making me sneeze like crazy. It's doing the same thing to the horses I work with, which is, in a word, gross. Jessicapierce (talk) 01:24, 6 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mount Elgon, Jack Maumbe Mukhwana Lanie Banks[edit]

volunteer cite sources and improve

congratulations for editor of the week,jessica sorry about last time on Arua i was sooo new to wikipedia ,but now i need yo help in improving these entries below, Mount Elgon,Jack Maumbe Mukhwana and Lanie Banks . thanks in Advance

Elizabethfoundationn (talk) 18:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reverting changes to Kakrapar Atomic Power Station[edit]

Hey there. I noticed that you revered my changes to the article Kakrapar Atomic Power Station. It was my mistake that I didn't add an edit message. However, I did preview my changes in the Visual Editor (couldn't view through the preview button since I hit publish by mistake). However, the changes I made were mainly to update the articles and remove incontinences with ground realities as well add better sources. I'm not sure how disputed work on Wikipedia but I urge you to reconsider your decision.

PS: I am relatively new to Wikipedia and not sure how 'User Talk' works or it's ultimate purpose. I'm not sure if it appropriate or within standards or guidelines to point things like this in User Talk. However, I saw no better way of contacting you on this.


Hey Jessica,

thanks for the edits! I still struggle a bit with the citations since I haven't really figured out how exactly this is working. But I am working on it! Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nýlistasafnið (talkcontribs) 12:07, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem, @Nýlistasafnið:! The formatting stuff can take a while to learn, but keep in mind you can always practice in your sandbox (link is at the top of the page). I'm always glad to see an article about the arts being improved, especially by someone who clearly knows and cares about the topic. It would be wonderful if you could add more citations to the article. Thank you for the work you've done so far! Jessicapierce (talk) 15:27, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help with reporting a bug[edit]

Hi, I would love some help reporting a formatting issue I've seen cropping up lately. This is not at all my area, so I got as far as Wikipedia:Bug reports and feature requests and got very daunted. If there's a more (non-technical) user-friendly way to report this, that would be great. Or if I could just explain the issue in plain English to someone and see if it bears reporting at all, that would be fantastic as well. Thank you! Jessicapierce (talk) 16:11, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey @Jessicapierce, could you tell us what the formatting issue is? If you could provide a link to it, or an explanation of what it is, that would help us try and fix the problem. Thanks.  Seagull123  Φ  16:18, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello, and thanks for the quick reply! While patrolling for citation errors, I've seen the same issue crop up over and over again. As far as I can tell, it's always with people using the Visual Editor (no idea if that's relevant). Essentially there are a lot of weird character substitutions occurring in citations. It's always the equal sign =, vertical bar |, and nowiki.
Examples can be seen in these recent edits: here (every citation added), here ("Se=eral yea|t pr=teins have als| been =dent|fied"), here ("Patricia A. Jac|bs, D.Sc.= at the annual meeting of|the America= Society of"), and here (" in Ma|ch=016"). Jessicapierce (talk) 16:29, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here is a new and rather dramatic example. Jessicapierce (talk) 17:46, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've done the honours and created a Phabricator bug report for this bug. Feel free to add your input. SUM1 (talk) 18:15, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This seems resolved; I've closed the help request. Thanks for pointing it out, and thanks to SUM1 for reporting it! Huon (talk) 22:12, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, excellent. Thank you all for your help! Jessicapierce (talk) 23:10, 3 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clan Spalding[edit]

Thank you, Jessica Pierce, for your communications. I can confirm I have no "external relationship" with the people I mentioned in my contribution to the Clan Spalding article, unless happening to live in Scotland or share the name Spalding somehow constitutes a COI. I can assure you that so far from being a "ton of errors", * everything* I wrote derives from reliable, published, if not always online sources.

I'd be grateful if you could demonstrate the erroneous nature of anything I wrote. Indeed, since you seem to reside in the State of Georgia where one claimant to the chieftanship of Spalding seems also to reside, I feel I should ask whether you yourself have a COI in this matter?

Furthermore, the removed content I added to the Marcel Dupre (whom I did not know personally as I was only 3 weeks old when he died) article also derives 100% from published sources.

I am surprised you have taken this action, as I have elsewhere seen unverified and indeed false information on Wikipedia, a case in point being this Dupre article where the utterly subjective claim about virtuosity versus content is unattested and relies on no examples.

I would be grateful if you would address my concerns. Thankyou. Mark G J Spalding (talk) 00:32, 6 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Mark G J Spalding:, and thanks for your reply. I've taken the liberty of tweaking the formatting of your message here so that it displays correctly. (It's bad form to change others' comments on Talk pages, but I wanted to make sure both our messages displayed clearly.)
The COI message I posted on your Talk page was boilerplate info that's commonly shared with users when it seems there may be a conflict of interest. It's something to be aware of, but was not the primary reason I removed your contributions to the Clan Spalding article; I removed it due to a number of other factors. Since we work on a collaborative model, other editors can always step in to fix minor issues. However, at a certain point, it's asking too much work of other people, and your contributions ought to be as correct as possible when submitted. I felt your submission passed this point. As a quick rundown, your edit contained:
  • punctuation errors
  • stray/incorrect words (an errant "on," "I'm" instead of "in")
  • damaged formatting
  • vague wording ("is often said..." - said by whom?; "hated the harshness of the governor")
  • unsourced claims
The content you added to the article is welcome here, but it needs some cleanup work, attention to detail, and some sources. You mention that your information comes from published sources, which is fantastic, and they need not be available online. I'd be glad to help, if you're unsure how to add citations for non-online source material. And please do feel free to edit the article, keeping the above issues in mind.
Regarding the Dupre article, I think I was clear in my edit summary (which you can see in the page history here), but if you'd like to discuss it further, or if I can help with anything else, please do let me know. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 03:19, 6 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Swan 65[edit]

Hi Jessica. Thanks for cleaning up the article. Are you interested in Swans?

Sami Lehtonen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sami P. Lehtonen (talkcontribs) 06:22, 23 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Inaccurate credit for Goof Troop[edit]

Hello Jessica,

I apologize for my inadequacies in using the correct methods and code to do a better job communicating my problem with your Goof Troop article. My background is in animation and definitely not on code. The fact is that I have worked in the industry for a long time and know of Mr. Peraza and his iconic work for the Disney Afternoon. He created Goof Troop alone, not with Robert Taylor. Robert was the Producer who came on board AFTER Mike Peraza had come up with the concept, characters designs and personality profiles and pitch.

You are giving away credit to someone who merely managed the series., Mr. Peraza created it.

You cite the following link which many of us use for pod casts, book interviews, D23 panels and more:

Please reread it, Mr. Taylor was the Producer, NOT a creator. I along with other fans of the show want to see just credit served where it is due. Again, I am sorry I am so bad at communicating with this specific type of language. I'm better with a pencil and sketch pad, lol.

Thank you, Maurry DisneyFanForever (talk) 20:58, 28 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Maurry, and thank you for your reply. I have no "dog in this fight" as I know nothing about the topic, and you definitely do seem to know about it. I have no objection to you changing the information on the page to more accurately describe the people involved in Goof Troop's creation. However, that blogspot link is just not going to be seen as a sufficient source.
If you can provide a better source, please do. Another option would be for you to post on the article's Talk page (here) starting a discussion about the changes you'd like to see made to the article. Someone may well step in and make those changes for you, and then you need not worry about any formatting issues.
Just let me know what you'd like to do, and I'll be glad to help, if I can. Best, Jessicapierce (talk) 22:48, 28 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thank you for your patience and help Jessica. Hopefully I will be able to do a better job of implementing this code in future pages.

-Maurry DisneyFanForever (talk) 21:00, 28 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your recent report at WP:AIV[edit]

Hey! I declined your block request of User:2603:3018:B00:A00:48C0:C7C1:E75C:83E7. What they were doing is removing some redundancies in categories. For instance, Maren Morris was in both Category:American female country singers and Category:American country singer-songwriters. The anon is stating that the latter is a subset of the former, so there's no need to have the artist in both cats. I'm not convinced their logic is 100% sound, but I am certain they're not editing maliciously. You may want to reach out on their talk page and engage them to make sure we're all on the same page. Please let me know if you have any questions about this. Thanks, caknuck ° needs to be running more often 20:30, 31 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Caknuck:, thanks so much for the explanation - that makes perfect sense. I reverted a few edits which I will now go and un-revert, and will indeed post to their talk page. One question though: what about the dead/living category issue? For example, this edit of Ned Miller, which added "Category:Living people" right under "Category:2016 deaths"?
That one looks like an error, and it has been corrected by Bearcat (talk · contribs). If there are others like it, please correct as needed. Cheers, caknuck ° needs to be running more often 19:55, 1 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just to be clear, the editor did make some legitimate edits amid their mess, but the bulk of what they do is mess. In the case of Maren Morris, the category they removed was indeed duplicate categorization with another category, but they also removed the same category from many other articles where it wasn't reduplication — basically, they were just indiscriminately removing that category from people regardless of whether it was duplicating another category or not. And adding Category:Living people to dead people wasn't an isolated one-time error, either, but is a persistent calling card of that user's editing patterns. You can see Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Country music category vandal from Tennessee for more information about this. I gave the IP in question a temporary editblock yesterday, and went through their editing history to review it — about half of what they did had to be reverted, and about half of that (for a quarter of the total) was the addition of "Living people" to dead people. Bearcat (talk) 20:09, 1 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

A year ago ...
Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
"minor copy edits"
... you were recipient
no. 1991 of Precious,
a prize of QAI!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:59, 3 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Metro Atlanta Wiki-Picnic Sunday: Wikipedia:Meetup/Atlanta/Wiknic 2019[edit]

Wiknic logo.svg

A friendly reminder that Wikipedia:Meetup/Atlanta/Wiknic 2019 is Sunday in Morgan Falls Park from 11am-2pm!--Pharos (talk) 17:34, 3 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Free Church of England[edit]

I see what you mean it repeats itself but I copied it with permission from

I think what it means is there was a split in their church and there is a breakaway group but perhaps wording needs amendment.

I'm sorry, but I also don't really understand what you've written here.
If you have copied text from elsewhere, that needs to be made clear.
The link you have included here ( does not lead to anything useful. If you meant you have included text from the history section of that site, the url is . Although you included that link as a citation along with your text, that is not sufficient. Using something as a source does not mean one is free to copy it verbatim. If permission has been granted to do so, that needs to be explicitly stated.
Also, whether permission has been granted or not, any text you add to Wikipedia needs to be readable and make sense. Jessicapierce (talk) 20:31, 6 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Thank you for the advice! Autoctono~enwiki

Re: Punctuation[edit]

Okay, thanks. See you soon. --LukeWiller (talk) 06:21, 9 August 2019 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for helping to improve my Christian Dior Ready-to-Wear runway collections article. I am still learning and very much appreciate the community's support and patience. I always welcome a fresh pair of eyes. Regarding your question about the citations, when I first began writing many of my fashion-themed articles, I was often citing, but the organization/website transitioned from an editorial publication to a retail site. I've noticed that most of their content was being redirected/migrated to the runway section of another Conde Nast title, Vogue. I can definitely review and update these citations where needed. As for some of the quotes, I transcribed them from the embedded video content on the links provided; again, I believe many of these were

Once again, thank you for your assistance. At one point, I felt targeted by a self-described deletionist, that editor didn't question or try to help. He didn't open it up to discuss and reach a consensus, he just pulled up every Wikipedia article I'd written and deleted them all, despite the fact that I'd received a Barn Star for one of them. I was extremely discouraged and gave up for a while, but I love and believe in Wikipedia and would like to make a valued contribution. I do think there is a place and need for an encyclopedic fashion resource that can live on as an archive in perpetuity for historians, students, researchers, and anyone with an interest in fashion--this has always been my aim when editing and writing articles as part of the Wiki Fashion Project. I've tried to be diligent with my research and sources. I've also adjusted my tone from earlier contributions to be less flowery or opinionated and more balanced, with as much factual detail as possible. I'd like to think I've influenced others, or at least that I'm not alone in this quest, because I've noticed the expansion of other fashion articles, namely the Chanel article, which now includes a section on Fashion Collections and Runway Shows. --Lisacarolinamartinez (talk) 23:03, 2 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:08, 19 November 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: cloud storage providers[edit]

Hi there Apologies! My mistake

I updated the notes that claimed OneDrive supported unlimited storage and that one could request for their storage amount to be upped to 10TB which was discontinued around 2018. I added that the current limit is 5TB across 5x accounts with the Office 365 subscription. Hope that helps!

--The Count of Tuscany (TALK) 02:41, 23 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

testing suggestbot[edit]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
5 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Cape Coast (Ghana parliament constituency) (talk) Add sources
2,633 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Gulag (talk) Add sources
53 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Château de Chaumont (talk) Add sources
88 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: B Experimental musical instrument (talk) Add sources
39 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Akhundzada Saif-ur-Rahman Mubarak (talk) Add sources
9 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Dallas Marshals (talk) Add sources
347 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Student rights in higher education (talk) Cleanup
7 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Akim Swedru (Ghana parliament constituency) (talk) Cleanup
114 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Philippine folk music (talk) Cleanup
476 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Musical ensemble (talk) Expand
4 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Richard Heymons (talk) Expand
3 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Ottogerd Mühlmann (talk) Expand
49 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: C Celtic fusion (talk) Unencyclopaedic
11 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Panic Attack (robot) (talk) Unencyclopaedic
78 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: C Music store (talk) Unencyclopaedic
1,604 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C 2019 Maharashtra Legislative Assembly election (talk) Merge
1,444 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: GA Bal Thackeray (talk) Merge
162 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Cow vigilante violence in India (talk) Merge
4 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Stub Sunyani East (Ghana parliament constituency) (talk) Wikify
234 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: B Musical instrument classification (talk) Wikify
33 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Mario Davidovsky (talk) Wikify
2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Stub Hadayat us Salikeen (talk) Orphan
2 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Gay Alliance of Students v. Matthews (talk) Orphan
43 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Engelsina Markizova (talk) Orphan
3 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Jaman South (Ghana parliament constituency) (talk) Stub
2 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start Palaio Loutro (talk) Stub
3 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Tolon (Ghana parliament constituency) (talk) Stub
12 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Sudhir Singla (talk) Stub
7 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Sekondi (Ghana parliament constituency) (talk) Stub
11 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Subhash Sudha (talk) Stub

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:55, 25 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possible renaming of article[edit]

Hi there, I could use some help with a situation at Country Day School, Guanacaste. It has recently been edited by several anonymous or new editors who claim that the school's name has been changed. If so, obviously the wikipedia article needs to be updated, but I don't know whether the page title needs to be changed.

This is far out of my expertise and I don't have the time to look into it. I have reverted several recent changes, mostly on grounds that they contained a lot of errors and trashed the formatting, etc. The most recent edits, I removed on grounds that they removed sourced content, added unsourced, etc. These recent edits have not been improvements, but it does seem that someone - or several people - are calling for a constructive, necessary change re the school's name.

Would someone please handle the renaming, if that's what is called for here?

Thank you in advance! Jessicapierce (talk) 22:57, 28 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Working on it. Bobherry Talk Edits 13:13, 29 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done! Let me know on my talk page if you need anymore help! Bobherry Talk Edits 13:25, 29 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you so much for the quick help, and for taking care of that; I really appreciate it! Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 19:59, 29 February 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Author & Professional Dating Coach Alan Roger Currie[edit]

I have a request for help from you: Can you kindly provide me with some support for the Alan Roger Currie article that I created in April 2015?? I would VERY MUCH appreciate your support and assistance. Thank you. The Discussion is HERE Chicago Smooth (talk) 16:42, 2 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


As a compiler of the history, geography and demographics data of my town, Whitefield Maine ( for over a half century) I am stymied when every attempt I make to supplement the common data on Wikipedia are rejected out of hand for the oddest reasons. Reasons that indicate that depth is NOT one of the goals of this particular editor . I would like to challenge these rejections with proof that data does exist in conventional form that should be included to round out the description our town . Please visit these suggested sites ( most are on the Digital Commons ) and reconsider my plea to have them added to our town's profile. ie:

Whitefield an Introduction :

Whitefield Geography:

Whitefield Demographics:

AWhitefield Amish Community:

Whitefield Historic Town Documents :

Whitefield's Arts & Artists;

Whitefield's Writers, Playwrights, Poets & Chroniclers:

Whitefield's Scientists, Mathematicians, Inventors & Innovators:

Whitefield area Web Cams:

IomeneIomene (talk) 02:34, 9 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, @Iomene: You are welcome to make constructive changes to the Whitefield article, and perhaps you can use some of those links as citations. But I would caution you against simply adding this list of links to the article. That's generally not the sort of content Wikipedia includes in a town article. If you doubt my word on this (or would just like a second opinion), please follow these instructions on how to add a "help me" message to your Talk page, which will send up a flare and get help from some other editor.
In addition, please brush up on formatting before editing further. Your contributions here are welcome, but they do need to follow certain basic guidelines. I'll post a few helpful links to that effect on your Talk page. Thank you, Jessicapierce (talk) 05:41, 9 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


A bit of background, the current version of this band was an unauthorised version made possible by the weak UK litigation laws. Although it has traded for a few years this way, recently the current main member has started to edit the history of the band as a reaction to ex members forming their version of this band.

The user Johnny Alucard aka Damien Deville is attempting to rewrite history by claiming he started the band in 1986 some two years before he joined an already existing band. He has also introduced some ridiculous statements such as him countersuing me with Sony Music lawyers a fact that never happened. Neither did the band subsequently reach higher chart positions and neither was he the majority songwriter.

If you were to go back and compare entries from many months ago you would see that I have retained much of the later information which although I could argue should not be there I have left in. I think this demonstrates that of the two sides I am being very fair unlike Johnny Alucard who quite frankly is acting very unscrupulously.

I also think a link to our band should be present of this page as our band contains 2/3 of the classic lineup, much to his annoyance.

I appreciate Wikipedia does not want an edit war and if as is likely this situation will continue I would request deletion altogether of this entry for the band Nosferatu as I cannot allow a factual site to continue to portray lies and disinformation.

Vladjanicek66 (talk) 16:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Vladjanicek66: thanks for the info, but I am really mostly invested in fixing grammatical and style errors. If you have objections to the current content of the article, you'd be better off posting these concerns to the article's Talk page (here) or using the "help me" template (here) on your own Talk page to ask for guidance. This just isn't my area of expertise. Best, Jessicapierce (talk) 16:49, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help, please[edit]

Hello, I've run across something odd with recent edits at Kottiyoor Temple.

  • The most recent edit summary says the content was copied from elsewhere.
  • The talk page of the editor in question has a "confirmed to be a sock puppet" message I'm unfamiliar with.
  • When clicking through to that other editor, it seems there has been a history of copyright violations.
  • The recent addition is poorly written (some sentences make zero sense, and all of it would be daunting to make readable) and contains formatting issues. However, I'm hesitant to fix any of it, if the addition should be removed altogether.

I would very much like someone who is not me to deal with this. :) Thank you! Jessicapierce (talk) 23:09, 13 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It appears that this content was copied from Kottiyoor Vysakha Mahotsavam, where it was inserted in Special:Diff/710874203 by Redtigerxyz. It appears that they in turn got it from Daksha, where the bulk of this text was inserted in Special:Diff/566128167 by Ram K Bhattatirippad. So, the chain of copying is very sloppy in attribution but, so far as I can see, this text was contributed to the project by an editor in good standing. I hope this helps. Bovlb (talk) 00:46, 14 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Strange formatting issue[edit]

Hello, I'm noticing something odd. I've found several wikitables whose formatting was broken, and therefore displayed improperly. The error was caused by the line break/spacing difference between this:

{| class="wikitable"

and this:

</ref>{| class="wikitable"

In the latter instance, where the wikitable is crammed up against an ending ref tag, the wikitable is broken. There is no other error, and adding a line break solves the problem. You can see my fix of one such error here.

I don't know if this is a new issue - I've never noticed it before. Is this really right, that such a small spacing/line break issue would be enough to destroy a table? Just curious, and if there's nothing that can be done about this, that's fine - just figured I should send up a flare to let someone know. Please let me know if this ought to be reported officially somewhere. Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 00:40, 14 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you look at Help:Table#Basic_table_markup_summary, you will see The above marks must start on a new line, so this is expected behaviour, I'm afraid. Note that you are also allowed to use HTML syntax for tables, which does not have this problem. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 01:17, 14 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks so much for the reply and the info, I appreciate it! Jessicapierce (talk) 14:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pleasant Prairie[edit]

As you can probably tell, I'm new to editing Wikipedia. I take it the style problem was capitalizing words in section titles rather than sentence form. Anyway thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garrison Point (talkcontribs) 20:25, 16 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A cup of coffee for you![edit]

Cup-o-coffee-simple.svg Thanks for the advice! By chance was it something other than cleaning the reference on the Woodstock high school page? MSWBB (talk) 13:22, 18 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi there, and thanks for the reply. I hear back from people very very rarely, so it's appreciated!
On taking a look at those recent edits, the issue at Woodstock High School (Illinois) was that you added nowiki tags. Those can be tricky, and in this case, they broke formatting (very easy to do). I now see that you also did fix that closing reference tag (from incorrect <ref> to correct </ref>) - but the nowiki essentially canceled out your fix.
The issue at Woodstock North High School was no big deal, but since I noticed you'd put capital letters in section headers ("Conference Titles" rather than "Conference titles") I just wanted to nudge you toward reading the Manual of Style, if you hadn't already - there's no better way to learn about Wikipedia's style expectations.
Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 16:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello They want to delete the article I wrote. I have followed your words. I didn't change your edits. Please guide me to prevent deletion --Hesamlv (talk) 13:54, 31 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello again One person in this article has erased many and now the article is very small. Please review. I no longer have access to my posts. There are millions of articles in English Wikipedia where many are very underrated and yet not deleted. I am researching someone else and am now afraid to delete the article--Hesamlv (talk) 15:40, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

East Sister Island (Ontario) ‎[edit]

Hi Jessica! Thank you for informing me of my lack of citation on the East Sister Islands web page.

I am unsure on how to cite this. I have boated to the island and declared independence and forwarded such correspondence to the Canadian government.

Could I perhaps make a website for the new nation, and cite the Declaration of Independence on there? That seems like a conflict of interest, but at the same time... it doesn’t, because as a sovereign state, my publication would be official (at least in the borders of the new country.)

It would be up to the government of Canada to re-claim their land.

Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whodoeswhatnow (talkcontribs) 05:09, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

East Sister Island[edit]

Hi Jessica! Thank you for informing me of my lack of citation on the East Sister Islands web page.

I am unsure on how to cite this. I have boated to the island and declared independence and forwarded such correspondence to the Canadian government.

Could I perhaps make a website for the new nation, and cite the Declaration of Independence on there? That seems like a conflict of interest, but at the same time... it doesn’t, because as a sovereign state, my publication would be official (at least in the borders of the new country.)

It would be up to the government of Canada to re-claim their land. Whodoeswhatnow (talk) 18:13, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Leaving the same message multiple times is not going to speed up my response. As you might understand, I have some other shit going on right now. I will reply the moment I feel like it. Jessicapierce (talk) 18:40, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, it was not my intention to bother you, I am new to Wikipedia and was not aware that the reply feature would Also post it to your talk page before adding it to your talk page a second time. My apologies. Whodoeswhatnow (talk) 22:46, 3 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I apologize for my earlier reply - it was hastily written in a moment of stress, and I shouldn't have done that. Trying times are no excuse to be a bitch. :)
With regard to East Sister Island (Ontario): I removed your changes because I assumed they were nonsense at best, and probably vandalism. It honestly didn't even occur to me that your claims were legitimate, mostly because you didn't include a source.
Without citing a proper, independent source, your claims are unlikely to stay on the page. WP:CITE will give you some guidance on what qualifies. From a quick scan over your changes to the East Sister Island article, you'll need to provide proof that the island has been claimed as a sovereign nation (and that, presumably, the process for that has been completed and everything is now legal - I'm not sure the mere act of claiming is enough for the law, or for Wikipedia), that its name has been changed, that it is no longer a nature reserve, and that it has human inhabitants. If you're able to provide those sources, some further explanatory text in the article would also be useful, as the "claimed because of corona" was so brief as to read like a non sequitur and/or vandalism.
However, Wikipedia will generally view your connection to this subject as a conflict of interest. It's not impossible for you to be allowed to edit the page, but it's dicy territory. WP:CONFLICT has some info on this.
The easiest way for you to have the article changed would be to post a request on its Talk page, found here. You can outline all the changes you'd like (optimally providing sources), and another editor can look into it and make those changes for you, if they're warranted.
If you do that, and no one seems to notice (some pages and projects get more attention than others), you can always send up a flare on your own Talk page, using the "help me" template. There is probably also a noticeboard at which you can ask for help on the topic, but frankly I'm out of my depth here - I usually just fix the commas.
Best, Jessicapierce (talk) 00:39, 4 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, thank you for the update. However, in terms of international laws, there are no ... legal ways to go about doing this. Claiming the land is an act of war against the Canadian government, and they will not recognize our sovereignty. You can see similar things between the borders of india/pakistan. They will change on maps based on which country you are in for the same reasons that it would be impossible for this island to become legal recognized by the nation that we take it from.

As for citing a source, as the acting authority on behalf of the new government, the declaration of (illegal, according to canada) independence becomes the source. (You won't ask America in 1776 to provide a source to England about their own declaration of independence), so it would be rather silly to hold me to a higher standard than you would hold an actual recognized nation.

The only way to get actual recognition is to convince enough people to agree with your stance.

I will issue a public statement, and rely on photographic evidence of my being there as proof that I am, indeed there. I will be setting up a website shortly, and making the article more precise as to the issue at hand.

However, I expect to be arrested (See, high treason ) upon doing this. I'm fine with that. (Whodoeswhatnow (talk) 06:08, 4 April 2020 (UTC))Reply[reply]


Dear Jessica,

I have removed the 8 year old bbc poll which was posted on the lead paragraph of this article as its old, out of place and this poll is not present on any other article with a similar topic. Jahro098 (talk) 09:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oscar Wilde and The Picture of Dorian Gray[edit]

Thank you for your comment on my edit of the Dorian Gray section of the article on Oscar Wilde. You say that I have transgressed the Wikipedia style guide - maybe I have, but unfortunately you have not said in what way I did this, nor what I should do about it. Since my contribution was only a couple of sentences, I would imagine that what I have done wrongly ought to be easily fixable. Can you please tell me what I should do in order to make my contribution abide by the rules? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fiskendo (talkcontribs) 17:40, 8 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure thing. Your second edit only removed part of a citation, which broke formatting and damaged the readability of the article.
Your first edit added content which was a bit of a non sequitur where it was placed - it might have been fine as a separate paragraph, but its overall intent was still very unclear. Three books are mentioned in quick succession (The Man in the Red Coat, The Picture of Dorian Gray, A Rebours), and it's unclear what the parallels are claimed to be. The latter book is said to have been used at trial, but to what end? It's ust a few quick, vague sentences which don't have much of a takeaway meaning.
The names of books need to be italicized, sentences need to end with punctuation (before the citation), the name of one book was incomplete ("The Picture Dorian Gray"), and the formatting of the citation was jumbled.
These are all fixable issues, but the onus is on the contributing editor to make sure their contributions are as correct as possible before submitting. This was just too much cleanup work to ask others to do, especially given that it's not clear what point was being made.
Don't let this dissuade you from contributing, just perhaps to take more time with it, and to use the Preview function before submitting, to catch those formatting errors. Hope this helps, Jessicapierce (talk) 17:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hello J I hope you will forgive this intrusion on your talk page. I would just like to let Fiskendo know that IMO the info they were adding is very specific to the book and is a bit too detailed for Wilde's article. It would go better on WikiP's article for TPoDG. I do think it is mentioned there in some form but it probably could be enhanced. Best regards to you both. MarnetteD|Talk 19:07, 8 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

its me[edit]

you dont know so check how all asian leagues are formatted then will understand, instead of useless report!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:23, 1 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Editing personal information[edit]

Hi Jessica

I hope all is well with you. Please forgive me but I sent you a question on Teahouse instead of here...

I wanted to let you know that I have been attempting to edit wholly or partially inaccurate information about myself and my family. It was my first stab at doing it, so if you have any questions for me regarding the changes I put forward, please let me know. I am happy to give you my email address also, though I'm not sure if emailing is the most secure method in terms of messaging! You commented that my edits "were not constructive"...I'm not sure what that means in relation to my own edits (and those I made for my wife) since they are accurate and come from the best source available on the subject(s)! For instance, demonstrably false stories from the "press" that are currently found in our bios/profiles, may not in fact be reliable, and therefore are certainly not constructive.

Again, please let me know if you have any questions as I stumble my way through this process!

Thank you,


David Hunt Muirfield1966 (talk) 07:51, 2 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello @Muirfield1966:, thanks for getting in touch. I think others have already stepped in to give you a better answer than I could, but I did want to emphasize that there is certainly a way for your Wikipedia page to be accurate. You editing the article yourself may not be the best way, though. As others have said, Wikipedia has pretty strict conflict-of-interest guidelines.
You can always post on the Talk page of any article, regarding changes you'd like to be made. And if you have any question, you can post the "help me" template on your own talk page, and someone will step in to answer your question. Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 16:16, 2 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your edit in Verona Villafranca Airport[edit]


recently I had to restore to a previous versions for page Verona Villafranca Airport because of multiple vandalisms by other users. This resulted in a lost of the (legitimate) edit you done, labeled as "minor copy edits, updated verbs" on June 15, 3:56 (system time detected). Can you please re-edit them? sorry for the inconvenience.
Riktetta (talk) 07:00, 15 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, no worries - I thought this might happen! I'm glad to redo those little fixes, and thank you for the message. Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 14:11, 15 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Jessicapierce - You have now had two full days to look up United States Military Decorations to see proper order of precedence yet you have not smartly gone in and changed back what correctly was altered which you not very smartly removed - For your ready reference here is what you should look at - - Therefore, you will properly note the list of decorations should then be correctly shown in the glossary and main body list as - Medal of Honor / Bronze Star Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster / Purple Heart / Air Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster / Army Commendation Medal / Army Good Conduct Medal - ( Showing word bronze before Oak Leaf Cluster is also not necessary ) Having the Purple Heart below the above order of precedence as it is currently shown is totally wrong - If you are capable of even understanding the above then the above proves you were wrong to remove what was altered - Therefore you really do need to make that correct and proper change or do be kind enough to explain to Mr. Lemon directly why you are being so obtuse - Thank You. { No response is required as most of you so-called ' editors ' appear to have never served in the military, never saw a sporting event or ever saw any movies/ TV programs with no grasp whatsoever of what is proper / right / correct } (talk) 00:19, 18 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It isn't necessary to speak to people that way; it isn't how to get what you want.
I have no preference as to the order in which decorations should be listed, and that is not why I removed your edit. If there is a standard or preferred order, then that's of course how they should be listed. I reverted your changes because they wrecked the formatting, as I explained in my edit summary. Please see the effects of your edits here (scroll down to "Revision as of 15:20, 13 June 2020"). You are welcome to edit any page you like, but please use the preview function to ensure you're leaving the page readable. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 02:53, 18 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Request for help[edit]

Hello, I could use a little assistance.}} Please see recent edits to Nigerian Civil War, specifically this one.

I've now removed this same edit for the second time. The main issue is that the editor is "fixing" a direct quotation, which is obviously as issue, as well as butchering the formatting by combining the quote within a citation with the subsequent article text. I have reached out to the editor and received no response.

I am rusty at the ins and outs of dealing with something like this, and would appreciate some guidance on where to post for help. Thank you! Jessicapierce (talk) 15:17, 21 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Attempting to discuss it with the user- as you have done- is the first step. If they fail to respond, but continue to revert you without explanation, they would be edit warring which could be reported to WP:ANEW(though you should avoid edit warring yourself in such a situation). 331dot (talk) 16:16, 21 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Just because you see the cut-to-the-fact edits I did for the Nigerian Civil War (i.e. removal of IRRELEVANT verbosity & OUTRIGHT fiction) to make it wholesome, should serve as some kind of 'steroid' for you to to attack similar support I lent in editing the article about Kumasi. I can understand your vigilante gung-ho I-have-lost-my-mind-and-I-am-out-for-blood emotional rampage but in case you do not know, I will like to bring to your attention that your knowledge about everything is far more limited than you might innately believe and uphold. In case you want to debate this last statement, I will pre-respond by leaving the forth-coming experiences of life you are probably yet to endure to serve as my evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zoserox (talkcontribs) 18:45, 21 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, I have no idea what you're trying to say. Want to try again?
As I posted on your talk page, the issue with your repeated changes to Nigerian Civil War was that you altered a direct quotation, and left a formatting mess. Jessicapierce (talk) 21:31, 21 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re:KTVQ (Oklahoma City)[edit]

That appears to have been an error. I was attempting to update the URLs to content from the website previously known as American Radio History, as the site's recent renaming and domain change to the World Radio History nameplate had deprecated those links. I was trying to make the corrections on my iPad, but had to go through three different websites to find a text replacement editor that worked and didn't accidentally result in me deleting the base text due to the fixed height of the iPad's virtual keyboard. In the copying process, based on what you stated, I may have accidentally double-pasted the text in the editor on one of the sites. TVTonightOKC (talk) 00:58, 27 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I gathered it must have been something like that. I've done worse! :) Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 03:11, 27 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

can I discuss Paul Reddy SAS with you here?[edit]

As above Gpmills (talk) 16:53, 4 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Gpmills: Of course; feel free. Thanks for the reply. Jessicapierce (talk) 16:57, 4 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question on notability level for inclusion on lists[edit]

Hello, I could use a little guidance. What level of notability do we require for a person/character to be listed on a name page such as Lauren or Tallulah? I was under the impression that in the case of fictional works, the character herself needs to be notable enough to have her own article, before being included on lists. But the more I look, the more it seems that if the book/movie/whatever is prominent enough to have its own article, then that is enough for the characters to warrant inclusion.

I ask because I fear I may have been too hasty in reverting a bunch of edits made by a new user today (if so, I'm glad to undo and apologize). Is there a difference in notability between Theo Huxtable (included on the Theodore list) of The Cosby Show, and the names of fairies found in a series of children's books (Rainbow Magic) whose names don't even appear on the wiki article for the series? Do both warrant inclusion on lists? My concern is that lists may become (more) useless if the're allowed to contain every Jennifer appearing in any published book, etc.

Thank you for any guidance you can offer on this. Jessicapierce (talk) 17:18, 11 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It sounds like you were correct to remove those names as insufficiently notable. List articles tend to accumulate junk if there are no firm criteria for inclusion, so holding the line that an article must exist first is justified. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 17:45, 11 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
While you'e engaged there, you could use Theodore Huxtable as an article to link to. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 17:48, 11 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Excellent! Thank you so much for the quick and clear help. And thanks for the link to Theodore Huxtable - I checked a few other examples but somehow skipped checking to see if that article existed. Cheers! Jessicapierce (talk) 17:51, 11 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 15[edit]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Prabhupāda, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sripada (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 15 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


How do I do whatever it is you are talking about? Cite properly — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nojusticenopeace100 (talkcontribs) 18:22, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nojusticenopeace100: See WP:CITE and Help:Footnotes. Please do also note that the citation problems were not the only issues with your submission (spelling and style errors, etc.). You are welcome to edit the article if these issues are addressed. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 18:51, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi Jessica

Yes there is a serious mistake here.

The Battle of Corinth section is a bit of a muddle. (Actually the battle was too..) As written at the moment it is made to appear that large numbers of Allied troops were captured by the Fallschirmjäger after the battle. I don't know if this is deliberate glorification of the Fallschirmjäger or use of an inaccurate secondary source, either way, it is not true. A few Commonwealth troops were cut of north of the canal after the bridge was blown and these and some injured troops and possibly some local Greek forces, were captured. The Commonwealth army units withdrew south.

Several thousand of Allied troops were captured a few days later 100 miles to the south of Corinth at Kalamata, (and many more evacuated from here and from Rafina, to the north of Corinth).

I tried to correct this as a minor edit but really the entire section needs a rewrite. The circumstances surrounding the destruction of the bridge over the canal are misrepresented too. Nobody knows exactly how the bridge was blown, whether by shellfire, by charges on the brige being hit by shellfire or being detonated by a couple of men who fired on them. Whatever, it clearly wasn't an accident.

It will take quite a time to find the references required to make these changes. The original is NOT I belive properly referenced. Can I suggest a health warning be put on this section in the meantime?


Tim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim Clarke01 (talkcontribs) 00:35, 22 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tim Clarke01: I'm no expert on the topic, and only removed your edit because it caused a formatting issue. You are free to make changes to the article (though please do use the Preview function). Your citations need not be perfect, but if you can provide anything at all, it would go a long way toward making sure your edits remain. You could also explain yourself briefly in the edit summary (this is good practice anyway), and/or start a discussion on the Talk page. Jessicapierce (talk) 02:20, 22 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I dont understand what you guys mean[edit]

You andEagleash mean . You both are saying that i am doing some unwanted edits , i didnt make unwanted edits . But you both are saying i am making unwanted edits and i will be banned . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Last0933a (talkcontribs) 13:04, 27 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Last0933a: I have no idea what you're talking about - some context would be helpful.
If this is about your April edit at Low-pressure area, you removed necessary wording and left incorrect punctuation.
If it's about your May edit of Vallisneria, you added extraneous markup.
You are welcome to edit here, but it is strongly advised that you learn more about Wikipedia's formatting, guidelines, and expectations before altering anything else. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 14:10, 27 July 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thanks for your advice ! Last0933a (talk) 04:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:32, 3 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Malietoa Moli Portrait[edit]

Talofa lava Jessica,

I made amendments to the above subject matter as Malietoa Moli is my great great grandfather and that is not his portrait that is the portrait of Malietoa Vaiinupo painted by the expedition of the USS Agate to Samoa. On this expedition the portrait of Malietoa Moli's sister Emma was also painted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tafaifa (talkcontribs) 12:36, 28 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Malietoa articles[edit]

Your are misleading people with your mistaken information, you cant even get the origin of the titles Malietoa right and you say the tongan king said Malo Tau which is not correct.....please get sources that are fronm samoa and living in samoa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tafaifa (talkcontribs) 13:11, 28 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have made no such claims. I have simply restored previous versions of pages you vandalized. If you refuse to provide sources or explanations, your changes constitute vandalism and you risk being blocked. Jessicapierce (talk) 13:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Since I am never wrong (well hardly ever), I had a look at a couple of UK style guides. Ah... Cue Boris Johnson impression. But I did find a quotation from Jane Eyre in an Australian style guide, which cites Ms Brônte using my version so I claim precedent. Bluster bluster.

No reply expected. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:37, 2 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the reply - it didn't even occur to me that it might be an English-variant thing! I thought I was fairly aware of those tricky little differences, but that's a new one to me. The insight is appreciated. Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 21:39, 2 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm afraid it isn't an English variant thing. It is my misunderstanding of the rule, I just claim to be in good company.--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 08:39, 3 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Punctuation fixes involving {{ill}}[edit]

Hello Jessicapierce,

Thanks for your punctuation fixes in this edit at Phases of Operation Car Wash including the proper placement of periods before a <ref> tag. However, in at least one case involving an interlanguage-link template, you broke a link. Here's the before/after of your change:

    • On 23 August 2017, the Federal Police launched a new phase named {{ill|Operation Slaughter II|pt|Operação Abate II|vertical-align=sup}}.
    • On 23 August 2017, the Federal Police launched a new phase named Operation Slaughter II [pt].
  • AFTER:
    • On 23 August 2017, the Federal Police launched a new phase named {{ill|Operation Slaughter II.|pt|Operação Abate II|vertical-align=sup}}
    • On 23 August 2017, the Federal Police launched a new phase named Operation Slaughter II. [pt]

Note that moving a period inside the {{ill}} breaks the link, because no article will ever be written on en-wiki entitled, "Operation Slaughter II." with a period in the title. If you wish to have the period precede the superscript interwiki link, you must do it this way:

  • INSTEAD, add the |lt= param, yielding this:
    • On 23 August 2017, the Federal Police launched a new phase named {{ill|Operation Slaughter II|pt|Operação Abate II|lt=Operation Slaughter II.|vertical-align=sup}}
    • On 23 August 2017, the Federal Police launched a new phase named Operation Slaughter II. [pt]

Note that the rendered text in this version, looks exactly like the rendered text in your "AFTER" version, however, the red link is accurate in the fixed version.

Can I ask if you used AWB or some other semi-automated process do do this? If there is a tool with an incorrect pattern-match or replacement text, I'd like to know, so I can repair it. (please {{reply to}} on reply; thanks!) Mathglot (talk) 07:46, 8 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Mathglot:: Hi, and thanks for the helpful comment. I used no automated tool - this was the result of me messing with a template I'm not that familiar with. I'm sure I must have "fixed" that period, scanned down the article in Preview to make sure I hadn't broken anything, and left it at that, not thinking through what I'd done to the text within the template. I'll know better for next time. Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 14:33, 9 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Genuine content removed accidently![edit]

Firstly, I am not blaming anyone, but I do know that the fact, on which you were confused and removed it, is actually true. That's why, I'm adding it again, and if you want, you can Google it too, where you would find several sources and books. Believe me I'm a TOPPER (talk) 09:20, 24 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the message. However, I was not "confused" in my removal of your content. Please do not make assumptions as to my thought process or state of mind.
Your original edit at Brahmashirsha astra was problematic, as I explained in my edit summary: "Undid addition of a lot of text which I'm not sure is warranted here, which was inserted between existing content and its source." I said nothing about "false claims," so I'm not sure where you got that from. The primary issue was that inserting content in front of an existing citation is simply incorrect, as it can lead to confusion.
Since your subsequent edit does not have this issue, the text can stay. However, please take a look at your wording, because it isn't entirely clear. What is a "mind born son"? Also, should "He did know how to retract the weapon" perhaps say "did not know how"?
In addition, if you're going to edit here, please choose one account (either anonymous or named), and stick it it. It is also helpful to include a link to the page you're referring to. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 13:28, 24 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regarding your questioning the reliability of my sources for the edits in Sexuality in Japan -- I stated that the source was written in old Japanese that even a modern Tokyo resident could not recognize. THe resource is ME a person with 50 years of Art experience relative to all forms of two dimensional art work including ukiyo-e which actually was the topic - not sexuality.[edit]

I also possess Japanese Army Officer Katanas which bear inscriptions that are also in old character Japanese - So if you are so special that you can read old character Japanese, you would recognize the reference that I left behind with this wikipedia junk that you try to pawn off as reference and a base of knowledge. I forbid my daughters to even reference Wikipedia due to its leftist and bullshit slant — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:33, 25 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Need someone to take a look at probable vandalism.[edit]

Hello, I've found some probable vandalism that I'm not equipped to figure out. Please take a look at this edit at Tigrayans. I can't tell if the unexplained content removal is legit or not (I suspect not), and half a citation was removed after "It is also of great importance for conflict resolution."

It looks as though someone is trying to remove all mentions of Eritrea from the article. The topic is something I know nothing about, and the article looks to be going through a lot of back-and-forth lately. Frankly this isn't something I want to get involved in, but thought I should let someone know. Can you help? Thank you, Jessicapierce (talk) 21:33, 26 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If I remember correctly, Tommysaucy did something similar in their edit at Ethiopia (their edit was revdel'd so I can't check). However, there is a lot of nationalistic editing regarding this geographic area. power~enwiki (π, ν) 19:19, 25 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My general opinion is that if a change contains an unexplained content removal (especially if it appears to be sourced) then it should be reverted, at the very least to get a discussion started on the talk page. There is no hard and fast "rule", though, so if you're on the fence it might be worth starting a talk page discussion to see if that diff should be reverted. If you want more help, change the {{help me-helped}} back into a {{help me}}, stop by the Teahouse, or Wikipedia's live help channel, or the help desk to ask someone for assistance. Primefac (talk) 00:36, 26 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Primefac: and @Power~enwiki:, thanks to you both. There have been subsequent edits to the page, so the above-mentioned removal of content can't be easily reverted. It looks like there's been a lot of back-and-forth over the past few weeks. I've posted a request for page protection, along with a request that someone evaluate recent edits. This just doesn't look like a challenge I'm up for. But if there's anything else I should do to bring this to someone's attention, do let me know. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 21:33, 26 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

answer to your suggestion[edit]

On skeem saam i saw that they did not add more information aboutvit so i added what i knew about skeem saam so i dont get your problem please stop being judgemental Mpunyela (talk) 20:58, 1 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Continued vandalism on Otacon article[edit]

Hi there Jessicapierce,

I can see that you've had some previous problems with Roelle Dimalanta on the Otacon article, and needless to say they're still at it despite your previous warnings. I've tried to revert the article back to before their most recent edit but like you say on one of your reversions, I don't know what's true on the article myself and whether there's any further reversions that may need making but I've tried my best on it.

I can't say I know how to report a user myself for continued vandalism, but it seems that they're ignoring all the warnings that you have given and need permabanning if it's something that you see fit and know how to go about doing.

Thanks for all your editing work,

Lewcario (talk) 16:52, 6 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks very much - I follow the Otacon page to keep tabs on exactly that sort of nonconstrucive edit, but have not been getting email alerts recently, so had missed the recent changes. I'll do what I can. Cheers, Jessicapierce (talk) 16:17, 8 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Updating according to the new Roman Martyrology[edit]

Hi, thank you for your observations. My problem is that I mainly work on Swahili Wikipedia and many times I use Italian sources. So, if I see in the English edition incorrect or obsolete dates, I correct them according to 2004 Martyrology. I understand it would be would be better to refer explicitly to it in the text, but my contributions to English Wikipedia are only casual. All the same, if you control in the Martyrology you will see I am correct. Peace to you! --Riccardo Riccioni (talk) 07:19, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hazar Motan Editing False Claim[edit]

Hello, I'm Jessicapierce. An edit that you recently made to Hazar Motan seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want to practice editing, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Jessicapierce (talk) 19:50, 9 October 2020 (UTC) If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

REPLY: Hello Jessicapierce. I want to let you know that i don't know the person you mentioned (Hazar Motan) and I never open or edit that page. I'm so confused with that claim and would you explain me? Thanks. Jonathan Alexander Citra (talk) 22:31, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jonathan Alexander Citra: Hello, just wanted to let you know that I've replied on your Talk page. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 22:38, 11 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


JanetThomas and Ths73 are adding information re 1WW and appointments to bishoprics based on original research. Ths73 tidies the sources and,for practical reasons,this can take a day or 2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ths73 (talkcontribs) 14:28, 12 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ths73: Hello, and thanks for the message, but I'm afraid I have no idea what this is about. Can you provide some context? Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 14:27, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ferrero SpA[edit]

| spouse children = PieraMichele CillarioFerrero, (Wife) | children = Michele Ferrero | relatives = Pietro Ferrero Jr.
Giovanni Ferrero
(grandson) | relatives = Giovanni Ferrero Sr.
(brother), Giovanni Sr, Pietro’s brother, who died in 1949.<ref></ref>
Pietro Ferrero Jr.
Giovanni Ferrero
Marie Eder Ferrero
Michele Ferrero Jr.
Bernardo Ferrero
John Ferrero
Michael Ferrero
(great-grandchildren) }}, I want to why do you remove this from this Wikipedia website do you have to show some respect to this Family here to the Ferrero Family you’re really have to show them some respect so stop removing this from this Wikipedia website okay my friend, just show this family some respect and nothing else can be so hard to do that so please explain that to me my friend? ;) :) PIETRO FERRERO Great-grandchildren Marie Eder Ferrero Great-grandchildren Michele Ferrero Great-grandchildren Bernardo Ferrero Great-grandchildren John Ferrero Great-grandchildren Michael Ferrero Great-grandchildren — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:19, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ I will repeat the message I left earlier on your Talk page (which is here, by the way; please read it):
Are you reading the comments left by myself and other editors? No one is saying you are wrong. We are saying the information is not noteworthy by Wikipedia's standards. Can you see the difference? Jessicapierce (talk) 20:06, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

From Tolipt[edit]

What was that about the message that u sent me Tolipt (talk) 17:00, 16 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not sure how to answer this, as I'm not sure what you're asking. I left several messages on your Talk page. Can you provide some more context? Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 17:03, 16 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alta (dye)[edit]

Hello! I moved the picture back to it's previous place place on Alta which you shifted for "layout reasons". Bengali Hindu brides dipping their feet in "alta" during "Bodhu Boron" is not a "cultural" practice. "Bodhu Boron" is actually only by Hindus and "allegedly" has "Hindu" significance behind it.So please don't change the current layout. Thank you. :) Okaymishti (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your change is fine. However, you are overthinking the placement of the image. Sometimes page layout and ease of readability are more important than having an image appear under a specific section.
Also, please note that you do not have ownership of this article, nor any other on Wikipedia. This is a collaborative project. You do not have the right to ask others not to make changes, and it's rude to do so. Please don't do this in the future. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk)

18:58, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Jessicapierce Sorry if I sounded rude, I didn't mean to. I definitely don't own the article haha.My point was if the layout was an issue then the picture should go under the "Religious significance" section (with valid ref of course) not the "Cultural Significance" one. I didn't want to be rude for reverting a fairly justified edit by you and just wanted to let you know about it not being a "cultural" thing, that's all. Please don't take it otherwise. Thanks Okaymishti (talk) 19:07, 18 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it. I take your point. However, because there is not currently enough text in the article for the images to be spaced properly, neither image is displaying in the exact perfect place. So for the time being, it doesn't matter that much. Jessicapierce (talk) 19:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My Reply[edit]

Hello Jessicapierce, I am that editor who was editing Jalpaiguri Zilla School, Geography of West Bengal etc in September 2020. But you was removing those again and again. Thank you, because for the pressure created by you, I have learned citing. I didn't know how to cite then, but now I have learned it. You can see, the edits I make nowadays, most of them are cited. Thank you again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4061:2E04:35DE:0:0:D88:3102 (talk) 15:06, 20 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Vandalism/false info[edit]

Hi, this is NoonboryKedabory.

Recently, I have noticed that someone has repeatedly been editing the page for "Noonbory and the Super 7" to include fan-made content. They also tend to edit the pages for voice actors they claim are in the show, but aren't (ex. Kathleen Barr, Garry Chalk) and they use numerous alternate accounts, all of which have a random string of numbers for a username.

How can this be stopped? It's highly annoying.

Thanks, NoonboryKedabory — Preceding unsigned comment added by NoonboryKedabory (talkcontribs) 11:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


JanetThomas and Ths73 have researched the CofE in the great War for many years. We are trying to enhance Wikipedia biographies with that knowledge. unfortunately we now live 150 miles apart and can only do this comfortably if JanetThomas does the additions and Ths73 does the references. unfortunately he can not always do this because you have interfered. i am sure you are well-intentioned but please be tolerant for a few hours and give Ths73 a chance to tidy things he has done on many others — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ths73 (talkcontribs) 18:24, 23 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ths73: What you call "interfering," I call "maintaining very basic Wikipedia standards and keeping articles in a readable condition."
It is just not appropriate for anyone to repeatedly add content which is so ill-formatted. If you and JanetThomas (@JanetThomas:) have an editing partnership that works for you both, that is a great idea that I fully support. But these changes need to be worked on privately before being added into articles for public view. Content with broken or nonexistent formatting shouldn't be submitted until it's cleaned up.
Off the top of my head, a better way to work together might be by emailing content to each other, using a collaborative Google Doc, or (probably the simplest idea) co-editing content on each other's Talk pages. I would suggest the sandbox, but I don't think a sandbox can be edited by anyone other than its owner.
I really do appreciate the content you both have added. It is obviously done in good faith. I would appreciate it if you would work with me, in order to find a more appropriate way to make the changes you both would like to see. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tha answer is easy. Just leave the JanetThomas additions for 24 hours or so to give me a chance to deal with the sources. If I have not been able to do that,then undo the amendments. We are in our 70s and do not find this easy Ths73 (talk) 11:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

John crane neilson[edit]

Hi jessica Thanks for your message. I was trying to input my great uncles date of death - 24th March 1988 - but struggled as there is a template. Could you do this for me at all please? Many thanks. Audrey Aud Marshall (talk) 18:37, 25 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Aud Marshall: Sure, I have made the change. It would be helpful if you could provide a source for this date - you can always add it to the article's Talk page and request it be added to the article. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 16:19, 28 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you Jessica. I have the death certificate in my possession, but I don't know if you could publish it or not? Happy to provide a photo if you want. Thanks Aud Marshall (talk) 17:17, 28 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The article Educational inequality in Southeast Michigan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This article represents a WP:NARROWCAT. There is already an article for Educational inequality in the United States; the inequality in Southeast Michigan specifically is not notable in its own right.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Stonkaments (talk) 00:58, 15 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Help with a Filmography[edit]

Jessica, If able could you help to re-organize and re-format the Peter Haskell filmography page? It is a bit of a mess and could use some re-organize putting his film and TV appearances into a properly formatted table. It would be much appreciated. Thank you.--I'm Listening to 80s Music (talk) 18:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Paul Korver[edit]

Thank you for your pass edits on Paul Korver page. I am asking for your help. Someone only looking at his limited soap career has tagged the page for deletion. Paul Korver is much more that a soap actor. Please add a bold *Keep with a signature ~ ~ ~ ~, to the article's deletion discussion page [1]. Thank you Telecine Guy (talk) 01:53, 28 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: Uzumba-Maramba-Pfungwe District, Zimbabwe[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Jessicapierce. You have new messages at Talk:Uzumba#Requested move 14 February 2021.
Message added --Bejnar (talk) 05:32, 14 February 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.Reply[reply]

Valentine Greets!!![edit]

Wikilove2 new.png Valentine Greets!!!

Hello Jessicapierce, love is the language of hearts and is the feeling that joins two souls and brings two hearts together in a bond. Taking love to the level of Wikipedia, spread the WikiLove by wishing each other Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person.
Sending you a heartfelt and warm love on the eve,
Happy editing,

BilCat (talk) 18:47, 14 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Valentine Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Nomination of List of fictional actuaries for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of fictional actuaries, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of fictional actuaries until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:05, 24 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Three years!

... on the day I was named awesome Wikipedian by Rlevse --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

August 2021[edit]

Tolu io (talk) 20:21, 16 August 2021 (UTC)hey Jessica, I only added a picture to the Wally Warning article,I didn't do nothing else ma'amReply[reply]

Need second opinion on Sino-Soviet border conflict[edit]

Hello, I'm hoping someone smarter than me can take a look at Sino-Soviet border conflict. I recently undid a lot of seeming vandalism there, but this is really not my area and I'm not sure I got it all, or that the remaining content is legit. The last thing I want to do is make things worse. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you, Jessicapierce (talk) 02:02, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would asking at talk pages of the relevant WikiProjects -- military history, for example -- be of utility? The {{helpme}} requests are processed by generic volunteers, many of whom don't know this topic well. Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 04:01, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'd recommend posting on Talk:Sino-Soviet border conflict to start, and then try the projects if that doesn't work. I did glance at the recent history, but I'm not familiar with the topic either. BilCat (talk) 04:14, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Marked the helpme request as closed. Welcome to open another if desired. Regards, --Gryllida (talk, e-mail) 05:19, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks so much @Gryllida: and @BilCat: - I don't know why that wasn't my first thought (other than I was super tired at the time). I'll post there now. Cheers! Jessicapierce (talk) 14:01, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You're most welcome. BilCat (talk) 19:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Primrose Aerodrome[edit]

I fly into this airstrip for work It serves the Kirby and Jackfish plants, HZP is the airport for Horizon oil sands. This strip is a 3-hour drive from the horizon plant.,+Alberta/Primrose+Airport,+Alberta+T0P+1H1/@56.3491362,-113.551173,7z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m14!4m13!1m5!1m1!1s0x53b0858f5f902163:0x7e56cc5f7fd32471!2m2!1d-111.7577988!2d57.3391674!1m5!1m1!1s0x53a5c054c5175ecb:0x5a056a799b9c218e!2m2!1d-111.1247486!2d55.3939166!3e0

Waxy578 (talk) 02:43, 23 September 2021 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Broken infoboxes bug[edit]

I noticed you've had to fix another instance of this after I used the app to add a short description. First, thanks for fixing it! Second, I've left a comment about it on the short descriptions talk page, with links to my two edits that you had to repair. I hope someone can track down what's causing the bug. Musiconeologist (talk) 12:58, 26 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem at all, and thanks for adding the comment about the error! I kept meaning to figure out how/where to report it (and forgetting). Cheers! Jessicapierce (talk) 13:06, 26 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You're welcome, and whether it was the right place or not, I'm pleased to say someone followed it it up an hour or so later by submitting an official bug report. So that counts as done, I reckon. Musiconeologist (talk) 02:42, 27 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Donald Miles Reece[edit]

re: my suggestions about Donald Miles Reece. has the correct city for his place of birth, high school and place of death; Missouri not Ohio. As I commented, he was my coach at Gower High School (now East Buchanan High School) in Missouri between 1956 and 1970. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimfromiows (talkcontribs) 19:32, 11 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Jimfromiows: that sounds like a fine reference for those changes. Feel free to edit that page, using the profilefootball link as a citation. Alternately, you can always post a request on the article's Talk page (you'll find it in a tab at the top of the Don Reece page) for someone else to make those changes and add the citation. Thank you, Jessicapierce (talk) 01:22, 12 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lower mythology[edit]

What suggestions do you have for the page Lower mythology and formatting the citations?

SiliconProphet (talk) 20:55, 31 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It looks like many of the ref errors have been taken care of. The biggest problem was that they needed unique refnames. There are still a lot of stray characters in there - apostrophes, brackets, etc.
I just fixed a few of these mysterious things: [[Osiris|Osiris]] ... what's the purpose of those?
Additionally, you don't need to do this: [[Anthropomorphism|anthropomorphism]] - you can simply type [[anthropomorphism]], as the system doesn't care whether the first letter of a link is capitalized - the link will work regardless. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 22:45, 31 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svgHello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:09, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

addition to Whitefield, Maine page[edit]

I would like to propose that the page be added to references . it is entirely Whitefield centric — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iomene (talkcontribs) 18:56, 30 December 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there,[edit]

You were the last one to edit about my great, great, great grand father Thomas James O'Neil.

Is it possible for you to ad a picture of him if I sent it to you?

Thanks, Kendra Kendra Krupek (talk) 04:09, 20 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gary Steelheads Edit[edit]

Not sure how to make a citation about the changes I made. I was the Director of Operations for a majority of the time with the team while in the CBA. 2601:8C0:700:9B50:C418:28F1:D9F6:2E55 (talk) 03:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Seanmclau: It's generally discouraged to edit topics with which you have a personal connection. However, the changes you made weren't anything controversial, and I personally would have no objections to you re-adding them. It's important that the page be left in a readable state - you can ensure this by always using the Preview function (your previous edit removed formatting and damaged the page).
Keep in mind that you can always post on any article's Talk page, requesting that information/sources be added to the article. This can help when the formatting of citations is tricky (or just something you'd rather not mess with). Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 15:09, 2 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ref names[edit]

Hi, I saw you're updating long ref names with shorter ones. In the process, could you verify the ref name is actually used? A named ref could be misleading, looking like it's used multiple times even if it's not. Thanks!--Marc Lacoste (talk) 08:59, 14 April 2022 (UTC) I don't follow your page, please ping me if you want to reply, thksReply[reply]

Also, explicit ref names are useful when editing the wikitext. I use a [source][date] format, more useful than a short ref name="full". Thanks. Marc Lacoste (talk) 09:03, 14 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Marc Lacoste: Hi there, thanks for your message. You're right, quite a lot of those huge refnames are used only once in a given article, so those citations don't really need names at all. My logic in shortening, rather than removing them, is that since the prior editor went to the trouble of naming the ref, it might as well keep a brief name for ease in future editing, should that editor (or someone else) want to expand the article and re-use the same citation. My main goal is to get rid of these goofy 100+ character refnames that needlessly clutter up the page and make it miserable to edit. On a citation that's only used once in an article, I guess I might as well remove the name altogether.
As for the naming style, I honestly can't see that it matters much, as long as the ref names are unique... I run across a huge number of vague refnames like ":0", "auto", or "2498669241", and those get the job done just fine. I'm generally using a word from the title or author named in the citation... surely that's clear enough? Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 14:14, 14 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm afraid you make a lot of assumptions on other editors wills. If an editor went to the trouble of naming a ref, perhaps he wants to keep the name he remembers thereafter, not a changed one for another editor's aesthetic taste. If a ref name stands alone, it's perhaps it was used twice but not anymore. If an unnamed ref needs to be used again, it's really easy to give it a name again. If you can't see why the naming style matters, perhaps you should not touch it and leave it as other editors want them? Abstract ref name should be avoided, but not obviously descriptive ref names. Editors have idiosyncracies. Perhaps it's not so bad and should be left at that with no change? I've got another one: I leave line breaks between sentences, as it allow for reordering while showing in the diff that nothing else has changed. I avoid disrupting existing wikitext in this way, but you shouldn't remove those line breaks either if you're unaccustomed as the diffs are illegible. Thanks.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 06:26, 15 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(@BilCat: if you have a minute, could I get your opinion on the following as well? Thank you.)
(@Marc Lacoste: thank you for the reply, and I will take your points into consideration. However, I can't help but think this is similar to other interactions I've occasionally had here, when another editor gets aggressive because my editing style is not exactly the same as theirs.
I do not consider what I'm doing a disruption, and I have been making positive changes here for many years. I really am open to criticism, as well as discussion on the finer points of Wikipedia. I'd appreciate it if you would assume that I am here to help, as I think my record shows.
I would also appreciate it if you would not revert my edits - particularly before I'd even had a chance to continue this discussion, as at Cessna Citation Latitude and Embraer ERJ family. In my recent edits of those articles, I made several necessary style fixes, shortened a few long ref names, and removed some seemingly unnecessary line breaks. Frankly, I found the line breaks bizarre, and not something I commonly run across while editing. To me, they made the page unnecessarily long. I see your point about the use of these line breaks... but it's a very uncommon practice, and I assumed it had been done in error.
Ultimately those line breaks do not change the appearance of the publicly-readable article, but my capitalization and punctuation changes do, and I wish you hadn't removed them.
I will leave the line breaks alone in the future.
About the ref names. For the most part, the editors who added these massive refnames have not been active since 2014-2017 or so. If they'd been added by a recently active editor, I would be glad to discuss it with them.
These refnames are often literally over 100 characters, spanning the width of the editing box and hugely cluttering the page. Since the whole point of a named ref is to avoid the article being a bloated mess that's hard to edit, the ref name should not be as long as the citation itself. Along the way, I found many which were not quite that massive, but more like ref name = "Cessna Takes First Flight in May - Flying Magazine 2020" - which also seemed excessive, so I've been shortening those as well.
I see where you're coming from on the single-use ref name thing, and will devote some thought to that. Ultimately, my edits are not harming the articles, and, in my opinion, are making them easier to edit. That is certainly my intention. As you say, editors have idiosyncracies, but we are working on the same side here. Thank you, Jessicapierce (talk) 13:31, 15 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Jessica, Marc Lacoste does good work, but he does have a few unique idiosyncrasies he uses in his editing. (I do too, so that's not a criticism as such.) His use of hidden notes and placing sentences is definitely unique, but I see its usefulness even while not using that style myself.

As to the ref names, Help:Footnotes#Footnotes: using a source more than once offers some guidance. As far as length, "Please consider keeping reference names simple.." is the closest it comes to covering that, though not explicitly. To me, shorter is simpler. On using ref names for future use: "You may optionally provide reference names even when the reference name is not required. This makes later re-use of the sourced reference easier." Therefore, I wouldn't remove them just because the ref is only cited once. I've had to reuse refs on many occasions, and it's much simpler if the ref names are already there. I usually add them myself if I use the Cite tool from the tool bar, which makes it easy to add. I hope that helps! BilCat (talk) 05:05, 16 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Jessica, thanks BilCat for the comments. I'm sure you're here to help, and thanks for your constructive edits, but to avoid any clashes, perhaps it could be best to avoid changing styles? As you said my editing style is not exactly the same as theirs, should you try to impose your style or leave theirs? Thanks!--Marc Lacoste (talk) 06:39, 16 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Marc Lacoste:, I was asked for my opinion here, and I wasn't planning on giving it otherwise. But I am confused as to what styles you think I'm favor of changing or imposing? I thought I advocated the opposite here. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 07:46, 16 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi BilCat, sorry for the misunderstanding: I was replying to Jessica, not you! I thought it was the flow of the conversation.--Marc Lacoste (talk) 10:43, 16 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No worries! BilCat (talk) 19:31, 16 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Marc Lacoste: Regarding imposing one editing style on another:
Spacing: Your preferred method of spacing sentences is fine by me, and as I said, I'll leave this alone going forward. I hadn't seen that sort of sentence placement before, and it didn't occur to me that it could be a useful method. I take your point about this tactic being useful in comparing page edits, as I often struggle to see exactly what's been changed.
When I removed your spacing, it was soon after I'd found some spacing in other articles that was really broken up, not just
between sentences,
but more
like this, along
with some       odd extra spacing       between words. The article displayed correctly, but editing it called for a lot of scrolling, so I removed some of those breaks and spacing.
I assumed your sentences breaks were something along the same lines, and maybe an artifact caused by someone copying their text from elsewhere and pasting it into the wikipedia window. Now that I've been told it was a deliberate choice, and something you find useful, I won't remove them in future. So, I have no intention of imposing my editing style on yours.
Ref names: This is a bit different, because although huge refnames don't damage the readability of an article, they do clutter the page and make it harder to edit. I've mentioned several times above how unwieldy I find them, but just to illustrate the point, "FlightglobalBellTargetsMidNovemberForJetRangerXFirstFlight" is a real example from Bell 505 Jet Ranger X. I've found many that were even longer. Thank you @BilCat: for finding the "keep them simple" mention in the guidelines. I'm often trimming a thousand characters of insanely long refnames from these aviation articles. Regardless of the original editors' intent or preferred style, I don't think it's a good policy to encourage bloated, unnecessary ref names like this. As I mentioned, from what I can tell, most of these citations were added nearly a decade ago, by apparently now-inactive editors. I can't discuss it with them, so I'm doing my best to tidy the articles, the same way I do with style errors, typos, etc.The long ref names aren't something I would call an error, but I also don't think they're something we should keep or encourage.
So in this area, yes, I guess my actions could be described as imposing my editorial style... but I'm also upholding what I honestly think is best policy (we can quibble over what constitutes a perfect ref name, but can we agree it shouldn't be one page-spanning unreadable run-on sentence...?). Every article has an Edit button for a reason, and I'm "being bold" and fixing something I think needs fixing. Thank you, Jessicapierce (talk) 23:47, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks. I agree those long ref names are goofy. I wouldn't actively shorten them, but I understand your actions. I don't know if a perfect ref name could exist. The usual form I use, [source][date] is a proposition, like the honed-by-the-age [author][year] academic ref names. But I'm afraid leaving only a common word like "full" is barely better than abstract numbers. Cheers!--Marc Lacoste (talk) 05:48, 18 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, I forgot my rationale for removing ref names used only once: when editing a single section and removing/replacing a ref, if it has no name I'm sure it's not reused elsewhere and can be removed immediately, while if it has a name I expect it is used again and should be kept for a possible usage outside the section, even if it's not: more work for the poor editor! Cheers,--Marc Lacoste (talk) 06:57, 19 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Miklós Kocsár[edit]

Hello Jessica,

I am the niece of Miklós Kocsár, and want to update the Wikipedia page. Can you please tell us what source documents are needed to justify family origin ? Should I really attach family papers ? In addition I would like to replace his photo. Can I do that or is it controlled too ? Thanks for advising,

Helen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Helena von Kotchar (talkcontribs) 16:55, 15 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Helena, thanks for your response - I will reply on your Talk page in a moment. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 23:47, 17 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Short descriptions[edit]

FYI — Short descriptions need to be plain text, without any HTML or Wiki mark-up. See WP:SDFORMATGhostInTheMachine talk to me 18:14, 26 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requesting help with Resilience (materials science)[edit]

Hello, I've repeatedly removed additions to Resilience (materials science) which have again been re-added by the contributor, before/without resolving issues with formatting, style, punctuation, caps, spacing, readability, and citations. In addition, there's a clear COI issue - the contributor is adding his own research. Please see the conversation on Sir 68 G A178's Talk page - I appreciate that he responded, and does seem to be editing in good faith, but the issues in his repeatedly resubmitted content have not been addressed.

Frankly I'm out of mental bandwidth to deal with this issue (and am also far from being an expert on how COI issues should best be handled), and would love to hand it over to someone else. If that's you, thank you. Jessicapierce (talk) 16:14, 2 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Hi there – he's edit warring, plain and simple. Edit warring can take place over a few months or a few minutes. I've warned him; if he reverts again (and these are reverts), report him to WP:AN3 and tell them Katie sent you (ping me if you do). I can put EC on the page but he's the only one messing with it, it's the only thing he's interested in at the moment, so I think this is the best way to go. Let us know if you have questions. Don't let the guy get to you. That's what we admins are here for. :-) Katietalk 20:21, 2 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you so much, I really appreciate the help! I mostly fix small unimportant errors, and situations like this are uncommon for me. It's a relief to get assistance from someone well-versed in this stuff - I really appreciate it!
    Let me know if I can ever help you with anything (like rogue apostrophes, I suppose). Cheers! Jessicapierce (talk) 20:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notice of noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Holy Name changed to Saint Paul Diocesan Junior/ Senior High School in 2020. The edits reflect that change.. Thank you. Letting you know since the OP didn't do so. Nil Einne (talk) 17:08, 15 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article Review and Help for Pamilerin Adegoke Article Creation[edit]

Hi Jessicapierce! Hope you're doing well, please i need your help to review a wikipedia article am creating for Pamilerin Adegoke. I just published it and its marked for Deletion. please find the link here Regards! George Nyiam (talk) 11:21, 3 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Precious anniversary[edit]

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg
Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A Paris Education???[edit]

Hi Jessicapierce, a message in my wiki entry says you have deleted something I wrote in someone else about "A Paris Education." But I've no idea what or where that is and I've never tried to edit anyone else's entry. What's this about please? Jack pizzey (talk) 17:42, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, you can view a list of your wikipedia contributions here. In October 2018, you (or someone using your account) did make a nonconstructive change to that article (see here), which was removed. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 19:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My entry under threat[edit]

Hi Jessica, my entry has a notice from an editor saying it needs more certification. That was followed for a time by people saying KEEP and one saying DELETE. Those have gone now. A friend has now added some links to newspaper reviews of my films. Can the threat to delete me now be removed please? The EXTERNAL LINKS section gives one to IMDB (the International Media Data Base) but says it is 'dead.' But it isn't. It goes to the a long list of my films. Jack pizzey (talk) 13:15, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm afraid I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't see any "keep/delete" discussion on the article in question.
My involvement in this happened 4 years ago, and was limited to the removal of the following text at A Paris Education:
"REVIEW I found this film stupefyingly sleep-inducingly drama-free and dismally banal. If you want to see a film about university students in Paris seeking meaning I recommend Bertolucci's THE DREAMERS."
Aside from being non-neutral in tone, your addition contained no actual information about the topic. Wikipedia doesn't collect film reviews (with the exception of exerpts from well-known media sources).
If you're referring to something else, please let me know, but the above deletion is the extent of my involvement with your Wikipedia activity, and is really all I can speak on. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 15:13, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year, Jessicapierce![edit]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Moops T 05:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jack Catley[edit]

Hi. I changed the above name from John William Catley to the correct name Jack William Catley. He was my Dad. His brothers and sisters called him John but his registered name and the name I knew him by was Jack. Thanks. (talk) 14:20, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gulfport Biloxi Intl Airport reference tag[edit]

Hello. Need a little help here. Go to above article, go to infobox on right at bottom of box. Can you clean up the citation #1 please. I cant figure out what the problem is. Thank you for your time and effort.Theairportman33531 (talk) 22:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]