User talk:Joe bob attacks

Welcome

Hello Joe bob attacks and welcome to Wikipedia! I am Ukexpat and I would like to thank you for your contributions.

Getting Started First steps • FAQ Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting help Community Portal • Help desk • Village Pump Where to ask questions or make comments • Request administrator attention Wikipedia: The Missing Manual Place {{helpme}} on your talk page and a small message explaining the problem The Commmunity Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists		Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Click here to reply to this message.

ukexpat (talk) 15:23, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Vote needed

Votes are needed on the Thomas Jefferson talk page, (1st section) Gwillhickers (talk) 02:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Noticeboard for Jefferson page

Sorry about the undo, I have to ensure this is separated from the previous sections.

Pardon my edit, but I must inform you that I had to refer an editor to the noticeboard for his fringe theories (not you). Your conduct is fine, but since you were involved in the dispute, I cited your discussion & warnings to him on this matter as well as those of other editors. You can see it here, and if I misquoted/inaccurately posted something involving you, then please say so: [1] Just to clarify, I'm not asking you to comment on that page, just to make known any errors I might have made involving your words/edits; I don't want this misconstrued into WP:CANVAS, which it is not. Ebanony (talk) 08:44, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I agree the content should be on his talk page, which is why I moved it there just now [2]. Unfortunately, he has the habit of removing the text I place and putting it to the Jefferson page, as he did here with this [3]. It's not I who insist on discussing it there. I'm more than happy to close the conversation, but he must stop promoting those fringe ideas; since he refuses, it is appropriate to leave a clear repudiation in the talk page to the things he goes on about. I will to move the other page back to his talk page, but I'm pretty sure he'll just put it back on the Jefferson page.Ebanony (talk) 01:33, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I tried moving the content to his talk page so that it wouldn't distract from the article, and I deleted some of my comments that I thought weren't helping the situation. Well, as predicted he put the info from his talk page (where it should be) to the Jefferson page: [4]. What more can I do?Ebanony (talk) 06:57, 7 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FAQ for Talk:Thomas Jefferson?

Was thinking that if a FAQ was set up for this talk page, that maybe that might keep some of the constant reverting and unending discussions to a minimum. Shearonink (talk) 05:42, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's a fantastic idea. Let me know if you need any help drafting FAQs? Thanks. --Joe bob attacks (talk) 22:58, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Page Progress in Mid-March

Your attention and input is needed again on the Thomas Jefferson talk page. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:23, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Jefferson

An editor has moved most of the historiography content to a new article, Debate about paternity of Sally Hemings' children, but it has been recommended for speedy deletion as duplicating material in the Jefferson DNA data and not having included the Talk page discussions.Parkwells (talk) 17:51, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Profession

Joe, it's not at all inappropriate to mention your profession. I mention mine on my user page. You can even claim to be an expert on the subject. Just note, though, that editors here take claims of expertise very cautiously because of prior claims by others of expertise. Being an expert is a good thing as long as you're aware that you're required, just like everyone else, to use 3rd party sources to support your editing. Being an expert should make that easier for you, in fact. The other thing that rubs people the wrong way is when folks use their expertise and adopt an elitist attitude. There is a bit of an anti-elitism trend around here. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing. I tend to regard anti-intellectualism as the opposite of what an encyclopedia should strive for, but elitism tends to run afoul of the whole 'anyone can edit' ethos. Anyway, don't feel ashamed to be an expert.--v/r - T P 23:53, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

T Thanks. I appreciate that. I really wasn't trying to disparage anyone else. It's what I do and I enjoy. It's all I do really. I'll be glad to put together some consensus sources if needed. I'm working on a genealogy project right now, but I always enjoy working on TJ. I think the worst part of this debate is that I'm an admirer of TJ. I admire him for his greatness and his flaws. Flaws are what make people interesting. Flaws help historians research and understand their subjects. Joe bob attacks (talk) 04:27, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Technical hint...

Hi Joe! With respect to [5]: To link to a user page, use the equivalent of [[User:Stephan Schulz|Stephan Schulz]] (which renders as Stephan Schulz). For most users, the equivalent of [[Stephan Schulz]] would result in a red link, and even for those where it is blue, it's not usually what you want. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 19:30, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Stephen! I'm still learning this stuff.--Joe bob attacks (talk) 04:40, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]