User talk:Joe Roe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from User talk:Joey Roe)
Jump to: navigation, search


Incompetent editing[edit]

I want to thank you for catching and fixing my mistakes [1] [2]. However, with the context of this IP's edit history and the unsourced ethnic content of the addition, I rather quickly assumed vandalism. It's an easy conclusion to arrive at, especially given that I lack your knowledge of the subject. So calling my edits "incompetent" wasn't very WP:AGF of you. Otherwise, I've seen your work around here and think you're a great asset to the encyclopedia. Take care Joe. - GS 03:42, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Tulle massacre[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Tulle massacre. Legobot (talk) 04:24, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

November editathons from Women in Red: Join us![edit]

Women in Red logo.svg
Welcome to Women in Red's November 2017 worldwide online editathons.
Robinson projection SW.jpg


New: The Women in Red World Contest

Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

-Megalibrarygirl (talk) 16:19, 21 October 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging

New Page Reviewer Newsletter[edit]

Hello Joe Roe, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!
Wikipedia New page reviewer.svg

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

  • Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:


If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

David Lowe (Historian)[edit]

Hi Joe Roe, thanks for rescuing the above article. I never realised that you could resubmit it yourself, I thought it would be the article owner only. I was suprised it was missed, particularly regarding somebody who is so well qualified for an article. I'm glad it has been resolved. Now that I know I resubmit myself, there is a couple of other ones available for article space. Thanks. scope_creep (talk) 11:04, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Yeah if you open the AFC Helper script on a submission that has already declined, it should give you the option to resubmit it as the original creator. Then you can review as normal and the templates etc. will all go to the correct places. I find myself doing it fairly often, what with AfC reviewing being a bit uneven! – Joe (talk) 13:24, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Turkey[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Turkey. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

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

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.

Views/Day Quality Title Tagged with…
34 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Daïra (talk) Add sources
287 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Waterloo (1970 film) (talk) Add sources
25 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: C Danubian Sich (talk) Add sources
1,659 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: FA Battle of Vienna (talk) Add sources
59 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: GA Battle of Khotyn (1621) (talk) Add sources
238 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Armoured train (talk) Add sources
1,485 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: B Ayodhya dispute (talk) Cleanup
104 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B Twin Galaxies (talk) Cleanup
22 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Prehistoric Hong Kong (talk) Cleanup
147 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: C History of the Cossacks (talk) Expand
27 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: FA Levantine archaeology (talk) Expand
33 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Socken (talk) Expand
43 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Crimean–Nogai raids into East Slavic lands (talk) Unencyclopaedic
280 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Reply of the Zaporozhian Cossacks (talk) Unencyclopaedic
2,001 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: B, Predicted class: B Cossacks (talk) Unencyclopaedic
43 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Gemeinde (talk) Merge
173 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Free economic zone (talk) Merge
142 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Overseas region (talk) Merge
35 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Exarchate (talk) Wikify
15 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C Nahal Mishmar (talk) Wikify
6,690 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: FA North America (talk) Wikify
10 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Cossack raids on Istanbul (1624) (talk) Orphan
5 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start ʿUmq al-Rabaḫ (talk) Orphan
3 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Lucie Pflug (talk) Orphan
29 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Stub Sorok (talk) Stub
3 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Dominic Tweddle (talk) Stub
13 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C Teleilat el Ghassul (talk) Stub
7 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: NA, Predicted class: Start Sasha McVeigh (talk) Stub
18 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Lugar (country subdivision) (talk) Stub
20 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Okręg (talk) Stub

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 11:49, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your response in the Tea House[edit]

Hello, Joe Roe. Thank you for your response to my question in the Tea House regarding spacing after a sentence period - one space or two needed. Thank you for the reference to the article on the debate on sentence spacing. Haven't had a chance to look at it yet, will do so in the near future. Best regards, Verbwright981 (talk) 21:36, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello Joe Roe[edit]

Trophy.png Hello Joe Roe
Hello Joe, It is Macedonian Snow Leopard. I believe

it does make sense. Advanced archaeological equipment or technologies will greatly reduce time consuming projects. Thats what i am trying to explain, after reading the authors book. Regards Macedonian Snow Leopard. Macedonian Snow Leopard (talk) 23:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Source fails WP:RS. Donski's MA in history doesn't make him an archaeologist and see [1][2] Doug Weller talk 10:01, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Blocked as a sockpuppet, master pushes this source. Doug Weller talk 17:14, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Can't say I'm surprised... – Joe (talk) 17:21, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Treblinka extermination camp[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:Treblinka extermination camp. Legobot (talk) 04:23, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Notice[edit]

Listen I know that my username is a reference to Lil Uzi Vert. Lil Uzi Vert is my favorite rapper. I mean, I am pretty sure that no one who has fame, diamond contact lenses, or Lamborghini Huracan (In which all of these Lil Uzi Vert has) would have a account for Wikipedia. Therefore, I see no "violation". Thank you, but try again. LilUzi25 (talk) 15:35, 10 November 2017 (UTC)LilUzi25

LilUzi25, you'd be surprised how many famous and "influential" people create accounts in order to attempt to edit the pages about themselves. I concur with Joe that you should probably request a username change. Even something as simple as "LilUziFan25" would be acceptable. Primefac (talk) 15:44, 10 November 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)
Oh, you think that deleting the crisis will solve your problems. I know these things. And for real, for real (Lil Uzi Vert reference) You'd be surprised by how many articles I've submitted for review that have been declined over and over by the same people even though I have all the things i should in them.LilUzi25 (talk) 15:56, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Cucuteni-Trypillia culture[edit]

The pseudonim "Joe Roe": Why do you falsify the wikipedia data, and remove any corection placed by real historians? In your message to me you ask me not to correct the informations at the page mentioned above unless "I bring reliable sources" for it. Is wikipedia NOT a "reliable source", but a fake site? In this case, "fake informations" are best at home on this fake site. In case wikipedia is a RELIABLE SOURCE, and because following my correction I pointed out in very thorough details the RELIABLE SOURCES for it, including the very paragraph of the correction-title in question (paragraph title which says "Early period 4800-4000 BC", while the paragraph itself describe this Early period as the period between 6500-5000 BC), you puting back the WRONG information of "4800-4000 BC" at a paragraph talking about a totally OTHER/older period, proves that you premeditate falsify the info in wikipedia and keep it wrong/false, pretending that it's "right"😉, while your own paragraph there proves you WRONG. Can't you read your own page??? (or "the page you are protecting")?? I also added a link to the artefacts presented in the paragraph above, where the History professor at NY University confirms the same thing I say, you denying evrything, and insisting on mentaining the wrong information on wikipedia, NOT sustain there by ANYTHING*, not even by it's own text in it's own chapter/paragraph.

  • You also pretend that "reliable sources" are needed to post data on wikipedia, while the paragraph title of "4800-4000 BC" does NOT have any proof attach (or "reliable source") of any kind.

Despite this, you insist in keeping this unsustained and wrong data there, amd sistematically remove correct & sustained data placed by specialist, thus contradicting yourself in your message to me about "reliable sources are needed", like you contradict yourself at the above culture where the paragraph "Early history 4800-4000 BC" is contradicted by the text/content bellow of it's own paragraph. Muntele (talk) 16:24, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Muntele. That is my real name, not a pseudonym, and I'm not in the business of falsifying anything. If you would like to contribute to Wikipedia effectively it would be a good idea to drop the personal attacks.
It's a Wikipedia policy that all information added to articles must be verifiable, which generally means it should be supported with a direct citation to a reliable source. I'll respond to the rest of your comments on the article's talk page so other editors can also join the discussion. Just please remember we are all here to improve the encyclopaedia. There's really no call to get so worked up about a couple of dates! – Joe (talk) 20:51, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:T-Mobile Arena[edit]

The feedback request service is asking for participation in this request for comment on Talk:T-Mobile Arena. Legobot (talk) 04:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

RfA[edit]

Considering that your ORCP went pretty well, would this be something you are up for? TonyBallioni (talk) 17:15, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: Yeah you know what, the comments were encouraging and there's no time like the present. I was thinking about bringing some of my nearly-there articles up to GA (to address Ritchie333's comment), but at the end of the day that would be jumping through hoops just for the sake of it. Would you be willing to nominate? – Joe (talk) 17:39, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Sure. I'd be happy to nominate. Normally its best to have two (and Ritchie is probably the most prolific recent nominator, so maybe he would be willing given his comments? He could also speak to the content work.) TonyBallioni (talk) 17:51, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Yup, I'm happy to co-nominate; I think your content work is acceptable, as far as I know. I would advise you not to rush for GAs before an RfA - I had to pull one once because the article wasn't reviewed properly and needed a re-review and rewrite, which would have caused pile-on opposition. Do make sure all the articles you have had a major hand with are up to date and properly sourced. Otherwise, I will do a thorough check of contributions and get back to you. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:50, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
That would be great, thank you Ritchie. I do stand by my content work, I just have a habit of moving on to something else before I feel it's ready for a GA review. – Joe (talk) 11:02, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
I've sent both you and Ritchie an email. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:57, 16 November 2017 (UTC)