User talk:John from Idegon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Caution
  • Unless otherwise requested, I will respond on this page.
  • Please include links to pertinent page(s).
  • Click New section to start a new topic.
  • Unsigned and/or misplaced comments may be removed unread.

My talk page may be protected from editing by non-confirmed editors from time to time. If that's the case and you cannot post here, please leave me a message here. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk)

Navy binoculars.jpg Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.

Northwest Hills (Austin, Texas)[edit]

Happy autumn. Do you have a link to the RfC about the use of "affluent" in city/town articles? I'm having an issue with the "upscale" neighborhood of Northwest Hills (Austin, Texas). Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:22, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

It had to do with Sherman Oaks, LA, California......Lemme look around. John from Idegon (talk) 21:20, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/Archive 19#Request for comment Here ya go, Magnolia677. It will be in my sandbox if you ever need it again. That's where I file links and such. John from Idegon (talk) 21:25, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Very upscale. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 21:40, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

BRD Cycle[edit]

Hi, thank you for your note on my edit of Palo Alto High School. I think you might want to look at WP:CYCLE. I made an edit under the bold principle. You then reverted it, but without specifying your reason for reversion as laid out in the Bold, revert, discuss principle. You rather suggested that the responsibility lies with the editor to seek consensus before making change. That's not my understanding of the ethos on wikipedia at all. Possums 11:50, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) @Possums: I would say be bold, but not reckless. Organizing by the date of graduation runs the risk of original research as... imagine the kind of referencing required. So the edit was contentious and should need some discussion to make sure there is a consensus. Alex ShihTalk 16:59, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
thanks, Alex Shih. Hi, Possums. Firstly, new messages go at the bottom of a talk page. Second, I'm sorry you interpreted it that way, but all I was saying was to seek consensus prior to making a major change such as that. You made a bold edit, I reverted it. If you think it important, you need to start a discussion on the article's talk page if you want it back. Altho that is the BRD cycle, and that is what is happening here, for stylistic changes, not factual additions, it is better to seek consensus first, if only to save yourself time. Re-arraigning an entire list like that is a fair amount of work, and it is doubtful that a change such as that would garner a consensus. Arraigning notables by grad date is really only useful to alumni of the school, and not the wider audience that the article is targeted at. Further it is seldom to never that grad dates are sourced, or for that matter, even given completely for the entire list. You are obviously new, and we are glad you are here, but rather than waste time, wouldn't it be better for you to make edits that haven't been made hundreds of times before and reverted? No need to re-invent the wheel! John from Idegon (talk) 17:07, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Secondary schools aren't notable[edit]

Hi. I think you've incorrectly closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rouse High School. All the keep arguments were some variation of SCHOOLOUTCOMES, which is invalid. I'd ask that you revert your close or I'll take this to Deletion Review. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:18, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

I think not. Do what you feel you need to do; I will not be participating at that. WP:STICK definitely applies, and that is quite clear from the AfD. I'd be surprised if a request for review isn't speedily closed. There is nothing to debate here, so no need to reply. You are simply misguided. John from Idegon (talk) 18:22, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Deletion review for Rouse High School[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Rouse High School. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Feel free not to participate. Let's just see who of us is misguided. I'm not dropping this stick till someone beats me over the head with it. Chris Troutman (talk) 18:59, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Justify a reference[edit]

John, How would I go about justifying the reference for notable alumni Philip Cioffari in the Mount Saint Michael Academy page? when only one of the 17 alumni have a reference? In the least Wikispeak way (LOL, I'm not an expert) can you explain the process? Thanks TheBronxNYC (talk) 03:08, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)The first step is establishing on-wiki notability. First get him an article. Anmccaff (talk) 03:14, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
I just found a website which mentions his time at Mount S. Michael, can that work also? TheBronxNYC (talk) 03:20, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Understood TheBronxNYC (talk) 03:21, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, TheBronxNYC. In order to be included in a notable alumni list, two things are required. First, the person must unambiguously be notable by Wikipedia's definition. This is best shown by linking to the person's Wikipedia bio. Although having a bio is not absolutely required, if they don't have a bio, you must be able to show the person would qualify with just a couple references. Excepting only a few people who would qualify based on a single achievement (holding certain elected offices, playing big league sports, winning certain awards such as an Oscar or the Medal of Honor), this just isn't possible, so you must write the article first. In addition, there must be a reliable source reference to the person's attendance at the school, either in the list or in their bio. To help you understand what I'm saying here, you should probably review the requirements for biographies at WP:ANYBIO and the specific requirements for academics at WP:NPROF. Simply being a professor is not in itself notable. Just a quick procedural note: There is no need to start a new section every time you post on a talk page. Section headers are used to deliniate subjects, so I've merged the two sections you created here. John from Idegon (talk) 13:44, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Revert of edit for Maine East High School[edit]

John,

Hi, Yesterday I added one of our classmates to the 'arts' section of notables. Could you advise what was wrong with the edit.


  • Bruce "Buzz" Podewell (1961) was an actor best known for being Mr. Wizard's assistant on the TV show Watch Mr. Wizard[1] from 1953 thru 1955. He earned a PhD in Theater history and was Professor of Theater at Tulane University for 40 years. [2]

Thank you, Richard Paul Maine East Alumni Assn. Maine South Alumni Assn.


Maine East Alumni Assn (talk) 02:33, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

References

  • Simple, he does not meet any criteria of notability we have. The requirements to be listed in a notable alumni section are the same as for a biographical article. The applicable guidelines are at WP:ANYBIO, WP:NACTOR, and WP:NPROF. The only one of those he might meet is NPROF. He definitely wouldn't qualify as an actor, and it's doubtful he'd qualify on the general requirements for a bio. The best advice is to WP:WTAF. By the way, your username (Maine East Alumni Assn) is out of policy, for which I'm going to request you be blocked until you change it, and you definittely have a conflict of interest on Maine East High School. I'll leave further information on your talk page. John from Idegon (talk) 02:48, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
    • Further, it is totally unnecessary to post your email address anywhere on Wikipedia, and very unwise besides. This is the 5th most accessed website in the world. I hope you like Spam. John from Idegon (talk) 02:53, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
      • One last thing: neither Wikipedia or your alumni website would be considered reliable verification for an edit on Wikipedia, and all edits must be verifiable. John from Idegon (talk) 02:56, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Marching Band is a Sport.[edit]

https://www.omahacentralregister.com/1198/opinions/is-marching-band-a-sport/ gives significant proof that marching band is, and should be considered, a sport. If you do not agree to this, please give me a reason why you disagree, I will be happy to listen to your opinions. Thank you. Phoenix53004 (talk) 22:47, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Also, Thank you for helping me become a better wikipedian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoenix53004 (talkcontribs) 22:48, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) @Phoenix53004: Gee, I can see why John can seem grumpy sometimes. Did you not read anything he posted to you? Alex ShihTalk 23:04, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
@Alex Shih: Thank you for pointing that out. I did not see the part referring to a magazine not being a reliable source. Phoenix53004 (talk) 23:11, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Also, can you quote Wikipedia itself? because https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marching_band states that it is considered a sport by Sports Illustrated.Phoenix53004 (talk) 23:17, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
If you can't quote wiki, here is this: http://www.halftimemag.com/features/musicians-as-athletes.html. Phoenix53004 (talk) 23:47, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Hi, Phoenix53004. Glad you're here and interested in school articles. I'm one of the coordinators of WikiProject schools and obviously they're pretty important to me too.

Let me apologize upfront, for this is going to be a rather lengthy post. Brevity and concision is highly valued by most Wikipedians, myself included. But the learning curve on this wacky website is quite steep at the beginning, and I'd be doing you a disservice by responding briefly.

One thing new editors frequently have trouble grasping is how we settle content decisions here. You're ahead of the curve here, as you are discussing and not edit warring. Thank you. We have literally thousands of policies and guidelines, most of which refer to content. I've been at this nearly six years and am still learning new things every day. Alex is an administrator and a bit longer tenured than I and I'm sure he'd say the same thing!

The thing about policies and content (with few exceptions pertaining to legal issues such as copyright and libel) is that policies do not actually decide content. Discussion and the consensus formed by discussion are what decides articles content. These discussions are held on an article's talk page if they only affect a single article or a central location for things that affect multiple articles (in this case it would be the school project's talk page.) The editor that wants to change the existing consensus makes arguments based on sources, policies and guidelines. Although I cannot point to a discussion where a consensus was reached to cover high school bands in a section on arts and not in the section on athletics (pinging the other coordinator, Kudpung), in the absence of a formal consensus, the way we've always done it can be considered consensus.

So what does that mean to you? You seem to be wanting us to cover marching band as athletics across the board. So you'll need to start a discussion at the project's talk page for that. Arguments such as you (I'm assuming it was you) made as an IP here yesterday will be discounted completely (see WP:ILIKEIT). The arguments you've made today are more in form, but somewhat lack in substance. Why? Reliability of sources. A school publication is never a reliable source (you need to read the link immediately proceeding this for the why), an editorial is never a reliable source, a trade magazine (halftime.com) would only be reliable for objective facts such as who won what when. Since Wikipedia is both dynamic and user-edited, we don't consider it a reliable source. But the Wikipedia mention you made above does point to the existence of a reliable source (Sports Illustrated). So what you've got at this point is a possibility of a single source, against 50 state athletic sanctioning bodies that say marching band is not a sport. Sounds like a pretty uphill battle to me.

I'm happy to help you with any questions you have about the workings of Wikipedia, but on this point, we are in disagreement. That's gonna happen here; actually, Wikipedia is designed so it does happen. Consensus is the mechanism we use to decide the "truth". The subject at hand is quite mundane, but it is the same process no matter what "truth" we are trying to determine. Thanks again, and sorry again for the verbosity. John from Idegon (talk) 01:18, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you, as I am new and I am not fully educated on Wikipedian Policies (obviously...). I will also cease this battle, as it seems you have won (still not happy about that, but I will attempt to act like a professional...). But still, you have helped me be a better wikipedian. I will now try to only work on editing things I know about and can get references on (example, I have an edit request on Moon about the moon moving away from earth.)Phoenix53004 (talk) 02:06, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
One more thing. Could it be possible to add a list of activities (that I have, which was published by memorial high school itself) to the page? The list I have is on paper, can that be a reliable source? I believe that if marching band is not a sport, then it should be considered an activity, or a club. Thank you for your time.Phoenix53004 (talk) 02:27, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Before I get to your question, let's share another teaching moment. Please make note of how I've used colons to create indenting in this thread. It makes conversations much easier to follow. Also, just make a horizontal space prior to your signature, not a line feed. Thanks. I'd think band would be a curricular offering. Perhaps marching band is a voluntary activity? In any case, a section on clubs in general is discouraged (as most clubs are strictly for the students and are of little to no interest outside the school. Clubs that engage in activities on a state or national level (robotics comes to mind) can be covered in an extracurricular activities section and existence can be sourced to the school, but achievement needs independent sourcing and is limited to only highest level achievement (state or national championship) just like athletics. Arts programs like band chorus and theatre can be discussed in an arts section with the same limitations. Keep in mind there are things we do not discuss in school articles such as individual students or staff names, details on requirements for participation or anything else that would be primarily of interest to the school community only. Things like competitive speech and debate, Model UN, Quiz bowl, etc can similarly be discussed in the Academics section. Hope that answers your question. John from Idegon (talk) 02:50, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Ok, Thank you. I will not make a section on clubs, then. You have been very helpful to me, so I will again say thanks. Phoenix53004 (talk) 03:02, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
@Phoenix53004: Yes, like John said, I still learn new things everyday and get scolded occasionally :-) One more thing, try not to think about winning on Wikipedia, it will help you along the way. Once you have everything down, you will find the entire experience very rewarding (I also presumably started editing when I was in high school). Alex ShihTalk 03:59, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
@Phoenix53004: The student news website of Omaha Central High School is absolutely not a reliable source. Whatever it claims marching bands to be is only their opinion and Wikipedia as an encyclopedia does not need to take any notice of it. They could claim the students have discovered the Moon is made of green cheese and put it on a school website (the claim - not the cheese). Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:09, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Edit warring?[edit]

Who is edit warring. There are problems with an article and bringing them to attention is edit warring? That is a wonderful welcome.2605:E000:9161:A500:3832:5234:5BA4:7DB6 (talk) 06:51, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

You made a change, another editor reverted your change, you put it back with a snotty edit summary, and somehow I'm the problem? The truth is not an absolute. We determine where the truth lies by discussion. So if you don't like the existing version, go to the article talk page and engage the other editor in civil discourse about the strength of the sources and the truth they may indicate, ok? Continuing to re-revert will lead to your editing privileges being suspended. Civil discourse won't. You're new and probably didn't realize that; now you do. I'm not a part of this; you need to work it out with Beyond my Ken. John from Idegon (talk) 07:01, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

2 October 2017‎ Wayne Dyer page, Reverted 1 edit by Dante Dos 2nd try[edit]

Sir, I am at a lost to suppose the reason and remedy for your 'revert'. I believe the source references of Sun Sentinel are reliable. Perhaps the wording is not right? Can an edit correct this? Thank you

In November 1991 Dyer was involved with soliciting a female for prostitution, a misdemeanor as a patron of an escort service busted by Florida state officials.[1] He subsequently pleaded no contest to inducing and enticing a lewd act in May 1992 and paid $5,000.[2] Dante Dos (talk) 23:19, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

References

Discussion of content disputes belong on the article's talk page. John from Idegon (talk) 23:30, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, was unsure of how to proceed. Entry was reverted without explanation other than needs consensus. Dante Dos (talk) 12:10, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Why are you re editing my amends on Donegal GAA?[edit]

Your not even from Ireland, I am. I played GAA. Have you? I’ll keep reediting your amends B166erdn (talk) 20:19, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

SVHS and WVHS Logos[edit]

Maybe you can help. Each of the above mentioned schools has new logos, that were recently sited as violating copyrights. Each school would like their logos updated on Wikipedia, which seems to be difficult. Can you help get the logos uploaded?

[1] [2]

WvsdSue (talk) 15:38, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

WvsdSue, are you simply ignoring the messages on your talk page, or have you not seen them? I know you know you have a talk page, because you responded there when you were blocked for your previous username. Not only am I not going to help you, I am going to ask an administrator to block your account's access to Wikipedia until such time that you show you understand what our policies are on PAID editing are and have shown a willingness to comply with them. It galls me that you receive money to do what you are doing and expect volunteer editors to drop what they are doing and assist you. You get paid for this, you figure it out. The articles about the school district you work for are not the property of the school district you work for; they are not under the control of the school district you work for; and as an employee of the district, you have less, not more right to edit them than others. If you show any interest at all in doing this the way you are required to do it by our legally binding terms of use, I will be happy to continue to monitor the talk pages involved and assure that any edit you propose will be dealt with in an appropriate manner. If not, not. John from Idegon (talk) 19:06, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

References

Request on 20:14:41, 10 October 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Albert-bell[edit]


I cannot understand what in my article is about advertisement. I did neutralize it absolutely, because this is not my product. I just saying that there is another spinal traction product and mentioned the inventor name. As a reference I am using US Paten and that's it. Tell me what I did wrong?Albert-bell (talk) 20:14, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Albert-bell (talk) 20:14, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

stop[edit]

stop taking my edit down. I cited the info as requested. Additionally your motto would suggest that anyone can add what they want if they are true facts. WHICH MY EDITS WERE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zack212345 (talkcontribs) 23:28, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Zack212345, I promise I will only revert your poorly sourced addition of an utterly non notable company to the article on Des Plaines, Illinois one more time, because if you add it without consensus again, your editing privileges are almost certainly going to be suspended. Let me ask you something. If you made the basketball team as a freshman, would you tell the seniors they were running the plays wrong on the third day of practice? Not if you were smart. I've been doing this much longer than you. Verifiability is required of all new additions, but verifiability does not guarantee inclusion. CONSENSUS is what decides content, even above most policies. You cannot add whatever you want, no matter what you think. You can either assume good faith that I'm trying to use my experience to help you avoid a serious error that will likely get you blocked or you can continue on the path you are on and likely get blocked. The choice is yours. John from Idegon (talk) 00:03, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, John[edit]

I want to thank you for your help with the Schoolcraft, MI page. I'm not sure if this is how you thank someone, but I thought I would give it a try. My next attempt will be better, I promise. I will also make use of the sandbox. I just thought since there was information already there that was inaccurate, I could just correct it. Anyway, I hope to add value for the Schoolcraft and Vicksburg area. Thank you for your help. --18:28, 11 October 2017 (UTC)Debchristiansen (talk) Deb Christiansen

Hi, Debchristiansen. Glad to hear that, and glad to help. May I make a suggestion? There is a big hole in the coverage of my old stomping grounds, and that is in the area of articles on schools. Both Schoolcraft High School and Mendon Middle/High School are missing articles on Wikipedia. There may be more, but those two are quite important due to their extensive athletic history. It's especially embarrassing for me because I'm one of the coordinators for Wikiproject Schools. School articles are relatively easy to do, and I'll be glad to help you in any way I can. John from Idegon (talk) 19:19, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi John![edit]

Hi John, I seem to keep running across your edits lately, and I just wanted to say thanks for all your efforts. With all the smackdowns a noob gets from experienced editors, I would never have continued on Wikipedia in the early days without the help you offered. Thanks! Jacona (talk) 10:13, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Re: School data[edit]

Hi, thanks for letting me know! I wasn't aware of the prohibition against using diocesan sources for enrollment numbers, but I see why it could be problematic to use first-party sources as-is. In these cases, all I had done was to update figures that were already citing the archdiocese's annual "High school open house guide", except with this year's edition instead of 2015's. I'd happily switch these articles over to NCES, but a quick glance seems to show that NCES's figures are from 2015–16 as well. The Ohio Department of Education maintains figures from October 2016 that I think would be preferable to NCES. What if we continue to cite the newer archdiocesan figures, but only in the article body, after citing the independent figure, and prefaced with "according to the Archdiocese of Cincinnati"? – Minh Nguyễn 💬 04:45, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

My main concern is that having the NCES figures gives us an even field for statistical comparison amongst all US schools public and private. Unless there is significant growth or shrink between the states most current and NCES, I guess I don't really see a reason to use another number. Having the most up to date facts is for almanacs not encyclopedias. Verified and statistically comparable seems more important. John from Idegon (talk) 06:24, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

AP Classes[edit]

Hey John, this is Kenneth. You recently reverted my edits, and while I understand that, I am confused as to why "16" AP Classes got changed back to "15" AP Classes. This year, AP Art History is being offered to students for the first time, so I had attempted to change the number of AP Classes to reflect that, and to add AP Art History. How am I able to edit that if there isn't really a citation for it, it's just that they implemented the class into our school? Kennethkim628 (talk) 16:37, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

The short answer, Kenneth, is you can't. Everything in the encyclopedia must be able to be sourced to a published source. You cannot ever base an edit on solely what you know. However, for something like this, which is not some claim of achievement or praise (such as a championship, an award, a claim of largest, most, first), it is quite alright to source it to the school's website. Most school websites have a section devoted to AP, and if not that, there should at least be some link to a course catalog. That would be fine. AP class listings are specifically endorsed as good content in the school article guidelines, but most information you could derive from a course catalog is not. Hope that helps. Please note that "must be able to be sourced" does not mean "must have a reference". It just means a source that can be referenced must exist, and if someone challenges an edit based on lack of reference, it must be added. However, those claims of achievement or praise that I mentioned above, should always be sourced with a reference independent of the school, right from the start. It will just save you a lot of hassle. John from Idegon (talk) 17:24, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Weidman, Michigan page reverts[edit]

Dear User John from Idegon: I have restored all the legitimate edits you reverted on the Weidman, Michigan page, adding a citation from the Veterinarynews website employed at the Pol page. It is all valid, and the most notable thing about Weidman is the above record-breaking show on NatGeo Wild.

Do not summarily revert edits when you have a beef with one. You want to fix or contest something, fine, but do not just revert an entire series of them en toto without specific MOS cause. Yours, Wikiuser100 (talk) 19:41, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Please establish the guideline of WP:Lede the Pol inclusion in the lead at the above violates. Do NOT revert: Take it to Talk! You've been around here 40,000 edits, you know better than to launch a trivial war like this. Yours, Wikiuser100 (talk) 20:07, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Which is what YOU should have done when I reverted you initially, rather than come here and make a totally dick like argument from authority. I'm at work; someone walked into my office or I would have replaced your source. The lede is the issue. You put it in the lede not me...that makes you responsible for gaining consensus. I'll reply when I have the time on the article's talk page. Get off your high horse. John from Idegon (talk) 20:54, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Done what, engage in ad hominem attacks? Just because this is your Talk page does not allow you to call someone names and degrade them. I made no "argument from authority", merely stated affirmatively some facts, first about the reason for moving the content to the lead and second about the proper way to handle reverts. You have a beef with one, change it and cite your reasons, don't summarily revert an entire series wholesale. Yours, Wikiuser100 (talk) 23:21, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Bear Creek Secondary School[edit]

Hi John from Idegon. I'm wondering if you'd mind taking a look at Bear Creek Secondary School since you have lots of experience dealing with these types of articles? I came across it why checking on some non-free files being used in the article, and tried to clean it up a bit. It probably needs more work since some of the article content is unsourced and some of it seems a bit trivial. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:56, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Marchjuly! Wow... trivial, peacock, puffery,off topic. Running out of negative adjectives. I removed the section containing the logo as off topic (it may be on topic, but IMO too trivial for including in the school district's article), so the logo is an orphan fair use. Also removed the section on the student council as unsourced and pointless (every school has a student council, so what?). That removed the scan of the poster from a dance, probably the most pointless illustration I've yet encountered on school article. I'm not much in appropriate content for a Canadian school, so I'll ping Meters, whose much better equipped to deal with it. I haven't marked any image pages any further than you had, but I'd suggest Googling the image in the Infobox. It looks pretty professional, and I'd bet it's a copyvio. John from Idegon (talk) 23:25, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for taking a look. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:06, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
I'll take a run at it later today. Meters (talk) 06:17, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Meters. John from Idegon (talk) 06:20, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
The picture of the school is likely the uploader's own work, as claimed. He uploaded a few pictures from the same area at the same time, and the metadata looks like original work. Meters (talk) 06:23, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Agreed. Only looked quickly on my phone. John from Idegon (talk) 06:29, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Clear Brook High School[edit]

I noticed that you removed my addition to the Fine Arts Achievements category as well as the category itself citing that "The encyclopedic achievement is unsourced". I was wondering what you meant by that. I understand the removal of the Color Guard achievement as I didn't have any other source than the fact that I was there when it was awarded to them. I mean no disrespect as I'm sure you're way more experienced at Wikipedia than I am but this particular subject is important to me and I'd like to see the Drumline recognized for their achievements. 70.139.59.5 (talk) 03:10, 18 October 2017 (UTC)LiquidSnake31170.139.59.5 (talk) 03:10, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi, 70 etc. First, if you want a username, I encourage you to register and get one. Just click the log in button and follow the instructions. There are many benefits including a talk page that is only yours, a watchlist so you can be notified when articles you are interested in have been changed, and the ability to receive pings (with which I could have notified you I've replied here). School articles have guidelines which ensure all school articles are similarly constructed for the convince of the target audience, the entire English speaking world. Minutia about various school activities is only interesting to the school community and hence we don't include it (that's what unencyclopedic means). We do not include content about individual school groups or teams achievement (and nothing at all about individual students or staff achievement) unless two requirements are met. One, you must have a reliable source independent of the school for it. You had that for the drumline (note small "d"), but not for winter guard (note capitalization). Two, the achievement must be ultimate. Winter guard won a state championship. That's an ultimate achievement. Drumline did not win their competition, altho it was apparently a higher level (calling the competition a national championship is probably not accurate, as most groups like marching band, robotics, cheer, compete in one of several nationwide organizations. None are recognized as THE national championship). If you can find an independent source for winter guard's achievement, that can be included. A tip for you: there is no reason to refer to the winter guard as the "Clear Creek Winter Guard". What other winter guard would it be in an article about Clear Creek High School? John from Idegon (talk) 04:00, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Spinal Traction (Orthopedic) Method Detensor[edit]

And it's back again, quite frankly this is getting rather annoying. As if AfC wasn't backlogged enough. Whispering 03:26, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Tell me about it, Whispering. I'm not a steady reviewer, I just sometimes do it in the course of my work at Teahouse, which is how I came upon this. I'm removing it from my watchlist. If you know an administrator who works around AfC, you could ask him to block the guy for CIR/NOTHERE and likely PAID. It would be way too much hassle to go to ANI, and AIV wouldn't block for this. He's clearly not getting it and he has had a clear final warning. Wish I could help more at AfC, but I've got enough on my plate with WP:WPSCH and Teahouse. And frankly, it would probably increase my frustrations with the PAID issue to the point where I'd say fuggitall. John from Idegon (talk) 04:14, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Update, Whispering. I have a lot of talk page stalkers, and one (who happens to have a mop) CSD'd the draft. Another admin will review it and then hopefully we're done. John from Idegon (talk) 04:35, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Guilty. I've had a quick look and couldn't find the connection between the user and Avazo Co (that makes the product). I've dropped a note for the user explicitly (again) asking not to re-submit again. If that warning is ignored, then it's time to block. Alex ShihTalk 04:41, 18 October 2017 (UTC)