User talk:John from Idegon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Project editor retention logo 1.svg WP:RETENTION This editor is willing to lend a helping hand. Just ask.

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

Congratulations on 5,000,000 articles[edit]

for all your contributions, thank you.

Smallbones(smalltalk) 13:24, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Walking Horse Hotel[edit]

I saw that you added the NRHP infobox to the Walking Horse Hotel article. I'm concerned, though, that that removes the information that was present in the building infobox. Is it possible to have two infoboxes? The hotel is still open as a hotel with rooms for rent, plus it has a restaurant, store and music hall. White Arabian mare (Neigh) 17:17, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

It is possible. Ideally, they would be merged, but i don't know if that is possible with info box building. I'll look into it. If you like writing about structures, I would highly recommend joining WP:NRHP. Collectively, they have a huge amount of knowledge on historic research. Feel free to add the building info box back, preferably right above the NRHP one. And keep coming to teahouse. IMO, it's one of the best resources we have. John from Idegon (talk) 17:32, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
It is possible to merge them. Add |embedded = as the last line in infobox building and copy the entire infobox NRHP onto that line. I can do it when I get home from church if you like. John from Idegon (talk) 17:42, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I'd be grateful if you would. I've never written about any structures before, and only did this one because it involved horses and Tennessee history, two things that I'm interested in and participate in WikiProjects for. I generally stick to horses and related topics. White Arabian mare (Neigh) 20:34, 1 November 2015 (UTC)White Arabian mare

5 Million: We celebrate your contribution[edit]

Wikipedia-logo-v2-en 5m articles.png
We couldn't have done it without you
Well, maybe. Eventually. But the encyclopedia would not be as good.

Celebrate 7&6=thirteen () 13:41, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 October 2015[edit]

Bellevue, Mississippi[edit]

I find it unbelievable that a place which doesn't exist has been kept as an article. I won't even create an article if GNIS only lists it as a ""local" and not a "populated place". What an insult to the careful editors of Mississippi articles. Magnolia677 (talk) 04:31, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Bethel, Alaska[edit]

Why did you revert the info about a major fire in Bethel, Alaska? The event destroyed two schools, and is a significant event in Bethel's history. Yet you left the paragraph about a Taco Bell hoax? I don't get it. Juneau Mike (talk) 11:36, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Comment from an outsider: Michael, this sort of discussion ideally belongs on the article's talk page. In terms of WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, the Taco Bell incident was national news and a national event by virtue of the commercial and the CNN report. The local fire isn't, and buildings burn down every day all over the world. Per WP:NOTNEWS, that doesn't belong in Wikipedia. If you want to challenge the presence of the Taco Bell incident in the article, do so on the article's talk page. And if you stil feel strongly about the fire, post a thread about that on the article's talk page, so the community can opine and consensus can be reached. That's how WP:BRD works. Softlavender (talk) 13:15, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Softlavender said it as well or better than I could. Juneau Mike, you yourself stated why the Taco Bell story stays and the fire story goes. You stated it "is a significant event in Bethel's history." We are not recording history from Bethel's point of view. We record the history of Bethel from the world's viewpoint. Fires are all devastating to those impacted by them. However, there was no loss of life in the fire you discussed. It did impact the operations of some local institutions, but nothing about it impacted the world beyond the community. The lack of coverage beyond the local media bears this out. If you wish to debate this, post on the article's talk page. Thanks for your contributions to one of the best things on the WorldWideWeb, Wikipedia. Happy editing. John from Idegon (talk) 16:07, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the replies. I for one object to the inclusion of "WP:othercrapexists". The inclusion of the word "crap" is a weasel word. The actual policy is: "Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions" which is much more encyclopedic. Why use the words "other crap" to describe good faith edits? The implication is that, "There is other crap that is just as bad as what you wrote." But my main point here is, why simply remove something that admittedly could be worded better, instead of just making good faith attempts at making it better? I spent a lot of time on that single paragraph on the Bethel page, and left it well referenced, and thought it simply being deleted entirely as heavy handed. Could I have worded it better? Of course! My vision for Wikipedia is, an editor makes a good faith addition to an article, another editor makes it even better. And I still believe the same. But the info belongs in the article. Thanks. Juneau Mike (talk) 16:44, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
On that we disagree, but as others do agree, it stays. That's the way this works. If I referenced the other crap link, I apologize. I meant to reference WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. I thought that link went there. I thought your writing was good btw. I just don't see the importance of a fire to understanding the subject of a community as a whole, especially considering the magnitude of some fires that have occured elsewhere. But admittedly, having spent most of my life in the Great Lakes region, where communities are young if they are less than 150 years old, may distort my perception of the magnitude of one event in a community that is much younger. Thanks for your contributions, Mike. John from Idegon (talk) 17:30, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Cuyahoga Falls, OH[edit]

Hi! I really do think that that Trivia section is important. I would like to source it correctly. I've read and reread Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trivia sections and my information seems to fit the bill. Even if the movies are merely "passing references," the Pretenders Song was written by a Northeast Ohio native, is about Northeast Ohio, and mentions Cuyahoga Falls specifically, so it seems particularly relevant. Also, I sourced it with a link to the lyrics, and linked to the Wikipedia pages for Chrissie Hynde, and the Pretenders. My sincere goal is to improve the article with some fun facts. I have seen this type of information on other Wikipedia pages, so I thought it would be fun to have it on that one. I would love some help and productive feedback, rather than instant deletion. Can you help? Andrewjc2 (talk) 02:34, 6 November 2015 (UTC)Andrewjc2 (talk)

Trivia is discouraged in numerous places in Wikipedia guidelines, including the one you are referencing. It is also discouraged in the guideline for content of US settlement articles, USCITY. But the bottom line on this is neither are policy. Both are guidelines. Which brings this to the most important guideline we have, WP:BRD. BOLD (edit), objection to that edit indicated by a REVERT, followed by DISCUSSION on the article talk page to reach a consensus on what the article should say. Please try that rather than edit warring, which is what you are currently doing. ::Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 02:48, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for your explanation. I appreciate your taking time to talk with me. Since dialogue and consensus are what we're after, what would it be like to leave the disputed section up for a while? Visible items are, I think, more likely to become topics of discussion. I think more users would be inclined to discuss this issue if they were aware of it. Consensus cannot be built if no one is aware of the issue.
That's not how it works. Sorry.John from Idegon (talk) 04:52, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Munster, Indiana[edit]

In ten years on Wikipedia, I've seen many reasons given for reverting edits but dismissively deeming an edit which is consistent with policy and guidelines "unneeded" definitely ranks among the most arrogant and bizarre. Wikipedia's Manual of Style, and just about every MOS in existence, clearly states that titles of publications should be italicized. My edit may have been gnomish but it was consistent with the MOS and therefore it was an improvement. The irony in what you did is if my edit wasn't needed, YOURS most certainly wasn't needed, and it definitely did not improve the article. Sarah 10:34, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Of course your italics were correct and needed. I'm editing on a small screen, and did not see the coding for the italics. What I did see was the "nowiki" tags, which were, and are, not needed....hence the edit summary. They serve no purpose whatsoever. ('s) will display exactly the same as (<nowiki>'s</nowiki>) will. Sorry for the misunderstanding. John from Idegon (talk) 16:51, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
I appreciate your apology, however, if you are asserting that the no wiki tags serve no purpose in the full text as it currently stands, you are incorrect. The no wiki tags are needed.
This is what happens to that text with no wiki tags: Newsweek's 2006, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 Top Schools list. The school is also ranked on The Washington Post's 2011 "The High School Challenge".
And this is what happens to the same text without no wiki tags: Newsweeks 2006, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 Top Schools list. The school is also ranked on The Washington Posts 2011 "The High School Challenge".
I certainly sympathize with trying to edit on a small screen but I would have thought that if you see edits come up on your watchlist and your screen is too small to understand their utility but you can see they are not vandalism and they are by long term editors or admins, that you would AGF, give them the benefit of the doubt and perhaps wait until you are on a larger screen to fully evaluate them. Just a thought. Sarah 20:58, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
lhig's. Wow, you're right! Is it the character set on an Android? Cause that doesn't happen when I'm on either my work laptop or the desktop I use sometimes. The apostrophe and the code character are different. Wow. Thanks for the schooling. John from Idegon (talk) 06:51, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure why it doesn't happen on some of your devices, but if the coded character for formatting is different to the apostrophe on Androids, that is probably why. I checked my iPhone or iPad and it happens on both, as well as my laptop. Thanks for the barnstar. It was very much appreciated.:) Sarah 03:06, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 November 2015[edit]

Robert Rowlkey and bias[edit]

Hi John, thanks for your help with the Tucson Pride article and the copyright issues with Robert Rowlkey. I noticed that he called you a "homophobe" and assume that you were biased based on your userbox tags which identify you as a Christian. My question for you is how do you handle such accusations? I feel that it is very easy for others to assume Christian bias. Do you experience discrimination often? I wouldn't have brought this up if it wasn't mentioned by Robert Rowlkey. Thanks.
-TheCaliforniaKansan (talk) 18:50, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

"Love the sinner, hate the sin.". It is obvious with some that agreeing to disagree will not even work. The aforementioned individual will never be a Wikipedia editor, and I'm no where near him in real life. The Wikipedia essay RBI can apply in real life too. It amazes me that the first to throw the discrimination card are often the most bigoted. If he would have read one line further on my user page he would have seen that I belong to the Disciple's of Christ, which is an "inclusive" denomination. IRL, I manage a faith-based ministry for homeless people. I learned a long time ago that not everyone will be saved, or even helped, by what we do. We just do it anyway, cause it is right and it is what He wants us to do. John from Idegon (talk) 23:34, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Reverted edits to Wester High School[edit]

Due to the fact that I am on an iPad, I can't directly make a reference... but I know that Ty Caloway (or however you spell his last name) appears as the first Google Image Search photo... here's a link: Kokomo is the nearby town in Howard County, correct? Well, he has since retired (as of last year), but he is famous... at least at Western. It is at least worth noting on the wiki page of Ty, right?

Anyways, just let me know if you need anything else... I try to lend a helping hand, but sometimes I do too much, and end up not knowing what I do wrong . leel. Thanks, Coolcam6578 (talk) 02:44, 12 November 2015 (UTC) Coolcam6578 (talk) 02:44, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Your so nice, you signed this twice. (: As far as Ty goes, probably not. The list of notable people is not for people important to the school or its community. It is for people from the school that meet Wikipedia's threshold for a biography. In other words, a person must have a bio on Wikipedia (or at least unambiguously qualify to have one.) I don't see why using an iPad should make it impossible to add a reference. I am on an Android and do it all the time. Please do not re-add bowling in the athletics section. Bowling is a sanctioned sport in Michigan. Perhaps the IHSAA will catch up soon. Your best source for the school colors will be at the IHSAA website. Although not controversial, we are only interested in the official colors. If you need help, stop back. I am one of the coordinators of Wikiproject Schools and Indiana schools are probably my favorite subject. John from Idegon (talk) 03:29, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Copiah Academy[edit]

John, can you give me an opinion on what's going on at Copiah Academy? Would you consider that to be vandalism? Thanks for your help, as always.Jacona (talk) 03:54, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

As you noticed, I did some dinking around. Gave the IP an only warning for threats. I can't right now, but further improvements might include adding the NCES data (at the corporate name. That's why I added it.) Removing the hyperlinks, verifying the numerous accreditations. The adminstors being accredited is simply false. The cited organization is a membership based professional association, not an accreditation agency. Maybe report the red editor to UAA. Good to hear from you. Happy editing, my friend. John from Idegon (talk) 05:19, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
And needless to say, I'm watching it now. John from Idegon (talk) 05:23, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, John, I just wanted to make sure I was not over-reacting. Another set of eyes is often a good thing, thanks! Jacona (talk) 17:33, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

The information provided by the user Alarics if very inaccurate and it a deliberate attempt at vandalism. Obviously it’s a previous student who is resentful for unknown reasons. The school was NEVER based on segregation nor do we institute a “3 lick system” for discipline. We do not beat our children and students of every race attend our school. No one is ever turned away. If you review our current school handbook, which I tried to reference last night when editing the page, we use a demerit system and we have done so for over 20+ years. To strike a child is against the law. In addition, I work for the school. I tried uploading our handbook as well as our official logo and motto only for it to be deleted. Now, this person, Alarics, has instituted a “vandalism tool” to prevent the very people who work at this school from providing accurate information. Yes, by all means, I can provide proof as to what is truthful. It is Alarics who cannot. I read wikipedia’s vandalism policy last night. It stated that I needed to provide a warning. Therefore, I did. It’s extremely disrespectful to insinuate this school is based on segregation. We just lost a beloved student who was also our football quarterback in a car accident. This young man was African American. Our school has been in the news locally because we’re in playoffs, dedicating each game to him, Jay Holloway. Google it. You can see for yourself how close knit and multi-racial we are. Finally, I simply want to provide accurate information about our wonderful school. Please block Alarics or just delete the page all together. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Copiah (talk • contribs) 19:18, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

And another thought, we have an outstanding dyslexia program as well as programs for other learning disorders for out K3-12th grade students. Not many schools, public or private, offer such specialized programs and I'd like to bring additional awareness to those who may need help/support for their child. I also tried to include that we offer financial aid to help offset the cost of tuition, as we are located in a rural farming community. This too was deleted as soon as I added it last night. Again, a deliberate attempt to make Copiah Academy look bad by Alarics.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Copiah (talkcontribs) 19:34, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Copiah, what is your connection with the school? Again, the content Alarics inserted is backed by a reliable reference. Addition of reliably sourced information is seldom vandalism. What references do you have to disprove this? Keep in mind we really don't care what the school has to say about itself. Please find some independent secondary sources to disprove what you want out and take it to the article talk page and make a case. Have you edited the article logged out from your account recently? As I strongly suspect you have some connection with the school, it would behoove you to read our applicable policies on conflict of interest and paid editing. Please take any further communication regarding the content of the article in question to the article's talk page and comply with the above-cited policies first. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 20:58, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

The fact that I have an invested interest in Copiah is subjective. The person who created the upload does as well obliviously, with an intent to put an extreme focus on the racial history within the private education system of Mississippi, namely Copiah Academy. You have to dig long and hard to find a book published in 1983 where Copiah is mentioned ONE time on ONE page, besides the back index, of a nearly 400 page book. That's your creditable source? So be it! Very creditable Wikipedia!

I'm sorry to offend you Wikipedia, but you are indeed PART of the problem with race relations current day for allowing such things to be the focus of a page for secondary schools. We're dealing with children and the betterment of children. Rather than focusing on the HISTORY of a school when segregation laws were still rampant 60 years ago NATIONWIDE, focus on the HISTORY OF AND PRESENT DAY academics and programs that are offered. Of course any ethnic parents could interrupt your Wikipedia pages as a credible source and be deterred from wanting to send their child to a school labeled with "segregated". Shame on you!!! Good job for keeping the focus on race, when the HISTORY and CURRENT academic programs and extracurricular activities SHOULD BE YOUR FOCUS of any secondary school. Again, I repeat that because of its extreme importance.

Is segregation in Copiah's history? Sure. As it is with HUNDREDS of schools across the south as well as in the north. Is it now? No. So why the history lesson with a STRONG emphasis being on segregation on a Wikipedia page? To scare of ethnic parents and students? Why should you care? Because schools like Copiah have the ability and tools to help many children regardless of skin color that many public schools do not offer. Your "history lesson of a page on segregation" only helps to keep the image of "white privileged" upheld. Besides advertising, "Hi, all people of every ethnicity, please come to our school", schools like Copiah rely on their academic programs and extracurricular activities to attract a variety a students. But your site does NOTHING to help break racial barriers.

Bottom Line: Look up Copiah Academy and you get a picture of segregation and that's NOT AT ALL accurate. You have NO idea what this school is really about nor do you care. And that is why Wikipedia will never truly be a valuable, credible cited source to any secondary academic institution or on university level institution.

However, if you are so intent on focusing on providing a history lesson on segregation within the secondary education, might I suggest doing a Wikipedia page with a listing of every private school in the state of Mississippi with a segregated history. It may even already exists. I didn't bother to look. But when it comes to an individual secondary school listing, private or public, the LAST thing you should be focusing on is race, unless there is current evidence that racism strong exists BY CHOICE of that school.

Go ahead and respond back with your site policies and tell me how "incorrect" I am. At this point, it's mute. I'm obviously speaking to deaf ears and you don't care about the betterment of children, only being right and even politically correct in response. Keep reporting a one sided picture, even if it deters a child from attending a school that could possibly offer programs, such as in dyslexia, that could help them succeed in life, in fear that they'll be the only black kid there.

Listed below, are our "sister" private schools who we are often compared to and compete with academically. I'm sure if you dig hard enough, you can also "find" segregation dirt on them as well. Why not include them in your documentary of "schools with a checkered past from 6 decades ago" because, well, that's what's really important, after all. What happened 60 years ago!!!!! Have a blessed day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Copiah (talkcontribs) 20:12, 17 November 2015 (UTC)


You shall have to offer a little more explanation as to why reference to a famous person being from a town is defamatory (perhaps on the discussion page like a normal poster) rather than first reverting and then - more egregiously, threatening to ban someone for an edit that is both factual and relevant (mention of famous people who have some association with the municipality are standard issue for articles on Canadian towns, see Lanigan, Saskatchewan or Blind River, Ontario for just two examples) and Unity is far more famous than these folks. Additionally, please peruse Wikipedia:Assume good faith. My edit was not defamatory as it was not a false statement but simple, verifiable fact. If you have any issues with it, or its inclusion in the article then I would prefer if you would discuss it in a civil fashion - without the threats.Threadnecromancer (talk) 03:27, 13 November 2015 (UTC)Threadnecromancer

  • Conception is quite relevant as she is from that town - it was quit important to her and to her later decisions in life - and yes not only is her conception in that town relevant but so is her family's business interests there. It makes her the most famous person to have had a connection with the town - it is both interesting and factual and such things are to be found in its sister articles. Your moving the goalposts around like this is telling - given that you were previously claiming it to be defamatory and making threats. But you are clearly not a reasonable or intellectually honest person and so this is frankly not worth going to arbitration to deal with you and your penchant for threats and repeatedly reverting well referenced information. You may want to refrain from such thuggish behavior in future though. Threadnecromancer (talk) 04:02, 13 November 2015 (UTC)Threadnecromancer
    • Whatever. Your arguements completely lack merit. It does no good to fight a battle of wits with the unarmed. Tata. John from Idegon (talk) 04:06, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Tulare, California[edit]

Hi John. I would appreciate it if you would please undo your last edit on the Tulare, CA page, regarding The Charades. I'am the Curator at the Tulare Historical Museum in Tulare, CA and I personally know The Charades. explains that they are from Tulare, CA. I have edited The Charades page, to reflect that they are from Tulare (someone else created that page; I personally tried to create a page for them several years ago, but was denied). I'am not an expert at Wikipedia, so if the above link needs to be added to The Charades page as reference, I would appreciate it if you could add that as well. Thank you, and if you have any further questions, please send me a message. Thanks in advance!

Regards, Chris (Tularehome) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tularehome (talkcontribs) 05:59, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

As a historian, surely you can appreciate the need for reliable sourcing and the difference between primary, secondary and tertiary sources. As an encyclopedia is a tertiary source, our sources should be secondary. The fansite you referenced above is secondary, but as a fansite, there is nothing to indicate any of the information contained on it is vetted, and no reason to even believe that might be the case. A fansite's purpose is to promote, and the links to album sales, etc on this particular one is strong evidence that is the case here. Further, what you have as personal knowledge is unusable, as an encyclopedia must be sourced to published information (see WP:V & WP:OR). Surely as curator of a museum in their hometown, you can find a reliable published source for the fact of their connection. Newspaper articles or magazine articles are fine. They do not have to be available online, although it would be nice if they were. If you need help with the technicalities of adding the good reference, please let me know. I'm happy to help. John from Idegon (talk) 09:50, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Please note that I again removed your addition to the above article, and to the article on the band for the reasons explained above. You need sourcing, especially since at least some of the band members are living. Our policy on biographies of living people is quite stiff. When you write about living people, everything must have reliable sourcing. Accuracy and verifiability is always important. When you are writing about living people that can sue over inaccuracies that are not attributable to another publication, it is doublely so. John from Idegon (talk) 10:03, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Being a bit BITE-y at the Teahouse[edit]

Hi John, thanks for all you do at the Teahouse and elsewhere around Wikipedia. However, I thought your response to this question was overly WP:BITE-y. The questioner was not asking us to do their work for them, merely for advice on how to handle the sources they have which are lacking full attribution information. The information you provided could have been couched less rudely. I hope you won't let antipathy towards paid editors and/or self-published authors affect your tone this way in the future. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 07:00, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Your opinion is noted. However, it is also disregarded. If you think the editor that I bit has ANY interest in building an encyclopedia, you are incredibly naive. Someone who takes money to do what others do for a more noble reason such as love, altruism or the quest for knowledge is a whore. One who does the same without having any idea of how to do it is a stupid whore. One who expects others to do the work they got paid for is a lazy, stupid whore.
It is incredibly naive to think that someone who takes money to do what the vast majority of editors do out of the quest for knowledge will ever be a valued member of our community. The community's inability to wrap their collective heads around that concept is one of the biggest factors in the decline of Wikipedia, IMO. What is the motivation of an editor in coming here to contribute (note that word has a charitable connotation) when it is quite alright to sell your services to the highest bidder? If we have those folks in our midst, how do we arrive at the truth thru reasonable discourse, which is the principal that Wikipedia is based upon?
Although you and I have been around about the same length of time, you've only become really active recently. Your contributions at Teahouse are quite appreciated in my home. You may not be aware of just how much more time paid editors are chewing up there. I have been around the teahouse since it started. In the past 18 months, the number of questions coming from paid editors has gone from negligible, maybe one a week, to the majority. Ask Colin or Cullen or TRPOD if you doubt me. Does it frustrate me? You bet. Is discouraging it harmful to the encyclopedia? No way. Please if you will explain to me just what value you perceive they add?
Recent events have left me quite dismayed at our community. Paid editing and our inability to find a way to deal with it is one issue. The inability to deal with serious issues of behavior (such as the current debicle over User:Neelix) is another. And lastly, the inability or unwillingness of the community to deal with extremely long term editors that refuse to understand that the Wikipedia of today with 5 million articles cannot operate in quite the utopian fashion that the Wikipedia of 12 years ago with a million articles did is vexing in the extreme. I am hoping that the upcoming ArbCom election might offer some hope for change. Not counting on it tho.
I gladly admit my answers to the user (I refuse to honor a paid person by refering to them as an editor. They are not. See above) were bitey. Remember, BITE is an essay, not policy, and also that AGF is not a suicide pact. You are more than welcome to continue to encourage paid editing, although I do not see how it can ever be good for the encyclopedia. Note that I was not in any way uncivil in the conversation you are referencing; just brutally direct. Directness is my nature. I tired of the praise sandwich, both giving of and receiving, decades ago.
I thank you for bringing your concerns to me. Please don't mistake my dismissal of them as disrespect for your views. It isn't that at all. I just completely disagree with you. Viva L'difference! I'm very glad you are holding down the fort at the teahouse. You give good solid advice. John from Idegon (talk) 09:23, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for a thoughtful and thought-provoking response. I do, in fact, think it is possible for paid editors to contribute positively to Wikipedia (though it may indeed be far less likely for them to do so than users who are not being compensated by anyone for their interactions with the project). It's my personal policy to be friendly to everyone who asks questions at the Teahouse unless they have already interacted inappropriately there and been duly warned — and I remain courteous even in some of those cases. (It helps that I get some satisfaction out of correcting people in a scrupulously-polite manner when correction is called for; I recognize that not everyone shares this quirk.) Thanks for explaining your position, and for being open to agreeing to disagree. Thanks also for your appreciation for my work at the Teahouse, which means all the more coming from someone who has been volunteering there as long as you have. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 12:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 November 2015[edit]

Round Rock High School[edit]

Hello, you removed my sourced edits on the webpage about Round Rock High School discussing recent events at the school. As they have attracted a lot of national media attention I believe it is worthy and nothing extreme about my point of view. Lodoeus (talk) 16:22, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Content disputes should be discussed on the article's talk page. John from Idegon (talk) 16:33, 16 November 2015 (UTC)


Hello my name is Idk450 and recently I was updating certain pages and I wanted to know how to cite the sources as I have them I just did not know how to put them. Idk509 (talk) 23:06, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Midland Lee performing arts[edit]

Any specific reason you changed back the information I updated regarding the Lee band? Glara1303 (talk) 22:59, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

The one I left in the edit summary? It's not encyclopedic content. We do not: Mention any achievement less than a state championship, discuss staff names, memorialize late staff members, mention student names, or discuss information that is most likely only of interest to the school's community. We do not promote, and we do not add anything anyone knows from personal knowledge. Each and every thing in the encyclopedia has to be source-able to an already published reliable source. For any wow-factor type thing, such as an achievement, we must provide a reference in the article. If there is anything that I removed that does not fit in those categories, feel free to add it back, with a proper citation. I will leave you some links on your talk page where you can get some help with editing Wikipedia. Many newcomers have a mis-shaped idea of what Wikipedia is about. That being said, I will be happy to help you make positive additions to the encyclopedia if that interests you. Just drop a note here. John from Idegon (talk) 23:09, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Chad Warrix[edit]

Chad Warrix & David Tolliver ARE Halfway to Hazard. WHY is David "notable" from his hometown of Hindman KY and Chad IS NOT "notable" from his hometown of Jackdon KY??????? Mmccalvin (talk) 20:17, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Good catch. Neither of the individuals are notable and I will remove the other one from the city list of notables. The band is notable. being in a notable band does not make an individual musician notable. See WP:INHERIT. John from Idegon (talk) 20:20, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Yaphank edits[edit]

Hi. As you know, you have twice removed my paragraph about how there is clearly still a severe racism problem in Yaphank, whereby non-Aryan non-Germanic people are finding it very difficult to buy a house there. This has gone to court, and has been widely covered in papers including the Daily Mail and the New York Times. The first time you said that the Daily Mail was not a good enough source, so I replaced the piece and added a reference to the New York Times, but you've again removed my paragraph. Please let me know why because I have substantiated the paragraph, it is highly relevant to this town and to its Nazi past, and I cannot fathom why you are trying to get me to remove references to it when it's clearly newsworthy. Rather than us get into a silly tit-for-tat editing war perhaps we can discuss here or, better still, come to the Talk Page on the Yaphank site that, as requested, I set up yesterday: Talk:Yaphank,_New_York All the best Tris2000 (talk) 13:53, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Which is what you should have done in the first place. I won't have the time to respond til late tonight. John from Idegon (talk) 16:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 November 2015[edit]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chief Sunrise Education Centre[edit]

Just noticed your comment "Doubt that a newspaper would do too well way out there." The Hub is a newspaper that is located in Hay River, Northwest Territories, the second largest place in the NWT. Also, Northern News Services publishes News/North which serves Hay River along with the rest of the territory. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 16:20, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 November 2015[edit]