User talk:JuanRiley

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 15:28, 26 September 2016 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online


  • This user is relatively new and does not edit a whole lot.
  • This user originally intended to edit articles on various technical subject areas; however, until that seems less like work that is still a goal only.
  • This user does not archive (he deletes) because: (a) he can't be bothered learning how to do so and (b) seriously, like anything on this page is important enough to do so. So if you want, try 'history'.
  • This user does not like comments/discussion on his page that are appropriate to an article's talk page. REALLY!
  • This user does, however, appreciate appropriate, friendly, and/or amusing asides concerning ongoing article talk page discussions.
  • On unfriendly comments:
    • warnings or (OMG) block notices by admins will usually be left here for a decorous period of time before being deleted;
    • warnings by self appointed keepers of the truth will be deep sixed quite rapidly.
      • some admins (and god help us now some arbcomms) are such self appointed keepers of the truth so I might just delete them too.


This post is left because I find it occasionally helpful and as an example of what rarely happens: a helpful post from a collegial editor.

Thank you for your interest in references :). You can find an example of a number of different techniques at the article Ketamine where I have just reworked them. When using shortened footnotes inside ref tags I use {{harvnb|...|...}} because {{sfn|...|...}} won't work. Blah... If you have questions or want help on refs anytime, post to my talk page. Yours in detail oriented reference formatting. - - MrBill3 (talk) 18:25, 2 August 2014 (UTC)


Just wanted to say "Hello" :) GoodDay (talk) 04:32, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@GoodDay: And to you sir: a wish for a very good day. Must admit though that I looked around to see what (omg) did I do now. :) Juan Riley (talk) 00:27, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Haha. GoodDay (talk) 00:28, 25 February 2016 (UTC)


I put in a lot of effort back in 2007 substantially writing the Omaha Beach article and getting it promoted to FA status, and still someone can come along and reveal to me some facet that I missed, so thank you for improving my knowledge on the subject, and for discussing differences in opinion so reasonably. It was a pleasure. FactotEm (talk) 19:01, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

You put a lot into just these recent edits--and I thank you sir. I am just a dilettante. A pet peeve of mine (and I know I shouldn't have them here) is that so-called "minor" contributors to the WWII effort are many times overshadowed in the articles by the "major" contributors--whether the minor element is a Polish brigade, a Canadian minesweeper, a Solomon Islander scout unit, etc.... You are right, however, in insisting on some reference-able citation. Juan Riley (talk) 19:35, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. My pet peeve is minor aspects of a subject being given undue weight and emphasis in the lead, specifically in the infobox. The lead, often the only section a visitor reads, is supposed to summarise the salient points of an article. ISTM that giving, for example, the Free French what is effectively equal Belligerent billing at Omaha Beach for the sake of 2 cruisers misrepresents the facts. I'm not saying that such 'minor' aspects should be eliminated from the article itself, I just don't see that they have a place in the lead. When I finally gain my rightful place as Supreme Being and Master Of The Whole Wide Universe those flags will be gone, but until then it's lemonade, mmm good for me. :-) FactotEm (talk) 07:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Lemonade..good for me good for you? Now I will look up your link to see if I guessed your allusion correctly.Juan Riley (talk) 23:04, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Nope I was wrong. Thought your reference was to Full Metal Jacket. Though in that case it was 'PT' that was "good for you, good for me'.Juan Riley (talk) 23:41, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

On Trolls[edit]

No big issue here. I am not going to edit another article while folk like (never mind) allow trolls like (never mind) to continue. Juan Riley (talk) 21:15, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

No big loss either. And keep off this page TROLL. Juan Riley (talk) 21:17, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

September 2016[edit]

Information icon Hello, I'm Meiloorun. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Gallipoli Campaign have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Please see WP:COPYVIOEL Meiloorun (talk) 🍁 03:52, 26 September 2016 (UTC)