User talk:Jfroelich

Greetings

Welcome to Wikipedia. May I suggest using the "Show preview" button instead of saving the page every minute or so? All those saves make for a long and confusing history page. Please feel free to call on my talk page if you have any questions I can help with. Chris the speller 22:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out, I admit my style of editing needs improvement and will preview my changes first to slow down the edits. Josh Froelich 22:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to mark your edits as minor when (and only when) they genuinely are minor edits (see Wikipedia:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one (and vice versa) is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting, and minor rearranging of text should be flagged as a 'minor edit'. Thanks! JonHarder ^talk 17:19, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lists and search engines

I apologize if I over-reacted. I will look at them careful and perhaps move 2 of them back, Yes, the writing is pretty rough-and-ready, and you are certainly more than welcome to improve it. One of the reasons for this list has been the attempt to delete not just linkspam, but excessive articles about commercial products. I would like to write articles for many of the things on lists in general that justify it, but I can't do them all. I'm glad to cooperate.DGG 20:19, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since they are both made by the same company, in this case you can do even better, with an article for the company which makes them, with sections for the two products. Then there should be a redirect to each of the products, using a section link. The advantage of putting them together is a meatier aticle, and now that they have section links working it will serve very well. I am giving you the standard WP answer to anyone who suggests an article on XYZ: write it yourself. (smile)

For me, putting them in a list serves as a reminder to write the article. Developing a group of articles is another of the reasons given for doing a list in WP:LIST, and there are many long lists done for exactly that purpose: collecting the items. But if you want to temporarily move them to external links I won't object, if you keep the annotation. The problem with lists of things in external links is that they are a mashup of all sorts of things. They can be organized into groups, but it seems to be rarely done. The other reason it's usually not done is that you have a mix of items which do have articles, and items that don't. For ones that do, you want to link to the article instead and its confusing to mix in see alsos and externals. There is a convention, and on balance a good one, against having more than one link to the same thing. DGG 23:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: GIS and Search

Hi. Sorry about the delay in replying - it's been a busy day. As a long-time user of both GIS and search engines, I understand where you're coming from. Search is a part of GIS, and GIS is used in a few search engines. However, the relationship is tangential to both, IMO, and doesn't justify the link. Search is only one feature among many in GIS, and most search engines are not geographic-based. The only other see also links on the page point to articles dealing directly with search engines, metasearch engine and job search engine. If there must be a see also link there, a link to web mapping would probably be more appropriate. That article needs work, though. - EurekaLott 03:42, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RV

Reverted vandalism on your User Page ;-) Happy Editing by Snowolf^(talk) on 16:04, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Restored search engine

09-November-2007: Okay, I have restored the article "search engine" to the November-2007 overview form (as minimal content), adding the following top hatnote to lessen shock for others who might expect the prior full content (from 2 months ago):

This is a generic overview only. For Web searches, see: Web search engine,

or for a particular search engine, see: List of search engines.

Sorry for the confusion: consider me to be one of the "shocked" readers who did not realize the former detailed article had become an overview article, with details shifted to "Web search engine". Thanks for alerting me to the problem of the current contents. I see now that you are not updating wiki articles daily, so I have updated the talk page to emphasize the recent migration to search-engine overview (see: "Talk:Search_engine#Converted_to_overview_only"). -Wikid77 21:03, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
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) 16:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Jfroelich. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Megaputer Intelligence for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Megaputer Intelligence is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Megaputer Intelligence until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Khinkali (talk) 21:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]