Jump to content

User talk:John from Idegon/Archive 56

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 50←Archive 54Archive 55Archive 56Archive 57Archive 58→Archive 60

North Sunflower Medical Center

Hi John, I'd appreciate your opinion (and the millions who watch your page). I'm struggling about whether to propose merging North Sunflower Medical Center into Ruleville, Mississippi. It seems right on the edge of Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). There's been some local coverage but most of the article is self-sourced, and it's really just a local medical center. Ruleville is one of the prettiest towns in the Delta. Thanks for having a look. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:34, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

There are actually 145 people that watch my talk, which is higher than I would have expected. FYI, 76 watch yours.
This is a tough one. IMO, hospitals should fall under a Gazetteer exception as features on the landscape. And this does have a source that is statewide, so it probably makes ORG. It would be silly to think that other better sources don't exist. In my little corner of the world, the local hospital is one of the most frequent topics for our miserable little local paper.
That being said, it is very promotional. And you gotta wonder how a brand new editor showed up here this morning, and managed to make a new, fairly correctly formatted and properly linked article. It reeks of WP:PAID. I cut back on some of the directory stuff. The article needs to be more about the hospital and less about the company, which appears to be a for - profit company (if they were a 501(c)3, they would not need a separate foundation). IMO, your best route forward would be to focus and better source the article rather than redirect it. In no case would I suggest boldly redirecting. I'd also suggest checking the author's other edits and cleaning up the promo and NOTDIR stuff. All of the creator's edits are about this business. Just my twopence. John from Idegon (talk) 18:22, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Btw, I've never asked you: Do you prefer to be pinged when replied to, or would you prefer to just check back Magnolia677? John from Idegon (talk) 20:07, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
No need to ping, I check my watchlist. There are some minor mentions of the hospital when it went by its former name. Some of the civil rights workers from the 60s were taken there. I'll put some work into the article. Thanks for having a look! Magnolia677 (talk) 20:23, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

SOCES (Sherman Oaks Center for Enriched Studies)

Excuse me sir I currently attend SOCES and I think I would know the clubs that are here. Tf why you even editing it. Are you an alumni? Username8901234567 (talk) 19:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are talking about. Please provide a link or at least the correct title of the article in question. John from Idegon (talk) 20:04, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Oaks_Center_for_Enriched_Studies

Um here's the link to the website. It shows that you deleted all the clubs and organizations so I added them again. Username8901234567 (talk) 20:08, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Ok. Now i know what you are talking about. You have a very mistaken impression of what Wikipedia is. The page on Sherman Oaks Center for Enriched Studies is an independent encyclopedia article about the school. It is not the property of the school; in no way is it for the school and there are no requirements for someone to edit it. As a matter of fact, Username8901234567, it is preferred that editors not have any connections to the subjects of the articles they edit. See WP:COI. I gave a sound reason for removing the content I removed in the edit summary when I removed it. If you disagree that's fine. Putting it back without a concensus to do so is not. Make arguements based in reliable independent sources and informed by Wikipedia policy and guidelines at Talk:Sherman Oaks Center for Enriched Studies and see if you can garner a concensus for inclusion. Talk to you there. John from Idegon (talk) 20:25, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

K Username8901234567 (talk) 20:33, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Thoughts on abortion? Username8901234567 (talk) 20:39, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Two more things. You're not communicating with your school chums. Please write in English, not textspeak. Second, I am going to copy this over to the article talk page. And your last remark was trolling.John from Idegon (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Sorry if I came off that way. This matter is of great importance to me and if you can understand, I reacted hastily. It was not trolling, as I viewed your profile and saw your thoughts. I am just trying to enhance my understanding on the subject matter. Username8901234567 (talk) 20:50, 5 October 2016 (UTC) Aka...trolling. This isn't social media. I'll thank you to not post here anymore. If you wish to discuss the article in question do it on the article talk page. John from Idegon (talk) 20:55, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Proud Knight

Hello John, I am Caesar Fuentes, a teacher here at Sherman Oaks Center for Enriched Studies. It has come to my attention that you have been harassing a student via the messaging feature here on Wikipedia. Her only fault was rocking the Burgundy and Black. My student was checking the SOCES Wikipedia page and noticed that a few clubs were missing. She added RIOT, a feminist club to the list and was irked by the fact that ALL of the clubs were take down from the page. She contacted you in maybe not the most graceful way, however, it is not only nefarious but simply ridiculous to belittle a student online and post the altercation on your public page. I notice now that you have removed nearly all of the information previously in the article. She should not be punished for standing up for her school. I trust that this will be rectified immediately.

Thank you, Caesar Fuentes Proud Knight — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caesar Fuentes (talk • contribs) 22:38, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Please point me to exactly where I have harassed anyone. She came to my talk page used a common abbreviation for a profanity and exhibited absolutely no understanding of what Wikipedia is, something you too are doing. I explained the problem to her and instructed her on how to handle it. I never "messaged" her, but simply replied to her much less than polite message she left here. The entire conversation is directly above. I await your reply and regardless of it, there is nothing that needs to be rectified. What results are you looking for? John from Idegon (talk) 23:33, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
John, I think both these users: Username8901234567 and Caesar Fuentes are looking to be blocked. There are several valid criteria for terminating their accounts. I've warned them both. Let me know if they continue to harass you.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:01, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
I have taken a look at the article history and decided to semi protect it for a while. That article has also been kin trouble before. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:05, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Amintou

Hello John,
The page I edited - "Medan vi lever" - got deleted even though I translated the text to english and contested the deletion telling you that I am not part of the promotion team for the movie I wanted to enter as a page (related to the director Dani Kouyatés page).
Reasons? I didn't get any response from you or anyone else and now the page is deleted.
Did I communicate with you guys in the wrong place?
Also, if possible, I would like to get a copy of the text, including the links to sources and reviews, didn't believe you were going to delete the page after the editing so I didn't keep a copy in english.
Best regards from Sweden
Amintou (talk) 07:43, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Grand Rapids Police Department

Hello, I'm pretty new to adding/editing Wikipedia pages, but I did a bit of research before beginning the process.

You appear to have a problem with the article, and I'm trying to determine if I'm doing something wrong here.

Some of your observations have left me scratching my head. Any specifics you could offer would be great. Things like "written like a personal observation" appear to be pretty off-base. There's really only factual and verifiable information listed in there. Like the list of previous buildings or chiefs. Or the count of employees.

To be fair, it is pretty clear by the history of the article that it is a work in progress to include sourcing. I'm trying to do this correctly. Thanks for your help. Pmerrill564 (talk) 17:56, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Therein lies the problem. One of the core policies here is verifiability. If you put an article in the encyclopedia without sources, most likely it will get deleted. Every single bit of information in an encyclopedia must come from a reliable, already published source, independent of the subject of the article. What you know cannot be used. If the problem is you do not know how to cite sources, that can be easily addressed. I'll leave instructions on your talk page on how to do that. If the problem is you wrote the article based on what you know and are looking for sources to support that, that is a bigger problem. The single best way to write an article is to take your knowledge and let that guide you to sources. Once you have sources, forget everything you know and paraphrase strictly what the sources say. In order to use information, you MUST have a source that says what you want to say. You cannot take multiple sources and draw conclusions from the combination of what they say. That's called WP:SYNTH and is not allowed. If all of your information came from usable sources, that meet our standards of reliability and are independent of the City of Grand Rapids, you probably do have enough for an article. Reliable sources must have a solid indication of fact-checking, either in written policy that is accessible, or by long-standing reputation. Generally, most web content does NOT meet those standards. Examples of reliable sources include newspapers, magazines (of general circulation. Trade publications or the publications of fraternal organizations generally do not meet standards), books (not vanity press or other self-published books), TV or radio news (and their websites) and vetted academic journals. Things that specifically do not meet standards for reliability are: blogs, anything user edited (such as Facebook or other social media, Wikipedia itself, IMDb, Instagram), pretty much anything hosted on a site like Geocities or rootsweb, fan pages.
Another issue is the requirements of notability (which is what we call our standard for inclusion. Name comes from what is required to have an encyclopedia article. It has nothing to do with importance or utility. It is based strictly on what has been written about, or made note of, a subject). You must have multiple sources, all reliable and all completely independent of the city, that discuss the subject of the article in detail. Additionally, some things require that some of those sources be from areas removed for the locale of the subject, to show that there is more than just local interest in the subject. A PD would need that. The rub for PDs is that although there are multitudes of sources that mention the PD (like every crime story from the area), few discuss the PD in detail. Although this isn't the case in every instance, absent a long history of corruption that would have drawn the sustained interest of the media, the only way that happens is if someone has written a book about the PD in question that has been published by a mainstream publishing house. Is that the case here? There is no assumption of notability for a police department. Right now the only cities in Michigan that have an article on their PDs are Detroit and Kalamazoo, and the only reason Kalamazoo does is their unique Public Safety department.
My suggestion: If the problem is you haven't added the sources, do so ASAP. If the problem is you don't have them, blank the page (after copying it to your computer) and it will be deleted. Then restart it at Draft:Grand Rapids Police Department (Michigan). (There are dozens of communities named Grand Rapids in the US). You can work on an article at your leisure in draft space without the worry of deletion. And please don't take this personally. It isn't at all. If I can help let me know, and I'll leave you some helpful stuff on your talkpage. John from Idegon (talk) 20:39, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Kimball High School

Someone with the name on your page is repeatedly revising the wiki page for the Justin F. Kimball High School in Dallas, TX after I have edited it. There are several changes that I made on the page and you seem to keep changing them - or at least it is attributed to you on the edit page. First of all, I am currently the President of the Justin F. Kimball High School Alumni Association, and as such have researched the history of the school in depth. Our athletic rivalry for years was Sunset High School, until 1966 when David W. Carter High School opened. After that, Kimball's main rival was Carter and their annual matchup became known as the "Oak Cliff Superbowl. Secondly, the Dallas Independent School District did not start the integration of the system until the 1970-71 school year. The courts ordered forced busing of minority students into majority schools in order to achieve rachial balance. Kimball's student body up until 1971 had been almost 100% Anglo. The student body makeup began to change in 1971, and by 1980, the majority of the students were African-American. Thirdly, the school received a new Principal in September 2016. Mr. Earl Jones left the school for a new assignment and was replaced by Mr. Llewellyn Smith.

I don't see on your page where you have a direct connection to the school, so I do not understand why you keep changing the editing revisions? If you have a concrete reason for doing so, I would be happy to discuss it. Otherwise, your actions constitute blatant vandalism, which as you know Wikipedia does not tolerate. In the future, please make sure that you have your facts straight before editing our article.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. Your help and cooperation would be greatly appreciated.

Txpipes61 (talk) 20:17, 9 October 2016 (UTC)Stephen Cumming, President, Justin F. Kimball High School Alumni Association Dallas, Texas

Are you somehow under the impression that the page in question is the school's? You couldn't be more mistaken. It is an independent encyclopedia article about the school. Each and every thing in it must be able to be sourced to sources independent of the school. If they are requested, they must be supplied. Wikipedia is not a host to distribute information the school, its staff, its students or its alumni want published. Anyone is allowed to edit it as long as their edits comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. It is preferred that editors do NOT have any connections with the subject of the article, which you obviously do. See WP:COI. That being said, all you have to do is provide the requested sources. It's not at all difficult, unless you are relying on personal knowledge or information from the school. We do not want or can we use either of those. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 20:59, 9 October 2016 (UTC) , co-coordinator, Wikiproject Schools
No, I am not under the impression that the page belongs to the school. However, I am wondering why you seem to have the authority to go around and change wiki pages as you see fit, or to delete changes? I have monitored this page for may years and have updated it from time to time with factual material - not some fluff or half-truths. There have been comments that I have deleted because they were inappropriate of the subject matter. You say that Wikipedia prefers that the editors do not have a connection to the subject, but how would someone know if the facts were correct and verifiable if they were not somehow connected to the subject? I have made changes to the page that can be verified easily. Now, first of all, the school Principal that you insist on retaining is listed is incorrectly - the principalship changed to Mr. Llewellyn Smith in September 2016 per Dallas Independent School District. It is noted so on the DISD web page of Administrative Changes. Secondly, It is noted in the Dallas Morning News archives that prior to the opening of David W. Carter High school in 1966, the main rival to Kimball High School was Sunset High School in Dallas. After 1966, Cater developed as Kimball's main rival. The moniker of the matchup being called the "Oak Cliff Superbowl" is one that was given by the Dallas Morning News and can be found in their archives as recently as September 2014. I also am questioning why you say that you do not want (or Wiki rather) information from the school? What other source would be more reliable than information provided by school administrators? I don't rely on "memories" or "students say..." or rumors and innuendo. Information that I have provided is correct, verifiable, factual. Txpipes61 (talk) 12:35, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
There are two things in play here. One is verifiabilty. We (and when I say we, I am referencing Wikipedia policies and guidelines) accept sources that are not independent, such as the school or the district, for mundane things like addresses and staff names (although the ONLY staff name we use is the principal). Anything other than that must come from sources independent of the district. This is due to the nature of an encyclopedia as a tertiary source. We do not report on the school. We report on what others are saying about the school. That is just what an encyclopedia is. That fact about the encyclopedias keeps the discussion of things that only interest the students staff families and alumni to a minimum. All that being said, all you have to do is actually add the citation you mentioned and no-one will revert you. It isn't complicated at all. There are over 5 million articles on Wikipedia, and last I heard, there are only about 6,000 active editors that monitor them. Many of those are like you, what we refer to as a WP:SPA editor, a single purpose account, that only monitors a few articles that they have a vested interest in. Most SPAs are not all that well versed on what the actual requirements are. Hence, a lot of poor quality goes undetected. I really have no idea what brought this article onto my radar (probably a change. There is a page called Special:RecentChanges that list all changes and it gets monitored by many serious editors to check for vandalism and inappropriate additions), but since it did, I've been trying to get it away from being a page that only serves as an extension of the school's webpage and turn it into an encyclopedia article. Content on any given page is decided by consensus formed on that article's talk page. 90% of all changes go uncontested. When there is a problem, WP:BRD kicks in. Someone makes a bold change, another editor reverts it and discussion ensues, ideally on the article talk page. These discussions are based in reliable sources and informed by Wikipedia policies and guidelines. The end result should be a consensus on what to include. Some policies you will need to know are reliable sources, WP:NOT, WP:WEIGHT and WP:BLP. The guidelines for school articles are at WP:WPSCH/AG. I hope this clears up your questions. If you have any further issues with the content of the article, please start a discussion on the article's talk page please. Happy editing! John from Idegon (talk) 14:43, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Information icon Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#Kalamazoo Foundation for Excellence. Thank you.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bossier High School (777 Bearcat Drive, Bossier City, Louisiana), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Public school and Parkway High School. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:32, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 October 2016

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:28, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Maine West High School

I see other schools have had difficulties with your editing in the past. I would appreciate it if you would not edit our pages. Sources are not always needed to be referenced when they are fact, so please stop making changes to our pages. We understand the copyright laws and the need to document sources when they are someone else's. Notable Alums are in the opinion of the readers and I see many schools use their Distinguished Alum as Notable alum. Our logo is our school logo and is not copyrighted. I would be happy to reference myself if that is necessary. ahauganAhaugan (talk) 15:56, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

VSAA

Dear John from Idegon, We appreciate your attempts at accurately representing the Vancouver School of Arts and Academics page, and understand your vigilance with these edits. However, your edits have been "adding flame to the fire" and we can work out the issues regarding our Wikipedia page as a school ourselves, and we do not need help from someone who does not live close enough to the area to understand the school itself. The school has in fact adopted a sort of "personal mascot", the Fighting Mimes, and your attempts at vigilantly correcting the page has not accurately represented the school. It would be much appreciated to no longer edit the VSAA page, and let the moderators in the close area work out the issues regarding vandalism of the webpage.

Thank you. Visible cringe (talk) 19:23, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern about your school's Wikipedia article, but your comments show a misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. This is not social media, this is an encyclopedia, by definition tertiary. That means that all content must come from reliable published sources and all but the most mundane must come from sources independent of the school. This page is in no way the school's page on Wikipedia; it is Wikipedia's article on the school. It does not exist to reflect what the school or its students want known about the school. Instead it is intended to be a neutral summary reporting on what others have written about the school. I have as much right as anyone to edit this page. As a matter of fact, since I have no connection whatsoever to the school, I am probably better suited to properly edit it than someone such as yourself who has a vested interest in the school. See WP:COI. That being said, I encourage you to help with all the silly vandalism that has been occurring on the school's page and to make properly sourced additions within policy (there are a lot of them and I'll leave you a guide on your talkpage) and guidelines (School article guidelines). Thanks for your interest in Wikipedia. John from Idegon (talk) 23:58, 19 October 2016 (UTC) , Co-coordinator, Wikiproject Schools

"When another editor requests a source, providing it isn't optional"

I assume there is a policy somewhere that says this. Would you please point me to it? Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 23:37, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

WP:BURDEN. John from Idegon (talk) 23:40, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. And thanks for the quick reply. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 00:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
No problem. Please use an independent source such as NCES or Indiana DOE Compass. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 00:17, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
I wasn't the original editor on this. (I'm just someone with an aversion to reversion.) So we'll see whether the original poster chooses to restore the info with references. Butwhatdoiknow (talk) 12:28, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

No worries. I should be able to update it myself sometime today. John from Idegon (talk) 12:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Beverly Massachusetts

Hi John,

Thank you for reaching out. Admittedly, I am new to Wikipedia and am unfamiliar with the communities procedures. I didn't mean to offend in any way. I look forward to your response and to coming to a consensus.

Best, Bob — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobjohnson89 (talk • contribs) 21:58, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Omar Mateen was a registered democrat

Information icon Please refrain from making un-constructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Omar Mateen. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and a blatant disregard for the honesty and integrity of factual information being conveyed through Wikipedia. You have attempted to suppress this information when more than one reference was provided. I challenge you to instead gather consensus for the removal of this factual, valid, appropriate and rather historical information that Omar Mateen was a registered democrat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.103.34.217 (talk) 04:46, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

First, new posts go at the bottom of the page. Second, you must sign talk page communication by typing 4 tildes. Last, concensus is needed for inclusion, not removal. Either by reverting, warning you or tagging the information, there are at least three editors opposing your edits and I've had two more thank me for reverting you. You are down to two choices: Either gain concensus at the article's talk page or drop it. You are way off base. Content is decided by concensus and you do not have one for this. No one is disputing the fact that he was registered to vote in the Democratic primary. What is under dispute is that doesn't mean he's a Democrat. I am and always have been an independent. But I'm registered to vote in the Republican primary due to the fact that I live in an area that is vastly Republican and most local offices are decided in the Republican primary. Being a Democrat does not follow from being registered to vote in the Democratic primary. What you would need are reliable secondary sources showing he either actively campaigned for or donated funds to Democrats. John from Idegon (talk) 05:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Can you provide me a link to the guideline that require the city and state be separate links? Thanks Niteshift36 (talk) 01:15, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

WP:WPSCH/AG Keep in mind that linking state names has long been held not to be over linking. This is English Wikipedia, not US Wikipedia. John from Idegon (talk) 02:19, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
  • That's what I found on my own and I don't see where it mandates separate links. In fact, I can't even see where it suggests it as the preferred method. Overlinking and piped linking are on the same page. While it's not imporper to link the state, it's not necessary to make it separate. A link to a generic article about the state really doesn't increase understanding of the subject school. It does, however, make it more annoying when using a smart phone or tablet and you touch the wrong part of a series of smaller links put together. While this may not be "US Wikipedia", most people looking up a specific US high school will already be familiar with the states. Niteshift36 (talk) 03:37, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Confirmation

Hi there, I'd just like to find out if you had any involvement in 100% of my editing getting erased in the article about the Townville Elemntary School Shooting? Thank you in advance. Depthburg (talk) 01:24, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

The edit history will tell you that. Having edits reverted is part of the process here. I left an edit summary. If you have questions please ask. Remember, assuming good faith is a policy here. You are new and there are lots of things to know about editing Wikipedia. I'll be happy to help you figure out why your edits were reverted, but I'm sure there was nothing personal about it and it kinda sounds like you're taking it personally. Don't. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 01:55, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Alright Depthburg (talk) 02:07, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

King of Prussia, Pennsylvania

If you get a moment could you look at some of the recent edits to King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. These are good faith edits but are poorly formatted. I'm not quite sure where to start, as the editor has been hostile to assistance. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:07, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:John_from_Idegon/Archive_56&oldid=803691811"