User talk:JohnfromLondon

Welcome!

Hello, JohnfromLondon, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Aristophanes68 (talk) 14:44, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

People self-identifying as alcoholics

Hi, a few such categorizations that you've added have been removed, as the designation must be supported by sourced content within the Wikipedia article. Thank you. 2601:188:1:AEA0:9C72:D001:B02E:25B8 (talk) 18:59, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK, there used to be a category of a similar name and I added articles that were applied to that category. The information detailing it must have been removed since that time. Cheers. JohnfromLondon (talk) 19:01, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then it's probably best to double-check the content before adding the category--perhaps someone ceased to self-identify (!?) or the content was removed for WP:BLP reasons. Cheers, 2601:188:1:AEA0:9C72:D001:B02E:25B8 (talk) 19:07, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Whether there was a previous category or not, if you place the category in an article without proper sourcing in the article you are violating Wikipedia policy, especially with living people. Wikipedia has strict standards for biographies of living people. As one of several examples: I could not find any evidence in the article that Michael J. Fox self identifies as alcoholic. And you didn't replace a similar category. It appears that you added it without regard to what is sourced in the article. It's OK to remove a category that is unsourced, but if you add a category, the burden to provide a reliable source is on you. Please be more cautious. Sundayclose (talk) 19:52, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another one: Rodney King. There is a difference between being an alcoholic and self-identifying as an alcoholic. Please stop. Sundayclose (talk) 19:58, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And another one: Melanie Griffith. I am asking you to stop any more editing until you have gone through all of your previous edits and removed the ones that are not properly sourced. Others shouldn't have to clean up your mess. Sundayclose (talk) 20:02, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also add that this category was previously deleted via CfD and I don't believe that anything has changed since that time in terms of how we handle BLPs (if anything, rules are more stringent.) Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 November 20#Category:People self-identifying as alcoholics Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 20:28, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:People self-identifying as alcoholics

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Category:People self-identifying as alcoholics, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 20:26, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Noam Chomsky, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Binksternet (talk) 18:50, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the guideline at WP:CATDEF requires the category to be a defining characteristic of the topic. If multiple sources don't declare the topic as an important member of the category, then the category doesn't belong in the article. In practice, if the article contains nothing about the category, then the category is unsupported and should not be placed. This is why I reverted all of your latest category additions, regarding the Category:Critics of neoconservatism. Each of those articles said nothing about neoconservatism. Binksternet (talk) 19:14, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

UR doin it wrong

Creating Category:Anti-democracy and then spamming that on a bunch of articles isn't helpful. First, is that category even useful? Second, what sources support those articles being in that category? Generally, if you find yourself doing machine edits like this you're probably wrong. It's just a matter of time before you get reverted, dragged into talk page conversations, and then taken to WP:AN for disruptive editing. Please start looking for consensus before continuing to tilt at windmills. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:12, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Anti-democracy has been nominated for discussion

Category:Anti-democracy, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:14, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]