User talk:Jtodsen

This is a Wikipedia user talk page.
This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jtodsen.

Hello

Nice to see you here (and your class sounds fun)! Sgelbman (talk) 13:16, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Online Ambassador for Political Scandals (Fall 2011)

Hello Dr Todsen, I have signed up as a Wikipedia Online Ambassador for your Political Scandals course. My preferred method of direct communication is through email (here), where I can provide you more information about myself and the hours I am available throughout the week (I live in the Eastern Time Zone). I look forward to assisting your students in contributing to Wikipedia and I hope the Wikipedia element of your class will be an enriching experience for all. Thanks. —Yk Yk Yk talk ~ contrib 16:58, 26 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi John, welcome to the Global Education Program! Annie Lin (Wikimedia Foundation) (talk) 23:02, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help

My colleague Remember has asked that I offer you some help, since I do some of the FA-quality work on US politics (I've made somewhat of a specialty of Nixon, who was known for political controversies). I'll watchlist this page, or you can always drop a line on my talk page.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:50, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I really appreciate it. Do you have a link for our class pages? Jtodsen (talk) 13:47, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Remember was kind enough to give me this link.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:50, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you need some ideas for controversies, the Maynooth grant article is one that I've hoped to see improved for quite some time, but haven';t gotten around to doing it myself due to the need to find resources on it, or if you want an ambitious project, while there is an article on Alger Hiss, there is none devoted to the controversy. Additionally, there were some Truman administration scandals which involved secretaries getting fur coats, that is why Nixon referred to Pat wearing a "respectable Republican cloth coat" in the Checkers speech. The speech article doesn't need help, but an article on the Truman administration scandals would be a worthy addition to Wikipedia.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:57, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles

I do not see that any of them would survive a GA nomination as of right now.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:54, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I agree. I think they've made some good additions, but not to the level I had hoped. Any chance you'd be willing to email me some feedback on them? Jtodsen (talk) 18:02, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Give me a few days so I can look at how they were at start of the semester.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:34, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Any chance you can get this? Jtodsen (talk) 21:54, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on it. Sorry. I've been distracted by the McKinley administration.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:55, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like my dissertation, I understand. It distracted me for a number of years. Jtodsen (talk) 22:04, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quite so. I'm sending it by email now.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:15, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback

Here is a summary of changes made to the articles, plus my feedback:

Article	Summary of changes	Feedback
Debategate	[diff] Addition of "Importance" section; addition of works cited to the "References" section.	Hasn't grown a whole lot in terms of content. It's also lacking in inline citations.
San Diego pension scandal	[diff] Expansion of lead, "Underfunding," and "Aftermath" sections using a few new sources.	No significant content growth. Inline citations are complete.
Maria Reynolds	[diff] General expansion of each section; addition of one new reference.	Not sure how much more the article can grow anyway. Needs more inline citations. Shouldn't Hamilton-Reynolds Sex Scandal be the appropriate article for the class?
Robert E. Coughlin	[diff] Minor expansion, addition of new references.	Article doesn't have potential to grow very much more. Overall it's a decent article considering the level of notability of the subject

I'll finish this later. —Yk Yk Yk talk ~ contrib 01:00, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article	Summary of changes	Feedback
Ohio Gang	[diff] General expansion of article and addition of references.	Judging from CREEP and White House Plumbers, there's not much potential for the article to become much longer than it is.
Operation Greylord	[diff] General expansion and addition of references.	More work could be done on the details of the investigation, not just the aftermath.
Maynooth Grant	[diff] General expansion from one non-new source; some of the previous sources were removed.	Incomplete WP:LEAD section; needs inline citations.
Burr conspiracy	[diff] Just the one edit made – expansion with the addition of multiple sources	Should not have added the text of an entire letter to the article. Apart from that, minor improvements were made.
Galphin Affair	[diff] Rewrote entire article.	Clear and crisp description of the scandal. Needs inline citations.
Crédit Mobilier of America scandal	[diff] No major expansion.

—Yk Yk Yk talk ~ contrib 03:52, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Feedback

The Hamilton-Reynolds sex scandal article is very good – clear and complete description of the affair. —Yk Yk Yk talk ~ contrib 04:17, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Battle of the Crater into Tunnel warfare. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa (talk) 17:33, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:DSM ANG Base.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:DSM ANG Base.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ronhjones ^(Talk) 17:50, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:147th Aviation Regiment.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:147th Aviation Regiment.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:22, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]