User talk:Mckai
|
San Joaquin College of Law
[edit]I'm pleased to see that you're adding citations when you add names. Keep in mind that the ref should show that they attended SJCL. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 23:23, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
- I've just added input to the talk page.--S. Rich (talk) 03:40, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for your contributions. Please look at the entry for "Robert Broughton". That entry follows WP format protocol. Regarding the citation needed tag, there are numerous other items which need improvement. I added the Family Clinic cn tag simply as an example. --S. Rich (talk) 16:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)16:48, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
- I have revised the citations. Let me know if there is anything I missed. Thanks again!--Mckai (talk) 22:37, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
non-minor edits
[edit]
Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to San Joaquin College of Law, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. --S. Rich (talk) 17:04, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Citation of sources
[edit]Two concerns: 1. You need to cite material following WP:INCITE. This is the accepted and expected method. I've changed one of your recent edits to follow the proper format, but as a Wikipedian you should be doing this work. 2. The source cited should support the material in the article. For example, this edit [1] added information about the officials, but did not support the fact that they graduated from SJCL. That is, a person named Susan Anderson might be a county supervisor and that Susan Anderson might have her name in the news, but where is the connection between that Susan Anderson and the person named Susan Anderson who graduated from SJCL? Without a tie in between the article and the source, the notations you added are vulnerable to deletion and/or {verification needed} tagging. Happy editing! --S. Rich (talk) 17:29, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
- My apologies for the citation for Susan Anderson you mention above! That citation takes the reader to her page as a Fresno County Supervisor with the link to “biography” directly under her picture. I have since changed the citation to the “click” on that “biography” link, where it mentions her as an alumna of SJCL. In addition, I have added numerous links to demonstrate that she has very much been in the news during the County’s budget struggles, and also her role as Commission Chair for "Fresno County First Five.” I have also added numerous links of that sort to Victor Salazar’s notation. As per the links, there has been a great deal of controversy over budget cuts to his office and whether that disenfranchised low income voters during the last election. Indeed, the situation was the subject of a Fresno County Grand Jury report which was released just last week. In this way, I am trying to address your concerns that they may not be “notable.” Also, as per other exchanges between us, I have tried to address your concern that the material follow WP:INCITE. I hope what I’ve done brings this up to standards, but if not, please let me know where I can add further improvements!--Mckai (talk) 21:28, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Cite overkill & lack of direct support in citations
[edit]Please see WP:CITECLUTTER re the multiple citations you are adding. Another aspect of this problem is the lack of direct support in the citations you are adding. For example, you are adding articles that mention the grads (like this one: http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/03/14/2310281/fresno-county-farmers-push-to.html) but do not support the fact that they are graduates of SJCL. Also, adding such cites is off-WP:TOPIC in that you are seeking to show that SJCL has noted graduates, not so much what the grads are doing. This sort of citation is subject to tagging as {Failed verification} or deletion. IOW, you are wasting a lot of time in adding these citations. --S. Rich (talk) 16:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
- Again, thanks for your help! I have deleted many of the extra citations. The one you mention above is for Supervisor Susan Anderson, who has two other citations in which secondary sources list her as an SJCL grad. Still, I have pared it back to the max of three per person. Also, I have left a response for you on the SJCL discussion page. Happy reading!--Mckai (talk) 19:32, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Exemplar Good Articles
[edit]WP has a class of articles classified as "Good" (WP:GA). In this regard, the Portal:Law/Good articles has a listing of various GAs. Willamette University College of Law and Earle Mack School of Law are the only two law school articles on the list. (There are no law schools in the law portal's list of Featured Articles (WP:FA), a very selective listing of articles.) I invite your attention to Willamette & Earle Mack as examples to which we should strive for when editing "our" articles. Best regards. --S. Rich (talk) 20:39, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the Tip!--Mckai (talk) 19:09, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
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) 14:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
[edit]
Hello, Mckai. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Mckai. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message
[edit]Hello, Mckai. 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)
June 2019
[edit]
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at San Joaquin College of Law. Bbb23 (talk) 16:52, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
- Read what I wrote at Ponyo's Talk page, and please stop posting to my Talk page. If you have anything more to say, use the article Talk page, but, whatever you do, don't re-add the material, or you risk being blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:04, 4 June 2019 (UTC)