User talk:WilliamJE/Archive 2

Agadir – Al Massira Airport incidents

This was done because the accident actually happened at Inezgane Airport, the old airport of Agadir. Agadir – Al Massira Airport wasn't build yet at that time - see also the edit summary, where I stated "moved some text to Inezgane Airport, the old airport of Agadir". See also the reference at the Inezgane page; http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19750803-1 --Antheii (talk) 13:31, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As per above source, I have removed the Boeing 707 incident again from the Al Massira article. --Antheii (talk) 12:03, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Replied on my talkpage. 149AFK (talk) 03:02, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Posted a reply. 149AFK (talk) 03:12, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

Hello. You appear to be involved in an edit war on Peggy Kirk Bell . While the three-revert rule is hard and fast, please be aware that you can be blocked for edit warring without making 3 reverts to an article in 24 hours. You are not entitled to 3 reverts and are expected to cooperatively engage other editors on talk pages rather than reverting their edits. Note that posting your thoughts on the talk page alone is not a license to continue reverting. You must reach consensus. Continued edit warring may cause you to be blocked. Toddst1 (talk) 14:40, 13 June 2011 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, WilliamJE. You have new messages at Toddst1's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Cherry Hill

[1] Claims it was a Par 72. --FourteenClowns (talk) 02:30, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, good catch. I only went with what I could find. --FourteenClowns (talk) 22:22, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paula Creamer and Marlene Hagge - youngest winner of LPGA event

Please read the LPGA record listing again:

http://lpga.com/content/Alltimerecords.pdf

Youngest winner
Marlene Hagge, 1952 Sarasota Open (18-hole event) at 18 years, 14 days
Marlene Hagge, 1952 Bakersfield Open (18-hole event) at 18 years, 2 months, 15 days
Paula Creamer, 2005 Sybase Classic presented by Lincoln Mercury (72-hole event) at 18 years, 9 month, 17 days
Morgan Pressel, 2007 Kraft Nabisco Championship (72-hole event) at 18 years, 10 months, 9 days
Paula Creamer, 2005 Evian Masters (72-hole event), 18 years, 11 months, 18 days
Amy Alcott, 1975 Orange Blossom Classic (54-hole event) at 19 years, 1 day

The LPGA certainly does seem to differentiate among tournaments of different lengths when assigning records for the youngest winner. --Crunch (talk) 04:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: His name is Robert Vernon Spears not Richard Spears

Please clarify your comment on my talk page. Cate |_Talk 18:59, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

You have reverted my edit without explanation. Please stop your disruptive editing. This has nothing to do with WP:User Pages. This is your first warning and you will be given no more. I will report to an administrator if you keep on reverting. Thanks. Qantasplanes (Talk with me) 11:03, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How short is my memory? I said I will complete this and when you keep on reverting it will have to start all over again. So what's the point if I'm about to finish it. Jeez. Qantasplanes (Talk with me) 12:11, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And also NO PERSONAL ATTACKS. Qantasplanes (Talk with me) 12:13, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK i will. I will be completed by tomorrow earliest. Qantasplanes (Talk with me) 12:41, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Archive 1

Glory's Last Shot

I would advise you to look here, before you comment on others pages. I would like a couple more sources on Ziegler nickname.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 08:23, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I do respect your commitment and zeal to Wikipedia, and would love to see you edit it further on golf or any multitude of articles, but just watch out what you say, please!SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 08:27, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All contentious material on bio of a living person must be removed or well/highly sourced. So, one source on the nickname probably won't work!SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 08:27, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Wire-to-wire

I took it from each major, and let them decide, we are not to do original research, when it comes to putting things on here. By the way, I would highly advise you to look at List of Masters Tournament champions, List of U.S. Open (golf) champions, List of The Open Championship champions, List of PGA Championship champions to see the source material, that I used in making the chart.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 15:58, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it does not matter what media members you are quoting, when the PGA Championship considers it to be wire-to-wire.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 16:20, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to change or improve upon what I put forth and created be my guest, but it better meet up with reliable sourcing guidelines.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 18:13, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Raymond Floyd 1969 PGA Championship victory

According to Rome News-Tribune, Floyd was tied for the lead after the first day of competition like Tiger Woods was at the end of the competition, so the source is correct to have listed by Floyd and Woods as wire-to-wire champions.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 18:01, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See, I advise you to go look how many tournament articles that I have created. I was the one that made all of the stroke-play women's articles in major with the exception of a mere five to ten, so I know what I am doing.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 18:04, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Masters Tournament champion Trevor Immelman

I guess you might want to look this one over!SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 18:24, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to thank you for looking into that respective article, and fixing it to make it accurate and correct.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 21:04, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Google News Archive

I just wanted to inform you of a sad event that this is being shut down, and we probably can't do anything about the situation.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 03:10, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Barnes

Go look at what I found was an error.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 03:12, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pg. 338 says Barnes was a naturalized-American, yet Tewapack does not recognize this fact. I think the hof is clearly in the wrong with their research because how can he be "intensely patriotic" and compete for the USA.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 16:49, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Assume good faith

I appreciate your contributions, but I just saw something that disappointed me ---> a gratuitous and self-serving comment you made about Tewapack in the edit summary section on the Johnny Miller page. Look, the guy is the premier golf editor and has been for years. When one contributes as prolifically as he has, one is bound to make mistakes. I find them occasionally and I just correct them without any fanfare. Look it, I make mistakes all the time and he corrects them without any fireworks. Golf is one of the best sections of the encyclopedia, and arguably Wikipedia has the most complete body of golf knowledge on the web. Thanks to the collaboration of all of us, but especially Tewapack. All the best,--Hokeman (talk) 04:29, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Look, none of us are perfect. He is one of the top 400 editors on Wikipedia in edit numbers. He started in 2006 just after I did, and I've had a symbiotic relationship with him for a long time. I know Tewapack can be direct and even blunt sometimes, but I don't find him particularly heavy-handed when it comes to changing other peoples edits. I would encourage you to keep the negative stuff out of the main space edit summaries, and only on the the user talk pages. Keep in mind all the good work that Tewapack has contributed for many years. We all have different levels of tolerance and different skill levels in respect to communicating and editing. Again, I appreciate your valuable contributions to golf. I just hate to see two of the top-guns of golf in a low level conflict — I'm afraid it will boil over into something much worse and hurt the project. All the best,--Hokeman (talk) 21:40, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Hokeman about Tewapack, but we have some disagreements, which can be handled in a civilly consensus manner. I just would like to see Wikipedia be the best most accurate reliable source of information on the internet/web, which you are helping with William. So, If you need some assistance come to me first before going to Tewapack directly. Tewapack does many tedious edits that are very laborious in nature, but he like us all including me have faults from time-to-time. I get into disagreements over when policies and guidelines are not followed, so I would keep your eyes off another editors behavior and start looking at content in how to make it better. So, keep your eyes and efforts focused on making Wikipedia a better place! Peace out, till next time.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 04:12, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, if the editior does anything that violates policy or guidelines then we will let the admins handle it thru their mechanisms. Go look at say the admin noticeboards or dispute resolution forums.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 04:16, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sharing

I wouldn't be too surprised if the LPGA doesn't schedule a stop in Palm Beach County soon. After all, they have many world class courses to choose from; plus everyone wants to go there in the winter. All the best,--Hokeman (talk) 12:58, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out that Johnny Miller's albatross was in 1972, not 1980. I got that erroneous information right out of the table at the end of the July 19, 2009 Guardian article. I'll change it in the prose and put your reference as the source. That was the second time this month for me that a resource has been mistaken. I put in the Loren Roberts article that he finished solo 2nd at the 1994 US Open. Got the information right out of golfmajorchampionships.com, but that turned out to be erroneous as well — he finished T-2.--Hokeman (talk) 20:45, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, the deal with the 1996 Quad Cities Open was that Woods was the 54-hole leader. Fiori was the champion and denied Tiger his first win, but there was no playoff with Tiger. Fiori beat Andrew Mcgee by two strokes in regulation. Billy Mayfair was the only one to beat Tiger in a playoff. Just about every time Mayfair gives an interview, he brings that up.--Hokeman (talk) 21:14, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Candie Kung

I am very aware of Candie Kung's citizenship status. In fact, it was me who added the information about her citizenship and the reference you just posted on my Talk page. I added this in 2009. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Candie_Kung&oldid=292556103) Was your latest comment to me in relation to something I've added or edited recently? --Crunch (talk) 00:05, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I want your opinion on something

I just finished creating a new page for a former PGA Tour event. I noticed that the Former PGA Tour Events navbox didn't come up. After a little investigation, I discovered User:Jrcla2 collapsed it because according to him, it had gotten "ginormous". He is basically a template editor and doesn't seem to be a clown; his talk page is full of barnstars. Your thoughts--Hokeman (talk) 20:56, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The template is getting very big. I'd just let it pass.- William 02:13, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

Please stop the personal attacks on me in your edit summaries. Tewapack (talk) 14:34, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They're not personal attacks. Just statements as to why bs is in articles you've edited multiple times without correcting it. You've repeatedly changed punctuation and capitalization but seldom have corrected blatant mistakes. Should I start a list of what I have found and your responses afterwards?- William 15:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

C'mon Man! Edit summaries in article space like this one[2] hurts the integrity of Wikipedia.--Hokeman (talk) 16:14, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Check out this blatantly wrong edit[3] and what Tewapack did right behind it.[4] I can cite many more examples. He fixes the spelling of playoff and the link to Mark Brooks but not the score that Perry made.- William 16:22, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaning up articles that have factual errors, spelling mistakes, etc. is all part of Wikipedia. It is not grounds for personal attacks, like this one: WilliamJE edit summary 14:37, 21 September 2011 on LPGA Corning Classic article. --Crunch (talk) 20:33, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I come across Tewapack constantly changing spelling and punctuation in recent edits at the same time they include blatantly wrong information which he lets stand. Do you believe he doesn't know Kenny Perry didn't double bogey the 72nd hole at the 1996 PGA? That's the worst case, but there are other whoppers he has done nothing about too. Oh there was the PGA Tour's Pleasant Valley Tour stop pointing to the wrong wikipedia article for over 4 years with Tewapack continuing to edit[5] in wrong information after the initial mistake. CVS Caremark Charity Classic and CVS Charity Classic aren't the same event.- William 22:31, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They are personal attacks and I've asked you politely to stop. I do not check ever fact in every article that I edit. If it is obvious vandalism, I revert. If it sounds fishy, I tag it with {fact} or research it and correct it. If it's plausible, I assume good faith editing and go on. Blaming me for every mistake I don't catch is ridiculous. Tewapack (talk) 04:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lexi Thompson

Please stop your repeated deletion of the Lexi Thompson non-affilated results table. A table of this sort has been on Michelle Wie and Tadd Fujikawa for years. It is the only way to track results from professional players who played years not being part of any tour.

Your argument that "Thompson's records can be found at Golf observer etc. We don't do this for Nicklaus, Woods and countless other golfers who played as a amateur in pro tournaments" is illogical:

If we just wanted people to be able to look things up on external sites, why do we even have Wikipedia?
The fact that there aren't similar for Tiger Woods and Jack Nicklaus is also illogical and shows that you didn't even know what you were deleting.. This is not about amateurs in pro tournaments. There are no amateur results here. This is about non-affiliated professional record.

I understand we both want to make the article better, but there are appropriate ways to do this. If you want to delete the section, you can use standard Wikipedia protocol and discuss it on the Discussion page to reach a consensus. Your actions are bordering on vandalism and are a violation of WP:FAITACCOMPLI and WP:CON among other rules. In particular, see this from WP:FAITACCOMPLI:

"Discussion is, however, called for if you think the edit might be controversial or if someone indicates disagreement with your edit (either by reverting your edit and/or raising an issue on the talk page). A BOLD, revert, discuss cycle is used on many pages where changes might often be contentious. Boldness should not mean trying to impose edits against existing consensus."

If you continue your actions, I will have no choice but to report you as violating Wikipedia policy. Thank you. --Crunch (talk) 12:18, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Results of minor league events that aren't wins- Trivial trivia

Results of LPGA events- Already in her LPGA summary box(Like every other active LPGA player)

Results of Major championships- In her major championship box

The boxes for Fujiwara and Wie see WP:Otherstuffexists. They shouldn't be there either.

Plus you've summed up everything in the article's over lengthy narrative. There is more written in Thompson's biography than there are of five or six golf hall of famers combined. She has one established tour victory. The article is overkill and that performance section an over the top version of it. Minor league golf results in a encyclopedia. What's next? A biography of the first blogger credentialed to cover the LPGA? He's been mentioned in the mainstream media too.

You want to report me to WP. I'll do the same. You're the one doing the reverting.- William 13:12, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I ask you again to bring this major article change to the Discussion page associated with Lexi Thompson and not to make unilateral changes. Making changes like this goes against the spirit and policy of Wikipedia guidelines. In addition your arguments in favor of removing the material continue to be inaccurate. Your arguments for deleting content stated above do not make sense to me, but let's see what other editors have to say. Since you have now repeatedly refused to discuss this change at Talk:Lexi_Thompson so consensus can be reached, I have no choice but to bring Wikipedia administrators in to mediate. This is unfortunate. --Crunch (talk) 19:39, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is now a discussion on the Lexi Thompson talk page. I'm sure you guys are both aware of WP:3RR, please don't edit war. --Deadly∀ssassin 23:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alice Ritzman

You created a page for her. In the article you said Ritzman's best ever finish was a playoff loss in 1986. Actually Ritzman lost three times in playoffs. Her LPGA Tour biography says so- William 17:37, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are probably right. This is an article I created a long time ago at the request of the golf portal, which I thought at the time contained very few women. At the time I may have been unaware of her other play-off's. My thoughts on her claim to fame were that she won more than 1.000.000 dollars in prizemoney without ever winning. My apologies if my research was incorrect or sloppy. JHvW 20:53, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sanford Women's Open

Your comments are sought at Talk:Sanford Women's Open. Tewapack (talk) 20:34, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

November 2011

Your recent editing history at Juli Inkster shows that you are in danger of breaking the three-revert rule, or that you may have already broken it. An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Breaking the three-revert rule often leads to a block.

If you wish to avoid being blocked, instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. You may still be blocked for edit warring even if you do not exceed the technical limit of the three-revert rule if your behavior indicates that you intend to continue to revert repeatedly. Lhb1239 (talk) 01:41, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

3RR Noticeboard

Because even after receiving the above notice you continued to edit war and break the 3RR rule at Juli Inkster, you have been reported to the 3RR Noticeboard. This is a courtesy notice. You may comment at the noticeboard talk page here. Lhb1239 (talk) 02:06, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did on User talk:Crunch. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Elizium23 (talk) 02:08, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on Beth Daniel. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. You are welcome to rephrase your comment as a civil criticism of the article. Thank you. Julie Inkster et. al. Gerardw (talk) 02:08, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At WP:AN3#User:WilliamJE reported by User:Lhb1239(Result: ), the history makes clear that you removed the same material four times, which breaks WP:3RR. You may be able to avoid a block if you respond in the 3RR report and promise to stop warring. I also see a very strong personal attack here:

Reverted moronic revert by imbecile editor who didn't bother to see a playoff box was put in the article replacing the notes. Somebody should get this person a seeing eye dog

You are on thin ice and I suggest you back away from these conflicts quickly, with proper apologies. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 17:13, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Juli Inkster

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for edit warring, as you did at Juli Inkster. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

The complete report of this case is at WP:AN3#User:WilliamJE reported by User:Lhb1239(Result: 31h). EdJohnston (talk) 19:06, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, kangaroo court. Read my response to the supposed reversions at the 3rr page. Prosecution based on faulty and distorted evidence by editors who took out perfectly good additions to the articles, not once, but four times= kangaroo court.- William 19:10, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Agadir air disaster

The article Agadir air disaster has been proposed for deletion. The proposed-deletion notice added to the article should explain why.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mythpage88 (talk) 08:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AfD converted to RfD on Ladies Masters at Moss Creek

I have procedurally closed the AfD you opened on Ladies Masters at Moss Creek, as AfD is not the place for deletion discussions of redirect pages. I have opened a discussion at Redirects for discussion and copied over your rationale. It may be found at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 December 14. Cheers! —KuyaBriBri^Talk 21:17, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your article has been moved to AfC space

Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:WilliamJE/Jane Blalock Cheating Controversy has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jane Blalock Cheating Controversy, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 16:32, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy.

I noticed the 'article for creation' that you submitted for review yesterday at 16:15, and I was going to 'accept' it (ie, make it live).

But I then noticed you'd already created a live article (at 16:17).

So, I got an admin to 'merge' the history of those two pages. That means, the history of the AFC page is now incorporated into the live article. So the whole thing is in Jane Blalock Cheating Controversy, see the history of that page.

I hope that makes sense, and hope it is helpful. If you have any question, ask me. Cheers, Chzz ► 00:13, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. You don't need to do anything; I just wanted to let you know. In case you looked at the page history and were thoroughly puzzled :-) Thanks for writing it. Best, Chzz ► 00:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Jay, Florida, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jackie Moore (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:58, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sudan Airways Flight 139

Thanks for your recent improvements on grammar. Cheers.--Jetstreamer (talk) 16:46, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas

	Happy new year!
	We wish you a merry christmas and a happy new year! Pass a Method talk 18:53, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback and Merry Xmas

Hello, WilliamJE. You have new messages at Jetstreamer's talk page.
Message added Jetstreamer (talk) 23:19, 25 December 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Jetstreamer (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Don't eat yellow snow!

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Flaming/MC2008}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

National Airlines Flight 27, thanks

Thanks for the advice re: the National Airlines 27 article. I had noticed the website copying issue, but had held off from removing the section completely as the material did conform to the CVR transcript from the NTSB recport. Edit was intended to make the article more neutral in tone.

I've actually encountered a similar problem to you with the article on the US 14th Army where someone used incorrect information from a website without checking against offline sources. One of these days I'm going to have to fully debug that article. Graham1973 (talk) 20:48, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]