Talk:John Jamelske

Latest comment: 1 year ago by 2601:602:900:7910:34DA:18E3:CA3:1303 in topic Heavy Revising Needed

Untitled edit

I have updated the article after watching a MSNBC report on December 9, 2006. I think this will better the article much so.

This is a BLP, yet the material in it is largely unsourced. Someone needs to ensure that this article has reference citations per policies of biographies of living people. Mattisse (Talk) 13:53, 5 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Crap edit

I cannot believe how bad the writing is in this article. --76.10.172.175 (talk) 01:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Date of conviction edit

The lede should include when he was convicted. RJFJR (talk) 17:57, 21 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on John Jamelske. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Heavy Revising Needed edit

The state of this article is shockingly low-quality in its formatting. From a lack of sources and citations, confused and disjointed order of events, lack of names or details of the persons involved, this does not meet the standards and expectations of a wikipedia article. From the sounds of these talk pages, this issue has existed for quite some time. I am unfamiliar with Wikipedia protocol, but what can be done to request attention to fix this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:602:900:7910:34DA:18E3:CA3:1303 (talk) 02:52, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply