User talk:WilliamJE/Archive 9

Guys and Dolls

Actually I was going to revert my reversion when you beat me too it. On second thought I realized the paragraph had too many issues to stand. Coretheapple (talk) 15:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

It's contentious and controversial. Get a source or sources and it can go up. On a side note, I just added obituary inline citations in the articles of Vivian Blaine and Sheldon Leonard who were both in G&D....William 15:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

I will when I can. At first blush it seemed like a reference only to Sinatra, whose feud with Loesser was well-established, but there were a lot of nooks and crannies in the article that were just too much. In particular, there was a reference to "Loesser's family," which I don't believe is correct. Coretheapple (talk) 20:08, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Helen Mason (endocrinologist)

Rather than Prodding a very new article, it might have been easier to look for a ref. You might also like to have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Royal Society/Women in Science Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at the Royal Society, March 2014‎ to which this and other stubs relates . Any help welcomed. Regards  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   18:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Rather than whining at my message board, you should familarize yourself with the requirements of WP:BLP that they need to be referenced. Any article that isn't, can be subject to prodding....William 18:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Not whining, simply asking for good grace and a collaborative approach. Some of us with poor a internet connection need to edit in bite sized gobbets of text, which sometimes means that not all content gets saved at one instant.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   18:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

PRODding: yes. AFD: see WP:BEFORE... --Randykitty (talk) 19:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

proposing an article for deletion 2 min after it has been created ^__^ — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChristophThomas (talk • contribs) 14:36, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Another editor who needs to brush up on WP:BLP-PROD which reads:

Per Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people, all articles are required to include reliable sources for any material about a living person that is contentious. In addition, all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged need a reliable source per our verifiability policy. The more contentious the material, the higher quality the source must be.

All improperly sourced articles about living people may be subject to deletion per the standard deletion processes, but in addition, biographies created after March 18, 2010, that do not contain at least one source directly supporting the material may also be proposed for deletion under this new process.

Any editor who creates new articles on a living person, should know the BLP requirement. If they ignore it or neglect it, they shouldn't be surprised when a BLP PROD tag gets added to the article....William 15:25, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

On the AfD you are asked to explain why the subject fails WP:Academic. Please enlighten us as to your reasons. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:01, 5 March 2014 (UTC).

• Indeed. I think WilliamJE and Velella both misunderstood my previous comment, so let me be more explicit here: you are both partially right and partially wrong. Tagging a BLP shortly after its creation with a BLPPROD tag is absolutely normal, justified, and necessary. Taking an article to AFD minutes after creation is unusual and not adhering to WP:BEFORE is at minimum bad form. As is a refusal to withdraw an AFD in the face of overwhelming evidence of notability. --Randykitty (talk) 11:37, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

IRC

Hi, several people from the baseball wikiproject are getting together after Wizardman's sudden retirement to figure out a better way to organize the Wikiproject. One of the ideas we came up with is having our own IRC channel to help each other, as well as new users with collaboration and content. If you need help connecting to IRC join #wikipedia-coffeehouse ^connect. The IRC channel for Wikiproject Baseball is #wiki-baseball ^connect. Thanks Secret ^account 23:01, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

Your recent editing history at Shot Heard 'Round the World (baseball) shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that 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. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. 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. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:26, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

He's the one who is reverting and ignoring consensus. The thing was at the WikiProject Baseball talk page for a month[1] and the only editor who posted on the topic agreed with me....William 15:29, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Don't care who "started it". Edit warring is wrong even if you're the one "in the right". – Muboshgu (talk) 15:31, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Actually, William, you haven't bothered to read the change in the content, which is a compromise. I proposed it on the Baseball talk page, and nobody -- including you -- objected to it. If there is something you disagree with regarding the compromise, please make your case on the article talk page, as I suggested some time ago, rather than blindly reverting my changes without comment. Hope you got good news on your skin biopsy. Thanks. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 15:39, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

And on your last revert, which you made after you were warned to stop edit warring, you say that you "already took it to the talk page". I don't see anything on the article's talk page from you. DoctorJoeE ^{review transgressions}/_{talk to me!} 15:44, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

WilliamJE I have protected Shot Heard 'Round the World (baseball) from editing I would appreciate if you could discuss the issues on the article talk page and try and achieve a consensus, thanks. MilborneOne (talk) 16:04, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: lack of explanation in comments here and here. Try WP:PERNOM. --Mysterytrey 14:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Long comments aren't mandatory. If you read PERNOM completely you'd know it says- 'If the rationale provided in the nomination includes a comprehensive argument, specific policy references and/or a compelling presentation of evidence in favour of keeping or deletion, an endorsement of the nominator's argument may be sufficient....William 14:11, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

May be sufficient? Sure. However, is does say "It is important to keep in mind that the AfD process is designed to solicit discussion..." and "Comments adding nothing but a statement of support to a prior comment add little to the discussion."--Mysterytrey 14:24, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Employee morale

I removed your speedy deletion tag, because the point is clear. Now, you may want to prod it as a dicdef, but that's another story. Bearian (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

P.S. Please avoid biting noobies who start new stubs. Bearian (talk) 17:30, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

DRN edit

In Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard, note that the last sentence of the " Have you tried to resolve this previously?" reads:

That edi

I assume something is missing.--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:23, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks SP, I'll take a look at it....William 18:24, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

You might want to take a look at this.

[[2]], not sure how much it bothers you but there are some good segjustions. CombatWombat42 (talk) 19:12, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Licence to kill

Use the article' stalk page for the reason it's intended and stop edit warring over something that fits within the accepted practice of the MoS. - SchroCat (talk) 19:27, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

You refused DRN. Go back to DRN or I will be taking ANI for the uncalled personal attacks you made on me and for your refactoring my and other editor's comments on your talk page. I'm already writing the post....William 19:31, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Re: see also links

All I know is that you have quite the habit of editing pages immediately after me that you've never edited before, regardless of what topic. See [3], [4], [5], [6], and [7]. Please stop removing the links, because these are links to parent articles and included as part of a nationwide standard, not the thing someone randomly thrown into the section. The only way that any of them are linked in navboxes is at the very top, where they're linked to provide context and not as a normal part of the navbox. Nyttend (talk) 12:46, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

What I wrote[8] to Orlady, partly applies to you too. While I continue to scrutinize administrators (and please note as part of his unblocking me, Sphilbrick said[9] ' I do not want you to stop complaining about admins who are out of line') so they don't do bogus blocks like Orlady did to me, I will examine articles these administrators work on and see if they can use even more work. No such thing as a perfect wikipedia article. The edits you listed above, me titling the notable people section correctly(Consensus[10] is Notable people not Notable residents or Notable natives etc), or adding entries to such sections, fixing see also sections, are edits I do all the time. If you or were to closely examine my edit history it would be apparent I do this with articles that you have and haven't edited. Check this out[11] my see also edits to namespace articles is well over 100 in my last 5,000 namespace edits. I really shouldn't have to defend myself like this, but its been proven time over time again around here that there are administrators who'll do bad blocks without checking the facts out and even sometimes when they do[12] and their incorrect evaluations is used for setting a block's length.

As for the See also, you're wrong as is all the articles that have those links. Navboxs came about to partly avoid large see also sections. The U.S. National Register of Historic Places navbox links to every state list. If you want to change the consensus, bring it to the MOS talk page....William 22:56, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

{{NRHP}} is not a navbox: we use it on every article to provide a list of important links, not as a method of navigating among related articles. Nowhere else can I remember seeing someone else call it a navbox; please consider whether you might have misunderstood. I agree that editing the same page as me is easily explained by going around as you do. It does not easily explain the fact that you repeatedly edit articles immediately after I have, regardless of the topic, and especially after your declaration of following Orlady, and apparently now me. On top of this, you accuse her of making this edit, which anyone can see was not made by her; when you repeat factual errors, why should I listen to anything you say? Your block log shows that you've been blocked for taking a confrontational battleground approach, and for holding grudges. Statements such as I'm campaigning against you now do not sound very compatible with our policy position of Making personal battles out of Wikipedia discussions goes directly against our policies and goals. Nyttend (talk) 00:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

WP:NAVBOX 'Navigation templates, or navboxes, are boxes containing links to a group of related articles.' The NHRP is a navbox and is being used as such in the articles. By your words. Why the links unless it is there to navigate?

I made an error with that edit, but you can't deny something. Orlady doesn't enforce WP:SPS unless it suits her. The blog was being used on the article which she watches like a hawk. As for my changing her comment, that is such an obvious accidental mistake that you clearly either don't understand WP:AGF or don't practice it. That goes against wikipedia policies and goals. You're using edit summaries to falsely accuse me of things. That violates WP:NPA.

You're knee deep[13] in errors and those errors and your buddy Orlady's errors[14] got me blocked. Now you're holding my block log against me. Toddst1 blocked himself indefinitely after he was finally being taken to ARBCOM and in all probability stripped of his admin. powers after a long history of abuse of such. Including against me.

Take me to ANI for wikihounding and refactoring other people's talk page comments. Expect to get laughed at when I show your bringing me up for following consensus in properly naming a Notable people section or adding people to them....William 01:18, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

William, these are experienced editors. Why pursue this conflict with them? Different editors have different styles and approaches. I understand that their are commons standards, but these do not seem like major content differences that are worth going to battle over. By all means help me with the articles I'm creating. They are full of mistakes. You're going to have a lot more fun if you lets this one go. Take care and good luck. Candleabracadabra (talk) 02:34, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Aviation Accidents template

Hi, I see you undid my edit in making the font of the incident normal as opposed to bold smallcaps, and I was wondering why you made the font back to bold smallcaps. I didn't see any confirmation of any passengers or crew fatalities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam.gov (talk • contribs) 19:02, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Stop being thick. Read this[15]....William 19:05, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, I read it, and your right. Thanks for your edit. Sam.gov (talk) 19:13, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Daniel Brooks

Hi

I have left you a message on the talk page of Daniel Brooks (golfer). Just wanted to clarify something on your previous edit.

Thanks for your help on this page Tracland (talk) 06:30, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ted Tollner may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• a year there before moving on to [Woodside High School (Woodside, California)|Woodside High School]] where he worked one year as offensive coordinator before coming head coach<ref>[http://news.google.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:44, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Richard Kreul may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *[[http://wnow.worldnow.com/story/14157028/former-state-senator-richard-kruel-dies-at-age-86 Former

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:58, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Prescott, Wisconsin may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *[[Alvin Baldus]], former member of [[United States Congress|Congress]]<ref>[http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=B000083 Alvin Baldus at Biographical

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:08, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, WilliamJE. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 15:07, 14 May 2014 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Nikkimaria (talk) 15:07, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Concerning the status of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370

Hi WilliamJE,

I see that you've removed my first message concerning the status of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370. That made me feel a little bit guilty for starters, because I just wanted to talk to you about MH370... anyways, moving on. Please let me reiterate my point...

Have you found any articles that state that the wreckage of MH370 has been found? If you haven't, then please refrain from making MH370 the "deadliest" incident of 2014, because the international MH370 search team is still looking for the plane.

Thanks for reading! TehPlaneFreak! talk 23:35, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

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

Milton Moore Snodgrass

The article does have a reference. It is listed in the section called References.Wjhonson (talk) 15:38, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Did you notice the so called reference is a password only page or dead link?...William 18:05, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

The Center Line: Spring 2014

—MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:05, 8 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of Imzadi1979

Userpage

I read your userpage, and found the following phrase in this section:

Put in a WP:RS for this designation otherwise me or some other doubting thomas editor may remove the statement.

Care to explain yourself? My first name is Thomas, I'm intrigued. --Launchballer 22:11, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Editors say some film is a cult movie. Where is the WP:RS for that claim?...William 22:14, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

It's the Thomas bit I was interested in.--Launchballer 22:18, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

You're not familar with here....William 22:21, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Never heard of it.--Launchballer 22:43, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Troy Kingi

Hello WilliamJE. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Troy Kingi, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article content has been added since it was tagged. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 01:54, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Montanez

Yeah I couldn't believe that intro. Pretty ridiculous. Anyways, good luck with the book, it sounds very interesting.--Yankees10 02:06, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ralph Houk may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s and 2 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• July 14, 2014|first=Joe|last=Reichler|work=Associated Press|publisher=The Tuscaloosa News]]}}</ref> After Berra's seven-game loss to the [[St. Louis Cardinals]] in the [[1964 World Series]],

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:28, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Please do not remove large amounts of content so quickly

Hello. In reference to your recent edits to Amsterdam Airport Schiphol: I understand you may feel that a certain section is not the right one for certain content. Fair enough, I won't argue that, however, instead of just deleting all of it, why don't you just move it yourself? Copy + paste takes under 30 seconds. Or make a case for it on the talk page. By just deleting the content chances are it will get lost, it's purely by chance I noticed it in the edit history due to the whole fuzz around the Malaysian Airlines flight. It's good content and I moved it to the requested section now. Please do not just remove large amounts of good content in the future just because you dislike where it's at in the article.BabyNuke (talk) 02:37, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Regarding revision at 2014 Aviation accidents template

Sorry, but please excuse my edit as it fixes the smallcaps. Smallcaps indicates the deadliest aviation accident, but may change whenever nessecary. StormContent 15:14, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Read again but all those designations have been taken out of the accident templates per consensus....William 16:48, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Do not place templates on my talk page.

Please stop placing templates on my page. It shows no evidence that you are listening to a word I am saying.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:43, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Trouted

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

You have been trouted for: Asking me to trout you. "Trout this user".

Crossair 498

I do not understand why you repeatedly revert my changes, especially as you edit summaries (insofar as I can understand them) seem to indicate that you agree with my changes discuss]. 86.5.176.168 (talk) 12:11, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Splitting of Category:Ice hockey people from Ontario

Having closed Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 12#Category:Ice hockey people from Detroit, and implemented the closure, I started to get worried about the size of Category:Ice hockey people from Ontario - currently almost at 1,200. A currently open discussion, Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 13#Category:Ice hockey people from Markham, Ontario, proposes upmerging more articles there. Being that you participated in one or both of these discussions, you may be interested in a related discussion at Category talk:Ice hockey people from Ontario#Splitting of this category. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 13:37, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Declined speedy

I ended up declining the speedy at Tamika Miller because there was an assertion of notability. There was an issue with copyvio, but I've cleaned it out. I figure that since there's an assertion of notability here (and it's likely that Miller will repost the content anyway, possibly with an ORTS ticket giving it up as fair use), it'd be better to take this to AfD if you want to seek further deletion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:03, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

NewspaperArchives

I just did some BOLD editing and copied the information from both the NewspaperArchive.com article and the Heritage Archives, Inc. stub article into new sections in Heritage Microfilm, Inc.. The Microfilm article still needs a fair amount of cleanup but the other two articles can be deleted. I just do not know how to handle the redirects properlly. Nyth83 (talk) 15:40, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of Joseph DeLuca (racing driver) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joseph DeLuca (racing driver) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph DeLuca (racing driver) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Taram (talk) 15:40, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Finnair flight AY 915

Hi,

Thank you for your attention to this article (Finnair flight AY 915) I wrote, and adhering to the principles of Wikipedia. However, even though the two items that you deleted did appear in the letters-to-the-editor section of Helsingin Sanomat, the writers are not insignificant to this discourse:

Jukka Rislakki is a retired journalist with Helsingin Sanomat and an author, considered to be an authority on the history of the Soviet Union and especially the Baltics. Stefan Forss is a missile specialis and an adjunct professor with the National Defense University (300 5Th Avenue, Building 62 Fort McNair, Washington Dc, District of Columbia 20319) in the US.

I think their opinions would add significant contents to this article. So I’d like kindly to ask you to reconsider this deletion, perhaps just delete the fact that these contributions appeared on such-and-such a place in the newspaper.

And if you think this article holds significance in Wikipedia, please do write to the talkpage, as someone seems to have posted a note to the effect that this is not so and that the article might be deleted.

Your sincerely, Apanuggpak (talk) 17:58, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Letters to the editor undergo little or no vetting. I have worked in the MSM, so I know. They fail WP:RS. Two, your source for somebody being who they are above wouldn't be accepted by Wikipedia either as a RS....William 18:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Laura Genender

I put it up for undeletion. --Goccie (talk) 15:36, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Joe Murphy

Notable article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.181.224.34 (talk) 12:39, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Joe, we know its you. WP:Sockpuppetry can lead to you being blocked....William 13:24, 27 September 2014 (UTC)