Jump to content

User talk:JohnCD

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JayLv99 (talk | contribs) at 17:11, 19 August 2008. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Messages before 1 Mar 08 are in Archive 1
Messages for March - June 08 are in Archive 2


July 2008

Symphony Membership Page

Whoever you are, your comments do not reflect the opinions of the Omaha Symphony Musicians or the Omaha Symphony Association. You do not have the privilege to represent this magnificent orchestra in any capacity that I know of. While your inflamatory statements may be corroborated by published reports, the only sentence relevant to our beloved musicians is the first one. The balance of your "facts" have nothing to do with membership.

Your negative comments are a disservice to the hardworking musicians and staff. Take your personal opinions and grind that axe somewhere more relevant. Remember, the world can see your personal opnions and comments and that is the opinion they will form about our orchestra. I am reporting your disrespectful comments to the Symphony staff all the musicians that I know and will urge them to do whatever necessary to stop your negative representation of our musicians. Shame on you.--Phnole86 (talk) 19:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The comments you are trying to remove from the article are not mine, they are those of the Omaha World-Herald, here, correctly cited. Further reply and warning on your talk page. JohnCD (talk) 19:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • They are not my opinions, they are statements quoted, accurately, from the Omaha World-Herald. I have no opinions about the Omaha Symphony Orchestra, and had nothing to do with the article, as you can see from the edit history, until I saw you start to delete bits of it with no explanation. If you have valid reasons for wanting to change the article, I suggest you explain them, with your sources, on the article's talk page and try to reach agreement with other editors, because if you continue the sort of edits you have been making - unexplained deletions and alteration of figures - you will be blocked from editing. JohnCD (talk) 20:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Omaha Symphony

You will be one of the reasons why the Omaha Symphony fails. --Phnole86 (talk) 00:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey JohnCD, quick note to say "thanks" for taking this on. I will interject with more citations and material late today, and attempt to address the various issues this anon IP has presented. • Freechild'sup? 14:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be glad to let someone with local knowledge and interest get involved - I know absolutely nothing about it, I just saw an unexplained deletion flash by on Recent Changes and followed that up. JohnCD (talk) 21:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commercial Communications Centre

Hello there,

I have got a message for my article that it would be speedly deleted from wikipedia.

First of all, I am not promoting anything and I only want to inform people of the next generation of Internet.

Second of all, my company is CCC UK LIMITED and the title that I choosed for my article is not the company name neither a product name.

Therefore, I would highly appreciate if you could leave my article to be on wikipedia.

Best Regards,

Arash —Preceding unsigned comment added by CCCUKLTD (talk • contribs) 16:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What you can do if you object to speedy deletion is to put {{hangon}} on the article just below the db tag, and put your reasons on the article's talk page. To help you, I have done that for you - now an administrator will read what you have written before he decides. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 17:06, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notification tag

I removed the notification because I added the tag on the article and had already added the notification on the user's talk page. --Ŵïllî§ï$2 (Talk!/Cont.) 21:52, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - there were edit conflicts going on and she was past final warning anyway - I reported her to AIV and she's been blocked 31 hours and both article titles salted. JohnCD (talk) 22:01, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Good job! --Ŵïllî§ï$2 (Talk!/Cont.) 22:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No offense taken.

I do think I can get my point across with help. I am a first time submitter, and to Wikki's guidelines I am sure the arcticle was poorly written, no sources cited, and out of step as far as how I layed it out.

Clinton Strange --ClintonStrange (talk) 19:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The problem is that what you have is an original idea, and encyclopedias aren't in the business of publishing original ideas. No Original Research is one of Wikipedia's three key content policies. (The other two are Verifiability and Neutral Point of View). So I'm afraid Wikipedia is not the place for what you are trying to do.
A tip about layout - don't leave leading spaces at the beginning of a line, that's what makes it go all funny. It's worth using the "Show Preview" button to see if you've got an edit right, then you can change it if need be before finally clicking "Save page". Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never been accused of that before :)

I had an original thought. Thanks. Perhaps a dictionary is where I need to take this...

--ClintonStrange (talk) 20:11, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually, you have another problem - there isn't any English "language authority" who could change the language for you - unlike the Spanish "Royal Academy" who purport to control that language, though I think they are generally fighting a rearguard action against Spanglish rather than proposing changes. In English somebody, I forget who, said "any noun can be verbed", and I think if you say to your clients "you're over-detergenting" they would know exactly what you mean. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:24, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kinross services

I notice you have marked the Kinross services page for deletion. I would encourage you to investigate the pages of a number of other UK motorway service areas as shown in the Moto Hospitality template at the bottom of the Kinross services page. Others have added pages about other Moto service areas in the UK and for the sake of completeness I believe that the handful of missing services areas should also be included. If you feel that Kinross is not notable then neither are any of the other service areas already present on Wikipedia.

I strongly feel that if a list of motorway services is on Wikipedia in the first place then it should be a comprehensive list. For this reason I would encourage you to undo whatever actions you have taken to delete this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nau03144 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You ask me to "undo whatever actions you have taken to delete this article"; if you look at the PROD template you'll see that anyone, including you, can remove it if you "object to its deletion for any reason". So you are fully entitled to remove the PROD. I would then probably take the article to AfD, and we could see what the community thinks. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 18:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see where you are coming from on this. I have read the articles you have linked to previously. Thank you for bringing these things to my attention - as you know I'm pretty new to this. It does strike me that under these guidelines there must be vast quantities of non-notable pages on Wikipedia.

However, even after reading the relevant information, I would still be disappointed to see Kinross services removed from Wikipedia in this manner. Letting this one article slip away without further discussion would not achieve a great deal. I feel that the question of the notability of individual motorway service stations is wider than just this one article and consideration should be given to their notability as a whole. In your eyes they are not notable, in mine I would consider them to be notable enough to merit inclusion. I know it's the All or Nothing argument that we are advised to avoid, but it certainly appears to this Wiki-newbie that unless you are willing to challenge the notability of this entire category then you would be achieving very little by removing a single article.

As a slight aside, I feel that it would be essential that someone judging the merits or otherwise of this article should be from the UK. I have no idea what nationality you are as your user page gives little away, but since the English language is widely used elsewhere in the world there is a distinct likelihood that you are not British. If that were true, then I would suggest that perhaps you may not be a suitable person to judge the notability of individual motorway service areas. If you are British, then this point is utterly irrelevant! Nau03144 (talk) 04:38, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your very reasonable response. I had already decided that, although you had not removed my PROD from the article, I would remove it myself because PRODs are meant to be for uncontroversial deletions, and you had raised an objection. So I have done that; I am undecided whether to take it to AfD, and will think about it while I am away for a couple of days and let you know. PS - I am indeed a Brit, all too familiar with motorway services, have used Kinross, and before I retired was a regular for breakfast at Membury Welcome Break. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 10:03, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome messages etc.

Hi. I've recently become more involved in new page patrolling, which has meant a dramatic increase in the number of (hopefully correct) prods and CSD's I'm flagging. I've come across a fair few situations where my "I've flagged something as yours to be deleted" message is the first thing on their talk page and, thinking about it, this seems a bit harsh for new editors. Are there any standard welcome message templates I should be putting there first before dropping the bombshell ? CultureDrone (talk) 09:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :-) CultureDrone (talk) 10:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

THEN CAN U TAKE THE EDIT PART OFF —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.140.212.195 (talk) 16:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Ritter

10th time is a charm. Salted. Thanks for the heads up. TravellingCarithe Busy Bee 19:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Perfect Apathy

Hey...why is my music project "My Perfect Apathy" not wikipedia worthy? -michael sandefer --message originally place on user page by Apexigod (talk · contribs) 17:17, 9 July 2008

My Perfect Apathy

Well, it has notability now. I'll be adding more to it in a little while...and honestly, you are telling me that since I made my own my perfect apathy page and not say....a buddy of mine..you are going to delete it?

That is absolutely ridiculous. I may not be famous, or have a record on a national chart YET...but I've made history, appeared on national radio broadcasts and had articles written about my music.

so technically, I belong here. Mike-C (talk) 00:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)apexigod[reply]

Welcome Break

John,

I wondered if you would mind having a look at the Welcome Break article and giving me a little feedback on it. I have substantially modified it over the last few days and as I'm new to this game I hoped maybe you could let me know how I'm doing. It was a very poor article before, I hope I've brought the standard up a little bit.

Thanks. Nau03144 (talk) 03:53, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RIG/Andrew Roberts/Stefan Roberts

Hi JohnCD, thank you for your feedback and your offer to take the articles to AFD. While I am regularly contributing to Wikipedia, I have very little experience with the deletion and AFD processes. Therefore, if the articles gets contested before tomorrow's deadline, I will take you up on your offer.

If this is going to be a confirmed hoax, it was a rather good one. I am still not sure myself if someone put a lot of effort into it, or if it is just poor citations.

Again - thank you for your offer. HagenUK (talk) 07:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for moving this on to AFD for me. I was looking through the policy, but it read like a japanese manual to the uninitiated ;-)
HagenUK (talk) 20:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your help! It is greatly appreciated! HagenUK (talk) 05:35, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Confused messages from Unites (talk · contribs)

LOL!!!!

OOOPS, i forgot signiture.... @@@@, ooops! Unites 15:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC) (Unites 15:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC)) not @@@@!!! LOL!

I can't be arsed (oops, asked) reading all them professional articles about rules of Wikipedia!! too long, make it nice and simple, not 6 billion words!!! oops that's the population of the world!!

Unites 16:01, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

reply?

are you even gonna reply??? ???? oooops! (~ ~ ~ ~) not @@@@, oops ????, NOOOOOOOOO!! (~ ~ ~ ~) finally! NOOOOOOO!! Unites 16:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

  • If you "can't be arsed (oops, asked) reading all them professional articles about rules of Wikipedia" you'll just find that your articles get deleted; and sooner or later you'll be blocked from editing. To put the three content policies in a few words: anything in Wikipedia must be backed up by an independent reliable source; Wikipedia doesn't publish original ideas (that was the problem with your article Economy of the Universe); and everything has to be written from a neutral point of view - no soapboxing. JohnCD (talk) 16:13, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oaaa

Got it; it's the ‘O‘o‘a‘a, a.k.a. Kauaʻi ʻŌʻō. Redirecting. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 11:14, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Songs of Scotland

Hi John. Thanks for that. I thought it was probably also a good idea to move American Folk Songs to a more specific title, so I have now done that. Hope this is all right. TheRetroGuy (talk) 12:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually, I see that at Wikipedia:Wikiproject Albums#Style it says "When there is no other encyclopedic use of the album title, the article should reside at the normal name, e.g. London Calling, not London Calling (album)." But I still think that for "Songs of Scotland" it was a good idea to add "(album)" - there might well be another article with that title, even if there isn't now. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Interestingly I notice there are a few entries for both Songs of Scotland and American Folk Songs at AllMusic, so I guess we'll probably end up having to disambiguate if articles are created about them. TheRetroGuy (talk) 13:25, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ERP Vendors

Hi,

I've read over the notability issues with the 2 ERP vendors that I wrote things about. Here are a few articles online that talk about both of them.

These articles talk about Slingshot: [4] [5] [6]

This article is about Vormittag: [7]

I believe that these articles help support the notability of both of the companies.

The reason that I posted these up were because I am currently searching for ERP software for a company, however the company i am looking for can not afford / do not want to go with the larger companies (all of which are already listed). Figured I would post up a few companies that i found that other people may be interested in.

Let me know what else i can do to get these companies posted. I also had a few other companies I would like to get up there because they are slowly helping me to make a well educated decision.

Tdelles09 (talk) 01:46, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The three for Slingshot are all press releases by the company or its parent Celerity, and press releases are specifically excluded in WP:ORG#Primary criterion. I don't know about IncBizNet, but it looks like a place where businesses post profiles of themselves, in which case the Vormittag one also wouldn't count. What WP:ORG is looking for in "significant coverage in secondary sources" is evidence that people independent of the company have thought it interesting enough to write about. The thing is, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and tries to avoid turning into a business directory that simply lists every company in the world. So my advice on how to get company entries in is, read WP:ORG carefully and search for independent material about the company. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hey. Thanks for letting me know. I'll take a look around sometime (if it is deemed these guys are fully worth my time to look at as an ERP Vendor) to see if there are any good third party articles about them.

Thanks for the info.

Tdelles09 (talk) 00:44, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of The musical parody

An article that you have been involved in editing, The musical parody, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The musical parody. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 19:09, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Untitled F.C.

You may wish to comment on a recent sockpuppetry case I have opened Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Mido z05, you may well wish to oppose given the statment made by the alleged puppet at the bottom but it would also appear that the comments made could confirm meatpuppetry? I'm not sure but given you were the opener of the AfD I thought you'd it appropriate to inform you. BigHairRef | Talk 19:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks. I'm inclined to leave it be - it looks as if it's just another supporter piling in. If lots of them appear we may have to put {{notavote}} on the AfD; but if, as seems likely, their page goes, I guess they'll lose interest and go away. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Come on be fair guys. you are deleting a page that has no violated anything and compared to other pages is more reliable and make more sense than half of them. Take it into consideration there is nothing wrong with the page. Keep it! Please! all we are trying to do is create a page that informs the public of our team to get more support and fans. This will help us gain popularity and then it will follow your criteria. But how is that suppose to work if you don't post our page. Please think about it i worked hard on the page and don't believe it deserves to be deleted. Mido z05 (talk) 20:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Group

Thanks for your nice comment Thats rather hurt full when it's not my fault i can't spell because i am dyslexic aswell the reason why there isent a few topics is becuase the website is currntily been rebuilt as we speak and aswell the forum is been cleaned up which is been needed.

I hope you can understand thius but i may just withdraw my account with wikipedia for the continue ness of which you keep deleting mya rticles when there true which really is rather down heartning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Titanicboss (talk • contribs) 20:56, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry about that - I've removed those words from the AfD. (Have you tried a spell-checker? They don't catch everything, but I find they do catch most of my mis-spellings). I'm afraid being true isn't enough to get an article into Wikipedia - it has to be about something of enough general interest for an encyclopedia article. The Wikipedia term for that is notable and it's explained at Notability and other guidelines linked from there. Also, an article has to be verifiable from independent reliable sources. So I'm afraid an article about a small, newly-started group like yours is not likely to make it. One other tip - when you post a message in a talk page, it's a good idea to end it with four tilde characters ~~~~, which the system turns into a "signature" of your user-name and the time and date like this: JohnCD (talk) 21:10, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ever feel like a salted Pulmonata?

Thanks for realizing what my primary concern is, that the articles should be quality, and someone's awards for quantity are second to the writing of the encyclopedia. It seems obvious to me. But I keep having to fight people over this. --Blechnic (talk) 05:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS This is about a comment you made on the AN/I thread about user W. Will and a remark made to me about my posting my concerns twice on AN/I. --Blechnic (talk) 06:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are too many good and even excellent young editors at Wikipedia for me to say that someone should be allowed to write crap just because they're using Wikipedia as their babysitter. --Blechnic (talk) 21:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redemption Hill

Ok maybe i added ' Clarissa ' to Redemption Hill's teen names or whatever but , why did you change the thing about Aaron Lambert , it's all true.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Em&Cj (talk • contribs) 18:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a playground, and it's important that it is accurate. So when I see edits by a contributor with a record of putting in false entries, and the first one I check is false again, I can either spend a lot of time checking whether any of the rest happen to be true or, if the others don't add much of importance, the safest thing to do is revert the lot. JohnCD (talk) 19:14, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kai Kasiguran

You tagged Kai Kasiguran for speedy deletion. Soccer players at the Major League Soccer level are usually notable. --Eastmain (talk) 22:36, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ah. I read the sentence "Kai was drafted by the Chicago Fire in the 1st round (12th overall) of the 2008 MLS Supplemental Draft" to mean he had been called up into the squad but not yet played - I recall several AfDs along those lines. I'd better stay away from American sports that I don't understand. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 14:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Perfect Apathy (continued)

Hello. I noticed that you have been involved with this article in the past. I tried to explain to its creator/subject what he needs to do in order to bring it in line with Wikipedia's guidelines, but his reaction was a bit hostile. A week has passed without any change to the article, and I'm not sure what the next move should be. Any ideas? – SJL 06:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • (Sigh!) I was relieved to see that you were looking after this. Still, my turn again now; the next thing is to take it to AfD, which I have done here, and get other views, so he can see you and I are not a conspiracy but just reflecting the community's standards. JohnCD (talk) 11:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks. I figured that was the next step, but I wasn't sure. I actually think that the article could meet the criteria for inclusion if rewritten and properly sourced, but the author seems unwilling to take constructive criticism. – SJL 15:53, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MBG Expense Management

I added some references to MBG Expense Management, and I do not think the tone of the article is unduly promotional. You may wish to review Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MBG Expense Management. --Eastmain (talk) 21:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


August 2008

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scooby Doo: The Beginning

Plenty of sources have turned up in a day. You might want to reconsider your !vote in this afd. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells• Otter chirps • HELP!) 00:58, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yaringa Boat Harbour Marina

I actually haven't finish the article, you tagged it before I added the references. Now my additions are not displayed and I don't know why. Please, look at the editing page of the article and give me advice what to do. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.98.167.221 (talk) 13:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops

Lol. Pressed the wrong button. Can you please stop spamming my talk page with your nonsense? Thanks in advance! Hampickles (talk) 19:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding undated comment was added at 19:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IMBIT article

Hello John,

I'm now reading through the requirements for an organization. Hopefully the article will remain, instead of a deletion. Do you have any suggestions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kriskras (talk • contribs) 11:18, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:27, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meriwether Lewis Clark, Sr.

Hello John;

I was still adding, editing, and correcting typos in the article when you moved it to another location of Wiki... where did it go???

Aedwardmoch (talk) 17:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)AedwardmochAedwardmoch (talk) 17:33, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

question

i've seen plenty of other articles written the exact same way that have not been deleted. please explain.Sandersonpr (talk) 16:24, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • The fact that some unsuitable articles have got in is not a reason for allowing more - see Other Stuff Exists. Crossing with your message I posted one on your talk page explaining that Wikipedia is not for promotion and pointing you to relevant guidelines; see also the reply headed "IMBIT" two up on this talk page. JohnCD (talk) 16:33, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fx Solutions Page - help needed

JohnCD -

I added 2 outside sources to my page and also tried to post it in the Business Economics Wikiprojects page for review.

Can you verify I took all the necessary steps to get my page added.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fxsol (talk • contribs) 14:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Ben Mullany

Since we did just hold the AfD on it, you're probably better off trying to discuss it on the article's talk page first. You're right in that AfD's don't normally have anything to do with redirection, but we do occasionally close one with that result and some may see it as a rather WP:POINTy way to "delete" the article. If you don't get any objections (give it a week or so, so that it has a chance to be noticed), then sure, go ahead. Thank you for not trying to drag this to Deletion Review. Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:01, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: 2081 (film)

There is a trailer available on the finallyequal.com website. To my knowledge that is reasonable proof that filming has (and is) taking place. Admittedly I am new to the Wiki business ("long time reader first time writer"), so I'd love all the tips I can get. JayLv99 (talk) 10:47, 19 August 2008 (EST)

  • That seems to be the film's own web-site, so doesn't count as an independent source. If the film is at all advanced there would surely be an entry on IMDb. First publicity about a film like this often appears at a very early stage when they are still trying to raise money.
For general advice, look at the links on the Welcome paragraph I put on your talk page; for this particular situation, WP:V, WP:RS, WP:IS, WP:NF on notability of films, in particular WP:NFF for forthcoming films, and WP:CRYSTAL for Wikipedia's general attitude towards future events - as an encyclopedia it needs articles to be much more solidly based than most web-sites like blogs and fan-sites.
You will see from the PROD template that you are quite entitled to remove it if you disagree with deletion for any reason - PROD's are meant for uncontroversial deletions. Unless I can find some sort of confirmation, I would then probably list it on Articles for deletion, which would start a five-day discussion about whether it should be deleted. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. This makes sense. I e-mailed the director and will save what I had placed on there to be resubmitted once it gets some independent backing. Hopefully they'll get on imdb or some other place soon. JayLv99 (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JohnCD&oldid=232938265"