User talk:Ncjon

UNCW

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you delete or blank page contents or templates from Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. Bluehole (talk) 22:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi NCJON -- seems like you're the one with the COI, since you are currently posting from North Carolina Research And Education Network. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluehole (talk • contribs) 23:18, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

There are 17 schools within the system that provide internet access to thousands of people, and I'm not at UNC-Wilmington if that's what you're implying. I have no conflict of interest in editing the UNCW page. Ncjon (talk) 23:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I know exactly who you are. Bluehole (talk) 00:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Then you know I have no conflict of interest in editing a UNCW page Ncjon (talk) 00:15, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Does this look familiar?

(North Carolina Research And Education Network) [Label IP Address]

North Carolina, Chapel Hill, United States, 0 returning visit

Date Time WebPage 28th January 2008 13:53:21 No referring link UNCW icked 28th January 2008 14:00:06 www.uncwicked.org/ UNCW icked » Zachery Mitcham, UNCW IT Security Officer 28th January 2008 14:13:37 www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Alan Cordle%22&btnG=Google Search UNCW icked » Why UNCW icked? 28th January 2008 14:13:59 www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Alan Cordle%22&btnG=Google Search UNCW icked » Why UNCW icked? 28th January 2008 15:05:55 No referring link UNCW icked 28th January 2008 15:05:59 www.uncwicked.org/ UNCW icked » About Me 28th January 2008 15:31:25 No referring link UNCW icked —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bluehole (talk • contribs) 00:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Well it's the first time I've seen it, so no, it doesn't look familiar. But yes, I visited your website about your opinions of UNCW today. It was no mystery to me how you knew what network I was posting from. I visited a couple of your other websites too. Ncjon (talk) 00:36, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The News Leader

Great work adding in all the history material! SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:23, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I have an interest in small newspapers and hope to flesh out a few more of those newspaper stubs. Ncjon (talk) 12:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Ranzino Smith

Ah, thanks for that. I checked to see if there were any other inbound links and didn't find any, so I just assumed it was there as vanity or joke. I should have Googled. --Mosmof (talk) 21:24, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

University of North Carolina School of Law

Please see Talk:University of North Carolina School of Law. Thanks. Yellowspacehopper (talk) 01:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Back at ya. Ncjon (talk) 03:28, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Local paper

"Please stop the edit warring over the local media. The N&O covers Durham, has offices in Durham, and provides home delivery in Durham." On the Durham article, I was only trying to follow the rules as laid down by two other Wikipedia editors. If the N&O is listed, I am going to again list Q-Notes, as it is printed in Durham, hand delivered in Durham, available via home delivery and also covers Durham news and events. Hope you will stand by me with this one. Matt (talk) 02:18, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent contributions! 66.87.0.179 (talk) 20:19, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank You! Ncjon (talk) 02:19, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Final Four appearances

Who did the original edits changing/removing the appearances? That individual should revert the edits to recognize all schools have the appearances as part of their history, vacated or not.

VictorsValiant09 (talk) 20:09, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

An IP user made the changes. I don't really care how it's presented, but if you're going to change it back to include the vacated appearances, then they all need to be done, not just Michigan.Ncjon (talk) 20:44, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

NC State Tournament Appearances

Show one cite that says NC State's tournament appearances were vacated before changing the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.17.127.60 (talk) 14:49, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

I sure hope the NCAA record book will be good enough for you. Pg. 48 Division I records Ncjon (talk) 17:49, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of List of NCAA Men's Division I Elite Eight appearances by coach for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of NCAA Men's Division I Elite Eight appearances by coach 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/List of NCAA Men's Division I Elite Eight appearances by coach 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.
Hi Ncjon, We started a discussion for deleting this page on the Wikiproject College Basketball due to it potentially not being notable enough SCMatt33 (talk) 14:42, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

UNC-SCAR Rivalry

Hey man, I see you frequently edit articles about N Carolina. Check out the article i've been working on, North Carolina-South Carolina football rivalry. Thought maybe you'd be interested. ESSE QUAM VIDERI!CarolinaBlue (talk) 16:53, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Indiana Mr. Basketball

Re [1]. What is "snarky" about following guidelines or summary "WP is not a WP:RS / WP:CIRCULAR". WP:V is fundamental, agree? The article still fails WP:GNG as having only one non-primary source. Widefox; talk 17:23, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

In the amount of time it took you to tag that - and now bring your complaint to my page - you could have made fixes. The circular comment is snarky, sorry. It doesn't fail the notability guidelines, although certainly could use some improvement. Ncjon (talk) 09:47, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

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) 13:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Brice Johnson

Hasn't technically qualified for his jersey to be honored. USA Today isn't one of the granting bodies. He will make first or second team by one if not all of the biggies, though. Rikster2 (talk) 19:43, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Rikster2. I realized that a little while after I made the change but hadn't had a chance to go back and correct it. I was just trying to satisfy the IP editor who is insisting on including Paige and Johnson in the chart. It's fixed now. Ncjon (talk) 21:00, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

No problem, I figured I just would wait til things died down before getting involved. Go Heels! Rikster2 (talk) 21:07, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

NCAA tournament records

I stand corrected. You are right! I found a similar error in the Women's record book a few years back. I email the NCAA with the findings. Good job. Roberto221 (talk) 22:54, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

It's surprising that there would be a mistake in there. You'd think they'd factcheck every one of those lines a few times. I thought about sending the NCAA a note, Roberto221. You may have inspired me to do so. Ncjon (talk) 03:50, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Syracuse

I received a response back from the NCAA about the appearances for Syracuse, St. John's and Louisiana-Lafayette. I described and pointed to the pages in the record book and also sent them the reference you posted about Syracuse. They agreed with me on St. John's and Louisiana-Lafayette and were going to make the corrections. For Syracuse, they said that the wins are being vacated but not the appearances which doesn't make any sense to me. So their appearances should be 37. I'll send you the email if you like. Roberto221 (talk) 19:16, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

That's a bizarre position, but OK. Ncjon (talk) 20:39, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Round of 64

Next time, can you leave me a comment or maybe a comment at WikiProject:College basketball before you make dozens of reverts? There was actually a conversation about this at WP:CBB and we decided to use the Round of XX. Yes, First Round is the official name, which is why we decided to include it in the schedule table as a compromise. The issue is that if a reader is flipping between different seasons for a particular team, it could say "Second Round" for both years but it actually means something different. Would you care to open up the conversation again? I'm not going to spend time changing them all back again and getting into an edit war. (Cc: @Bsuorangecrush:) ~ Richmond96 T • C 03:14, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

At your request Richmond96 I started a discussion at WikiProject:College Basketball. The only previous discussion I found there was long before the NCAA returned to calling the games first and second round, btw. Ncjon (talk) 11:04, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Ncjon. 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)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.

About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF) or surveys@wikimedia.org. About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Public Thanks

Ncjon, I just want to thank you for catching my mistake on the List of 50 programs with most all-time wins. I totally forgot that 25 years was the requirement. But, I would also like to add, Wisconsin had a record of 27-10, which, in addition to their previous 1,552 wins, would put them at 1,579 wins, and Washington State would have 1,572. Therefore, Wisconsin should be awarded the 50th spot. Please correct me if I am missing something.

Nonetheless, thank you.

Potatornado (talk) 00:39, 26 April 2017 (UTC)