User talk:John from Idegon

This is John from Idegon's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97

Please sign your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end. Thanks!

Unless otherwise requested, I will respond on this page.

Please include links to pertinent page(s).

If you came here to complain about my removal of your unsourced edit, don't waste either of our time. Just provide sources for your edits.

Click New section to start a new topic.

Unsigned and/or misplaced comments may be removed unread.

My talk page may be protected from editing by non-confirmed editors from time to time. If that's the case and you cannot post here, please leave me a message here. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk)

Beware! This user's talk page is monitored by talk page watchers. Some of them even talk back.

Sundays web series in Fort Bragg, Ca Wikipedia page

NOT INTERESTED

I don't help anyone whose interest in Wikipedia is using it for promotion. Not now, not ever. John from Idegon (talk) 01:40, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi John ~

My name is Forrest Naylor, creator of the "Sundays" web series filmed and produced in Fort Bragg, Ca. I noticed you removed my Sundays web series information from the "In Popular Culture" section. The reason I went to edit it in the first place is because first of all I didn't even know it was on the site until I was called this afternoon and somebody told me that "Sundays" was listed in that section. The reason I was editing it was because it had an incorrect website in the reference link so I went to change it. While I was doing that, I decided to add to the text that it was created by me and also added that it was a multi-award winning web series. I thought that was significant to incorporate.

Anyway, was hoping it can be put back in the In Popular Culture page. I am a legitimate screenwriter/director/producer living in Fort Bragg and "Sundays" is indeed a multi-award winning web series created by me and filmed and produced in Fort Bragg, Ca.

Here is a link to my IMDb page for confirmation: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3295374/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1 Here is a link to the Sundays web site: www.SundaysTheSeries.tv

Please let me know if I can answer any questions.

Thank you for you time.

Gratitude,

Forrest Naylor 98.207.245.38 (talk) 01:08, 1 August 2019 (UTC) <https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3295374/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1></forrestnaylor.com>[reply]

I have no interest in helping you promote yourself. Goodbye. John from Idegon (talk) 01:39, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Removing my edits on the Richmond, Virginia page

John - I've lived in Richmond for years and I spend most of my free time going to shows in the area. The two artists I added have existing Wikipedia pages that state they are from Richmond, and as a resident I can confirm that is true. I don't believe that adding two successful Richmond bands to a listing of other Richmond bands/artists is likely to be challenged, which is the first statement on the citation page you asked me to reference. My primary reason for editing that section of the text was to add Avail as they're kind of a big deal in the Richmond music scene and a glaring omission, and to fix what appeared to be sloppy additions that weren't alphabetized.

I would kindly ask you to check your facts and consider fixing the additional content you removed. SterileVision (talk) 03:26, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a few articles for you to browse if you're so inclined..

https://www.kerrang.com/features/avail-return-with-two-sold-out-hometown-reunion-shows/

Decibel Magazine Hall of Fame - Avail - Over the James

https://www.houstonpress.com/music/crossover-kings-power-trip-and-iron-reagan-rip-it-up-at-walters-9233911

https://www.vice.com/en_au/article/rnxk7r/iron-reagan-wants-to-stab-you-in-the-eye-interview SterileVision (talk) 03:34, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, shows you how wrong you can be. They got challenged. I have no interest in discussing this here. If you want to attempt to gain consensus for your change, start a discussion on the article talk page. I'd strongly suggest that you not argue it doesn't need sourcing. Goodbye. John from Idegon (talk) 03:43, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you're doing well...

Hi John from Idegon! It's been quite some time since we've said hi to one another... I just wanted to leave you a message and wish you a great day and happy editing, and let you know that I was thinking about you... I hope you're doing well, and I hope you remain active in this project and that we keep in touch. :-) Cheers - ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:22, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wheaton North High School

Undid your undo and removed your warning. There was an edit conflict and the article was not reverted to a clean version. The editor in question was cleaning up. Meters (talk) 05:06, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Archbishop Carroll High School (Washington, D.C.)

Hello, why is the logo that was put up for the Archbishop Carroll High School (Washington, D.C.) article "Non constructive" when the Wikipedia articles of other high schools in the same area and have their logos on their respective Wikipedia article pages (for example Georgetown Preparatory School, Bishop McNamara High School, etc.), and Llakew18 (talk) 03:30, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Hi Llakew18. Please take another look at the edit summary left by John; he didn't remove the logo because he thought adding it was unconstructive; he removed it because he believes the uploaded file is a copyright violation. John made multiple changes in his edit; so, his edit summary attempted to explain each change. The "non constructive" part of his summary is in reference to something else.

Now, you really shouldn't be uploading files found online under a free license to Commons or Wikipedia that you yourself don't hold the copyright on unless it clearly states on the source website that the file has been released under a free license. Please see c:Commons:Licensing for more on this. You've already had one file you've uploaded to Commons deleted by an administrator and some of your other uploads have also been tagged as having issue. It's OK to make a mistake once maybe even twice, but a Commons administrator is likely going to step in and take action to stop you from uploading any more files that have licensing problems if you continue to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:26, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From Edit Summary left on the Archbishop Carroll High School (Washington, D.C.) page:“Hey, I took that picture ([File:Archbishop Carroll High School (Washington, D.C.) Front Entrance.jpg]]) my self with my own iPhone. You can’t say that’s I committed a copy right violation because I took the photo my self and own the right to it.” Llakew18 (talk) 04:33, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You were asking about why John removed the logo file from the article; so, I assumed you were talking about File:Archbishop Carroll High School (Washington, D.C.) Logo with School name.png and File:Archbishop Carroll High School (Washington, D.C.) Official Logo.jpg and I apologize if I got the files mixed up. Please note the time on John's edit here and the time of this edit you made to File:Archbishop Carroll High School (Washington, D.C.) Front Entrance.jpg. You clarified the license roughly an hour after John removed the file; my guess is that John mistook the file for being a copyright violation based upon some of your previous uploads; so, if a mistake was made, it was made in good faith and probably would have been made by myself or another editor given the same circumstances. If you really want to make it 100% clear that the photo is yours to avoid any similar misunderstandings in the future, you can send a WP:CONSENT email to Wikimedia OTRS; you probably don't need to do that, however, unless one of the things in c:COM:OTRS#Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS? applies. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:17, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit revert in Odessa, Texas

I have reverted your reversal of the inclusion of George H W, Barbara, and George W Bush in the list of notable past residents of Odessa, TX, as fact of their (admittedly short) residency in Odessa TX is properly sourced in each of their respective Wikipedia articles. Additional sources beyond this are not typically necessary. | Uncle Milty | talk | 09:58, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the head's up. Perhaps if you were familiar with the applicable guidelines you wouldn't have wasted both our time. Oh, and the proper preposition would be "on". I haven't been in Odessa in 50 years. John from Idegon (talk) 02:13, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stafford Senior High School

Why are you continuously reverting my edit on Stafford Senior High School when I explained to you why these edits were done? { [ ( jjj 1238 ) ] } 05:37, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you continuously adding stuff to that article I've told you isn't needed? John from Idegon (talk) 15:24, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect About Paid User

I am not paid by the Society for Marine Mammalogy. It is a volunteer effort to ensure experts in marine mammals are editing Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia is a main source of information for a lot of people, as I am sure you are aware. Our effort is part of the SMM’s volunteer educational outreach to help ensure accurate and academically cited information on marine mammals is easily accessible to the public. Msmith1700 (talk) 15:59, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Hi Msmith1700. Just for reference, WP:PAID and WP:FCOI doesn't necessary mean compensated monetarily and it can involve other forms of compensation. Even if you're not being "paid" and are editing as a "volunteer" it still sounds like you might have a WP:COI if you're editing content related to the SMM and its activities as part of a program organized by the SSM; so, you should avoid editing any such pages as much as possible and follow WP:PSCOI instead. At the same time, your specialized knowledge about marine mammals is most welcomed by Wikipedia, but you should take a look at WP:EXPERT, WP:OWN and WP:NOR because such knowledge doesn't necessarily give you any special final editorial control over article content; you will still be expected to edit according to the same Wikipedia policies and guidelines that all editors are expected to follow. FWIW, since your interested in marine mammals, you might find like minded editors in WP:MARBIO; WikiProjects are always looking for knowledgeable people to help out.

Finally, all Wikipedian's, including Wikipedia administrators, etc., are volunteers, so there are technically no such official Wikimedia Foundation staff positions as "Wikipedia curator" when comes to editing Wikipedia from Wikipedia's perspective. If that's the "title" you're referred to by the SSM or by others outside of Wikipedia, then that's OK but it doesn't confer any special editing privileges upon you edit. (Apologize for all the short-cut links; it's a bit easier to post them than linking to the full page). -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:46, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: the message left on the user's talk page mentioned "financial stake", "Paid advocacy", "being compensated", "especially egregious", "paid advocacy", "compensation for your edits", "your employer", "The template Paid" and other such phrasing. Perhaps that is where the confusion arose. MPS1992 (talk) 22:55, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Edit from the New Mexico State University page

Hi John,

I noticed that you had mentioned that I may have had a conflict of interest with my edit of the New Mexico State University page. I actually have no ties to the university, but was going through each flagship university on the list of flagship universities, and noticed that New Mexico was the only one that had two. Upon further reading, the single source I found that listed NMSU as a flagship university was the one that was cited in the article found here. However, you go through the article to the list that it has, there are universities such as Auburn University, California State University, and Purdue University listed as flagships, even though they're not considered flagship universities in their states nor within Wikipedia itself, which is why I saw the source as faulty for being the criteria considering NMSU as a flagship university.

According to the US Department of Education - ERIC, a list recognized by the United States Government in this study here, and College Board, within their survey of flagships published annually here, both of which are primary sources listed on the Category talk:Flagship universities in the United States page, UNM is the only university recognized as a flagship in the state.

In terms of within the state itself, there aren't any publications or official language that call NMSU a flagship, meanwhile UNM has been consistently considered the flagship university since its inception, as seen in the Acts of the Legislative Assembly of the Territory of New Mexico, 28th session, chapter 138, section 7: “The university of New Mexico hereby created and established, is intended to be the state university when New Mexico shall [be] admitted as a state into the union”.

Thus, while maybe using UNM's own website as a source maybe was a bit short-sighted, other credible sources consider UNM to be the only flagship university in the state. Jtrws (talk) 19:59, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

College articles are rife with promotional editing. If you source something laudatory to the subject of the article, it's likely you'll be reverted. John from Idegon (talk) 20:04, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Camp Becket Page

Dear John,

This is a reply to your comment about me receiving financial compensation for editing the Camp Becket Wikipedia page. I am most definitely not being paid for fixing the page, I am an alumni of the camp and thus I know quite a lot about it. I can see how that could be a conflict of interest, but I am only changing the page to reflect the camp in the best possible way, not to try and advertise as others have been suggesting.

On a separate note, the reason that I have been so involved in this page is that it originally had the sister camp, Camp Chimney Corners, listed as a subsection. Originally i was attempting to change the name of the whole page to Becket-Chimney Corners YMCA, the title of both organizations, but it seems that others would be in more support of creating a new page entirely called Camp Chimney Corners. I was wondering if i could have your support in creating this new page. Let me know how you feel about this. Thanks! Jmansfield2021 (talk) 00:50, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jmansfield2021, encyclopedia articles must be constructed from information paraphrased from reliable secondary sources. What you know is entirely irrelevant. I have no idea how we ended up with all these articles on obscure summer camps, but there simply isn't much written about them, and hence they should not be here. John from Idegon (talk) 17:48, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! Need a hand?

Hello, John from Idegon! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! John from Idegon (talk) 21:42, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus requirement? How do I get that?

CLOSED

I'm under no obligation to instruct you on how Wikipedia works. You have more than enough information available to you to figure out your own answers. I'm a volunteer and I'll use my time here as I decide. Do not post here again. John from Idegon (talk) 21:45, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

After I provided press validation of success in Harrison Walmart store#Herb5247 (talk) 21:42, 19 August 2019 (UTC)Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).2 I was asked for consensus? How do I get that? https://harrisondaily.com/news/walmart-store-no-celebrates-years/article_7d272304-183b-11e4-b459-0019bb2963f4.html[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Franklin Academy reversion

CONTENT DISPUTES GO ON THE ARTICLE'S TALK PAGE

Zachpw, as another editor has already told you, content disputes should be argued on the article's talk page. That way, all interested editors are aware of it and can participate. Disputed content requires consensus, and the editor wanting the content carries the burden of obtaining that. I'd suggest you quote exactly what you want with its sources attached, and argue from policy based on your sources. John from Idegon (talk) 13:31, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I understand the issues with the Franklin Academy page. But the majority of what I put was cited with secondary sources, and from what I recall I only used primary sources to cite things that were already there previously. Can we put back what was actually suitable instead of a complete revert? Not trying to promote, just want a decent page longer than a sentence. Thanks. Zachpw (talk) 12:29, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Wade Warren bio

Wade Warren is a former acting head of USAID who is now working at Deloitte. I, as a Deloitte marketing person, have been attempting to update his bio and I see I've run into trouble. If there is an issue with notability, it seems that previous heads of USAID have bios on Wikipedia. The bio was flagged previously for not having adequate sources, which I tried to fix by adding some citations. In the process, I'm guessing I did something that made the bio now unacceptable? Please let me know what I can do to fix it. I have added back links to other Wikipedia pages that were there previously that I inadvertently deleted. Thank you for your help!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wade_Warren

Elizhenry (talk) 23:28, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]