Edit filter log

[ 0 => '{{Talk header}}', 1 => '{{Outline of knowledge coverage|New Jersey}}', 2 => '{{WikiProject New Jersey|class=C|importance=Top}}', 3 => '{{WikiProject United States|class=C|importance=High}}', 4 => '{{WP1.0|v0.7=pass|class=C|importance=mid|category=Geography}}', 5 => '{{On this day|date1=2004-03-12|oldid1=2758765}}', 6 => '{{Auto archiving notice|bot=MiszaBot I|age=90 |small=yes |dounreplied=yes}}', 7 => '{{User:MiszaBot/config', 8 => '|archiveheader = {{aan}}', 9 => '|maxarchivesize = 100K', 10 => '|counter = 2', 11 => '|minthreadsleft = 4', 12 => '|algo = old(90d)', 13 => '|archive = Talk:New Jersey/Archive %(counter)d', 14 => '}}', 15 => '{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn', 16 => '|target=/Archive index', 17 => '|mask=/Archive <#>', 18 => '|leading_zeros=0', 19 => '|indexhere=yes}}', 20 => '== Edit request on 2 January 2012 ==', 21 => false, 22 => '{{edit semi-protected|answered=yes}}', 23 => '<!-- Begin request --> ', 24 => 'Why not add 'Newark' to the list of cities that "helped drive the Industr1al Revolution", after all it is probably the most important one.', 25 => false, 26 => 'Why is there nothing about Hurricane Sandy on this page? [[Special:Contributions/63.3.2.130|63.3.2.130]] ([[User talk:63.3.2.130|talk]])', 27 => false, 28 => '== Garden State ==', 29 => false, 30 => 'The author(s) of the article completely missed the meaning of "the garden state". From earliest America and on New Jersey had a booming farming output which New York / City relied on - and thus New Yorkers nick named it so - it had nothing to do with "dress up" gardening (but allot to do with botanics).', 31 => false, 32 => '== Factories in the 1900's ==', 33 => false, 34 => 'And still. This article focuses highly on military installations, gardens, and drugs. However in the 1900's New Jersey was a Flush with factories making near everything American's sought (tooth brushes, etc), a fact easy to see as many old buildings are still standing. These were hopping in the 1970's era. By or in the late 19[90]'s many of the small factories closed due to imports etc. However New Jersey still has a strong and proud product making community.', 35 => false, 36 => '==No battle during Civil War? NJ doesn't have a lot of things==', 37 => 'An editor has reinstalled an uncited phrase, "unlike many states, including some Northern ones, no [Civil War] battle was fought there. {{cn|date=September 2014}}"', 38 => false, 39 => 'First, there is a lot of things that Wikipedia is not. It is not a collection of things that a place or person is not. NJ doesn't have a DisneyWorld, doesn't have a naval militia, doesn't have a former governor whose last name begins with "X", Elvis Presley wasn't born there, ad infinitum. An article (and a place or person) is defined by what it '''does''' or '''is''' or '''has''' or '''was''' that is different from other states.', 40 => false, 41 => 'Also, lists this long become hard to maintain. Easier to maintain what NJ is, uniquely. When a new fact arises, we know where to look. We don't look at the other 49 states and insert, "Arizona doesn't contain a city like Bayonne."', 42 => false, 43 => 'It is not cited because no [[WP:RS]] is going to have any statement like that. Most Northern States did not have a "battle" on them, except (notably), Pennsylvania and probably Maryland. Two out of what? Two dozen? This is not encyclopedic and should be rm. Thanks. [[User:Student7|Student7]] ([[User talk:Student7|talk]]) 17:40, 23 September 2014 (UTC)', 44 => false, 45 => '==Reinstatement of pov "only"s==', 46 => 'I made a routine deletion of pov "only"s, leaving those that made sense such as "New Jersey is the only state to..." type sentence. I did rm onlys where they tried to make a [[WP:POV]] point. "Only" emit x.x% emmisions. No criteria for deciding whether this was good or bad, the decision left up to the editor NOT to the reader. With data, the reader should be drawing these conclusions her/himself. Wikipedia should not "lead" the reader. There were about a dozen in both categories: npov/pov. An editor reverted the npov ones back to being pov. See, for example, discussion at [[Wikipedia_talk:Words_to_avoid/Archive_5#Only.2C_just]]. [[User:Student7|Student7]] ([[User talk:Student7|talk]]) 20:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)', 47 => false, 48 => ':Pretty clear that it is [[WP:POV]] to '''qualify''' data using adjectives or adverbs. Words should be "qualified" using other data to be npov. [[User:Student7|Student7]] ([[User talk:Student7|talk]]) 19:03, 18 May 2015 (UTC)', 49 => false, 50 => false, 51 => '==Comparative onlys?==', 52 => '{{ping|Oknazevad}}. If I say "You are the only editor to have said this"(proper cite), that may be an acceptable sentence. ', 53 => false, 54 => 'If, however, I say, "You have told me this only five times," that is npov comparative, even with a proper cite. There is no balancing information to surmise if "five" is a low number or a high one. There is just the pov word, "only," implying that five isn't very many. In proper context of actual values, it may represent a '''lot.''' The information should be furnished so the reader can make up her/his own mind. As an encyclopedia, we should not be "leading" the reader, as the media does, routinely. That's one of the major differences between "us" and "them." [[User:Student7|Student7]] ([[User talk:Student7|talk]]) 20:10, 22 May 2015 (UTC)' ]