User talk:John from Idegon/Archive 42

This is an archive of past discussions with User:John from Idegon. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 35

←

Archive 40

Re: August 2015

The information I provided lets people know what an average home in Hutto, TX costs along with taxes, price per sqft, and neighborhoods in that city, for someone considering a move to Hutto, TX. The information is pulled directly from tax records and our MLS and people are not required to register to view the information. I read the guidelines for external links and followed the rules. Please let me know which rule, specifically, I failed to adhere to as I don't want to make the same mistake again. Even if you don't agree with the hyperlink itself, the information provided is valid and shouldn't have been removed completely. EvancedRealty

Re: Clay HS Logo

Thanks for the info! Very interesting. Sorry I wasn't aware, but thanks for catching it and reverting it. Have a good one! ihhavens (talk) 03:36, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Clay High School (Indiana) logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Clay High School (Indiana) logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

J.L. Richards Fixes

Thanks so much for a beautiful job reorganizing and cleaning up the James Lorin Richards article. I was obviously in way over my head and I really appreciate your work. Thanks again,

Jtlanghorne (talk) 13:43, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 August 2015

Editorial: Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic bias than traditional publishers

Op-ed: Je ne suis pas Google

News and notes: VisualEditor, endowment, science, and news in brief

WikiProject report: Meet the boilerplate makers

In the media: Probe into Nehru edits launched; dangers of the right to be forgotten

Traffic report: Mrityorma amritam gamaya...

Featured content: Maya, Michigan, Medici, Médée, and Moul n'ga

Blog: Get help editing Wikipedia with the new “Co-op” mentorship program

Semi-protected your talk page

For two days. Let me (or any other admin) know if you'd like that adjusted. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 01:49, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I must remember to get a different cologne. Attracting way too much attention. John from Idegon (talk) 02:06, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

La Salle and COI

Please know that Braden.bonner has disclosed his COI on his Talk page. I saw your questions on the Talk page to him. Couple of notes, fwiw. First, I generally address COI issues with editors on their Talk pages rather than article Talk pages, as the discussion is not about the article per se and doesn't really belong on the article talk page... and doing it on the article Talk page can end up mashing together content disputes with the issues around COI management, and that mashing can get messy, quickly. Second.. I generally find that in working with editors with a potential COI and educating them about our COI guideline and why it matters, sugar gets your farther, faster, than vinegar. Most folks who edit here want the public to respect Wikipedia (and in a funny way, editors with a COI sometimes grasp the need to protect WP's good name more swiftly than others) and will abide by the COI guideline when the issue is framed that way. Do with that as you will. Thanks for your concern to protect the integrity of WP! Jytdog (talk) 10:20, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Chino, California

I hope you're enjoying your summer. Could you have a look at "Chino in popular culture" on the Chino, California article? I cleaned it up a bit, but it still seems mostly trivia. I'm never sure about deleting these things. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 12:14, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello

Do you really think blocking one IP will keep me away? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.12.217 (talk) 12:44, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 August 2015

News and notes: Superprotect, one year later; a contentious RfA

In the media: Paid editing; traffic drop; Nicki Minaj

Forum: Community voices on paid editing

Wikimanía report: Wikimanía 2015, part 2, a community event

Traffic report: Fighting from top to bottom

Featured content: Fused lizards, giant mice, and Scottish demons

Technology report: Tech news in brief

Blog: The Hunt for Tirpitz

Upper Arlington High School

My source for adding John Knox to the alumni was the following clip: [1] It shows Knox's introduction in the Upper Arlington Baseball Hall of Fame last January 24, and says he graduated from the school in 1966. --Xuxl (talk) 09:22, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Xuxl. You Tube is not considered a reliable source since it is user generated. If the guy was good enough to play in the bigs, it stands to reason that he must have been mentioned in a newspaper story on a game when he was in high school. That would be a much better reference. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 15:33, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

How about these: [2]; [3]? --Xuxl (talk) 10:01, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Xuxl: Those are better, but still do not fit the requirements of WP:RS. Reliable sources are sources that have some sort of fact-checking methodology in place. Newspapers and magazines (and their websites), radio and TV news (and their websites), books published by mainline publishing houses (not self published or vanity press), and trusted academic journals are all examples of what is a reliable source. You may not realize it, but sourcing does not have to be online for Wikipedia. A print newspaper found in your local library would be just fine. You would make your citation for that with the cite news template. I'm more than happy to help you do the technical of the edit, but I do not have time to do the research. Hope it goes well. Happy editing. John from Idegon (talk) 16:07, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't have any vested interest in this matter. I update a baseball-only site (Baseball-reference Bullpen) and for that one, the information I have found about John Knox's high school history is enough. I don't think you will find anything more reliable than a school actually adding him to its Hall of Fame as proof that he attended; it's a rather trivial matter, and not worth poring over microfilms of regional papers from 1966, on the odd chance that he was mentioned when he was a high schooler, to confirm (I'm not located anywhere near Ohio these days, so it would imply a lot of work). In any case, I know all about reliable sources, but there has to be some slack given for small, non-controversial matters, as opposed to items that actually require a higher level of sourcing. --Xuxl (talk) 09:06, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

No. _Fortuna ^{Imperatrix Mundi} 10:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello neighbor!

Anyone who can see smoke from the Soda fire must be a neighbor! Anyway, I undid your reversal of an edit on the Boise article this morning. I realize that the editor had not included any citations (other than an inter-wiki link to an article about the Pioneer (train)). I've added citations and completed a little copyedit on the new material as well. Those actions would probably be pretty self-explanatory, but the reason I'm dropping a note here is to ask if, as someone who expresses interest in retaining editors, don't you think that simply reversing the edit might come across as a little "bitey" when the info was accurate, just unsourced? Etamni | ✉ | ✓ 12:10, 19 August 2015 (UTC)