User talk:Alansohn: Difference between revisions
→James Bond actors: new section |
|||
Line 761: | Line 761: | ||
:::Then I think you both perhaps should read over the whole talk page and its archives. This is not new, there have indeed been personal attacks, quite a bit of bad faith (to the point of even calling for Kbdank71's desysopping), and to consider his comments "civil" is, at the least, stretching it a bit. - [[User:Jc37|jc37]] 11:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC) |
:::Then I think you both perhaps should read over the whole talk page and its archives. This is not new, there have indeed been personal attacks, quite a bit of bad faith (to the point of even calling for Kbdank71's desysopping), and to consider his comments "civil" is, at the least, stretching it a bit. - [[User:Jc37|jc37]] 11:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC) |
||
::::Without having read it, the simple act of questioning whether someone should be an admin hardly sounds like a personal attack. [[Special:Contributions/199.125.109.75|199.125.109.75]] ([[User talk:199.125.109.75|talk]]) 16:05, 12 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
{{unblock reviewed|1=If only I had asked [[User:Kbdank71]] directly about his justifications only for the contested and sourced CfDs that he provided no details for. Perhaps, this all could have been avoided if only Kdbank71 might have realized that providing any explanation for a contested CfD close could avoid problems down the road. If only I had not come to the unfortunate bafflement of seeing seven CfDs all closed by Kbdank71 within a span of a few minutes and seeing all of them, contested or not, being closed with the rubber stamp of "The result of the discussion was: delete". Perhaps the result would have been different if I had not listed all seven CfDs when trying to get additional details from Kbdank71, instead of assuming that he would realize that some of these CfDs (the contested ones, and especially where sources were provided in the CfD) were different from the others. If only I had offered the same documentation showing why I had a good faith issue with the close of [[:Category:Fictional_obsessive-compulsives]] instead of hoping that Kdbank71 would provide context on his own and allow him the opportunity to respond to my reasons for questioning the close rather than hope he would reply and explain his actions. If only this had been an AfD, where providing reliable and verifiable sources trumps a claim of [[WP:OR]] without question, and not the topsy-turvy CfD world, where providing multiple reliable sources to rebut [[WP:OR]] carries no apparent weight and is not worthy of even consideration as an argument to keep a category, this might have ended differently. It's clear that things could have gone differently, and I have learned a valuable lesson from this about how the CfD process operates. I do understand why [[User:Postdlf]] prefered to pursue pushing for a block rather than addressing the underlying problems, and [[User:Jc37]], who has been the initiator of a laundry list of CfDs and has been similarly unable to accept reliable sources as a solution to claims of [[WP:OR]], has had to resort to maliciously false personal attacks, most notably a claim that I have been "calling for Kbdank71's desysopping" in complete violation of [[WP:AGF|assuming good faith]] to rationalize this punitive block. In contrast, I am not the only editor who finds this particular block unjustified. Between this take page and [[WP:ANI]], four editors with whom I have had no prior contact to the best of my knowledge -- [[User:Erik the Red 2]], [[User:Pete.Hurd]], [[User:Casliber]], [[User:Ned Scott]] -- have independently agreed that the circumstances in question do not justify a block. If consensus should have any meaning anywhere in Wikipedia, it ought to be here. [[User:Alansohn|Alansohn]] ([[User talk:Alansohn#top|talk]]) 00:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)|decline=This request is too long; see [[WP:GAB]]. However, I do not need to read it to decline it. First, your restriction reads as follows: "Should he [Alansohn] make any edits which are <u>judged by an administrator</u> to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, he may be briefly blocked" (emphasis mine). Note that the restriction does not require that your edits "are" indeed uncivil, etc., it is sufficient that one administrator judges them to be so. That condition being met, your block is in accordance with the restriction and is endorsed accordingly. If you find the restriction to be too restrictive, you need to petition the Committee to alter it. Second, I, as an administrator, determine that your subsequent edits ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alansohn&diff=prev&oldid=244691805], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alansohn&diff=prev&oldid=244716134]) also violate said restriction because they, at least, assume bad faith with respect to [[User:Jc37]]. The block is therefore also endorsed for these subsequent edits. — <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sandstein|<font style="color:white;background:blue;font-family:sans-serif;">''' Sandstein '''</font>]]</span></small> 07:37, 12 October 2008 (UTC)}} |
{{unblock reviewed|1=If only I had asked [[User:Kbdank71]] directly about his justifications only for the contested and sourced CfDs that he provided no details for. Perhaps, this all could have been avoided if only Kdbank71 might have realized that providing any explanation for a contested CfD close could avoid problems down the road. If only I had not come to the unfortunate bafflement of seeing seven CfDs all closed by Kbdank71 within a span of a few minutes and seeing all of them, contested or not, being closed with the rubber stamp of "The result of the discussion was: delete". Perhaps the result would have been different if I had not listed all seven CfDs when trying to get additional details from Kbdank71, instead of assuming that he would realize that some of these CfDs (the contested ones, and especially where sources were provided in the CfD) were different from the others. If only I had offered the same documentation showing why I had a good faith issue with the close of [[:Category:Fictional_obsessive-compulsives]] instead of hoping that Kdbank71 would provide context on his own and allow him the opportunity to respond to my reasons for questioning the close rather than hope he would reply and explain his actions. If only this had been an AfD, where providing reliable and verifiable sources trumps a claim of [[WP:OR]] without question, and not the topsy-turvy CfD world, where providing multiple reliable sources to rebut [[WP:OR]] carries no apparent weight and is not worthy of even consideration as an argument to keep a category, this might have ended differently. It's clear that things could have gone differently, and I have learned a valuable lesson from this about how the CfD process operates. I do understand why [[User:Postdlf]] prefered to pursue pushing for a block rather than addressing the underlying problems, and [[User:Jc37]], who has been the initiator of a laundry list of CfDs and has been similarly unable to accept reliable sources as a solution to claims of [[WP:OR]], has had to resort to maliciously false personal attacks, most notably a claim that I have been "calling for Kbdank71's desysopping" in complete violation of [[WP:AGF|assuming good faith]] to rationalize this punitive block. In contrast, I am not the only editor who finds this particular block unjustified. Between this take page and [[WP:ANI]], four editors with whom I have had no prior contact to the best of my knowledge -- [[User:Erik the Red 2]], [[User:Pete.Hurd]], [[User:Casliber]], [[User:Ned Scott]] -- have independently agreed that the circumstances in question do not justify a block. If consensus should have any meaning anywhere in Wikipedia, it ought to be here. [[User:Alansohn|Alansohn]] ([[User talk:Alansohn#top|talk]]) 00:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)|decline=This request is too long; see [[WP:GAB]]. However, I do not need to read it to decline it. First, your restriction reads as follows: "Should he [Alansohn] make any edits which are <u>judged by an administrator</u> to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, he may be briefly blocked" (emphasis mine). Note that the restriction does not require that your edits "are" indeed uncivil, etc., it is sufficient that one administrator judges them to be so. That condition being met, your block is in accordance with the restriction and is endorsed accordingly. If you find the restriction to be too restrictive, you need to petition the Committee to alter it. Second, I, as an administrator, determine that your subsequent edits ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alansohn&diff=prev&oldid=244691805], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Alansohn&diff=prev&oldid=244716134]) also violate said restriction because they, at least, assume bad faith with respect to [[User:Jc37]]. The block is therefore also endorsed for these subsequent edits. — <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">[[User:Sandstein|<font style="color:white;background:blue;font-family:sans-serif;">''' Sandstein '''</font>]]</span></small> 07:37, 12 October 2008 (UTC)}} |
||
Revision as of 16:05, 12 October 2008
Welcome!
Can you have someone block an address for me?
Hi Alansohn,
It's been a while but could you please have an administrator block 24.173.216.50 indefinitely for me? This person obviously just wants to slander Dorien Bryant, and I don't know any admins. Thanks. -Jrcla2 (talk)
Hi Alansohn
thanks again for your help with my posting re: Fair Lawn - I appreciate your asistance in helping me learn wikipedia. I will be more careful going forward - and thanks for the nice note.... Trust2deal Trust2deal (talk) 19:39, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading images/media to Wikipedia! There is, however, another Wikimedia Foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In the future, please consider creating an account and uploading your media there instead. That way, all of the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons (you may view images you have previously uploaded by going to your user contributions on the left and choosing the 'image' namespace from the drop down box). Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading!--OsamaK 07:28, 27 June 2008 (UT
Paul Kondratuk
I'm the user that keeps deleating the play house 22 section of the East Brunswick, NJ article. It was a relevant and necessary edit because I live in East Brunswick and the it's been anounced that the project for rebuilding playhouse 22 has been stopped and the playhouse will no longer be an attraction to our town. So please do not block me for making important edits. If you have any questions or comments please email me @ paulkondratuk@hotmail.com. Thankyou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.46.70.48 (talk • contribs)
RfA thank you
— JGHowes talk - 19 August 2008
Jeff Behar
I didnt know how to email you, for the information about Jeff behar and hillsborogh
Professional bodybuilders | Mister-olympia, see: http://mister-olympia.bganzeige.de/professional-bodybuilders
also see:
http://botw.org/top/Sports/Strength_Sports/Bodybuilding/Personal_Page/
You can also just google him, jeff behar writer, jeff behar bodybuilder, jeff Behar NASA, jeff Behar ceo of Musclemagfitness.com
He graduated from hillsboro, 1983.
U can also see him on TV, on comedy central by googling his name and comedy central or going here:
http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=70301&title=golds-gym
U can also confirm by checking the hillsboro area at classmates.com
Sorry for having to wroite in here. I did not know how else to email you back with the information you requested.
The Special Barnstar | ||
For your contributions to Power Memorial Academy by adding verifiable sources, which significantly helped it to achieve DYK status. Truthanado (talk) 01:14, 12 September 2008 (UTC) |
Paul Curran (politician)
Number 135
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:33, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK ~ Ray Chambers
Number 136
Thanks for nominating. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 17:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oops - it was this one, not this one! Cheers, Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 17:08, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Charlie Rangel
Thank you for cleaning up my entry. I'm still new to Wikipedia so I have a lot to learn. I went back and did a bit more editing that I hope is satisfactory.(Wallamoose (talk) 18:14, 15 September 2008 (UTC))
DYK on main page
Number 137
--well done Victuallers (talk) 19:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- p.s. I guess you know that anyone can hand out the credits like this? Victuallers (talk) 19:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Great! Thats what I was hoping. Have a look here... no one has done the last 4 yet ... Apart from updating the main page then non admins can do 95% of the tasks Victuallers (talk) 20:03, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Well done Alan, they look ok to me. If you want to do that in future then watch that page and see when someone starts to load it to the main page. Its a good idea to say hi first before doing the credits but 90% of the time people are very happy to get help. Its a great way for people to learn you exist. cheers Victuallers (talk) 20:16, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
I think giving yourself thanks is weird but OK. If you decide later to have a go at copying new noms to the next update (which anyone can do too) then you need to avoid choosing your own hooks. As I say if you "watch" the dyk templates then you will see the admins at work (and their helpers). As I say apart from actually doing a "cut and paste" to the main page then I believe you can do anything. I feel you have the right mix of being bold and not making a complete mess. Actually if someone does get the wring thank you .... then its hardly a disaster and can be corrected easily with a few apologies. Good luck Victuallers (talk) 20:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
Hunterdon County Courthouse
Number 138
--BorgQueen (talk) 01:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
My RfA
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 03:15, 16 September 2008 (UTC) |
another two dyks
Numbers 139 and 140
-- well done. thx for expansion of Whitney Darrow, Jr. from the wiki.
-- well done. thx for Fleming Castle too Victuallers (talk) 09:41, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
USRD Newsletter, Issue 6 (FINAL ISSUE)
The U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter | ||
Volume 2, Issue 6 • 8 September 2008 • About the Newsletter | ||
|
|
|
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS |
- —Rschen7754bot (talk) 03:25, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
International High School (New Jersey)
Number 141
--BorgQueen (talk) 09:10, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Morehouse article reference
The Pace University degree should be Masters in Teaching--not in Education. The reference source is not correct. Pace University references: http://www.pace.edu/page.cfm?doc_id=31584 http://www.pace.edu/page.cfm?doc_id=31616
as well as http://www.timmorehouse.com/
I'm a newbie and not comfortable correcting this. --Silver2e (talk) 04:30, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Martin Tytell
Number 142
--Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:04, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Amongst Friends
Ah, ok, my mistake, I now see I needed to go to the next page in the ref. I'm happy for the cite tag to be removed. Still don't believe it mind. Sounds to me more like typical movie fake food rather than a ploy to save money. It must surely have cost more than a bag of Doritos to pay someone to tear up triangles of cardboard. SpinningSpark 12:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
- Could be. There's not much of a market for fake tortilla chips. Alansohn (talk) 12:09, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
James Zadroga
Number 143
--BorgQueen (talk) 12:06, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Tabernacle Township, New Jersey
Why did you delete one of the notable residents from the list in the article Tabernacle Township, New Jersey? I hope you are not conspiring with other users to commit vandalism on the article. If the deleted resident is not notable, perhaps his wikipedia article be removed as well. Thank you. Faethon Ghost (talk) 19:29, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
Ah sorry, I thought you removed Doolittle but it turns out you just moved it. Thanks! Faethon Ghost (talk) 19:34, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Wallpack/Walpack, New Jersey
Hi Alan ... I'm working on converting the New Jersey NRHP county lists to table formats. Along the way, I'm tidying up some links. List of Registered Historic Places in Sussex County, New Jersey, has red links for Wallpack Center, New Jersey. I was planning to create a redirect for these links to Walpack Township, New Jersey, but am hesitating because of the minor difference in the spellings. Since you are a regular editor of New Jersey-related articles out here, do you happen to know if the spellings of both are correct? Googling Walpack Township and Wallpack Township, the former returns more hits. Googling Walpack Center and Wallpack Center, the latter returns more hits. Consistent with the Google results, the USGS GNIS database] has the township spelled Walpack and the "center" spelled Wallpack. I recognize that this is a very sparsely populated place and that you may not know this level of detail, but I thought I'd pose it to you since you seem to have some local Jersey knowledge. Thanks. --Sanfranman59 (talk) 19:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanx!
Thanks for the many kind words. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 01:55, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
- How do I know when this will be a featured DYK? DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 03:26, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
More Thanks
Thanks for your help with Samuel Fisher.--Samuel J. Howard (talk) 03:30, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Controlled Demolition, Inc.
Number 144
--BorgQueen (talk) 13:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Amongst Friends
Number 145
--BorgQueen (talk) 20:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Wikis Take Manhattan
Wikis Take Manhattan
|
WHAT Wikis Take Manhattan is a scavenger hunt and free content photography contest aimed at illustrating Wikipedia and StreetsWiki articles covering sites and street features in Manhattan and across the five boroughs of New York City. The event is based on last year's Wikipedia Takes Manhattan, and has evolved to include StreetsWiki this year as well.
LAST YEAR'S EVENT
- Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Spring 2008 (a description of the results, and the uploading party)
- Commons:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Gallery (our cool gallery)
WINNINGS? Prizes include a dinner for three with Wikipedia creator Jimmy Wales at Pure Food & Wine, gift certificates to Bicycle Habitiat and the LimeWire Store, and more!
WHEN The hunt will take place Saturday, September 27th from 1:00pm to 6:30pm, followed by prizes and celebration.
WHO All Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians are invited to participate in team of up to three (no special knowledge is required at all, just a digital camera and a love of the city). Bring a friend (or two)!
REGISTER The proper place to register your team is here. It's also perfectly possible to register on the day of when you get there, but it will be slightly easier for us if you register beforehand.
WHERE Participants can begin the hunt from either of two locations: one at Columbia University (at the sundial on college walk) and one at The Open Planning Project's West Village office. Everyone will end at The Open Planning Project:
- 349 W. 12th St. #3
- Between Greenwich & Washington Streets
- By the 14th St./8th Ave. ACE/L stop
FOR UPDATES
Check out:
- Wikis Take Manhattan main website
This will have a posting if the event is delayed due to weather or other exigency.
Thanks,
You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:49, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Biomedical Tissue Services
Number 146
--BorgQueen (talk) 05:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK query
Thanks for the double DYK! Just a query: I see that User:CactusWriter, the creator of one of the articles I nominated, A Victim of the Mormons was not notified. I'm not sure if this was an oversight. --Bruce1eetalk 06:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- I've taken the liberty of notifying CactusWriter myself – I hope this is ok. --Bruce1eetalk 06:33, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK
Number 147
--Jordan Contribs 09:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK credits
Thank you for doing the DYK credits. Next time, please wait until after the actual DYK page has been updated from Next Update at Template:Did you know. Until then, these are only "suggested" DYK hooks, after all. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 07:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- I don't know why I thought they had already been moved. Thanks for the catch. I will be more careful next time. Alansohn (talk) 07:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Lynn Forester de Rothschild DYK
Number 148
Congratulations :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:35, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK 25/9
Number 149
weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 21:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
One of my all-time favorite Cubs. He was a major impact player on the Cubs of 1969 and 1970, kind of forgotten now when they talk about the Banks-Santo-Williams era. A very quiet country boy who just happened to have a knack for knocking the big bang in clutch situations from time to time. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, I remember his Mets days also. I especially remember one game I was listening to on WGN radio, in which he hit a high fly to left that Billy Williams was camping under, but the ball landed in the upper deck overhang a the Polo Grounds, for a game-winning homer. Both the Cubs and the Mets were pathetic in those days, but occasionally one or the other of them would catch a break. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 13:46, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
re:DYK nom: 1971 Major League Baseball All-Star Game
I wanted to stop by and offer personal thanks for the kind words, and for putting the nom through. Is there anything else I should do to help it continue through the process? LonelyBeacon (talk) 04:37, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, yes, the 1971 All-Star Game, the one that rained home runs. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 13:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK nom
Number 150
--Jordan Contribs 08:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
J. Clarence Karcher
Number 151
--BorgQueen (talk) 17:50, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Bill Laxton
Number 152
--BorgQueen (talk) 23:51, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Hyman Golden
Number 153
Thank you for your contributions! - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 05:50, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
NJ - Municipal Emergency Services
Alan, I've started putting in sections called Emergency Services into Bergen County municipalities. I've started with the towns in the Pascack Valley (i.e., River Vale, Old Tappan, and Hillsdale, New Jersey). Before I keep going, I just wanted to run it by you first. I'd appreciate it if you could just take a look at my contribs and let me know if you think I'm off to an ok start. Thanks!! Shirulashem (talk) 20:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- You're off to a great start, and I think it adds to the article at the municipal level. The one thing I would suggest trying to do is to add more sources to support the details. Where are the numbers and models of ambulances and staff members coming from? I do keep an eye on these articles and assume that like me you will be off the computer mid-week. Wishing you the best for a happy and healthy new year. Alansohn (talk) 21:17, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
- thanks. k'siva v'chasima tova. Shirulashem (talk) 12:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK
Number 154
--Jordan Contribs 23:36, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Richard Wesley
Number 155
BorgQueen (talk) 12:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Where do you want to go today?
Number 156
BorgQueen (talk) 12:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Vandal
Sorry Alansohn
Didn't realize that one persons idea of relative data was vandalism to another. I will still continue to edit, but me more careful and cognizant of your feelings. RegardsCommonsPark (talk) 14:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
WikiProject New Jersey Newsletter (September 2008)
The WikiProject New Jersey Newsletter | |||
---|---|---|---|
| |||
Project News | Article Alerts | ||
The Maryland WikiProject has put together a great chart comparing the growth of several state WikiProjects, including WPNJ. Take a look at the chart to see how the growth of WPNJ compares to some of our peer projects. Please remember to place the {{WikiProject New Jersey}} tag on the talk pages of any New Jersey related articles you create or come across. You can also add the new articles page to your watchlist. Some updates have been made to the NJ Portal, but much more needs to be done. If a few volunteers can put together Featured Article summmaries, we can automate rotating the portal content. The same can be done for DYK items. Please take a look and see if you can assist. |
The following articles may be in need of attention:
Featured Article candidates:
Good Article nominees:
| ||
Wikipedia Release version 0.7 | New WPNJ members | ||
The Wikipedia 0.7 project team has chosen the New Jersey related articles that will be included in the next downloadable version of Wikipedia. You can review the list of selected WPNJ articles, check the articles tagged for cleanup, or nominate additional articles for inclusion.
Selection is an automated process based on article assessments. To help avoid vandalism and POV concerns, specific versions of articles can be tagged for inclusion in the downloadable release. See the New Jersey section of the bot results to recommend a production version. The process ends on October 20, and then a bot will select an appropriate version if none has been recommended. |
Please welcome the following new members to WikiProject New Jersey:
| ||
Article News | Help Wanted | ||
Both Jon Corzine and The Sopranos were promoted to Good Article status in the past month. No WikiProject New Jersey articles were promoted to Featured article status. Battle of Trenton was not listed as a Featured Article, and may need more editors to complete the remaining work to be promoted. Also, in an item that was missed last month, Thomas Edison was delisted as a Good Article in July.
The WPNJ Assessment Drive is ongoing. Please help assess all of the articles about places in New Jersey. There are currently 106 articles that have not been assessed. |
|||
Editor's Notes | |||
Fall has arrived, and with it will come a rush of new Wikipedians. Inviting new editors to join WPNJ is easy to do, and can help us improve our New Jersey articles. Keep an eye out for editors who work on NJ articles who can help the project. The Wikipedia Release version project is in its final stages for the next version. Take a look at the article lists, cleanup where you can, and nominate articles that should be included on the DVD version of WP. Lets make sure that those who end up with a downloaded copy of WP get solid articles about New Jersey. - Jim Miller | |||
You are receiving this newsletter as a member of WikiProject New Jersey. To stop receiving these messages, remove your name here. |
- Newsletter delivery by xenobot 16:21, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks
Excellent work on List of ice hockey arenas by capacity finding sources. This is the legwork that I wasn't looking forward to doing. Unfortunately. you're on your own for a while, as I'm a little busy these days. But I figured your should know your hard work isn't going unnoticed. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 23:50, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Plácido Domingo is "people of New Jersey"?
Could you please claify this with evidence? - Jay (talk) 01:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Mike Berniker
Number 157
Daniel Case (talk) 02:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK for John Montague (baseball)
Number 158
Keep up the good work! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Richard Kessel
Number 159
Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
New York State Consumer Protection Board
Number 160
--BorgQueen (talk) 09:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Tim Harkness
Number 161
Daniel Case (talk) 18:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
PROD templates
Thanks for getting those PRODs removed; I cut the third one, from Salt Flat, Texas. I've never met this editor before; do you have any idea why he believes that these places aren't notable? Nyttend (talk) 04:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
"Inherent Notability" ??
You seem to be supporting inclusion of articles that lack any notability and, in fact make no claim of notability, much less provide references to support such claims. As defense, you claim "inherent notability." Can you help me understand what "inherent notability" means and how it meets notability requirements? Are there accepted guidelines and policies that support this concept? Is there an objective measure? Is there any form of valuation at all? I'm not interested in personal opinions or essays not accepted by consensus. The guidelines and policies I'm aware of seem to contradict your claim, and I'm hoping you can point me to guidelines and policies I might have overlooked. Thank you. —Danorton (talk) 04:20, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes#Places, which describes the precedent in substantial numbers of previous AfDs that such places are notable. Alansohn (talk) 04:24, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Egyptian Geological Museum
Thank you for rescuing the Egyptian Geological Museum article. Matthew Glennon(Talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 14:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC).
DYK for DuMont Building
Number 162
Cirt (talk) 23:20, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Don Ultang
Number 163
BorgQueen (talk) 04:45, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Irvin J. Borowsky
Number 164
Cirt (talk) 10:32, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Bob Miller (1957-1974 pitcher)
Number 165
Cirt (talk) 10:33, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Smile
NHRHS2010 (talk · contribs) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
NHRHS2010 | Talk to me 14:29, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Bruce Conforth
Number 166
Keep up the good work! ~ User:Ameliorate! (with the !) (talk) 08:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Notice
Please accept this notice to join the Good Article Collaboration Center, a project aimed at improving five articles to GA status every month. We hope to see you there!--LAAFansign review 02:05, 6 October 2008 (UTC) {{{1}}} |
Miller
Just working through it now. :-) Peanut4 (talk) 20:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
NetSupport Manager
I wish I'd been paying more attention to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NetSupport Manager (2nd nomination) now. The reason I stated advertising as a reason, and I realise now I wasn't clear, is that the guy who wrote the article is the guy who wrote NetSupport Manager. Just curious whether this would have affected your "Keep"? AlistairMcMillan (talk) 20:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- Probably not. I've seen articles that did start out as an advertisement, but had the offending text removed, But this one didn't even reach that level. The text is a rather bland description of the product. Alansohn (talk) 22:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Milt Davis
Number 167
Nice football hook. Cbl62 (talk) 22:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC) Cbl62 (talk) 22:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Bob Miller (1953-1962 pitcher)
Number 168
Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
DYK for Egyptian Geological Museum
Number 169
Cirt (talk) 09:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for saving that one. I sub stubbed a bunch of Cairo museums a few months back when I was going through an extensive missing list of museums and hadn't got around to expanding them. Any help you can give filling out the others would be much appreciated! Cheers The Bald One White cat 14:01, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Blocked
Hello, Alansohn. Per your conduct here, I have blocked you for 31 hours, pursuant to your editing restrictions. You are, of course, free to dispute this block below using {{unblock|your reason here}}
.
Yours, —Animum (talk) 22:40, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
- I personally feel that is a bad block. I've read through that discussion and the restriction in the arbcom case, and Alasohn has not been uncivil, assumed bad faith, or made personal attacks. -- Ned Scott 05:12, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- Then I think you both perhaps should read over the whole talk page and its archives. This is not new, there have indeed been personal attacks, quite a bit of bad faith (to the point of even calling for Kbdank71's desysopping), and to consider his comments "civil" is, at the least, stretching it a bit. - jc37 11:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- Without having read it, the simple act of questioning whether someone should be an admin hardly sounds like a personal attack. 199.125.109.75 (talk) 16:05, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- Then I think you both perhaps should read over the whole talk page and its archives. This is not new, there have indeed been personal attacks, quite a bit of bad faith (to the point of even calling for Kbdank71's desysopping), and to consider his comments "civil" is, at the least, stretching it a bit. - jc37 11:35, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Alansohn (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
If only I had asked User:Kbdank71 directly about his justifications only for the contested and sourced CfDs that he provided no details for. Perhaps, this all could have been avoided if only Kdbank71 might have realized that providing any explanation for a contested CfD close could avoid problems down the road. If only I had not come to the unfortunate bafflement of seeing seven CfDs all closed by Kbdank71 within a span of a few minutes and seeing all of them, contested or not, being closed with the rubber stamp of "The result of the discussion was: delete". Perhaps the result would have been different if I had not listed all seven CfDs when trying to get additional details from Kbdank71, instead of assuming that he would realize that some of these CfDs (the contested ones, and especially where sources were provided in the CfD) were different from the others. If only I had offered the same documentation showing why I had a good faith issue with the close of Category:Fictional_obsessive-compulsives instead of hoping that Kdbank71 would provide context on his own and allow him the opportunity to respond to my reasons for questioning the close rather than hope he would reply and explain his actions. If only this had been an AfD, where providing reliable and verifiable sources trumps a claim of WP:OR without question, and not the topsy-turvy CfD world, where providing multiple reliable sources to rebut WP:OR carries no apparent weight and is not worthy of even consideration as an argument to keep a category, this might have ended differently. It's clear that things could have gone differently, and I have learned a valuable lesson from this about how the CfD process operates. I do understand why User:Postdlf prefered to pursue pushing for a block rather than addressing the underlying problems, and User:Jc37, who has been the initiator of a laundry list of CfDs and has been similarly unable to accept reliable sources as a solution to claims of WP:OR, has had to resort to maliciously false personal attacks, most notably a claim that I have been "calling for Kbdank71's desysopping" in complete violation of assuming good faith to rationalize this punitive block. In contrast, I am not the only editor who finds this particular block unjustified. Between this take page and WP:ANI, four editors with whom I have had no prior contact to the best of my knowledge -- User:Erik the Red 2, User:Pete.Hurd, User:Casliber, User:Ned Scott -- have independently agreed that the circumstances in question do not justify a block. If consensus should have any meaning anywhere in Wikipedia, it ought to be here. Alansohn (talk) 00:20, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This request is too long; see WP:GAB. However, I do not need to read it to decline it. First, your restriction reads as follows: "Should he [Alansohn] make any edits which are judged by an administrator to be uncivil, personal attacks, or assumptions of bad faith, he may be briefly blocked" (emphasis mine). Note that the restriction does not require that your edits "are" indeed uncivil, etc., it is sufficient that one administrator judges them to be so. That condition being met, your block is in accordance with the restriction and is endorsed accordingly. If you find the restriction to be too restrictive, you need to petition the Committee to alter it. Second, I, as an administrator, determine that your subsequent edits ([1], [2]) also violate said restriction because they, at least, assume bad faith with respect to User:Jc37. The block is therefore also endorsed for these subsequent edits. — Sandstein 07:37, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
- I'll search out diffs, to corroborate my comments (and if requested, also in relation the user's comments above), if it's found to be necessary by the reviewing admin. (Though a read over User talk:Kbdank71 should probably deal with a fair amount.) - jc37 00:45, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- That the claim was made without a diff -- and none exists -- should raise further issues regarding the legitimacy of the block. Alansohn (talk) 00:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- It is extremely disturbing that User:Jc37, an admin who should be more than familiar with WP:AGF, would make a maliciously false claim to justify a block and then refuse to provide any support for his allegation while the block was still open. Again, providing sources to support statements carries absolutely no weight. Alansohn (talk) 01:59, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Alansohn (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Despite a clear consensus that this block was improper and unjustified, and despite a request to reconsider the block, no action whatsoever has been taken. User:Jc37 stopped by to insist that his baseless personal attack was justified and seems to have had little luck searching for the maliciously and knowingly false claim that I have been "calling for Kbdank71's desysopping". Any good faith response to clearing this block will be appreciated.
Decline reason:
I could be wrong, but I think your block has already expired. If you're still blocked, is it an autoblock or IP block? — Golbez (talk) 07:03, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
This makes for fascinating reading. High drama indeed. I hope you end the reign of terror against you soon. You're obviously a good guy! :) (Wallamoose (talk) 06:57, 12 October 2008 (UTC))
- You want fascinating, you should have seen the email I just got from Alansohn.
- Anyway, in response to him: Sure, since it seems your block shgould have expired by now, I'll see if we can figure out the problem. - jc37 08:59, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- The message I get is that you should be unblocked.
- But since you say you can't edit, I'm going to try to reblock, and unblock, and see if it works (I'll note what I'm doing in the block summary.) - jc37 09:02, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, if you're still online, try to edit. (Hopefully that cleared everything.) - jc37 09:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Words of Turkish origin
Hi, Alansohn. I was generally concerned with the category Words of Turkish origin, and saw that there was a discussion for renaming the category to Category:Turkish loanwords, but unfortunately it was too late when I noticed that. For me too it was necessary to rename the category to Turkish loanwords for consistency. Therefore I formed a new category named Turkish words and phrases and made some cleanup on the other category, namely I transferred some of the words from Category:Words of Turkish origin to Category:Turkish words and phrases. So, if we can re-open the related discussion, I will be pleased to support the renaming. Happy edit. --Chapultepec (talk) 11:55, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
James Bond actors
Per longstanding and widespread precedent, we do not categorize actors on the basis of the roles they play. Please read Wikipedia:OC#Performers_by_role_or_composition and please do not attempt to single-handedly undermine consensus by adding the articles back. Thank you. Otto4711 (talk) 14:18, 12 October 2008 (UTC)