User talk:Onel5969/Archive 6

This is an archive of past discussions. 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 6: May 2014

Jersey City Soccer

Sorry about restoring the Prod... was unfamiliar, and should have researched the correct protocol before I did it. Just went back to the page to revert my own change, but you had already taken care of it. Will take it to AfD.Onel5969 (talk) 20:16, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

• Before you start the AFD though. Perhaps I'm missing something. There's numerous references to the team as Jersey City. And I just found same in a 1929 newspaper (page 9, column 4, league standings - [1]. Nfitz (talk) 20:24, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

• @
  Jersey City Celtics". I was going to move the page, but there is already a page named that, and referring to the ASL team from the 1920s.Onel5969 (talk
  ) 20:27, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

• No, that's an earlier team that folded in 1921. Hang on, here's a better reference; it's an article from a Providence newspaper of February 11, 1929, describing their last game, a 4-2 loss to Providence on Saturday February 9, 1929. See page 11 on the final column - [2]. The name of the team is simply "Jersey City". Nfitz (talk) 20:31, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

• @Nfitz: Hi. Okay, I get the Celtics were an earlier team, but the team from New Jersey was not simply named Jersey City. Even in the article you reference, their name might be (but I agree it's not definitive), the "Jerseymen". The Providence team is never mentioned in the article, but is simply referred to as Providence (and who can blame them with a name like "Gold Bugs"). It's extremely in 20th century for a team to not have a name following the city/state designation.Onel5969 (talk) 20:44, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

• Surely Jerseymen (or booters) is simply Sportsroom jargon. Even if it were part of their name, how is it grounds for deletion? It's only grounds for editing the article! Nfitz (talk) 20:50, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Stephen II of Hungary

Thank you for your bold copyedit of the article. Now I am brave enough to make a GAN. Have a nice day. Borsoka (talk) 04:10, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Stockton, Ca. & Ernest Swinton.

Is it OK for me to go ahead and make this small matter historically reliable, or would it be a waste of time because we're in "You've argued with me so I'll use the rules to obstruct you" territory? Hengistmate (talk) 14:01, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

BTW, it's thought that the miniature tank was built not by Holt for Swinton's visit, but by a motorcycle vendor for the local Red Cross, as a novelty fund-raising gimmick, and was borrowed for the occasion. However, that is OR, known only to people who are well-versed in the subject, and therefore not admissible. Hengistmate (talk) 17:42, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

@Hengistmate: Cool. If you have a citation for that detail, you should add it to the photo caption. Onel5969 (talk) 17:44, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Sadly, it's OR, based on primary evidence from people who were actually in the area at the time. We shall have to wait until it appears in a secondary source. Hengistmate (talk) 09:46, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Chicago tourist section

I am just trying to help tourists. I made my posting in the correct section of the page. I mentioned the glass balcony which is not mentioned anywhere else on the page. It is significant information about tourism in Chicago. So I am not sure how you can call it "redundant".

What I posted is good information for someone wanting to know about tourism in Chicago. Help me out here. How can I mention the Willis Tower as a popular tourist destination, and mention the unique glass balcony without you deleting my post? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lester12483 (talk • contribs) 01:02, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

@Lester12483: First, it doesn't really bug me, but I know it bugs quite a few other editors, because when I first started editing I would occasionally do it: please sign your work, either in an article, or on another user's talk page. In case you don't know how, you simply use the ~ four times, like this: Onel5969 (talk) 01:39, 13 May 2014 (UTC). Second, I wasn't the editor who reverted due to redundancy, and quite frankly didn't check it out. I think if you re-worded your post to something along the lines of "The Willis Tower, as mentioned above in the architecture section, is a popular..." That way, you deal with the redundancy issue (which now looking at the article, I'm not sure I agree with). Third, you also need to be wary of using words like "spectacular". Fourth, do you have a citation for the information you included? Is it a web page? If so, cut and paste the web address here, and I'll go in and edit a citation, so you can see how one looks (and there are several different ways for that, I'll simply use the one I'm most familiar with). Hope this helps. Onel5969 (talk) 01:39, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		CopyEditor's BarnStar
		I award you this CopyEditor's BarnStar for insisting on clear, comprehensible, and grammatically correct articles. Hey Onel5659! Thank you very much for copyediting Star Wars! Have a nice day! :)—— [talk] 11:21, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 13 May

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the She Wore a Yellow Ribbon page, your edit caused a missing references list (help | help with group references). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Onel5969&action=edit&section=new# — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huddyhuddy (talk • contribs) 13:07, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

@Huddyhuddy: Hi. While that wouldn't act as an actual citation. If you scan the image and send it to me, I'll put it in the article, with much of the same wording. That way, you'll be describing the image, and get the information in. Photos can't act as citations. That's original research, and Wikipedia is only based on secondary research.Onel5969 (talk) 13:12, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

sending an image

Hi,

Thanks for the reply 8) Do you have an email address?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Onel5969&action=edit&section=new# — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huddyhuddy (talk • contribs) 13:14, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Clevelanders

I see no need to remove the section about Clevelanders who made it big nationally.

They are part of what makes Cleveland Cleveland...pointing out all the folks from here who are all now big time stars.

Vjmlhds (talk) 18:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

@

• Don't threaten me...you are not better than me. Vjmlhds (talk) 18:16, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

• • BTW...you also can have a case made against you for
    WP:3RR, ease up. Vjmlhds (talk)
    18:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

No threat, just simply following the rules. I asked you politely. Might I suggest you also might want to brush up on

WP:CIVIL? My 3rd edit was not a revert of your material, but taking your advice and removing all the information which did not belong in that section. I'll ask you again, politely to please self-revert. Onel5969 (talk

) 18:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

No...I will not self revert. Why should I? If you don't like the way the article sits, why don't you change it? Why should I self-revert, especially under the guise of a threat. What do you call bringing up calling in admins if not a threat? This looks to me simply as you wanting me to do your bidding or else... Vjmlhds (talk) 18:31, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

As I said, it wasn't a threat, just politely letting you know that I had no wish to enter into an edit war. After my second revert, you explained your position, and even though at that point you made your third revert, rather than report your 3RR violation, I started a discussion on the talk page, then re-edited the article taking your position into account. You then chose to revert a fourth time. I've asked you twice to self-revert (as you should, per

WP:3RR), let's see what others on the talk page have to say. The administrators have put the procedure in place for a reason. Please follow it.Onel5969 (talk

) 18:37, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

I self reverted. But, if on the talk page, other editors say that the way it was was fine, then you have to live with it...after all, it sat that way for a very long time, and only after I added Dr. Oz to the mix did you all of a sudden have a problem with it. Vjmlhds (talk) 18:43, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

@Vjmlhds: Thanks. And absolutely. WP is all about consensus. I've stated my position, and you've stated yours. As I said on the talk page, I hadn't noticed the other entries which I thought inappropriate until you made your Oz edit. Even then, I didn't look at the rest of the article, since it was unchanged, until you brought my attention to it. I understand folks having pride in people from their city who have made it good, but that's why the Notable People section was created. Think how crowded pages would become if the culture section in each city page had EVERY person who was born, lived or went to school in that city? Same could be said of the Sports section, or the Politics/Government section. That's the only point I was trying to get across.

btw... please give my position some thought. There is not a whole lot of activity on Cleveland's talk page, and we might not get any other folks' input. What say we give it until Thursday, and if no other responses are there, we continue the discussion on the talk page and reach an agreement between us? Onel5969 (talk) 18:52, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

If there are no other editors that put in their $.02, then I'll just leave it as is. And I apologize if I came across as crass, but it just came across to me like you were threatening me with running to the admins, and that's what took me aback. I much prefer working with other editors than against them. Vjmlhds (talk) 18:58, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations...you've made a convert outta me. Once I stepped back and smelled what you were cooking, I began to understand. Vjmlhds (talk) 22:03, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm glad of that. Not that I "converted" you, but that you understood I wasn't looking for a confrontation or threatening you. Sometimes, when you text or "message" someone, it can come across differently than intended. I'm all about the consensus, it's one of the things I like best about WP. btw... I'm a member of the copy edit guild, so if you ever need an article gone over for c/e, let me know. I also am a member of the film and city projects, so you can always approach me about those as well.Onel5969 (talk) 23:00, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Award 4 U

• 
  Back Scratcher's Barnstar

Awarded to Onel5969 as a gesture of showing that I wish to have a peaceful working relationship, rather than an adversarial one
Vjmlhds (talk) 19:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

AfC Invite

Hello, I am inviting you to Articles for Creation receives hundreds of articles; currently, there are only a few active reviewers. Our current backlog contains a total of 2366 articles. We would greatly appreciate your help in reviewing articles. Purge AfC submissions Random submission 2+ months 2,361 pending submissions Purge to update t e Wikipedia ads file info – #69 Review Now!

2013 population estimates

In case you haven't noticed, the Census Bureau released the 2013 estimates for all cities and towns this morning. The lists can be found here. The top link lists all the top cities in order, though I don't know how to link to the table itself. Although technically most of what you reverted was uncited, the Quick Facts page for each city will have the 2013 numbers soon. And what I changed (OKC->27th) wasn't incorrect. The Wikipedia article just hasn't been updated yet. I will be reinstating the number with a citation. Kennethaw88 • talk 03:07, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

@Kennethaw88: - Thanks. I knew that, but there was no citation. I literally reverted 50 pages today which simply put in the information without putting the citations in. When you made the change, you linked to the article, which didn't support your change. Editors shouldn't leave it up to others to add/update citations, or correct links. For example, you shouldn't link to a page which doesn't support the data you're updating. You don't have to link to the table, simply update the citation. Onel5969 (talk) 03:52, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

That's fair. In any case, the update is forthcoming. Kennethaw88 • talk 04:36, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

list of haunted locations

hi onel5969 just a heads up that that article is using british english, i noticed you changed a few like centre to center etc. just to save you or some other editor the work of changing it back later — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.25.142 (talk) 21:39, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for the heads up. I noticed that an editor had tagged it on May 22nd, but in going through the article, it was very inconsistent in its usage, e.g. sometimes using center, other times centre. Same with words like rumor but then there was neighbour. Since the British English tag wasn't done by consensus, as I'm doing the c/e edit, I'm standardizing it to American English. I will put it on the talk page, but I'm already 2/3 of the way through the article on my first pass.Onel5969 (talk) 22:09, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

i had a look back at the first few edits and they were done in british english so im guessing that is why. i forget what the rule is called but im meaning the one where if it is started in an english variation it carries on in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.25.142 (talk) 22:30, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi again... it's not so much what the first few edits are, so long as it is standardized. Usually, if a subject deals with something from the British Empire (or its former colonies), it's done in BE (e.g. British Cinema, or the article on Singapore I edited), and if it's done on an American topic (like RKO films) its done in AE. On something like this, it can be done in either. It just needs to be standardized. I posted a topic on the talk page, so hopefully there will be some input.Onel5969 (talk) 22:40, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Onel5969. You have new messages at Ibadibam's talk page.
Message added 01:22, 28 May 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ibadibam (talk) 01:22, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

The FP

Long time no speak! I hope you've been doing well. As you can see from the title, I'm coming back to give you a quick update on The FP. I've added a lot more information and images. Drafthouse Films was wonderful and changed the licensing for two images of the cast and crew, and I got an image of an actual filming location. I've also added a Visual effects section, expanded the Cast section (which I plan to do even further once I get the film on DVD), and done a lot of copy-editing. I was wondering, if you had any time, if you'd be willing to give it a gloss over and see what you think I might need before going to FA. If you can't, I totally understand! Thank you for all the help you already gave me during the GAN.