User:Djflem/Archive 2015

St. John's Park
Hi. I've reverted your undiscussed move of this article to "St. John's Rotary". Please discuss on the talk page and get a consensus for the move. Thanks. BMK (talk) 22:22, 4 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Please note that creating duplicate articles is not allowed, per WP:FORK. For this reason I have sent your Holland Tunnel Rotary, which substantial duplicates -- without proper accreditation -- the current article St. John's Park, back to your user space. If you move it again, I will bring this matter to the attention of admins.  Please note that per WP:OWN you cannot own or control St. John's Park, and when you moved it without discussion, and I moved it back asking for a discussion and consensus, you cannot behave as if it belongs to you, or that you can unilaterally decide which is the proper title and focus for the article.  That discussion is ongoing, and you move of the article from your user space is an attempt to override the consensus forming there that "St. John's Park" is the proper title for the article. Please stop screwing around, and follow the consensus on the talk page. BMK (talk) 01:45, 6 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Do not revert the article without a consensus to do so, per WP:BRD. BMK (talk) 22:34, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Please stop just making stuff up. Duplicate articles aren't allowed, yours was a deliberate duplicate, a "fork", so I moved it back to your userspace from whence it came.  I don't need a "consensus" to do that. I'm just following policy, but if I did need a consensus, the one at St. John's Park which says that the focus of an article should be the history of the land and not the existence of a circular cluster of 5 highway esits, and that the proper title of that article is "St. John's Park" and not "St. John's Rotary" or "Holland Tunnel Rotary" -- that real consensus would do just fine. In the meantime take a look at this pages:
 * WP:Disruption
 * WP:Tendentious editing
 * WP:Ownership
 * WP:Consensus
 * WP:IDHT (for "I didn't hear that")
 * Maybe they'll give you a clearer idea of how things work on Wikipedia. BMK (talk) 02:35, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguating articles
Hi Djflem. You recently moved Michele Brown to Michele Brown (athlete) but you haven't fixed the incoming links to the page. As a result, no article now point to the athlete article! When making disambiguation pages, it is a requirement to fix the incoming links, otherwise the article move offers no disambiguation improvement for the encyclopedia. Can you fix these links to the new target? Thanks. SFB 15:00, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi again! I took out the easy ones that linked through templates. The remaining links to fix are visible on the "incoming links" I linked to above. Thanks. SFB 17:13, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Finished the last couple. All done now - Thanks! SFB 22:25, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Hudson County Freeholder template
We had an edit conflict on Template:NJ Hudson County Freeholders and it appears that in trying to get the changes in I undid a change you had made. Because some of the districts cross multiple municipalities and others don't, I'm not sure that it's evident what the place name is at the end of the parentheses. If you still feel it's obvious, feel free to remove away. Again, my apologies for stepping on your edit. Alansohn (talk) 22:15, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Please...
...don't post on my talk page again. Thanks. BMK (talk) 22:43, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Badgering people
I noticed you repeatedly inserting a comment on another users talk page. Stop it. If a user removes your comment from their talk page, it is a statement they read it, and that they don't want to respond to it. Thanks. Hipocrite (talk) 22:45, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Funny how you're post, Hipocrte, comes just so quickly after BMK'sDjflem (talk) 15:38, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Please stop editing against consensus on St. John's Park
The consensus of the commenters on Talk:St. John's Park is that the focus of that article should be on the history of the square and park which was turned into a railroad terminal, and not on the 5 exits from the Holland Tunnel that are there now. The consensus also is that the article should be named "St. John' Park" and not "Holland Tunnel Rotary". The consensus is that the "rotary" is not notable, and the history of the land is. Almost all of your recent edits on St. John's Park have been in complete contradiction to this consensus, in fact, you deny there is any consensus at all, when it is clear and unambiguous. Continued editing against a talk page consensus is disruptive and can be considered to be tendentious, and could lead to your being blocked from editing. Please stop. I see from your talk page that you've done good work elsewhere, so please find something else to do and give up this campaign of non-consensual editing. BMK (talk) 02:25, 9 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I know I do good work, that's why the botch job promoting a non-neutral POV on St.John's Park is offensive.Djflem (talk) 22:44, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I will admit that the current article does a poor job of focusing on a bunch of non-notable highway exits, as you would like it to (talk about a POV!!), and I'll take full credit for that, since the consensus on the talk page firmly rejected your desire to move the article in that direction. You keep trying to skew it that way, but as long as the talk page consensus is clear, you're not going to be able to, thankfully. BMK (talk) 04:17, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * BTW, your understanding of WP:WEIGHT is wrong, your understanding of WP:LEAD is wrong, your understanding of WP:N is wrong, your understanding of WP:V is wrong, your understanding of WP:OR is wrong, your understanding of pretty much every policy you've thrown at me in this dispute has been faulty. You would probably benefit from taking a bit of a break and re-reading some policy pages to refresh your understanding of them. BMK (talk) 04:23, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Now we can add WP:Vandalism to the policies you don't understand. BMK (talk) 23:49, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Decency of reciprocity and writing on my talk page
IMO it would be decent of someone who asks me not to write on their talk page, to have some (self) respect and courtesy and not write on mine but that would be too much to expect from you, I suppose. So don't.

Stop vandalizing St. John's Park talk page
This is a warning to stop Vandalize on Talk:St. John's Park You do not have permission to edit my comments on Talk:St. John's Park.

hi Hipocrite (talk)
Hipocrite (talk)

A reminder...
...that you are not allowed to post on my talk page unless you are required to by Wikipedia policy. There was no requirement that you slap a (bogus) edit warring tag on my page, any other editor could have done that, had they seen fit to do so, so that was not one of the exceptions to the rule.

Once again, no posting on my talk page, please. BMK (talk) 22:41, 14 January 2015 (UTC)