User:JonRidinger/evidence

January 18
removed cleanup tag (called it "wikify tag") without discussion

removed tag again after I restored it, claiming "discussed in talk"

Added name to notable natives section which is already complete

January 19
Mass addition of content and sources from talk page sandbox. About half the sources were unreliable; included peacock terms and restored previously removed unsubstantiated boosterism statements such as "Akron residents have long played an important role in defining the worldwide cuisine."

I removed source citing it being from Wikipedia

Restored dubious source

January 20
restored poor wording and cruft in Culture section. Claims of "starting discussion before removal, yet did not participate in discussion I started explaining my reasons for removal which Beirne agreed with here

restored a second time after my second removal; made false claim of non-discussion in edit summary

restored again a third time after Beirne had removed it; again no discussion; personal accusations in edit summary. Does finally participate, but clearly does not understand culture.

removed hidden header in Notable natives citing the Toledo, Ohio and Kent, Ohio articles having more people in their respective lists.

January 21
despite repeated explanations that the culture section is for examples of culture that come from Akron, he continues to put the fact that the Marlboro Man was born in Akron as an example originally of culture from Akron and now Akron in popular culture, even though the Marlboro Man ads had nothing to do with Akron. Added several sources, most of which either didn't match their statments or were unreliable. Also re-added unverified (and false) statement "Akron residents have long played an important role in defining the worldwide cuisine." added another source which is a set of postcards and does not actually support all of the info it follows.

brought back claims that the Menches brothers invented the waffle cone, caramel corn, and are the disputed inventors of the hamburger. They are actually disputed inventors of all three, and the references for the waffle cone and caramel corn that he provide clearly state that. In spite of that, though, he wrote that the brothers were the inventors of those two foods without qualification.

after much discussion he added the qualifier to all three supposed inventions of the Menches Brothers. There is still the issue, though, that they are originally from Canton and and did their supposed inventions outside of Akron, so the relevance is not established. His comment on the change was: "It's well known the Menches were residents of Akron, dont really need ref for that, fixed sentence to match ref", showing a disregard for verifying facts. They did eventually live in Akron but it is not clear that it was during the time of the inventions.

Restored personal interpretation of a source that states "...the Akron graded system was imitated by other populous Ohio cities such as Massillon and in many other states as well" to "across the United States" after originally putting the correct statement in here after I had put Ohio (missing "and other states"). Made effort to come to understanding after I reverted it, though clearly does not understand the concept of matching sources and info

January 23
again restored sentence that has no source and is pure boosterism despite discussions on talk page. Has been removed multiple times by both Beirne and JonRidinger. Claims in edit summary "restored due to talkpage".

another restoration of boosterism lead sentence; accusations of vandalism Claims in talk he did not accuse of vandalism.

restored same sentence again. Defense in talk is largely based on plagiarized sentence from Cleveland article rather than any sort of evidence from sources or even in the article itself.

January 2
refers to me as "Jonathon" (one of many variants uses)

denies it after I ask him not to and refers to me as John after making comments about my credibility.

January 3
accusations

January 6
justification for later move of Crime in Akron, Ohio to Crime history in Akron, Ohio. Clearly does not understand purpose of sections or weight.

makes untrue statement using an article I edit regularly

January 12
removed Beirne's statement of removal on dialects, then claimed section was removed "without explanation". Restored to a different, unrelated section here but removed his claim of "without explanation"

January 19
Response to comments; reference to Kent (my hometown) meant to be personal; also irrelevant and placed below a random "A" section apart from my comments here

I moved existing text in the talk page up one section to put it with the info it was originally responding too.

duplicated text in original location that I had moved to logical location in the thread; threat in edit summary

not really a revert as the "restored" text is different than what was originally there and kept it at the same location I had moved, but put accusation in edit summary

January 20
subtle accusations of not using discussion and rushing to remove data.

more false accusations of disruption and false claims of us having to "prove" the need to remove info and him "proving" it should be removed

claimed that Beirne was being disruptive when he said the reference to the Marlboro Man needed a citation. By the time this was written Beirne was saying that the reference given, a NY Times obituary, failed verification because it didn't mention Akron anywhere. Threeblur said "that's just one of many Bernie's disruptions lately." So he considers using templates requesting proper references to be disruptions. BTW, on January 21 he changed the reference from the NY Times to one at Fandango. So while he eventually produced a reference that said what he claimed, we had to put up with several reverts along with a personal accusation.

wiki page that shows David McLean was the Marlboro Man and from Akron, also why it didnt need the citation Bernie was asking for. Yeah im done.--Threeblur0 (talk) 06:52, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * As we have said multiple times and is clearly stated in Wikipedia guidelines, Wikipedia is not a source for itself. If the article on him has a good reference then borrow it from there, but don't count the article as a source.  --Beirne (talk) 07:01, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Uh it does...right next to the words Akron, Ohio...you and him would know if yall would simply click the man's page. I mean seriously, since when did something that was backed up on a back linking page needed to referenced, especially in cases of people.--Threeblur0 (talk) 07:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The issue isn't whether he's from Akron anyway...bottom line he shouldn't be included in the culture section at all. --JonRidinger (talk) 07:19, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Threeblur0, read the guidelines at the link I posted. Wikipedia is not a source for itself. The article at the link says: "Wikis, including Wikipedia and other wikis sponsored by the Wikimedia Foundation, are not regarded as reliable sources. However, wikis are excellent places to locate primary and secondary sources." I was therefore relying on the reference you provided at the end of the sentence. The obit did not say he was born in Akron, so it failed verification. And Jon is right, the Marlboro Man doesn't belong in the culture section at all. --Beirne (talk) 07:24, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

January 23
again claims popular culture section was removed without discussion as well as the Menches despite edit summaries here for popular culture; here for the Menches Brothers; and here for boosterism sentence. Popular culture section removal had previously been explained at Talk:Akron, Ohio.

defends inclusion of boosterism sentence; clearly does not understand encylcopedic content or purpose of Cuisine section or Culture.

comments about using made up words ("unvandalize") and again clearly does not understand the purpose of using other articles, especially featured ones, as examples.

Defense
where Jonridinger did what i accused him of, and what Bernie falsely states is false. Besides that, really all i have to say to this is the evidence is the revisions and i will dig out later if the need ever comes.--Threeblur0 (talk) 06:29, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Had already been removed and explained prior to this edit here citing guidelines from WP:USCITY and examples from two featured articles, Cleveland and New York City, also put small explanation in initial edit summary here.
 * In your edit, you removed the popular culture section with no given explanation to why, maybe due to just reverting my edit because it was - my edit - and didnt actually read what was placed in the article like you should had.--Threeblur0 (talk) 06:46, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That is an accusation that is purely speculation, and false speculation at that. I removed it for the same reasons I already spelled out previously.  Adding a subheading to the section did not change the scope of the content nor did it validate its inclusion.  You need to stop taking edits personally.  --JonRidinger (talk) 06:55, 21 January 2010 (UTC)