User talk:DrJamesX

Hello,

Would you please explain to me why you removed my additions to the David Ferguson Bio page. I continue to work on the neutrality of my edition and am wondering why people continue to remove my edits.

Cassandrar (talk) 03:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

January 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 08:53, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Uwishiwazjohng (talk) 04:28, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of David Ferguson (impresario)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article David Ferguson (impresario), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process
 * Legal Section author admits his contribution may violate WP:SYN, WP:V, and/or WP:OR and would like all history of Legal section expunged and the article to start over from current state

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached.

Editing problems
When you edit the Ferguson article, please be more careful with your changes. In particular, I've noticed three types of problems that your edits cause: Overall, I really believe that you would be more successful at editing if you used Preview to view your changes before you published them (and no, you're not the only one!).
 * 1) Duplication of links : the "Putting Punk in Place" source is already cited; adding it the way you did made it appear twice in the reference list.
 * 2) De-linking bands : if you look at the before and after, you'll see that The Avengers and D.O.A. both went from being wikilinked to not.
 * 3) Sloppy editing : you changed a sentence from "For that record, Ferguson commissioned Jean-Michel Basquiat to design what has become one of the iconic album covers of the punk rock era." to "For that record, Ferguson commissioned Jean-Michel Basquiat to design became one of the iconic album covers of the punk rock era." I don't think that that was an improvement.

I hope you take this in the spirit with which it's intended—to make both our lives simpler. Thanks! Dori (Talk • Contribs) 02:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Not an admin
Hello, FYI, I am not an admin. I am going to remove that description from your BLP notice board. -- The Red Pen of Doom  19:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

February 2009
Please do not add unsourced or original content. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 06:57, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The above template should only be used in cases of violation of policy or of subtle vandalism, neither of which were the case here. Templating good-faith edits is itself considered a violation of Wikipedia's civility policy. Orderinchaos 22:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, that would be a matter of opinion, then. Anything that returns the NY Arts source to the page, or additions based on that source, (imo) definitely counts as subtle or sneaky vandalism, as User:DrJamesX well knows. As always, I'm happy to discuss this on the talk page. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 22:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Dori, there you go again...insinuating something without foundation. First, you falsely accuse me of COI w/Ferguson. Now you, who has engaged in unwarranted reversions of sourced text, raise the notion of 'sneaky vandalism, as User:DrJamesx well knows'.  Is that you rattling around in my head?  Because if it isn't, then you have no clue as to what DrJamesX knows or doesn't know and I'd appreciate that you cease with these accusations and pointless speculation.

DrJamesX (talk):::~DrJamesX

Citing unconventional sources
To me, the liner notes on an CD would generally be considered a reliable primary source for the production credits for that CD. However, I would think the citation should be to the liner notes themselves and not to a self published website that hosts a copy of the liner notes (for reading: WP:Citing Sources). Someone at Reliable Sources for questions about whether or not its a reliable source [, or WikiProject Music [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Music]] may be better able to let you know what consensus the community has around those issues and how to cite some non-accademic sources. --  The Red Pen of Doom  21:10, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd agree that rateyourmusic would be considered an unreliable source from Wiki's point of view, but the tracklists/info being cited were not controversial as they would be found in the liner notes of the album. I reverted the immediate past edit to your last one, although made some minor changes on the way. Orderinchaos 22:04, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just a note, headings like "No, Dori, No" kind of don't help - people coming in from the outside will just think "ZOMG drama" and not read what you have to say. Orderinchaos 09:03, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:59, 24 November 2015 (UTC)