User talk:JJMC89/Archives/2016/February

St Michaels Cave (Avalon)
Apologies for inconveniencing you with the references of St Michaels Cave (Avalon). I was cut short with time, and had to abruptly leave Wikipedia. When I returned this morning, the work was done. thanks Filikovalo (talk) 21:48, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No inconvenience. Happy editing. —&thinsp;JJMC89 04:13, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Your edits
Hi JJMC89 I'm new to editing and contributing to Wikipedia and so I'm a bit confused by your edits. You seem to have removed some information including references and you have also rearranged citations. I'm a bit confused. As a new contributor would you be so kind as to explain your edits to me please? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daveorama (talk • contribs) 08:22, 2016 February 1 (UTC) You have a concern about conflict of interest. I have no relationship with this group. I simply host a weekly community radio show (as a volunteer) and I interviewed one of the members a couple of months ago and then published that interview. As a journalist I use Wikipedia often when prepping to interview artists. Back in September I had been prepping for an interview with Delhi 2 Dublin and found that their Wikipedia page was very outdated. After I conducted the interview I realized the band also had two new members and a couple of members had left the band. So, as a way of learning how to contribute to and edit Wikipedia, I decided to make an attempt to edit the Delhi 2 Dublin page. After achieving a slight bit of knowledge doing that I then decided to attempt to make a new page. Since I recently interviewed The Funk Hunters and noticed they did not have a Wikipedia entry, I decided to use them as a test subject. A "notable" subject that would allow me to learn how to create a page from scratch. Having interviewed both of these bands and having published an interview with them I thought it gave me enough information to make a contribution here. If citing my interview along with the other citations crosses a line then I will happily remove it. Publicizing my interview is not my intention. So I have no issue with it being removed from the reference list. My main interest is learning how to create an acceptable page entry in Wikipedia and to learn all the editing tools and guidelines. Other than being someone who interviewed this band once, I have no other association with them. Maybe you can help me with the Delhi 2 Dublin page. When I first attempted to edit it I had all the proper verification citations but I did not know how to enter them correctly. Then I learned a methodology creating The Funk Hunters page. But when I went back to the Delhi 2 Dublin page today to enter the citations properly, they did not show up when I saved the page document. Maybe you can tell me what I did wrong. Thank you for your patience. I'm just trying to learn how to be a successful editor and contributor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daveorama (talk • contribs) 04:58, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I removed some external links and added details to the references. I removed the festivals since it is doubtful that there is significant coverage in reliable sources to demonstrate that those performances are notable and the record labels since they are mentioned in the discography. —&thinsp;JJMC89 04:13, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you JJMC89 for your edits.
 * Thanks, this addresses my concerns, and I have removed the tags. I would not cite your interview in the article. Your edit to add the citations was correct; however, since there wasn't a Reflist in the references section, the references appeared at the bottom of the page instead of in the references section. I have noticed that you have inserted brackets ([]) around ; you don't need them. You may want to take a look at Help:Introduction to referencing and WP:Identifying reliable sources. I also left message on your talk page with some helpful links. If you have further questions, please ask. Happy editing! —&thinsp;JJMC89 06:51, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Please don't make changes that don't affect the rendered text
This is purely my personal opinion, not official WP policy or guideline or even an essay—but speaking strictly personally, I would like to ask you to refrain from edits that do not affect the rendered text, such as this edit that you made to WWVB. Specifics: Note that if a particular style of using whitespace or newlines or etc. in the wikitext is considered an "optional style", then changing them purely for personal preference is contrary to an Arbcom ruling. I'm not reverting these changes (although as I work on the article in the future it may well be "migrated" back to my preferred style) and I certainly am not going to bring any "cases" anywhere. The reason I'm leaving you this note is to ask you to consider: While such edits do not affect the text seen by the reader, they do increase editor workload. They complicate the editing history of the article and make diffs between versions more time-consuming to go through. Many of these changes can be difficult to see and evaluate in the diffs display. This can sometimes cause a lot of wasted time and effort for later editors trying to figure out what a previous edit has done.All because of edits that do not improve the article for the reader, not in the slightest detail. Thank you for considering this suggestion. I realize you are acting in good faith to improve the encyclopedia as you see it, but please consider that you are making unnecessary work for those who follow you. Jeh (talk) 08:48, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Many editors prefer to use two spaces at the end of sentences to make them visually easier to find in the edit window. And others do it just out of old typewriter habits. For example, the previous sentence has two spaces after it, while this one has just one. You'll notice that they render the same. Similarly, it is a habit with many to hit the space bar at least once after every period, even if the period is at the end of a paragraph. And again, there is no effect on the rendered text, so no reason to remove it.
 * Many editors like to break up a lengthy template, particularly citation templates, by using one line per parameter (again, usually to make the parameters easier to find in the edit window). If you find it that way, please leave it that way. There is actually a guideline on this, that template styles should be not be converted just for the sake of personal preference.
 * Spaces before the vertical bar that demarcs a template call don't render. No need to delete them.
 * On the other hand, some editors do prefer to pack the edit window as densely as possible. Either way this is a personal preference and the preference of the previous editor(s) should be respected, just as is done with WP:ENGVAR.
 * Nor is a space required in  . Nor is a space harmful.
 * The "File:" prefix does the exact same thing as the "Image:" prefix, so there is no reason to exchange one for the other. Particularly in the case where it is an image, why change it to "File:", when "Image:" is more informative to the next editor?
 * Thank you for your thorough feedback, . I will make adjustments to my AWB profile. The edit in question did fix a typo; however, that is not the point. For, I use that format because it is the proper format for empty XHTML elements for compatibility with HTML, and it matches the rendered source. All forms of   in wikitext render as  ; however, all syntax highlighters do not treat them all the same, so   is preferable. File is the namespace name, where Image is an alias that exists for legacy purposes. In any case, I will stop making such changes with AWB. —&thinsp;JJMC89 17:55, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Carl Reese (driver)
Hi, I see you're editing an article at the same time as me! I'm sorry, but perhaps you can refrain from editing until I'm done? I am not going to be able to aggregate all of our contributions together. Art2welp (talk) 17:19, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Comment by User:D.R Neal G
Still trying to get the better of me, you cant unless you cheat then I won on moral grounds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D.R Neal G (talk • contribs) 03:59, 2016 February 13 (UTC)
 * D.R Neal G C'mon man... please give us a break and stop it... it's just not needed. It's just disruptive and it's only going to make resolving this harder for you. It would be easier for you to just follow the resupute resolution protocol and talk it out peacefully. Help us out, man. Please?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:03, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment by User:D.R Neal G User:Oshwah your just a parody, but let me educate in a simple concept. If you take on the role of administrator then you have a moral obligation to play by the rules that you are administering to others. If you adhere the rules but don't abide by them yourself then your corrupt and dishonestly. You User:Oshwah are a hypocrite if you unable to live up to the claims on your page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D.R Neal G (talk • contribs) 04:18, 2016 February 13 (UTC)
 * I responded to your message on my talk page. Please feel free to take this conversation there so we can chat :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:23, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Please sign your comments with four tildes ~ at the end of each of your comments. It makes the conversation much much easier to follow. cheers — Sn1per (t)(c) 04:07, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello....
Hello, I didn't think I missed a "box tick" with all the work I've been doing on Clutch albums today but I may have done so...been very diligent with making sure each addition is labeled correctly, but may have missed the odd one here and there....Nuro Dragonfly (talk) 07:52, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Do not continue to mess with my work. I'm not here to impress you. I have entered a missing album in the Clutch live albums section. I'm not asking your permission. It is an Australian, like me, live recording that fans know all about. I have added more than sufficient cite's to the page. I will say it one last time, DO NOT TOUCH MY WORK WITHOUT ASKING ME FIRST! That is not a request.....because next we will be dealing with the Admin on your Vandalism of others work, as I can read through this page you have a history of doing. I have seen a multitude of articles on this site that have nowhere near the sufficient effort that I put in, that are still on this site, that you can put you completely arrogant efforts into.....Nuro 18:38, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You should become familiar with WP:OWN and WP:N, specifically WP:NMUSIC. —&thinsp;JJMC89 18:40, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You should become familiar with respect! If you have an issue with anything YOU ASK FIRST, or you MAY add a revision discussion talk to the top of the page. I've read all of these and they are covered by various options in these lists.Nuro 19:41, 16 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nuro Dragonfly (talk • contribs)
 * JJMC89, can I respectfully suggest that you desist from any further Afds of this editor's articles (assuming there are any)? As you know, Nuro is feeling harassed and targeting a single editor's work for deletion could seen as WP:WIKIHOUNDING, a form of harassment. So please, let's not make the situation worse. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:48, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I wasn't planning on nominating any more right now. Some other articles related to Clutch might need an AFD, but it has nothing to do with any article contributors. Nuro only created one of the three articles that I nominated. —&thinsp;JJMC89 21:03, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Gaur (artistic group) tampered
Hi, sorry I have no clue what this is about, since it has never happened to me in my 8 years on the WP. You have removed the history of the article so I cannot track the previous edits and editors, that does not stick to regular WP operation. I explained well the reasons. Where is the policy that states that a newly created article with no reference should be removed. Iñaki LL (talk) 22:00, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The article is located here. I moved it to give you time to work on it. As it stands now, it would be most likely be deleted if left in the mainspace. —&thinsp;JJMC89 22:06, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I do not like double standards and I should not think this is one. A tag at the top of the article should be enough in the meanwhile, and not removing the whole article. Iñaki LL (talk) 22:12, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Double standard? I would have been the second editor to tag the article for deletion. Since you expressed that you believe the group is notable and the article is a work in progress, I thought it would be better to draftify it instead. —&thinsp;JJMC89 23:07, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The thing is I do not know what the rule has been to move the article to draft, not referenced? There are a good number of articles without references. They usually have a tag at the top and that should do for a while. Anyone knowing sth on the subject is aware of the group's relevance. Iñaki LL (talk) 22:31, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Well yes, the article is not referenced. If that were the only issue, I would have just added unreferenced. I moved it because it doesn't explain why the group is notable. Expand it and add some reliable sources. —&thinsp;JJMC89 03:39, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for the the outline and the links, fair enough, I did not mention its notability at the lead, plus not referenced... Still it comes across as a bit of over-zeal. There is no problem with the topic's notability. Iñaki LL (talk) 19:32, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I noticed you haven't worked on the draft since I moved it. I thought for sure you would have edited it and moved it back. My apologies if my move has deterred you from editing it; that was not my intent. I added some references and moved it back to mainspace. Is the group more commonly referred to as Gaur or Gaur Group? —&thinsp;JJMC89 18:20, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you! It can be given as Gaur, for disambiguation Gaur (artistic group). Iñaki LL (talk) 22:58, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Banned editor
You mentioned at WT:AFD that the 166.x editor is community banned. I think I know which editor that is but I can't find the ban discussion. Do you happen to know where it is? Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 21:18, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Here you go: WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive277 —&thinsp;JJMC89 21:36, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Why???
I'm confused. What is the point of using AWB to replace a transclusion of a template redirect with the target template? More to the point, isn't there something more useful you could be doing? I see plenty of people tinkering with templates on talk pages, but doing nothing that actually improves the encyclopaedia. There are thousands of articles out there that need work on them, and there are plenty that don't exist yet but should—just pick up any biographical dictioanry, gazetteer, almanac ... within five minutes you'll find something that should have an article or that only has a stub! HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  02:24, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Three template redirects were deleted at RFD. After they were deleted, I replaced them with the former target. —&thinsp;JJMC89 02:37, 21 February 2016 (UTC)