User talk:JJMC89/Archives/2016/January

F. Ray Comstock
I undid the changes you made to this article because they were inconsistent with the Manual of Style, which says "a single line break may follow a sentence, which may help some editors." Single line breaks make it easier for physically handicapped people to edit text, and are invisible to readers. I will undo these pointless changes again, and ask that you respect accessibility concerns in future. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:35, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The key word there being may; there doesn't need to be. You should not be reverting edits when doing so introduces errors back into the page. His first job was an a theater usher should be His first job was as a theater usher, and days should not be zero-padded unless all-numeric per MOS:BADDATEFORMAT. Also, your second revert was a misuse of WP:ROLLBACK since my edit was not vandalism. —&thinsp;JJMC89 15:55, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Perhaps I was a bit abrupt, but for personal reasons I am very sensitive to accessibility issues. A good general principle is to correct errors, but "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Specific guidelines discourage or prohibit changes to date formats (3 May 2015 vs. May 3, 2015), spelling conventions (honor vs. honour), citation styles ( vs. ) and so on, but even with apparently trivial details of text layout it is best to make no change if there is no problem. One editor may prefer:
 * while another may prefer:
 * Either way works the same, with no visible difference to the end user and no difference to the metadata that is generated. Best to leave it. The only effect of changing the markup style may be to irritate the editors watching the page and to obscure the real correction. Again, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Aymatth2 (talk) 23:43, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Either way works the same, with no visible difference to the end user and no difference to the metadata that is generated. Best to leave it. The only effect of changing the markup style may be to irritate the editors watching the page and to obscure the real correction. Again, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Aymatth2 (talk) 23:43, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Either way works the same, with no visible difference to the end user and no difference to the metadata that is generated. Best to leave it. The only effect of changing the markup style may be to irritate the editors watching the page and to obscure the real correction. Again, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Aymatth2 (talk) 23:43, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Bad AWB edit
In this edit, you added an extra equals sign after the name of the location map, which broke it and caused a script error. Do you know what caused this? Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:47, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * AWB would not have done that on its own. I seems like I missed the =Laos when I did the manual part of the edit. My apologies. —&thinsp;JJMC89 03:13, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Tag on Christopher Felver article
Hello JJMC89. Thank you for your contribution to the Christopher Felver article. I have done quite a bit of editing/research on this article in the past several weeks. I believe it is quite objective at this point, and do not believe the note about it being a possible autobiography is relevant anymore. Also, a few minutes ago, I put more info into the lead. I'd be grateful if you'd have another look at the article and consider whether the tag on the article applies now. Thanks - and Happy New Year! Ray Jameson (talk) 09:22, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your work on the article. The autobiography tag was added back when the article was created, since that's what it was at that point. You are right, I isn't relevant anymore. In the future you can remove maintenance templates for issues that you correct without asking. If someone still thinks it is an issue then he/she can tag it again. You may wish to add some categories to the article. —&thinsp;JJMC89 03:38, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

User:AnneMorgan88
Regarding the user you warned for 3RR, please see the edit summary they made shortly thereafter here. If you're not sure what "FDA" means in this instance, see the fourth line here. Thanks! --JonRidinger (talk) 06:30, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Show me their warnings
Just joined, didn't know of the three-revert rule but those other clowns did. Is it not against the rules to CIRCUMVENT the three-revert rule by having a buddy come and do it for you? So editors are allowed to bully and gang-up on new editors to push their agenda without even looking at the edits made by the new editor? Which by the way, CORRECTED a lot of ERRORS on that page. I hope you warn/reprimand those two for BREAKING THE RULES by CIRCUMVENTING the three-revert rule as well as bullying, otherwise, that would make you COMPLICIT to their bullying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AnneMorgan88 (talk • contribs) 16:25, 2016 January 7 (UTC)
 * No one circumvented 3RR, and you broke 3RR. No one bullied or ganged up on you. Your edit summaries and comments have not been WP:CIVIL. You would do well to listen to what other editors have told you on Drmies talk page. —&thinsp;JJMC89 02:39, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Carola Insolera


Did you check this link > https://www.instagram.com/p/9X0zCNCCBx/?taken-by=carolainsolera and http://www.pressreader.com/italy/grazia/20151022/281599534349115/TextView (it is a Grazia article that has been printed on Oct 22nd 2015) but it is not online. Busasu (talk) 01:53, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * this is another interview about her on HOLA magazine http://www.sancristobal.amgr.es/signos/?p=10489 as you see, interview on Grazia is in Italian language, whereas on Hola is in spanish language. These two are pretty big magazines.... Busasu (talk) 01:59, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Certain sources being reliable does not mean that other sources are not. IMDb and blogs are not reliable sources. —&thinsp;JJMC89 02:19, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * i just created this link to give credit to this amazing model (translation in english is provided). please let me know if it helps: https://insoleracarola.wordpress.com I also have added the "visual language expression" paragraph on the model's wikipedia page. it might explain it better. Busasu (talk) 18:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Karan Doe
Hello dear. The subject is neutralized and many citations have been added. Also more accurate categories have been added. Hope it works Abhaymahajan999 (talk) 11:46, 23 January 2016 (UTC)