User talk:Javaweb/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Javaweb, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! RJFJR (talk) 20:23, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Roger Ebert and oclc id
Sorry I didn't look closely enough at your edit to notice that. I didn't realize that you had added an additional template, one that I was not familiar with. It sounds like a great idea, and offhand, I don't know if any Wikipedia guideline or policy that precludes it. I've gone and restored it in the Ebert article, so that the mention of that book in the Bibliography section includes both the New York Times citation and the oclc id. Nightscream (talk) 17:21, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. Here is the  documentation. OCLC can be used by itself. See the  documentation. --Javaweb (talk) 19:51, 16 November 2010 (UTC) Javaweb

24.113.35.16 vandalism
Special:Contributions/24.113.35.16 shows that ip address generates vandalism. Could you take a peek and see what can be done to minimize future damage, perhaps a block or ban? The ip address has been warned on the Talk page Javaweb (talk) 23:55, 17 November 2010 (UTC)Javaweb

Reply:

While this user's edits are vandalism there are only two edits in November so far. If the vandalism was more frequent we could block it, but blocking a (possibly dynamic) IP for occasional vandalism seems a little extreme. Worse, if this is a dynamic IP the user could actually be vandalizing from multiple IPs and blocking this one would barely inconvenience the vandal (it would require a range block to stop that). You may want to check this IP's contributions occasionally and see if this is the beginning of persistent vandalism. If you feel this needs to be pursued further now let me know and I'll look into it further. Thank you. RJFJR (talk) 20:08, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

California Attorney General election, 2010/Vote Table
Hi, I nominated that page for deletion, it serves no purpose. The election results will be certified soon. Hekerui (talk) 22:43, 6 December 2010 (UTC) Deleting is the right thing to do at this point. It no longer is required. Thanks for the notice.

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:10, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Phil Ochs
Hi. Thanks for adding the link to the news article to Phil Ochs, and thank you for your message.

I usually type footnotes on a single line, but the changes I made to the footnote you added were stylistic: I changed "NY Times" to "The New York Times", I changed the author's name from "author" to "last" and "first", and I added "accessdate". These are very minor things, but I try to keep all the footnotes in the article in the same format.

Have a Happy New Year! — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 21:49, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Ina Garten edit
I'm sorry, but who are you to say that what I write isn't noteworthy. Please keep your opinion to yourself and keep OUT of my edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatherwannabe (talk • contribs) 05:25, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

It would be worth noting only IF a substantial percentage of her audience left her because of concerns about her political opinions but there is no substantiation. We need numbers of people that dropped her show exclusively because of that for verification from a  Reliable source, please.

So exactly WHO made you Wikipedia GOD to declare what does and does not stand as "substantial." Sounds like you have a bit of a savior complex. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatherwannabe (talk • contribs) 23:03, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Ina Garten
Hi Javaweb,

At this point, I don't think the situation calls for protection of the article. If persistent vandalism becomes an issue, please leave me a message or make a request at WP:RPP. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 19:08, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 15:44, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Strom Thurmond
Hi, thanks for your comments. I recently read The Warmth of Other Suns, too, and have read Nicholas Leman's The Great Migration (mostly about families going up along the Mississippi to Chicago). That's a good suggestion to provide a larger context for the actions of Thurmond and others like him, but we'd have to find sources linking them. Also read The Most Southern Place on Earth (1990s), about the Mississippi Delta, and it has much to say about the white power structure's manipulation of the labor market.Parkwells (talk) 19:32, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Your deletion re:Ina Garten
Context: Thesocialearth was responding to this talk post:

== Make a Wish's Ina Garten Statement ==

"The Make-A-Wish Foundation has a very strong working relationship with Ina Garten, a celebrity wish granter who has generously made herself available to grant a wish in the past. Ina is a good friend of the Foundation and we are grateful to her for her support of our mission."

- The Make-a-Wish Foundation

--Javaweb (talk) 20:27, 26 March 2011 (UTC)Javaweb

Thesocialearth's comments starts here: I appreciate your comment, however, the deletion of the "controversies" tab is not justified simply because MWF "forgave" her. The incident generated negative press, therefore the statement is neutral and factual. Please consider adding to the "controversies" tab with the information you included in your comment on the talk page. Thanks. Thesocialearth (talk) 00:44, 27 March 2011 (UTC)


 * It is Make-a-wish's comment, not mine. Wikipedia is not the place to repeat manufactured "controversies" that web sites publish to get page views. I bet if Make-a-wish had a life boat with 1 available seat, Garten would be offered the seat and the guy writing the scandal sheet would be swimming with the sharks. Not eaten. Professional courtesy and all :)

--Javaweb (talk) 02:31, 27 March 2011 (UTC)Javaweb

Ann Dunham
I'm having a bit of a problem understanding your goal as far as the refs go at Ann Dunham. First off, I think there's an error of having too many vertical bars (|) in the Sup template, causing it not to display the super-scripted text at all. If this was intentional, then my comment about only seeing the page number in edit mode remains. Check out the Scottsboro Boys article, for one. Some (definitely not all) of the references there illustrate the method I was suggesting; see, e.g., the cites to the Acker (2007) and Aretha (2008) books.

(I moved over here because the ref format esoterica is probably of limited interest to others, unless we end up with a real disagreement instead of the present state [on my part, at least] of uncertainty.) Fat&amp;Happy (talk) 21:44, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

D.N.A.
I could not have agreed more with your suggestion about re-instating 'how the news got to America', so here is what I have just put on the James D. Watson discussion page; at least, this is more reliable than what JDW refers to as the "Sunday Telegraph" when it didn't exist. Hope you like it? [archived news accounts moved to User:Javaweb/DNA ] Martin 2.27.127.232 (talk) 15:11, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Dear Martin, Interesting. I love seeing the word-pictures drawn (e.g.,spiral staircase), seeing how accurate the articles are, Pauling's reactions, etc. I have archived the references to User:Javaweb/DNA to preserve them. --Javaweb (talk) 16:12, 3 July 2011 (UTC)Javaweb

You will find part of the New York Times 'May 16th' 1953 cutting on this URL: http://www.packer34.freeserve.co.uk/selectedTATAwebsites.htm

This was really how the DNA news got to the US, however briefly!

Martin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.27.131.127 (talk) 07:05, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Dawkins and Morality
I congratulate you on being willing to put in the effort to try to educate User:Mx000f on atheism and morality. I didn't have that energy. Quite frankly, I still very strongly believe that the kind of rubbish Mx000f posted does not belong on the Dawkins Talk page. It is ignorant, bigoted tripe. It's really an attack on all people who don't get their morals from the same religion as Mx000f. It's pretty obvious I am one of them. I believe such comments should be treated as the insulting and personal attacks they are. This is not religious intolerance on my part. It's an abhorrence of the bigotry of people like Mx000f and those who have taught him what he believes. While I hope your efforts have some success, long years of experience have discouraged me from spending my time that way. HiLo48 (talk) 20:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll admit you are wiser about using your wikipedia time than I am. I was not trying to convince Mr. Mx000f of anything. Rather, I was picking up on a deficiency in the article: Mr Dawkins talks tons about why he believes atheism is moral and yet we say nothing in the article, misleading Mr. Mx000f and readers to think it is not something Dawkins has considered. There is the passage in the The God Delusion that might also belong in the Dawkins article. What do you think? It has been years since I have read Dawkin's book. Did I give a fair representation of what he said?  --Javaweb (talk) 21:02, 3 August 2011 (UTC)Javaweb

ina garten
your refusal to include relevant and factual information re: garten reported on abc.com webpage (reliable source) is in fact a violation in and of itself. The quote is directly taken from the abc.com page and therefore not editorializing on the part of a contributor. Additionally, i am the parent of a cancer survivor (5 year old) and a make a wish recipient and to any individual like myself, gartens refusal to grant a wish is relevant in more ways than one. IF you do not wish to include any of garten's personal views, then ALL activism should be deleted as it is an expression of beliefs held by her. I have contacted wikipedia once to address this, I will do so again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.205.119.116 (talk) 05:01, 6 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry to hear about your child's illness. The treatment required to save their life is horrific.

> > I have contacted wikipedia once to address this > Here is that discussion from late June 2011:

 ++ ++
 * B E  G  I  N                                                        |

Javaweb refusal to include factual information, i.e. Garten's refusal to meet with Make A Wish child is based solely on personal opinion and not on the regulations of wikipedia (see discussion page); therefore, the page should be edited to include the stories widely reported re: Make A Wish. This is NOT a fan page and should not be regulated by someone who clearly has a personal interest in presenting only flattering or what they perceive as "neutral facts" about this person User:76.205.78.155 04:38, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * My advise would be to reword your paragraph to minimize any inadvertent editorializing. Wikipedia should report that people have criticized Garten, but it itself should not criticize her, even in the tone of how it reports events. User:Gamaliel 06:31, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Consensus on the talk page seems to be not to include it at all - it seems to be very much a manufactured gossip-rag type of "controversy", rather than an event that reputable sources see as significant to Garten's career or notability. --User:Demiurge1000 07:07, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * It is not encyclopedic or noteworthy that a person doesn't do something. Every person doesn't do countless things. There are only 24 hours in a day and a limited number of years in a person's life. I see no need to mention this whipped-up controversy in our bio of Ina Garten User:Cullen328" 08:09, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


 * If that is the case, then I would also advise the IP editor to discuss the matter there. I was only attempting to assist what appears to be a new editor with issues of BLP compliance, not take sides in a content dispute. Those here who wish to discuss the matter of inclusion should also join the talk page discussion. User:Gamaliel

The following editors with actual user names and edits outside of just Ina Garten are part of this consensus: You can see their edits/discussions on the article page or talk page. I am not a fan of Ina Garten. I am a fan of reliable sources that do not manipulate their reporting to make a mundane incident into a story. You can see the discussion here and [[Talk:Ina_Garten#Seriously_Ill_Boy.27s_Mom_says_.22STOP_THE_MADNESS.22|here] ,Anonymous IP 76.205.78.155, I do not see even one word from you on the discussion page. The discussion page is the first place to discuss, not here. If you have answers to our concerns, please provide them there. She is a 63 year-old lady with a show and books to produce and, according to your reference, gets about 100 requests/month. She helped out Make-a-wish before. It is physically impossible for anyone on a TV network available to tens of millions on basic cable to fulfill every request made of them. To berate them for, in the words of Make-a-Wish, not doing the impossible and not fulfilling all worthwhile charities's every request, is an unrealistic expectation. It is not notable because that is true of practically everyone in Wikipedia whose name does not begin with "Saint". --User:Javaweb 09:25, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Javaweb  ++ ++
 * User:Freshacconci
 * User:Zenswashbuckler
 * User:Ale_jrb
 * User:Aecamadi
 * User:Demiurge1000
 * User:Javaweb
 * E N  D                                                              |

Since your comments equally pertain to and are of interest to other editors of the Garten article, I'm copying your comment to Talk:Ina Garten for discussion. --Javaweb (talk) 19:24, 6 August 2011 (UTC)Javaweb
 * User:Freshacconci
 * User:Zenswashbuckler
 * User:Ale_jrb
 * User:Aecamadi
 * User:Demiurge1000
 * User:Javaweb

Here is a response from another editor: To think that Make-A-Wish can accommodate every wish that an applicant makes, or that every celebrity meeting request can always be accommodated, is a) naive, and b) to not understand how the program works, or what is logistically possible.

Make-A-Wish works very hard to grant the applicant (a child under 18 suffering from a life-threatening illness) the wish of his or her choice. But there will always be limitations. Some things just aren't possible, practical, or logistical. The most popular request M-A-W receives is a trip to Disney World or Disneyland. These are almost always granted. The organization is set up to accommodate trips of these kinds. Other popular requests are for specialized computers that are adapted for a disabled person's special needs, or installation of a private swimming pool or therapeutic hot tub. These are relatively easy requests to make possible. Some applicants do request meetings with celebrities, usually in the sports or entertainment world. For the most part, celebrities do try to accommodate requests for meetings with Make-A-Wish children because it's positive public image relations, and they like helping fans in need when they can. But it's not always possible for a celebrity to accommodate every Make-A-Wish request. When applicants make celebrity meeting wishes, M-A-W will always tell the child and his or her parents to have second or third choices ready because they know they may not be able to coordinate the meeting, or get the celebrity to go to the child's classroom or come to their birthday party, the various kinds of requests children make of their favorite stars.

I know a family with a chronically ill child who asked to meet with a celebrity. I can't remember which celebrity now, but it was someone who could not accommodate the request. The girl's second choice was to meet the Olsen twins (Mary-Kate and Ashley), who were young teens at the time. There was a wait time of a few months, but eventually, the girl and her parents and siblings all enjoyed a cruise with the Olsens. They had a blast, and were treated to many other fun and exciting special surprises. The girl and her family were delighted with the granted wish, and I know they had no disappointments. The child did not linger over the ungranted first wish, and the parents were quite happy with M-A-W for bringing so much joy into their otherwise stressful and challenging lives.

I find it quite unreasonable for anyone to fault Make-A-Wish or any individual celebrity for being unable to accommodate every request for a celebrity meeting. Make-A-Wish is a most commendable charity that has been brightening the lives of extremely ill young people and their families since its inception, which I think was the 1960s or 70s. They should be applauded for their noble work, not lambasted for requests they couldn't grant, which are the minority. Individual celebrities should not be denounced for turning down a M-A-W request either, in my opinion. These are people with a multitude of obligations, and heavily-booked schedules, with possibly hundreds of thousands of fans requesting to meet. Among those large numbers probably are many who have sad or even tragic situations and who are deserving of a brief respite of joy. There is simply no way any public personality can accommodate every fan who asks to meet them, have them to dinner, or land an invitation to their ranch or mansion, etc. --Aaronsmom12 (talk) 23:16, 6 August 2011 (UTC)Aaronsmom --Javaweb (talk) 19:23, 7 August 2011 (UTC)Javaweb

Canvassing
I'd like to hear what you think at Talk:Anders_Behring_Breivik. causa sui (talk) 21:21, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Make a Wish
While I agree with your position, please be careful about confusing notability with accuracy.

If an issue (such as Ina Garten) receives significant media attention and this has an impact on her, it is notable and proper to include it in her article (as a controversy).

It is irrelevant whether the issue existed in the first place, or whether the issue has subsequently resolved.

The proper way to include this in the article would be "In 2011, Garten received significant media attention claiming she refused to grant a wish. This was later denied by the foundation, and the boy's mother issue a statement saying...". The incorrect way to include this would be "In 2011, Garten denied a boy's wish to...".

While your reversions of the anonymous user were correct, your earlier reversions were not (or at least, not for the right reasons). It is not Wikipedia's position to censor information on the grounds it was "innuendo", "unfair", a "manufactured controversy" etc. The correct reason for reverting these edits is that they were not supported by reliable sources. If reliable sources did exist demonstrating wider media coverage and an associated impact, you would not have had grounds to revert.

I trust you'll keep this in mind in the future Guycalledryan (talk) 16:38, 3 September 2011 (UTC)


 * It is clear to me that Guycalledryan's remarks here were made in good faith, but I respectfully disagree. I truly believe that adding this material to Ina Garten's biography would be a WP:BLP violation.  It would place undue weight on a trivial incident, and would violate our standards that Wikipedia doesn't report on media sensationalism.  The more responsible sources being advanced to argue that this is notable are actually deploring the coverage it has received, such as Salon.com which remarked, "But, hey, what do facts matter when there's an opportunity for a good old-fashioned character thrashing? Who cares, even, if it's at the expense of the alleged victim? Haven't been angry enough yet today, Internet? Take it out on Ina, let the facts and Enzo's family's feelings be damned."  Attempts to insert this garbage into Ina Garten's biography here are sadly mistaken.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  00:50, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

James Lawson
That must have been great, to have the opportunity to listen to Rev. Lawson. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 05:05, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Your comments about Ina Garten
Well done! I agree 100% with your remarks today. The Salon article described this pack dog media mentality pretty well, as I recall. I will speak out as often as necessary to prevent this garbage from appearing on Wikipedia. Best to you.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  00:37, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: email
You are correct about what I meant in this edit. If they had been notified, that's good. I thought they weren't, but I guess I didn't really check into it.- Peregrine Fisher (talk) 15:18, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Non-free files in your user space
Hey there Javaweb, thank you for your contributions! I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Javaweb/Ann Dunham.


 * See a log of files removed today here.
 * Shut off the bot here.
 * Report errors here.
 * If you have any questions, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:24, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Peet's
My best moment at Peet's: we sold an automatic tea maker (really high quality, got the water boiling, then let it cool for a few minutes before infusion, then drained the liquid after the right number of minutes), and the carafe was clear glass. i demonstrated the maker at the coffeebar, in the afternoon, with sunlight shining through the glass carafe. the tea was Assam Golden Tip, same general qualities as your fave, just not as high quality, and the color of the liquid was EXQUISITE. reddish gold, like a ruby with brown highlights. Try making a pot of it in a glass carafe or cup, hold it to the light. Mr Peet trained everyone very well, no BS sales pitches. we knew what we sold was great, so we didnt have to oversell, just advise and consent. Im glad they are still doing it right there.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 20:16, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
See thank you on WP:Tea regarding Talk:Steven Pinker. (",) 99.181.136.135 (talk) 16:06, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Barefoot Contessa
Thank you very much for the advisory. I have that article on my watch list now as well. You and I can race to be the first to revert BLP violations. It will be like a contest. Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  06:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Lyndon B. Johnson, poverty & equal opportunity
If the results you cite in your remark attached to your reversal my edits today are correct ("poverty rate halved ..."), why don't you make and footnote them in the text of the article? If true they're very important to LBJ's reputation - they go to the heart of what he was about.Epischedda (talk) 02:54, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The cite was adjacent to your edit. I've added the confirming quote:
 * --Javaweb (talk) 04:22, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Javaweb