User talk:Johnconorryan

Welcome!

Hello, Johnconorryan, 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!
 * 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

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Organic light-emitting diode‎, please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 08:28, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

April 2011
Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Android (operating system). Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.  Neil N   talk to me  03:12, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Grooveshark
Johnconorryan, I have given the reasons for the deletion several times, but I will try again. Blogs are not considered RS (Reliable Sources) as per Wikipedia policy. The dispute does not warrant placement in the lede and is in fact addressed further down in the article. If you would like to add more in that section I doubt anyone will object. Just make sure you add references and ensure that they are RS (ie. not blogs). On another note, please ensure you read the changes you are making prior to reverting as the last time you added back some vandalism inserted by an other user. I will add this note to your talk page as well and will ask a senior editor to weigh in as well. As always - Happy Editing!Daffydavid (talk) 21:44, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
 * See my comment below, please. Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  18:28, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Grooveshark, Robert Fripp, and DGM
DaffyDavid was correct that blogs are generally not considered to be reliable sources.

However, his conclusion was somewhat rough hewn. Please note my discussion on the talk page of Grooveshark, which describes why it is misleading to dismiss Fripp's diaries as blog entries. Briefly, he is the founder, CEO, and public face of a record company, whose website features his diaries. The diaries are discussed widely by academic sources and leading newspapers. I gave a link to the New York Times alongside The Guardian, etc. All of these sources discuss the diary entries that you cited previously, so you were correct that this was important and relevant material that should be covered.

What is best is to use secondary sources, with due weight, when writing the article. The article now suffers from being based on Grooveshark sources, violating our guidelines, and in this case leading to obvious bias. Such primary sources should be used as "color" for the article, e.g. to allow users to check statements that have been reported in high quality reliable sources. Please use the NYT or The Guardian to discuss Fripp and Grooveshark, and then cite Fripp's diary for color.

If you have time, please try to restructure the rest of the article so that it is based on reliable secondary sources, rather than Grooveshark primary sources, which again should be cited for color.

Best regards, Kiefer  .Wolfowitz  18:26, 29 May 2012 (UTC) P.S. I imagine that Grooveshark's management was unaware of the risk-averse response to a letter containing the word "copyright" from Robert Fripp:
 * Kiefer .Wolfowitz  18:41, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Kiefer .Wolfowitz  18:41, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Kiefer .Wolfowitz  18:41, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Amar Bose
Hi, just dropping by to note that i undid part of an edit you made in the articel about Amar Bose. The edit[1] appeared to be incomplete. Please check if you can redo it completely. cheers Hakunamenta (talk) 17:30, 20 July 2013 (UTC) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amar_Bose&diff=prev&oldid=564427708

Reference format
Thank you for the reference you added at Tesla Motors. Could you also remember to format them the same way as other references in the article - in this case by using. Thanks again.  Stepho  talk 22:39, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments on the profile of Mary Lou Jepsen
I made minor edits and one significant change today to Mary Lou Jepsen, despite my conflict of interest. This note summarize the changes and my conflict.
 * 1. Updated the profile to put Mary Lou Jepsen's work at Pixel Qi into past tense. (Several sentences were still in present tense, making this section inaccurate.)
 * 2. Added a section header for Mary Lou Jepsen's new work, at OpenWater. (That this is her new company *is* noted in the header, but not in the body.) I did not write anything significant here, rather would allow others to post appropriate content.
 * 3. Changed the whimsical note about her being Foursquare mayor of Carnegie's to past tense AND added a note that this is an expat watering hole. If someone wants to add a link to Carnegies ...
 * 4. Changed the image. The updated image is fully public domain and is recent (from 2018); the image it replaced is 10 years old.

My conflict of interest: Mary Lou Jepsen is my wife.


 * A great image, thanks. The whimsy is, as with the original Hitchhiker's Guide, part and parcel... (added by an anon long ago!) If you have any past images that can be freely licensed, that would also be welcome (in context, better than portraits).  category:Mary_Lou_Jepsen is pretty slim.  – SJ +  20:09, 29 July 2018 (UTC)


 * 5. Corrected the date of the new photo to 2018 (had been unchanged from 2014 as the new image was uploaded).
 * 6. Thanks SJ for the suggestions.