User talk:Onel5969/Archive 6

Archive 6: May 2014

Jersey City Soccer
Sorry about restoring the Prod... was unfamiliar, and should have researched the correct protocol before I did it. Just went back to the page to revert my own change, but you had already taken care of it. Will take it to AfD.Onel5969 (talk) 20:16, 4 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Before you start the AFD though. Perhaps I'm missing something.  There's numerous references to the team as Jersey City.  And I just found same in a 1929 newspaper (page 9, column 4, league standings - . Nfitz (talk) 20:24, 4 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi. If you carefully look at the references you cite, you'll see my initial concern was correct.  The name of the team was not simply "Jersey City", but "Jersey City Celtics".  I was going to move the page, but there is already a page named that, and referring to the ASL team from the 1920s.Onel5969 (talk) 20:27, 4 May 2014 (UTC)


 * No, that's an earlier team that folded in 1921. Hang on, here's a better reference; it's an article from a Providence newspaper of February 11, 1929, describing their last game, a 4-2 loss to Providence on Saturday February 9, 1929.  See page 11 on the final column - .  The name of the team is simply "Jersey City". Nfitz (talk) 20:31, 4 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi. Okay, I get the Celtics were an earlier team, but the team from New Jersey was not simply named Jersey City.  Even in the article you reference, their name might be (but I agree it's not definitive), the "Jerseymen".  The Providence team is never mentioned in the article, but is simply referred to as Providence (and who can blame them with a name like "Gold Bugs").  It's extremely in 20th century for a team to not have a name following the city/state designation.Onel5969 (talk) 20:44, 4 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Surely Jerseymen (or booters) is simply Sportsroom jargon. Even if it were part of their name, how is it grounds for deletion?  It's only grounds for editing the article! Nfitz (talk) 20:50, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Stephen II of Hungary
Thank you for your bold copyedit of the article. Now I am brave enough to make a GAN. Have a nice day. Borsoka (talk) 04:10, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Stockton, Ca. & Ernest Swinton.
Is it OK for me to go ahead and make this small matter historically reliable, or would it be a waste of time because we're in "You've argued with me so I'll use the rules to obstruct you" territory? Hengistmate (talk) 14:01, 8 May 2014 (UTC)


 * BTW, it's thought that the miniature tank was built not by Holt for Swinton's visit, but by a motorcycle vendor for the local Red Cross, as a novelty fund-raising gimmick, and was borrowed for the occasion. However, that is OR, known only to people who are well-versed in the subject, and therefore not admissible. Hengistmate (talk) 17:42, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Cool. If you have a citation for that detail, you should add it to the photo caption.  Onel5969 (talk) 17:44, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Sadly, it's OR, based on primary evidence from people who were actually in the area at the time. We shall have to wait until it appears in a secondary source. Hengistmate (talk) 09:46, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Chicago tourist section
I am just trying to help tourists. I made my posting in the correct section of the page. I mentioned the glass balcony which is not mentioned anywhere else on the page. It is significant information about tourism in Chicago. So I am not sure how you can call it "redundant".

What I posted is good information for someone wanting to know about tourism in Chicago. Help me out here. How can I mention the Willis Tower as a popular tourist destination, and mention the unique glass balcony without you deleting my post? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lester12483 (talk • contribs) 01:02, 13 May 2014 (UTC)


 * First, it doesn't really bug me, but I know it bugs quite a few other editors, because when I first started editing I would occasionally do it: please sign your work, either in an article, or on another user's talk page.  In case you don't know how, you simply use the ~ four times, like this:  Onel5969 (talk) 01:39, 13 May 2014 (UTC).  Second, I wasn't the editor who reverted due to redundancy, and quite frankly didn't check it out. I think if you re-worded your post to something along the lines of "The Willis Tower, as mentioned above in the architecture section, is a popular..." That way, you deal with the redundancy issue (which now looking at the article, I'm not sure I agree with).  Third, you also need to be wary of using words like "spectacular".  Fourth, do you have a citation for the information you included?  Is it a web page?  If so, cut and paste the web address here, and I'll go in and edit a citation, so you can see how one looks (and there are several different ways for that, I'll simply use the one I'm most familiar with).  Hope this helps.  Onel5969 (talk) 01:39, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 13 May
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:35, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * On the She Wore a Yellow Ribbon page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=608465727 your edit] caused a missing references list (help | help with group references) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F608465727%7CShe Wore a Yellow Ribbon%5D%5D Ask for help])

edit for passport
Hi,

I have old passport from 1950 & 1956 that clearly show such an added clause to a visa issued to a US citizen. I can send such an image, will this permit me to leave that section you undid?

Thanks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Onel5969&action=edit&section=new# — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huddyhuddy (talk • contribs) 13:07, 17 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi. While that wouldn't act as an actual citation. If you scan the image and send it to me, I'll put it in the article, with much of the same wording.  That way, you'll be describing the image, and get the information in.  Photos can't act as citations.  That's original research, and Wikipedia is only based on secondary research.Onel5969 (talk) 13:12, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

sending an image
Hi,

Thanks for the reply 8) Do you have an email address?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Onel5969&action=edit&section=new# — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huddyhuddy (talk • contribs) 13:14, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Clevelanders
I see no need to remove the section about Clevelanders who made it big nationally.

They are part of what makes Cleveland Cleveland...pointing out all the folks from here who are all now big time stars.

Vjmlhds (talk) 18:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, but that's not what that section is for. I've added a discussion on the Talk page, which is where this discussion should be taking place. And since you broke the WP:3RR, might I suggest you self-revert your fourth reversion, before I have to get an administrator involved? Thanks.Onel5969 (talk) 18:10, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Don't threaten me...you are not better than me. Vjmlhds (talk) 18:16, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * BTW...you also can have a case made against you for WP:3RR, ease up. Vjmlhds (talk) 18:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * No threat, just simply following the rules. I asked you politely.  Might I suggest you also might want to brush up on WP:CIVIL?  My 3rd edit was not a revert of your material, but taking your advice and removing all the information which did not belong in that section.  I'll ask you again, politely to please self-revert. Onel5969 (talk) 18:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * No...I will not self revert. Why should I?  If you don't like the way the article sits, why don't you change it?  Why should I self-revert, especially under the guise of a threat.  What do you call bringing up calling in admins if not a threat?  This looks to me simply as you wanting me to do your bidding or else... Vjmlhds (talk) 18:31, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * As I said, it wasn't a threat, just politely letting you know that I had no wish to enter into an edit war. After my second revert, you explained your position, and even though at that point you made your third revert, rather than report your 3RR violation, I started a discussion on the talk page, then re-edited the article taking your position into account.  You then chose to revert a fourth time.  I've asked you twice to self-revert (as you should, per WP:3RR), let's see what others on the talk page have to say.  The administrators have put the procedure in place for a reason.  Please follow it.Onel5969 (talk) 18:37, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I self reverted.  But, if on the talk page, other editors say that the way it was was fine, then you have to live with it...after all, it sat that way for a very long time, and only after I added Dr. Oz to the mix did you all of a sudden have a problem with it. Vjmlhds (talk) 18:43, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks. And absolutely.  WP is all about consensus.  I've stated my position, and you've stated yours.  As I said on the talk page, I hadn't noticed the other entries which I thought inappropriate until you made your Oz edit.  Even then, I didn't look at the rest of the article, since it was unchanged, until you brought my attention to it.  I understand folks having pride in people from their city who have made it good, but that's why the Notable People section was created.  Think how crowded pages would become if the culture section in each city page had EVERY person who was born, lived or went to school in that city?  Same could be said of the Sports section, or the Politics/Government section.  That's the only point I was trying to get across.


 * btw... please give my position some thought. There is not a whole lot of activity on Cleveland's talk page, and we might not get any other folks' input.  What say we give it until Thursday, and if no other responses are there, we continue the discussion on the talk page and reach an agreement between us?  Onel5969 (talk) 18:52, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * If there are no other editors that put in their $.02, then I'll just leave it as is. And I apologize if I came across as crass, but it just came across to me like you were threatening me with running to the admins, and that's what took me aback.  I much prefer working with other editors than against them.  Vjmlhds (talk) 18:58, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Congratulations...you've made a convert outta me. Once I stepped back and smelled what you were cooking, I began to understand. Vjmlhds (talk) 22:03, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm glad of that. Not that I "converted" you, but that you understood I wasn't looking for a confrontation or threatening you.  Sometimes, when you text or "message" someone, it can come across differently than intended.  I'm all about the consensus, it's one of the things I like best about WP.  btw... I'm a member of the copy edit guild, so if you ever need an article gone over for c/e, let me know.  I also am a member of the film and city projects, so you can always approach me about those as well.Onel5969 (talk) 23:00, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Award 4 U
Awarded to Onel5969 as a gesture of showing that I wish to have a peaceful working relationship, rather than an adversarial one Vjmlhds (talk) 19:02, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

2013 population estimates
In case you haven't noticed, the Census Bureau released the 2013 estimates for all cities and towns this morning. The lists can be found here. The top link lists all the top cities in order, though I don't know how to link to the table itself. Although technically most of what you reverted was uncited, the Quick Facts page for each city will have the 2013 numbers soon. And what I changed (OKC->27th) wasn't incorrect. The Wikipedia article just hasn't been updated yet. I will be reinstating the number with a citation. Kennethaw88 • talk 03:07, 23 May 2014 (UTC)


 * - Thanks. I knew that, but there was no citation.  I literally reverted 50 pages today which simply put in the information without putting the citations in.  When you made the change, you linked to the article, which didn't support your change.  Editors shouldn't leave it up to others to add/update citations, or correct links.  For example, you shouldn't link to a page which doesn't support the data you're updating. You don't have to link to the table, simply update the citation.  Onel5969 (talk) 03:52, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
 * That's fair. In any case, the update is forthcoming. Kennethaw88 • talk 04:36, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

list of haunted locations
hi onel5969 just a heads up that that article is using british english, i noticed you changed a few like centre to center etc. just to save you or some other editor the work of changing it back later — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.25.142 (talk) 21:39, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi. Thanks for the heads up.  I noticed that an editor had tagged it on May 22nd, but in going through the article, it was very inconsistent in its usage, e.g. sometimes using center, other times centre.  Same with words like rumor but then there was neighbour. Since the British English tag wasn't done by consensus, as I'm doing the c/e edit, I'm standardizing it to American English.  I will put it on the talk page, but I'm already 2/3 of the way through the article on my first pass.Onel5969 (talk) 22:09, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

i had a look back at the first few edits and they were done in british english so im guessing that is why. i forget what the rule is called but im meaning the one where if it is started in an english variation it carries on in it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.25.142 (talk) 22:30, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi again... it's not so much what the first few edits are, so long as it is standardized. Usually, if a subject deals with something from the British Empire (or its former colonies), it's done in BE (e.g. British Cinema, or the article on Singapore I edited), and if it's done on an American topic (like RKO films) its done in AE.  On something like this, it can be done in either.  It just needs to be standardized. I posted a topic on the talk page, so hopefully there will be some input.Onel5969 (talk) 22:40, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Talkback
Ibadibam (talk) 01:22, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

The FP
Long time no speak! I hope you've been doing well. As you can see from the title, I'm coming back to give you a quick update on The FP. I've added a lot more information and images. Drafthouse Films was wonderful and changed the licensing for two images of the cast and crew, and I got an image of an actual filming location. I've also added a Visual effects section, expanded the Cast section (which I plan to do even further once I get the film on DVD), and done a lot of copy-editing. I was wondering, if you had any time, if you'd be willing to give it a gloss over and see what you think I might need before going to FA. If you can't, I totally understand! Thank you for all the help you already gave me during the GAN.  Corvoe  (speak to me)  17:20, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi. Yes, am doing quite well, and hope the same for you.  I'll give it a looksee tomorrow. Onel5969 (talk) 17:42, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Bonnie Tyler copyedit
Hi! Thank you for requesting a copyedit of Bonnie Tyler for GA. Very interesting topic! It's also great that you're working with another editor, or indeed helping another editor, to get this article approved to GA status.

The copyedit is now basically complete, however there are a variety of things that I need to check with either you or the main editor working on improving the article.

I don't have a list of all these right now, but one very immediate question is, what year was Tyler born? One WP:SPA chooses to challenge the official version. Any thoughts on how to resolve this? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:57, 30 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for doing the Copy Edit work. You should really check with  for any questions specific to this article, as I was only looking at it from a c/e, grammar perspective.  Regarding her age, I'm not sure.  If you check out some of the references, the article from Metro says she turned 50 in 2009, which would make her birthdate 1959.  In case of a single editor questioning it, I'd revert it, and say "unexplained or uncited edit" in the edit summary.  If they continue to insist, start a category on the talk page.  I'll put the article back on my watch list as well.  Thanks for all your effort on this. Onel5969 (talk) 20:14, 30 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks to you both for your contributions and input. Most sources do cite that Bonnie was born in 1951, and you can see a short discussion about it on the Talk page for the article. She performed in Germany last year on her birthday - lots of my friends went, who even heard her confirm that she was 62 at the time. She will be 63 in about a week and a half. If I am needed for any other facts, or source hunting, please get in touch! I'm happy to help. Bonnietylersave (talk) 11:56, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

which draws vs that draw (Dallas demographics)
Are you sure b/c I'm thinking it's not the correct grammar. The Verb/Subject agreement seems off .... both are plural with "draws tens of thousands" and that isn't correct right? Am I missing something
 * There are two issues: the use of which vs. that; and the tense agreement. On the first, which is definitely the correct word, since the clause it begins is a subordinate clause (in other words, you drop the entire clause and the main point of the sentence doesn't change).  On the second a parade weekend draws, parade weekends draw; in this instance the sentence is dealing with the parade weekend. But thanks for taking the time to check.  Onel5969 (talk) 00:11, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

@Onel5969 thanks for clearing that up.