User talk:WopahoJoe

July 2019
Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to BAM (magazine), it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:05, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at BAM (magazine). Your edits continue to appear to constitute vandalism and have been automatically reverted. Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 04:55, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Note that human editors do monitor recent changes to Wikipedia articles, and administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism.
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made should not have been considered as unconstructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this warning from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to place on your talk page and someone will drop by to help.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this warning: BAM (magazine) was changed by WopahoJoe (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.95372 on 2019-07-14T04:55:24+00:00

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at BAM (magazine), you may be blocked from editing. GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:02, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Huh?
What do you mean? WopahoJoe (talk) 18:46, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Reliable Sources
I am the reliable source. I am, as disclosed to you at log-in, Joe Amadeo. My radio name in the 70s was Wopaho Joe on KOME radio. So, this is not an anonymous, shadow posting. I was there. I lived it. Wikipedia had a pathetic stub story. They asked for a contribution to make the story more informative. You got it. If you’d like, I’ll change it to first person accounts. But I thought you would want the whole story of the rise and fall of BAM to be a 3rd person narrative. I just rec’d a note telling me I’ve edited the info 10 times and to keep on writing. Are you a spammer or competitor to Wikipedia trying to work against Wikipedia? How on Earth does a person add a source to a story that’s never been told? When I was terminated from BAM, I took some time off and then started my own NASCAR sponsorship agency. Then, my own advertising agency. Then, launched a local motorsports TV show, hosting, filming, editing the show for SportsChannel (now FoxSortsNet). Then, became a NASCAR Chief Steward (head of officials). Then, in 2002, launched a retail website selling weather stations. Now, add to that a couple of VRBO/AirBnBs that offer to guests horseback riding, rifle and shotgun target shooting, and 4wd tours of local areas near the Grand Canyon and, to say the least, I’ve been busy. But a former BAM employee of mine called and pointed out the minimalistic story on Wikipedia and told me to go and tell the whole story. So, I’m working on it. Joel Selvin writes an opinion piece about the Bammies demise. And his article becomes a source. But the Publisher of BAM and the Assoc Exec Producer of the Bammies writes and he is not a source. Huh? So, I guess I could pitch Selvin on an interview and if he ran it, then, that would become a source, right. That’s what makes me think you’re not representing Wikipedia. Wkipedia asksme to keep writing and editing. You tell me to stop writing. And I have no idea who you are. What would you think if you were in my shoes? WopahoJoe (talk) 02:48, 15 July 2019 (UTC)