User talk:Jgera5/2014 Archive

This archive includes edits to User talk:Jgera5 from 2014. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the user's regular talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Notification of automated file description generation

Your upload of File:ArthurTreachers.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 12:21, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:BPampm.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

• Another one of your uploads, File:CitizensBankCard.jpg, has also had some information automatically added. If you get a moment, please review the bot's contributions there as well. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:50, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

January 2014

Please do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 02:05, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Jgera5. You have new messages at CactusWriter's talk page.
Message added — CactusWriter ^(talk) 18:06, 25 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sources

Hi, I've noticed that most of your edits to wrestling articles end up getting removed or changed drastically because the sources that you use are totally unreliable. Here is a list of sources that Wikipedia believes to be reliable for wrestling topics. I'm guessing that your additions to CM Punk will soon be removed as they reek of speculation and news. You do a great job typing up a lot of material and I'm just giving you a heads up because I hate seeing good faith users like yourself get reverted, especially since you've spent so much time on these things.LM2000 (talk) 21:46, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Even if you include just reliable sources, a long section on his (suspected) departure seems undue.LM2000 (talk) 00:31, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

February 2014

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Billy Gunn. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. Thank you. STATic message me! 04:24, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

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 The Shield (professional wrestling), you may be blocked from editing. STATic message me! 22:10, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Punk

You might be interested in this discussion. It involves the edits you just made to CM Punk.LM2000 (talk) 18:14, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:PilotFlyingJ.PNG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:PilotFlyingJ.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:28, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

March 2014

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 Scooby-Doo! WrestleMania Mystery, you may be blocked from editing. STATic message me! 01:31, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The Shield (professional wrestling), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Director of Operations (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:53, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by inserting unpublished information or your personal analysis into an article, as you did at The Shield (professional wrestling), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. STATic message me! 09:20, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Your Third Opinion request

Has been removed because it was in regard to a conduct dispute. 3O does not handle conduct disputes. Consider RFC/U or ANI for conduct disputes. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 13:54, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

I rather suspect that I'm going to regret doing this, but I want to tell you that I've looked at the notices that STATicVapor has left, above, on your talk page and have also looked at some of your other editing and have to tell you that I think that his criticisms are valid and that your reaction to them is inappropriate (especially this one (and even more so when compared to this assertion by you)). If you continue to lash out by going to places like 3O, and even more if you go to ANI or RFC/U which I mentioned above, you're going to be engaging in self-destructive behavior. Look, I do a lot of content dispute resolution at 3O, DRN, and MEDCOM, and I see recurring problems. One of the problems with Wikipedia is that it has a serious side with articles about things like history and science and politics and a fannish side with articles about sports and movies and video games. There is a vast amount of loose editing on the fannish side which does not comply with Wikipedia policies and which lures editors who edit mostly in those areas into the belief that those loose practices are acceptable. But they're not. And it constantly happens that folks who mostly edit on the serious side, where policies are generally rigidly enforced (in order to prevent chaos) wander over into the fannish side and encounter folks who aren't used to editing to those standards and then some variant on what's happening between you and SV occurs. Editors who aren't used to the higher standards suddenly get held to standards which, to them, seem impossible to meet: Everything has to be sourced and has to be sourced to a "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" (per SOURCES) which isn't a blog or other self-published site and which if it is a PRIMARY source can only be used for very limited purpose (and never as the sole source for an article or about a third party living person), and which actually says what is being asserted in the article without analysis or synthesis, and on and on and on. When confronted with the fact that everything must be sourced and that the required standard for what qualifies as a reliable source is quite high, the editors who work in the looser areas suddenly come to the realization that what the strict-standards editors are saying is that a lot of what they're used to including in Wikipedia can't be included at all. Since they've not had to deal with that, they find it hard to believe and feel like they're being picked on or harassed or stalked, especially since those standards are so universally accepted over on the serious side that the serious-side editors don't generally spend a lot of time explaining them when they revert or place notices about them. But they're not being picked on or harassed. They're just being held to the standards that they should have been following all along. When they then start calling on places like dispute resolution and ANI, they're frequently amazed that they don't get any support and that, in fact, the complaints that they're making against the strict-standards editors boomerang on them and they find that they're the ones who are in trouble, not the ones that they're complaining about. That's where you're headed if you pursue this. While you might not like what STATicVapor is saying to you, or the way that he's saying it, he's giving you straight advice. Please understand that I don't mean any of this to be condescending or unnecessarily critical, but you're headed for trouble and I'd like to divert you into the runaway lane before you crash. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:12, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

References

Comments left on STATicVapor's talk page

That wasn't nice of you to leave that sort of note on Static's talk page. Wikipedia is not the place for WP:NPA. Let me tell you a quick story. When I first started editing Wikipedia, I wasn't familiar with Wikipedia's policies. I was doing things the wrong way. I got furious when User talk:STATicVapor redirected one of the articles I created. Later on, I realized that I was doing several things wrong, and that Static was only helping me out. I don't know what happen in your case, but whatever it is, you shouldn't get so emotional to the point where you start leaving those types of messages. I'm pretty sure Static has his reasons and I believe that you two can work out your differences. As a community, we should look out for one another and discuss our differences in a civilized manner. This is just my 2 cents. versace1608 (talk) 17:04, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

ANI

Your apology over at ANI is a good first step, Jgera5, and goes a long way, but you can't just shuck this off. Unless you stop adding unsourced and poorly sourced material to articles, something like this is inevitably going to happen again, if not with STATicVapor then with some other editor. The community is pretty tolerant of a newcomer who pops in and does that, but as you yourself point out, you've been around for years. Repeatedly making edits which obviously don't comply with our requirements, even if they're done in topic areas where edits aren't usually held to that degree of compliance and scrutiny, can most definitely eventually get an editor blocked or banned, and monitoring an editor who has the practice of doing that is not wikihounding (q.v.). This isn't a threat, I'm just giving you some advice and I'm not going to be monitoring your edits, but if STATicVapor or someone else does so you may find that there's not much sympathy for your objection that they're doing it if, in fact, your edits are clearly non-compliant (and you may very well have invited such monitoring by making that SPI report). Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 14:27, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

White Album move discussion

I responded to your argument on the move discussion, but I'll reiterate here: May I point out that our own WP:UCN and WP:OFFICIAL say to use a common name over the official name? Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 13:46, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

There's been a misunderstanding. To quote WP:RM/CM: "Note: Unlike certain other request processes on Wikipedia, nominations should not be neutral... Nominators may also participate in the discussion along with everyone else, and often should." As well, I brought up the warning right above this since move request discussions should "make reference to applicable policies and guidelines," and Wikipedia policy is pretty dismissive of the official name argument. Besides discussions not being a simple vote but rather based on which side's arguments win out, I have seen nominations (like the Chelsea Manning mess) be decided after a significant portion of votes were thrown out for specifically not referencing policy. I apologize if I seemed aggressive, but I wanted to make sure you were aware of policy's stance on the official name argument. Dralwik|^{Have a Chat} 18:17, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Move discussion

There is a move proposal here which has been open for some time now. Please have a look if you're interested. Radiopathy •talk• 21:45, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Disregard. Radiopathy •talk• 09:42, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chief Wahoo

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Chief Wahoo you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Go Phightins! -- Go Phightins! (talk) 20:20, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chief Wahoo

The article Chief Wahoo you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Chief Wahoo for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Go Phightins! -- Go Phightins! (talk) 20:31, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:NewDatsunLogo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:NewDatsunLogo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 21:28, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

PA Turnpike

I understand (and even support) what you are trying to do; but I would advise you to leave things alone until some sort of consensus develops. The user who reverted it may simply do so again and we don't want an edit war. 331dot (talk) 10:50, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

PA Turnpike split

The split proposal has only been open for four days, and it has not yet attracted much commentary. I reverted the split under WP:BRD: you were bold to move ahead so soon, you've been reverted, so the change needs to be discussed. You're at a 1-1-1 tie: you're the only supporter, I've so far opposed the split, and Fredddie made a neutral comment regarding a different section. That's not consensus. Since we have no deadline here, there's no harm in leaving the discussion open a while to see what commentary it attracts. AfDs run for seven days, and RfCs can run for up to 30, so four is really too soon to close the discussion. Imzadi 1979 → 10:53, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Citations

You added some content to Interstate 68, and you included a source for that addition. That's all good news. Can I suggest that you match the citations to the formatting used in the article? This edit of mine expanded the citation to use the same templates as the rest of the article uses, expanded the information to include the missing author and publication location, and converted the date to comply with the MOS. MOS:DATEFORMAT does not allow "09/15/2014", and Featured Articles like I-68 need to fully comply with the MOS as well as display formatting consistency. Again, I'm not faulting you for adding content, just asking you to consider taking a few moments to look at an article and follow the style and formatting it already uses. Imzadi 1979 → 16:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 8

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited WFMJ-TV, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Channel 11. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Miller Lite 2014 logo

File source problem with File:MillerLite2014.png

Thank you for uploading File:MillerLite2014.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 02:05, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:MillerLite2014.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:MillerLite2014.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Corkythehornetfan (Talk) 02:06, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Decades (TV network) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• :''1) Two boldface asterisks appearing following the call letters ('''**''') includes KCCO-TV and KCCW-

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:53, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pennsylvania Route 576

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pennsylvania Route 576 you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Rschen7754 -- Rschen7754 (talk) 05:41, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 27

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rainout (sports), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Eastern Standard Time. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:26, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pennsylvania Route 576

The article Pennsylvania Route 576 you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Pennsylvania Route 576 for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Rschen7754 -- Rschen7754 (talk) 20:42, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Noelle Foley

The article Noelle Foley has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable. Famous for who her father is.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. RealDealBillMcNeal (talk) 00:12, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Sirius XM Radio channels, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Águila and En Vivo. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:27, 4 December 2014 (UTC)