User talk:RJASE1/Archive/May 2007
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] The Thirty-nine Steps
As an insufficiently ruthless deleter of WP:SPAM when I find it, may I wish you well in your campaign? However, I couldn't see a problem with the link you recently deleted from The Thirty-nine Steps , which seemed to direct to an academic essay in a respected publication. --Old Moonraker 06:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] your edits
Hello,
around 11 April, you blocked me/removed my links to various Northern Ontario articles. all of my articles are educational in nature and NONE are spam. in fact, they are offered at no charge to the public and the pages are used to teach history and the built environment at the university level in Canadian universities, are listed in the hand-edited online Canadian Encyclopedia, are used to teach digital photography, etc.
An administrator unblocked me and said he liked my pages and saw nothing wrong with them. Again, there is nothing commercial on those pages. A bureaucrat then approved this name change for me. In the last day or so, I've read that it might be a good idea to put follow up on other Wiki editors' pages, to keep them up to speed, and so hence this note. I've never spammed Wiki nor do I intend to. But I do provide excellent resources on Northern Ontario history, nor are there any other web pages out there which duplicate my efforts; hence, my work is unique. I am primarily an educator, a writer by avocation and have a master's in historic preservation, so I do know what I'm doing with the pages. Just thought I would let you know what had happened since. Thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ccharned (talk • contribs) 00:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC).
This guy Ccharned is shamelessly plugging his site in many wiki entrys and should be banned...
actually, i do not "plug" my site. it represents years of historic preservation work at the graduate level and the pages are used noncommercially, to teach history...as i have already said. i did you the courtesy of letting you know the outcome; please respect others and skip the disparaging remarks, of which i could make several myself but will take the high road here as there are more important things to do in life than argue about wiki entries. have a nice day. ccharned 00:51, 22 April 2007 (UTC)ccharned
[edit] Question about Original Research
Hello!
Since you helped us before, I'd like to ask for your help once again, if you don't mind.
In the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chambers_stove , you seemed to indicate that, since bona fide historians devoted exclusively to this topic were not likely to be found, those of us who have an interest in it were the most likely candidates to be contributors, as long as we make sure the article stays neutral.
If this is, indeed, your view, would you review the article? I ask this because I inserted some very valuable personal history into the History section of the article from a man whose father worked for the company that made these products for many years, and now there's a flag on the article regarding original research. I'd like your take on it, as I don't want to do anything that's against the rules. It seems that information with such detail - given by someone who was there - would be of benefit to your readers. If allowed, does the flag need to remain?
Your thoughts and comments, as always, will be respected and followed.
John E. Chambers 22:24, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Chambers Stove Again
RJASE1, we need a neutral 3rd party over at Chambers stove again. John E. Chambers is adding large graphics and I think it's ruining the look of the page, it doesn't look like an encyclopedia article with a big Chambers logo at the top. It looks like an advertisement for Chambers. There's also a huge graphic in the middle that's hard to read and it links to a for-profit website run by John E. Chambers. I thought we agreed that we weren't going to link to our "conflict of interest" websites? Anyway have a look see what you think. I'm loathe to remove the images and get into an edit war.
Also some of the research is attributed to a personal letter received by Todd W. White, but this is not published source and constitutes original research. Again I'm loathe to remove it for fear of starting another revert war. Your neutralness is appreciated. Thanks. 24.30.150.30 02:09, 3 May 2007 (UTC) Crap, forgot to log in. Trying signature again... lowracer 02:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC) There, that worked.
[edit] Link Spam or not?
Do you think adding Bowmore bottlings at WhiskyCommunity as weblink to Bowmore Single Malt should be considered as link spam?
(This site requires registration, but only for publishing new content.)
Dpesek 21:24, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XIV (April 2007)
The April 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 14:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] User talk:76.19.169.20
Hi, I noticed that you warned user 76.19.169.20 a while back, the person is at it again. He blanked his user page, not sure if I should have but, I restored it and added a comment about his latest entry.
Hi, I noticed that you warned me a while back, and I'm at it again. I blanked my user page. Hardnfast restored it and added a comment about my latest entry. 76.19.169.20 18:57, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] mathsisfun.com
Hope you don't mind that I'm starting to restore some of the links you removed a while ago. Most are decent and some are actually quite useful. If you still have COI concerns please let me know, and as always feel free to undo any of my actions. If it helps, I have nothing to do with this website. Regards, --Abu-Fool Danyal ibn Amir al-Makhiri 02:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WP:UFA
Hello, I thought I should tell you that when you see inappropriate usernames you should now report them to the new Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention instead of WP:AIV, thank for your work with reporting inappropriate usernames. Regards — The Sunshine Man 09:41, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hill City South Dakota
Hi RJASE1, I am a fellow member of the South Dakota project. I am wondering if you can take a look at the Hill City, South Dakota page and let me know what is good and what should go. I have included every topic that I can think of. Things that still could be done are the adding of picures and the using books as sources - right now I only have websites as sources. Soon I will be ready to tackle bigger projects - like the Black Hills page. Thanks. Lmielke359 00:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
