User talk:Jro571

Welcome

Hi, Jro571. This is NOT some automated message...it's from a real person. You can talk to me right now. Welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed you've just joined, and wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us. The tips below should help you to get started. Best of luck! Chzz ► 12:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need to read anything - anybody can edit; just go to an article and edit it. Be Bold, but please don't put silly stuff in - it will be removed very quickly, and will annoy people.

Ask for help. Talk to us live, or edit this page, put {{helpme}} and describe what help you need. Someone will reply very quickly - usually within a few minutes.

Play in your user area. For example, create User:Jro571/test.

Edit existing articles, before you make your own. Look at some subjects that you know about, and see if you can make them a bit better. For example, Wikipedia:Cleanup#2009.

When you're ready, read about Your first article. It should be about something well-known, and it will need references.

Good luck with editing; please drop me a line some time on my own talk page.

There's lots of information below. Once again, welcome to the fantastic world of Wikipedia!

-- Chzz ► 12:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Grade sources • Cite sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists • Best articles Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Pages needing attention • Peer review The missing manual

Disambiguation link notification for October 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Du Quoin, Illinois, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rantoul (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) 11:10, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Jro571. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Jro571. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Jro571. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

August 2019 / Dave Getz

Hello, recently you asked for help with your sandbox via the help desk. Following this, some editors worked on the 'page' correcting multiple formatting, referencing and Manual of Style errors. However, with this edit you appear to have undone all their corrections. This has caused the re-appearance of ref error messages and incorrectly written references together with basic formatting mistakes like capitals in headings (headings are in sentence case) and hyphens instead of ndashes for numerical ranges. There's also the removal of Wikilinks and required templates such as 'authority control' and others. It is your sandbox and you can do what you like with it (within certain conditions) but the corrections ought to be restored before the page is submitted for review. Eagleash (talk) 18:27, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Eagleash, Many thanks for your message to me, and I hope that I'm replying in the correct manner. I'm grateful for the corrections made by the Wikipedia editors who worked on my "Dave Getz" article, and of course I didn't mean to undo any of the work that they did. I do hope that their corrections can be restored, and that the article can be published. Jro571

Hello, I have restored the changes previously made. It looks as though you displayed the source for an old version of the page and then clicked 'publish'... this would have the effect of restoring the earlier version. The 'publish' button BTW, really means 'save' but was changed for some convoluted reason to do with copyright law! I feel that Getz would ultimately be considered 'notable' (in the Wikipedia sense) but at the moment the page lacks sufficient sourcing to properly demonstrate this. Please see WP:BLP, WP:GNG / WP:NOTABILITY and WP:NMUSIC for more information. Sourcing to his own website or interviews with him don't really help that much in creating an article. Wikipedia reports on what has been written about a subject in independent reliable sources. So if some further, more independent, references are available, that would help things along greatly. If it were to be submitted now, I think it *could* be rejected for lack of notability / references.

On another note, to alert another user to a message add {{ping|their username}} to the start of your message. This, the message and your signature all have to be added in one edit or the 'ping' will not work. You sign your posts (not in articles or edit summaries) by typing four tildes (~~~~) and indent your replies by using increasing numbers of colons (:).

When you feel the page is ready for mainspace, click the blue button within the header notice. This will submit the page for review and experienced editors will consider it and provide feedback if they would like to see improvement. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 02:35, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help on this, Eagleash - much appreciated. How can I view the article on Dave Getz, now that it's been corrected? I want to be sure that I'm displaying the latest source, rather than the version I submitted before it was corrected by editors. - Jro571

The 'current' version is here. If you are viewing an older version of a page you should see a pink warning notice at the top. If that version is not what you want, click 'read' in the tabs at the top to be taken to the latest version.

Please note the info. re talk page formatting above. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 02:59, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Eagleash, I wanted to give you a quick update on the Dave Getz article. After receiving the version which had been corrected by Wikipedia editors, I ran the text by Getz himself. He pointed out several inaccuracies, mostly concerning the details of his involvement with Country Joe McDonald (I hadn't realized that Getz worked with Country Joe at two distinct times, separated by two years). My earlier version had also given the wrong year of birth of one of Getz's daughters. In addition to correcting my errors, Getz also provided me with some additional information about his musical and artistic career, which I've now included. My fingers are crossed: I hope that there are no lingering problems with the format or anything else, and I pray that I didn't commit the same absurd error that I did a couple of weeks ago, inadvertently wiping out a number of corrections. I'll stay tuned for further developments. Thanks so much, Jro571

September 2019

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Dave Getz, from its old location at User:Jro571/Dave Getz. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. -Liance^{talk/contribs} 02:15, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, I did not see your message above as you did not add a 'ping' as previously mentioned. Also please remember to sign your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).

Unfortunately as a result of this edit summary and content above, it appears there is a conflict of interest. Wikipedia has a policy in this respect and I need to add the 'official notice' below. Please read it and the linked pages and make the necessary declarations. This is not a reflection upon you but one of the ways in which Wikipedia tries to ensure neutrality. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 05:07, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

COI notice

Hello, Jro571. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the COI guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 05:07, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Dave Getz has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Dave Getz. Thanks! Eagleash (talk) 05:12, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Eagleash, Thank you for alerting me to the need to acknowledge a possible conflict of interest regarding my draft of an article about him for Wikipedia. It's perfectly true that I contacted him, first in order to obtain further information (beyond the bio he provides on his website), and later to ask him to check for errors or important omissions. This last phase was especially helpful, since my earliest draft contained significant mistakes regarding his experience in the visual arts, his musical career post-Big Brother, and his personal life. That is the extent of my knowledge of him. He is neither a personal friend, a family member, a colleague, or a neighbor. I've read the Wikipedia COI guidelines, but it's not clear what else I need to do at this point in order to move on to the next phase. For the rest, I promise to be patient, and to wait out the lengthy period before my latest edit can be reviewed and, hopefully, published. In the meantime, I heard from another Wikipedia editor, Liance, who wrote to say that my draft had now been moved to another location, (Draft:Dave Getz).

Again, please add a ping as described above and please sign your posts. Unfortunately Wikipedia does not rely on what a subject (or any person connected with them) has to say about themselves. It reports on what has been written about a topic in independent secondary reliable sources. I would recommend that you declare a COI. As said this is not a reflection upon you. A COI, if handled correctly should not stop an article about a notable subject from being accepted. At the conflict of interest page there is a heading "How to disclose a COI" – click here to be taken directly to that section. There, you will see "Connected contributor template" click on 'show' and the template will display. Copy and paste that template (all that's within the double curly brackets) to the top of the article talk page. Delete all the italic text within the template but *nothing else* and replace your username with your actual username. Then save the talk page. I note you have submitted the draft for review. As previously, I think he should be considered notable but if you can find some more sources, I think that would help things along some. Eagleash (talk) 21:18, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jro571:Dear Eagleash, Thank you for alerting me to the need to acknowledge a possible conflict of interest regarding my draft of an article about him for Wikipedia. It's perfectly true that I contacted him, first in order to obtain further information (beyond the bio he provides on his website), and later to ask him to check for errors or important omissions. This last phase was especially helpful, since my earliest draft contained significant mistakes regarding his experience in the visual arts, his musical career post-Big Brother, and his personal life. That is the extent of my knowledge of him. He is neither a personal friend, a family member, a colleague, or a neighbor. I've read the Wikipedia COI guidelines, but it's not clear what else I need to do at this point in order to move on to the next phase. For the rest, I promise to be patient, and to wait out the lengthy period before my latest edit can be reviewed and, hopefully, published. In the meantime, I heard from another Wikipedia editor, Liance, who wrote to say that my draft had now been moved to another location, (Draft:Dave Getz). I hope that I've now "pinged" this message correctly, and I hope that my signature is correct as well. It's all Greek to me, and I'm very grateful for your help - all the more so since I learned that you were gradually withdrawing from the ardous tasks of editing Wikipedia articles. jro571

Unfortunately not pinged or signed correctly. Please see the second paragraph of my message above dated 20 August (02:35). You ping my username (not yours) and you sign by adding 4 tildes (~~~~) to the end of your message. I go back to the response I made earlier. Click on the link I gave and add the template to the article talk page.

On second thoughts, I will do this for you – which is OK for me to do. I would hope you can find and add some additional reliable sources as the connection (however slight) gives the impression of original research which will not help at review. As noted previously Wiki reports on what independent sources say about the subject. It is more important (due to the COI) to add supporting references to statements in the article. Eagleash (talk) 01:46, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have now done that on your behalf. It may seem pedantic but Wikipedia does like to have these things well and truly clarified. As I say; will hopefully not be a problem now, but await review. Unfortunately I will not review it (I am both new page and WP:AfC reviewer) as I have worked on the page. Eagleash (talk) 01:59, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Eaglish: I appreciate your doing this on my behalf. I completely understand your point, and the policy doesn't seem pedantic to me at all.<jro571>Jro571 (talk) 11:04, 9 September 2019 (UTC)</jro571>[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dave Getz (October 10)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bearcat was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This is not reliably sourced well enough to demonstrate that he warrants a standalone biography as a separate topic from the band. Four of the seven footnotes here are not reliable sources at all -- and of the three that are, he's the author, not the subject, of one of them, and briefly mentioned in, but not the subject of, the other two. This is not how you reference a person as notable enough for an article: you need to show media coverage about him, not media coverage he wrote about other things or media coverage about other people which briefly mentions him or stuff that isn't media at all.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dave Getz and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Dave Getz, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Bearcat (talk) 21:38, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jro571! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Bearcat (talk) 21:38, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Dave Getz

Hello, Jro571. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Dave Getz".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:05, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Dave Getz

Hello, Jro571. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Dave Getz".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 06:49, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:31, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]