User talk:JCC the Alternate Historian

Help With Creating Sandbox

Since I just created my account yesterday, may I please get some help with creating my sandbox? I have no idea how to put up the boxes to tell about myself, what are my interests, my ancestry, and my political views. Does anyone have directions on how to put the infoboxes on my sandbox? I would appreciate the help! --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:24, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and welcome. You did not receive a reply because no one saw it until now I suppose. You can find a lot of options for userboxes at Userbox Gallery and you can develop your userpage using tips from WP:UPDC. Next time you have a question, feel free to drop by at my talk page - I am always willing to help! :) Alternatively, you can include {{helpme}} in your help request and someone will notice the message and get to you (or else you may not receive a response). You can also go at the Tea House or help desk at anytime you want - they are really friendly and helpful. For the help with infobox, do you mean an infobox about yourself or for an article? You can checkout Template:Infobox Wikipedian and WP:INFOBOX for that respectively. Let me know if you have any more questions or need help with anything. I would be glad to help! :) — Yash^talk stalk 17:04, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More Help With Sandbox

Could I have some more help with my sandbox? The help I need is that I want to have several subsandboxes if anyone knows what I mean and I want to know how to make them. The reason why I want to make some subsandobxes is that my main sandbox is starting to get cluttered and I don't want to have it get too cluttered. I've seen people on other wikis with more than one sandbox and I just wonder how I can make ones for my various projects I've made over the past several months. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done Well, I created the other sandboxes for myself a while back. With that, that issue is no longer. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:29, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Need Even More Help With my Sandbox/Edit request 8/2/2018

While I was able to create a few more sandboxes for my various projects, I have run into a few issues regarding pictures on election infoboxes and I haven't been able to fix them. I'll list them below,

On my Guns of the South Sandbox, several images are larger or smaller then they should be. On the 1864 election infobox, the pictures of Horatio Seymour and John C. Frémont are smaller then they should be. On the 1867 CSA presidential election infobox, the photo of Nathan Bedford Forrest is also too small. In addition to that, the color for the Radical Republicans for Frémont isn't showing up.

On my Joe Steele Sandbox, the photos Republican candidates from all six presidential elections (1932, 1936, 1940, 1944, 1948, and 1952) are too small. The photos of Herbert Hoover (1932), Alf Landon (1936), Wendell Willkie (1940), Harold Stassen (1948) and Robert Taft (1952) are all too small. The photo of Thomas E. Dewey (1944) on the other hand is positioned almost perfectly, but still needs to be adjusted slightly.

I tried fixing the images several times before, but all times have failed. Could I please have some help with those issues? I would appreciate the help very much. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:00, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's been two months and no one has helped me or even replied. I tried figuring out the problem of why the pictures weren't lining up properly on my sandboxes, I discovered the photos were not all the same pixel sizes. I figured that was probably the cause of my issues. However, even after adjusting the sizes of the pictures, they are still messed up. Could I please have some help with this issue or at least have someone tell me what to do in this type of situation? --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:34, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The other issues I pointed out two months ago are also still a concern such as the color for the Radical Republicans not showing up. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:45, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done Well, I was able to fix the image problem once and for all thanks to some help from the newer US Presidential Election articles where the photos of the candidates are separated differently with arrows and such (I don't know really how to describe it). The only problem now that I know of now is that the color for the Radical Republicans for John C. Frémont still isn't showing up. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 15:00, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done Well, I no longer have to worry about the two Guns of the South maps. Thanks to JerrySa1, the article and my GOTS infoboxes both have the appropriate maps. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:10, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	For the time and effort you have dedicated in writing about United States presidential election in Vermont, and about American history in general, you deserve this. Your contributions are recognised and very much valued; thank you for all the positive work that you have been doing. Happy editing! — Yash^talk stalk 16:54, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it took so long to reply! Thank you very much for this barnstar award, Yash! I appreciate it very much. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 13:22, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, JCC the Alternate Historian. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! — Yash^talk stalk 17:05, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United States presidential election in Vermont, 1908, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia. 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) 09:55, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know about that, DPL bot! I just fixed the mistake. Apparently, I must of forgotten to link Georgia to the U.S. state of Georgia. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 15:13, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help With 1852 US Presidential Elections in Massachusetts and Vermont

When I created the articles for the 1852 Presidential Elections in Massachusetts and Vermont, the articles didn't turn out right visually. I've tried to fixed the mistakes I made by accident when I created this new article regarding the 1852 US Presidential Election in Vermont. However, the several additional edits I made haven't helped the article no matter what I did in attempt to fix it. I think the problem is that somehow, the results box somehow ended up below the reference section and the reference link for the source of the election ended by in the results section and screwed up the article. The 1852 election in New Hampshire article also got messed up when I created it, but was fixed just a little while ago (Thank you Mr.Election for fixing the page! I appreciate that very much! :) ). Could someone help me please help with my mistake? I would also appreciate that very much! --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:30, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 18

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United States presidential election in Vermont, 1800, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Democratic Republican Party. 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) 10:12, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, DPL bot. I just fixed the mistake. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:10, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem

If you're wondering what was wrong, I'm pretty sure that the kind of table you were using. You're welcome! --Mr.Election (talk) 13:51, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from United States presidential election, 1836 into United States presidential election in Michigan, 1836. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. If you are the sole author of the prose that was moved, attribution is not required. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:22, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are still not adding the required attribution, as required under the terms of the CC-by-SA license. Please have a look at this edit summary as an example of how it is done. Please leave a message on my talk page if you still don't understand what to do or why we have to do it. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:27, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa, sorry it took me so long to reply! I hear you. I'll follow your directions for editing next time. By the way, the only thing I copied from the 1836 election article was the mention about Michigan being disputed during the election because it had only became a state on January 26, 1837, and had cast its electoral votes for president before that date and so on so forth with the paragraph. The other stuff about the whole election campaign was added by a user named Bc103693, only to be deleted by him later on. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:58, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Nice job! So many articles on presidential elections in states. You are certainly making me review a lot of articles, and I can't wait to do more! RileyBugz ^{Yell at me} \| _Edits 19:06, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the barnstar award, RileyBugz! I appreciate the award very much. And don't worry my friend, more presidential election articles while be created in May after I complete a months worth of editing and creating articles about alternate history, science fiction, fantasy, and locomotives. See you around and I'm looking forward to you reviewing articles I've created as well :). --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:20, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Fifty Degrees Below, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Superstorm. 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) 10:46, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I redirected Superstorm to Perfect storm, the closest article that isn't a disambiguation page. Thanks for telling me by the way, DPL bot! By the way, most of the messages on my talk page will eventually be removed once my talk page becomes too clustered. See you around my friend. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:08, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

United States presidential election Articles in the States

A page you started (United States presidential election in Rhode Island, 1856) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Rhode Island, 1856, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for contributing this article to Wikipedia!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 23:46, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Maine, 1860) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Maine, 1860, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Please make sure that when copy and pasting, you change all of the names. eg if you copy and paste the article from Connecticut and change the data to Maine, make sure to change the name, too.

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 17:47, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Maine, 1868) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Maine, 1868, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Wow, you are creating a lot of pages!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 13:04, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Rhode Island, 1876) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Rhode Island, 1876, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 17:11, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Maine, 1876) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Maine, 1876, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 17:11, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Connecticut, 1872) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Connecticut, 1872, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 17:12, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Maine, 1880) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Maine, 1880, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 19:58, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Rhode Island, 1884) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Rhode Island, 1884, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful election article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 16:34, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Maine, 1884) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Maine, 1884, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful election article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 16:35, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Connecticut, 1884) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Connecticut, 1884, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful election article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 16:35, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Connecticut, 1896) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Connecticut, 1896, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 17:09, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Maine, 1892) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Maine, 1892, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 17:10, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Rhode Island, 1892) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Rhode Island, 1892, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 17:10, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Rhode Island, 1896) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Rhode Island, 1896, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 17:10, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Connecticut, 1904) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Connecticut, 1904, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful election article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 13:34, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (United States presidential election in Maine, 1900) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating United States presidential election in Maine, 1900, JCC the Alternate Historian!

Wikipedia editor Elliot321 just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Thank you for creating this useful election article!

To reply, leave a comment on Elliot321's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Elliot321 (talk) 13:34, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization

In the future, please make sure to capitalize like this:

**** United States presidential election in ****

instead of this:

**** United States Presidential Election in ****

Thanks! Elliot321 (talk) 17:40, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) JCC seems to already do this. RileyBugz ^会話 _投稿記録 22:39, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatrolled

Hi JCC the Alternate Historian, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:11, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it took me so long to reply, Anna Frodesiak. Thanks for giving me patroller rights. I appreciate that very much! I enjoy creating articles about US Presidential Elections in the inadvisable states that haven't been created yet. I was surprised on how many that weren't created! Don't worry though, more election articles will be created in July. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:29, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging articles

Thanks for creating all the US presidential election by state articles. Could you possibly tag the talk pages with {{WikiProject Elections and Referendums|class=stub}} when you create one? I'm doing it at the moment but you are creating rather a lot! Thanks, Number 5 7 19:30, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Another request/reminder to to this. Thanks. Number 5 7 19:37, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it took me so long to reply, Number 57. Well, thanks for the message! By the way, I just tagged a bunch of articles to create their talk pages. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:36, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of Disney animated shorts

Regarding the YouTube link: YouTube videos are generally not reliable sources, and that link says nothing about where the colorized version came from. If you can't find a better source, then the information shouldn't be included. Trivialist (talk) 21:57, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Trivialist, I see we you undid my revision of the List of Disney animated shorts article, you said that the redarwn version of Mickey's Choo Choo looks like someone colorized it themselves, not something Disney did; not worth mentioning here.

A few things I want to tell you. For starters,I highly doubt that someone could colorize a late 1920s cartoons by themselves. God known how long that could take! Also, the video looks too poor in quality to be colorized by that YouTuber. In addition to that, did you even see the Toon Disney logo in the bottom right corner of the screen if you watched the video? I highly doubt that logo was photoshopped in there. More likely, back in the early 2000s (as evidenced by the 2001-2004 Toon Disney logo), Toon Disney must have been airing some old Mickey Mouse cartoons and that YouTuber recorded it on VHS.

However, while doing some research, I found a website a while back called the Colorized Cartoon Database that contained some information about some black and white cartoons that have been colorized. According to the website, between 1984 and 1992, ten Mickey Mouse cartoons were colorized (the link can be found below me by the way). However, the names of the ten cartoons aren't listed. Well Trivialist, I'll do some more research and find out the origins of the colorized version of Mickey's Choo Choo. See you around.

http://calvincrowe.tripod.com/redrawn/misc.htm#

--JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:38, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

While doing some more research last night, I found out on the List of black-and-white films that have been colorized aticle here on Wikipedia that Mickey's Choo Choo was colorized by the Walt Disney company back in 1991. At least we know that Disney actually colorized this cartoon. The source that was provided on the article is this:^[1]

--JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:29, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that works as a source. On a side note, the Mickey's Choo-Choo article doesn't mention the colorization, so it might be worth adding there. Trivialist (talk) 21:07, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to it soon Trivialist. Thanks for reminding me about that. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 14:00, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the colorized Mickey Mouse cartoons, there were also ca 30-50 computer colorized Mickey Mouse http://www.intanibase.com/oldforum/index.php?topic=1976.0 DoctorHver (talk) 22:57, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ PAu001629050 / 1991-10-31

August 2017

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Looney Tunes are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. SummerPhD^v2.0 18:11, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fine SummerPhDv2.0, I read you loud and clear. By the way, did you see the new message I left on the Looney Tunes: Back in Action talk page? On the talk page, I decided we should move the discussion that you, Trivialist, and I were having about the films competators at the box office to my talk page so we wouldn't waste space discussing the same topic over and over again. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 14:10, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you work something into an Article for me?

It's in the talk page for the 1856 US Presidential Election regarding the Union Party of Pennsylvania. I'm not sure how best to integrate that into the main article page given its scope, and I figured it might interest you as a fellow Alternate Historian. --Ariostos (talk) 15:59, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

United States presidential election, 1864 in Harry Turtledove's The Guns of the South Map Request

In Harry Turtledove's alternate history novel The Guns of the South, we learn the results from the 1864 presidential election in one of the two tables in the back of the book. While I got the information down on my sandbox, I wish I could add a map of the electoral votes from that election. Unfortunately, no such map has been made (at least on either Wikipedia or Wikimedia) to my knowledge. To anyone who sees this request, could you please attempt to make a map of the election results. I will list the information below containing which four candidates won electoral votes from whatever state they carried below. I wish anyone who decides to make this map good luck!

The states that voted for Democratic candidate Horatio Seymour were New York (33), Pennsylvania (26), Ohio (21), Indiana (13), Kentucky (11), Missouri (11), Wisconsin (8), Maryland (7), Oregon (3), and California (5). He won the election and carried these ten states with 138 electoral votes.

The states that Republican incumbent Abraham Lincoln were Maine (7), New Hampshire (5), Vermont (5), Massachusetts (12), Rhode Island (4), Connecticut (6), Michigan (8), West Virginia (5), Illinois (16), Minnesota (4), Iowa (8), and Nevada (3). Lincoln came in second place and carried 12 states with 83 electoral votes.

The other two candidates that were known to win states were Radical Republican John C. Frémont, who only won three electoral votes from Kansas and Independent George McClellan, who only won 10 electoral votes from Delaware (3) and New Jersey (7).

--JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:10, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I spent all morning today putting the information from the table written down in a notebook. Since I will be creating an election results table om my sandbox, I'll get copy the info from my notebook to there. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:17, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I finally got the information regarding both presidential elections into a notebook. I've got the popular votes, electoral votes, the states the candidate carried, and the percentage of the votes (US election only). I will attempt to create the two election results tables on my sandbox hopefully tomorrow. It's a job that will probably take up to a few hours to do. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 14:49, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess I stretched the truth on that! Hopefully on Sunday, I can at least try to add the 1864 US Presidential Election and 1867 CS Presidential Election election templates to my talkpage before relocating it to my sandbox. I'll probably start with the US one first. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:20, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Found map

Well, I found a map of the election results on DeviantArt of all places. A user by the name of IronPiedmont1996 uploaded an election infobox regarding the Guns of the South 1864 US Presidential Election with a map. I'm not even sure how I am going to get the same map or if I am going to have to ask someone to make on for me. Anyways, a link to the election infobox and map can be found in the link below me.

https://ironpiedmont1996.deviantart.com/art/Guns-of-the-South-U-S-Election-714461828

--JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 14:28, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Confederate States presidential election, 1867 in Harry Turtledove's The Guns of the South Map Request

In Harry Turtledove's alternate history novel The Guns of the South, we learn the results from the Confederate States 1867 presidential election in one of the two tables in the back of the book. While I spent my weekend writing down information in a notebook that I'll eventually transfer over to my sandbox, I wish I could add a map of the electoral votes from that election. Unfortunately, no such map has been made (at least on either Wikipedia or Wikimedia) to my knowledge. To anyone who sees this request, could you please attempt to make a map of the election results. I will list the information below containing which four candidates won electoral votes from whatever state they carried below. I wish anyone who decides to make this map good luck!

The states that voted for Confederate Party nominee Robert E. Lee and his running mate Albert Gallatin Brown are Florida (4), Georgia (12), Kentucky (14), North Carolina (12), Tennessee (14), and Virginia (13). Lee and Brown carried 69 electoral votes from these six states.

The states that voted for Patriot Party nominee Nathan Bedford Forrest and his running mate Louis Wigfall are Alabama (11), Arkansas (6), Louisiana (8), Mississippi (9), South Carolina (8), and Texas (8). Forrest and Wigfall received 50 electoral votes from these six states.

--JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:55, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, JCC the Alternate Historian. 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]

I'll give the candidates a look. I might vote in this election once I understand what's going on, but I'm not making any promises. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 14:43, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dang, I completely spaced it and missed voting in the election! Oh well, I guess there's always next year. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:20, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request for discussion at Talk:Vermont

Thank you for your interest in editing the article, Vermont. Could you look in on a question on the talk page at Talk:Vermont#Choice of verbiage and give your thoughts and opinion? Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 14:14, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll eventually take a look at it. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 14:46, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 14, 2017

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aftermath: Population Zero, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Puma (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 18:21, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that! I though that puma would've just redirected to cougar rather than a disambiguation page. The problem has now been fixed. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:02, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Guns of the South 1864 US Presidential Election Table

Finally! I finish that United States 1864 Presidential Election table! Now that I completed it, I have now relocated it to my sandbox and deleted the table off of my talk page. There is only one problem about it though, I could not figure out the percentage for Minnesota's popular votes. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:25, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Guns of the South 1867 Confederate Presidential Election Table

Well, now that I completed the Confederate States presidential election of 1867 results table, I have now relocated it to my sandbox and deleted the table off of my talk page. Now with that finished and out of the way, I can really now start on the US 1864 Presidential Election table. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 15:24, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of fictional monarchs, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Icelandic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok DPL bot, the problem has been fixed. Icelandic now redirects to Icelanders on the article. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 13:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Two Georges New Map Request

Recently, I added a request on the talk page of The Two Georges to mention how inaccurate the map that is currently used on the article is. If anyone wants to answer my request, you can either answer my here on my talk page, the Two Georges talk page, or both. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:40, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of fictional Vice Presidents of the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Taft (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know about that DPL bot, but Vmavanti already fixed the linking problem before I got to it. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 14:10, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Urgent Help With Green Mountain Railroad and Vermont Railway articles!

I need some urgent help with the Green Mountain Railroad and Vermont Railway articles! When I was editing the Green Mountain Railroad articles a short while ago, I decided to add two sources to mention the fates of former units #400 and #401 after they were sold by the GMCR. However, after I completed the edit, the information about #401 somehow moved down into the reference section. I tried fixing the problem, but it didn't help at all!

As for the Vermont Railway article, this is a mistake I made a while back and for some reason hasn't been corrected. Back in July of last year, I moved #301 to the former units section of the article as that diesel was sold to GMTX in late 2015 with four other Vermont Rail System GP40s as deal for FEC SD70M-2s 431/432. That part of the edit went smooth, however, former unit #381 somehow is now clinging to the side of #301's box rather then being underneath it. I have tried several times over the past few months to fix the mistake, but all attempts have failed miserably.

Could I please have some help fixing these mistakes on those two articles? It is very distracting seeing two noticeable mistakes on those articles and me trying and failing to fix them. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 15:40, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Ken Gallager fixed the mistake on the Green Mountain Railroad article, so that's all set. However, the Vermont Railway article still needs that edit to fix the problem that is on that article. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ken Gallager also fixed the mistake on the Vermont Railway article, as well. Thank you very much for that! I'm glad that the two problems on those articles are finally fixed. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:21, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 10

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of fictional United States presidencies of historical figures (S–U), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Robert Taft (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Problem is fixed! Sorry about that, keep forgeting that there is more than one Robert Taft. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 14:01, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

United States presidential election in Vermont, 2016

Hi JCC, Thank you for your hard work in generating the results table by county in United States presidential election in Vermont, 2016. Would you be so kind as to add a citation with a reliable source and perhaps a summary paragraph to introduce it? Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 00:20, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done I have just added a source. Surprisingly, the article was missing the source which most of the other presidential election in "insert state name here" articles, which is "Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections". --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 12:39, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, JCC the Alternate Historian. 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]

Disambiguation link notification for January 16

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

1904 United States presidential election in New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to New York

1908 United States presidential election in New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to New York

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know DPL bot, but a user named Onel5969 has already taken care of the problem. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 14:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

This is unrelated to anything in particular, but I recently saw a couple of wikiboxes and general information in your sandbox, I'm pretty impressed with your AH skills. Would you happen to have an account on AlternateHistory.com by chance? Your wikiboxes would be best suited for the Maps and Graphics section btw. Jerry (talk) 17:32, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, hello Jerry. Thanks for the likes on the infoboxes. Which one is your favorite? As for having an AlternateHistory.com account, I don't but I plan one creating one eventually and I'll put them on the Alternate Wikipedia Infoboxes thread. Do you have an account on that site? It would be really nice to stay in touch both here and there once I eventually create an account. You know, I actually got influenced to make infoboxes about characters and events from Family Guy, American Dad! and South Park after looking at gap80's infoboxes based on The Simpsons. Have a nice day! :) --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:39, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I like the wikiboxes you made for the Southern Victory series the most. Personally I've only read the first two of those books, but I know what happened in the plot already because I've read timelines that involve crossovers of timelines in the user-only sections. I used to have an account on that site, but I left because I felt the mods were way too strict. I still lurk on that account but I don't plan on continuing to post my content there. (Not going to post the username because my Wikipedia name includes portions of my actual name and everything on this site is publicly searchable.) Besides that I haven't had the motivation to do any TL's and keep at doing them.

But yeah, nice to see another Alternate History fan on this site. I'm mostly on the mapping side (And I've gotten pretty good at that as time has gone on), so my wikibox skills aren't actually very good. Too bad I can't really apply my skills to Wikipedia because the maps here are to serve informational needs, and high-quality maps aren't necessary or are detrimental to conveying information, so I can't apply that. :/ Jerry (talk) 00:45, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair Jerry, the Southern Victory infoboxes aren't originally mine. They were on the Great War and Settling Accounts articles for years before I got hold of them. The ones formally on those two articles were really messy as Hell and I basically took the infoboxes, did a heavy duty clean up job on them, and then put the restored infoboxes on the articles. Oh buy the way Jerry, since you are good with maps, could you perhaps do a favor for me? In Harry Turtledove's novel The Guns of the South, the book goes into detail about two presidential elections that occur (and these details are kinda important). One is an alternate version of the 1864 United States presidential election while the other is the 1867 Confederate States presidential election. Details about those two elections can be found on the Harry Turtledove Wiki, the GOTS Wikipedia article and my Guns of the South sandbox. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:40, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@JCC the Alternate Historian: https://pastebin.com/ir0Avrhq

Both links to the maps are in this pastebin. If there's a problem, just tell me, and if you need any other maps, well you know who to call heh. I haven't done wikibox maps in quite a while, most of the time I make maps more like https://pasteboard.co/Ic8ZOfL.png or https://imgur.com/VK6ckWD

Thanks Jerry, but I have no idea what to do now. How am I suppose to add them to Wikipedia? I've never uploaded photos to Wikipedia before. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:30, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oooo...right. I did not think of that. Usually I see wikiboxes being used for purposes outside of wikipedia so I just use inspect element for things outside of wikipedia. Though in this case, it seems that the only way to do that is uploading it on wikimedia.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:1867_Confederate_Election.png http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alt-1864_Union_Election.png

Wow! Thanks Jerry! The maps look nice. However, it looks like you messed up the placements of Lee and Forest on the Confederate Presidential election map. The map shows Lee winning Forest's states and vice versa. Lee (who won Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia and Florida) should be red while Forrest (who won South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas and Texas) should be blue. Other than that, good job. Well, tomorrow, I guess I'll add both maps to my Guns of the South infoboxes and tell the guys over at the Harry Turtledove Wiki (where I also work) that some maps have become available to use. Don't worry though, I'll make sure to credit you for making the maps. If I need any more help with anything, I'll give you a ring. :) --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 23:00, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of fictional states of the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gunnison Valley (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 07:21, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I fixed it DLP bot. I had to unlink it entirely because there's not a Wikipedia article for the Colorado Gunnison Valley. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:45, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:JCC the Alternate Historian/sandbox/The Guns of the South

A tag has been placed on User:JCC the Alternate Historian/sandbox/The Guns of the South requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. -- a ^{they/them | argue | contribs} 18:27, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First my sandboxes get vandalized, then they get deleted!? This is ridiculous! I've had those sandboxes for months and no ones complained until now! My Guns of the South infobox was important, considering it had the tables for the alternate 1864 United States presidential election and the 1867 Confederate States presidential elections and both events are important details to the novel. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:40, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:JCC the Alternate Historian/sandbox/President McCain

A tag has been placed on User:JCC the Alternate Historian/sandbox/President McCain requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. -- a ^{they/them | argue | contribs} 18:29, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First my sandboxes get vandalized by 111.217.48.20, then they get deleted!? This is ridiculous! I've had those sandboxes for a long time and no ones complained until now! Other people get to have more than one sandbox, why can't I!? --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:50, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:JCC the Alternate Historian/sandbox/Joe Steele

A tag has been placed on User:JCC the Alternate Historian/sandbox/Joe Steele requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. -- a ^{they/them | argue | contribs} 18:30, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First my sandboxes get vandalized by 111.217.48.20, then they get deleted!? This is ridiculous! I've had those sandboxes for a long time and no ones complained until now! Other people get to have more than one sandbox, why can't I!? --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:51, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of User:JCC the Alternate Historian/sandbox

The page User:JCC the Alternate Historian/sandbox has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. ST47 (talk) 18:32, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First my sandboxes get vandalized by 111.217.48.20, and then now all of them (including my main sandbox) they get deleted!? This is ridiculous! I've had those sandboxes for a long time and no ones complained until now! Other people get to have more than one sandbox, why can't I!? Other Wikipedia users have tons of information on their sandboxes, why can't I!? --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:55, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:JCC the Alternate Historian/sandbox/Southern Victory

A tag has been placed on User:JCC the Alternate Historian/sandbox/Southern Victory requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. -- a ^{they/them | argue | contribs} 18:33, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First my sandboxes get vandalized by 111.217.48.20, then they get deleted!? This is ridiculous! Compared to my other sandboxes being deleted, this one isn't a very big deal since I only had two war infoboxes located were only just there so I could clean them up and relocated them to the Great War and Settling Accounts articles, which I did a while back. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:05, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:JCC the Alternate Historian/sandbox/Robert Conroy novels

A tag has been placed on User:JCC the Alternate Historian/sandbox/Robert Conroy novels requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. -- a ^{they/them | argue | contribs} 18:34, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

First my sandboxes get vandalized by 111.217.48.20, then they get deleted!? This is ridiculous! Compared to my other sandboxes being deleted, this and the Southern Victory one aren't that big of a deal to me since I didn't have much there --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:10, 9 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) 00:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you reviewed

Hello, JCC the Alternate Historian

Thank you for creating 1920 United States presidential election in Oklahoma.

User:Insertcleverphrasehere, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Needs more than 1 source to meet WP:V.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Insertcleverphrasehere}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

— Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 22:07, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You known any other good sources other than the US Election Atlas? --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:20, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve 1924 United States presidential election in Oklahoma

Hello, JCC the Alternate Historian,

Thank you for creating 1924 United States presidential election in Oklahoma.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

More than 1 source is needed to meet WP:V.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Insertcleverphrasehere}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

— Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)}_{(click me!)} 22:09, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You know of any other good sources other than the US Election Atlas? --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:25, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alternate Generals II, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chihuahua (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:43, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright I fixed the problem. Sorry about that! --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:20, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Alternate Generals II

Hello! Regarding Alternate Generals II, please add material from secondary sources that describe the work in an encyclopedic, real-world context, as encyclopedia articles should not simply be summary-only descriptions of works. Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 04:45, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Third party sources

Per your recreations of Alternate Generals I, II and III, and your query, third party sources (also called secondary sources) are sources that are independent of the subject itself, the creator, publisher, etc. Book reviews, news coverage, and scholarly journals are some of the many possible sources that turn an article from a trivial showcasing of content into an encyclopedic article discussing the significance of a work. As I mentioned above, Wikipedia articles should not be summary-only descriptions of works. This is not my personal opinion, it is one of the policies of What Wikipedia is not: Wikipedia treats creative works (including, for example, works of art or fiction, video games, documentaries, research books or papers, and religious texts) in an encyclopedic manner, discussing the development, design, reception, significance, and influence of works in addition to concise summaries of those works. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a bare bones database of short stories. For more information regarding summaries, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction. You've been editing long enough to understand that a subject needs significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject itself to demonstrate notability. Please strive to expand articles with reliable secondary sources. Cheers, --Animalparty! (talk) 00:31, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm writing some election redirects

Hello JCC the Alternate Historian,

I have recently been creating many redirect pages for the presidential elections at the state levels. Since a majority of the state results of presidential elections have written with the exception of many early ones; this might be another "frontier" of sorts and I'm wondering if you'd like to help me out.

Also, I would like to congratulate you on many of your pages you've written for the presidential elections. Your efforts have tremendously helped with the presidential elections and keeping them better documented.

Thank you, --Skim

You're welcome Skim, glad to help out! :) It is kinda weird how the election articles were redirected in late 2018 but most of the links on the articles were not. Even after over a year, a lot of presidential election articles are still like that for some reason. I'm just helping out with that as much as I can one presidential election article at a time. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alternate Kennedys, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Britain (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:13, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done Fixed! Sorry about that. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 14:05, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Assume"

Here in Wikipedia, nothing is "assumed", period. Mostly referring to this, but I can not be arsed to review every edit on similar topics you might have made. --Prospero One (talk) 10:31, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Liberating Alaska article is over two years old at this point. I'm surprised no one has complained about it until now. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 19:14, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your plea

Re [1]. You can remove the PROD proposal yourself, but the sources right now are very poor and the article is unlikely to survive AfD, just like dozen+ of other characters and locations from that series that already got deleted within the last month or so. But nothing is lost, this kind of stuff can be written up at https://ttte.fandom.com/wiki/Gordon_the_Big_Engine . Unfortunately, Wikipedia has policies like WP:GNG/WP:NFICTION that limit what we can have. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:53, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is the talk page on the Gordon article the appropriate place for debating if the article is going to be kept or not? If not, do you known the place where it can be debated and could ya link it for me so I can get to it? Also, I added two more sources to the article a couple of days, that should be enough to keep the article. I'm pretty sure five sources is enough to keep it. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:44, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For a WP:PROD, it is. However, the page may be deleted if the PROD is not declined. But you are welcome to decline it yourself per WP:PROD, at which point the page may be subject to a wider discussion at WP:AFD if someone will start it (which I may, for example). Number of sources is less important than their quality. Sources need to be reliable, independent and in-depth (see WP:RS, wP:GNG). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:13, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Imperial units

Don't restore challenged content without providing reliable sources. "I read it in another Wikipedia article" is not a source. Neither is another Wikipedia article. If the claims are reliably sourced in the other articles then you may reuse those sources. You have been here long enough that you should know this. Meters (talk) 02:38, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alright Meters, I'll take your word for it. Sorry for starting that mini edit war with you. I couldn't find any sources regarding why Canada still uses miles and miles per hour on its railways. I did find a source on the Rail regulations in Canada article saying that Canadian Railways still use miles, but I don't think it's what either of us would be looking for. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 3

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alternate Generals II, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Adlai Stevenson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:56, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done Taken care of DPL bot. Sorry about that, I always forget that there is more than one of him. The one I was looking for and meant to link was Adlai Stevenson II. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alternate Generals III, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Culloden.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:28, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done Fixed the problem. I redirected Culloden to the Battle of Culloden. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:05, 11 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) 02:53, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Victory discussion

Hi JCC, as one of the few editors who does a lot of work on alternate history article I wonder if you might want to make a comment at the discussion here about the Southern Victory series? I see the alt-hist project got pinged for the previous discussions but no-one seems to have responded to that. FOARP (talk) 19:58, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go take a look FOARP. Sorry it took so long for me to reply. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 20:49, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 14, 2020

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Darkness Descending, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Into the Darkness.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:37, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done Just fixed it. Sorry about that. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:00, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks but

Thanks for adding sources to [2]. Could you format them so they are not bare URLs? In the visual editor it's a one-click to reformat refs, or you could use a script like User:Zhaofeng Li/reFill. TIA! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:24, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 23:05, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Hoover Dam in popular culture for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hoover Dam in popular culture, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hoover Dam in popular culture until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, SDZeroBot. I'll go to the discussion page and let my voice be heard. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:45, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Could I ask that you not create any more articles about works of fiction unless you can properly show notability by citing sources about the work's reception? Reviews (in reliable sources only - no Goodreads or anything like that), awards, nominations, etc?

"The book exists" isn't enough. DS (talk) 00:48, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, a lot of book articles here just have info about the plot and a few sources for references. Half the time, they don't even have info about how good or bad its reputation is. No one has complained to me about that before so please do not complain to me about it now. Also, Wikipedia articles are not going to look like masterpieces when they're first created, I can't do everything you know! If other uses want to add the book's reputation, the book cover, ect, they're perfectly welcome to. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:40, 4 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"No one has complained to me about that before" doesn't mean you're doing the right thing, it means nobody has complained about it before. You're not addressing notability. For some of these, I'm able to find sources. For others, I'm not. Similarly, "a lot of book articles here just have info about the plot and a few sources for references" isn't an excuse for producing more substandard articles on non-notable books. It's like finding an unflushed public toilet and deciding that this means you don't need to flush either.

For a lot of the book summaries you've written, I'd be perfectly justified in replacing them with redirects to the author's article, or even taking them to AfD. I don't want to do that. Do better. Don't write about works of fiction unless you can supply evidence of notability. Even just URLs would be better than nothing. DS (talk) 03:08, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, regarding "no one ever complained before", you were asked in February 2020 to not write articles that are purely plot summaries. DS (talk) 03:16, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:48, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FantasticFiction.com is not a "source" of information, it is a website where people buy books

A Deadly Education is on my watchlist, so I noticed when you added a link to its lead to the website FantasticFiction.com. Apparently you added the same link to many other articles today as well. These look like spam links--is there something I am missing about your adding multiple links to a commercial website? HouseOfChange (talk) 02:13, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So is Amazon, but people use that as a source too. Also, a good portion of the books in the links have info about the books descriptions (ei: info about the plot) in them, so it's not spam. Also, I've added links to FantasticFiction.com to various other articles before and no one has complained to me about that before until now. If it is spam, I apologize for that. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 15:10, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, HouseOFChange, for your information, yesterday (4-20-2022), I added the link to FantasticFiction.com to only two articles while fixing the link to that said website for two other articles. I don't know what universe you come from to think that having two links to FantasticFiction.com on two separate articles is MANY. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:50, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Amazon is a reliable source for INFORMATION about books such as the ISBN. FantasticFiction is somebody's commercial website and an example of WP:ELNO #5: "Individual web pages[5] that primarily exist to sell products or services." The first page of your contributions shows that 18 of your past 50 edits mentioned adding links to FantasticFiction.com. I don't have energy or expertise to argue with you about this, so I will look for a noticeboard relevant to this issue. I see that DragonflySixtyseven has previously tried to educate you about Wikipedia policy on this talk page and received the same no one has complained to me about that before excuse, which is not, in fact, an excuse for ignoring policy. HouseOfChange (talk) 12:46, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FantasticFiction makes money if you buy a book through them. It's basically a sales site. Doug Weller talk 18:18, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well HouseOfChange and Doug Well, I guess I won't be adding anymore links to FantasticFiction.com. Oh, by the way, I also saw and replied to the ANI notice down below. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 23:30, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. It is here. HouseOfChange (talk) 13:26, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Asking as suggested at ANI, do you have a COI here -- a personal or financial connection to FantasticFiction.com? HouseOfChange (talk) 14:45, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know about the discussion that is talking about me. Should I go over there to the discussion and mention my actions?

Oh, and by the way, the answer to having a personal or financial connection to FantasticFiction.com is a big fat NO. I'm not a spammer and I don't intend to be one. I only started going to that website recently and only started adding it to Wikipedia articles as a source because some of the pages about the books have summaries so they at least provided some info. Sorry for any convenience that I may have caused.

Oh, and I heard on the discussion that you mentioned that you have Covid. I'm really sorry that you caught it --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 23:15, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thought. Yes, the link to ANI is there to let you tell your side of the story. Glad you don't have a COI, that would be a different problem from not understanding guidelines. This is a VERY small problem to get mentioned at ANI, so please try not to be upset by it. Lots of good people end up at ANI once or twice when some cranky person, with or without covid, has tried in vain to get their attention for something. HouseOfChange (talk) 00:16, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just replied to the thing about me on the Wikipedia noticeboard to give my two cents and apologized for my actions. I'm glad I'm not getting into huge trouble. For a second or two, I thought I was going to be blocked for a bit or banned entirely. Glad that isn't the case. Oh, by the way, what's a COI? JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 23:26, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you are related to something you are editing about, you've got a conflict of interest. Doug Weller talk 11:25, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest. Alright then Doug Weller, thanks for telling me the definition. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:55, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Liberating Alaska

The article Liberating Alaska has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Can't find any evidence of notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Doug Weller talk 18:58, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know about this, Doug Weller. I guess I'll go over to that article in a little bit and give my two cents about the proposed deleting of Liberating Alaska. Oh, by the way, do you know who to archive talk pages? I'm asking this because my talk page is starting to get very long and crowded. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:45, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright Doug Weller. Yesterday, I added my thoughts about the proposed deletion of the Liberation Alaska article on the article's talk page. On the talk page, I mentioned that the article shouldn't be deleted entirely, but instead redirected to the Harry Turtledove bibliography article. However, it looks like the deletion tag on the page was removed by Espresso Addict, who saw my comment on the talk page. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:19, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you find anything satisfying WP:NBOOK? If not, it should be as you suggest redirected. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 09:47, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I take a look around for some other sources about Liberating Alaska. However, given that it's a short-story and not an actual book, it may be a bit difficult. If I'm unable to find anything good to use as a source, I guess it will be best to just redirected that article to the Harry Turtledove bibliography article. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:50, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Election Day (short story) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Election Day (short story) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Election Day (short story) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 06:03, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling me this, theleekycauldron. Since I'm the one who created the article, I should probably go over to the discussion page and give my two cents about this. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:45, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Alternate Generals for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Alternate Generals, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alternate Generals until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, SDZeroBot. I got the notice yesterday and just went over to the discussion and gave my opinion. Is it just me, or is it every time I turn around, another article that I created or contributed a lot on gets marked for deletion? JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:00, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hey, I know how it feels to have your articles nominated for deletion. It is... quite crappy to see your handiwork get dangled above the shredder. I've had two articles I wrote deleted, and a third spawned a contentious discussion before coming to a "keep" close. I hope you're not too discouraged by it—your writing is definitely quality :)

When you look around for topics to write about, you'll want to be sure that they meet the inclusion guidelines—the key is to see how much you can write using only the secondary sources available on the topic. If you can put together a substantial article without using original research, unreliable sourcing, or synthesization, you've probably got a notable topic on your hands! But if you find that most of what you've got is plot summary/boilerplate stats, then the topic probably isn't ready for pagespace yet. It can take a long time to figure out what works; but if you get that down, you'll be writing lots of GAs and FAs in no time.

It doesn't look like Turtledove's creations are the most notable; but it seems like you're interested in U.S. politics. There are lots of state legislators with the potential for substantial articles; why not start there? Or go bigger, for U.S. representatives and senators. You could even get yourself a subscription to newspapers.com through the Wikipedia library and find new people to write about there. The sky's the limit if you know where to look! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 02:27, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling me this, theleekycauldron. Sorry to hear about two of your own articles being deleted. Is it just me, or has Wikipedia gotten a lot more strict over the years?

For US politics though, I usually just stay to the presidential elections. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 23:05, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for November 24

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rock and Roll (Gary Glitter song), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bobby Hill.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done I fixed the issue. Sorry about that. I forget sometimes that there's more than one Bobby Hill. Thanks for letting me know about my mistake. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 15:35, 24 November 2022 (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) 01:33, 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) 00:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You need to stop

I've just reverted about 10 of your recent edits which were completely unsourced. Please note that Wikipedia does not accept original research. Please stop. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:33, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then. I should note that some of this is not my fault. Some things might have info on one article that contradicts something on another article. If I have caused any convivence, I apologize.

If it's alright with you, Magnolia677, could I readd some of that info to the articles with sources? For example, if I add a source for the Grace Cottage Hospital for Townshend, Vermont, would that be okay?

By the way, either you or I should probably edit the article for the Brattleboro Memorial Hospital to mention the right amount of beds (61, not 62) and that source you mentioned when you undid my edit on the Brattleboro, Vermont article. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 00:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Magnolia677, it looks like the article for the Brattleboro Memorial Hospital had the same source as the Brattleboro article after all. I fixed the amount of beds and corrected the number from 62 to 61.

Oh, by the way, do you know how to archive talk page?. Mine is getting pretty long and I noticed that other users have archived talk pages of their own. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 01:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Magnolia677, thanks for fixing the link to the source on the Brattleboro Memorial Hospital article. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 23:10, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

Please do not add or change content, as you did at List of hospitals in Vermont, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:41, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're talking about the info I added about the Rockingham Memorial Hospital, right? Alright, I'll try to find a source or two to back up my reverted edit. Does Wikipedia allow info from Google Books to be used as a source? What I mean is that the info I put down about the Rockingham Memorial Hospital that you undid came from two books that might be on Google Books. One is Images of America: Around Bellows Falls (which I have a physical copy of) and the other is the History of Rockingham, Vermont: 1907-1957. If I can find them on Google Books, can they be used as sources on the article? JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 23:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did at Townshend, Vermont, you may be blocked from editing. With this edit you wrote that this was "the smallest hospital in the state of Vermont", citing this source. This was not support by the source cited. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:32, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be fare though, with only 19 beds, Grace Cottage is the smallest hospital in the state of Vermont with the amount of patients it can have at a time. However, I do see what you mean. I'm sorry for that mistake. By the way, did you read the replies I left for you either here or on your talk page, Magnolia677?

Oh, by the way, I good good news and bad news about the Google Books source I mentioned. The good news is that Images of America: Around Bellows Falls is on Google Books itself. The bad news is that only the first 30 pages are viewable previews and that info about Rockingham Memorial Hospital is on pages 37 and 38. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 00:15, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good news Magnolia677, I was able to add one of the sources after all. Specifically the book Images of America: Around Bellows Falls, Rockingham, Westminster and Saxtons River. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:45, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 1860 United States presidential election in New York, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I must have forgotten to put (state) when I tried to link to New York. Anyway, @Onel5969 fixed the linking error. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whale

Smash!

You've been squished by a whale!
Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something really silly.

Please refer to a certain list, which you improved the stylistic consistency of in 2021. Your services to retrocausal wildlife conservation have been acknowledged by the WWF and IUCN. EnronEvolved^{My Talk Page} 19:28, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll go take a look. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:30, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1789 Virginia election

I know it's been years since you made the article, but where does the 3,040 Federalist/1,293 Anti-Federalist number come from in the 1788–89 United States presidential election in Virginia article? Wowzers122 (talk) 22:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It probably came from the actual 1788-89 United States presidential election article years ago back when I created the 1788-89 United States presidential election in Virginia article. The info might have been inaccurate, so I apologize for that if it was, but info on both articles have long since been changed and corrected. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 23:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Justinian (novel)

The article Justinian (novel) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

almost 9 years later, I do not believe this meets the notability guidelines for a book. Although the author is often discussed and interviewed, this pen name and novel has not been covered as far as I can tell except by a few blogs.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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.

You had some recent edits JCC, if you are interested in trying to find good sources for this thought I would notify you of this proposed deletion! Gnisacc (talk) 19:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't necessary call my five edits from 2020 to 2022 recent edits, but I did edit the page five times over those two years. However, I'll see if I can find any sources for Justinian. I did add a source, but removed it later on because I got complaints that it wasn't reliable. If I or anyone else can find a good source, the article will probably get deleted or redirected. I'll also go over to the deletion proposal page to give my opinion. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 22:55, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like someone was able to find a few sources for the Justinian article. With that, this conversation is now moot. JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:00, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] PAu001629050 / 1991-10-31

[1]