User talk:Jcmcc450

Welcome!

Hello, Jcmcc450, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --NeilN ^{talk to me} 23:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Kirk Fogg

I'm pretty upset that Kirk Fogg has been deemed unworthy of a Wikipedia page. Last I checked, this was The Free Encyclopedia and not the United Encyclopedia of Soviet Republics. I don't know how to sign this stuff, but this is Pacojoe731 if you didn't know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pacojoe731 (talk • contribs) 02:00, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

I understand you're upset, but Wikipedia is not an anarchy. It is a free encyclopedia, but we don't just make pages "because we can". It would rapidly devolve into bloat-i-pedia if that was allowed. The general consensus by the community (not me). was that Kirk Fogg was not notable enough by himself to be his own page. Jcmcc (Talk) 16:55, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Belarus

I have a request to approve the following edits of the national language in Belarus. I already explained why there is only 1 national language (Belarusian), even though there are 2 official languages. Official languages changed several times in history (Ruthenian, Polish, Russian, Belarusian), but the national language (Belarusian) was always the same, being the heritage of the nation. Polish and Russian languages are national for Poland and Russia respectively, but not for Belarus. 178.121.203.30 (talk) 19:39, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I changed the article to reflect the national language. In the future, if you make a change, describe your changes in the edit summary. Especially in a contentious article like Belarus which is undergoing a culture war. Jcmcc (Talk) 04:48, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Lumbee

After doing some research, I believe we need to tie the history of the Lumbee people to the efforts of the Virginia bureau of vital statistics of the 1920's. The work of Dr. Walter Ashby Plecker, and the newly founded Anglo-Saxon Club of America in had a direct impact on the racial identity of not only the Indians of the tidewater VA area, but some of the ancestors of the Lumbee people who are also from the tidewater VA area. . Racial Integrity Act of 1924. one of the therory is that the Lumbee area decendants from migrating slaves from the Virginia area. The racial act and its implementation clearly shows how the Indians of that area and time were mis-categorized as blacks. Mulatto identity or theory of origin researched by prominent Genealogists Dr.Paul Heinegg and Dr.Virginia E. Demarce have published research on the Lumbee ancestral origins using historic documents,Primary source records, published state records and many types of civil records, proposing that the Lumbee are an politically invented tribe and descend mainly from the mixed race unions of African males and European females referred to as Mulatto. In their book Free African Americans, Heinegg and Demarce have traced the migration of some of the ancestors of the people now calling themselves Lumbee to Robeson County from the Tidewater area of Virginia as individual colonist. Tying these together sheds light no the subject. clearly, I need to include more citations for this line of thought. rick barton 6/5/15 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbarton59 (talk • contribs) 20:48, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

@Rbarton59: I understand that you want to draw connections and show how things tie together, but wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a blog. Making conclusions such as tying things together is considered Original Research and is not allowed on Wikipedia. What you can do is find supporting articles, books, and other Reliable Sources and cite them heavily only restating what they say. If you can't find any reliable sources, then it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. No matter what the outcome, thank you for your efforts. You put a lot of time into it. Side note: Make sure you understand how to use references, putting a [10] doesn't actually cite anything, it just messes up the reference table. Jcmcc (Talk) 21:10, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

73.29.184.78

In response to your WP:AIV filing, I have blocked:

• User:73.29.184.78 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I did not look through most of his edits to know if they need to be undone. Could you please check and clean up his mess, or let me know if you need further admin assistance? DMacks (talk) 13:48, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Certainly, ill get right on it Jcmcc (Talk) 15:01, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Major League Lacrosse

Hi,

I have been an avid major league lacrosse fan for years and know that the edits I made were accurate. The league is indeed a professional league and to have it listed as 'semi-pro' is a slap in the face to not just the league but the athletes that play in it and the fans that support it. Also, the salaries are not publicly released like they are in other professional sport leagues so there is no way of verifying those salaries therefore I believe it should be taken out because it is not proven fact.

List of Shudra Hindu saints

Just an FYI, it's a creation by a long term banned (in violation of that) user whose articles are a mix of fact and fiction, so I've deleted it. Letting you know since you suggested a split. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 04:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

New Page...

It's Dnoose123, I would like to inform you that I have recently created a new wiki page about Drumnahavil. This place does actually exist and I am writing to inform you that it is real, encase that after my previous test edit, you think that it is made up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dnoose123 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

If you want to make test edits on Wikipedia, please use this page Jcmcc (Talk) 15:01, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Jcmcc450. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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

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

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Jcmcc450. 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)

Leopard Society

I would like to personally thank you for reverting the “Leopard Society” page and also improving its quality overall. Another user seems bent on removing all negative history associated with the Society from the page in favor of their own views, which they cite as coming from a class taught at the Rhode Island School of Design. I appreciate your editing the page not only back to a more historically accurate viewpoint, but also to one that doesn’t sacrifice said accuracy for political correctness. As someone versed in the fields of both psychology and criminology (specifically psychology of the criminal mind and abnormal psychology), I have researched the Leopard Society as an example of a group known to have committed serial murder at times. I regularly research the causes and history of the phenomenon of serial killing and believe the glossing over of this group as an example of this is both misleading and biased. I know this is only one page focusing on one group, but it has an undeniable connection to more well researched killers, and when learning how the mind of a serial offender works, the smallest piece of information still has value to researchers like myself and others, even if only to make a small connection between past and present.

So again, thanks for the effort on your part and sorry for such a long post. We cannot simply ignore historical accounts and facts for the sake of “not appearing racist,” nor should we rewrite entire pages (especially using very unprofessional language littered with opinion) to suit what fits our own sensibilities. You have avoided that with your edits to this page, so you have my gratitude. Hopefully the page will retain its truly helpful (and widely accepted) historical information. SimplyEbinMene (talk) 08:17, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Carbon County Courthouse

Thanks for your thanks on the Carbon County Courthouse -- I want to add pics including the pictures of the 3 court houses -- I am not use to formats on here at all so ANY input would be greatly appreciated -- added the DImmick MEM Library -- Mauch Chunk Lake -- Mauch Chunk Opera House to new -- stubs -- please feel free to help with added texts- pics or documentations to any of them -- thanks again Mikey41 (talk) 21:35, 26 April 2018 (UTC) |}

Kenyatalk

I understand as mods you have to keep Wikipedia free from advertisement's or promotions but that was not my aim when creating that page. It's a site I love to use and the owners have their own target market which Wikipedia is not part of.That was my first wikipedia article and I had copied the format of other similar sites like http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Nairaland and this http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/JamiiForums which is currently shut down by the government of that country which made the members join Kenyatalk . It was my first article and if I broke any rules I apologised for that and will still do so today but locking the page without giving me the chance to improve on it to conform with Wikipedia standards was way overboard of you. I tried contesting and explaining myself but none of you responded or even bothered to contact me. I request for you to unlock it and allow me write it afresh in a way that complies with the standards of the site. You can read through the new article before it's approved and advise where necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onger321 (talk • contribs) 12:16, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Onger321:. I would like to clear some things up, then explain why kenyatalk was deleted (and now protected). First off, I am not a mod, or an admin, or any position of authority. I am just a user. I also did not lock the page. That was performed by a mod as you kept recreating the page after a deletion discussion took place and it was decided to delete the page. The reason that the page was deleted was twofold.

One: The page had unambiguous advertisement. It was not written neutrally or factually. It contained lots of subjective information that was entirely unsourced. This brings us to

Two: The page lacked notable secondary sources. Wikipedia requires reliable secondary sources in every single article. The Wikipedia project relies on these sources to help split the wheat from the chaff. Effectively, if a subject (such as Kenyatalk) doesn't have any reliable secondary sources, then it is considered not notable enough for Wikipedia.

If you believe you can create a good, neutral, reliably sourced article. Go ahead and make a draft out of it. Once you think it is good enough, have other users review it. Once you have users agreeing that the article would be a good addition to Wikipedia, it will be added with the assistance of a mod. Jcmcc (Talk) 18:42, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Jcmcc450. 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)

A quick statement on your edit history background

Hi. This is a topic regarding your background of your edit history - most notably on articles that have been created in good faith or valid reasons which have been either nominated for deletion or disputed, with your involvement.

First of all on the OviLex deletion forum, I agree to the point that User: Raphael.concorde stated. I made an accidental erase on one of the other user's statements in replacement of my opinion, which was reprimanded by what I perceive as a over-reacted threat and unnecessary message to this extent:

This is your only warning; if you purposefully and blatantly harass fellow Wikipedian(s) again, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/OviLex, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Do not disrupt the deletion discussion process by deleting other users comments. Jcmcc (Talk) 10:50, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

This message is not only highly and unfairly judgemental in my actions - which were no way in form of harassment or any of that matter. In fact this is a violation of Wikipedia's Blocking Policy on not being Punitive. see http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Sanctions_against_editors_should_not_be_punitive for more information. Furthermore, observations I have made on your talk page have showed that other wikipedians have encountered similar situations regarding your biased opinions, despite their hard work on new articles they have created, which meet Wikipedia's guidelines on suitable criteria for new articles.

In addition, at the top right of your talk page shows a section for WikiLove being not accepted, regardless of any shape or form. Please do not take this as a threat, but a observed statement: that section tells me that your mental skills with working kindly but constructively with Wikipedia moderators and Users is not only unfair and inadequate, and could be an abuse of power. Please think about this and change your approach to things that you don't agree with by discussing and addressing concerns in an friendly and effective way, and listen to their valid point clearly. Also your actions must not cause personal grief to users, especially to me (even if you might perceive it as vandalism) in regards to the message above.

Hope this helps, and hope your future is bright. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:4872:8600:48A8:609:BDB:26E1 (talk) 21:50, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

The template for warnings is generic, and not personally written by me. It is an automated tool called twinkle. On Wikipedia, deleting other users comments, especially in the midst of a contested thing such as a deletion discussion, is generally a one-and-done type situation. If you had made that same mistake 2x, you would have almost certainly been banned. Not by me either. I am not a moderator. I am just an editor. The warning was exactly that: A warning. I wanted you to realize the severity of deleting other peoples replies. It appeared extremely disruptive and gave me the impression that you were trying to hide discussion from the mod's who would make the deletion decision.

For information regarding deleting/editing other users posts, see WP:TPO. The page you linked is not Wikipedia Policy. It even says that in the banner at the top. It's a good "rule of thumb" but its simply not policy.

Regarding Wikilove, please see my userpage for more details on why I do not wish to take part in Wikilove. Your hasty conclusions about my "mental skills" are not particularly appreciated. I cannot abuse power as I do not have any power. I am just your everyday editor. If the way I handled the situation (letting you know that you violated a very serious policy that could have landed you a ban) caused you grief, then editing Wikipedia may not be for you. Also, sign your posts by writing "~~~~" at the end. Cheers Jcmcc (Talk) 22:46, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

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) 00:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

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) 01:44, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Vi Hart

You are likely to get blocked if you continue your editing pattern on Vi Hart, a WP:BLP. It is disruptive and counter to MOS:GENDERID. Please stop rather than continuing to escalate this issue. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:33, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Following WP:BRD is a perfectly reasonable way to edit on Wikipedia. I even created a new section in the talk page which the undoing editors promptly ignored. Whipping out threats about blocking instead of reading the edit text and engaging in discussion on the talk page is far more worrying than a bold change based on following the MOS. Jcmcc (Talk) 12:33, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

I posted this comment here before seeing your talk page discussion, but what concerns me is the fact that you twice reinstated a controversial edit that had already been reverted once. That is not BRD. That is BRBRBR. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:19, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

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) 00:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Signature

Hey, @Jcmcc450. Just letting you know that your current signature doesn't include a link to your userpage. According to WP:SIGLINK, Signatures must include at least one direct internal link to your user page, user talk page, or contributions page; this allows other editors easy access to your talk page and contributions log. The lack of such a link is widely viewed as obstructive., a link to your userpage is required. Thanks, Cowboygilbert - (talk) ♥ 19:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Cowboygilbert, My signature follows the guidelines of WP:SIGLINK. It includes the talk page link. "Signatures must include at least one direct internal link to your user page, user talk page, or contributions page". Thank you for your concern. Jcmcc (Talk) 19:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)