User talk:LonelyBeacon/archive2

DYK nomination for 1971 Major League Baseball All-Star Game

I nominated your article 1971 Major League Baseball All-Star Game at Did You Know for inclusion on the Wikipedia main page. This is a fantastic article that people should know about, and I would like to encourage you to nominate your new article to DYK. Please feel free to contact me if I can help, and keep up the great work on school and other articles. Alansohn (talk) 00:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've had some nice things said about my work in the past, but this ranks pretty much up at the top. Thank you for the words of kindness, and for the nom. LonelyBeacon (talk) 00:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: DYK notification moved to Awards section on my user page.

You're a real trooper!

Thanks for all your hard work fighting vandalism and cleaning up high school pages. A13ean (talk) 19:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(blushes) .... thanks! Always good to get some kind words like that! LonelyBeacon (talk) 20:03, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to thank you for keeping an eye on things! I do want to let you know that the recent change to 'Head of School' in the 'Morgan Park Academy' article was legitimate. Due to the economy, a number of admin, staff, & faculty were laid off :( DaneOne (talk) 05:39, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Carmel Catholic High School

I saw the deletion you made on my addition to the Carmel Catholic High School entry. However, I am not sure I understand your note. The page referenced is a fan page for the CC page. I am a parent of a CC runner. While the concept of this page has been approved by the school, and has a link to the school page, it is in fact not affiliated with the school's website. It is there to provide info on the team to other parent's and friends of the program. kmatus —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmatus (talk • contribs) 23:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Kmatus!

I thought I had this read correctly, and so I went and took a long hard look at the policies on external links. I thought that links to particular clubs and sports were generally not included on article pages, and I was under the impression this was a sublink off of the school website. Given your explanation, and having taken a quick look at things, I went ahead and moved the link to the "External Links" area.

Sorry for the inconvenience. I misunderstood the source of the page. I have a friend who teaches at Carmel, and I have run into the Corsairs on more than one occasion in my coaching career. I myself am a graduate of a fellow ESCC school. Best of luck on the season. LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huge thanks. I liked your edit wayyyyy better than mine. I really appreciate you cleaning it up. Carmel is a little slow on editing their website, but they are suppose to add a link as well. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kmatus (talk • contribs) 22:46, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Battlefield High School

Can you direct me (and others) to the legal precedent you have cited regarding a professional sports association issuing a cease-and-desist order to an American public school? The NBA and NFL have both published statements in the past declaring that they have no perception of copyright infringement in this past-precedent use. You cited the removal of the information under "no original research," but failed to provide your own constructive rationale for the edit. I don't necessarily disagree that it's not terribly relevant information to the article, but two research wrongs don't make a right. ;) Please cite your legal precedent. I'm genuinely interested to read your source! Bhs itrt (talk) 15:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One more: 2007-2008 statistical information isn't outdated in a public school; it's as current as you can get in terms of a complete past year's statistics! Bhs itrt (talk) 15:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will try and find the instance; it relates to the use of a Viking logo by Niles North High School. I'm not sure if it is noted in their article or not, but it was in our local papers. For the record, I did not remove that under WP:OR, I removed it because it was uncited, and to the best of my knowledge it was incorrect. For the record, under WP:V, it is incumbant on the information to be referenced, so I was within my rights to delete it. I will try and find my reference, nonetheless.

The dates that I saw were for 2005-06 and 06-07. I agree that 07-08 is the most up to date that one could have for now. LonelyBeacon (talk) 17:24, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the source I saw, and is hardly authoritative, but for openers:[1], check out the bottom of page 1. LonelyBeacon (talk) 17:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Glenbrook North

Thanks for edits on GBN - forgot how to cite articles, the articles are the linked page for TOC, as well as the new external link i had added. Matt Purdy is a current teacher at GBN - http://gbnfm02.glenbrook.k12.il.us/staff/FMPro?-db=Help_Teach&-lay=Web&-format=search_results.htm&-SortField=FLName&-SortORder=ascending&-max=all&active=yes&-Find=start%20search. Didnt do rest, but can get you sources for rest too.10max01 (talk) 15:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delahanty

Hi, Thanks for your message. I was actually prompted by somebody deleting the original note about Horner, for no apparent reason. Anyway, glad you liked it. --AndrewHowse (talk) 12:08, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ESanchez013

Hello, LonelyBeacon. You have new messages at ESanchez013's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^Get to know me! / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 22:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Willie Stargell

Oops. I should have written April 9th. Thanks for catching that mistake! Iowamutt (talk)

No problemo! LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:12, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize as well

Title, and I wasn't being rude to Sanchez I was being honest. He was talking about a situation he didn't know anything about. 24.184.206.83 (talk) 21:10, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Benet Academy revert

Thank you for letting me why it was reverted. I now see clearly the reason it was done. My interpretation of the needed citation was for the Real Men of Genius statement. Thank you for the correction! Inthe80s (talk) 18:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem .... I hope that your find one ..... back when I worked on the article, I did try to find one. LonelyBeacon (talk) 22:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination for 1971 Major League Baseball All-Star Game

I nominated your article 1971 Major League Baseball All-Star Game at Did You Know for inclusion on the Wikipedia main page. This is a fantastic article that people should know about, and I would like to encourage you to nominate your new article to DYK. Please feel free to contact me if I can help, and keep up the great work on school and other articles. Alansohn (talk) 00:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've had some nice things said about my work in the past, but this ranks pretty much up at the top. Thank you for the words of kindness, and for the nom. LonelyBeacon (talk) 00:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re:DYK nom: 1971 Major League Baseball All-Star Game

I wanted to stop by and offer personal thanks for the kind words, and for putting the nom through. Is there anything else I should do to help it continue through the process? LonelyBeacon (talk) 04:37, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It has already been selected for the next update (see Template:Did you know/Next update) and should be on the main page in the morning. You will receive an official notification on your talk page when it goes through. Congratulation! Alansohn (talk) 04:43, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

On 26 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1971 Major League Baseball All-Star Game, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Jordan ^Contribs 08:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1971 Major League Baseball All-Star Game

Hey. I actually think it's a pretty good article. I can't really think of what else needs to be added. It's got citations, it's got coverage, all in all it's a good article. Thanks for your time in writing it. —Borgarde^talk 14:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ernie Banks

Lonley Beacon, If you would do minimal research you would discover that O.J.Simpson is indeed the second cousin of Ernie Banks. Being a big Cub fan from Chicago and an even bigger Ernie Banks fan I would never libel the name or reputation of Mr. Banks in any way.

I look forward to your retraction Jkarr Jkarr1 (talk) 16:37, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go read wikipedia's policy on verifiability. This policy requires all edits, especially edits of a contentious nature (like claiming that OJ and Ernie Banks are relatives) be documented. Your edit was not referenced, and as such I was well within my right to challenge it. I actually did research it, and found no credible sources. If you have a credible source, you must include it in your edit. I also counsel you to read wikipedia's policy on reliable sources before you do so. It is the responsibility of the editor adding information to fulfill verifiability with reliable sources. Failure to do so constitutes grounds for deletion of any edit. LonelyBeacon (talk) 17:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further, your first edit stated that he was O.J's "uncle" ... then you changed it to second cousin. This is the pattern that is established by many a vandal: come up with some amusing invented tidbit, then change it when the vandal thinks they have something "better". The edit history very much appeared to be vandalism in progress. LonelyBeacon (talk) 17:19, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Viewmont High School's The Green Man

It has come to my attention that you edited Viewmont High School's page erasing "The Green Man" section. This is obviously an attempt to remove unneeded material from the page so I promote you on maintaining the standards of the page. However, it has also come to my attention that the reasoning for the removal of the section was the lack of verifiability. The school newspaper is currently working on an issue in which directly addresses "The Green Man," proving it's verifiability in both mass periodical production and in an online source. Since my account is new to Wikipedia, I would like to clear the school's newspaper, The Danegeld, as a reliable source, of which will be available online in the upcoming month. I would very much dislike to defy a change you see fit (the deletion of "The Green Man" Section) so I would like to re-add the section with your agreement on the reliability thereof. The web edition of The Danegeld is not currently updated so we cannot currently site it as a source, but as it will be available soon, it would be in my best interest to immediately reinstate "The Green Man" section and site the source (The Danegeld) as soon as it is available. Thank you for your time, -Super Eric George —Preceding unsigned comment added by Super Eric George (talk • contribs) 20:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya Eric George!

First, I did provide a reason for my deletion, because when you restored the previous deletion, you asked for a reason, so I gave you one.

There are two issues that are pertinent to the discussion:

1. The school paper is considered a legit source to meet verifiability. It also needn't be on-line. There are many sources used to meet the verifiability requirement that are not on line (old newspapers, magazines, books).

2. The other pertinent issue is the policy on reliable sources. this gets trickier. In general, articles need to rely on independent sources. That is: a school paper would not generally be considered an "independent source". This is not as "in concrete" policy as verifiability is. I'm not speaking for others, but I would interpret a school paper as being fine here.

3. Another issue might be as to whether or not this is considered "encyclopedic". An important part of an article about schools is "traditions". If The Green Man has been around for a while, and is a tradition at the school, then I think almost any editor would agree that this belongs, provided that it can be sourced. If this is something that is relatively new, then there may be doubts as to how much of a tradition it is. The key to establishing how encyclopedic it is, is generally providing multiple sources that confirm it has been around a while. Having edited a lot of school articles, I know that this cane be difficult, as many local papers won't cover school traditions, even if they have been around a while. There are many traditions at my school that I cannot add to the article on this site because there is no

In short, if you can source it and demonstrate that this is a tradition that has been around a while, then I think it should stay. Otherwise, I'm not sure it really belongs. I wish you the best of luck on that! It seems like an interesting tradition. LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you very much as that clears things up quite a bit. The Green Man isn't necessarily a tradition as it hasn't been around for more than a few years. However, I would very much consider it a tradition in the making since it has been around and will be around for a number of years. I have already re-edited the page, but if you see fit to remove it until the school newspaper comes out, feel free to exercise your judgement and I will not bother to edit it again until it is published and evidence is presented. Thank you for everything, Super Eric George (talk) 03:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)Super Eric George.[reply]

Sounds fair to me .... I can't speak for any other of the editors here ...... without the ref, they may delete it, but I won't touch it. LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Parker High School

Who are you and what do u know about this school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dboy3587 (talk • contribs) 03:11, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Dboy!

Who I am is an ordinary editor, just like you. As such, just like you, I can edit any article on this site. However, like you, there are certain policies that we are all required to follow. I left a message on your web page (at the same time you were leaving one here) regarding some of the policies that you should examine. I wish you the best in editing, but I strongly encourage you to become more familiar with this web site's policies regarding editing. Best of luck to you! LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:18, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gonzaga High School

Thanks for your helpful comments regarding my edits to Gonzaga High School's website. Of course everything I write is truthful. I'm a man of truth, and a Physicist like yourself. How about if I include the original material from Gonzaga and the Maryland Province of the Jesuits regarding Cornell Bradley's sexual misconduct, as well as the Washington Post articles? They're referenced on my website but I can also post them to Gonzaga's entry on Wikipedia if that's what you prefer.

Finally, look, we're talking about a priest who abused people, including myself. My abuse took place at Gonzaga in a classroom. There may be other abuse victims out there who want to come forth and be helped. Silencing the publication of material that might help them to come forward does not serve a useful purpose - and it helps the institutions that facilitated the abuse to remain out of the public eye.

-- Robert Burgoyne —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertburgoyne (talk • contribs) 03:33, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Robert,

Just so we're clear, I don't want to come across as insensitive. I cannot imagine what it is like to go through something like this, and anyone victimized like this ... they have my sympathy. I don't want you to think for a moment that I am trying to protect anyone who committed criminal acts of this nature. I think you would find this attitude prevalent among the editors here (I don't mean to speak for others, but I am guessing this would be the case). Further, a core policy around here is the policy barring censorship. We take the good with the bad, and no one has the right to delete entries because they simply don't like what is being said. I support that policy, and don't want you to think that this deletion had anything to do with me deciding that this information was damaging the school, or that I simply didn't like it.

This is not so much a question of what I personally prefer ..... it is very much about the policies of the website. I'm not sure if you had a chance yet to read those policies that I linked to on your page, but the verifiability policy is about the single biggest content policy that exists here. As you have suggested: I think that citations to original documents is extremely important ..... even if I (personally) were OK with your website, it would only be a matter of time before someone else took this down. The policy on biographical information on living persons is taken with an extreme amount of seriousness around here for all of the reasons I mentioned.

Another issue regarding the referencing of third party, neutral material: one could question whether or not the inclusion of incidents like these are encyclopedic. Another commonly referenced policy is an explanation of what this website is not to be used for. Without strong, reliable referencing, incidents similar to this could be interpreted by other editors as lacking the notability to be considered encyclopedic, or that the inclusion of the information is for purposes other than that of an encyclopedic nature, and deleted for that reason. Proper sourcing usually allays these concerns among editors.

On a side note, typically new comments are added at the bottom of the page, and to start a new section, you put double "=" on each side of a title for that section. I noticed you are new, and it takes time to learn the ropes ..... don't feel bad. Also, every time you leave a comment on a talk page like this, make sure you type four "~" after your comment so that your signature appears, and people will know who left the comment.

I wish you the best of luck with your work. LonelyBeacon (talk) 05:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for adminship

I have run across your anti-vandalism efforts again and again, and I think you'd be a great candidate for Adminship. Please let me know if you will accept this nomination, and I will go ahead and set up the RfA. RJaguar3 | u | t 22:15, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rjaguar3,

I am deeply honored that you would offer this. I am not 100% sure I am ready yet. I do feel that I have strong anti-vandal record, I have participated in some RFD discussion .... reported some socks, and I think that especially in the last few months I have come a long way in learning the mechanics of article creation/heavy editing (referencing, citing, uploading images properly, etc), but I think there may be some deeper areas of policy that I have not yet come across that I need to get a handle on.

When I think I'm ready, I will drop a line. Again, I am appreciative for the support and generous offer. LonelyBeacon (talk) 22:22, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings to a fellow Illinoisian

My reply to your comment at my talk page is located on the same. Thanks for writing, and cheers! Unschool (talk) 05:12, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shoeless Joe

The edits I did were simply due to redundancy. For example, Kennesaw Mountain Landis had links to his entry both times his name was mentioned in the article, so I removed the second. Likewise, a lot of the years mentions had links to that year in baseball, so I removed several of them to avoid redundancy. I never took out any links, I just took out the links that were repeated. It made sense to me, but whatever. I'm not going to bother switching it back.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 01:01, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's weird.

Since I was using Huggle, it should've kept going up the ladder in warnings but it didn't. Hmm...lemme try to fix it. Wysprgr2005 (talk) 13:21, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well...It's been fixed. Wysprgr2005 (talk) 13:23, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the education. I wasn't picking on you .... quite the contrary; thanks for vandal busting! LonelyBeacon (talk) 14:27, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to the Chantilly HS editing

First off the teacher who was arrested on charges of Meth can be found here:

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=25&sid=1401442

Secondly the information about LS is widely known from students and teachers in the school. I am a student at the school and can provide whatever references you need to back up the claims. I can provide an article from our school newspaper, the Purple Tide, if necessary however currently their online website is encountering some problems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redskins0756 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That first source looks good; I would go ahead and add that.

As for being "widely known", while I don't doubt that it is widely known in your community, WP:V, which is a critical policy at wikipedia, requires that all information, especially anything potentially controversial, be cited with reliable sources. The school paper would not qualify because the school paper is not a third party source (this is outlined in the reliable source policy. If there were an article in a local paper, or an education journal, a news magazine, etc, then you could use that source. I have seen a few editors try to defend an edit by saying "it is common knowledge" or "this is widely accepted", etc, but eventually that material gets removed because it isn't properly referenced. I wish you luck in finding a source to support your edit. LonelyBeacon (talk) 16:38, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

???

Why are you giving me warnings when my changes to Chicago hot dog were accepted? This is pretty nasty and uncalled for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.127.230.139 (talk) 15:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your one edit (identifying them as pickled sport peppers) was fine. Repeatedly removing a link with no better reason than "its wrong" is disruptive because it was against the consensus of editors involved in editing. The warning, from where I am sitting, was legitimate. LonelyBeacon (talk) 16:39, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Niles West notables

Thanks for your advice. You said that proof of their notability was not needed, just proof of their connection to the school. I understand the school part. Why is proof of their notability not needed?--DAW0001 (talk) 03:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Daw!

The project which helps to set guidelines for school articles is WP:WPSCHOOLS. Under their guidelines, alumni are generally not listed as "notable alumni" unless they already have an article here. Since they already have an article that is being linked to from the school page, someone could go to that page and get all of the information about that person (including references confirming all of their accomplishments). When being included on the list of alumni, the only thing that needs to be there is a reliable source confirming that they actually attended the school (they needn't have even graduated, just attended.

I hope that helps. Best of luck! LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:08, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maine South High School and Hillary

Hey there LB. First let me say I'm an admirer of your diligent work on the Maine South page as well as others. As for Hillary, I can take your suggestion and remove the fact tag. I agree that as of now the assertion that Maine South has received attention because of Hillary is correct, but there was no cite referenced in that section, and wikipedia seems to be moving toward citation of all assertions esp about living persons and politicians. Tho it seems cumbersome. You are also correct that the attention to the school from Clinton predates the 2008 race and I will change that. I split the sentence into two and stand by my reasoning, that Ms. Clinton, while bringing wider recognition to Maine South, is not the chief cause of its reputation. Even in the Tribune you will find more hits relating to its sports teams than to Ms. Clinton.Popsup (talk) 06:42, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you wouldn't take it as a suggestion or a criticism of your work .... just an inquiry and nothing more. Of course you are right about the referencing, and especially about living persons. I think what you've done is good, and I'm all for it. Happy holidays! (and thanks for the kind words about my work) LonelyBeacon (talk) 06:46, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Benet - thanks!

Thanks for the message - I see why you reverted. I was approaching it from a different angle, as in, are they truly notable? Now I see why the alumni thing must be referenced as well, and that makes complete sense - thanks again for setting me straight. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Basket548 (talk • contribs) 00:04, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Basket, you're All right! Best of luck on your editing, and Happy New Year! LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:23, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Thanks x 2

No problem. I've been on a navbox-making binge lately (a quick look at my recent contributions will tell you all you need to know) and this seemed necessary to make. By the way, I've taken your example of the Illinois High School Association's infobox and will be hopefully making them for each of the NFHS organizations, if I'm motivated enough. I personally edit the NJSIAA one and it already looks way better because of it. -Jrcla2 ^(talk)^(contribs) 20:11, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I could take credit for that infobox. It was there long before I started working on the article, but I do like it. I know the feeling about the navbox. I made one for the Central Suburban League, and before I knew it, had the East Suburban Catholic Conference and Chicago Catholic League done. Time flies when you are having fun. Best of luck on your editing. LonelyBeacon (talk) 22:01, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Naperville North

1

Yeah, I understand that you're not trying to be contentious. One thing was I didn't see where the NPOV thing was (even though I understand it's appearing to be written by a student). For one, it probably seems more libelous than it really is (all of the stuff is at least as crazy as it seems--the administration has blatantly violated laws and rules multiple times). But I understand where you are coming from. And one thing...what is your challenge ;) ? That's my two scents 02:00, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Working with schools as I do, I see that school administrations are hardly wearing halos as often as they think they are. Sometimes they are doing the wrong things for the wrong reasons. However, sometimes they have their reasons, even if they are not popular or obvious (I don't want you to think I'm taking sides here ... I wasn't there, and have no connection with NN). My challenge was simply on the basis that the wording seemed POV, and there was no citation to prove anything happened ... my experience with that (and please, this is not an accusation) is that these are usually people who are blowing things out of proportion ... that is, the event undoubtedly happened, and I certainly accept there was some incident. I would challenge that this incident was big enough to include in an article for international readers trying to learn more about the school.

On the flip side ..... if (strictly as an example), there were contentions that the school administration had routinely broken the law, trampled student civil rights, etc .... some of this moved to the courts, or were the written about in newspapers which documented this, then I would see including a section like "Legal action" or "Controversies". When editors get into extraordinary claims, it generally requires airtight sourcing to keep it in the article.

Like I said, this is how I am reading things, and I don't want you to think I am censoring anything. I do some work on Chicago area school articles, and while I don't doubt that this generated considerable controversy in the school, I just don't see how it would be a detail of short term interest.

Best of luck in editing ... for what its worth, while I work for another school in the suburbs (way north), NN is a school that gets one heck of a lot of respect ... if you are somehow connected, I tip my hat. LonelyBeacon (talk) 02:13, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks about the respect thing; I'm currently a senior, I graduate Wednesday. So on Thursday be expecting me in the notable alumni.

jk, but in regard to the Airband thing, you honestly have no idea how angry we've become. I was honestly trying to maintain as much NPOV in that section as possible; you should see some of the stuff I removed. It's too bad it's not really citable, because that really had to be one of the biggest times of turmoil for the school, especially with the Bill Ayers thing at the same time, if you heard about that, and everything else the administration has done in the past two years that doesn't happen at any other schools. But thanks for your concern about the article! And sorry if that was too message board-like. That's my two scents 17:37, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2

I see what you mean. I won't restore it; I thought you just removed the whole section thinking it was all about alumni/current students. I think it was just a communication breakdown between you and me. I don't really know all of the guidelines, I just know the main ones and I know the gist of some of the smaller ones. I just go by the guidelines, etc. cited by other editors. I'm just not a very big fan of removing something uncited, but rather tagging it...I'm not sure why I (or anyone else) didn't tag that section; I know it hasn't really changed for a long time. But I'll try to find citations for some of that; I know they're out there I updated it with one yesterday and I have no idea why I didn't cite it. But thanks for the help! That's my two scents 17:37, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First off, congratulations on graduating .... you're walking out of a great school, and I'm sure heading off to bigger and better things.

I have zero doubt about the anger over things going around. Not being there/having been there, I'm not 100% sure what happened beyond your description, but I have been present for similar problems at other school. No doubt there is a lot of anger in the air. It is just critical that any claims be cited and referenced. If the school administration is breaking the law, and there's some reference that even hinted at the problem, I would be hte first one on board to put it in. Wikipedia is absolutely not censored in that regard, nor should it be.

I also tend to tag vs. outright delete .... except for two situations, both of which (IMO) were in play here. One is that while this is undeniably a big deal right now, there is the long term importance .... think of it this way: this is an encyclopedia article; would this be considered a defining moment in school history, if everyone were reading this 20 years from now. My experience with schools says that incidents like this can be very big at the time, but they tend to blow over, and by next year, very few people remember it ..... in five years no one remembers it. I know that's easy for me to say as an outsider, but this is my experience (this is where I was bringing in WP:NOTNEWS. The second issue: anytime anyone brings in hints of legal impropriety, there needs to be extra special care. Without an outside source, it reads like gossip, heresay, or opinion (even if it is real and true). There's just no way for anyone else outside the situation to discern truth from gossip. Given that threshold, I opted to delete vs. tag (for what its worth, before I deleted, I did do some searches for the incident, looking for local newspaper accounts, but found none ... another thing I will try and do before deletion).

Thanks for being understanding, and my apologies if I wasn't clear enough. Sorry your senior year ends with a bit of a bum event like this, but (trust me on this) things will get much better soon! Congrats! LonelyBeacon (talk) 18:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:GBNHScrest.png

Thanks for uploading File:GBNHScrest.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 02:06, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hinsdale Central

Hi! You seem to be editing the Hinsdale Central High School page a lot. Just out of curiosity, do you just enjoy patrolling high school pages or are/were you a student at Hinsdale Central? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Netalarm (talk • contribs) 04:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Netalarm,

I have no connection to Hinsdale Central, though I am familiar with the schools in and around suburban Chicago. Among the other school articles I have worked on: Joliet Catholic Academy, Chicago Vocational Career Academy, Maine East High School, Hillcrest High School (Country Club Hills), De La Salle Institute, Evanston Township High School, St. Viator High School, Benet Academy, Carmel High School (Mundelein, Illinois) ..... among others. For some reason which I have no memory of, I did some edits on HC some time ago, and mentally noted that the extensive list of athletic accomplishments was taking up a lot of room, though I had no wish to delete any of them. Some time recently, I learned how to make a collapsable table, and realized that is what the article needed. When I put the table in, I decided to do some other cleaning up as well.

About all I knew about HC before editing the article is that it was a bog school, a good school, and that except for New Trier, its about the best sports school in Illinois. LonelyBeacon (talk) 05:19, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Hello, LonelyBeacon. You have new messages at Tide rolls's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

License tagging for File:StFrancisDeSalesChicagoSeal.png

Thanks for uploading File:StFrancisDeSalesChicagoSeal.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 03:07, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oyster bay

Hi LonelyBeacon -- Hi thanks for saving me some explanation. I was just going to come back to the Oyster Bay High School article to look you up, as that is the one out of about 20 Oyster Bay articles where an IP editor had made changes that I felt needed to be undone, where a subsequent editor's change also got reverted by my action. I was deciding whether i should reimplement your edit or if i could just notify you so that you could restore your edit if you wish. Since I know nothing about the notability of these alumni, I would prefer if you would make the edit, if you don't mind. Sorry for causing some extra work for you. Thanks! doncram (talk) 17:52, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Roger that, Doncram. I could tell, only once I got to your Talk Page, that it seems you have been having issues with IP people swooping in and having their way. I was finally able to find a weak (but still reliable) source for Thomas Pynchon (who is a highly notable author). I could not find a reliable source for the other. I do wish you best of luck on holding off the IP folks, and thanks for the clear message on what was going on. LonelyBeacon (talk) 19:28, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: User:Niccos

Thanks for the heads up. I don't have a huge problem with him personally, and I'm hoping he's willing to talk it out in talk, but we'll see. --Mosmof (talk) 01:00, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hope it works out too. I had been watching this develop, and would not have likely gotten involved except he already had four warnings this month against him prior to this .... so, I thought someone needed to step in and calm this editor down. LonelyBeacon (talk) 02:06, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there - thanks for the message about this editor. I'm happy to help and explain my reasoning.

I gave Niccos the 3RR warning that I did because I think what's going on is an edit war/dispute, not vandalism. S/he's using the talk page for discussion, and discussion is what we want, right? If this were mindless reversion, clicking the 'undo' button over and over again, with no effort to explain or discuss, I might be persuaded to block for vandalism. But this editor, I think, needs to learn about 3RR and the way things work around here. They took the time to learn how to insert a legitimate reference to ESPN with <ref> tags - that's the sign of someone who wants to contribute, even if it's not exactly the kind of ref or content we want. Someone I once coached back in the day started out in a similar fashion, and s/he is now a good contributor to the encyclopedia.

If Niccos continues to edit war today, after my warning, s/he should definitely be reported to AN3, but I don't think this is a vandal yet and I don't want to push him/her that direction. I'm a chronic AGFer, so my block hammer is really more of a Nerf bat. But I do sometimes trade it in for a ball-peen hammer. ;-) If you have more questions, don't hesitate to ask, and thanks again for the message! - KrakatoaKatie 03:39, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not that you require my affirmation, but that sounds like sound reasoning. LonelyBeacon (talk) 03:51, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment on political straw polls

The article Straw polls for the 2008 United States presidential election and its associated pages were deleted as of 9 Nov 2008, and the deletions are now being reviewed. Because of your prior involvement, please comment at Wikipedia:Deletion review#Straw polls for the 2008 United States presidential election. Thank you for your consideration! 20 involved editors are being notified. JJB 19:21, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Dan Sullivan

Feel free to re-nominate Dan Sullivan (Illinois politician) for deletion. There was never supposed to be an article at that title. The IP who added his name wrote "Dave Sullivan", [2], but I must have misread something or mistyped something and changed that to "Dan Sullivan" [3]. There was no article at Dan Sullivan (Illinois politician) at that point. That article was created by Knagel35 a few months later, but it seems like he was just trying to fill in a red link, and didn't actually know anything about the topic: [4]. Zagalejo^^^ 23:04, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Roger wilco .... I will go through the process. LonelyBeacon (talk) 02:20, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

answer

Listen man, why don't you change this page KF Partizani Tirana?This is totally wrong.This is HUGE shame for Wikipedia.You can call yourself encyclopedia?!LOL If you block me, you'll just confirm that you're useless.You MUST correct this page!And I'm not Vandal, you are, because you fetch and carry false information! —Preceding unsigned comment added by N.U.S.K.N.V.P. (talk • contribs) 22:59, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn't "direct personal attack" and you (editors) weren't doing your job...That's why I wrote that you're "useless".Why don't you answer me about this page KF Partizani Tirana?This is huge mistake and shame for Wikipedia.All facts are faulty and about FK Partizan from Belgrade! —Preceding unsigned comment added by N.U.S.K.N.V.P. (talk • contribs) 13:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. Calling someone "useless" is a personal attack. Name calling is not something condoned at this site, and that is something you need to be aware of.

2. I don't know enough about the subject of this article. What I can suggest, if you are concerned about the facts being faulty, is that you find some reliable sources to back your assertions, and edit the article with reliable sources properly cited. This is how edits are defended here. How do we know if what you are saying is any more "correct" than anyone else? Proper sourcing is what is needed.

As I noted on your talk page, what I was initially responding to was the incivility. No matter how correct you know your edits to be, and no matter how wrong you think another editor is, you absolutely do not have the right to call people names or describe them as you have. That is the policy of this website, and we are all required to follow it. You may be right about your edits, but the civility cannot be ignored. I do wish you the best of luck in editing. LonelyBeacon (talk) 14:01, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say that you're useless like person, but all editors because of wrong information...But forget it. I think if you enough about that subject, you should ask someone else of editors to correct that, because it is very big mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by N.U.S.K.N.V.P. (talk • contribs) 17:17, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

West Aurora High School and Wendell Minor continued

Would this here: http://www.sd129.org/alumni/awardhistory.asp be sufficient for proving that he is an alumnus of West Aurora High School? He is in the West Aurora High School Hall of Honor. If you scroll down to the 2006 Honorees, he is listed. If not, The Beacon News has an article entitled "Ten to be inducted into West's Hall of Honor" from August 29, 2006 which also mentions the same information as the School District's website. And yes I did understand completely why you removed it. I looked into some other articles, and I believe the person who wrote that got confused because of what a Pulitzer Winner said about Wendell Minor. But regardless, he is definitely not a Pulitzer Winner. Anyways, I justed want to check first with you. :)

Hoping4nash (talk) 19:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those sure look like they meet reliable source info to me .... for what it is worth, I am on vacation visiting a friend's house, and their daughter as a children's book written by Buzz Aldrin and illustrated by Wendell Minor ... LonelyBeacon (talk) 21:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Niles West High School

Thanks for the notice, I truly appreciate that. It sounds sensible to me, although I think you accidentally re-added the link to the yearbook that I removed. --Jj110888 (talk) 16:44, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry that...

I broke Wikipedia but I see that it was fixed easily. Secret Agent 008 (talk) 23:35, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that legal threats are not permitted and results in a ban. Does this count?

I hereby declare that I will sue you.

Does the word "sue" trigger a filter which results in ban? Secret Agent 008 (talk) 23:41, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, that filter probably doesn't work because this message gets through. Maybe a 3 minute delay? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Secret Agent 008 (talk • contribs) 23:42, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

James Iha / Elk Grove High School

Just wanted to let you know I got your message about James Iha being an alumni - thank you for finding a source! Cheers, Paradoxsociety (review) 05:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problemo. When I see things like that ... I tend to challenge them myself. I happened to have some extra time and went on a ref hunt. LonelyBeacon (talk) 07:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Downers Grove South High School

Then please create the article about the person first. I routinely remove blacklinks and redlinks since there have been no reliable sources to prove that the person is notable. I don't disagree that Olympians are notable, but there should be an article before listing them at the school, or anywhere else. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:36, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you loud and clear. I have been using the guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Alumni, which state that the alum either should have an article, or be eligible for one. There was (to my knowledge) not a requirement that the article be created before inclusion (all of course provided that a proper verification is given). Again, if I have misinterpreted this, please let me know. LonelyBeacon (talk) 01:49, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How long do we wait for the article to be created? Days, weeks, months, years? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:53, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have an answer for your question. I am in the midst of editing articles about schools. I am right now more focused in properly implementing the policies of Wikipedia and the consensus of the editors in regards to those articles. The provisions allow for the inclusion of an alum that meets the criteria of notability. To the best of my knowledge, I have not violated the spirit nor the letter nor the consensus of the editors in regards to this. Right now, I could create an article that reads "X was a bobsledder in the Y Olympics", and reference where this person went to high school. That is hardly an article, and I would rather not take the time now to research that person (and others like him I encounter in editing school articles) beyond his threshold for meeting the criteria for inclusion in the article that I was editing. If I have gone against consensus, or the notability requirement in thinking this alum should be included, then I genuinely restate that any editor should point this out to me, and I will be the first to delete said person. As I am reading this, the threshold is not that an article must actually pre-exist for inclusion to move forward, but that the person must meet the requirements of WP:N to be included. LonelyBeacon (talk) 05:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On reflection, you could try filing a request for article creation with WP:WikiProject Olympics, WP:WikiProject Sports, or WP:WikiProject Winter sports ... they might have the best access to references to help in the construction of an article on a bodsledder. LonelyBeacon (talk) 05:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Zach Kaplan and Glenbrook North Notable Alumni list

Hello, LonelyBeacon. Thank you very much for the explanation of the reversion/edits you made. I have added an article for Mr. Kaplan, which I believe demonstrates notability (as you seem to agree in your second comment). I have also updated the reference on the alumni page to the official high school yearbook, which shows Mr. Kaplan to be a 1997 graduate. Is this sufficient, or are yearbooks considered invalid sources? Guacmol (talk) 01:47, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

School article assessments

Yes, most of these articles are clearly quite important for the project and should be good if not featured, I am glad these schools are now being done justice. It is pretty clear from the assessments I did you have put at lot of time and work into improving school articles, hence I think you deserve this...

Camaron · Christopher · talk 15:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Camaron, thanks for the gift! LonelyBeacon (talk) 18:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Glenbard West

Hi Lonely. I'm glad my addition passed your approval criteria. However, I'm curious why you changed the Wiki reference to Lonesome Dove. In my version, the reader was linked to a Wiki page that has a far more in depth description of the TV mini-series and even lists the award winners. Your version, with (film) added at the end, gives very little information. --Zaksdad (talk) 23:19, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear ... it isn't my approval criteria ... this was simply a suggestion based on experience I have had in editing and with other editors.

The reason for the change: Lonesome Dove links to the Larry McMurtry book, while Lonesome Dove (film) refers to the TV film that this person won the Emmy Award for. Sometimes, separate links don't exist, but in this case, one happened to exist, and since it more specifically fit the project he won the award for, I thought I would make the change. I also added The Fugitive (1993 film) because he won a BAFTA award for that.

Please don't think I have a problem with your editing ... one of the key ideas behind Wikipedia is that it is a collaborative process. You knew enough that this person was a notable alum ... I knew enough that the referencing needed to be stronger, but didn't have an idea where to look ... you did. I've had more experience formatting school articles, and made a few tweaks to what you put in. In the end, the article is improved. LonelyBeacon (talk) 00:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Next time I will read more carefully.

You are right ... your link did have the awards information that was relevant to this person ... and upon looking, that table shouldn't have been there. The article you originally linked to was the article about the book, but that second large awards table was all about awards won by the TV movie. What I did was take that table and move it to Lonesome Dove (film), which is really where it should be, and fixed the referencing. I had to go back and check because that table was at the bottom of the article, and when I first went over there, I saw it was the book article, and that film awards shouldn't be there (unless there was only a single article covering the book and the TV film. I'm going to go back and find out who made that table and let them know that I moved it. Thanks for the question ... I wish I would have read it more carefully the first time. LonelyBeacon (talk) 00:52, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All's well that ends well, LonelyBeacon. --Zaksdad (talk) 03:57, 16 August 2009 (UTC) One thought though. I looked up "Lonesome Dove". Most people, I believe, would simply put those two words in for a search of anything concerning Lonesome Dove. Book, writer, composer, stars, etc. It would be a shame if information was hidden somehow from a reader not "smart" enough to be very specific in their search for certain information. Can't that table you speak of be in both places?--Zaksdad (talk) 04:11, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good point. My thinking is that someone either didn't know there was an article on the film, or wrote this before the film article was written, and it was never cleaned out. I added a redirect statement at the top of the Lonesome Dove article. This way, if someone is looking for the film or the series, and all they do is type in "Lonesome Dove", they will not only know they are in the wrong place, but will know exactly where to go. I think this solves the problem that you brought up, which was a problem. LonelyBeacon (talk) 04:24, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Johnsburg High School Band Directors

I couldn't help but notice your editing of Johnsburg High School Band directors, after I put it back in. I think this is important information. I see your point about a list of Principals, but I don't think this makes band directors any less valid. Infact, many in education would say that teachers in general are there for the kids more than any administrator!

Being that these teachers have worked long hours with literally hundreds of students, I think a list of who put in this extra time and dedication should warrant a listing, especially on the section of the school that they worked so hard for.

VDL8 (talk) 19:28, 23 August 2009 (UTC)VDL8[reply]