This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ritchie333. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Not that it matters, I'm sure, but I'm now all about the love for people who really care about the project. You're one of those. So let's reboot. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:48, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
A bollocks face? Well you could start with this one and add that one too. I'll think about the M25 GA, I spend long enough on it. EZL? I'm not even allowed to discuss that, as you know. Is that some kind of trap? So soon? The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 17:52, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
I missed that. When did that happen? I had a quick look on the dramaboards and the only thing I can find is a proposal being tossed out. In my view, it is poor form for an administrator to log something at WP:EDR and not put a link to the discussion that led to the consensus. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)18:02, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
You know me, I have so much drama swirling around (like a novice Fram), I couldn't point you to anything. I'm sure someone somewhere will be able to point to the bit where I was banned forever from engaging in that whose name can't be spake ever, although I was given the dispensation that I could do whatever I liked at WP:TRM which, obviously, is complete bollocks, but that's how we roll here. I think I'd be okay with making reviews of articles in isolation of any known main page "process of whose name I cannot speak", and I can draw attention to the myriad issues from said "unspoken other place" at WP:TRM, but I can't actively engage with the community, even when it's utter horseshit and full of problems and embarrassing and on the main page for hours and hours. Because that all makes sense. Can't risk it because there are certain admins who, in the past, have shown a determination to simply block, block, block, and move on, mechanically, almost like a robot. So I'm treading cautious these days. Happy to help with the normal sub-par stuff that gets onto "certain" parts of the main page, but I'm permanently "under a cloud". The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 18:09, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Oh, that. I see there I wrote "As I said on the other thread, if you gain TRM's respect and have a quiet off-wiki word, he is reasonable. If you charge in on horseback with Arbcom pro-forma templates, you'll get blown a raspberry", though I seem to remember most of my participation in that discussion was to try and diplomatically get BU Rob13 to take off the spiderman outfit and climb down from the Reichstag. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)20:24, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
It was my good friends at Arbcom who instigated the topic ban. As odd as it is. But I have renewed respect for some of them after their response to the board, so I'm letting it slide for now. I think I can trust at least a handful of the remaining committee to do the right thing. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 18:35, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
I have remained largely silent on the Fram issue aside from stating my views on it once (which drew a few comments of "that's far too sensible to post here") and kept a wide berth of the more hysterical side of discussions. I have said the WMF was, if not incompetent or malicious, extremely naive and unfair about banning a longstanding contributor without any explanation or any right of appeal, but I just don't think Fram has got the right temperament and communication skills to be an administrator and I would have supported a desysop, though probably not a site ban.
Well sure. If I was a betting man/dog/amoeba, then I'd place 1000/1 on that Arbcom tell you to do one, evens that the ban is extended further (as normal when my appeals are lodged) and a million to one against anything favourable occurring. So sure, go for it, common sense is in short supply of late, but I think it's always trumped by the rejoicing hawks who await my demise. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 20:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
The ban was the result of last autumn's round of drama, when the mysterious "TRM groupies" were brought into the equation and I think you offered someone a Christmas Ale, Ritchie. But probably as long as there are people at DYK who "complain when you're around, and rejoice when you leave" it's going to be difficult for TRM to find a home there... — Amakuru (talk) 20:21, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Late to the party, back from another delightful concert, pianist playing his own piano concerto, first time in Germany (on my talk). No time for Wikipedia. The hook is not about Georg Katzer (I expanded the article but not 5 times), but his opera, and I tried to oblige saying East Germany (which I believe never was a country, - a region yes, a political system yes, but not a country)), and need a check if that would work. The opera with the useful quote about trying in vain to pound at the doors of the mighty. (Insert the mighty you think have too much power.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:00, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Paycor page deletion
Hello Ritchie
You recently deleted a page I created titled "Paycor," but I don't understand why it was deleted. The reason was marked as a G11: unambiguous advertising or promotion. However, I believe I only had factual information on the page regarding the subject, and I referenced several outside sources including Inc Magazine and The Cincinnati Enquirer. I also fail to see how it is really different than other company pages I see on Wikipedia, like "LaRosa's Pizzeria" or "Paylocity" for instance, so I'm not sure why it warranted deletion. Can you give me an explanation? Thanks
@Seanschaeffer24: Company articles are a hard sell on Wikipedia; the basic problem is the world at large doesn't talk about them and mainstream news outlets and books don't write about them. If this sounds unfair, then unfortunately it's just a reflection of what the world thinks about payroll software compared to somewhere to have lunch. LaRosa's Pizzeria is included because it has coverage in multiple national news sources, such as this piece in USA Today which explains its longevity and regional importance, while Paylocity is included in the Deloitte Technology Fast 500. If you want the text restored to your userspace so it isn't lost, I can do that for you. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)19:04, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
@Ritchie333: I get what you're saying, so let me ask you this: If I included more widespread, national outlets/sources (like Forbes for example), would that make it so the page would be eligible to stay published? And thanks, but I still have a copy of the text I can use. Seanschaeffer24 (talk) 19:25, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
The best way to proceed is to use the article wizard at Wikipedia:Article wizard. This will take you through a series of steps, explaining basic dos and don'ts, and then create the new page in draft space, where it won't be deleted. If you need help, there is a good Q&A page called The Teahouse which welcomes new users' questions and can give further advice. Once you think the page is ready to go "live", it will be flagged for review and an independent and experienced editor will look at it. I hope that all makes sense. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)20:04, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 17
An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.
Hi Ritchie, I see you declined the speedy for the recreation of this article. I had raised the AfD at the time and have just done so again - this is (as far as I can see) an identical copy of the article back then. Nothing has changed. The only thing worth noting is that the original author of this article has been blocked and the new article is most likely a sock. There has been previous sock activity with this user and a new case has been raised. Very "ducky" behaviour. This may be worth considering in the light of a marginal AfD previously. pseudonymJake Brockmantalk17:14, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
will find far better summaries that qualify as snarky, from me. That was an objective description of him. Have you ever heard of him or read his works? ~ Winged BladesGodric19:54, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
I am well aware of Peter Wright and Spycatcher, which were major and re-occurring items on British news just over 30 years ago. I don't understand why calling him a fuckwit in an edit summary is conductive towards writing or improving an encyclopedia, and to then complain about other editors leaving milder edit summaries is, well, hypocritical. Update: Ah no, this is some other Peter Wright (and not obviously the Mail on Sunday journalist either); however that doesn't really invalidate my point. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)20:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
All I see is that you are well-aware of how a person can write books from his grave .... What leads to you believe that Peter Wright is a coyrighted name?
Godric, has it occurred to you that over the past 24 hours or so, you have acted like a massive cockwomble? I mean, honestly, I'm trying to do the review of Elisa's block as fairly as I can, and you're make a frightening spectacle of yourself. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)16:13, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
You have absolutely done a fair and commendable job and given the way it's running, she will get site-banned. There's no doubt on that. And, has it ever occurred to you that you are increasingly getting into a habit of maneuvering into completely alien territories despite however clueless you are? ~ Winged BladesGodric19:33, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Well, I must say that T&S's recent initiative to bring Wikipedia closer to the ideal of a collegial safe space imbued by peace and harmony is having an almost magical effect. EEng22:53, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Aaah, now I see, you're one of those crazy deadheads on Wikipedia who drinks real ale (the kind). I'll take half a cup of Rock and Rye to go with that, with the ale in a bocksbeutel, listening to the river sing sweet songs, to rock my soul. North America100023:25, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
It's strange how I like all that music (largely because it's improvised and you can dig out endless variations on a familiar piece of work, keeping it fresh in your mind) but I'm not particularly interested in the tie-died hippy culture that goes with it. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)11:19, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for replying. Yep, the music is where it's at (I like your "endless variations" description). The scene used to be chill in the mid 80s, almost utopian in some ways: peaceful, functional, fun. After Touch Of Grey, the scene got bigger, but it didn't entirely break the scene. The gangsta hippies in the early to mid 90s ultimately ruined the scene. North America100022:28, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Old skool. Friends of mine don't always understand my strong regard for the Dead, so I try to hook them up with the best, 5-star shows, to offset the various weak shows that are out there. Re Dancin', take your pick: Frost 85 or Greek 85. I'm lucky enough to have caught the boys at both venues back in the day (but neither of these shows). I think I like the Frost version slightly better. Cheers, North America100000:20, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I am going to leave one final request that you leave me alone, meaning, please refrain from editing my talk page unless policy requires you to do so and I ask that you refrain from editing my userpage, ever. There should be no need for you to intervene as an administrator as anything involving me would be easily considered WP:INVOLVED. I have done my best to stay away from your editing and I have refrained from commenting about much of anything you're involved in and I'd appreciate the same respect in return. Praxidicae (talk) 17:04, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
While you are free to tell people to stay off your talk page and stop bugging you, I notice that since then you have left a rather snarky message on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The School of Artisan Food after I showed you a source that (in my view) shows at least the article could be redirected to Nottingham Trent University (per policy). If you want me to leave you alone, surely it's only fair to leave me alone and not leave messages like this that are at best irrelevant and at worst inflammatory?
Your problem is you appear to go around looking for trouble, defacing articles and nominating them for deletion, and when you are challenged on it, you get angry and upset and start insulting the other parties. You need to assume more good faith. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)09:02, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
you are very misguided and misrepresenting facts. If you truly believe my intent is nefarious and that I am a vandal, you know the appropriate venue to go to and I suggest you bring your concerns up there becuase the actual evidence contradicts yours statement and you’re just WP:HOUNDING me as this point and creating needless personal attacks. I stand by what I said when I asked you refrain from interacting with me. And need I remind you, ‘’you’’ edited theee things after me. Not the other way around. Praxidicae (talk) 13:51, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Praxidicae asked you to leave her alone and you present evidence that you're doing exactly the opposite. It seems to me as though you routinely check their contributions and involve yourself in them, which after being asked not to, is hounding. You went so far as to blank their userpage, which although the content was not necessarily nice, should not have been done by you as you are heavily involved. It's evident you have caused this editor distress and that you do not see a problem with it. The best course of action now, and what I ask of you to do, is to ensure your editing does not converge with Praxidicae's. You're both constructive editors and nothing good will come of this. Thank you, Vermont (talk) 14:33, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article M25 motorway you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of The Rambling Man -- The Rambling Man (talk) 19:40, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
It comes as no surprise now to see users with grudges demanding "further sanction". If it wasn't so funny, it'd be tragic. I still want a picture of the four-level stack. Perhaps next time I go to Reading I'll go hands free and photo it as I pass underneath.... The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 16:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
The article already has quite a nice aerial view of the M4/M25 junction. I've never seen it from that angle before. I may have some M23/M25 excitement somewhere in my photo archives. A typical thing that became totally overengineered once the London Ringways were cancelled. — Amakuru (talk) 19:39, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
The article I was working on for the Purple Rose Theatre Company was deleted due to G12 & G6 - I think I've got a grasp on what those mean. I don't understand the G8 reasoning for the page though. I'm still learning up on all of this.
I'm requesting that the draft be restored in hopes that I can remedy the problems. I'm new and I think I just need more help/need to delete items that aren't from reliable sources. Am I understanding that correctly? I'm hoping that since the notability check was good (as referenced below) I should be able to amend the problems and move forward.
22:10, 19 July 2019 Ritchie333 talk contribs moved page Draft:The Purple Rose Theatre Company to Purple Rose Theatre Company (Draft passes notability check, should be good to accept) (revert) (thank)
@Thomas.Macias: The problem with your draft isn't anything to do with sourcing; as I recall that was accurate and at least one independent editor concluded the theatre was notable. Rather, it's because the prose appeared to be copied and pasted from other websites. The G6 was logged after Bkissin reviewed your draft and passed it, as it required an administrator to overwrite the existing page, which was a redirect to Jeff Daniels. I looked at the article and the prose looked suspiciously well-formed and comprehensive for something so new, so I used one of our copyright checker tools. I found the first paragraph in the body was an identical copy of a website, the second paragraph copied another, and several other paragraphs were copied from the theatre's official website. Unfortunately, the terms and conditions you see when you edit a page say "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted". User:Ritchie333/Plain and simple guide to copyvios has more information - Wikipedia's definition of "copyright" is very specific; any text must be licenced to be shared with anyone, and even resold, and most websites don't offer this. The G8 in the logs is simply clearing up the related talk / draft talk pages that don't point anywhere once the main article is deleted. I hope that explains things. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)08:50, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
Got it. That explains a lot. So then, if I understand correctly, even if something is directly quoted and the source is sourced, it still won't necessarily be protected from copyright. There was a lot on the page that was my own work, and I don't doubt that others were not my own words. Is there any way I could get the draft back anyhow and correct the mistakes? Or is it a line in the sand "no turning back" sort of thing? If it is, I get it, but I know you know that a lot of hours went into getting the formatting and sourcing correct. I'd be... not quite devastated, but upset if I couldn't at least get the work back and fix what I did wrong.
Looking ahead to any future work on Wikipedia, is there a way you can share your copyright checker tool process with me? Or point me in a direction to learn more? That would help me double check anything I put on this site moving forward.
@Thomas.Macias: Unfortunately, all Wikipedia pages have to be distributed with an appropriate free documentation licence, and text copied from other websites has to be deleted for legal reasons, regardless of what state it's in. We release this involves work submitted in good faith to be lost, and that is a shame.
To install the copyvio check tool yourself, edit Special:MyPage/common.js and add the following line : importScript("User:The Earwig/copyvios.js"); You'll then get an extra option in "Tools" called "Copyvio check". Click on it and it will give you a report on how likely the page is to be copied from another website. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)10:01, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
Ritchie333, Did a check using earwig. the 75% match is a false positive, that website copied from us; I figured this out by scanning what Merkava looked like the day the news article was published; They looked the same and no one added in a bunch of content at the time, so it had to have been a backwards copy. They also didn't remove the citation when copying it over to the news site; As it says "Mark II chassis provides a low-cost way to upgrade support units' capabilities to perform medical, logistical, and rescue missions.[19] " If you see citations like this pop up during scans, the potential of the website copying from us is much higher. I have to do an irl thing now but I'll look at the other results on earwig later. 💵Money💵emoji💵💸12:31, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
I'm removed all the copyvios found by earwig from the article. The section Swadim is talking about seems to be clean. 💵Money💵emoji💵💸15:19, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
I don't know Wikipedia procedures well, yet, but you have been helpful in the past, so I hope I can ask you about something.
This is my husband's page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_F._Ware_Jr. He is remarkable in that
1. He was in charge of flight test engineering at the Skunkworks, Air Force Ones...
2. He, with me, co-founded the Ware Lab at Virginia Tech, and
3. Though he was a conservative icon, and his sphere were also conservative, he married me, a transsexual, SRS in 1981. He got with me in 1989, lived together since 1993, married me in 1995...married me 17 times, each year on our anniversary until his death in 2012.
People in our sphere have always tried to hide this, even caused pain to us trying to drive me away.
This is true, and it is very important that a man of his conservative nature, a Christian Elder, in the 1990s would marry me, a transsexual, and the person who removed the paragraph said it was almost slanderous to say—as if I am someone of a nature who a man like Joe should not marry. I wouldn't be surprised if the remover was someone in his sphere who is still trying to shut it up.
But I've learned in life there is nothing wrong with me and that it's wrong of people to assume there is or should be. I've been trying for years, now, to own myself and our love. I've shared it to all friends, organizations I'm in, in my book, at Virginia Tech (where his lab is), all over, because it is BEAUTIFUL. He loved me. A man like that; he loved me, married me, stayed with me until the end in spite of prejudice that tried to hide the fact.
SIR: I am not sure how to handle this, but saying Joe married a transsexual is not any slander—it's true and is a beautiful testament to his loving nature, non-judgmental, non-prejudiced, nature.
QUESTION: What can I do to prevent that paragraph being removed again?
Thank you
Jenna Ware,
Hathalm
Mrs. Joseph F. Ware, Jr.
Co-founder of the Ware Lab at Virginia Tech
Transsexual
@Hathalm: Firstly, my apologies for not replying sooner, I am not in a position to be on-wiki much at the moment and have been distracted by other things in life. Anyway, it sounds like you had a good marriage that gave you lots of happiness, and that's nice to hear. For what it's worth, one of my best friends is transgender and which she has suffered problems from people, I have tried to be as supportive as I possibly can towards her because to me she sounds like a sensible and intelligent woman.
Hi Ritchie, I've just sent an email to you via email this user - can you please respond to it as soon as you're able? Thank you in advance. ♠PMC♠ (talk)03:11, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Ritchie, I've just sent you an email relating to off-wiki communications. Take your time responding, we need to get this right. Cheers! The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 07:45, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
On 19 July, I pointed out that the webpage had copied from Wikipedia. I understand that these things can be overlooked easily. It's what happened next that's unusual. Instead of asking Jim to undelete it (or doing it yourself), it seems you copied the deleted version, copy-edited it, then re-created it as your own. You then undeleted the previous edits. This has added Isabel Pell to the list of articles you created, but not marked as recreated. It has also left a confusing history, where with one edit it's tagged, and the next is a copyedit that has added 12,577 bytes.
Did you do the same thing at Green Tomato Cars? Your list of creations shows that you created it, but in fact someone else did. The logs also show a deletion and undeletion by you on the day the log says you created it. SarahSV(talk)17:20, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
@SlimVirgin: This seems to be an artifact of the MediaWiki software. I used the same procedure for restoring Isabel Pell as I did for other articles started by Elisa and deleted per G12. You can see the same issue in the history for Allanah Harper, where I appear to add 2K of prose, despite the overall size of the article going down.
As far as I recall, somebody moved Green Tomato Cars without a redirect while I was copyediting it; resulting in me re-creating the article without realising it. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)16:15, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Ritchie, thanks for the explanation. What should have happened at Isabel Pell is that, once you'd realized the mistake, someone should have asked Jimfbleak or another admin to undelete. The admin who undeleted would also have removed the copyvio tag, so the history would show tag added, tag removed. Then, with the article restored, you could have made your copy edit.
Instead, you recreated the article as your copy-edited version, then undeleted its history, which meant (1) you acted as admin and editor on the same article; (2) the article was added to your list of creations, even though you didn't create it; and (3) the article history looks odd (one minute tagged as copyvio, the next an addition of 12,577 bytes described as a copy edit). The way to avoid this in future is to make sure you don't act as editor and admin on the same article, except perhaps for issues such as BLP violations. You can ask any admin to undelete (or whatever admin action is needed), and that leaves you free to edit. SarahSV(talk)16:51, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
Passing comment, I imagine that rev deleting a cv is appropriate, but slightly agree with caution in recreation. Despite the awareness of copyright amongst active contributors here, which is largely ignored elsewhere. adding something missing is a worthy task and deserving of attribution and guidance. But could be I am missing the point. cygnis insignis10:50, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
"make sure you don't act as editor and admin on the same article" While this is generally good advice, in this specific case I assumed I had general consensus to restore the article after it was pointed out I had made an error and there was no obvious disagreement. "In straightforward cases, the community has historically endorsed the obvious action of any administrator – even if involved – on the basis that any reasonable administrator would have probably come to the same conclusion." If a third party had complained that the article should not have been restored and should have remain deleted per G12 then yes, that would be involved. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)11:27, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
Simple undeletion wouldn't have been an issue. It's that you copied the deleted text, changed it, created the article as your own, then undeleted the history. That created an entry in your creation log showing you as the article's creator. I've never seen an admin do that before. I thought it worth mentioning so that it can be avoided in future. SarahSV(talk)02:15, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
Hello. Would you be willing to nominate this article for DYK? The Debut (Jackie Evancho album). I like to do research and write articles, but the technical DYK nomination process is arcane to me. The hook could be:
Thank you very much! Let me know if I can help you out with any proofreading/copy editing, which is my forte. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
question of procedure
Hi Ritchie, I notice you are active and have a query on contesting an unblock of a user, although I recommend not getting involved and responding hypothetically. The advice to let it go is an option, of course, but assuming I don't, what is the next step after discussing it with an admin? cygnis insignis10:44, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
I assume we're talking about King of Hearts unblocking Wnt. Since the blocking admin endorses the unblock, unless you have further information that Wnt is being disruptive and should be blocked now, there is no need for any further action. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)11:17, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
The blocking admin did not recognise a consensus to unblock, but did not register an objection; not quite the same thing. I don't, of course, have any new information (as they were blocked), just my personal conviction they should not be contributing any time soon. I did request a hypothetical response, not forthcoming so I will leave you to it. Have a good one. 11:36, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
Ref HELP, again, FYI. Paragraph Deleted Again
Hello Ritchie. Thank you for taking an interest.
Now a day later, another author deleted the same paragraph as before, the one in Retirement section that says Joe Ware married a transsexual—which is true. I am his wife/widow, and I am transsexual, have been with SRS in 1981. We got together in 1989, married in 1995.
Joe was a significant conservative icon. His family worships him. He was flight test engineer in charge at Skunk Works, Lockheed, over the 1st 2 Air Force Ones, the U-2, the SR-71, the C-130 Hercules...and he was a Christian, a Presbyterian Elder...
There have always been people in his sphere who took exception to our marriage. It felt,rather, like it was the 1950s and he was a white icon who married a black person. People tried to run me off from the start. Yes, he was 40 years older, but neither of us had a concept of that, either. He was a MARVELOUS man, and we loved each other, truly. We married each other ever year on our anniversary, for a total of 17 times, I'm fond of saying.
But people have been abusive of me during our time together and even after his death in 2012. As well, people in his sphere have tried to hide the fact that a man like that would marry someone like me.
The paragraph in question is the 2nd in the Retirement Section of Joseph_F._Ware_Jr. It is a very positive paragraph.
No reason was given for the revert, and I did note that on my undo just now, but I believe the offending part of the paragraph is where it says he married me, clarified as transsexual.
I believe it is very important to state the truth of our marriage, as it shows what a good man he was, and to feel I shouldn't state that truth is to slam me for being what I am, that it's not okay he married someone who is transsexual, which can't be true.
Anything you can do or advise me will be most helpful.
And Someone Deleted the transsexual parts of that paragraph again
Hello Ritchie,
Clearly, this is over my head. I need help, guidance.
Someone else rapidly changed the page in a matter of minutes to delete, among other things, that his wife is transsexual. They also cited otehr things, some of which are wrong: Joe is not a living person. My book self-book autobiography of 2016 is there to show my statement of the truth. That I am transsexual in our marriage is unusual, and that's why it's newsworthy.
People are making choices that are removing this fact of my transsexuality from our marriage. If you have any advice, please share.
I don't understand the Talk edits about Joe's page
Hello Ritchie,
Two things are happening to Joe's page, I think.
1. People keep reverting the page to an edit that has a sentence fragment in it. I keep fixing that, but they keep changing it back to the sentence fragment: Retirement section, Para 2, Sentence 2, begins "Though..."
3. I removed my citation to my book, as it was SPS, by request. I believe it's relevant, as it's the only source of this covered-up information, that I'm transsexual. But if it's not allowed, okay. But I think it is very noteworthy that I, his 3rd wife, am/was transsexual. NOTE: Such things on the wed page I supplied such as Joe being in the Coast Guard Auxiliary, helping them with Counter Terrorist activities...were all supplied by me as his wife, earlier, and they're okay without third party discussion, but I can't add that I'm transsexual because it refers to me? That results in the avoidance or suppression of what is so important, proof that Joe was non-judgmental, non-prejudiced, in an era that has been very anti-trans. We took a lot of hell fort this. How can it not be stated?
And now, even though I left off my book citation, I'm being warned about doing an edit war because I keep going in and re-inserting correct Ware Lab data, me as transsexual, fixing the sentence fragment. I'm not trying to war.
I have added my thoughts to the discussion page Talk:Joseph F. Ware Jr. - let's keep conversation focused there so it's all in one place and people can easily find it. I've been watching your video from the Virginia Tech College of Engineering YouTube channel, where you talk about how fun it is to get up in a plane and see the world from above. That sounds more exciting that what I'm doing this evening (which'll probably be doing some washing and cleaning). Ritchie333(talk)(cont)15:22, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
I may have been banned?
Hi Ritchie. Yup, we all ge to do the washing and cleaning at times. :) I don't look forward to it, either.
I may have been banned at Joe's Talk page. I saw someone else counter your statement, then I tried to add the following, TWICE, but it doesn't show. I find NO where saying that I've been banned, but it's not taking the reply. Nonetheless, here it is, below, including me publishing this twice in the VT campus newspaper, in 2018, though I paid for those 2 full page adds.
Making Progress
Thank you Ritchie333 for your helpful comments. Yes, I am supportive of the issue of my transsexuality on Joe Ware's Article. I believe it is noteworthy that in a climate of transphobia, of hate, where I had been threatened, assaulted, our home intruded...that he would stand up and openly declare his love for me, marry me, and that we stayed together until his death in 2012. Joe Ware, a conservative man, defense department engineer, married me, a transsexual.
As to publication, Virginia Tech did include that video of me. I don't think I look that good on the video, but I approved of it.
I also published this exact matter TWICE in the Virginia Tech campus newspaper, about Joe's wonderful family, the Ware Lab, my transsexuality, Virginia Tech's Commission on Equal Opportunity and Diversity stating unanimously that transsexualism exists, and my hope for further campus integration in time—all published on August 28, 2018 and again on September 11, 2018—but I don't know if it matters here as, yet again, those two full-page ads were advertorials, as they called them. I paid for them.
I must be doing something wrong, here, though, because the fact that this great man stood up in a climate of hate and openly married me, transsexual, is not something that can find a way onto his Article. My book was self-published https://www.amazon.com/Shadow-Life-Aerospace-Love-Secrets-ebook/dp/B01MQX0THD/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=Jenna+Ware&qid=1564068631&s=gateway&sr=8-2 , the two times it was in the Collegiate Times I paid for, I'm not allowed to include information about myself in his Article, and another person can't speak authoritatively about my transsexualism...
On the POSITIVE SIDE, Yes, VT did do that video of me, in my airplane hangar at Camarillo, CA, and I've well established that I am truly transsexual and that we were married.
RESOLUTION ??
1. Would it be acceptable if someone else, other than me, included a line in Joe's Article something to the effect that his third wife was/is transsexual? Because this is not only true, it's the kind of thing that is important for our society.
2. I see the sentence fragment got fixed, but
3. I still need to fix the incorrect statement in Retirement that says Joe founded the Ware Lab. There were 3 of us who co-founded the Lab: Joe, me, and Hayden Griffin, Ph.D., a then engineering professor at Virginia Tech. This is all described in detail in my book, but that citation isn't liked because it was self-published. But Virginia Tech has stated this as well: https://eng.vt.edu/warelab/about-the-ware-lab/friends-of-the-ware-lab.html
4. No third party sources that talk about Joe marrying a transsexual? In the 1st paragraph of Retirement, note that he served in the Coast Guard Auxiliary, helped them with counter-terrorism, owned a Beachcraft and a T-28...all without citations, but they're there. I'm the one who supplied that information. It says citation needed, but it's still there.
All this ruckus is over this word: "Transsexual." Why is that? Why is that one thing, that he married someone like me, the thing that's so disallowed, that has no way in? I'm asking that this great mean, demonstrated by his open marriage to me, be allowed.
Self-published work is disliked because it can contain falsities. I understand. But mine is conservative in that area, and I believe the information in it is important to describe this great man who showed remarkable courage and strength of character in openly marrying me.
As Godric has said, he can't find any sources in newspapers.com that talk about you and transsexuality. If he had found any, he would have put them in the article and that would have ended the dispute. I have asked Megalibrarygirl for assistance as she is a professional librarian and has full access to many offline journals and periodicals, including a lot of local news sources, that aren't widely available on the end of a Google search.
From my personal point of view, if you look like a woman and act like one, I'll treat you as one. There's more stuff about transsexuality I can talk about but it involves real-life friends of mine that I'm not at all comfortable mentioning on-wiki; suffice to say I don't have a problem with it at all. And it is important to get the issues to discussed out there. (I note above that I confused transsexuality with transgender - the two are different, but I do have a friend in each of those "categories") In the meantime, you could stick User:Ritchie333/Userbox Trump on your userpage, it might not be able to get the article fixed quicker, but it will at least make you feel better. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)17:00, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
Hi Ritchie! I looked at several databases and tried searching under both "Jenna" and "Jennifer." However, I see no reason not to include the information about Joseph Ware's personal life. It's written about here and I'd consider it to be a reliable source and it's not written by Jenna. Clearly, his open mind and his marriage of 22 years would have an effect on his life and should be part of the article. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:54, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
@ClemRutter: I have semi-protected Steve Bray for a few days. Bob Marshall-Andrews doesn't appear to have been edited for a fortnight, so I don't think any action is necessary there. Ritchie333(talk)(cont)19:26, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
DYK nomination of The Debut (Jackie Evancho album)
All the German air forces (there are 3) are linked to in the hatnote at German Air Force and have been for a long time. This page is redundant and unneeded.
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.
Hello, Ritchie333. Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Hello, Ritchie333. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 15:18, 5 August 2019 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Arbitration motion regarding Ritchie333 and Praxidicae
After discussion with both parties, the Committee resolves that Ritchie333 (talk·contribs) be indefinitely banned from interacting with, or commenting on Praxidicae (talk·contribs) anywhere on the English Wikipedia. Praxidicae has agreed to abide by a mutual interaction ban for the same duration. This is subject to the usual exceptions.
Support
AGK, Courcelles, GorillaWarfare, Joe Roe, KrakatoaKatie, Mkdw, Opabinia regalis, Premeditated Chaos, SilkTork, Worm That Turned
This cannot be![1] And the Victoria Line series has barely been begun... I don't know what prompted this but hope all's well with you mate, and that you'll be back with us soon. — Amakuru (talk) 07:41, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Take a break and do come back
Hi Ritchie333, You have done a great deal valuable work in Wikipedia and many of us appreciate you time spent and contribute to Wikipedia project. Take a break and come back as all things settle in time. Take care. CASSIOPEIA(talk)07:41, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Despite all our conflicts, you were one of the good guys, who cared for the 'pedia. Don't know the cause but I hope you come back, someday in future. ∯WBGconverse07:44, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for pink cat, written with Fylbecatulous in mind. (Why is the article not in it's navbox? ... and the image not in the category?) I'll write Britten's Purcell Realizations with you in mind. I went over my images from "it is enough" to "life is too short" but think a cat may fit best. Wishing you well, and hoping that you'll be with us again some day, - a selfish wish because the place is much sadder without you. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:53, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
This happened; a secret Arbcom case with no (publicly visible) case request, request for evidence, or finding of fact. While I've explained at length recently why this kind of Nacht und Nebel action is sometimes unavoidable, I find it even less likely that Ritchie333 can be classified under the violent criminals and genuine lunatics which that star chamber clause was intended to address than I do Fram. ‑ Iridescent09:05, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
I'm subject to an in camera IBAN handed to me by Arbcom, but that was for very different circumstances. There's no reason at all that this was conducted in a similar manner. The Rambling Man (REJOICE!) 09:29, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Very sorry indeed to see this. I hope you'll feel able to come back after in the future. You will be missed!, Best Johnbod (talk) 13:38, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
I can only imagine this is aggravating, but your presence is really valued here Ritchie, and I hope to see you back. I emailed you yesterday ignorant of this mess, and while you obviously have bigger things on your mind now, if you've seen it you know at least one of us values your judgement very highly. Best, Vanamonde (Talk)13:54, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Sorry to see this , You're a great editor and you're a fucking great admin too!, I hope you'll come back in the near future, In the meantime I wish you all the very best, Thank you for everything you've ever done here!, Take care, Regards, Dave14:36, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
