User talk:John5Russell3Finley

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] John5Russell3Finley blocked from editing Bernat of Septimania

Hello, 1) Please state exact reason for me being blocked, the generic page answer to the question is completely useless to me. 2) You folks wanted Bernat cleaned up, well, I was cleaning him up, he is my ancestor, I don't know if he is your ancestor, but I take a certain interest in mine, and you folks wanted him cleaned up and I was doing that. It takes a while to, as some one else stated in the talk section the English was very bad in places. It takes a while to sort it out, especially if one is unsure what is being said. However I have a BA in History, and have spent some time studying this period, so I feel confident that the changes I was making made sense. 3)Unless you have a very good reason for blocking me I expect an appolgy John5Russell3Finley 03:14, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


I did not block you, although I did block User:Joe Finnes and User:George Walaby recently, and you may be a victim of autoblock. Do you have dynamic IP or maybe someone else used your computer? Please paste the block message. —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-05 03:30Z
1) I do not know what dynamic IP is, so if it is important to this process please provide explanation of dynamic IP.
2) I am the only person who uses the computer that I used to make the post(I have several computers here, and this wasn't the one I used to make the post, this is another computer that I use for special purposes), other people use my email address, though I don't know of anyone using it other than me recently.
3)If relevant please provide explanation of Autoblock
John5Russell3Finley 04:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Can you paste the message you see when you try to edit? Why did you think I blocked you? Is there anyone at your location that may have used Wikipedia recently (even a different computer, but sharing the same internet service provider)? —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-05 05:08Z
See Wikipedia:Autoblock for information about autoblocks. If you have dynamic IP, simply disconnecting and reconnecting to the Internet would move out of the autoblock. —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-05 05:16Z

OK, I will give this a bit of time and space, as I only do this stuff every so often. This sounds like maybe there may be something going on that I don't grasp and for which you are not responsible. If it persists I will let you know (right now I'm on my graphics computer which I don't usually use for general surfing and research so I'm just a bit hesitant to risk much cut and paste). The way I got your ref was that when I was attempting to do a little cleanup on Bernat's biog I saved the changes (about 3 changes of words-from to of sort of stuff {I figure that what ever language Bernat's biog was written in that maybe the translator program may have some trouble with English ? especially translating articles ? I've successfully cleaned up several of these biogs before, though I'm unsure what language it was though I suspect-from what little skill I have with that particular language that it was spanish}, deleated perhaps 2 words and divided a paragraph into 2 paragraphs) then after I previewed it I tried to save it and got the MSG that I was blocked from changing anything due to vandalism etc listing you as the source of the block, with a link to a page of general definitions and explanations. One possible thing is that I may have tripped over a rule while editing one of my own talk entries (which I had several minutes previously editted to remove some excuses that I no longer thought relevant) and one thought I had in the back of my mind was that I may have tripped over one one of your rules, however it was me editing my own words and making them less offensive (even though the only insult would have been to me personally). The MSG said that it was a 24 hour block, so if I have more problems it will be (some time from now likely more than 24 hours) while I'm on my general use computer, and I'll go the full 9 yards with it, hope it's just a glitch. If you have any further insights I would like to hear them. One thing may be that I am on aol, and I have read that this ISP has troubles with Wikipedia. Happy 4th of July64.12.116.197 07:24, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi John5Russell3Finley, okay, that definitely explains it then (that you use AOL - nothing to do with editing your own talk entries). The Wikipedia:Autoblock page explains why AOL has problems with Wikipedia - basically kids messing with pages that get blocked; the only way to identify them is by IP address; but AOL recycles IP addresses quickly. I have unblocked your IP 64.12.116.197 - it may have already changed since you were blocked the first time. I apologize for the collatoral damage - unfortunately it's possible you'll encounter something like this again via AOL. (The reason I was originally suspicious was the similarity between your username and that of one of the vandals I blocked.) —Quarl (talk) 2006-07-05 07:35Z


Welcome!

Hello, John5Russell3Finley, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  —Wrathchild (talk) 15:40, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Martine Croxall

Hi John5Russell3Finley ( is there a shorter name I could refer to you by? :) ). The problem I found with the article was that at certain points it began to lean from being a biography towards being a bit of a worshipping article instead. What I've learnt at the BBC is that impartiality is everything, and even in a biographical article about a newsreader, even one you find attractive as you seem to. I have come into contact with Martine Croxall myself many times working (almost) alongside her but I won't be mentioning the article so for the time being there is no need to worry.

With several comments I found you had entered into the article, these would be much better off on the article talk page since they refer to, for example, the lack of decent images available of Martine Croxall which can qualify for fair use on Wikipedia. The problem with fair use images is that they are not meant to be crystal clear in quality, but decent enough to allow for identification of the subject. Based on that criteria, the image I have uploaded for the article is more than adequate, though I will seek to update it as and when newer images become available via my website of choice for such images: TV Newsroom.

I hope you did not take offence as a result of my changes to the article and that we can work together to ensure more people hear about Martine Croxall, the "info babe" herself, as you wish. :)

Wikiwoohoo 14:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Russ,


I saw your previous edits to my talk page so I'll answer those as well as the most recent.

You can call me Wikiwoohoo or Grant if you wish, however, can I make it clear that I'm not a celebrity, I'm a news journalist rather than news presenter so you will have never seen me on television, though I have the relevant qualifications to be well equipped to do so. Think of it as this way: I contribute to what you see between the countdowns and programme titles.

With Martine Croxall and Alastair Yates, both are relief presenters, they do not have their own defined time slot to present. As with that, there is a large pool of presenters, that can be picked as and when they are available, which is why you can go for so long without seeing certain presenters. Don't worry, he hasn't left us yet!

Karin Giannone is the correct spelling for her name, tough spelling, don't worry, you aren't alone in struggling with that one.

To be continued...

[edit] Current discussion v.a.v. BBC etc.

Personally in my case this discussion is done, if anything else is bothering anybody, "ghost posts" which though not per se a bad thing result in this case from my deciding that just maybe what I had said was not really all that useful, and that just maybe it ought not to be there.John5Russell3Finley 22:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Edit conflicts

You left a message on my talk page about a month ago. I apologize for not replying sooner, but I've not been around. (Boring real-life stuff.)

Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, no one, not even the BBC, has "control" of the articles here. If you're involved in an edit war I suggest you get some advice from some of the more veteran Wikipedians. I've not been around, so I don't have any names to throw out. Check out the information on resolving conflicts at [Wikipedia:Community_Portal#Departments], especially on getting help.

I hope that's helpful. I'm sorry I haven't been more active. —Wrathchild (talk) 23:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sorry not to be replying earlier, me too with the real world stuff, I guess that the "edit war" was a while ago, and well, I guess I like Martine Croxall and Wikipedia too much to have let the Wikiwoohoo edit stuff drag me and etc down into a conflict, I guess I've gotten over that kind of stuff, when I was doing genealogy I got into some stuff like that, and it doesn't help anybody at all, and it does kind of mar what you are working on which I guess can ruin the thing for the folks you are actually trying to reach. I guess that my posting was more of a heads up than anything else, like maybe this is something to be watching for in case it happens to other contributors. The BBC is not per se a bad thing, but if it gets repressive, well, maybe folks need to be watching for that sort of stuff. Thanks for the reply, John5Russell3Finley 01:38, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Hello, how is everything? I just noticed that you mention something about an edit conflict with me over the Martine Croxall article and was wondering what this could have been about. If you could let me know that would be great. Cheers. Wikiwoohoo 21:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edward Bishop (of Salem MA in 1692)

A tag has been placed on Edward Bishop (of Salem MA in 1692), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Finngall 21:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know about other editors here, but I have yet to acquire psychic abilities. I can only judge an article based on what's there, not on what's going to be there. Place a {{hangon}} tag on the article for now, and add content as appropriate. In the future, I suggest creating a subpage of your userpage, creating the article there, and moving the finished result over to the actual article page. Finngall 21:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
I've deleted the speedy delete tag. Seems to me like the title could be tightened up, but that can be handled by a copy and a redirect. Thank you for your time. Finngall 22:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] 16th-18th C Am Relig

You claim that the New Lights is a term from the Second Great Awakening. 1) The terms Old Lights and New Lights are used to describe critics and awakeners since the First Great Awakening. 2) The dates you provide are 100 years before the 2nd Great Awakening as it is. I'm a history PhD so I have a bit of an expertise here.


OK, I will take at face value your assertion that you have an advanced degree in some area of history (which is I guess not too closely related to US Colonial Era Protestant Clergy ?), though please before responding to this response please do register and respond while logged on as this will help to dispel any assertion that you are a hostile sockpuppeteer.

Have you read any of the material I refered to in my comments ? Have you actually carefully read all of my posts on the subject ?

Rev. Dr. Samuel Finley seems to have been aware of a "Great Awakening" that occured prior to the one the "modern Scholars" seem to call "The Great Awakening". I do not know much about it since I was not at all interested in the family religion until you folks put up this stuff numbering the Awakenings, and I realised that what I had understood until recently was at odds with the scholars. Best guess here is that what We had always refered to as the First great awakening occured in either the very early 1700s, which could mean that Jonathan Edwards might have lead it and that the Finleys etal. in the early mid 1700s got annexed to it later on, which I think is maybe my best guess since I think that pre 1720-c.1750 seems to be an awfully long time for an awkeneing, or possibly that The First Great Awakening actually occurred in the 1600s. There are at least 2 possible places for this that I think might justify a title of "Great Awakening". One possibility is that it centered around what eventually became the witchcraft trials. Whether it ended with them or started with them or if they were just evidence of the furvour that would have to exist for an Awakening to be "declared" ? Well, from what I have read it would seem that there was something going on, and perhaps our modern (or perhaps our post American Revolution) sensibilities may have caused us to deny it, as this "numbered great awakening stuff" has all the flavour of Revisionst History trying to clean stuff up....and maybe even trying to make a British English Language cultural common religious area. However, it may just be that in the 1600s there was lots and lots of that sort of stuff, and it could even refer to my people's coming to America in the 1600s which was often seen as sort of evangelical in and of itself, and the Americans after that had a seriously profound effect on England and on English religion. There seem to have been quite a number of instances of American Religion and American religious figures influencing England in that Century. I would suggest a careful examination of the Rev. Dr. Finley's papers if you really are interested in this subject. John5Russell3Finley 21:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Taskforce

You are being recruited by the Salem Witch Trials Task Force, a collaborative project committed to improving Wikipedia's coverage of the Salem Witch Trials. Join us! 
Psdubow 15:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly blocked

Hi John. From reviewing your talk page there may be other users on your network who are causing problems. If this happens again please copy the unblock details here, or if you prefer you can email me this information. My address is listed on my user page. Thank you, Can't sleep, clown will eat me 20:37, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bishop Edits

Thanks for all the cleanup edits on the Bishops, the Salem project is shaping up quite nicely. Hopefully people will be able to read these articles and be informed of more of the truth of the situation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billy Bishop (talk • contribs) 01:30, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SWTTF Newsletter

The Salem Witch Trials Task Force Newsletter
Volume I, September 2007
Project News
  • We have just initiated a SWTTF Collaboration. It is an effort to bring a selected article in the scope of this Task Force to at least GA status. Our current collaboration is, our main article, the Salem Witch Trials. You may nominate an article for the next collaboration here.
  • We have also just created a new unit, the SWTTF Anti-Vandalism Unit. This Unit concentrates on stopping, preventing, reverting, and reporting vandalism in articles within the scope of this Task Force. This Unit also focuses on cleaning up articles as well. Although all members of this Task Force are encouraged to revert vandalism, to specifically be a member of this Unit please sign yourself up here.
  • The SWTTF Fall Requested Article Creation Drive is starting, This is a task for all wikipedians, whether or not they are a part of this Task Force, who wish to participate. Prizes range for the friendly cookie, to the SWTTF Barnstar and the grand prize of The Golden Wiki-Award! For Rules and more information go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Massachusetts/Salem Witch Trials Task Force#The Fall Requested Article Creation Drive.
Member News
  • There has been some discussion about breaking off from the Massachusetts wikiproject. Please join in at the task force talk page
  • If you know anyone who would be interested in joining the project please invite them.(but please don't spam random talk pages :P)
  • We also welcome all are new members. Thanks for joining!!!
Messages from the Editors

This is are first newsletter, and because of me its a day late. This first issue was not very well announced (which is probably also my fault :D), but for the next issue we encourage everyone to help write it. Also for the first time I delivered the newsletter personally, but for the future Grafikbot or betacommandbot hopefully will be doing this automatically. So please place your self in the right place here. And last but not least please be bold in your editing. Happy Editing! Yamaka122 ...:) 22:59, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 10 – November 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!
Articles Needing Attention
Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively.
Contributors to this Issue
We couldn't do it without you!

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

[edit] Van Horne

Sir, the changes were in no way vandalism, and in fact were made to be much more consistent with other similar military biographical articles. You have the right to undo my edits, which I think were a significant improvement in style (and corrected some minor mistakes), but do not label my well intended changes as vandalism. I have edited hundreds and hundreds of military articles and resent the implication, sir. No vandalism intended, jusy one veteran military editor's opinion that this article needed some rework to make it better. I will stay with editing Civil War articles, where the style guide is well established and formally agreed to (WP:ACW). Regards! 8th Ohio Volunteers 20:37, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Recently someone has added a template to the discussion section of the article on Gen. Isaac Van Horne claiming that it is under the authority of certain folks. Having grown up with the stories of Gen. Van Horne, I think he is an Ohio Politician and am quite sure that he is a Pennsylvania Politician, and I edited the article to have it conform more closely to the format of the then existing articles about his Military experience Politician Ohio-NorthWestTerritory resident contemporaries. The War of 1812 is a thing in Ohio that has a distinct identity with its own people, and deserves its own grouping (if necessary you can group it with residents of Michigan etal. parts of the old NWT). The above individual (viz: 8th Ohio Volunteers) couldn't spell and his prose was barely readable, and I removed some (but not all) of his additions because of that, and because his phrasing begged questions that I couldn't just answer through adding more info. I couldn't just rewrite his rewrite and add the stuff he forced to have added and still have it make sense so I reverted it. The current formating allows additions without making too much trouble about it. Whereas prose with no headings if done badly can make adding more info more difficult. As a minimum: If you're gonna redo it please spell correctly, as too many of this fine man's other monuments have been mangled recently. John5Russell3Finley 18:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of History of West Eurasia

An article that you have been involved in editing, History of West Eurasia, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of West Eurasia. Thank you.

[edit] Deleted Message

I've deleted my message to you about the hist WE vote because if I read things right it may be not okay for me to write to people voting. So can I please ask you not to check the history file until after the vote is closed. Sorry about that. Dejvid 20:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] William H. Neukom

Can you add some citations and a stub template to this article? It's liable to get deleted if you don't.--Dr who1975 17:36, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

for my reply see the discussion page of Dr who1975 John5Russell3Finley 03:53, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I read the discussion area before my initial post. You simply ask people to add "more". How does that change any of my comments which center around citing and securing the informationm you have already put there? You accused me of deleting the article but it has not been deleted and I was never threatening to do so. I will go ahead and add the stub template and citations for you. These are easy things to do that you can learn simply by looking at othe arrticles in wikipedia (or politely asking another wikipedian who leaves a constructive message about these things in your discussion area). I will let you know once i have done so so you can look at my changes so that, in the future, you can do these things too.--Dr who1975 17:47, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I've wikified the stub... please take a moment to reveiw my changes as these are all elements you could've added to the article. If you feel there are any further improvements to be made to the article. Please feel free to be bold and do so.--Dr who1975 14:58, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
P.S. It is good that you added this page. I hope our exchange here hasn't soured you on contributing to wikipedia. My goal here was to show some other things you're going to want to add when you create a new article.--Dr who1975 15:10, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
I didn't add the style tag to the article. User:W.marsh did. If you click the history and do a diff you can see who added what. I was trying to explain to you why I thought he added it and reassure you it wasn't a slight but I see no good deed goes unpunished.thanks.--Dr who1975 (talk) 02:14, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
relax.--Dr who1975 (talk) 22:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] comments about a presidential candidate

in or about sentance 3 of the specified section of the article it states: "he ties his maternal family history to possible Native American ancestors and distant relatives of Jefferson Davis, president of the southern Confederacy during the American Civil War"

OK, the article makes a claim about the subject's family. The claim deals with people who were living about or before the time frame in which the people I specified were living. Therefore the idea of antiquity as a reason for not including the information I suggest would seem to be silly, moot ?, or just plain invalid.

John5Russell3Finley (talk) 17:39, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Successor account

See discussion here. [2] Jehochman Talk 20:37, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Kohs, the puppetmaster responsible, has bragged on WR that he stole the name as a "cover" - I suspect he chose to impersonate this user given his prior activity at History of western Eurasia plus his inactivity, and I don't think John5Russell3Finley is responsible. krimpet✽ 04:50, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] John Russ Finley ????

wow...I certainly did not expect that me taking a break during the BOB election silliness was gonna have this sort of result...not a clue here on my part...I think I do have a valid reason for not spending any time here while the election is having the impact it seems to be having here...not a chance that I can support somebody stealing my identity and forging a fake user page though... I will be patrolling here until this thing gets fixed, but the silliness with BOB has left me a bit less than happy, so don't expect me to have a lot of willingness to do much, but I will be around again for a while, at least until this thing gets cleared up, John5Russell3Finley (talk) 20:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, it's not your fault. :/ Greg Kohs is a notorious banned user who loves to disrupt like a 12-year-old, though he's really hit new lows this time by impersonating an innocent user. It's over and he's blocked again, and his actions will not be taken against you. :) krimpet✽ 17:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ohio govs

I think I've done just that, let me know. --Golbez (talk) 16:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)