User talk:Glman/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Johnson & Johnson Climate Change Section

Hello, a few weeks ago I added a section to the J&J page in regards to the impact they are having on climate change. You removed this with the note "addition of essay-written section that needs work/discussion before mainspace". I was wondering if you could explain what exactly you would like me to change. I would also like to inform you that this contribution is part of a college class I am taking. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Frog231 (talk) 22:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Nikki Haley's quote

Hello, in the past few days you've undone multiple WP:GOODFAITH edits on the Nikki Haley page. I am leaving a note on your talk page because I'm wondering why you've done this. Imo this discussion should be happening on the Nikki Haley talk page as you yourself suggested (that way others can see and contribute as needed), so please continue this discussion there if you think this discussion will continue longer than a quick reply.

Anyway, the revision you've undone multiple times was the following sentence: "On January 16, 2024, Haley stated "the US has never been a racist country." The fact that Haley said this is not controversial -- it was widely reported in the news and there is not even the slightest doubt that Haley actually said this. Of course every statement ideally should have a source, so I spent some time deciding which of many possible sources to include -- ended up going with a Fox source whose headline was basically the quote as well as a cnn article from a couple of days later, I feel this combination gives a decent top level of context for anyone who might be interested.

On that note, why did you undo the edit? I legitimately don't understand how someone would or could conclude, multiple times, that the two sources provided don't support the statement that "On January 16, 2024, Haley stated "the US has never been a racist country." I've provided the sources below so you can take another look if needed. Anyway, if you want to continue the discussion with more than just a quick reply please respond on the Nikki Haley talk page, that way others can contribute as well. Thanks!

Source links: https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/19/politics/nikki-haley-why-america-isnt-racist/index.html https://fox59.com/news/national-world/haley-says-us-has-never-been-a-racist-country/

GrandpaSurf (talk) 10:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

This discussion belongs on the article talk page, and I have responded to you there! glman (talk) 13:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

You're right, this discussion does belong on the Nikki Haley talk page. But... as of this message you have not yet responded there. Maybe you've been meaning to and haven't posted your response yet? Looking forward to hearing what you think (and why you think it). Thanks! GrandpaSurf (talk) 14:55, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

University of Cincinnati

When reading the WikiProject advice page, it seems more appropriate to use ranges in paragraphs. Ranges are inconsistent with the rankings infobox in other articles and cause clutter.

WP:UNIGUIDE also states 1) "do not exclude or re-factor rankings" and 2) "attempt to include every ranking" in the Academics (or Academic profile) section. The advice appears to support using "unranked" in the infobox.

I'm interested in your thoughts on this. Redraiderengineer (talk) 21:34, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Hey! We really should include the context in the infobox as we update. While not article use this yet, most articles do not appropriately use context at all. Many rankings are only sourced in the infobox, so if we do not include context there, it's not anywhere. As for unranked colleges, including this would create many articles where there is an infobox with no rankings at all. Removing unranked results doesn't remove context, as users can assume that if not listed, the college is not ranked. glman (talk) 17:09, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Correct use of 'however'

For your information and future editing: [1] A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 18:28, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

The use of however to begin a sentence is not agreed upon as incorrect. If there is a Wikipedia style guide against it, please, tag it. glman (talk) 18:32, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

If you read the article I linked to, you will see that when used at the beginning of a sentence, the word meaning and context changes. How you intend for the word to be used is not what it ends up "saying" when placed at the beginning of the sentence where you put it. There are numerous other sources online that support the article I included above. I didn't remove the word this time, but I did correct how it's presented so it fits with what you were trying to say with your edit(s). A4M2 Alaska4Me2 (talk) 18:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

The source you linked literally says that "When used at the start of a sentence...however represents a contrast". Even Mirriam-Webster says "Although there have been many restrictions proposed for how however is used, there has never been any strong agreement on them." If there is a Wikipedia style guide against it, please let me know. I'd be happy to adjust due to it. I hear you that some could read it differently, the change is fine. glman (talk) 19:29, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Hatnotes

Hi. You recently reverted the hatnotes I added to the NASCAR, IMSA and Champ Car World Series pages. Is there actually a convention to not include hatnotes if the subject is linked in the lead section? WP:HATNOTERULES states that "if a notable topic X is commonly referred to as 'Foo', but the article 'Foo' is not about X, there must be a hatnote linking to the article on X". I think this seems to apply to both NASCAR and IMSA since their premier series are commonly referred to simply by the name of the sanctioning body, and someone who is not familiar with the topic and is searching for the article on the premier series but instead ends up at the sanctioning body article might not initially realise the difference even if the premier series are linked somewhere in the lead section. The IndyCar article also has a similar hatnote. As for the Champ Car hatnote, I think it is needed given that there are many "Champ Car" links that incorrectly direct to the CCWS article instead of CART since the two topics were originally covered at the same article; see this discussion. Carfan568 (talk) 22:03, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

@Carfan568 You'd need a reliable source that indicates these series are commonly known by these shorter names, not just original research! If that existed, then a hatnote would be appropriate. glman (talk) 22:21, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Here are some sources that use the shorter names: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], and [8]. Carfan568 (talk) 03:39, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I would encourage you to propose this at each series talk page or the Wikiproject page, so we can get additional input. My two cents, the first clearly uses a full name for the series "IMSA GTP", the second and third are talking about the main IMSA (IMSA win overall) and specify in the article. The fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh are talking about NASCAR proper, not Cup specifically. (Saying "NASCAR driver" can mean any series and is used as such, even truck and local guys are called "NASCAR drivers" in media). glman (talk) 13:07, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I have started a discussion about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Motorsport. Do you still disagree about adding the hatnote to the Champ Car World Series article? Carfan568 (talk) 21:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Edit to Presbyterian College page

Please forgive me, glman. I'm a graduate of Presbyterian College and thought the intro for my alma mater was sub-par. I heard that the Pomona College Wikipedia entry is a gold standard for higher education institutions and modeled the intro after it. This is my first time trying to make an edit on Wikipedia. Please advise regarding how to improve the Presbyterian College Wikipedia page. Thank you. Dyerwriter (talk) 19:51, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

Explanation on edit in 2024 Xfinity Series season article

Hi Glman,
Can you please explain your edit on the 2024 Xfinity Series season article where you deleted the info I added about it being The CW's first year broadcasting the series leading into them being the full season TV broadcaster of the series in 2025? The new NASCAR TV contract in 2025 is mentioned in the intro in the 2024 Cup Series season article so I don't see a reason why it can't be the same way in the Xfinity Series season article. If you still don't think we should add it in the intro, could we add info about that in the schedule section where the TV channels are listed?

Thanks,
Cavanaughs (talk) 09:37, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

We can absolutely add it to the body. The lead is meant to summarize the article, and half of it being about the schedule is WP:UNDUE imo. We should discuss on the talk page for that article! glman (talk) 14:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

The Independent Florida Alligator

Hello, I currently work at The Alligator and have for the past 26 years. I am in charge of alumni information. The list of past editors has been on this page as long as I can remember. I don't know why it was removed but I put it back. I have 118 years worth of publications listing the editors for those years. I don't know how to add citations so I can't do that. Please assist me by replacing the data and adding a citation if you want one. Thank you. - Ellen 64.238.191.228 (talk) 18:33, 15 May 2024 (UTC) I just made an account here - User name is Ellen Light

Hello! I understand, but information on Wikipedia needs verifiable, notable external sources. If you view WP:V and WP:RS, they will provide helpful information! glman (talk) 19:50, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

I can't imagine what would be "verifiable, notable external sources". The only thing that I can think of is to link to the library's digitalization of our archives. We are talking about the names of the individuals who held the position of editor in chief of our newspaper. It's not exactly debatable thing. They are concrete facts that were published and are available in our archives both in print and digitized. I don't get it. Ellen Light (talk) 19:55, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Then you need to include in-line citations for each editor to verify. Again, I highly encourage you to refer to wikipedia's policies and guidelines. They will help you accomplish this and be a successful editor. WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:N are great places to start! glman (talk) 19:57, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

I'm not going to do over a hundred individual citations... Can't I just provide a citation to the University of Florida's digital archives of our publications as a collection??? Ellen Light (talk) 20:03, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Russellville

ALL CDP's are unincorporated communities. And you are taking the source thing way too seriously right now. You know that it is an unincorporated community so stop. –ACase0000 (talk) 19:46, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Please refer to WP:V and WP:RS. I'm just following WP policy. Best! glman (talk) 19:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Whatever. But to please you and the policy is this is a reliable source?:

https://www.lynchhvac.com/air-conditioner-furnace-hvac-contractor-russellville-tn-37860/ It mentions being "unincorporated community".... -ACase0000 (talk) 20:03, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

This does not appear to be a reliable source per the policy. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with WP:RS! glman (talk) 20:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

University of Pennsylvania Football

You state that Penn first played Cornell in 1876. The University of Pennsylvania website, via the 2023 Penn Football factbook, states that the Cornell - Penn series did not begin until 1893.

See page 122 of the Fact Book: https://pennathletics.com/documents/2023/9/13/2023_Penn_FB_Fact_Book.pdf

With regard to the Penn vs Navy game in 1986, that same source on page 137 states that the final score was 30 to 26. Please provide your sources to back up what appears to errored edits.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wa3frp (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure what you are referring to. glman (talk) 14:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I reverted an edit from an IP editor. If this editor is you, I'd encourage you to sign in and use the edit summary to avoid rvs. in the future. glman (talk) 14:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

Suzanne Collins edit

Hello, you reverted my edit on Suzanne Collins page. I had added Fire Proof (book 11 in The Mystery Files of Shelby Woo series), which is one of her books. Suzanne worked for Nickelodeon and one of the shows she worked on was The Mystery Files of Shelby Woo (This is on her wiki page with a reference.) This is the book that was written by Suzanne Collins, author of the Hunger Games: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/782592.Fire_Proof

I have the book in hand and there's an 'about the author' section at the end of the book. I don't know if you can get this book at your local library perhaps to corroborate. I don't know if we are allowed to post pictures here. I can type the info here, this is verbatim from inside the book: "Suzanne Collins has been on the writing staff of the Nickelodeon television show The Mystery Files of Shelby Woo since the first season. She also worked on staff for Clarissa Explains It All and Hi, Honey, I'm Home and wrote eight scripts for the Nick Jr. series Little Bear. Other credits include development work for Sunbow Entertainment and Rankin/Bass. Suzanne lives in New York with her husband, Cap, and her son, Charlie." The ISBN10 of my copy is 067102695X.

I assure you this book was written by Suzanne Collins author of The Hunger Games. Lostinshadows (talk) 20:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Taylor Swift

About the Taylor Swift edit, I am sorry this was perceived as biased. I had simply read that she first became vocal because of that situation, and I didn't see it included. As it was her first time speaking politically, I figured it was important. Would you suggest a better method of phrasing what I wrote, or does it just need to be left out?

Sorry for any trouble.

Ray Lee Radd (talk) 11:39, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Operation Gyroscope

I had merely tried to make the really long sentence into a few shorter ones, as the entire paragraph was one sentence. I don't understand why this is a problem. Ray Lee Radd (talk) 02:15, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Stop edit warring. Take it to the talk page. glman (talk) 02:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Gulf South Conference

Hello, I noticed that you recently updated the Gulf South Conference page to reflect the changes that occurred to its membership for the 2024-25 athletic season. I left it up since it's close enough now that reverting the edits would just be needlessly pedantic, but NCAA membership changes for a given athletic season do not become official within the organization until July 1st of that year, so in the future, please refrain from editing college conference and athletic team pages until that date has come to pass. Finchwidget (talk) 18:17, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

2024 Southern 500

I'm not coming here about the revert you did on my edit, I understand that. I was coming here because Darlington Raceway has a specialty logo for the event, given how it's the 75th anniversary. Should we add the specialty logo or what? I'm asking cause since you've been here since forever and know what to do and what not to do on race articles! Thanks! 45BearsFan (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Oh yeah and if I add the logo would the website (the official darlington website) be a reliable source for mentioning that it's the 75th annual race? 45BearsFan (talk) 18:30, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I think adding the image to the top of the article on the 2024 event is appropriate, and yes, while it is primary, it would work for citing it as the 75th! glman (talk) 19:00, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Reverted edit on B. J. McLeod

Hello,

I'm not sure why my edit to the page was reverted, since it was done in compliance with MOS:BOLDQUOTE as well as MOS:NICKNAME, the latter of which states:

"The quotation marks are not put in lead-section boldface."

Thank you for your consideration. 1980fast (talk) 00:16, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Removal of "‎LGBTQ representation" section from Nomad of Nowhere page

While I generally agree with you that "reddit and twitter are not WP:RS, they are WP:UGC", in this case, most of these sources were fine. I have incorporated them, in a different form, into the main characters section AND noted WHO is saying them. Considering they are from a series writer AND series creator, they shouldn't be removed, considering each of their roles in the series itself. I hope that you do not object to this. Historyday01 (talk) 16:36, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Update: I did some digging and I found the interview summarized on Reddit (which honestly wasn't a good source anyway), and I added it with this edit. Again, it would be faulty to remove this source, as it is an interview with TWO series directors. I suppose on some level I should thank you for the removal, as I wouldn't have reassessed the sources and looked at them again without your edit. I even updated my entry for Skout (one of the series protagonists) elsewhere based on the changes I made to the article. Also, per WP:SELFSOURCE (which says "use of self-sourced material should be de minimis; the great majority of any article must be drawn from independent sources"), the Nomad of Nowhere article is fulfilling this, and WP:UGC says "Content from websites whose content is largely user-generated is generally unacceptable" meaning that those websites CAN be acceptable (under certain circumstances, like the ones here). I ask that you please do not remove the few sources I just added, with the caveats as I explained. Also, you could argue that the comments by Miles Luna and Georden Whitman are "original materials that are close to an event, and are often accounts written by people who are directly involved" (i.e. primary sources), while the interview with Jordan Cwierz and Yssa Badiola is ALSO a primary source (the footnote on WP:NOR says "Further examples of primary sources include: archeological artifacts; census results; video or transcripts of surveillance, public hearings, etc.; investigative reports; trial/litigation in any country (including material – which relates to either the trial or to any of the parties involved in the trial – published/authored by any involved party, before, during or after the trial); editorials, op-eds, columns, blogs, and other opinion pieces, including (depending on context) reviews and interviews"). As such, removing the sources I just added would run afoul of those Wikipedia rules. Even if you don't agree with that reasoning, removing the sources I added would weaken the page for users and editors alike, removing information which would be useful to anyone reading the article.Historyday01 (talk) 17:52, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

I hadn't replied yet, but thanks for your work on this! I had no issue with inclusion, but it needed proper sourcing and placement. glman (talk) 16:54, 13 August 2024 (UTC)