User talk:Magnolia677

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Can you revert this please? 2601:206:301:4A90:48E:3734:202B:39E4 (talk) 04:00, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No personal attacks[edit]

Hello Magnolia677. I see here that you have a habit of removing relevant, neutrally-phrased, reliably-sourced material from pages, rarely give understandable edit summaries, and many users have asked you to stop. Certainly at no time is it acceptable to refuse to discuss your edits and engage in personal attacks as you did here. Invasive Spices (talk) 10 August 2022 (UTC)

  • You have made no effort to respond on talk pages. You have instead responded with WP:FOLLOWING and WP:EDITWARRING in this edit. Stop your disruptive editing immediately. If you continue you may be blocked. Invasive Spices (talk) 13 August 2022 (UTC)
    • Hello again Magnolia677. I see you have continued removing relevant, neutrally-phrased, reliably-sourced material I have added. This time on a different page. This raises the question of whether you have a problem with me or with hostility in general or both. I see that @Myotus tried to talk to you and you responded insultingly. I would like you to just stop this. Thank you. Invasive Spices (talk) 9 September 2022 (UTC)
@Invasive Spices: Down in the Delta we'd say, "You're madder than a wet hen!" I didn't respond here because an admin followed me and wrote "I don't see the supposed personal attack", and also questioned the relevance of your edit, as did I. Moreover, I'm not sure how I can be following you at either Atascosa County, Texas or at Starr County, Texas, when I first edited both articles long before you did, and both were on my watchlist. Wikipedia benefits from your unique knowledge and interest in bugs and crop diseases and stuff like that. But when you add that "a dramatic increase in permethrin resistance in Cattle Fever Ticks (Rhipicephalus microplus) has been noted here." the economy section of an article about a US county, someone is probably going to delete it and question its relevance. Thank you for writing. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:29, 9 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • My last reply was 25 days ago, the other editor's 26, and your last reply was 30 days ago. Refusing to use the Talk: page for 30 days and then suddenly reverting because I tried to discuss a reversion on a different, unrelated page with you here is very disruptive. Invasive Spices (talk) 9 September 2022 (UTC)

The article Love, Arizona has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

GNIS and Arizona Place Names" both describe this as a station. Could not find evidence of a community or significant coverage to establish notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. –dlthewave 12:57, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion[edit]


This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

-SusanLesch (talk) 23:33, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion[edit]


This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

-SusanLesch (talk) 16:49, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion[edit]


This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

-SusanLesch (talk) 17:03, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Your response is expected at:

Now you've opened a new discussion.

-SusanLesch (talk) 17:33, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion[edit]


This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

-SusanLesch (talk) 17:44, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Magnolia677. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cities/US_Guideline.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-SusanLesch (talk) 19:32, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Truist Park[edit]

Hi there. I added two attendances and two boxscores from information I got from the tours Wikipedia page ( Chromatica Ball ) and ( Worlds Hottest Tour ) these are reliable and correct. I don’t know how to add references but they are correct. Wolla96 (talk) 10:48, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Wolla96: Thank you for writing. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners. Keep in mind that other Wikipedia articles cannot be used as a source. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:50, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I could not understand the edit summary you gave me here, so could you tell me why exactly you reverted my edit? Thanks, (talk) 15:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please stop making that same edit. You've been reverted by many editors. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:50, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I did, I admit, and was directed to the talk page for the article, where I was told to add it without the link that I had added to it. (talk) 19:04, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I disagreed with your edit. Best to seek a consensus on the talk page. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:06, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I did, and stated so in my edit summary. (talk) 19:07, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Now you need to seek a wider consensus than one person. I'll leave a message there in a bit. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reverting vandalism = edit war?[edit]

Please consider reading the edits of the IP to Oakville Trafalgar High School. It was blatant vandalism calling the teacher a “man” and saying the backlash was deserved. Also they claimed that everyone hated it, which they provided no source. I think you got confused because it is not an edit war. Screendeemer (talk) 14:10, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Screendeemer: I'm not sure which edit you mean? All I've done recently is remove a picture. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:28, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You left a message on my talk page accusing me of being in a edit war, but all I did was remove snarky comments from an IP that only ever edited that page. Screendeemer (talk) 18:00, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You were in an edit war, and I'm not on your side on this one. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
”In September 2022, the school was the subject of well-deserved backlash after a male teacher was filmed living his fetish by wearing a large prosthetic bust with protruding nipples while teaching a class.” How is that not vandalism? Screendeemer (talk) 18:19, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, that IP edit was vandalism. Then the IP reverted your POV edits, and you revered. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:37, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


You are confusing Fort Myers Beach, Florida with Fort Myers, Florida. The former town is in the news. The latter not so much. Venkat TL (talk) 19:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Randolph, New Hampshire[edit]

South view mt crescent aug 2007.JPG

Hi Magnolia677, I saw that you removed an image from Randolph, New Hampshire, saying "none of this is located in Randolph". I did not create that image, but I think that both the viewpoint (Mt. Crescent) and everything shown between there and the bottom parts of the mountains (including the stretch of Rt. 2) is officially in the town of Randolph. Do you agree? Thank you for your other edits of this page. Ebony Jackson (talk) 18:39, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Ebony Jackson: Thanks for writing. I posted the photo here. It's so low-quality that it barely improves the article, and it's difficult to located anything in the image, per MOS:IMAGEQUALITY. What do you think? I'll look around online and see if I can find better photo of Randolph. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:43, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I guess it is a subjective thing, but to me it gives a good sense of the surrounding landscape. If you can find a better image of this view, then that would be great, but for now, I'd suggest reinstating the image as is. Ebony Jackson (talk) 21:09, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ebony Jackson: I looked for a better image, but there isn't one. You are welcome to add the image back, and then I'll start a discussion to get the community's input. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:12, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Assumption illinois[edit]

Why did you revert my edit on assumption Illinois? I added a source at the bottom under references. The information regarding Canada is incorrect and is listed as such on the city of assumption website, which ai added and you deleted. The city in Canada was not formed until long after the city in Illinois. The parish was founded in 1807. The person who changed the name is buried in Assumption and the rest of his family is buried in Louisiana. Rather than flagging it, you deleted it. Why?

Corpusant (talk) 12:03, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Corpusant: I deleted it because it wasn't supported by the inline citation following your edit. I went back and see what you did now. Glad you got it straightened out. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:20, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you! Corpusant (talk) 15:24, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Washington Metro headways[edit]

There are many sources illustrating this - why did you remove it? Fastfoodfanatic (talk) 13:19, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Fastfoodfanatic: Could you show me where this was sourced in the article? I must have missed it. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:24, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Magnolia677: I did not source it. I mean there are many sources I could have used. Fastfoodfanatic (talk) 13:28, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


How are you? 2600:6C63:677F:F974:1DE8:DB21:C203:F186 (talk) 18:51, 21 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

All good. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:53, 21 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion[edit]


This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

-SusanLesch (talk) 20:42, 23 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I restored the the Lake's being largest in Essex County that you had reverted, but with an unimpeachable source where previously the "largest" assertion was unsourced. Perhaps that's why you reverted. Larry Koenigsberg (talk) 16:06, 24 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Larrykoen: Thank you! Magnolia677 (talk) 16:47, 24 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cass Scenic Railroad[edit]

I see where you reverted (basically) every edit I've made to the Cass Scenic Railroad wiki. While some of it was conferred to me by their mechanical team and can be removed in the notes column, you also removed several rows of the table that can easily be seen from Cass's website from a simple web search. These are locomotives that are owned by the railroad and it is listed on multiple sites. It would be nice if I did not have to retype of all of that and remake that table. Midnight Railfan (talk) 12:24, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Midnight Railfan: Everything is in the page history. Just click on "view history", then click on my edit, then cut-and-paste it with references. See Help:Referencing for beginners. Let me know if you get stuck. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:36, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oops, wrong Gayville[edit]

Hi, We noticed that the photo you added to the Gayville, SD article was the wrong Gayville, SD article (there are TWO Gayville, SD's and two articles...) I'll let you fix it. A few details: From history: 15 February 202 Magnolia677 13,443 bytes +photo,_South_Dakota For the community in Lawrence County, see Gayville, Lawrence County, South Dakota

Fred and Becca who used to have family reunions in Gayville, Yankton County, SD which does not have a hill like shown in the pix Fholson (talk) 13:24, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Fholson: I moved it to the correct article. Thanks for pointing that out! Magnolia677 (talk) 13:33, 27 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hello. I'm confused about your edit here.

Why do you believe mos requires that we not identify which of the people is the one relevant to the article?

Also - as the players are both looking in one direction, why do you believe that the mos requires that they be looking other than towards the text of the article? 2603:7000:2143:8500:9DA0:EED1:18F2:5FBA (talk) 16:19, 3 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@2603:7000:2143:8500:9DA0:EED1:18F2:5FBA: The photos should be right aligned. Sorry for removing one of the words from the caption. My error. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:53, 3 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks as to the removal from the caption. As to the placement of the photos, you write here that they should be right aligned. But you pointed me to MOS:images, earlier. Which states "Mul­ti­ple im­ages can be stag­gered right and left." I'm confused by your revert. 2603:7000:2143:8500:DC6D:A907:4AD6:1CCB (talk) 17:07, 4 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There's only one image. How is this confusing? Magnolia677 (talk) 13:01, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is only one other image, that at the top in the infobox, which is of course on the right. In this image, the players are both facing to the right - in which case having the image on the left, so that they are facing into the text rather than away from the text, is the preferred placement. The MOS which you pointed me towards does not say that in this case the image should be right aligned, as you said was the case. Rather, it suggests that the placement that you changed was fine as it was. That's what is confusing to me. 2603:7000:2143:8500:A188:53A2:1B22:A938 (talk) 16:49, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Most images should be on the right side of the page, which is the default placement". Magnolia677 (talk) 18:47, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good Article[edit]

In case you didn't see it, our work on the Cary, North Carolina article has resulted in GA status. I know we don't always agree, but I have learned a lot from you! Thanks, Rublamb (talk) 23:11, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Rublamb: I've been watching. Thank you for your hard work on that article. It gives readers an interesting and very encyclopedic background of this wonderful city. Well done! Magnolia677 (talk) 23:29, 7 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Crime in Demographics section[edit]

Hi Magnolia, I'm wondering if you have any justification for placing crime stats in the demographic section of city pages. Thanks. AlleyRegent69 (talk) 23:35, 19 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@AlleyRegent69: Please read my edit summary. I reverted your edit because you were editing against consensus. I personally do not see a need for crime stats, unless they are particularly notable. However, you can't just make up your own section names. Just let the discussion at US Cities reach a consensus, then make your edit. No rush. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:25, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A consensus was never sought on the original guideline, and there clearly isn't a consensus among US city pages. New York, the city used as the example on WP:USCITIES doesn't have crime in the demographics. Chicago doesn't. New Orleans has Crime as a section. Do you consider all those "against consensus"? AlleyRegent69 (talk) 22:10, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@AlleyRegent69: Please discuss this where you can get input from other editors. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:17, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Providence Historical Census Data[edit]

Can you explain why you felt it necessary to move the historical census data to the History section instead of Demographics? Nearly every other US city has a single-column right-justified table of the decennial census in the Demographics section. But you're insisting on a 5 column version in the History section for Providence? I'm confused by your reasoning, because you haven't left any. If there's a good reason to have Providence's historical data different from every other city, please let me know. I'm new here :3 AlleyRegent69 (talk) 00:09, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@AlleyRegent69: My error. Sorry. Fixed. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:30, 20 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My edits getting reverted[edit]

Ok, even though I use sources for my edits, but I'm not sure why did you keep noticing my edits and reverting them? Is it because my edits are unsourced? Even thought some of my edits were word rephrasing, how come you seem to notice them?

Can you give me more details? -- 2601:205:C001:EA0:DD9D:F980:1B2C:6117 (talk) 20:19, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Read the edit summaries. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:21, 22 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Magnolia677. You have new messages at Talk:Minneapolis#Owamni/Fuji_Ya_exterior_photos.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-SusanLesch (talk) 13:38, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SusanLesch: Asking questions at Minneapolis--about edits I made at Chicago and St. Louis--is out of scope, and the fact that you're following me is creepy. MOS:IMAGEQUALITY mentions "dark images". Magnolia677 (talk) 14:14, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Two questions are unanswered for a couple days. The reason I look for you is to get answers and not hold up the discussion. And a while ago when you went behind my back about initiating a FAR which was, shall we say, far creepier.
Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Magnolia677. You have new messages at Talk:Minneapolis#Owamni/Fuji_Ya_exterior_photos.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

-SusanLesch (talk) 15:42, 25 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edits Gulfport MS[edit]

Do not change info added about neighborhoods of Gulfport. Based on local knowledge and experience. Mawmawtt (talk) 14:33, 26 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reverts on edits[edit]

The edits you reverted were not vandalism, and not erroneous. I will add sources for them soon. I don't think threatening to ban me was the best idea, it's off-putting. Heh0002 (talk) 14:58, 28 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The sources I added for "Kane Train" being a nickname are legitimate; the article straight up refers to Gibbs as such in the title, and Gibbs himself has called himself that in many of his songs. What in the world would be an acceptable source for this according to your standards? Heh0002 (talk) 22:00, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Please read the references I added before taking a flame thrower to the article.

I included notes about Harrison Dillard, a story from the Plain Dealer which clearly refers to Nageotte as a Cleveland native, Gerard's Olympic bio where it states he was born in Cleveland, and a news story about Miocic which notes him as Cleveland's own.

You can be born in the city and move to the burbs at a young age, you know. Vjmlhds 23:31, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message[edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg

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

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Truth or Consequences[edit]

Hi Magnolia, Hope all is well with you and yours and that you had an enjoyable Thanksgiving holiday. I wanted to send you a personal note, since I reverted your edit on Truth or Consequences, NM. The 1997 film, Truth or Consequences, NM (film) with Kiefer Sutherland is notable, although it received poor reviews. We have a WP article on it. I restored the content, added a link to the film article, and a review in Variety. All best regards, Netherzone (talk) 22:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Netherzone: All good. Thanks for the note. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 23:00, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

WikiProject Canada 10,000 Challenge sixth anniversary[edit]

Canadian Barnstar - Red v2.svg The Red Maple Leaf Award
This maple leaf is awarded to Magnolia677 for expanding Osmond, Newfoundland and Labrador, during the sixth year of The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg (talk) 22:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Magnolia677. I hope things are going well for you. I just added some information to the article of Chriesman, Texas and removed all of the information that was there because every single bit of it was unsourced. There were only two references in the article and the rest was just completely unsourced. There was no citation needed tag in the article, so I expanded it by providing sources. How does it look now? Colman2000 (talk) 22:25, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Colman2000: Thanks for writing. The article looks good! I'd like to make a few very minor tweaks if you don't mind. Look at the main street. This place has history which you've brought back to life. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:30, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Of course! Go right ahead. Do you have a source for that? Colman2000 (talk) 00:09, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here is the diff to what I was telling you about if you want to view it. [1] Colman2000 (talk) 00:26, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Colman2000: I made a few tweaks. It looks great. Thanks for your hard work. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:28, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not a problem. Thanks for your help! I sent you a diff to what I was telling you about, but if you scroll down to what was seen in the history section of the article, you can see that it was unsourced. Colman2000 (talk) 00:31, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Undisclosed paid editing[edit]

"Perhaps to fill some mental void on your end"? LOL, what a guy. This is just to inform you that I've indeffed them, and that I'm pretty surprised no admin got there before me. Bishonen | tålk 09:51, 10 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

Update: they've already appealed, been declined, and flamed out. Fast work. Bishonen | tålk 10:33, 10 December 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]
@Bishonen: One of the only thing all editors agree on is paid editing. Thanks for your help! Magnolia677 (talk) 11:42, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ellwood oil Japanese attack[edit]

Well I find it humorous that you do not accept my edit, if you would read the page you will see all the facts are in place. This is a long running myth that will continue to run, it appears. Ok by me. (talk) 18:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I'm familiar with the Ellwood Oil Field area, so the article is on my watchlist, and Tom Modugno publishes a lot of very good local research on his Goleta History blog. He's correct that the Japanese commander story is a local myth. It's a small town, and longtime residents with an interest in the area often know more than many of the mainstream sources, so it's good to pay attention when folks dispute what's in the Wikipedia articles - and help them rework their contributions to fit Wikipedia's guidelines, instead of rejecting them. I'll help with that part. Dreamyshade (talk) 18:56, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ Please note that a consensus of editors at WP:RSP have agreed the Wordpress blogs are generally unreliable. Perhaps User:Dreamyshade will assist you in locating a reliable source to support your edit. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:28, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
WP:RSP says " is a blog hosting service that runs on the WordPress software. As a self-published source, it is considered generally unreliable and should be avoided unless the author is a subject-matter expert". is not on - it's simply made with Wordpress software, which is a situation not explicitly discussed on that page. A lot of websites run Wordpress, including name-brand news sites, although many of those examples are a couple years old, and they may have shifted software in the past couple years. Still, Rolling Stone runs a version of Wordpress (see "Powered by VIP" in the footer), and it's noted as "generally reliable" on WP:RSP.
But also, Tom is a subject matter expert. He's quoted as a local historian in this architecture database and in multiple local press articles, such as this one related to Ellwood, another one about that tree, and described as "encyclopedic about Goleta’s history" in this article. He has also published several columns in the local newspapers, such as this one and this one. But I don't expect people to check which local self-published sites are considered reliable, and COI is a potential issue as well, so I have also advised Tom to draw from the sources he's used instead of citing his website. Dreamyshade (talk) 02:11, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Walker Art Center Edits[edit]

You made an edit which was to undo edits on the Walker Art Center page, claiming that they were simply "artistic babble from a primary source of artistic babble" I would argue that both facts that I added made improvements to the page as a whole. There is no reason that there should not be more information about both the 2005 building and the conflict in 2017, this information is relevant and would improve reader's understandings of the history of the Walker as a whole. The sources are reliable and the information is accurate, and placed accurately. I would appreciate if you would undo your edit, and put my facts back in place. (talk) 14:03, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply] Please discuss this on the article talk page. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Editing Question[edit]

Hello @Magnolia677. I have a question about the Minneapolis article and the Minnesota article. You seem to be the right person to ask in terms of experience and interest. I am reaching out since I am not a registered editor (who can’t edit protected pages (or their talk pages) for that reason).

For Minneapolis —> the “DFL has held a majority of Council seats there for 50 years” in the 5th paragraph reads very awkwardly and comes across as confusing rather than helpful. Should it be adjusted to talk about the city being known as a national center of progressive politics? (The rest of the state is moderate and Minneapolis has been in the news for its progressive leanings). I was thinking that may be much more informative to readers when talking about politics. It also seems to say it is the largest city twice (but I may be misreading). You do what you think is best for that article opening.

For Minnesota —> unlike other states’ pages, it does not talk about what states and Canadian provinces it is near. Also the part about “more recent decades….” near the end is quite a jumble to read. As a result, its purpose in the opening comes across as lost. Attack that opening section as you see fit.

Very much thanks for your help. I would do it myself if I was a registered editor! —- Grebbgy88 (talk) 15:45, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First, you are a "registered" editor. That occurred when you created an account. Second, I think you mean that you are not WP:AUTOCONFIRMED, which, if true, means you cannot edit articles that are semi-protected. Third, if you weren't autoconfirmed and you wanted to edit semi-protected articles, like the two you mention, the proper procedure is not to ask another editor to do things for you, but to make a request at the article Talk page using {{Edit semi-protected}}. Finally, as it happens, you are autoconfirmed, so you can edit the articles directly.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:00, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank youGrebbgy88 (talk) 17:11, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

'Tis the season[edit]

Snowman drawing.svgHappy Yuletide! Snowflake.svg

Merry Yuletide to you! (And a happy new year!)

Schazjmd (talk) 17:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Schazjmd: Hey, thanks so much! Have a wonderful holiday, and happy editing in 2023! Magnolia677 (talk) 17:57, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey magnolia[edit]

can you please add my albums back to my wiki discography page as well my new updated image that’s also on my Spotify page. Their are many albums missing that are a major part of my career. Thank you for the bio grammar correction but theirs also missing information - NEAKO - Wikipedia page Nikko bailey (talk) 07:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nikko bailey: I removed them because they were unsourced. If you click "view history" on the article, you will find a link to a previous version of the article where they are displayed. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 09:29, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My edit on Davenport, IA[edit]

Hello! I'm new to this thing, and only really made this account to put up information on a Proposed freeway that eventually resulted in the construction of Welcome Way. The reason I saw it fit was because had the freeway been built, it would have been important, and its direct correlation to the one-way system of Brady St. and Harrison St./Welcome Way. Also the idea of something that could have changed the landscape of Davenport not being mentioned really anywhere online aside from a blurb in a blogpost is just kind of sad. Anyways I won't undo your edit or go against it or anything, just wanted my thoughts out there. Thank you and well wishes!

-BigManChuck BigManChuck (talk) 09:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy holidays[edit]

Ohara Shoson (Koson), Egrets in Snow, Ohara Koson, 1927
Have a wonderful holiday season
filled with peace, joy, prosperity and wonder.

Hi Magnolia677, Thank you for all your contributions during the year.
May your 2023 be filled with creativity and good health.

Image: Egrets in Snow, Ohara Koson, 1927

Netherzone (talk) 23:19, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Netherzone: Thank you so much for the holiday greetings. All the best to you and a wonderful 2023! Magnolia677 (talk) 23:50, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Winchester edit reversions[edit]

Hello, I modified the Winchester TN page to fix inaccurate information. For example, the dogwood festival was stopped years ago and replaced with the high on the hog festival. I made this edit and then you had reverted this. Note that the link to the dogwood festival goes no where now and still refers to the dogwood festival which is nonexistant. Why did you revert this to the inaccurate information again? Amandajra (talk) 15:19, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy holidays[edit]

Fairies dangling on and frolicking around flowers
Seasons greetings!

Wishing you joyous holiday spirits,

and best wishes for the New Year


Illustration of dancing fairies, 1914, taken from the poem “A Spell for a Fairy,” by Alfred Noyes

Beccaynr (talk) 02:38, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Beccaynr: Thank you so much for the holiday greetings. All the best to you and for wonderful 2023. Magnolia677 (talk) 09:08, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy holidays![edit]

Hi Magnolia677. I wish you a very merry Christmas and a happy new year 2023. I just expanded the article of Martin's Mill, Texas, which, like the article of Chriesman, did not have any sources and some original research. I added four references to the article and some links. Please make some minor tweaks if you so wish. All the best! Colman2000 (talk) 02:38, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Colman2000: Thank you! All the best for a great 2023! Magnolia677 (talk) 14:32, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Don't edit what you don't know![edit]

Whats up boss. I'm directly in the industry. I am on 1017. Don't revert what you don't know. This definitely isn't your topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silver24shil (talkcontribs) 23:06, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ottawa Rowing Club[edit]

Hello, your recent edits to Ottawa Rowing Club constitute a drastic change, and in my opinion they have significantly vandalized/harmed the article. Respectfully, it is clear that you lack information about the subject of the article. For context, I am an active member of the Ottawa Rowing Club.

You cited WP:EL. Per my edit summary here, I had initiated the proper referencing format for the list of names; the rest was going to be added later. As for your removal of the list of names by citing WP:NOTDIRECTORY, I will point to WP:SOURCELIST and WP:LISTPEOPLE to reinforce the following position: the vast majority of the people on that list already have stand-alone articles about them, meaning their notability has already been established. As for those less notable people in the list (e.g., those without an article), they may be included per WP:LISTPEOPLE, which states "In a few cases, such as lists of people holding notable positions, the names of non-notable people may be included in a list that is largely made up of notable people, for the sake of completeness."

As for sources, there exist multiple reliable sources which link the vast majority of the names to the Ottawa Rowing Club, it's just that it's a cumbersome task and will require several hours in order to properly format the sources. For example, Alanna Fogarty, while not notable enough to have her own article, can easily be verified as being part of the ORC by looking here (page 16, 2:30 PM race), and her participation at the 2016 and 2018 World University Rowing Championships can be verified here. This is just one example. The dozens of other names can almost all be verified by similar means as being connected to the Ottawa Rowing Club, and their participation in the international events in question has already been proven using the World Rowing website. Additionally, there is an Alumni Search feature on the Ottawa Rowing Club's website, which can be used to verify the names.

In summary, I request/propose that a consensus be reached regarding the specific inclusion criteria for the list, such as restricting it to alumni only. As well, while I recognize that the article in its state before your edits was far from perfect (and I agree with some of your cleanup edits such as tidying wording and removing overlinking), your edits regarding content removal went too far. For this reason, I believe a more measured approach is warranted; one where consesus is reached before any drastic changes are unilaterally undertaken. You included a userbox on your user page stating that you're polite. I believe I've been courteous in my criticism, per WP:AGF; I'm hoping you will respond in kind. Thank you. Rowing007 (talk) 18:09, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Rowing007: Could you please discuss this on the article talk page? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:41, 24 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


You reported me after one comment asking me to stop doing something I did feel was improving the articles and which no one but you even mentioned to me? We may disagree about the value of the deprecated parameters or whether they will ever be filled in but to go to AIV without even giving me a chance to digest or respond is kind of sucky, especially on Christmas Day. You're from the Delta? Might as well be from the SFBA. (talk) 22:36, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ You're right, it's Christmas, and we're all busy with family, and I wish I had more time and crayons to explain this to you, but your edits--hundreds of them--do not improve Wikipedia. Clearly you are interested in making valuable edits which will improve the project. A great was to do this would be to revert all your edits. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:50, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Magnolia677 is also an experienced editor and would not have reported you without good reason. Please note @ that you are operating dangerously close to a personal attack, which itself is deeply problematic. The day of the year is immaterial. TY Moops T 22:58, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

Barnstar of Reversion Hires.png The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
For your work. Push onward! Moops T 23:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Moops: Hey, thanks!! Magnolia677 (talk) 23:07, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You earned it. Merry Christmas. :) Moops T 23:08, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Savoy, Mississippi[edit]

Now just what exactly do you expect me to do in terms of citing my source here? The Crossroads gay bar was an integral part of rural gay life in east central Mississippi and one of the only prominent businesses in Savoy. I have given the only web source I could find, along with a link to a wiki page for the literal movie that was made about the bar. Your continuous editing on pages that I, myself, have created is feeling a bit targeted; according to your talk page, I'm not the only one thinking that. I'd ask that you kindly cease your insipid little edits, as it makes for nothing but a hostile environment. I have more than proven this bar's existence to you. Borealism (talk) 01:25, 27 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Borealism: If it was so integral, then someone would have written about it. The source appears to be user-submitted. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:34, 27 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Someone would've written about it" - there's a literal documentary about it, which I linked on the page before you vandalized it. I can only assume you have actual fucking brainworms. God bless. Go touch grass. Borealism (talk) 16:12, 27 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removal of New York giants section in the incidents at MOA[edit]

I saw you reverted my edit stating New York giant players were in the mall at the time of the shooting. However there is another part saying that Kyle Busch was in the mall during a different shooting, is that okay and I phrased it wrong? Or is it still trivial? LuxembourgBoy42 (talk) 00:27, 29 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@LuxembourgBoy42: Thank you for writing. My concern is that there is nothing encyclopedic about listing names of celebrities who by coincidence just happened to be in the largest mall in the United States, during a targeted gang shooting that had nothing to do with them. Please see WP:VNOT. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:47, 29 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notice of neutral point of view noticeboard discussion[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. SusanLesch (talk) 23:53, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Maine House of Representatives article finally up-to-date[edit]

I just thought I'd let you know that I finally replaced everything I had blanked out on the Maine House of Representatives article (the old information was out-of-date with the convening of the new Legislature, and the districts (and particularly the district numbers) had totally changed). You had asked me on December 11 to revert that. I had gotten the names, municipalities of residence and party affiliations added on December 12, but I hadn't gotten the year elected and year term-limited added until this evening. But it's there now. Thanks for not reverting, as there was a lot of stuff I had done in my December 8-9 edits that I'm glad I didn't have to redo or try to go to an old version of the article to salvage. Kevin Lamoreau (talk) 04:26, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Kevin Lamoreau: Awesome! Thank you. Have a great New Year. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:18, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Walker Lake[edit]

Prior to colonization, the Northern Paiute people were nomadic, so basically everywhere they stayed was seasonally. That does not take away from its significance. It was returned to year after year and continues to be the site of annual celebrations to this day. It is also just incorrect to say they only inhabited one small part of the area, as my recently-added citations show.

If you still believe that information about this is not relevant for the lead paragraph (not even the lead sentence), please explain why here. Khazik (talk) 18:30, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year![edit]

Happy New Year, Magnolia677![edit]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Moops T 22:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Moops: Thank you! All the best for a wonderful 2023! Magnolia677 (talk) 23:25, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To you as well. Keep up the great work from the delta! Moops T 23:30, 31 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year, Magnolia677![edit]

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Abishe (talk) 03:14, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ontario King[edit]

Trophy.png Ontario King Award
Well done on adding great detail to Ontario based articles! Eihsok (talk) 03:41, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Eihsok: Thank you! Magnolia677 (talk) 09:17, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Big Scarr[edit]

.... not really sure why you undid my Big Scarr edits as they were obviously already in the article, such as him being a trap, musician and drill musician, it literally said it in his genres. Plus he was very obviously a male but whatever i guess... 4TheLuvOfFax (talk) 13:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@4TheLuvOfFax: "Trap" was unsourced. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

did you not pay attention to the genres? 4TheLuvOfFax (talk) 17:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

West Des Moines, Iowa[edit]


Thanks for being diligent for vandalism and inaccuracy; however, adding accurate 2020 census data with a citation from the US Census Bureau should be in the clear. The 2020 census data for the city is pretty straightforward...feel free to check out the citation and compare.

Would you be able to revert the article? Thanks, and Happy New Year! WLRT1 (talk) 15:09, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@WLRT1: You added census data that was not supported by the source cited. Could you please explain why the edit you are disputing says that you accessed the data in 2012? Magnolia677 (talk) 15:16, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Of course...thank you for your watchful eye. That would be a typographical error, and sincere apologies for my mistake. The data was accessed in 2022, not 2012. I will make that change now. Was there any other disputed data from the census page? WLRT1 (talk) 15:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@WLRT1: You also changed the name of one of the city councilors. So long as everything is property sourced, and the source supports the text, then perfect. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:56, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fixed...thanks. Both the census and city website are cited properly. WLRT1 (talk) 18:33, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@WLRT1: Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:58, 1 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Revision 1131663295 - Raymond, New Hampshire[edit]

Good morning, Magnolia677,

You recently undid my revision, revision 1131663295, on the page for Raymond, New Hampshire. The revision specifically outlined the New Hampshire Fence Company. Your note asked what the revision had to do with the town of Raymond, and I’d just hope to clarify so I’ll be able to add it back with hopefully no issue.

The New Hampshire Fence Company was, for its entire run, a Raymond-based company, as well as the biggest fence installation company in all of New Hampshire for most of the 1940s-1980s. Specifically, Raymond is where Frank J. Mafera, the inventor of chain link fence weaving, lived and patented his method. Earlier this year, the state of New Hampshire installed an official New Hampshire Historical Marker in Raymond commemorating the importance of the company and Mafera’s invention. Alongside the photographs from my own personal collection that I have added to this revision as sources, I hope this will be a valuable resource for people trying to understand either the history of chain link fencing in America or New Hampshire/Raymond’s industrial and engineering history.

Please let me know if there are any issues related to this revision and I’ll be glad to help amend! BakedintheHole (talk) 15:06, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@BakedintheHole: Thank you for writing. My concern was that your edit was about non-notable people and a non-notable company, and most of the edit had nothing to do with Reymond and was partly sourced with your personal photos. What is notable is the historic plaque. I have trimmed your edit and added the information back to the article. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removed unsourced content[edit]

Magnolia, when it comes to the disbanded or renumbered fire companies in Springfield, Massachusetts I did source them by stating that the info came from I stated that on the edit history page. thank you tom950. Tom950 (talk) 22:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Tom950: Could you please list the specific edit you are referring to. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:47, 5 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nina Hartley[edit]

I see you got into a debate with other users over Nina Hartley's contributions, career history and association with sex positive feminism. I see that there were many references provided and I am curious as to why exactly you completely reverted the contributions and did not consider the citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moderateasneeded (talkcontribs) 20:36, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Moderateasneeded: Please discuss on the article talk page. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:02, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Through out the 2nd wave of feminism there was a thing called the feminist porn wars. The focal issue of such debate was whether feminism supported or disapproved of porn and sex work. Nina Hartley was at the forefront of the debate. She was mentioned in several articles and played a role in this debate. She is called a feminist by many people and she considers her self a feminist. Her porn is different than the likes of Sasha Grey or PinkXXX. She wrote several books and supports sex education. When it comes to sex positive feminism or the feminist porn wars Nina Hartley has an opinion that is valued higher than your average American woman. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moderateasneeded (talkcontribs) 21:26, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bank of North Carolina[edit]

I just noticed a photo of a bank in the BNC Bank and the history says you added it. Considering the bank that the article is about was started in 1991, a photo from 1974 surely is irrelevant. However, there are two options. You could find out if there is enough information on the bank that the photo represents for Wikipedia to have an article on that bank, or perhaps the bank in the photo was taken over by another bank which has an article and maybe that information could go there.

I was going to suggest discussing the addition of details of that other bank to the article where the photo was, but the title of that article is BNC Bank, so even if there could be consensus, it wouldn't work there.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Vchimpanzee: Ok, the original photo gives the address at "Fayetteville and Martin Streets, in Raleigh". And this source says, "The First Union National Bank of North Carolina building at 234 Fayetteville St.", which on Google Maps is that exact corner, so there we have it! Let me change the category and other details on the photo, and thank you for removing it from the article. What is most disappointing for me is not my original error, but that I cropped out an AMC Gremlin from the original photo. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 20:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

US Presidential election county results[edit]

To Magnolia677,

Why are you reverting my edits that included more historical US presidential election results for some New York State counties? The sources for the figures are provided within the "self-published source" that I gave in the edit description (not self-published by me, I might add), including source links to historical newspapers of the time at Most US states on the spreadsheet lack such detailed electoral results information from around the time of the civil war and before, and so no figures are included on the list. However, New York State's counties are all included in the spreadsheet dating back to 1828.

I don't understand why you revert my edits that include these election results, which would have broadened the list of results that was already included on the wikipedia pages. Really strange. (talk) 22:54, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please read my edit summaries, and the detailed edit summary here by User:Heavy Water. You are welcome to discuss at WP:RSN. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@ My edit summary was not exactly detailed, so I should explain further: it is a self-published source and cannot be used whether you wrote it or not and whether they claim to be citing sources or not.
If, however, you can cite the historic newspapers directly, (it seems they're available online) that would be great. Please understand that I appreciate the work that you are doing, we simply cannot cite a Google Doc. Heavy Water (talk) 00:31, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Spanish names[edit]

Please do not remove the original names of those sites in Spanish. It is totally relevant information. Lopezsuarez (talk) 19:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Lopezsuarez: You've added Spanish translations to places that have zero connection to Spain or anything Spanish. Please revert this mess you've made. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:59, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You are a bit hispanophobic. Un poco. Lopezsuarez (talk) 20:29, 14 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deletion of well sourced material[edit]

Hi Magnolia677, I wanted to stop by to check-in as to why you have deleted the section I have been working on for the past few hours in relation to the artistic installations at Claridge's? I believe I had well sourced my contributions and now see that you have chosen to delete without discussion. I'm sure you can imagine why a fellow contributor might appreciate being notified of such a large deletion. I see the edit summary was written as "done" which doesn't indicate summarise the edit very well. I'd appreciate understanding why the decision was taken to remove the work to better my contributions in future. Happy editing! Jo Jc JoTalk💬Edits📝 16:30, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Jo Jc Jo: Thank you for writing. I've been removing some over-the-top puffery from that article. Sorry for not leaving a more detailed edit summary; the "done" means I had just combined that paragraph with the preceding one, so it needed to be removed. Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:14, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the response. I don't believe it to be "Over the top puffery". I do not believe the information, especially relating to Damien Hirst, one of the worlds greatest living artists, moving into the hotel, to be puffery. There is not consensus on this so I will revert the edit to maintain the status quo and take it to the talk page. Jo Jc JoTalk💬Edits📝 17:33, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jo Jc Jo: The article is about a hotel, not an artist. Please don't start an edit war to add more puffery and out-of-scope content. User:Escape Orbit has also been cleaning up the article. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:47, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I object to your accusations of edit warring. I was reverting and I was mid-way through posting it on the article talk page as per Consensus when I received your warning.
There are plenty of examples in this article that are about individuals. There is a paragraph on the King of Yugoslavia moving in, there is a paragraph on Winston Churchill moving in. It's hardly like I've written an entire section on Damien Hirst and for what I have included, I believe it to be important to the article. Hirst is a major part of the hotel's recent history and I believe, the inclusion of the content I had written was balanced. However, it appears you don't want to hear this, nor do you assume good faith and think it should be taken to the article talk page.
With your air of superiority I don't particularly want to engage with your further on this so I won't take it to the talk page or bother further with the article but I wish you all the best. Jo Jc JoTalk💬Edits📝 18:23, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

January 2023[edit]

Hello. The edit that I made was just reverting the article to the previous edit since someone deleted accurate information. The major transportation information that was deleted from "Detroit" and "Chicago" is also listed in the Wikipedia infoboxes of "New York City", "Los Angeles", etc. and appears to have been there for years. I didn't originally add that information. So I believe that my editing was constructive. Where does it say that information shouldn't be there? T Yorke (talk) 04:32, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Manganese, Minnesota[edit]

Hello, Magnolia677!

With regard to your editing of Maganese, Minnesota, understand this is a Feature Article, having gone through multiple review processes. I know Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, and I have no way of knowing whether or not you have written any Featured Articles, but Wikipedia defines them as such: No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible.

My goal in writing articles about ghost towns is two-fold: First, to honor those people who lived in the community, and second, to ensure ALL of the available information can be sourced in one place. Much information related to the (former) communities I write about are not available online: they require trips to the state archives at the Minnesota Historical Society, trips to county historical societies (in this case, Crow Wing County, Minnesota) in addition to regional historical societies (like the Cuyuna Iron Range Heritage Network), public libraries, university libraries and site visits. It takes years before I have all of the available information.

In reviewing your user profile, I can see you are very active with over 129,000 edits since you joined Wikipedia in 2012, so you must have ample time on your hands. I have a business to run and other non-profits I am involved with, so time for me is a luxury. I compose my articles in the sandbox until I feel the article is ready to be migrated to the main page (so it goes out as one big edit) and once there, request a copy edit from Jonesey 95 before placing them out for peer review. The paragraph about the Cuyuna Iron Range stratigraphy was written based on previous comments by Finetooth during the FAR for a different featured article: you learn a lot by going through the rigorous review process, and I was proactive in providing a paragraph on stratigraphy here. Mining is a big deal in Minnesota, so apparently the reviewers felt that a discussion of stratigraphy to be relevant. During the peer review process for this article, Ruhrfisch requested the inclusion of both a photograph for the Geology section as well as a stratigraphic map (which I had released to the public domain from the Minnesota Geological Survey just for this artcile). Ruhrfisch also had a previous working relationship with the late Brianboulton, who had assisted me previously in FAR.

When you gut an article like this, your are depriving the reader who may be looking for the comprehensive information previously stated by removing reliably sourced information as well. You are also removing content that had been requested by previous reviewers who helped elevate the article to this level (which suggests to me you are blindly editing without reviewing the previous reviewers comments). Ironically, when I first put this article out for peer review, I contacted my original mentor John from Idegon to ask him what had happened to his very capable friend, Coal town guy since I valued his opinion. The response I recieved was that CTG had left Wikipedia over the same issue: a bunch of his articles were gutted. I hope it was not you, but he did mention on his talk page that both he and CTG were familiar with who you were. It seems at this point John from Idegon has been permanently banned from Wikipedia as well: I don't know why and I'm not privy to such information. I know he was having health issues, but I'm sure the Admins had reasons they found it necessary to take such a drastic step.

At this point I am debating on whether or not the article should be locked and reassessed since your deletions of material suggested by previous reviewers (in potentially wanting to make this an edit war) may no lonqer qualify Maganese, Minnesota as a Featured Article. In reviewing you CURRENT talk page, there seem to be many issues with your "habit of removing relevant, neutrally-phrased, reliably-sourced material" cited by other users, in addition to four requests for dispute resolution. I have been too busy writing my next article Withrow, Minnesota to deal with your previous edits to Manganese, Minnesota until now. If you want to make yourself useful, please, by all means, go out to Peer Review and make suggestions, and I will either comply with your requests or defend my position, but leave the copy editing to Jonesey 95. Otherwise, if you want your name associated with a Featured Article, may I suggest, with no disrespect intended, that you go out there and promote one for yourself.

Best Regards, DrGregMN (talk) 19:39, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DrGregMN: I was pretty careful with my edits, and I'm familiar with ghost towns. I wrote most of the articles at Category:Mississippi populated places on the Mississippi River, and hundreds elsewhere, such as Zuber Corners, Ontario, Mars, Texas, and Trump, Colorado. And it was Coal Town Guy who suggested I visit Jenkinjones, West Virginia, where I nearly got shot taking a picture. My concern at Maganese is that someone backed up a truck of out-of-scope content and dumped it in. I've never seen paragraph after paragraph of content about state geology added to a small town article. It's certainly not suggested at WP:USCITIES. You are welcome to start a discussion on the article talk page. Perhaps the article needs to be re-named. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:28, 22 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't really have a dog in this fight, and I haven't read all of the FA/GA background, but it appears that one or both editors involved here is removing material and then, after being reverted, removing some or all of that material again prior to a discussion. That appears to go against the spirit of WP:BRD. I encourage you both to continue discussion, perhaps including the editors who recommended inclusion of the disputed content. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jonesey95: I started a discussion at Talk:Manganese, Minnesota#Undue geologic details. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 11:34, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cochiti Pueblo[edit]

Hello Magnolia, hope all is well with you and yours. I think you may have made a mistake on the Cochiti, New Mexico article by removing the native name for Cochiti. Several of the Pueblos in New Mexico are reverting to the native names, and I think we should respect their traditions. (For example, Santo Domingo Pueblo is known as Kewa, and San Juan Pueblo is now known as Ohkay Owingeh, etc.) On the Cochiti Pueblo's official website, it states the native name is: ko-tyīt' in Keresan (which is the language spoken by the Cochiti people along with English and some Spanish). See here: [2]. Let me know what you think. Netherzone (talk) 22:28, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Netherzone: I hope all is well. I self-reverted. The official local language may indeed not be English. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 22:41, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]