User talk:Magnolia677

Userboxes

88716This user has made over 88716 edits.

This user has created 361 articles on Wikipedia.

On the Internet, nobody
knows you're a dog.

Error in the Famous Persons

In the Severna Park page, the person you are putting as for a Grand Wizard in the KKK is infact NOT A MEMBER of it and it was a nasty joke played on him. Thanks

Kabiguan (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 00:38, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Magnolia677 was not adding a name, was reverting your addition of a non-notable name. All changes have already been reverted to the correct version. - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:42, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

WP:Edit war

You appear to be engaged in three edit wars at: Marquette, Michigan, Oscoda–Wurtsmith Airport and Chippewa County, Michigan. You are also up against WP:3RR. Edit warring can get you WP:Blocked from editing. Please note that you may not like the content, but these are in WP:RS and that is what they say. WP:Verifiability controls, and not WP:Truth. Take it to the talk pages and WP:BRD it. I mean it. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:01, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

In case you are interested...

Just thought I would leave this here, in case you are interested in expanding upon it... - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:48, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Calvert, Alabama

I notice you do a lot of cleanup work on settlement articles. I'm not too acquainted with the terminology regarding Alabama cities incorporation, but it looks like a MOS disaster. 174.254.192.80 (talk) 11:26, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@174.254.192.80: It definitely needs some attention. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 11:33, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Message

Hi,

I saw your message regarding the edits I just made to a page. When making my edits, I tried to provide a source in the References section of the page. However, as a relatively new user on Wikipedia I did not know how to edit the References section in source mode, as it only allowed me to edit in source mode.

I will take a look at more Wikipedia tutorials regarding editing in source mode, and how to cite a source so I can put it in the References section of that page.

JLiu1596 (talk) 00:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@JLiu1596: Thanks for writing. Feel free to ask for help. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:35, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Dave Pounder

I see that you keep removing cited sources that establish a notable alumni's place on the wiki. All other individuals do not have any references listed that establish their "notability" while two sources that establish another's notability that seems less agreeable to the Catholic institution does not constitute "notability" upon what basis? Is the basis of notability predicated upon agreeance with Catholic tenets on sexuality? Or what would constitute notability, beyond being a public figure? PSYCHREL (talk) 23:13, 31 January 2021 (UTC)PSYCHREL

On Wikipedia, an individual is generally considered notable (as far as being added to lists like "notable alumni" go), if they have a Wikipedia article of their own (please note every other individual in said list). This has nothing to do with any other institutions. Also, as far as the source you provided, IMDb is not a reliable source. If you feel this individual is in fact notable enough for a Wikipedia article, I invite you to create their article. After which, you can begin adding their name to lists of notable individuals on other articles. Please note, there are specific guidelines regarding the notability of actors, pornographic or otherwise. - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:26, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@PSYCHREL and Adolphus79: Dave Pounder is somewhat notable in his industry, and according to his bio, did indeed attend Detroit Catholic Central High School where he "studied college prep courses and started to develop an interest in pornography". Back in 2014 Pounder ran unsuccessfully for a seat on the Palm Beach School Board. There is actually a fair bit of bio in reliable sources out there about Pounder, though I'm not sure it's enough to support an article (and I doubt Hottest Moms In Town or Corn Fed Naturals will get nominated for an Oscar). Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 00:07, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm not saying he is not notable (I have no idea), I was just explaining the addition, and reversion, of his name on that specific list. If he is in fact notable enough for an article, by all means, start one. Can you find reliable sources for this information, not just IMDb? - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:11, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@Adolphus79,

Yes, I have a news article where he is the topic of reporting: https://www.metrotimes.com/detroit/celebrity-skin/Content?oid=2192619

"Pounder went to Detroit Catholic Central in Novi, where the rigid, all-male environment gave him focus. He excelled in school and mountain biked with classmates in the neighborhood. Dating-wise, well, there were the priest-supervised dances (yawn) with the all-girl Mercy High."PSYCHREL (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2021 (UTC)PSYCHREL

Well, if you can find a few more of those, then by all means create an article... - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:20, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@Adolphus79,

I have several, he was also a candidate for a public school board in Flordia: https://miami.cbslocal.com/2014/06/18/former-porn-star-running-for-same-school-board-hes-suing/ & writing a book on sexual behavior: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/esteemed-pornographer-dave-pounder-examines-sexual-behavior-in-new-book-218514881.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by PSYCHREL (talk • contribs) 00:25, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Message Recieved About Edits

Hi Magnolia677,

Thank you for the warm welcome in your message! I am a bit confused. Which parts of my edit to the University of Dayton Neighborhood page did not conform with the verifiability policy?

Thanks ItsNeighborhood (talk) 21:24, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@ItsNeighborhood: Thank you for writing. I reverted your edits because you changed the name of a neighborhood without providing a source supporting that the name had, in fact, been changed. I have elucidated at Talk:University of Dayton Ghetto#Requested move 1 February 2021. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:47, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

February 2021 edits

Hello. I re-edited the content with a valid source to represent BRS Kash's project release for the 2021 in hip hop music article, and updated the sources on the Kodak Black discography page to support the recent edits, so that should fix those issues. Now about the edit to the Countdown article, it has been messy for a while now, with consistent vandalism. I was simply getting the page back in order to where it was before. I've been following the updates with this article for some time, and have made sure to keep it as neat and accurate as possible. There was absolutely NO intention to ruin the page, on my part. Thanks. Purplehaze45 (talk) 23:05, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Reverts on Minnesota State Capitol

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Minnesota State Capitol. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Myotus (talk) 00:57, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Photos

I do not mean to get in a battle about what photos added are disruptive or not. I understand you believe the photo on the Washington (state) page was disruptive, but you took photos I added off of pages that were not disruptive, and did add useful information to pages. Considering these photos disruptive seems to be a matter of your opinion, but I will now be more careful to be sure the photos add useful information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardmouser (talk • contribs) 23:54, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

@Richardmouser: Just because you visited a place, and took some pictures there, does not mean every one of your photos can be added to a Wikipedia article. I urge you to read MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE. For example, adding a photo of a river to an article about a different river, is probably going to be reverted. Adding a close up picture of a water tower to an article about a US state is probably going to be reverted. Adding a photo of a canyon to an article where there is already a picture of the same canyon, and that picture is better than yours, is probably going to be reverted. Adding a photo of some place in darkness is probably going to be revered. Adding a picture of a fish in a stream to an article about a waterfall is probably going to be revered. Adding a picture of bird in a tree to an article about a river is probably going to be reverted. This is just from memory. Please stop adding your personal photo album to Wikipedia! Magnolia677 (talk) 00:04, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

The photo of a Coho salmon added to the Multnomah Falls page was taken just below the waterfall in the same creek. The bald eagles were standing directly above the Snake River. Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. Judging by the pointlessly long message you left me, you have a lot of emotion built up and like getting in arguments with people on Wikipedia. You think you're a high up in Wikipedia when really you're a controlling person who's trying to be sure no one else can contribute to pages of useful information in the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardmouser (talk • contribs) 00:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't have to post photos to Wikipedia anymore, since I have so many accomplishments in photography outside Wikipedia. Arguing with people like you is pointless. You're an example of the way people are treated for contributing to Wikipedia. Just know that you're a control freak and you're not actually doing anything good for the world. The point of you being on Wikipedia is to stop people from contributing information to the world.

@Richardmouser: I'm sorry you have misinterpreted my motivations. I just care more about the quality of Wikipedia than I do about your personal photo album. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:22, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

It's not like I have a choice to post to Wikipedia anymore. You'll delete any photo I try to post from the sake of your own anger. Making emotion driven decisions such as going on a rant of deleting peoples' photos because you're upset they posted one low resolution photo is not productive for Wikipedia. Yes, the photos I post are from my personal photo album. Try to use it as an insult, but photos have to come from somewhere, after all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardmouser (talk • contribs) 00:30, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I looked at the page you wanted me to read about image relevance. I understand all the information on the page. I understand your concern that some of my photos are not relevant to pages, however, the photo of the Coho salmon in Multnomah Creek was relevant, however you deleted the photo saying it was not relevant, for example. I will never again post a low resolution image again, but I will need you to stop deleting photos I've added to pages that are relevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardmouser (talk • contribs) 00:54, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

AN Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/ regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Dealing with an Undproductive Moderator. fyi. Britishfinance (talk) 21:24, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Phoenix Police Department

Once again you've called on editors to discuss changes to this article at the talk page when a discussion already exists and you haven't acknowledged or participated in it (the first time was in September). It's an understandable oversight once, but when it happens repeatedly it starts to look as though you're not actually interested in working collaboratively. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:17, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Arms & Hearts: Am I Kreskin? Magnolia677 (talk) 17:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

If it requires supernatural powers to check a talk page for the existence of a discussion, my Hogwarts letter must have got lost in the post. As must those of the vast majority of editors who manage it without any difficulty. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:42, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

February 2021

Please refrain from abusing warning or blocking templates, as you did to User talk:Horse Eye's Back. Doing so is a violation of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please use the user warnings sandbox for any tests you may want to do, or take a look at our introduction page to learn more about contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:18, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

You appear to be going from article to article adding "citation needed" tags. If you are operating a bot you need to stop your disruptive editing. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:21, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

I am not operating a bot (that would be the worlds slowest bot BTW). Theres nothing wrong with tagging articles with necessary tags, also I use a variety of them per wikipedia best practices not just citation needed. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 23:23, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Apology

Hi Magnolia677, I'd like to apologize for the dispute about the photos. I understand your frustration if you are the one who has to determine whether my photos are added to pages or not. I also understand the perception that I'm only adding photos to pages for my personal benefit. I'll be sure to add photos for the purpose of adding useful information to Wikipedia. If you disagree with a photo I add to a page, I'm happy to politely discuss whether the photo should be added or not. Thank you for all you've done for Wikipedia.

All the best, Richard Mouser — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richardmouser (talk • contribs) 23:42, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Loranger, Louisiana, you may be blocked from editing. Please stop removing Kayla Ard from the Loranger, Louisiana page. Kayla Ard is mentioned in 6 other articles right here in the english wikipedia. As the head coach of the Utah State female basketball team she has been featured on ESPN and some of the largest media outlets in both Louisiana and Utah. She passes enough of WP:NSPORT for a brief mention in the town article content. DavidDelaune (talk) 17:53, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@DavidDelaune: Are you referring to Kayla Ard? Magnolia677 (talk) 17:57, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Magnolia677: Instead of adding her to the bullet point list I am considering adding an entire section in the article featuring a few local athletes. There is already a problem in the world with domination by males in society. I would like to give female athletes some encyclopedic coverage. And we seem to have the similar problems here on Wikipedia with more articles featuring males. What would you think about moving her mention directly into article content? DavidDelaune (talk) 18:08, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@DavidDelaune: I think that until you write an article about this person, she will continue to be removed as a non-notable. I would also appreciate if you would strike your warning above. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:12, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Magnolia677: Are you telling me that you believe editors cannot mention people unless they have their own wikipedia article? That doesn't make any sense. By the way, I couldn't help but notice that you appear to be engaged in multiple edit wars across a half dozen articles. I think it would be best if the warning remains. Looking through your edit history I really do see what I would describe (in my opinion) as disruptive editing. DavidDelaune (talk) 18:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, from the sources you provided, I do not see how she passes WP:NCOLLATH. Also, if you were to mention her anywhere, it would be on the school's article, not the town's. - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:35, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Kayla Ard is head coach of a NCAA Utah State Aggies women's basketball team which is directly mentioned in WP:NCOLLATH DavidDelaune (talk) 18:54, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Then, by all means, feel free to create an article about her, but please find more than one reliable source that contains more than a mere mention of her. Per WP:USCITIES#Notable people, "A fast and easy way to establish this is if they already have an article written about them on Wikipedia, since it would have never been approved, or would have been deleted, if they did not meet notability requirements. This is not the sole rationale for inclusion, since some people who might meet notable standards may not have an article, but it is a quick reference. If challenged, additions without their own article should be removed and discussed on the talk page of the city, until a consensus is reached." and I see no attempt by you to discuss this on the town's talk page, or anywhere else before placing a warning template here. - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:03, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

This is an agreement made by the state governments to strengthen relations

This agreement is the forestry program that al cooperations is carried out by fortification protocols in all cooperationsw such as economic or a promama one or 100 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZT2000 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@ZT2000: First, this doesn't make sense. Second, please respond to the conflict of interest tag on your talk page. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@ZT2000: I think you have misunderstood, or maybe there is a language issue. I'm not the one paying you. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:49, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Magnolia677 reported by User:DavidDelaune (Result: ). Thank you. DavidDelaune (talk) 18:57, 11 February 2021 (UTC)