User talk:JonRidinger

Beacon Journal Innerbelt articles

Since you edit a lot of stuff in greater inland Northeast Ohio: There were articles published today and yesterday in the Beacon Journal which include a lot of history about the Akron Innerbelt, but they're not straight highway history articles, they include sensitive topics, so I wanted to ask your opinion on how to handle them before I added them to the SR-59 article. (URLs on request if you can't find them.) Mapsax (talk) 00:43, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi there! I don't have the articles right now to read them, but my guess is that you shouldn't have any issues using them as long as they support whatever it is they're being used for in a reference. It's no secret that the construction of the Akron Innerbelt was controversial, much like other similar highway projects in the 1960s. Bottom line, though, is as long as whatever statements you plan on adding are both factual and supported, there shouldn't be a problem. Can you give me an idea of what you plan to add? --JonRidinger (talk) 18:50, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

OK: [1][2], primarily the lengthy first one (they appear to have the access restrictions lifted, but if that changes, they're also at Yahoo! [3][4]) With the tone of the articles, I'm not sure how I can pull cites from them without appearing to have POV. I want to be very careful. Mapsax (talk) 22:36, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Yeah, it's what I thought regarding the construction of the Innerbelt and its connections with racial inequality. These two are very much reliable sources, as opposed to someone's personal blog, so as long as you cite what the article says and don't add your own commentary using POV words like "unfortunately" or stuff like that, there's no reason that background can't be included in the history or in the more recent history as to why there is support for its removal. "Urban renewal" was a huge part of why the Akron Innerbelt was built. --JonRidinger (talk) 18:16, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

So I just nominally included the first article as a source for the city buying the piece of land on the SR-59 article, but there's much more potential for it, including on the I-77 and SR-18 articles (since the contentious portion of I-77 past Fairlawn was planned as relocated 18). Since you've written a lot in the respective WP articles, I'd like you to judge what will flow the best from the new source. Mapsax (talk) 01:13, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

AL Central division timeline

FYI, I undid your edit to the AL Central division timeline, reinstating the version that shows the Indians team name through 2021 and the Guardians name beginning in 2022. As you'll see from the division timelines for the American League East (Devil Rays -> Rays), National League East (Florida Marlins -> Miami Marlins), and American League West (California Angels -> Anaheim Angels -> Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim -> Los Angeles Angels, and Pilots -> Brewers), the practice has been to include the name that the team competed under in each individual season, documenting name changes over time. SS451 (talk) 20:35, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Radio

Regarding the Akron article and radio stations. Don't be so hung up on the city of license, as that really doesn't mean anything in modern TV or radio. All the stations serve Akron first and foremost, and in truth, COLs are used to work around outdated FCC rules about how a city can only have so many stations in their city limits. Bluntly, COLs are smoke and mirrors. Stations like WCUE, WQMX, WKDD, WNIR and WSTB all are upfront about serving Akron first and foremost, but they have suburban or nearby COLS to keep the FCC off their backs, but like I said, it means zero in the big picture. It's like that all over the country with both TV and radio stations.

Vjmlhds (talk) 18:45, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Let me point out several things just to show you how little COL means - WQMX is licensed to Medina, but their studios are in Akron. WKDD is licensed to Monroe Falls, their studios are in North Canton, and their slogan is "Akron's Best Music". WNIR is licensed to and based in Kent, but their motto is "The Talk of Akron". As I said, in the grand scheme of things, COL = BS to placate the FCC, and is hardly the end all be all of anything. Vjmlhds (talk) 18:54, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Notability guideline does not determine the content of articles

You recently removed content from article with the edit summary "names should be listed here for Wikipedia articles that already exist." Please don't do that. Our notability guideline explicitly states that it "does not determine the content of articles, but only whether the topic may have its own article." The specific guideline for notability of people also clarifies this: "Inclusion in lists contained within articles should be determined by WP:SOURCELIST, in that the entries must have the same importance to the subject as would be required for the entry to be included in the text of the article according to Wikipedia policies and guidelines..." ElKevbo (talk) 05:29, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

I basically ask "please don't do that" back to you. I'm fully aware of the notability guidelines, SOURCELIST, and LISTBIO, and how they apply and don't apply. I'm also familiar with your personal position on the these noted people lists, which I disagree with and know many other editors do as well. I'm also quite familiar with the precedent at hundreds of university, school, and city "noted people" lists and that has consistently been to include only those with established notability since it keeps them from becoming unnecessarily large, hence most in-article list sections being called "notable people". Making it for notable people gives a more concise definition to editors as to who to include rather than highly subjective "accomplished" or "successful" criteria, on top of allowing for people who are notable alumni of a school but aren't "successful" (such as convicted criminals, etc.). Most articles could stand on their own quite well without noted people lists, so there's no need for them to be any larger than they would be otherwise. Is the reader's understanding of Kent State Stark or any school lessened because we don't include a few alumni who aren't notable? In this case, I don't think so. I could see it if there was a trend of the school producing a large number of people in a specific discipline, but that doesn't appear to be the case here and even there, mentioning the specific alumni wouldn't necessarily be appropriate. Small regional campuses aren't likely to have much of any sizable notable alumni lists and there's nothing wrong with that. --JonRidinger (talk) 13:57, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

If you'd like to change our notability guideline then you're welcome to make a suitable proposal. Until then, it remains a project-wide guideline that reflects a broad consensus.

In the meantime, you can accomplish most of the same goals by removing information that is either unsourced or simply undue; that covers the vast majority of the content that you appear to find objectionable. We are certainly not obligated to include every alumnus of an institution in the institution's article; we can and should practice editorial discretion. We simply cannot remove material from an article only because that information is not notable. ElKevbo (talk) 23:26, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry, no. It's not an issue with the notability guide, nor is there broad consensus in the project to include people in the lists of alumni who aren't notable on their own. I've seen enough discussions to know that is NOT true. That's your interpretation of how those policies interact with university articles and I disagree with it and will continue to edit as I have and as many others have in all kinds of notable people lists I encounter. It makes perfect sense to use notability as a benchmark for inclusion in these lists because it's easily enforceable and clear to editors, whereas "successful" is not, sources or not. I will not be discussing this with you further. --JonRidinger (talk) 12:54, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Brownie Elf

Not trying to give you a hard time or be argumentative, but you just can't discard the elf, especially that he's now front and center at midfield at First Energy Stadium.

Never said the helmet wasn't the main logo, but it isn't the ONLY logo either. The Browns basically have 3 logos now - the helmet, the elf, and the wordmark. The way I have it laid out features all 3. Don't need to remove the elf, as the way it's laid out in the infobox features all 3 logos

Vjmlhds 04:10, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

It's not discarding it as much as it is realizing how logos work for teams and on Wikipedia. Most teams have a "primary logo" and "secondary logos". The primary logo is what is used most often on official team sites, uniforms, social media, etc. The Browns' primary logo is the orange helmet and the infobox is for the primary logo, not for every logo. And the Browns have made no such announcement that this version of Brownie is a major secondary logo. That's beside the reality that the orange helmet remains the primary logo across multiple sources, including the NFL and the Browns themselves. Teams can, and often do, have multiple secondary logos, and the Browns are no different in that regard. The Cavs are another example of that, with multiple secondary logos, at least one of which you added to that article in the appropriate section.

Don't read too much into the center field logo since A) there hasn't been a center field logo for a few seasons, and B) the Browns have had a new field design in the 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, and now 2022 seasons. The Browns also routinely bring out historic logos like this, hence the regular usage of the other version of Brownie that appears on many licensed merchandise. As for the 1946 Brownie being used on the field this season, there is very little usage of him in Browns media outside the field announcement. I imagine we will be seeing more of him during the year, but that doesn't mean it suddenly becomes the featured primary logo on the Wikipedia article, any more than the other secondary logos for the Cavs are listed in the infobox on that article. ----JonRidinger (talk) 13:51, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Further, please use Talk:Cleveland Browns to discuss issues related to that article. I posted a topic about the logo already (Talk:Cleveland Browns#Logo again), and then come here to find a reply on my own talk page. --JonRidinger (talk) 13:54, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

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) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Concert listings

Thanks for your thanks. I've been deleting the future concert listings on several stadium articles because I was following a few editors who were adding them. I'd start a discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Event Venues/Sports task force but the board is inactive. No pushback to the deletions yet. I also chatted with User:BilCat about this. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 14:26, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Agreed! Same for me in dealing with these excessive venue tables like for concerts, World Cup games, or other special events. Thank you again for your efforts and let me know if you need any assistance. --JonRidinger (talk) 14:30, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

FirstEnergy stadium name

For what its worth, in reading the PR which you sourced, in addition to hearing all the reports in the media, to me it seems that the name hasn't reverted yet, only the agreement to change it back was immediate. Of course jumping through hoops to change the article name back just to change it back the other way soon would be impractical to say the least. Mapsax (talk) 02:34, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I see how it could be interpreted that way, but there's also nothing in the press release that makes it sound like they are holding the name until a specific date. That makes sense given it's the off-season and the regular season is still months away. I think the perceived uncertainty leaves the door open for a new naming rights deal with someone else. That said, the team moved the web address of the stadium back to clevelandbrownsstadium.com within hours of the announcement, updated the Facebook page with a new logo while apparently waiting for the title of the page to be moved, moved the Instagram page to "@brownsstadium" from "@festadium", and moved the Twitter page to @Browns_stadium (@FEStadium is a brand new account with 0 followers). In other words, I think we're safe with moving it now :) --JonRidinger (talk) 13:58, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

The Center Line: Fall 2023

Volume 10, Issue 1 • Fall 2023 • About the Newsletter

Features

• A New Future for Road Articles Online

Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi 1979 → on 19:00, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Hudson High School (Ohio), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hudson City School District. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Precious anniversary

Precious

Eight years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:47, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Farmington, West Virginia

Thank you for adding on to this Wikipedia and clearing things up. I ask one thing, please do not erase my work, I have done lots of research and I am new to citations on Wikipedia. I love Farmington, and continue to research, but I've found it difficult to cite its history on this platform. Thank you and I hope you can understand. Historyboy07 (talk) 17:50, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Historyboy07: thanks for the reply. I'm glad you love Farmington and hope you continue to research and expand the article. I'm very similar about my own hometown. Please understand, though, that Wikipedia is a collaborative effort, so it's not a matter of "erasing your work" as much as it is making sure what is added is accurate, properly cited, clearly written, and fits Wikipedia policies and the general guidelines for US city articles (those guidelines can be found at WP:USCITIES). But yes, you do need citations or content will eventually be tagged or removed, not just by me, but any other editor who is familiar with city and town articles.

Citations can be confusing at first, and I understand as I remember when I first started editing. First, you need to be aware of what constitutes a "reliable source" and that can be found at WP:RS. Second, Wikipedia has citation templates, which are great for organizing your sources. Those can be found at WP:CITET. I used them when I updated the Farmington article and added several sources. I'm happy to show you how to use them or answer any questions about a source you may have. That said, I do caution you that if you don't like seeing your work edited or sometimes removed (especially if it isn't cited), you'll run into problems on Wikipedia. When I, or any editor, rewrites or edits info, please do not take it personally and do not assume ownership of an article. Discussion is welcome, but in any kind of collaborative work, there are going to be disagreements. --JonRidinger (talk) 15:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I absolutely understand. I've found most of my research in books on the history of Marion County. I'd like to write a book about the town someday. Historyboy07 (talk) 17:36, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

That's awesome! Best of luck getting a book written and published! On Wikipedia, I've used plenty of physical sources myself. The citation templates at WP:CITET for things like books, magazine & journal articles, newspapers, and even maps have an option to include a URL if available (and the access date for when you visited the site), but are not required. There have been many times I have had to remove a URL from a citation because the link was either changed or is no longer available. If you need examples, I can show you or you can look at the article on my hometown (Kent, Ohio), where I used quite a few not only in the history section, but throughout the article. But yes, outside of "minor edits" (such as correcting spelling, adding a comma, or fixing a template so it displays correctly) always a good idea to include some kind of citation that other editors can see when you enter new information or update/correct existing info (unless an existing citation already includes the info you are adding/correcting). --JonRidinger (talk) 20:04, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:KSU Ashtabula.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:KSU Ashtabula.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:KSU East Liverpool.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:KSU East Liverpool.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:KSU Salem.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:KSU Salem.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:42, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Metropolitan Statistical Area edit

I undid your "Metropolitan Statistical Area" edit. This is an official designation from OMB and a subtitle of an article so it should be capitalized when initially provided. StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 18:42, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

@StillWatchesCartoons: that's fine, but just FYI, there is no need to pipe certain terms (see WP:NOTBROKEN). Metropolitan statistical area and Metropolitan Statistical Area go to the same place. But do note, on the MSA article, it consistently uses the more general lower-case spelling, and OMB only capitalizes the full phrase in article titles since they use title case while Wikipedia uses sentence case. The article about the designations says: "The United States Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delineates metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas..." and another link on the same page also uses lower-case for the term: "Includes data on total population and population-weighted density by distance from city hall for 2000 and 2010 for metropolitan statistical areas in the U.S." Only places I'm seeing the term "Metropolitan Statistical Area" fully capitalized is in titles, which wouldn't apply on Wikipedia since, like I said, we don't use title case here, hence most of the city articles using the general term and the MSA article itself being "Metropolitan statistical area". And yes, I always thought it was a formal designation too (and should have all three words capitalized) but it is apparently not. --JonRidinger (talk) 14:17, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi Jon - I see what you are saying, but then I also see "Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, Combined Statistical Areas, and Metropolitan Division" in title case from the July 2023 OMB release and then the authors afterward go to the lower case. Go figure. In any event, feel free to make the changes as you see them. Thanks! StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 14:41, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC)