User talk:Willondon

Please put new topic messages at the bottom of the page.
If you posted here and expect a reply, look for it here.

Comments supported by examples rather that by references

I think in reference to my most recent edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Acronym&diff=prev&oldid=1238548924

I would be hard pressed to find references but I or anyone else could find examples within Wikipedia of the problamatic use of acronyms. Correcting or reverting those would not be "nice". Raining on someones parade is not generally taken well. I prefer to be vague and just to say that it happens rather that to call someone out on it. I can't think of a positive result of making a more obscure term out of a longer one on except where brevity is an advantage like not enough room on the line to spell things out. A thing is not made notable when there is an acronym for it. There are a lot of requests in Wikipedia for making articles less technical and more understandable. A good way of doing that would be to discourage the use of obscure acronyms. Reknihtdivad (talk) 20:36, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would be hard pressed to find references but [...] Finding reliable references is one of the pillars of Wikipedia's basis. I or anyone else could find examples within Wikipedia [...] A large part of that is not relying on original research. _signed,Willondon (talk) 21:10, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Goldbridge

Hi can you stop changing and misdescribing my edits on this page. This is a person that has gotten wealthy by pretending to be something he isn't. The public should know the truth, I'm not trolling. Thanks 2A0A:EF40:2F8:8C01:5827:D70F:3E62:98D5 (talk) 15:38, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a source for the content? That's what's missing. _signed,Willondon (talk) 16:32, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's difficult as when something is 'widely believed' it might not be written down but it's very important as it speaks to the quality and bias of the content produced by the individual.

This is from an actual player of Manchester United: https://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/man-utd-red-devils-defender-paul-parker-influencer-mark-goldbridge/blt7fe6fcd03bb7cee8

Regarding not attending games, again this speaks to the authenticity of the content. Di Cesare has a live watchalong of every Manchester United match so by definition does not attend the games. I'm not sure how to reference that but it is self-evident. Perhaps you could reference the YouTube channel itself.

You have to understand that there is a very large and loyal fan base of the club that goes to games, has supported through thick and thin through childhood and genuinely cares about the club. In the real Manchester United fan community, Di Cesare is almost universally seen as somebody that is exploiting the club for profit on his channel/s by being overly sensationalistic, negative and defamatory about both how the club is ran and real supporters, and I believe it is important to capture that. He has been banned from United press conferences for inflammatory rhetoric. 2A0A:EF40:2F8:8C01:5827:D70F:3E62:98D5 (talk) 17:32, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the link provided redirects me (based on my location it seems) to a different edition. I can select the UK edition from there, but then I'm at a generic current news page, and I don't see a search function where I can look for "Goldbridge". You would need a source to comment on how game attendance speaks to authenticity; otherwise it's original research. You would also need a source for "[...] almost universally seen as somebody [...] exploiting the club [...]". It seems like much of what you want to add is personal knowledge or analysis, and Wikipedia needs reliable sources. It's not that Wikipedia thinks you are wrong, or are lying; it's just that you need to help Wikipedia vouch for your edit. Sorry, but that's the way it works. _signed,Willondon (talk) 18:34, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK - so I will sort the first link. Regarding a source to link authenticity and attendance, I don't want the article to mention that, it's just common sense and people can draw that conclusion if they wish. If I find a source that shows he does not attend then that would be correctly referenced, right? The last part was just some context for you, I don't want to include it either 2A0A:EF40:2F8:8C01:5827:D70F:3E62:98D5 (talk) 20:41, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A source that shows he doesn't attend games isn't necessarily worth anything. As a layman not familiar with the coverage Goldbridge provides as a YouTuber, I would probably assume it just means he's not set up to provide live coverage on-site, rather than in a studio. A reliable source that says he doesn't attend games, and comments that it means something, lends the content some notability. What you really need is a reliable source that provides commentary supporting what you want to add. The content is ultimately opinion, but like a respected movie critic, a regarded sports critic or commentator can be a valid source for those sort of additions. _signed,Willondon (talk) 22:11, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to the Homelessness Page

Hi there, I wanted to reach out to you about the reversal of my edits. You see I was doing this edit for a course grade. While I know that you view it as original research I did cite the textbook that I used when making this addition. I have never made edits to this page and was only doing it for the course. I totally understand your call to take it down and do not want an editing "war", however, I want to let you know that the words were basically from the professors mouth and the textbook to the page and not just something I came up with on a whim. It would be great to see this edit put back but I do know that that's not very common on these types of websites. Anyways, Id love feedback that is actually constructive so that the next assignment I do you leave my edits as they are. Thanks! Kendallryan02 (talk) 03:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I assume reference to your edit here [1].

Re the words were basically from the professors mouth and the textbook: I didn't see any word-for-word copying from the source, which is good; it's important not to violate copyright
I had a problem with the tone, which was didactic: e.g. "in order to better understand", "important to note", "important to remember", "important to highlight". "Wikipedia voice" should be a rather dry reporting of what reliable secondary sources have said about a subject, and should not attempt to tell the reader what it is important to know.
The content suggested a context far wider than the article itself. Many researchers have studied homelessness as a whole [...] would seem to introduce a whole tutorial in itself, not an addition of a few facts to the article. Much of the content is devoted to defining and illustrating "intermediaries", which should be beyond the scope of a small addition to the article.
As an editor working on a course assignment, your goals will often intersect with Wikipedia's, but sometimes they will not. Sometimes an instructor will assign a task which is not compatible with Wikipedia, especially if it views Wikipedia as a whiteboard for accomplishing educational goals. Every edit to the articles is "live", and expected to preserve the integrity of Wikipedia's purpose. There is a resource at Wikipedia:Education program which gives guidance to constructing assignments that avoid conflicting with Wikipedia's goals and methods.

Rather than trying to shoe-horn a mini-essay into the article, you would improve Wikipedia by adding forms of discrimination which contribute to homelessness, or perhaps reporting on the impact various forms have, or what mitigating efforts have been tried. I hope you haven't been assigned a project that will be impossible to complete while meeting Wikipedia's goals as well. I wish you the best in your future endeavours. _signed,Willondon (talk) 16:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

my special yo-yos section

What happened to my special yo-yos section? Its gone. I am going to try and cite more sources but I read about the Nine Dragons Yo-Yo on YoYofactory.com. I heard about the Synergy yo-yo on a YouTube video made by Brandon Vu that was about his yo-yo collection; he mentioned the Synergy yo-yo. On that same video he said "The Synergy yo-yo is basically an earlier version of the YoYoFactory Nine Dragons yo-yo." Please tell me how I can publish the special yo-yos section without it getting deleted. Sincerely, SushiLover12345 SushiLover12345 (talk) 19:32, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You need to find reliable secondary sources that support the information you want to provide. A secondary source would be one independent of the yoyo itself. It's no good if the Acme YoyoCo says their yoyos are "special". My Mom says I'm special. It's better if this conversation is held in one place, at the Yo-yo talk page. That way, people that are interested in the yo-yo article and might be able to help will see it. Helpful editors aren't likely to come across the issue on my talk page here. _signed,Willondon (talk) 20:10, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My reliable secondary source about yo-yos IS yoyofactory.com. They offer a detailed description about their yoyos. ALSO I added a link to the Nine dragons Yo-Yo . after the words, "YoYofactory Nine Dragons" in my edit, there is a small [40] which is a link to the reliable secondary source of the Nine dragons Yo-Yo.

You know what, here is the link:

[2] SushiLover12345 (talk) 20:54, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the final message that I will send about this issue on your talk page. After you reply to me, we will continue this discussion on the yoyo talk page.

also the [7] on my previous message is the link to my secondary source about the Nine dragons yoyo SushiLover12345 (talk) 21:05, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WILLONDON STOP DELETING MY EDITS TELL ME WHY YOU ARE IN AN HOUR OR IM DELETING MY WIKIPEDIA ACCOUNT AND NEVER USING WIKIPEDIA AGAIN IM BEING DRIVEN CRAZY WITH YOUR ANTICS SushiLover12345 (talk) 15:45, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TELL ME WHY YOU ARE IN AN HOUR Editors are not required to respond on any sort of time-frame or deadline; you're just in luck that I happen to be logged in now. I assume reference to this edit here [3]. The edit summary says "inadequately sourced (YouTube); needs a reliable secondary source to establish what is "weird". You can see at WP:RSPYT that YouTube is not considered a reliable source for Wikipedia purposes. At Wikipedia:No original research, you can see that personal knowledge or analysis is not accepted, either. To describe a yo-yo as "weird", and treat "weird" as a type of yo-yo, you need a reliable secondary source that says so. I hope you appreciate the time I'm taking to respond, considering that I apparently had the power to shut you down just by waiting out an hour without responding. If being reverted because your edits don't conform to the way Wikipedia does things is driving you crazy, perhaps Wikipedia isn't the place for you. _signed,Willondon (talk) 16:20, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Huh 81.102.168.63 (talk) 19:03, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WILINDON, stop deleting the history part of the CPS page

Please stop removing the history of CPS, you most Likley don't even go to this school, meaning that this is none of your business, there is absolutely no reason to delete it, wikepedia WANTS us to expand pages to please stop Happymappy12342 (talk) 02:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) As stated by wilindon, you must inculde WP:reliable sources for your additions to wikipedia. GrayStorm^{(Complaints Dept.|My Contribs.)} 02:22, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To repeat from my post on your talk page:

Last time I'm going to warn you about defacing my user page. And the last time I'm going to advise you to read Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Help:Referencing for beginners, and throw in Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article advice for good measure. If you need more help making edits that aren't vulnerable to being reverted, ask at the Teahouse. Don't post here any more. _signed,Willondon (talk) 16:39, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not care, you don't go to carlisle school, for the last time THE PAGE IS NONE OF YOUR FREAKING BUISSNESS LEAVE THE PAGE AS IT IS WILLY BILLY WIL WIL DONN Happymappy123 (talk) 00:42, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I've created an ANI post about this, figured I'm technically suppost to tell you since ur mentioned in it. Ur obviously not in trouble tho. GrayStorm^{(Complaints Dept.|My Contribs.)} 01:12, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edit

I reverted your revert of the edit on John Leguizamo. I was working on the page to add a reference for it. Rofraja (talk) 15:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see that now. Thanks for the note. _signed,Willondon (talk) 15:09, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

stop vandalizing Sourced information on Atama and Editan without proper citation, if this persist, you might be blocked from this space. Akpako (talk) 05:15, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Idiot sock

Have already reported this garbage vandal here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Yamla#Idiot_sock; lowlife has the nerve to defend themselves in their talkpage, i refuse to drop my two cents there because this individual does not merit one ounce of my wiki-time!). Still today, i will reply to you regarding the Jordi Amat (footballer) article.

Attentively, continue the good work RevampedEditor (talk) 18:22, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you will be notified here because i clicked the option "reply" at my talk page, but mention nonetheless that i have replied to your pertinent query there. --RevampedEditor (talk) 18:32, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Geometry Dash xo

You reverted my edits after i was adding a true thing. you also posted about it like you did something i was factually correct and adding another form of entertainment. BidGic (talk) 00:13, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But if you read the advice at Wikipedia:Disambiguation, you see that adding another form of entertainment isn't the purpose of a disambiguation page. _signed,Willondon (talk) 00:16, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your Teahouse question

I am way behind in the archives but I saw this question. I have been a registered IMDb user for more than 20 years and I'm not aware of any way to see what others cannot see. But I know how to ask there.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't get very specific because I wasn't sure I should quote you or even link to your question, but with what I asked, I was told "No. I don't believe so."— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 18:07, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your response. I've been curious for a while (though not curious enough to set up an IMDb account). A while back there were a few different "producers" that were inserting themselves into articles. I would sometimes check IMDb as a step to verfying. On a couple of occasions, I happened to see that the producer was not listed on the IMDb projects cited, and then the next day they were. Hmmm. I wondered if there was a way, like with Wikipedia, to see who added what and when. Thanks again for the reply. _signed,Willondon (talk) 18:15, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Done _signed,Willondon (talk) 17:43, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Stop saying I’m vandalizing you liar! Tylerdued3 (talk) 17:55, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

that sure is right, i have a wikepedia page on my school and wilindon is deleting a part i added about my schools history and calling it “VaNdAlIsM” Happymappy12342 (talk) 12:56, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Say to 1000mm

Guds lapskausblanding er veldig viktig for globalforvaltningen av soppressurser. 139.164.154.73 (talk) 11:41, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revdeleting harassment comments

Please can you revdelete the racial snarks by sock user from my talk page history. I can't take the unnecessary abuse as I am facing mental issues. They are added by this account (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/117.228.176.138 ). Regards Io5678 (talk) 22:53, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. I'm not an administrator. _signed,Willondon (talk) 22:55, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

St Benedict's Bedfordview

I added history. please check if it is good or not. kind regards. DJM123412334 (talk) 13:19, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I decided to revert the edits [4]. The main reason is that no source was provided for the content (see Help:Referencing for beginners to learn how to add sources). Another reason was "peacock language" (see WP:PUFFERY) such as "rich history", "remarkable journey", etc. In looking for a source, the most obvious place would be the school itself. As a primary source, it's not ideal, but not wholly objectionable. The important thing if you draw on those resources is to not violate copyright by copying word for word. You need to put those things in your own words. Hope that helps. _signed,Willondon (talk) 15:35, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thanks @Willondon. Still new to the thing. I'll make the edits later next week. Enjoy your day. DJM123412334 (talk) 15:46, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

undoing the Law Enforcement Warning article

i don't understand why you would mark this as unsourced considering my source is the national weather service itself: https://forecast.weather.gov/wwamap/wwatxtget.php?cwa=usa&wwa=Law%20Enforcement%20Warning Strawblarri (talk) 19:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because you didn't provide a link to the source along with your addition (see Help:Referencing for beginners to learn how to do that). If you decide to add it again (with source, of course), don't repeat the actual warning text in the article. That's not necessary. _signed,Willondon (talk) 20:02, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You could have done your research yourself on this and added it to the article as the LEW is still in effect, but you did not. Also, there should at least be an example of the warning, as shown from the many others that were listed. Strawblarri (talk) 20:04, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:BURDEN. I also don't think another example is needed. _signed,Willondon (talk) 20:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

without that example someone could remove information accidentally, and it still contributes to the article in some way, considering it’s a stub. 2600:1012:B349:C8B0:713B:281A:38AC:54C6 (talk) 21:23, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

sorry about the message above btw, I sent that though email so it doesn't seem like it was me. Strawblarri (talk) 21:32, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion that there are already enough examples is not a strong one; I respect other editors' opinions there. You will have to provide sources for additions, and the onus is on you for that. If you want to add that information again with a source, I can help with any loose ends that need tied up. Happy editing. _signed,Willondon (talk) 22:17, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I see you've gone ahead and added it.[5] I put the source next to the statement with the {{cite web}} template. _signed,Willondon (talk) 22:31, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Willondon, I'm here to ask a question regarding the articles source. for some reason, the website that linked the example and that I used as the source completely cleared the page, basically making the source unusable. is there any other way me or you could restore the original source? ex: way back machine, etc. thanks! Strawblarri (talk) 22:43, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://forecast.weather.gov/wwamap/wwatxtget.php?cwa=usa&wwa=Law%20Enforcement%20Warning if you check the source, the page seems to have been entirely wiped. Strawblarri (talk) 22:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. That's what the page looked like when I checked it. It seemed odd to use as a source, but I figured you can tell it's from the National Weather Service, and though empty, states it's a Law Enforcement Warning. I know things like the wayback machine and Internet archives keep copies, but I'm not familiar with what they cover, or how to work them. Since the article is a stub in need of development, I think demands on sourcing can be a little relaxed. The two main things a reliable secondary source does are (1) verify that it is a fact, (2) support that it is something worthy of note. The current sourcing doesn't do the second one, but I think it covers the first. Better sourcing might come from news coverage of LEW's launch, or if/when it expanded to include weather events, or a source detailing what the LEW is, and what it covers. _signed,Willondon (talk) 23:15, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]