User talk:EagleAg04

This user may have left Wikipedia. EagleAg04 has not edited Wikipedia since September 21, 2010. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Hi EagleAg04. I responded to your question on my talk page but then noticed you are new so I thought I'd respond here just in case. I saw the GA comment, but that was an invalid complaint. The Footnotes/References (separated) model is everywhere on WP (and on many, many Featured Articles). Generally, it is common practice on WP to follow the citation method that was already being used in the article and not change it. I saw that you just joined WP:WikiProject Texas A&M. I'm glad! We can always use more members. If you have any questions about how WP works or how to do something, feel free to ask me. User:BQZip01, User:BlueAg09 and User:Oldag07 are other Aggies who are very active at WP and are usually happy to help whenever they are asked. I hope you like it here. Karanacs (talk) 14:56, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy EagleAg! I have been noticing your edits recently. They have been very valuable. You are the best newcomer I've seen on Wiki thus far. I award you this barnstar for your good work:

		The Original Barnstar
		I award the Original Barnstar to EagleAg04 for the tremendous work he has done to continually improve Wikipedia. BlueAg09 (Talk) 19:16, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gig 'em! BlueAg09 (Talk) 19:16, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello EagleAg04. Concerning Texas A&M Hillel, do you have any advice on how I might improve this article's references and/or expansion? Bhaktivinode (talk) 02:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• You may want to expand the article by organizing the content into sections like those proposed in WP:WikiProject Organizations/Format for organization articles and adding content in areas where needed. I would also encourage you to WP:CITE#FULL, using WP:CIT if you find it convenient to do so. I believe the Texas A&M Hillel also has a slogan or motto, so you could add that if you are able to find a reference for it. If you would like, you could also start using Template:Infobox Organization or another appropriate infobox template.

Please stop your efforts to hide the truth about George Foreman's murder of Malcom X-san. See WP:AGF - 24.10.51.165 (talk) 03:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AGF is a guideline, so it does not override commmon sense. Exceptional claims require exceptional sources (see WP:REDFLAG). If you wish to have that material included, all you need to do is provide a reliable source for it. Read WP:PROVEIT to understand the official Wikipedia policy. EagleAg04 (talk) 03:24, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your adding Joseph Bonnell to the "Category:People of the Texas Revolution", however, I believe you put him under 'J' for Joseph. He should be under 'B' for Bonnell.

When I looked at the "Category:People of the Texas Revolution" page to edit it, all I saw were the 3 subcategories - not the entries... Did not know what to do next!

MYwiki17 (talk) 00:53, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct, I forgot to give the category a sort key. The easiest way of doing this is to use the DEFAULTSORT template. It has been added to the Joseph Bonnell article. You can read WP:Categorization#Setting a default sort key if you are interesting in learning about how it works. EagleAg04 (talk) 01:07, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, this looks fine. And thank you for the reference, too. MYwiki17 (talk) 01:05, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In case you're wondering, there is a graphic of the screen with that quote found here:

http://www.austin360.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/tvblog/entries/2008/10/03/kxan_goes_dark_for_time_warner_customers.html

-- azumanga (talk) 03:40, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to accurately update this page, but you keep changing things back. Please help me better understand why you are doing this. Nmckinney828 (talk) 19:55, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Without an edit summary, it was unclear why the material was being removed. The material that you deleted and was restored had a reliable source. How can anyone else know whether the existing content is now incorrect without a more recent reliable source proving otherwise? WP:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research are some of the core content policies here, so those documents should be used a basis for determining whether content should be added or removed. EagleAg04 (talk) 01:55, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I understand that, thanks for the direction. I would like to reorganize the page so that it is no longer broken out by client. Because clients change so much, I would rather have it focus on core company information. I think this will help keep the page more accurate in terms of it being about the company. How do I go about making that big a change without having you change it back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmckinney828 (talk • contribs) 21:52, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a very good reason for removing it. That article has many sections which are way too short and could also benefit from the use of citation templates. It would be good to add a comment on the talk page for the article (Talk:GSD&M Idea City) so that others will understand what you are doing. You are welcome to go ahead and make your edits (per WP:Be Bold), but please be sure to use an edit summary. Thanks, EagleAg04 (talk) 01:28, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, great - thanks again for the advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nmckinney828 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for your help with the GSD&M Idea City page. I have made it much better and tracked the reason for my edits. Since you know your stuff on Wikipedia, can you tell me how to now get rid of the flags on the page? Nmckinney828 (talk) 20:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone can remove the maintenance tags as long as it is not controversial that the problem has been fixed. The article is much more concise leaving much less unreferenced content, so I removed the referencing tag. One remaining concern is that the History section appears to focus more on the Wal-Mart account that all of the other accounts. Partly for this reason, the Expand tag was not removed. Thanks for your help. EagleAg04 (talk) 04:01, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, thanks for the help with the references on the Austin Museum of Art page. I couldn't figure out how to get those right. I was wondering if you could help me with something else regarding that page. It keeps getting flagged for sounding like an advertisement, but i've tried to make it sound as neutral as possible. Do you have any suggestions on what I should change to keep it from getting flagged? Thanks! -Cgunn4321 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.207.51.230 (talk) 19:27, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The introductory lead to the article has already been cleaned up, but using an objective and unbiased style by presenting facts without stating opinions elsewhere in the article would help. More referencing to reliable sources could also be used in some places. EagleAg04 (talk) 03:23, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy Eagleag. The List of Texas Aggie terms is up at featured list candidates. On the talk page, there is a discussion about what the correct name of the article should be. Your input on the matter would be much appreciated. Thanks and Gig em! Oldag07 (talk)

I've reformatted the article to better follow the appropriate Company article format. I removed quite a bit of trivial type stuff, and I have removed most of the stuff about the Isla Vista as it is not a part of the actual Freebirds chain, but a separate restaurant since the two partners split ways. I made some factual corrections based on the sources you provided as well and changed it to a stub. Finally, I removed the images as they were decorative rather than encyclopedic. For now, I've removed the tags as between the two of us, the issues have all been corrected. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 07:33, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you removed my contribution to the lance armstrong page. The contribution was in fact almost cut and pasted from another section in wikipedia. It was referenced although I'm not sure I did this correctly? The information I posted, although controversial, was in fact 100% accurate and was verified by Lance himself as I have indicated in the article. Not everything Lance did was nice and I believe it is responsible and fair for the article to reflect this. Please advise me further on how to place this contribution correctly as I am sure wikipedia encourages freedom of speech particularly when information used is entirely accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kello76 (talk • contribs) 18:16, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy Ag! To be brief... I don’t know how to specifically cite the information I added to the Reveille page. I was on the Traditions Council at Texas A&M this past fall semester and can verify that it is true. It was part of a briefing packet we received, that was comprised of information taken directly from the University Archives.Txaggie2011 (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, EagleAg04. The only reason I removed Bobby Bones's real name from his article was because he has had problems with stalkers on more than one occasion. He has asked me personally to keep his real name out of the article (just like they keep their real/full names off the show). I just keep it off the page out of respect for the DJs. Mattjeast (talk) 13:52, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While your efforts to protect the DJs are admirable, I doubt that any stalker would be detracted as his real name can already very easily be found performing a search for news articles containing "Bobby Bones". A link to one of those articles is even included on that Wikipedia article itself. Much like the rest of the internet, Wikipedia articles are not censored (WP:NOTCENSORED). The Wikipedia policy on public figures such as celebrities (WP:WELLKNOWN) allows for the inclusion any material which is documented by reliable third-party sources. It seems counter intuitive that his real name should be removed over privacy concerns, but his birth date would not be removed. If Bobby Bones is concerned about this privacy related matter, then you should refer him to the information at WP:BIOSELF for information about how to contact the OTRS team. They can help to ensure that any privacy-related information if permanently deleted from the page history and not just from the current revision of the page. EagleAg04 (talk) 00:17, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not trying to save the world by protecting the ID of the DJs. I'm just trying to respect their wishes. I don't see what adding their real names adds to the article in terms of "value" and why it is important to keep it. I'll forward him the information you've provided.Mattjeast (talk) 14:09, 16 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the value in adding Bobby's real name is in making the article complete by including information that has been reported by multiple, third-party WP:Reliable sources. That information has been added by other editors several times in the past, which seems to indicate that others have considered it valuable. Instead of just removing the material every time it was added by someone else, you could have also communicated with those editors to work towards building a WP:Consensus. If a consensus had been reached, a comment could be added to the article source to refer editors to the archived discussion on the talk page and discourage them from making changes without discussing them first. EagleAg04 (talk) 04:20, 17 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 14:11, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited

Date Saturday, December 8, 2012 Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m. Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104 Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand. Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki. Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration. Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 03:08, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to participate in the 50,000 Challenge, aiming for 50,000 article improvements and creations for articles relating to the United States. This effort began on November 1, 2016 and to reach our goal, we will need editors like you to participate, expand, and create. See more here!

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:38, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]