User talk:Mainstrike

April 2012[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Jana Novotná, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use your sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

As mentioned before, the tone you used is inappropriate for Wikipedia, which is not a publisher of original thought. Your additions are unverified and are not neutral. Also, your repeated use of "Jana", as opposed to her surname, is inappropriate. Please do not re-insert the removed edits, or others of the same kind. Thank you. James26 (talk) 04:09, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Tennis Edits[edit]

Don't have much time, but the links I provided, such as WP:Tone and WP:V, can give an indication of what I mean. I don't mean to offend you at all, but I disagree with some of the affection in your edits. Be happy to discuss this at further length later if you like. James26 (talk) 15:45, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. I'll go ahead and answer your request.

Firstly, your additions lack inline citations to verify what you're claiming. I've checked the sources, and they in no way cover everything that you've added. Without reliable sources, your additions qualify as original research.

Secondly, where are the sources for the adjectives you use to describe living people ("feisty") or events ("devestating")? Those sound very much like your personal view, which would again qualify as original thought.

Third, the tone I found in the articles was inappropriate. This isn't the place for hyperbole ("Forever etched in time"; "Mary Joe makes a splash"), or personal views ("feisty"; "devestating"). We're all free to write like that on personal Websites, but Wikipedia articles are supposed to be written in a formal and neutral manner.

Also, you can check most articles on living people (Tom Brady, for example), and you'll see that articles generally refer to people by surnames, and shouldn't alternate between those and first names. That isn't encyclopedic. I'll restore the correction you pointed out in Jana Novotna (which wouldn't have been an issue with a source present), but I'm again reverting to a formal tone per the links I cited above. Thanks. -- James26 (talk) 22:51, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Firstly, everything that you add to articles needs to be sourced. That's the standard policy on Wikipedia, especially when it comes to living people. You can easily find examples of this (and how to do it) in the Petra Kvitová article, or the Roger Federer article. With all due respect, you're under the same requirement as the rest of us to put the work into adding sources. We don't simply edit based on our personal memories, or whatever.

Here are some examples of what I'm getting at. :)

A statement like "most observers predicted" needs to be sourced. You'd cite a source like this.

A person's results and achievements need to be sourced. You'd cite a source like this when it came to that sort of thing.

Once again, I've reverted your edits because -- as I noted before -- the tone is too casual and contains too much hyperbole, with or without adjectives. And the results remain largely unsourced. And Tom Brady is not an exception; the use of surnames is standard practice on Wikipedia. Check the Roger Federer article, rated "GA", and you'll see that it doesn't generally call him "Roger."

Rather than addressing the policies I've been linking, you're arguing your point of view. Please add sources, and leave opinions out, when re-inserting that info. Let me know if you want help. Thanks. -- James26 (talk) 19:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

June 2012[edit]

Please stop adding first names or replacing surnames with first names in tennis articles. This is an encyclopedia, and after a first mention, people should be referred to using their surname. Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:19, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you've been asked to stop doing this before. I'm asking again. Thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:08, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning, continuing to disrupt the encyclopaedia by ignoring WP:SURNAME will result in your account being blocked. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:20, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

November 2012[edit]

I see you have been warned for this before, but I guess it bears repeating. We do not use the first names of subjects per WP:SURNAME. You changed the text on both Abigail Folger and Wojciech Frykowski to include usage of first names for no reason whatsoever. As such, I have reverted your edits on both articles. Pinkadelica ^♣ 23:44, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 16:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]