User talk:Jonahrapp

Peter Guo-hua Fu School of Architecture, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Zanhe (talk) 18:11, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Portrait of Raymond Moriyama.jpg. 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) 03:38, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You invited me to your Discussion page. In doing so, I expect you not to delete any of my Lead edits during these discussions, so that I do not delete yours, too.

Please keep in mind that we are both editors. Objectivity, where validated, is the cardinal rule here. You seem to insist that only the first degree awarded by McGill should be included in the Lead and that no other McGill "firsts" should be allowed. That is your personal opinion and subjective value judgment. There is no rule or precedent anywhere that says only the first degree or diploma should be included in the Lead. If you believe that the first degree is so important, I will accept that. But please be fair and objective by also accepting that the election of McGill's first university leader (principal), establishment of first school, appointment of first faculty,etc., are also equally important firsts in the history of a university and no doubt deserve to be in the Lead for the same reasons that you have in mind in putting in the first degree. Thank youKupal123 (talk) 23:05, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion this discussion should be happening at Talk:McGill University rather than on user talk. The steps of WP:Dispute resolution are open to both of you. Someone made a request at WP:RFPP for full protection of McGill University to stop the war. I'm declining the request, but you should both be aware that blocks are possible if edit warring continues. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 03:03, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you EdJohnston. As I said on my own user page, I did not start the edit war but was simply responding to Jonahrapp constant deletion of my contributions while keeping his, and for no legitimate reason at all. On my part, I promise to cease and desist from further editing and to keep his edits there along with mine, until this matter is resolved in Talk:McGill University as you suggested and which is very well received with thanks.Kupal123 (talk) 03:51, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your "contributions" are a risk to McGill University's GA status. You do not properly cite your sources, your punctuation is off, your edit is written with a snide attitude and it does not follow the guidelines of a Lead section. I have requested that the article be semi-protected. Do not say I reverted your edit "for no legitimate reason at all" when I have clearly stated here and on your talk page my reasoning. Magnolia677 even wrote that your edits have been unconstructive and disruptive, and stated that it would be removed, yet you continue to re-add it and revert my own corrections. Jonahrapp (talk) 04:25, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Let me make this clear Jonahrapp that your edit does not belong to the Lead. There is nothing in my edits that is not fully documented. Cite even one, since everything there is with appropriate references. Neither can you justify why your McGill "first" is better than my McGill "firsts." It is all your opinion. And neither did that other editor you cited ever say that you were correct in adding in your edits or removing mine. He just said to stop editing. Finally, as EdJohnston CLEARLY REMINDED YOU AND ME, WE (meaning. YOU AND I) CAN BOTH BE BLOCKED IF WE BOTH KEEP DELETING EACH OTHER'S EDITS. I hope that is clear to you.Kupal123 (talk) 04:38, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you would simply look at the guidelines for a Lead section (Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, you would see how your edit is flawed. Please revert your own edit to the one I left, which is how the article has been for months. Not even my own devising. No need to get so angry. Listing 8 seemingly random "firsts" and writing that the University, "like any other university," had many "firsts" certainly does not follow the guidelines for a Lead. Also, just because other WP articles use a URL with no author, date, accessdate, publisher etc. doesn't mean it is the correct way to cite sources on Wikipedia. McGill University is an important institution and should have a high quality article, so have some respect.Jonahrapp (talk) 05:23, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I have come to fully memorized the guidelines for a Lead section Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section over the years, and find that it is your edit that is totally flawed. Nowhere do the guidelines say that you should add the first degree awarded by a university in the Lead, correct? And nowhere does it say that other "firsts" in a university history are banned or improper, correct? It is all in your imagination. URL have been used as references in many other WP articles, including those articles on universities that are more prestigious than McGill, and using URLs does not depart from the undeniable fact that they are valid references. You are just nitpicking on trivial, presentation style. And just because you do not like using URLs does not in any way imply that the references are invalid or in your own subjective words "improper." There will be no more reverts and further edits at this time. You saw the last editor warn you to desist from any further changes to the Lead unless you want to be blocked.Kupal123 (talk) 07:50, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As has been mentioned, this discussion should be moved to the article's talk page to gain input from a broader community of editors. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:18, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jonahrapp. What's with this removal? EdJohnston (talk) 01:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi EdJohnston, I removed it as it appears the user wrote it in two separate sections on the McGill talk page, and I had responded to the first instance of their usage of it, in the section above which it actually pertained to. I can undo it if you'd like, but I don't see a reason as I had no intention of responding to it. Thank you. Jonahrapp (talk) 01:35, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Macdonald-Harrington Building, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Theroadislong (talk) 07:33, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Philip J. Turner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bedford, Quebec (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 12:19, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article McGill School of Architecture you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Reidgreg -- Reidgreg (talk) 16:21, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! Thank you, Reidgreg. I will try to be as available as possible over the week. Jonahrapp (talk) 16:24, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that I'll be taking you up on that – I think the article needs a fair amount of work, but if you have a lot of time on your hands you might be able to get it done in a week. More on the review page. – Reidgreg (talk) 14:34, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article McGill School of Architecture you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:McGill School of Architecture for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Reidgreg -- Reidgreg (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article McGill School of Architecture you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:McGill School of Architecture for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Reidgreg -- Reidgreg (talk) 16:41, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I was wondering why my contributions were deleted and how to fix this? I thought it was fairly relevant information as most other university pages have this. Thanks. 26 April 2020. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edwardmayfield (talk • contribs) 00:39, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Edwardmayfield. I didn't delete your contributions, I simply moved them around within the Lead for a more logical flow. Rather than writing "McGill is consistently ranked as one of the best international universities in the world" (and, btw, the source you included specified that it was one of the most international universities, not the best), at the beginning of the article (seemed a little out of place, and a bit fluffy), I moved this to the section of the Lead where rankings were already mentioned, and reworded to "McGill consistently ranks in the top 50 universities in the world". I also moved the information about acceptance rates to the middle of the paragraph instead of the end and properly attributed the sources for each statement in that paragraph, which did not seem to have been done before.

When adding information to the Lead, especially for a page like McGill's, you should first discuss these proposed edits in the article's Talk page, but I figured that the information you included belonged in the Lead so I didn't remove your edits, but rather rearranged them. Thanks! Jonahrapp (talk) 00:47, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 03:03, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Yale School of Architecture, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paul Rudolph.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:30, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. 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 2021 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) 00:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]