User talk:DJ Jones74

An article that you commented on, Robert Max Ross, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Max Ross. Thank you. A. B. ^(talk) 02:25, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw you were one of the people who had edited the article Thomas Clark Rye. I changed his middle name in the article to Clarke because that's how Tennessee Encyclopedia spells the name. NGA also has a profile by that name and Find A Grave as well. I hope to get the spelling to somebody's attention so that the article could be transferred to its proper place. 128.214.205.5 (talk) 11:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, DJ Jones74! I am Sallicio and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Sallicio^{${\displaystyle \color {Red}\oplus }$} 16:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't notice that he actually changed parties. If the correct party is the old name for another organization, then you can redirect it to that party, so we don't have a blank. If it is not, then feel free to create the page. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jacksonian Republican linked to the Democratic-Republican Party, so that seemed to do the trick. There's no Wiki color code for that party designation (nor for Jacksonian), however. DJ Jones74 (talk) 00:46, 24 February 2009 (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) 16:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Scottsboro, Alabama, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 03:41, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Bessemer, Alabama. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Magnolia677 (talk) 01:47, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DJ Jones74. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DJ Jones74. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What's your source for change? Thanks Dankarl (talk) 02:36, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It was a small mistake by the person who punched in the original figure. They put in 375 when it is 376. You can check against the 2010 Census factfinder: ^[1] DJ Jones74 (talk) 02:43, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Houston, Alaska, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. besides being unsourced, the information you are adding is of no use. The incorporation date for the community should already be in the article in two different places, and it goes on the census roll at the next census, which since 1790 has been in the year ending in zero. Is the sky blue there too? Maybe you better put that in the article. John from Idegon (talk) 21:34, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Houston, Alaska. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. John from Idegon (talk) 00:16, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DJ Jones74. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, DJ Jones74. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Bisbee, Arizona, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:18, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop wasting my time with these deletions. We've been over this before when I was working on Alabama locations. I've already done the same for Alabama, Alaska, and American Samoa and have been working at present on Arizona. DJ Jones74 (talk) 22:34, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Benson, Arizona. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You have been cautioned about using unpublished sources which cannot be verified. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:21, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I SOURCED the content to the CITY MANAGER who confirmed via email today (9/30/2019) the month and date of the referendum to upgrade Benson to city status. She forwarded to me a scan of the information. I cannot place a scan of this file on Wikipedia. The reason I contacted her to obtain the information was because there was no online reference to the date of this occurrence. I explicitly informed the city manager I needed the information to place on the Wikipedia page. So, you tell me, how else am I supposed to transmit this information that doesn't personally offend your delicate sensibilities, sir ? DJ Jones74 (talk) 23:29, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:02, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At Agua Raiz you wrote:

"It was the 3rd largest community recorded (2nd largest native village behind Arenal) in Arizona County (Tucson being the largest). Because census takers in 1860 and the specials prior to that failed to denote the precise location of the specific Pima villages on maps, it is unclear their exact locations today."

You cite page 140 from this source. Could you please explain where on that page you found that? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:23, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This document you are citing is an unreviewed academic paper commissioned by the tribe. It fails WP:RS because it is unreviewed (if it were published in a respected academic journal we could use it), and it fails WP:INDY because it is commissioned. Magnolia677. John from Idegon (talk) 18:01, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense. It is a well-researched article with impeccable reference notes throughout. It curiously did not seem to elicit a problem when referenced by another editor when they created pages on the Pima Villages, only "magically" when I did. This is not the first time you have unfairly and subjectively targeted my edits, the last time being in an uncivilized and sarcastic tone when I was working on Alaska places.DJ Jones74 (talk) 04:34, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please answer my question. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:31, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The population ranks came directly from the 1860 census reference link^[1] Table No.3, p. 3. The second sentence refers to the point that because no maps were made of the individual villages or place names, either in the 1858 and 1859 special census surveys or in the regular 1860 census for Arizona County, New Mexico, that other than for knowing the general area (along the south bank of the Gila River within the present-day Gila River Reservation), and the order with which they apparently existed (p. 166 of the document, listing villages from east to west) it is unclear exactly where they are today (although Agua Raiz and Arenal were cited for being between Sweetwater/Statonic (Stotonic) and Pima Butte).

Do you have a source supporting that "no maps were made"? Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 15:27, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No maps were made of the individual villages, unfortunately, as Wilson's treatise above stated. I've been scouring the internet trying to find them. They were broadly labeled -- as a group -- on maps of the period as "Pima Villages", but these were clumping the 10 Pima & Maricopa villages of the 1860 census together. You will see its location on this 1865 map: https://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~1751~180038:Official-Map-Of-The-Territory-Of-Ar?sort=Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No&qvq=q:Official%2BMap%2BOf%2BThe%2BTerritory%2BOf%2BArizona;sort:Pub_List_No_InitialSort%2CPub_Date%2CPub_List_No%2CSeries_No;lc:RUMSEY~8~1&mi=4&trs=6 Zoom in to the border between then-Pima County (in pink) and Yavapai County (in green), just SE of the junction of the Gila and Salado (Salt) Rivers is the location shown near Maricopa Wells and labeled on the map of the vicinity "Maricopas and Pimas." However, this map notes that part of the Pima Villages lay on the north side of the Gila. In 1860, all of the villages were on the south. But they began to move their villages northward as required in search of water (they had been north of the Gila in the time before the 1858-59-60 census surveys, all cited in that reference material). To my knowledge in 1860, no maps were made to accompany any census materials (largely because the war was starting and they did not have the resources to spare). The Wilson treatise referenced goes into considerable detail regarding the problem with maps (and lack thereof) and the problem with trying to figure out which village was which (because non-native attempts to label them via the aforementioned census taking presented problems, along with their being moved). Add to that, census-takers in 1870 effectively wrote off the Indian population of Arizona and counted all of 31(!) living in the White settlements (whereas over 4,000, then the majority of Arizona, was counted in 1860). By 1870, as cited above, those villages were already either "on the move" or left abandoned.DJ Jones74 (talk) 07:32, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please indicate on what page of the Wilson document it states that "Because census takers in 1860 and the specials prior to that failed to denote the precise location of the specific Pima villages on maps, it is unclear their exact locations today". Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 12:29, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That was my encapsulation of the author's statements/conclusions on the matter, which were well researched. I did not use any direct quotes, since that might be considered unauthorized plagiarization of his work.DJ Jones74 (talk) 12:43, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You've been here 10 years. You should know by now that no one has a "right" to add whatever they want to a Wikipedia article. If someone objects, your change stays out until consensus is reached. Is there another way? If so, I'm sure not aware of it, so please enlighten me. If not, quit being disruptive and follow WP:BRD. John from Idegon (talk) 20:17, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12 years and 7 months, actually. If said edit deletion is frivolous, prejudicial and unhelpful in explicitly stating what exactly is wrong, I will promptly revert it... Especially so when there are 3 individuals here who seem to have a habit of ganging up on my edits when I've never engaged in retaliation against them or their work. Point being, I don't go and stomp all over your edits and hard work, so please give me the same courtesy and stop wasting my time when I'm working on numerous articles. You could've made your point privately by ASKING me to edit down the number of pics instead of removing the entire edit. If you want to open an objection, YOU do it.DJ Jones74 (talk) 20:35, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Anderson, Etowah County, Alabama, you may be blocked from editing. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:43, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've grown quite weary of having my well-researched and well-sourced edits being deliberately and systematically removed by a troika of individuals who have harassed, insulted and engaged in foul-mouthed attacks and thoroughly unhelpful "comments." That you back each other up in your edit wars demonstrates an abuse of power and you should be suspended if not expelled for these kinds of actions. Enough already.DJ Jones74 (talk) 23:18, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Anderson,_Etowah_County,_Alabama <--see sources

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Arab, Alabama. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:44, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Arab, Alabama. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:06, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At Arcola, Alabama, you wrote "According to the returns from 1850-2010 for Alabama, it has never reported a population figure separately on the U.S. Census." I'm not quite sure what this means. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 22:55, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No population figures were reported for Arcola at any point from 1850-2010 as per the 17 census references for the period as referenced to you individually yesterday. It also means in addition to no population for the village of the name, there was also no beat or precinct named for Arcola for the period (for which I report a population under demographics if there is).DJ Jones74 (talk) 23:02, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 00:09, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Autaugaville, Alabama, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel Pratt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 10:09, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting any suggestions/comments for proposed "population by race" template to add to U.S. places. The following is an example for Autauga County, Alabama. I thought putting each census on such a chart with a line-by-line racial breakdown would be more helpful (or easier to follow/use) than the simple population total we have at present (historic population template), and written-out paragraphs of racial and/or other demographics. I'm not 100% satisfied with it, wondering if there should be a percentages table on it (i.e. % growth or decline per race). DJ Jones74 (talk) 07:38, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Historic Demographics

Facts & Trivia:

Lowest Population: 3,853 (1820)
Highest Population: 54,571 (2010)

Lowest Rank as Populated County: 60th of 67 (1920 & 1930)
Highest Rank as Populated County: 9th of 36 (1830)

Lowest White Population: 2,203 (1820)
Highest White Population: 42,154 (2010*) (*White, Non-Hispanic)

Lowest White Population as Percentage: 33.5% (1880)
Highest White Population as Percentage: 79.7% (2010*) (*White, Non-Hispanic)

Lowest Black Population: 1,650 (1820)
Highest Black Population: 11,717 (1910)

Lowest Black Population as Percentage: 17.1% (2000)
Highest Black Population as Percentage: 66.4% (1880)

Highest Number of Slaves: 9,607 (1860)

Highest Population & Percentage of Hispanics: 1,310 & 2.4% (2010)

Highest Native American Population: 232 (2010)
Highest Native American Population as Percentage: 0.9% (1890)

Highest Population & Percentage of Asians: 474 & 0.9% (2010)

4th Most Populous Black Majority County (9th of 36 overall): 1830
3rd Most Populous County with Native Americans: 1890
Lowest Populated County with Black Majority: 1890-1900 & 1930
5th Lowest Population of White Residents: 1890

Notes[edit]

References[edit]

Thanks for writing me for input. I'm very visual and enjoy seeing data presented in a chart, and you've certainly put a lot of work into this. Some may object to your color choice (Indian = red; Asian = yellow) but it's just a draft. May I suggest you seek input at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline, where you can get comments from a large group of editors? Cheers. Magnolia677 (talk) 17:58, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments/suggestions. I'll post this on the page you directed me to for more input from other editors. Thanks again.DJ Jones74 (talk) 13:57, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:09, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline on why this is not OK and does not have consensus for you to do. CodeLyoko^talk 04:47, 10 December 2019 (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) 01:40, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]