![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Saint Joan of Arc School (Evesham Township, New Jersey) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 29 March 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Evesham Township, New Jersey. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
It seems to me that the Marlton article should be merged into the Evesham Township article. To quote this article:
"Marlton" is often used in place of the township's name, even when referring to locations beyond the boundaries of the CDP.
Evesham is not one of those NJ townships that really has more than one distinctive CDP or "town" within it. "Marlton" is commonly used to refer to the entire township, so the two articles seem a bit redundant.
Legalskeptic ( talk) 03:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
I changed the word "from", (correctly) to "over". Either one is correct; it is not a big deal, but "over" indicates the direction of the change and makes the article more understandable to the reader.
Why are you ( User:Alansohn) reverting edits that improve the article and calling them (in this edit [1]) WP:Vandalism, which is defined as "any addition, removal, or change of content, in a deliberate attempt to damage Wikipedia"? WP:Vandalism goes further to state that "Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. Edit warring over content is not vandalism. Careful consideration may be required to differentiate between edits that are beneficial, detrimental but well-intentioned, and vandalizing. Mislabelling good-faith edits as vandalism can be considered harmful."
I do not consider my edits to be "misguided", but even if they are, why would you violate the Wikipedia policy by labeling my edits as vandalism? One could consider your actions as Wikipedia:BULLYING, "the act of using the Wikipedia system and the power of editing to threaten or intimidate other people". While, I sincerely hope that is not the case, it appears that when I edit any article related to the state of New Jersey, it is quickly reverted by you, sometimes overtly (and often with a rude, belligerent edit caption), and sometimes it appears that you disguise the edit within a misleading edit caption. There are numerous wikipedia policies and essays directed towards the behaviours mentioned above. I am sure you are quite aware of them, but here are a few nonetheless. Wikipedia:Ownership of content, Wikipedia:Assume good faith, WP:CIVIL, Wikipedia:Right to Edit.
You cannot prevent others from editing articles. You don't own Wikipedia, all articles in the state of New Jersey, nor even this one article. Please stop your attempts to prevent others from making positive contributions to Wikipedia.
In conclusion, while I feel that "from" is perfectly legitimate, use of the word "over" clarifies the meaning, improving the understandability of the article. If others do not agree, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't classify the change as "vandalism". Jacona ( talk) 15:31, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
1. I disagree with your analysis of the grammar. The change provides clarity by emphasizing the direction of the change, rather than confusing the reader as you assert.
2. I will attempt to WP:AGF here, but it seems rather obvious that "not an improvement" referred to the previous edit, in which you called my good faith edit "disruptive", not to the edit I was making. 3. Why do you call this vandalism? You don't address this. It is clearly not vandalism.
4. If making any edit whatsoever to an article one has not edited before is somehow "vandalism", how have any edits other than page creation ever been made?
5. Allegations of stalking: What makes you think I'm going through your edit history? I in fact have looked at articles edit histories, and have in many cases have avoided making edits to articles in which you were the previous editor, to avoid any such perceived conflict. However, I've been bouncing around New Jersey, largely following wikilinks from one article to another, particularly today the New Jersey Athletic Conference. I notice that you show up in the edit history of almost every page involving New Jersey. If it is unacceptable to start editing a page that you have not edited before, New Jersey would be solely your domain. Is that what you are trying to accomplish here?
Please allow other editors, including myself, to improve Wikipedia articles in New Jersey. Please Assume Good Faith. Please do not bully, or assert ownership over these articles.
Thanks for your cooperation! Jacona ( talk) 17:18, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
And what are you insinuating on cooper union? Is that your territory, ineligible for others to edit? They look like good edits to me. Jacona ( talk) 18:00, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Evesham Township, New Jersey. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:25, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Evesham Township, New Jersey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.twp.evesham.nj.us/about_evesham.htm{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.twp.evesham.nj.us/about_evesham.htm{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://press.co.burlington.nj.us/PRESS/EResults/When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:43, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Evesham Township, New Jersey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://home.lrhsd.org/pwrx/pages/page.jsp?P_SITE_ID=1&P_PAGE_ID=1When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Saint Joan of Arc School (Evesham Township, New Jersey) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 29 March 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Evesham Township, New Jersey. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
It seems to me that the Marlton article should be merged into the Evesham Township article. To quote this article:
"Marlton" is often used in place of the township's name, even when referring to locations beyond the boundaries of the CDP.
Evesham is not one of those NJ townships that really has more than one distinctive CDP or "town" within it. "Marlton" is commonly used to refer to the entire township, so the two articles seem a bit redundant.
Legalskeptic ( talk) 03:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
I changed the word "from", (correctly) to "over". Either one is correct; it is not a big deal, but "over" indicates the direction of the change and makes the article more understandable to the reader.
Why are you ( User:Alansohn) reverting edits that improve the article and calling them (in this edit [1]) WP:Vandalism, which is defined as "any addition, removal, or change of content, in a deliberate attempt to damage Wikipedia"? WP:Vandalism goes further to state that "Even if misguided, willfully against consensus, or disruptive, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism. Edit warring over content is not vandalism. Careful consideration may be required to differentiate between edits that are beneficial, detrimental but well-intentioned, and vandalizing. Mislabelling good-faith edits as vandalism can be considered harmful."
I do not consider my edits to be "misguided", but even if they are, why would you violate the Wikipedia policy by labeling my edits as vandalism? One could consider your actions as Wikipedia:BULLYING, "the act of using the Wikipedia system and the power of editing to threaten or intimidate other people". While, I sincerely hope that is not the case, it appears that when I edit any article related to the state of New Jersey, it is quickly reverted by you, sometimes overtly (and often with a rude, belligerent edit caption), and sometimes it appears that you disguise the edit within a misleading edit caption. There are numerous wikipedia policies and essays directed towards the behaviours mentioned above. I am sure you are quite aware of them, but here are a few nonetheless. Wikipedia:Ownership of content, Wikipedia:Assume good faith, WP:CIVIL, Wikipedia:Right to Edit.
You cannot prevent others from editing articles. You don't own Wikipedia, all articles in the state of New Jersey, nor even this one article. Please stop your attempts to prevent others from making positive contributions to Wikipedia.
In conclusion, while I feel that "from" is perfectly legitimate, use of the word "over" clarifies the meaning, improving the understandability of the article. If others do not agree, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't classify the change as "vandalism". Jacona ( talk) 15:31, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
1. I disagree with your analysis of the grammar. The change provides clarity by emphasizing the direction of the change, rather than confusing the reader as you assert.
2. I will attempt to WP:AGF here, but it seems rather obvious that "not an improvement" referred to the previous edit, in which you called my good faith edit "disruptive", not to the edit I was making. 3. Why do you call this vandalism? You don't address this. It is clearly not vandalism.
4. If making any edit whatsoever to an article one has not edited before is somehow "vandalism", how have any edits other than page creation ever been made?
5. Allegations of stalking: What makes you think I'm going through your edit history? I in fact have looked at articles edit histories, and have in many cases have avoided making edits to articles in which you were the previous editor, to avoid any such perceived conflict. However, I've been bouncing around New Jersey, largely following wikilinks from one article to another, particularly today the New Jersey Athletic Conference. I notice that you show up in the edit history of almost every page involving New Jersey. If it is unacceptable to start editing a page that you have not edited before, New Jersey would be solely your domain. Is that what you are trying to accomplish here?
Please allow other editors, including myself, to improve Wikipedia articles in New Jersey. Please Assume Good Faith. Please do not bully, or assert ownership over these articles.
Thanks for your cooperation! Jacona ( talk) 17:18, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
And what are you insinuating on cooper union? Is that your territory, ineligible for others to edit? They look like good edits to me. Jacona ( talk) 18:00, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Evesham Township, New Jersey. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:25, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Evesham Township, New Jersey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.twp.evesham.nj.us/about_evesham.htm{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.twp.evesham.nj.us/about_evesham.htm{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://press.co.burlington.nj.us/PRESS/EResults/When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 22:43, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Evesham Township, New Jersey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://home.lrhsd.org/pwrx/pages/page.jsp?P_SITE_ID=1&P_PAGE_ID=1When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)