Jump to content

Talk:Jay C. Block

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Additional source

[edit]

Don't have time to tackle it at the moment, but here's an article with stuff like where he went to college and other base facts. Part 1, and the much bigger part 2 and the sidebar. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 13:51, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

[edit]

If someone wants to put in the energy, it would be good to crop the photo to just its left half -- it will run larger and be more focused on the subject. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 02:32, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How's that? JFHJr () 04:51, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed a location parameter oopsie; it started as an article image in situ, but I promoted it to the infobox for being the only one. Now it's centered. JFHJr () 04:55, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good work. That works well if this is what we have for the infobox... but if we get a more recent picture for that, it would be nice to have the soldier photo at full height, give him at least some context. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 06:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, a more recent photo would be great for the info box. To place the CSS Crop image in an article, it might need a manually added thumbnail box and caption. The crop height can be extended much more easily but also manually. Feel free to ping me if help is needed down-placing or modifying the image. Cheers! JFHJr () 06:17, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I didn't know about the CSS crop box. I'm an old man, I brute-force edit things with Photoshop the way my mammy did and her mammy before her. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 14:38, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The photo thankfully got updated, and the context for the wartime photo is mostly gone. If and when it's not WP:UNDUE per context, here's another CSS crop for content illustration: {{Css Image Crop|Image=080520-F-3001D-002.jpg |bSize=300 |cWidth=150 |cHeight=220 |oTop=0 |oLeft=0 |Location=right |Description=Block in 2004}}. Cheers! JFHJr () 02:11, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do I need to fully protect the page while you folks discuss it?

[edit]

Happy to do so. I encourage the editors editwarring in live pagespace to talk here please. BusterD (talk) 23:20, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Third person controversy

[edit]

S0091 and I have removed a paragraph of controversy that's mostly about someone else (irrelevant content is WP:UNDUE) and references this subject in a rather WP:BLPSPS fashion or not at all. If there's a problem with removal of this content about an alleged controversy or criticism, I hope others will offer to explain here how it's biographically significant and of enduring coverage in regards to this subject (not someone else by association). Cheers! JFHJr () 23:21, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My initial removal was on erroneous grounds so rightfully reverted. However, I now have done a Google and Proquest search, with names spelled correctly this time :), and the only source I found that mentions the criticism is the one article by the Santa Fe New Mexican. Unless there are other reliable sources indicating significance, I agree it is WP:UNDUE. S0091 (talk) 15:14, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:21, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccuracies

[edit]

@Block2024 you have removed some content stating it is inaccurate. Some of the content you removed is sourced to reliable sources so that should stay but if there are claims not supported by the sources, that should be removed. Can you please be specific so we can help? Also, please take a look at this version of the article. Is that version accurate? S0091 (talk) 17:05, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]