User talk:Peteforsyth/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

→

An award, and maybe archive time?

		WPOR Award: Sponsored in part by the Big Gold Dude.
		You are hereby granted this shiny object for all your hard work at WikiProject Oregon! Great job with your article creations in November, lots o' government stuff that's been needed. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:23, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Agreed on all counts. :-) And thanks for the barnstar! —EncMstr (talk) 19:24, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite!

Hi there, nice to "meet" you as well. I appreciate the invite, and will look into it more when I get home. I am new to the Oregon info-realm, as I am not currently an Oregonian but plan on moving to Portland in the very near future. It has been interesting learning all about Oregon, and I am very much looking forward to meeting new people and seeing new places. Hopefully your fellow Oregonians are as nice as you are (though perhaps I should not assumer you are an Oregonian--I am doing so only based on the fact you are posting info about the state in your spare time). Thanks again! Whataworld06 (talk) 22:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, I now read on your userpage you are from Portland. Perhaps we will cross paths one day! Whataworld06 (talk) 22:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
- - Hey there, again! So I am just reading so much about Portland/Oregon lately, and I was surprised to see I could not find an article specifically dedicated to the Oregon Cannabis Tax Act 2010. I've seen it mentioned a few times, but realized I had to leave wikipedia for more information. I'm no druggie, but I find this subject fascinating (especially coming from such a conservative state). Am I just not seeing it, or is this possible act not worth its own article? Figured you were the one to ask since you follow legislation and ballot measures so closely. Whataworld06 (talk) 01:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again! (Cannabis in Oregon article)

Hey there, thanks for your contributions to and assistance with the Cannabis in Oregon article. It's certainly off to a great start, and I look forward to seeing it expand. Whataworld06 (talk) 14:42, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

By the way, do you have much experience with album articles? It seems to be a pain to upload album covers. I wasn't sure if you knew a fairly easy way to upload album covers without difficulty. If not, no problem--and no need to respond. Keep up the great work! Whataworld06 (talk) 01:50, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, all sorts of copyright restrictions, etc. No worries! I will do more research on the matter. Peace! Whataworld06 (talk) 01:54, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

A friendly reminder from the oft-forgotten Wikisource

The Oregon Constitution and its index still needs a lot of work, and it's an awful lot of work for one person. If you got time to help out, it'd be appreciated. I also posted a suggestion concerning the index on this talk page. Äþelwulf Talk to me. 11:22, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I haven't forgotten, believe me! I'll check in over the weekend. Glad to see you're still hammering away. -Pete (talk) 20:36, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Joshua Marquis

Thanks for the tips. I've tried to use the five or is it seven pillars when posting. I didn't realize that substantive debate didn't belong on that page. As you can probably tell my main interest is making sure that what is said about me is largely true if debateable. On my own web page (coastda.com) I invite all comers and never delete or edit out negative comments. But if you check out the URL from the unsigned user you edited you'll see a small but extremely vitriolic group of haters. I'm comfortable with controversy and look forward to other people putting counter views. Much of what I've written (in newspapers) generates lively debate. Thanks for the tips and edits Coastda (talk) 16:44, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

>> "I invite all comers and never delete or edit out negative comments."

False again. He never posts other comments than his own anymore -- that's why the DriedSalmon forum was created and continues. In fact he blocked one person from email for his comments. —75.139.213.230 (talk) 22:40, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips Peter and I sincerely appreciate the help. This fellow above is precisely the reason I monitor the page. In my business I will inevitably alienate some people but to give you an idea of what I consider a legitimate controvery from someone who really dislikes me but makes his point well see this piece by David Feige from the Boston GLOBE: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2006/07/16/innocence_by_the_numbers/ This was in turn in response to a series of pieces by the New York Times' Adam Liptak: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/25/us/25bar.html That particular article post-dates Feige's piece but you get the idea. Coastda (talk) 23:10, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Agreed -- it's not difficult to imagine how someone taking this kind of approach might get blocked. Thanks for the links, looks like promising material. -Pete (talk) 23:16, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar. I hope to keep plugging away on the measures, and other political/election topics and articles centric to Oregon. Ideally if we could have the full story on Oregon elections, politics and the history thereof, that would be a great resource I (and I suspect others) would use. Pipe dream perhaps, but there it is. Lestatdelc (talk) 00:16, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, well-deserved!

A pipe dream perhaps, but one that I've shared for a long time. We've hit some pretty major milestones recently: the full history of ballot measures (largely due to EncMstr's efforts) and complete coverage of current Oregon State Senate members (stubs for all, full articles for many), largely attributable to Esprqii and Aboutmovies. Also been working on the Oregon Constitution with Athelwulf, both here and on Wikisource. We're making big strides, and your recent efforts are a great addition.

Going forward, I'm pretty focused on getting a wiki-friendly bill through the legislature: [1]] (please help out there too if you're interested, or at least add your name in support) and, related to that, I'm planning to email all current legislators and request that they submit photos. (That email will go out Jan. 5).

Anyway, very glad to see you getting this stuff taken care of, and looking forward to seeing what we can get accomplished in '09. -Pete (talk) 07:11, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

We seem to envision many of the same things about the true potential of hypertext and open transparent publication of a truly accessible narrative about our government and politics. To be quite honest, I am shocked to learn of an actual legal impediment to ordinary citizens doing things like re-publishing Oregon laws, etc. I have signed up as a supporter, though I am not sure how best I can help at this point, and don't want to overcommit in any case, but would like to help when and how I can. Lestatdelc (talk) 08:40, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Columbia and cousins

Doing something with the tidal Columbia is an interesting idea and not one I had considered before you brought it up. I know zilch about Vancouver Lake, truth be told. This leads me, though, to another thought I keep having, which is that it's too bad forward movement on the Columbia River article has stopped. I had imagined that we'd push through the rather big list of to-dos in a couple of weeks and charge off to FAC, but it's proven harder than I expected. I don't think the main problem is a writing problem so much as a too-many-cooks problem. If you decide again to take it to FAC, I won't holler "whoa" as I did before but will help however I can. I'd prefer to be only a helper and nothing more grand; just give the word if you want to have another go at it. Finetooth (talk) 03:47, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

For me, the thing that stopped me was the realization that our coverage of things native was so egregiously thin. I actually found a source that would help in fleshing it out, but it just suddenly seemed like...so much work! I will get back to it, shortly. I think I'll do that much, and then nominate. That seemed to me like the only thing i'd classify as "major" holding it back. Thanks again for your help, and your support! -Pete (talk) 04:37, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

MacDaddy

If anyone could improve this article, I bet it's you! lol --David Shankbone 23:32, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Man! I finally found the proper redirect -- Virility. Sorry I called you a pimp and a prosty! --David Shankbone 00:10, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Does anybody know who this Shankbone character is? Might just be me, but I think the guy's got a couple of screws loose. -Pete (talk)

You know...virility could use a new photo.... might I suggest this one? --David Shankbone 00:13, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking about you during that photoshoot, baby. -Pete (talk)

I think you have enough on your plate, Petey. Just get past New Year's before expanding your horizons - lol! --David Shankbone 00:16, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Peteforsyth was inducted into The Hall of The Greats

Shucks, thanks. The look on his face seems like someone who is about to get blindsided by an errant ladder or two by four. Here's hoping it's Steven who takes the blow, not me! Appreciate it, Dave. -Pete (talk) 19:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

You are, of course, *totally* wrong. (lol - inside joke before I get taken to ANI). Actually, there were maybe 9 photographers at this event, and we of course get our own section up close and unobstructed. Right when Colbert arrived and sat down, one of the photographers revealed himself to be a spy! He was a 9-11 Truther! He started screaming, "Keep laughing, Stephen, when are you going to tell the truth about 9-11? Why don't you tell another joke, Stephen!?" as he was led away (and of course he shouted out some web address nobody wrote down). It was cool in that it was an unscripted moment, and also when photographing it's easy to get lost in the view finder - I had to force myself to ignore the Truther, or I wouldn't have gotten any shots. So all of the Colbert photos on Commons from this event were taken as a 9-11 Truther was screaming at Colbert, and he was trying to pretend he couldn't hear him. --David Shankbone 19:27, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Here, I'll do a gallery of the expressions as the truther is yelling:

"Hey Stephen! Tell the truth about 9/11!" blah blah blah
Colbert realizing it's a wacko
Colbert mouthing "I can't hear what you're saying" and then shakes his head
Colbert turning to someone who came in with him and making a joke nobody could hear as the guy is taken away screaming

I believe the joke was "Forsyth is TOTALLY WRONG." -Pete (talk)

DYK for Alcohol in Oregon

On 30 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Alcohol in Oregon, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cirt (talk) 21:45, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Message on my talk page

May I ask what user you are talking about? --Orange Mike | Talk 17:22, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Ah, that one! As a fellow government worker (on his lunch break), I can sympathise with that user; but our rules are clear. Another editor (Finngall) did give Metrogov a welcome, along with a warning, before I blocked them. As I said in my message on the talk page, their intentions were quite possibly benign; but we have to hold everybody to the same standards on rules like role accounts and inappropriate usernames. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Yours is an excellent point, and one I will keep in mind in the future. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:44, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

No big. I'm thick-skinned and slow to anger. We obviously have interests in common, not least in local and state government. Oregon is also high on the list of places-not-Wisconsin-where-I-could-bear-to-live; but Potlatch is not quite WisCon. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:03, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Petey's coming to Colorado!

Woo-hoo! --David Shankbone 15:40, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Any activity on the Oregon Government 2.0 bill?

I haven't noticed a lot of significant progress being documented at PdxWiki. No activity on the talk page since my last comment either. Maybe I'm just out of the loop? How can I get into it? — Athelwulf ^[T]/_[C] 03:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

My fault! Actually, a fair amount going on, which I haven't gotten into an email or onto the wiki yet. We got a draft back for the public domain stuff; and we've got somebody working on an additional bill to require government to use open document formats. And, a Flash developer who's volutneered to produce a 5 minute video piece, if we can put together a script etc., to advocate what we're doing. I will put together an update email, and update the wiki page, by tomorrow night. Thanks for the "ping," and my apologies for not being more on top of this! -Pete (talk) 21:09, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

WikiThanks

Thank you for your wonderful suggestion on: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous) as someone who invests time in saving articles, you maybe interested in the conversation we are having here: Changing name to Articles for deletion, you may also be interested in Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron. Have a great weekend, hope to see you very soon again! travb (talk) 15:03, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Hats off

		The Socratic Barnstar
		I just read this post of yours and have to say, this is probably the best and clearest explanation I've ever seen of how people start out here and how we should treat each other. This should be a motto for all of us. Politizer ^talk/_contribs 23:14, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your good advice. I think we've smoothed out the issue and I definitely understand where he's coming from better than than I did before. I was ignoring some of his very legitimate concerns with the way I approached him, and I apologized for that. In the end, it may prove to be a useful incident to learn from, as you suggest. ... Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 05:56, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Peter Courtney edit

What's with this edit to the Peter Courtney article, using a diff to another article as a reference? I'm assuming it was a mistake, seeing that the diff doesn't seem to provide any relevant info and knowing you're a pretty busy person. Jason McHuff (talk) 07:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, good question -- I suspect I copy-pasted the wrong URL. I'll seek out the right one tomorrow...I know he's the chair, because I testified before that committee ;) Thanks for catching that. -Pete (talk) 07:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. Its interesting that such a poor edit has been in there so long. He may not be the Governor, but he is a very notable person. Jason McHuff (talk) 05:45, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

FYI, that edit still appears to need fixing. Also, I fixed another error you made to Seattle Post-Intelligencer: [2]. Template: Oregon Encyclopedia requires underlines between the words in the parameter (should have been "allen_eric_w_"). It was looking odd in the article, but looking at the template, it makes since how it was being displayed (the URL was ended at the first space and the other parts were showing in the reference)

BTW, sorry I didn't make it to the last two WikiWednesdays or the RecentChangesCamp. I've been trying to get some other stuff done, and something came up last-hour before the last WW. Jason McHuff (talk) 03:35, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Aah yes, I've made that error with the OE template before. Sorry I missed that, thanks for catching it!

As for the other error, how about this: I'll fix the error when you come to a WikiWednesday ;) -Pete (talk) 18:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey, if I have the ability to come (something else isn't happening), I'd love to come. Jason McHuff (talk) 07:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh boy -- I'm actally gonna be outta town for the April meeting, but you should go anyway if you can! Maybe see you in May? -Pete (talk) 23:30, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Yep, they told me you're in San Fran. IOW, I was there, but you weren't! :) Two other things: I'm not sure if the AboutUs phone number is useful for trying to get into the building, since I think it might go to voice mail or something after hours (it wasn't yesterday that I had this problem, even though I had issues with my server which held me up until about 6). Also, I could have probably made it last month if it was a week late. I was actually going to come over on the 4th.

Lastly, have you seen how Encarta is going to shut down, very possibly due in part to Wikipedia? I have at least three (older) versions of Encarta on CD/DVD and access to Encarta Premium online but don't really use them. Jason McHuff (talk) 22:51, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Online project

Hey Pete. I was speaking with someone you may know the other day (Carla Axtman of BlueOregon / Loaded Orygun fame) about an online project in the vain of what we chatted about here, and she suggested that I get in touch with you to discuss it further. If you could shoot me an email at lestatdelc@mac.com I would love to talk to you about it and seek your input and council on it. Lestatdelc (talk) 03:30, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Award from: Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron's Hall of Fame

Congratulations, you have been inducted into the Article Rescue Squadron's Hall of Fame.

The Article Rescue Squadron's Hall of Fame award, a Life Preserver has been added to your existing awards.

Feel free to add more articles saved awards, and to award other people this award too, for saving articles from deletion on Wikipedia. Ikip (talk) 16:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Your welcome! Have a wonderful week, and I hope to honor you with many more awards in the future. Ikip (talk) 09:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I think the wikiproject Oregon perecentage of saveing articles is close to 100%. It's quite a bit different from fiction AfDs, but I keep an eye oon Oregon deletion sorting. I almost can't remember when the result was delete. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 10:12, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. The only deletion I can remember is List of ZIP Codes in Oregon, part of a large number of similar articles deleted, disregarding/trampling our value added format. —EncMstr (talk) 16:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I dunno about that. Seems we've slain any number of unneeded articles.. SOULJAZZ comes to mind as a particularly unpleasant deletion debate, but there's any number of others. It may be that we're near 100% for articles where there's a discernible consensus amongst the Oregonian set, but then again that may just indicate that we're all in this together. :)

These words from the wise Aboutmovies come to mind:

“

AFD: Being a Deletionist or Inclusionist is inappropriate. In my opinion being either is a violation of the neutral point of view and an assumption of bad faith. Each editor that thinks about deleting another article or participants in the AFD process needs to enter either with an open heart and an open mind, and then apply the relevant Wikipedia guidelines/policies to the individual articles. Otherwise your bias can get in the way of making a sound decision based on the current policies.

”

-Pete (talk) 19:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Are you sure it's wise for you to be seen in public with this guy?

Email to legislatures

Did your email to the Oregon legislatures ever go out? Raul654 (talk) 22:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Government 2.0 bill

G'day Pete. I'm wondering if there has been any activity lately on the bill. I still very much would like to help out with the bill (schoolwork permitting), but I don't know what progress we've had. There's certainly been a lot of vandalism on that page, but the last time any content was actually changed, our president was still the president-elect. :) Also, is there an unofficial, implicit leader of this effort? — Athelwulf ^[T]/_[C] 22:14, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Cannabis in Oregon template

Hey, do you think there are enough articles to create a similar template for Cannabis in Oregon. I'm not as familiar with differences between Measures, Acts, Propositions, Bills, etc. to know what could be included where, nor am I familiar with which legislative proposals have articles on wikipedia. Since I know you are familiar with the ballot measures and other Oregon-related legislation, I wanted to get your feedback on the issue of creating a template. Possibilities: Portland Hempstalk Festival, Oregon Medical Marijuana Act, etc. Thanks! --Another Believer _(Talk) 17:51, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Could be a good thing. I think having an article like Cannabis in Oregon takes care of most of the need for it (notice that California doesnt have a similar article). But if you want to create a template, I think that would be great. I'd suggest separating your task into two parts: first, find all the articles you might want to include, and then figure out the best way to visually present them. If it were me, I'd first create a category Category:Cannabis in Oregon (or Category:Marijuana in Oregon), and start putting the articles in there. That would be a good category to have anyway, and it will also get you a step closer to building a template. Just a thought, hope it helps. -Pete (talk) 19:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I think you are right. Having Cannabis in Oregon takes care of that--I'm just a sucker for nice templates, so I thought it might be helpful. However, now that I read over the Cannabis in Oregon article, I see there are not enough articles about legislative proposals or laws, etc. to create a template for. Maybe in the future! Thanks again. --Another Believer _(Talk) 23:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Bye!

Showed up today out of the blue & I'm about to disappear again, but I just wanted to say a quick hello before I do. Thanks for all your contributions -- and I say yes take Columbia River to FAC! I hope to be back editing again someday, but now I'm going to vanish again. Keep up the great work! (That NW1, so mysterious!) Northwesterner1 (talk) 03:58, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

For you

		The Real Life Barnstar
		This is measly reward for the dedication Pete has shown to Wikimedia, wikis, collaboration and transparency through his tireless real world advocacy as a member of WikiProject Oregon. To call this barnstar long overdue would be an understatement. Steven Walling (talk) 20:48, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Hear, hear! Katr67 (talk) 22:28, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you both, I really appreciate it :) Already thanked Steven on Twitter, but I realized it's looking here like this lovely award is going un-acknowledged. Not so! -Pete (talk)

WP:POINT violation at a GA article

This recent edit [3] by disruptive WP:SPA Off2riorob (talk · contribs) who has a history of already being blocked for Disruptive editing: Poorly sourced POV edits despite warnings, seems to be a violation of WP:POINT, especially in light of the subsequent comment made by the POV-pusher at the article's talk page: for example see this inappropriate edit summary [4], and the incivility in the remarks which stray off topic of discussing the article's content itself, and of reliable sources. It would be appreciated as you are an admin at WikiProject Oregon, if you could investigate this user's behavior. Thank you for your time, Cirt (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Wow, upon noticing Off2riorob (talk · contribs)'s creation of this page [5] (which, in its present state is mostly WP:NOR violations) that page was then tagged by a third-party user to be merged to Osho [6], but Off2riorob (talk · contribs) changed the tag for some reason to propose a merge of this unrelated article into the GA 1985 Rajneeshee assassination plot [7], where Off2riorob was already disruptive, above, we begin to see that the entire creation of this page violating WP:NOR is also a violation of WP:POINT: disruption of the project to push a point of Off2riorob (talk · contribs)'s position regarding his desire not to use the term "followers" in 1985 Rajneeshee assassination plot. Cirt (talk) 21:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Osho Follower. Cirt (talk) 21:13, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Posted to ANI to get some additional attention: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Disruption_from_two_users_at_a_GA-rated_article. Cirt (talk) 21:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

sign this

You forgot to sign this. Good email, BTW. tedder (talk) 19:05, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

FYI

Yes, in fact I was so interested I read it hours ago. Good letter. I hope it gets results. I've been pleasantly surprised at how promptly and helpfully non-Wikipedia authorities have responded to my requests. The USGS adjusted their Columbia Slough coordinates in response to one of my queries. (I give EncMstr full credit for the idea of sending an e-mail to the USGS in the first place.) More recently, I wrote to Peter Harnik, the director of the Center for City Park Excellence, Trust for Public Land, to point out that the Trust was using an out-of-date number for the size of Forest Park. He congratulated me (us, really) on our important work and agreed to make a change to the Trust's park list sometime during the next few weeks. Finetooth (talk) 21:35, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

tech assistance.

thanks pete . I also agree that the mug shot should stay . I trimmed the picture in windows paint and it ended up as a bitmap and I couldnt upload a bmp file , so it needs trimming which program would be good for that or should I upload the original and let someone else trim it ? I prefer to trim it myself ..help!(Off2riorob (talk) 20:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC))

Off2: I'm not Pete, but I stalk his userpage. Use GIMP, or (re)post the image and I'll crop it for you. tedder (talk) 21:31, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that Windows Paint probably isn't the best program -- and GIMP is definitely the best free tool for what you're trying to do. I think uploading it and letting someone else crop it per your instructions might be the easiest way to go -- I'd be happy to give it a shot, and do it a second time if it doesn't quite match your vision... -Pete (talk) 22:03, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

If this is about this image, I already did it. The file still needs ownership information added to it, though. tedder (talk) 22:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

In reply to pete's question on my userpage . I am new to image licencening , so a little help would be good . Right now I'm unsure , and that is why I havn.t tagged it . Basically I emailed Sheela asking her for a free use photo and telling her what I wanted to do with it , to update her photo on wikipedia . After askng a couple of questions on picture help I have sent her an email asking her to confirm free to use rights and I am awaiting a reply.So although I feel I already have been given free use from the owner , I have sent asking her to confirm this and I have been bold in uploading it. What could I tag it with while I am waiting confirmation?(Off2riorob (talk) 07:08, 19 April 2009 (UTC))

Question

So, I am not sure how involved you are with the construction and maintenance of WikiProject Oregon (I know you work on many of the articles, but I am referring to the project itself), but I was wondering if you might have any suggestions for WikiProject Rufus Wainwright. I am trying to assemble a group to work on articles related to Wainwright, his albums/songs, etc. Based on some of the other project pages I have seen, I created a scope, participant list, DYK section, as well as a couple templates for group use. However, I was not sure if I needed to create one of those quality/importance assessment charts like the one WikiProject Oregon uses (along with many other projects). If you happen to have just one second to take a look at the project I have started, when you are free and able to do so, it would be much appreciated. Just wondering if there is anything else I can do to improve the page and better organize the articles associated with the project, creating goals and to-do lists, etc. Thanks again! I promise some day I will learn to quit bothering you. :p

BTW - Portland is incredible! While finding employment has been very difficult, I am not regretting the move yet and I am hoping something in my preferred field will come to me soon. I look forward to reading and contributing to many more articles related to Oregon in the future! --Another Believer _(Talk) 23:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Use of State of Oregon Photos

About yr/so ago, we exchg'd notes on rules for using photos produced by State of Oregon in wiki-articles. Bottomline was--even though State of Oregon makes all its photos available for any use w/o restriction, fact that State prohibits third parties from selling rights to State Archive/Blue Book photos makes them off limits for use in wikipedia (unless there is specific Fair Use rationale). However, just found very interest statement on photo gallery page of Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. It says: "These images are the work of ODFW employees, taken during the course of the person's official duties and belong to the Public Domain." That's pretty clear statement. So, why would photos taken by ODFW employees be different from photos taken by other State employees? Can we then assume, based on very clear statement by ODFW, that all photos taken by State of Oregon employees in course of their duties are Public Domain? What do you think?--Orygun (talk) 02:27, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Excellent research, thanks for sharing. My general understanding is that the Oregon Constitution gives agencies the authority to claim copyright if they like, but maybe the "default" position is public domain if they don't? I'm still not completely sure. I'll try to let you know if I learn anything new. But in the short term, I think you can safely treat that agency's works as PD.

Also, you might want to join the Oregon Transparency Taskforce email list, which we recently started to keep track of issues like this. -Pete (talk) 19:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Very interesting...so I guess it all depends on legal default--i.e. are all State photos Public Domaian unless department claims ownership, or does State retain ownership unless department releases them to Public Domain. At least we have another sources for usable images. Thanks!--Orygun (talk) 00:03, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Something shiny

		Wikipedia Motivation Award
		With a Real Life Barnstar cluster. For continuing to promote Wikipedia, and WikiProject Oregon, to the rest of the world, and in real life, and especially for tomorrow's radio show. Good job! Katr67 (talk) 19:38, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Well that's such an incredibly cool award...I'm really flattered. Thanks Katr! -Pete (talk) 02:22, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Peteforsyth and WikiProject Oregon on the radio tomorrow

Pete Forsyth is on the radio tomorrow morning repping WikiProject Oregon. -->David Shankbone 00:13, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I think he knows :-) tedder (talk) 00:16, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I was letting followers of his page know, but a reminder to Pete could be helpful :-) -->David Shankbone 00:20, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Heh. I just found it amusing. Looking forward to hearing it. tedder (talk) 00:23, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

They might have figured it out from the barnstar above. ;) Katr67 (talk) 01:01, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Are you saying I've been using a megaphone to spread the word? Yeah...it's possible, I get carried away sometimes :) Looking forward to it, and hoping some of you wikifolk make accounts at opb.org and participate in the online discussion during the show! There are bound to be many questions... Thanks for your interest everybody! -Pete (talk) 02:21, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Well done. I listened, and it was good. The show's focus seems to have been more on Oregon Encyclopedia than Wikipedia, but you explained the latter eloquently. -kotra (talk) 18:25, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you sir! Yes, I agree it was a little heavier on the OE side..but it was basically OE's PR efforts that led to the show happening to begin with, so I think that was kinda fair. Also, I was encouraged that in many ways, David's questions came from a perspective of "Wikipedia gets this stuff right, why is OE falling short of its goals/failing to build community on a large scale?" I'd much rather have a good foundation to comment from, than have equal time on the show. Hopefully, this show will make it easier to do stuff that's more heavily Wikipedia-focused in the future. Thanks for listening, and commenting! -Pete (talk) 18:57, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Advice?

Did I do the right thing on Eagle_Nebula#External_links? (I tried clicking on what had been the last of the External links, but Avast gave me a Trojan Horse! warning. So I felt the responsible thing to do was to disable the link, but leave it available in case it gets fixed.) — Martha (talk) 02:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Great catch! I altered it so that your comment is within the comment field, because otherwise I think it would be confusing to the vast majority of readers, who don't know a thing about the Wikipedia editing process. Some great photos on that article!! -Pete (talk) 03:25, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Kotra's RfA

Hi, as conominator at Kotra's RfA I am happy to see that you added your support. It happens that I don't know Kotra personally nor his/her gender. I notice you refer to Kotra as "he". Many editors (including myself) don't give out personal information and I try to respect that. Do you have a source for kotra's gender? Cuddlyable3 (talk) 10:30, 15 May 2009 (UTC) (Reply on my page)

Nope, no source, and now that you mention it I may be mistaken! -Pete (talk)

Here's a source:[8] It's self-published, but I think it may be admissible in this case (although the publisher is known to be unreliable...). -kotra (talk) 17:29, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Examining the publisher in action has convinced me that it is unlikely a Wikipedia admin could be mistaken about this. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 18:32, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Hah! Funny. I learned something from the comments at that video, too -- apparently I'm a dirty person! I'm going to go take a shower :) -Pete (talk) 20:32, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Aunt Betty

Hilarious!

You left out all my original research that proved she was a founding member of the Oregon Sports Hall of Fame and is widely thought to be the leading contender to be the Independent Party of Oregon's candidate for the U.S. House seat in Oregon's 6th congressional district in 2012.

--Esprqii (talk) 21:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, and for a time she was homeless at Pioneer Courthouse Square. She's mostly harmless though. Katr67 (talk) 22:01, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Glad you liked it :) Feel free to add any non-notable elements that may be missing. -Pete (talk) 07:46, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Rescue

Please see this discussion on Drawn Some's talk page for an explanation of those tags:[9] Fences and windows (talk) 03:54, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

WES

I was happy to work on the Westside Express Service article; thanks for recognizing the effort... 67.100.125.4 (talk) 03:41, 11 July 2009 (UTC).

		Wikipedia Motivation Award
		Here's a barnstar of sorts for going to the trouble of giving an IP editor a bit of recognition. :-) 67.100.125.4 (talk) 03:55, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Signpost interview

Greetings! I have been conducting interviews for the WikiProject Report in The Signpost. I would like to interview you for WikiProject Oregon. Are you interested? --Cryptic C62 · Talk 16:32, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Do it! Katr67 (talk) 17:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Why, I'm flattered! I'd love to do an interview. We have some great volunteers over here, and lots of innovative projects...I'd relish the opportunity to give our work a little exposure to the rest of the community.

I'm less familiar with your interviews than I'd like to be (and I'll fix that!) But if you're open to the idea of talking to more than one person for your piece, I'd encourage you to talk to other folks in addition…we're a pretty active project, and while I can speak to most of what we do, there are areas where I have very little involvement. In particular, Katr67, Aboutmovies, EncMstr, Tedder, Steven Walling, Esprqii have all put substantial effort into the project, and may have some insight. The highly technical stuff is not really my forte, but many of these folks have been instrumental in setting up project management tools that let us keep track of a high volume of content, and I think a lot of it is pretty innovative.

I'm more active in writing and editing content, recruiting new members, and building a sense of community -- that's the sort of stuff I'd be more likely to focus on.

I'll check out some of your Signpost pieces, to get a feel for what you're doing. If you'd like, you may want to read and/or listen to a radio interview and blog piece I did a couple months back: http://opb.org/thinkoutloud/shows/encyclopedic-ambitions -Pete (talk) 19:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Most of my interviews have been one-on-one, but this one featured two interviewees. I'd be willing to have all of you guys participate, making it more of a round-table discussion than a plain old interview. I'll be posting instructions at the interview talk page for everyone to read before we get started. I'll send out the invitations later tonight. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 21:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I'll be watching! Thanks, Cryptic. Looking forward to it. -Pete (talk) 09:08, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Frances Fuller Victor

On July 19, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frances Fuller Victor, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page _{(here's how)} and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 11:56, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

I am an intern with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and I am trying to update their wildlife refuge wikipedia pages! I am supposed to take the info from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife website but I can't figure out how to format it correctly. Is there anything I can do to put the info straight off the website without getting in trouble? Kjohns33 (talk) 16:15, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiBacon bot results

Hey , I've been developing a bot to show collaboration and initial edits between two Wikipedians (i.e., how did we first cross paths?). Here are some initial results involving you: User:TedderBot/Bacon_Results#Wikibacon: Peteforsyth, Tedder. Please let me know what you think on my talk page: User talk:Tedder#WikiBacon results. tedder (talk) 01:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

the notable alumni linking discussion

I was starting to reply at Talk:Jefferson High School (Portland, Oregon), then realized it would be a much better discussion at WT:WPSCH. Do you mind copying/moving your comment over there so I can reply? It's a fairly general thing, certainly not exclusive to JeffHigh. tedder (talk) 22:38, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Fine by me -- though, I think you're not going high enough in the pyramid ;) In my not-so-very-humble opinion, the best thing would be to have something at WP:OVERLINK or in the WP:MOS that states this clearly for all dab pages, see also sections, and "notable x" sections. -Pete (talk) 01:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I guess my thing is that it isn't a dab page, it's a list. If it was a dab, you are right- disambiguation pages are supposed to have one unpiped link per line. (it says "Each bulleted entry should, in almost every case, have exactly one navigable (blue) link; including more than one link can confuse the reader.")

However, applying this to all articles, or to all lists in an article, doesn't seem appropriate. Certainly entries shouldn't be overlinked by having every word linked, but my feeling is that if something "complicated" like a team name is mentioned to give an individual context, it should be linked.

OVERLINK is a concern, but there's a difference between every word being linked and having ~2 per sentence/line. So it's more of a style thing. Here are some examples:

Too many:

Dante Cunningham, NBA basketball power forward, Portland Trail Blazers

My preference:

Dante Cunningham, basketball, Portland Trail Blazers

Your preference:

Dante Cunningham, basketball, Portland Trail Blazers

WP:UNDERLINK could almost be cited, as a link to Portland Trail Blazers gives context to the article. On the other hand, OVERLINK does say links should go to "articles with relevant information, through references". Relevance could be argued, as a link to the Blazers is only related to the article through Dante Cunningham. So, I dunno. Further thoughts?

Ultimately it'll probably come down to personal preference. Lists of people occur in multiple places, and since it's mostly preference, consensus could be reached at local levels (WikiOregon, WikiSchools) or go up further- but I suspect WP:CREEP would be mentioned if something like this was codified. tedder (talk) 05:26, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

User:Willy turner

Hello, Pete. I noticed your recent message on this user's talk page and welcome your thoughts regarding some slight concerns I have. During this user's mass assessment project they have removed seemingly appropriate WikiProject banners from talk pages, such as Talk:Serial killer here and Talk:Harvey Milk here. They also changed the importance rating on banners for WikiProjects of which they are not members, such as Talk:Stephen Colbert at the 2006 White House Correspondents' Association Dinner here and Talk:Anna Politkovskaya here.

A number of editors, including me, have left notes on the user's talk page expressing concern with these types of edits. They can be found in the talk page history, as it appears they have been removed by the user. If my concerns are unwarranted, let me know and I won't mention it again. Thanks, momo ricks 02:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick reply. I was afraid that may be the case. I'm still an amateur when it comes to dispute resolution. Do you think an RfC is the best avenue? momo ricks 03:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

That would be super helpful. I'll start working on it. Thanks again, momo ricks 03:41, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Great, I'll gather the diffs and give you a courtesy heads up when it's posted. Best, momo ricks 23:00, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost interview

I noticed (and left something on the talk page about) what appears to be a leetle discrepancy in the header paragraph: they say there were 7 members of Wikiproject Oregon, but I see only 5 listed. FYI! — Martha (talk) 19:41, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

7 were invited, two (myself and Katr) didn't contribute. Go fix it, Martha! :-) tedder (talk) 20:45, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Researching Wikia links

Pete, I have an idea for making an unbiased assessment of Wikia links from Wikipedia, through objective research. Would you like to help me with the design and execution of this research? It might take about 3 hours of your time, and we could jointly publish it at a credible non-profit org site simultaneously with notice on Wikipedia in a formal RfC. -- Thekohser 20:49, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your invitation re: Wikia. 3 hours is a rather substantial chunk of time, but I am intrigued by the project. I did a quick search of wikia.com. The links I clicked indicated a range of uses that are entirely appropriate, mixed in with a few that are slightly questionable. In the "entirely appropriate" category I'd put stuff like Murder House, where the link is part of a disclosure that the article was copied wholesale from Wikia. In the "slightly questionable," the lists of characters from Smallville certainly should not have multiple Wikia links; one such link might be appropriate where it is (in the ELs section, but not used as a citation); that strikes me as a borderline case best left to a relevant WikiProject to decide.

None of the links I found used interwiki linking, so I think it's safe to assume that NOFOLLOW is turned on like other external links.

So, I'm not seeing a major cause for alarm that would inspire me to devote three hours. But if you have further thoughts, feel free to share. -Pete (talk) 21:50, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not comfortable with a methodology of "the links I clicked". First, this is the more effective way to find external links within Wikipedia, rather than the Search box. Second, I would want to take a random sample of at least N=100 links (meaning we'd need to either pull sample based on a random-generated list of numbers, or take "every Nth link" from the master list). Third, there is more to evaluating the link than simply determining whether it is "questionable" or not. Variables in my more comprehensive assessment would include:

Type of space from which link originates (User, User_Talk, Article, Article_Talk, Wikipedia, etc.)
Number of total pages in Wikia wiki linked to
Number of unique active editors of Wikia wiki in past 30 days
Number of edits on Wikia wiki in past 30 days

A visually appealing graphic (Edward Tufte-style) of this data would tell us much more than ever before about the nature of Wikia linking in Wikipedia. But, if you're not feeling up to it, I can probably find someone else. -- Thekohser 01:46, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the external links search tool -- I wasn't aware of that, and it looks like a very useful one. As for methodology -- please understand, I'm not claiming any kind of scientific comprehensiveness, just trying to do a quick assessment of whether I want to invest some time into researching this issue. I have a lot of projects I want to work on, and thus far I'm not seeing the really compelling question about Wikia. Do you have reason to suspect there's an active campaign to add links to Wikia that are out of compliance with EL guidelines?

I'll confess, I'm intrigued by the technical aspect of what you suggest, and may want to participate on that basis alone. Feel free to send more detail my way if you like, either here or by email. -Pete (talk) 02:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Check your e-mail soon. I'll be setting up the spreadsheet, I will invite you to it, and you may contribute as much or as little as you care to. I find this sort of independent research fun and a strangely relaxing pastime. -- Thekohser 14:43, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Main page

Pete. Thought you would like to know that Forest Park (Portland) is to be featured on the main page on July 31. I don't know how it was chosen; that's one of those many mysteries I haven't looked into. It wouldn't be as good as it is if you and others hadn't helped me push it from reasonably OK to FA. Finetooth (talk) 04:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Congats you two! Katr67 (talk) 20:54, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to you both! The lion's share of credit goes to Finetooth though -- really an excellent article. Glad I could help resolve a few of the details. -Pete (talk) 21:33, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:ORE participants list

You gonna add your two cents? Katr67 (talk) 20:54, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I've been following that discussion with pleasure...though I have not read every post in detail. It seems to me that it's headed in a good direction, and I don't feel that I have any tremendous insight. (I also haven't had the time to familiarize myself with what they did in California.) I'm pretty much happy with whatever solution you guys come up with -- I think that anything resulting from the depth of consideration you've given it would be an improvement on the current system. Hope that's not too much of a cop out? -Pete (talk) 21:40, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Yep, there's a lot of tl;dr, but it's still a cop out. :) Howz about, as a neutral party, you try sorting out the discussion, ala Dante's to see if there's a consensus? Katr67 (talk) 22:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, burn, Katr :-) I am curious what Pete thinks because it seems right up his alley. tedder (talk) 00:33, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Aw, shucks. I have some stuff to do, but should be able to check in on this later this evening. Thanks for the hassling, it's quite flattering actually :) -Pete (talk)

Welcome back, welcome back, welcome back, Mr. COTW

		The COTW award from WPOR.
		Thanks for leading the way in last week's Collaboration of the Week! For your work adopting a governor, I think you were the only one to do so. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:48, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Redirects and all that

As I said, it's clear you don't know what a redirect is. My apologies. :D SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 01:43, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Nope NO idea! =D -Pete (talk) 02:08, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

USGS

I thought about consulting first, but it seemed quicker to plunge ahead. I figured you'd be tied up with more serious stuff. I picked the spelled-out version because it looked like quite a few of them were already that way. Part way through, I decided that it was the other way around and that I was moving a pile of rocks from one place to another that I vaguely remembered moving before in some sort of proofreader's dream. I'd be willing to wager 50 cents that a reviewer later in the process will suggest abbreviating all but the first one. :-) Finetooth (talk) 15:09, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Reading your note again, I sent a red alert to Pfly just now telling him that we'd gone over the falls in a barrel. Finetooth (talk) 17:39, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		The Oregon portal is incredibly well-crafted. Makes me and my Connecticut Portal jealous! –Juliancolton \| ^Talk 17:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Well thank you very much for the recognition, but most of the credit, I think, should go to Aboutmovies (talk · contribs), Zaui (talk · contribs), and Cirt (talk · contribs) who, to my recollection, are the ones who've done most of the heavy lifting over there! I always wonder if there's a better way to approach portals...seems there must be a better way to expose a broad area of coverage, but I keep falling short on specific ideas. I'd be interested to hear any thoughts on that. -Pete (talk) 18:47, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Blount

It's nice working with you, too.--Henry talk 02:06, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

River plans

Looks like we are almost to the goal line on Columbia River. Another plunge or three by Refrigerator Perry might do it. Meanwhile, I'm slowly cleaning up Bull Run Watershed and adding to Bull Run River (Oregon) and trying to figure out what goes where. I haven't forgotten Columbia Basin; it's on my longer-range to-do list, as is Willamette River. Meanwhile, I'm about ready to send Tryon Creek to PR to see what's what. Your ideas about Forest Park were extremely helpful, and if you have any thoughts about Tryon Creek, I'd like to hear them. Please let me know if you'd like me to do anything more in particular with Columbia River; I think the dust mice are all nicely vacuumed unless someone spots a batch I've missed. Finetooth (talk) 19:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. There's no hurry at all on Tryon; like you, I'm swamped with interesting projects. I haven't given any serious thought to Columbia Basin yet, but I will. Finetooth (talk) 20:05, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

It dawned on me this evening that you might mean that you want to move more of the Columbia River material from the "Watershed" section over to the Columbia Basin article in order to shorten the river article. If so, I didn't mean to duck the question; I just didn't comprehend it. I'm sure it could be done if necessary. Is that what you had in mind? Finetooth (talk) 03:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

And actually, I like the river article pretty much the way it is, and I'm certainly not advocating any biggish changes. Just send Refrigerator up the middle a few times, then horns, klaxons, and lots of confetti, and then someday someone else can try to make a Perfect Article (PA) out of a Featured Article, and good luck to 'em, I says. :-) Finetooth (talk) 05:06, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Kari Ann Peniche‎

Hi. Lets agree on at least adding 1 sentence that multiple sources state that she allegedly is providing women for men in exchange for money. Please dont delete referenced material from major news sources, because I will just keep adding to the article with even more valid sources. You are a fine editor of natural attractions in Oregon but your POV (could it be love?) skews your views on Kari Ann. Cheers! Meishern (talk) 21:19, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

It's not a matter for compromise -- if it's a violation of WP:BLP, as I believe it is, then the danger is to Wikipedia; as another editor stated, we don't have the lawyers that the NY Daily News or Fox News do. Please note that WP:V states that exceptional claims require exceptional sources. While the gossip pages of Fox News or NYDN may be sufficient for many things, allegations of criminal activity raise the bar on sourcing.

I really don't have much of a POV on Peniche, I worked on the article at the urging of a fellow editor who noted that the article was attracting a lot of hits. I'm glad that my work on natural attractions has pleased you. -Pete (talk) 21:30, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Pete took it well, and I'm sure it was meant in good humor, but Meishern, you accusation of POV (with a dash of "you don't know what you're doing so hands off my article") is very off the mark and perhaps just the teensiest bit uncivil. And no, she's not my type either. Cheers! Katr67 (talk) 21:44, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually no

I don't find any pundits entertaining. I occasionally listen to Rush, and though he annoys me with his rants, I occasionally look up what he says to see if he's in the ballpark (which, more often than not he's not). I find Jon Stewart and Colbert funny and watch them regularly, but I can't stand Olbermann or Matthews. Oh, and incidentally, my guess is that if Franken wants to remain in power, he'll kowtow to a few special interests (everyone does, no matter how wealthy or independent they are, check out how much running costs and the amount of fundraising they have to do just to remain in office). Soxwon (talk) 23:53, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

You're exactly right, I don't consider Colbert and Stewart pundits because they have both established the fact that their primary goal is to entertain (see Stewart's description of his show during the teabagging: "Hours of scrotum-based humor. Oh my god, MSNBC is us. They're the Daily Show. Well what the fuck am I supposed to do now?.... Soxwon (talk) 00:17, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

WPL

I saw your edit that added William Paine Lord to the 19th Oregon Legislative Assembly. Strange that the 19th Assembly was on my wishlist, and strange that I'd never heard that name before today. Even stranger, I created William P Lord High School this afternoon. Poor Mr. Lord, having a juvie school named for him. tedder (talk) 00:06, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Strange, indeed! I'm fascinated by the "Hold-up of 1897" and trying to find some better sources about it. What a crazy time! -Pete (talk) 00:08, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Nice :-) Glad you got all those goodies. Now I'll have to figure out some way to exploit ~~you~~ the books.. tedder (talk) 00:22, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Lewis A. McArthur

Pete: Thanks for assessing Tam McArthur article! I don't normally comment on assessments, but in this case think "Mid" importance might be appropriate (vice "Low"). Tam McArther is one of only 70 Oregonian who's bio is included in Oregon Blue Book. While not everyone on that list is well known to general public, these individuals all made important contributions to the state. Based on that, think "Mid" importance would be justified. Again, thanks for taking time to read/rate article.--Orygun (talk) 02:23, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination for LeGarrette Blount

This would have been a great hook, it's too bad the article doesn't qualify. FYI, references, footnotes, tables, charts, images, and pretty much anything else that's not text in paragraphs don't count toward expansion for DYK nominations. I think that's why this article still came up short, despite the major expansion. cmadler (talk) 12:51, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Stanley Green

Thanks for offering to help with the Stanley images, which lightens the load. :) If you could send me your email address, I could forward you the non-border versions. That might be easier, though it's up to you. My email is slimvirgin at gmail dot com. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 16:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Gee, thank you very much. I didn't really expect to receive a barnstar for removing my own article from GA status, but thank you very much.--Music26/11 20:28, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. And thanks again.--Music26/11 20:32, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

OHSQ/Culp Creek help

Can you find this page in your collections? If so, join the ~~party~~discussion over at User talk:Katr67#Culp Creek.2C Oregon. tedder (talk) 20:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Lewis L. McArthur

Pete: Thanks for Register-Guard article. Right now, Lewis L. McArthur link simply take reader to Oregon Geographic Names which discusses him as single-line inside rather short article on book. Would like to do stand-alone article about him at some point, but can't find wiki-able photo. However, am collecting source material--so will add Register-Guard article to file. Thanks again!--Orygun (talk) 01:47, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Columbia River lead

Pete, you've probably seen the third support by now and the suggestions from User:Fowler&fowler about re-writing the lead. I'd be happy to undertake the rewrite, but since you're the main contributor, I'm feeling cautious. On the other hand, the sooner we do this, the better. If we respond to F&f's satisfaction by Monday, that would be soon enough to catch the next round of promote and archive activity at FAC. I believe one round normally occurs on Tuesday or Wednesday and another on the weekend. Please let me know if you'd like me to attempt the re-write. Otherwise, I'll assume you are doing it. (I'd be happy to do it by committee, if you think that's best, but it'd be slower, and time is of the essence, as the lawyers say.) Finetooth (talk) 01:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing it up. I just saw those notes, and am impressed by the level of feedback. I'm just back from a busy weekend, and feeling a little worn out...probably won't work on it tonight.

I think I'd enjoy the "by committee" approach, and it seems like we've been able to do stuff quickly that way before…if you're so inclined, please do jump in, and I'll see where it's at tomorrow. I'll work on it either way, but if you seem to be on a roll, I'll keep my contributions minimal. How's that sound? -Pete (talk) 01:56, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll see what I can do, and we'll confer tomorrow. I didn't sent a note to Pfly, but he probably watches your talk page as well as the FAC page. If we don't hear from him, we can ping him tomorrow. Hope the weekend was fun. Finetooth (talk) 02:01, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Actually I don't watch this page (well, I do now that I'm editing it!), but saw F&f's comments. I didn't get a chance to look more closely until Finetooth's post on the talk page. I too am feeling tired after this weekend (have a nasty lingering cold type ick) and didn't think I could muster the brain to work on it. But it wasn't hard once I got to it. When y'all get a chance please check though--sometimes I make stupid mistakes. F&f's comments were very good--those were some awkward sentences alright! Hopefully they are somewhat better now. G'night! Pfly (talk) 05:29, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Columbia River

Congrats on bringing this up to FA. Columbia River and the Gorge are undoubtfully among the most scenic natural environments in the US, and they now have an equally fine article to complement it. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:54, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Klaxons and confetti! My heartfelt congratulations to you for leading the way on this, an FA about a major international river. Finetooth (talk) 02:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

My warmest congratulations too! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Wahoo!! Thanks to you all for your kind words! And Ruhrfisch, your contributions were not in any way small, as you said on Finetooth's page…from where I sit, they really made us see the article in a new light, and reshape it accordingly. Your comments along the way have been a pretty important part of the vision that's guided this article to where it is today. -Pete (talk) 07:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Congrats to all. Aboutmovies (talk) 08:24, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

[outdent] (Waves hat in air)-Good work, all of you! — Martha (talk) 00:08, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey

I'm going to give you a call tonight. -->David Shankbone 20:36, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

sweet! :D Pete (talk)

Arbcom

No problem; I was probably a little snarkier than was warranted, as well. The clerks might remove your comments, but I'll leave them in place. On point, my intent was to show that Glasscobra and Lara are not the only two who supported Law with the knowledge of his true identity as undertow. We can't single them out without looking at the other admins at that Rfa - and if we do that, we have an arbcom case with a measurable percentage of our admins on trial. And I don't think that's a great idea. Best, UltraExactZZ ^Claims~ Evidence 23:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Pete, I've just left you a reply at my talk page. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 03:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Pete: Please keep to your own section on the arbitration requests page. It helps the committee review the matter with minimal clutter. Many thanks, AGK 23:01, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

That was already pointed out to me -- I invited the person whose section it was to delete my comments if they wanted. -Pete (talk) 02:05, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Thumbs up dude

		The COTW award from WPOR.
		Thanks for leading the way in last week's Collaboration of the Week! For your work on several of the last few COTWs. Not a lot on each, but a lot of work in the aggregate. Aboutmovies (talk) 08:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Gordon Smith page move

There doesn't seem to be much opposition to moving to "Gordon H. Smith", so could you pull the trigger? -Rrius (talk) 23:42, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Done! -Pete (talk) 01:45, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! -Rrius (talk) 01:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Got a minute to update the Columbia River article's status on your user page?

The text there comes from before it was rated a GA.... — Martha (talk) 02:49, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Hear, hear!

Congratulations; let's hear it for public outreach :-) Now if only we could get your mother down to Boston for an event... +sj + 03:12, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks SJ! As for an event, if you ask, I bet she'd love to attend :) -Pete (talk) 19:29, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Your broken image

I fixed it: File:User contributions detail.svg. --Ysangkok (talk) 02:39, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much, I'd lost track of that -- and it's very timely, it will come in handy! I really appreciate the follow through on that :) The lack of outline looks better, too. Good work! -Pete (talk) 09:18, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Congrats

Pete,

I just wanted to wish you the heartiest of congratulations on your new position with Wikimedia. It is very well deserved and I'm sure you are delighted to be working for such an amazing organization. From the little that I know about you and this new position, it seems to be a perfect fit. I hope the new opportunity proves rewarding.

Cheers, Cacophony (talk) 06:39, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks! Hope to still see you around here once in a while, my focus is obviously shifted, but I can't forget my WP:ORE peeps! -Pete (talk) 09:19, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Contest time!

Actually, you're a reverse Californicator; doesn't that make you an Oregonizer? But there should be a dirtier-sounding term. Any of the spies of Pete's page got an idea? Something involving sex oregons? --Esprqii (talk) 00:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC)