This page 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.
An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of the Tonight Show with Conan O'Brien episodes. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Tavix | Talk 16:21, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey, it turns out that the intention of the nominator of the Commandant article is that this not be the main article for the position after all. Was hoping for your input into the naming question raised by that at the nomination page. Geraldk (talk) 23:33, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
List of National Historic Landmarks in Indiana
Hey, I took a look at List of National Historic Landmarks in Indiana. It looks like you're ready to take it to FL. Issues may arise, but I can't see anything that I would predict to be a major issue. If you've looked at my FL nomination, most of the problems came from a fellow NRHP member's unwillingness to compromise with the reviewers. Let me know how it comes out. Best of luck! Altairisfartalk 22:31, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Cloud Gate Support and copyedit
Did you make some IP edits before your copyedit under your name. I disagree with most of these edits and want to know if they are yours. Reply on my talk.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:58, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I could not just revert the IP edits because something in your edit conflicted with it. I have tried to undo the IP edits, but probably undid something minor that you did. You may want to double check what I did.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Reywas92, I noticed that you supported three articles at FAC within a half-hour; I hope you are taking care to thoroughly read articles and consider other reviewers' feedback before supporting. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:32, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
National parks
Please stop turning lists into redirects without any discussion. Use {{mergeto}} and {{mergefrom}} templates if you see a need for turning those long-time stable lists into redirects – and naturally, explain on the talk page why you deem it a good move. -- Sander Säde 17:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Anabukinchan
I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Anabukinchan, which you proposed for deletion, because its deletion has previously been contested or viewed as controversial. Proposed deletion is not for controversial deletions. For this reason, it is best not to propose deletion of articles that have previously been de-{{prod}}ed, even by the article creator, or which have previously been listed on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article, but feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! -- pne(talk) 18:16, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
(FWIW: I think that she's probably "old meme" by now and have no big problems with deleting her now, four years after I heard about her. But prod doesn't seem to be the way to go.
I don't feel strongly enough about the article to AfD her myself, but feel free to do so if you wish to. -Pne)
Thanks for the notice about the AfD! -- pne(talk) 12:35, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
National parks of Sweden
Hi, I've begun adding descriptions of each park here. Is that what you had in mind? TheLeftorium 11:31, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! :) I'm gonna add references to each NP's page at the EPA website now, like you suggested. TheLeftorium 16:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
how to...
HI,
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO CHANGE SOME THING TO COPYRIGHT. I NEED HELP CHANGING THE INDIANA STATE MUSEUM LOGO AND FOR THE FUTURE. SO IF YOU COULD GIVE ME THE STEPS THAT WOULD BE GREAT!
THANKS
Sedna10387 (talk) 17:49, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
President list
I wanted to let you know that I withdrew the presidents list. It is taking me more time to change the table structure than I originally thought it would. With that said I think it is coming along nicely. I do have a couple questions though. I am thinking about dropping the VP column and adding a column for State of association so we can eliminate another list. Do you have any thoughts on that. Here is a link to the page I am working on if you want to put any comments on the talk page I would appreciate it. President list --Kumioko (talk) 16:35, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. I added some input to the review, which appears still to be open. Can you go to the GAN page and sign yourself up as the reviewer, so other editors know it's underway? Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 02:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Reference Check redirection
Not sure I understand why you redirected the "reference check" page to background check when the point was exactly to point out the confusion there is between the 2?
Can you explain? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patriprigo (talk • contribs) 21:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Removal of scare quotes
You've removed several scare quotes from headings recently and I'd like to discuss your reasons for removing them and my reasons for wanting to replace them. My view is that the scare quote is used correctly in these cases to alert the reader that we are writing of a figurative "road/bridge to nowhere" and not a literal road to nowhere. You may be taking this as the sense of scare quotes which means the author disagrees with the conventional use, like saying "alternate medicines" to indicate a disbelief in the validity of alternate medicines. That isn't unreasonable at first glance, but after consideration, I hope you'd agree that the quotes simply capture the figurative nature of the phrase, since it makes no sense to disagree with a figure of speech. Please share your thoughts. Celestra (talk) 17:43, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
That's fine. I agree about using them too often; that clearly suggests a non-NPOV presentation. The Palin pages still have a few POV pushers on both sides. You might want to err on the side of ignoring personal preference in favor of MoS, but I won't change it back and chance firing up those folks. Have you thought about trying to get your preference into MoS? Celestra (talk) 21:10, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you added the image at right to Iditarod Trail Sled Dog and Balto. I removed the images from those pages because the statue is actually not a statue of Balto. The statue is of an anonymous sled dog. Its a very common misconception that the statue is a statue of Balto. Even the various Alaskan visitor centers have pamphlets that incorrectly identify the statue as a statue of Balto. Coaster1983 (talk) 20:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know! Would it be okay though to keep it at the Iditarod article labeled just as a sled dog? Reywas92Talk 20:41, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Museum categories
I figured I'd run into you in Indiana. Feel free to adjust behind me, but you might want to take a look at the states that come alphabetically before Indiana and/or read the discussion at WP:MUSEUMSdm (talk) 03:55, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
PS: Even though Indiana doesnt appear to have a lot of museums, it looks like there are a lot that still need to be added and will presumably fill in some of the county cats. The county/city cats are important because they tie the museum back into the county and in the more developed counties, can tie into "visitor attractions in X County" or "Culture in X County". If a particular city has enough museums to have an cat of its own, that's great too. Thoughts? dm (talk) 04:07, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
This file is currently the subject of a deletion discussion at Wikimedia Commons,
Please contact someone from that project URGENTLY if you do not want this file
deleted.
Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
This file is currently the subject of a deletion discussion at Wikimedia Commons,
Please contact someone from that project URGENTLY if you do not want this file
deleted.
Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:25, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
FLC: List of lemur speciess – updates made
When you have a moment, would you please re-visit the FLC for List of lemur species. You had made some comments on July 11, and I had made the requested fixes shortly thereafter. If you could review my changes and the notes I made, I would greatly appreciate it. –Visionholder (talk) 00:00, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Signpost and good articles
Sorry for not getting back to you sooner. Would you be interested in writing a small story for the Signpost about GAN and its backlog? It would be a good way to restart Dispatches, which has been absent from the Signpost for a few months now.--ragesoss (talk) 17:40, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
Sheep
Hi there. Please forgive this slightly odd request; I was seeking an active Wikipedian in the Indianapolis area; reason being, the spotlight team are working on the article Marco Polo sheep, and we're struggling for pics. I wondered if there might be someone who could pop down to the zoo with a camera. Even better would be a sound clip of a 'baa'. Let me know if you can help; cheers, Chzz ► 17:40, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
List of elements
I got a good start on the list: symbol, name, number, weight, density, melting point, boiling point, etc. I'm hoping to get 15 or so columns of properties, within a width limit of about a 1000 pixels. Is this your project? It would be good if you had the CRC Handbook. The article needs good citations, updated weights from IUPAC, etc. This could be quite a good article (or list) for students, etc., a "one stop shop" for elements' properties. Later, perhaps, "Properties of the elements" would be a better name for the article.
Myself and Timmeh have had a strong discussion about major change to this article. Before we did anything we wanted to get feedback regular editors of this page, William S. Saturn, Hysteria18, Jerzeykydd, Ratemonth, JayJasper, GoodDay, Qqqqqq, GageSkidmore, Reywas92, and FallenMorgan. Please send this to anyone else I may have left and please read the thread on Ruled Out and give us your feedback.
Can you help me find a reference that is a good independent reference for this article or it could be deleted.
Thanks for your time
Sedna10387 (talk) 18:24, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
AP Stats GA
Hi, Reywas92. Thanks for taking the time to review my AP Stats article. I've addressed all of your concerns on the review page, with a little disagreement regarding making exam info more prominent. I'd appreciate additional feedback. Thanks!--Edge3 (talk) 19:52, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
I've addressed most of your concerns already, but do you know where I could find the number of students who took the AP Stats exam in 2001?--Edge3 (talk) 15:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! I really appreciate it.--Edge3 (talk) 16:08, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Can you help me with this article? I need one good reference.
Thanks,
Sedna10387 (talk) 11:50, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Emuoha
Hi! I've removed you A7 tag from Emuoha, because the subject of the article is a demographic group, which is neither a person, organization, nor web content. Therefore, the article doesn't meet the A7 criterion. Feel free to use prod instead. Regards, Jafeluv (talk) 01:03, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
List of Indiana state symbols at FLRC
I have nominated List of Indiana state symbols for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.--Crzycheetah 04:32, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image (File:2 euro coin type2.jpg)
⚠
Thanks for uploading File:2 euro coin type2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 09:53, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, mostly
"If you are going to create articles on months, can you at please at least use the correct punctuation for dates?" There's no need to be that sarcastic about it, although I appreciate that you've brought an error to my attention. I didn't realize I'd put a comma in a title, but I'm glad you fixed it with a redirect. I'll doublecheck the other ones I've done to make sure that I've not repeated this mistake elsewhere. Mandsford (talk) 23:15, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
I see that you were referring to the punctuation inside the article itself, rather than the title. Either form is correct [1], and I've been writing it that way for more than 30 years. However, everyone is free to edit an article as he or she sees fit. Mandsford (talk) 23:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Public use
I've reverted your change on Public use. I created the article because it was requested, and also because it's a substantial part of takings clause doctrine in the U.S. My stub could use some references, but it's certainly a notable sub-topic of due process and eminent domain law.
I appreciate that your redirect was WP:BOLD, but likewise, I think it's mistaken and I"ve reverted it as such. If you really think my opinion is wrong in this respect please let me know, and take the issue to AfD or the appropriate moves/redirect page. Shadowjams (talk) 08:36, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
re: Fishers IN, revisions/edits/reverts
I am continuing work on this page to correct errors and change all POV language. At first I tried to, sort of, combat that language with more and stronger language but that obviously didn't work out. I think I've got the hang of it now though so I would appreciatte it if you would at least attempt to discuss my edits before reverting all of my work at once. I would also like to see a balanced, less biased approach to the "current events" type of information presented. During our short discussion re the use of the word "overwhelmingly" you asked for a source. I cited the source (which was NOT the Town of Fishers) and it (along with half-a-dozen other items was reverted (without a proper reading, imo) by the World. May I replace it?
98.220.168.40 (talk) 04:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your edit to the Agatha Christie Talk archive. Frankly, I wasn’t sure when I archived it whether or not all that stuff at the top was supposed to go or not. But, I could’t find anything at WP:ARCHIVE to tell me one way or another. I think it makes scrolling through the archive tedious, so am glad that it could be removed. Is there a written rule/guideline about this or is it more about wikicustom? Thanks! — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:01, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't know if it's writen somewhere, but ArticleHistory and WikiProject boxes should not be on archives because they add categories to the talk page. Having them double-lists the article on the Project ratings, and they're just redundant to the current talk. Cheers, Reywas92Talk 17:07, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Wow! That’s brilliant reasoning!! I always forget about the categorization stuff. Mind you, I am trying to be more conscience of it. Thank you for a very clear and perfect explanation. I only wish I had thought of it … :) — SpikeToronto (talk) 17:23, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
GA Sweeps
I see that you reviewed Condoleezza Rice for GA Sweeps. In order to include the article as reviewed, an assessment needs to be left on the talk page (use {{subst:GAR}} and then click on individual review). If you believe the article meets the criteria, then state so, and if there are any issues then point them out for the editors to address them. I'd recommend taking a look at other reviewer's articles (also add your name there with articles you review) as well as the full instructions. If you have any questions, let me know. Thanks for helping, I appreciate it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 23:57, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Xeno has been kind enough to offer to auto assess out 2700 or so unassessed articles of WP:INDIANA. We can organize out categories somewhat, and he can set defaulty importance ratings on the articles too. To do that though, we have to make a list of all our categories and indicate what importance they want them to be. I have put together a list here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Indiana/Categories. I have broke it down using our current importace guidelines. Any category that could have articles with different importances, can be left in a list where no default importance will be sset, meaning we have to set it ourselves when we assess. If you should have a chance, could you give the list a lookover and make any changes you feel are nessecary? I was hoping to make sure our project's active members did not object to this before I tell Xeno to go ahead with the process. —Charles Edward(Talk | Contribs) 17:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
number of September 11 deaths
Hi-
Re your change to the September 11 article ("why is this number different than the one on the left?"), 2,993 is the total deaths on (or shortly after?) September 11. 2,995 is the total based on the official list of WTC victims. One person who died half a year later and one who died six years later have been added since the attack, because their cause of death was due to exposure to dust during the attack. The table in the Casualties section has all the details, see the references there. Either number is reasonable, but I can't think of a way of making the distinction in the article which isn't really cumbersome.
Hi Reywas92! I'm just dropping by to let you know of the FLRC delegate election that begins on Tuesday. You may run in the election by following the instructions on the page. If you don't wish to run, please come and vote sometime next week! The election starts Tuesday and ends Saturday. For more information, check out the opening section of the page. Cheers, iMatthewtalk at 19:50, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
deletion
You beat me to the deletion marking. [[User:2829NE]] (talk) 22:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
You are a little like me!
I also at one point had the first 100 digits of pi memorized past the decimal point. I also believe eleventy is a real number, but maybe not eleventy-twelve. Also please read the section after this.--Thisisthebestusernameever! (talk) 23:35, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello Reywas92, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Georgetown District High School has been removed. It was removed by BryanG with the following edit summary '(Deprod, ref and expand. On notability, see WP:OUTCOMES#Education.)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with BryanG before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:53, 15 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)
Logo
Do you know how to get the white background off a logo?
Hello Reywas92, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Asking Alexandria has been removed. It was removed by Krazycev13 with the following edit summary '(no edit summary)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Krazycev13 before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:12, 21 September 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages)
I was looking at your pictures
and wondering what happened to your Chihuly picture? Copyright police? Or., something else? Carptrash (talk) 06:18, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, copyright. I think it's technically fair use, but I'm not sure because there are so many others. It's okay, but thanks for your concern. Reywas92Talk 21:03, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello there! As an editor who has posted a comment in one of the recent Peer Reviews, GANs or FACs of International Space Station, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind commenting in the current Peer Review as to whether you feel your original comments have been dealt with, if you see any new issues with the article, and whether or not you believe the article will meet the criteria for Featured Article status. Any new comments you have would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks, Colds7ream (talk) 16:59, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello Reywas92, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Desaxe has been removed. It was removed by Fabrictramp with the following edit summary '(removing expired prod template after restore)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Fabrictramp before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:28, 7 October 2009 (UTC) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 20:28, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Bachmann
Why not join the discussion and explain why her son has anything to do with her views on Americorp. I have yet to hear a single reason why it is relevant. Arzel (talk) 06:06, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Jasper Howard
I removed your prod addition there, because well if you look at the page there's a prod and prod-2 tag already there. ;)--Giants27(c|s) 01:18, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Chaco Culture National Historical Park
Your edits break {{Infobox nrhp}}, leaving the fields showing.Special:PermanentLink/322559460 Take a closer look at the data in the infobox: it shows the history including that it was a national monument, was delisted and is now an historical park. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)talk 21:23, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
If it was a national monument, it should not be listed at the top of the infobox. I see that it is included at the bottom, but it is misleading to include it written out at the top. Reywas92Talk 21:29, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I think you mean the buff colored line at the top of the infobox, then I agree that is is confusing. I'm not sure why any of those lines are there— they don't seem that informative. Regardless, that should be taken up on the template page, as this will affect any article using the template. The article currently shows markup because the date exists without |nrhp_type3=. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)talk 21:36, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I got it. There the nrhp type is formernmon, and it shows up as Former U.S. National Monument. Reywas92Talk 21:42, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I just figured it out as well. That template is a bit complex. Thanks. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)talk 21:44, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Lava Beds In Television
It wasnt a news report! It was a 3 minute clip for a film festival on KIXE-TV, public television for the North State! I know this, because I'm the one who filmed the video! And I also wrote about my Lassen one, on the Lassen page, and they didn't delete it!
"jeez that's a lot of fact tags. Here's a few refs"
LOL. I know.... I think I'm probably a little more critical than the average user because I live near the park. I've always found a lot of their claims to be rather eyebrow-raising-worthy and I just noticed there seemed to be an awful lot of praise and high claims and, for such a tiny park, I figured it needed some sources. :) --132 03:23, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Upper Pine Bottom State Park images
Thanks for your comments on the images in the FAC for Upper Pine Bottom State Park. I have managed to take several more photos and uploaded them on Commons, as well as adding one to the article. The new images are here too. Thanks again, Ruhrfisch><>°° 02:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Removed Article and Personal Information from Samantha Peszek article
I am curious as to why the most recent interview with Samantha Peszek and insight into her personal life was removed without any explanation or discussion on her talk page. Thanks THDju (talk) 07:21, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments on my FA nom of Augustus O. Stanley. I finally got some time to respond to all your comments. Let me know if you have additional concerns. I hope you will eventually be able to support the article's promotion. Acdixon(talk • contribs • count) 16:31, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Good catch on noticing that the Olympic Games article is featured but has never been on the main page. I think that's the one I'm going to propose for opening day, if that makes sense to you too. Takes some of the pressure off on the Pierre de Coubertin article... Geraldk (talk) 23:46, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
We did it at the same time, but you were first by a millisecond! Fast! Varlaam (talk) 00:30, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Barnstar
Hi Reywas92
The Barnstar of Diligence
Thank you for your constructive criticism and swift GA review of Tikal, the article is better because of your thoughtful input. All the best, Simon Burchell (talk) 18:39, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Insect GA
I would like to say that the GA for insect FINALLY passed, and is now a good article. Tell me how it looks, Insect. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 22:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I'm also working to improve ALL insect orders, and currently working on Earwig, and while I wait for a reviewer, maybe you can help?? :P Bugboy52.4 | =-= 23:44, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm the culprit on the inconsistency problem. In fact, I'm the problem on every problem on that page (I'm the only major contributor). Thanks for helping out with it. It was a long long project to get ready to put on the mainspace. A few IPs have already corrected some errors in it. If you see other issues that need attention let me know. Thanks Shadowjams (talk) 09:46, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Happy Reywas92's Day!
User:Reywas92 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Reywas92's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Reywas92!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:04, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Depew Memorial Fountain
I'm glad to have found another interested in public art in Indy. However, I strongly disagree that the Depew Memorial Fountain article should be merged completely into the article about the Memorial Plaza. I've reverted your changes, but don't know how to get the Depew article itself back up.
It is my hope that in the future the article on the Memorial Plaza can serve as the central place for individual articles about each of the componenets of the plaza. Clearly, they are all deserving of unique articles as each has its own history and background.
Do you know how to get the old Depew Article back up?
Hello Reywas92, and thanks for your work on Wikipedia I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Seal of Indiana – a page you tagged – because: Hang-on tag indicates that this page move is not "non-controversial",. Suggest achieving a consensus on the talk page. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. Nancy talk 18:38, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
hey about Baker
Hey, this edit by you redirecting a NRHP to a NRHP list-article is a bit extreme. Would you please not ever do that? Your edit summary suggested you could not yourself find information to expand the article, but that is no reason to eliminate a stub article. Take such to AFD if you like, although the AFD would fail as NRHPs are generally held to be wikipedia-notable. Also, FYI, the Baker (Indianapolis, Indiana) article did include mention of a MPS document which should describe the place (and for which I just now added an external link), and every NRHP has a nomination/inventory document available for free upon request to the National Register. Further, this is one of a series of about 20 badly-named Indianapolis NRHPs. I have myself wondered about requesting the Indiana state historical office or the National Register office to give them more descriptive names, in this case perhaps it should be "Baker Apartment Building". But currently it does appear the NRHP name is just, oddly, "Baker". doncram (talk) 19:03, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply to my Talk page. FYI the document that i linked in the Baker article is not the nomination document for Baker itself, but rather a "Thematic Resources" (TR) or "Multiple Property Submission" (MPS) study document about a bunch of NRHP candidate properties. These documents are numbered 64xxxxxx or 65xxxxxx in the NRHP's document numbering system i think, and we have them listed out at wp:mps. I did not obtain the NRHP document for Baker itself (And to be honest i had not downloaded the 2.9 MB document to confirm it covers details about Baker, in part as i am working off a slow internet connection these days, perhaps for another 2 weeks. In many such documents, every NRHP candidate related is covered explicitly; in other such documents it is a cover study and the details about each NRHP candidate are in separate documents for each one. I had looked at the TR document before though. Now after downloading it again i see the TR doc does give some more specifics about "The Baker". I'll add more about it to the Baker article.)
There are in fact 36 badly named NRHP properties in Indianapolis. See Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in Marion County, Indiana#Odd one word names for details and discussion back around July 1, 2009, at which time i noted your input would be helpful, but that i knew you were unavailable then (and several of us were very busy finishing up a nation-wide NRHP list completion drive ending July 4). All 36 should be given more descriptive names, perhaps prepending "The" or adding "Apartment Building" or "Flats", or at least using the full spelled out names on pages 2, 3, 4 of the TR doc. Perhaps now, we could both comment further there? doncram (talk) 17:03, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
P.S. Great about your working up from the bottom in adding NRHP nomination docs to the List of NHLs in IN list items. I didn't realize you were doing that, and was working very slowly myself for the slow internet connection reason. Looks like the nom docs are all added now. Thanks! doncram (talk) 17:11, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Earwig/GA2
I'm glad to be working with you again! Bugboy52.4 | =-= 23:55, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Just a quick question, some of the comments I don't now what you are referring, like the comments with just arrows, "→", and a lot are not specific like the comment just says "here?" or "the two suborders Arixeniina and Hemimerina what? (the 1950s)." Bugboy52.4 | =-= 02:03, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Alright, tell me what else I might of over-looked and/or did not fix properly. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 02:17, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
KK, I think that's it. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 04:04, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Article move
Please forgive me for reinstating the previous title of this article, but the subject has been broadly discussed in talk already. It is important that the phrase be marked for what it is, a phrase.[2] Thanks. --Poeticbenttalk 19:36, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Israel Shumacher
Hi Reywas! Just letting you know that I declined your speedy deletion request of Israel Shumacher. It seems that he could possibly be notable enough, plus he exists on the Hebrew Wikipedia. You're more than welcome, of course, to take the article through AfD. Have a good day. Cheers, Arbitrarily0(talk) 20:02, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello Favonian, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Troubled identity – a page you tagged – because it makes a credible claim of possible importance (this claim may have been added after you tagged). I agree the subjetc is non-notable, and have sent it to AfD, however notability is not the threshold for speedy deletion.
I noticed that you didn't notify the article's creator of the speedy deletion nomination. Please make sure to do that in the future, as failing to do so will often lead to confusion on the part of new users.
If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:34, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Wikicup
Thanks for your invitation to the WikiCup. I had considered entering before, and I may give it a closer look now. If I am able to realize my goal of making Governors of Kentucky a Good Topic this coming year, scoring 5 points x 60+ articles would make me a contender, wouldn't it? LOL What if I get it to good topic early in the year and featured topic later in the year? Would the points count twice? Acdixon(talk • contribs • count) 16:53, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Peer review?
Reywas92, I am hoping to get List of American politicians who admit to cannabis use to featured status eventually. I am currently looking for reviewers to assist with a peer review, before I waste any time at FLC if the list is very subpar. If interested, you are welcome to provide feedback, keeping in mind the requirement for FL status. I just thought it would be nice to know what I need to work on before even attempting FL status. Thanks, and best wishes! --Another Believer(Talk) 20:31, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
If you catch yourself suggesting a merge is possible in a deletion nomination, then please stop what your doing and initiate a merging procedure. AFD is not the place to go to if an article could be fixed by referencing, moving or another similar course of action. In this case merging was a perfectly reasonable solution. -Mgm|(talk) 09:08, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
2010 WikiCup Signups Reconfirmation!
To ensure that everyone who signed up is still committed to participating in the 2010 WikiCup, it is required that you remove your name from this list! By removing your name, you are not removing yourself from the WikiCup. This is simply a way for the judges to take note of who has not yet reconfirmed their participation. If you have not removed your name from that list by December 30th, 2009 (by 23:59 (UTC)) then your name will be removed from the WikiCup.
It's worth noting the rules have changed, likely after you signed up. The changes made thus far are:
Mainspace and/or portal edits will not be awarded points at all.
Did you know? articles (which were worth 5 points last year) will now be worth 10 points.
Good articles (which were worth 30 points last year) will now be worth 40 points.
Valued pictures will be now awarded points, however the amount (5 or 10 points) is still being discussed.
Featured lists (which were worth 30 points last year) will now be worth 40 points.
Featured portals (which were worth 25 points last year) will now be worth 35 points.
Featured articles (which were worth 50 points last year) will now be worth 100 points.
Featured topics (which were worth 10 points per article last year) will now be worth 15 points per any article in the topic that you were a major contributor to.
Good topics (which were worth 5 points per article last year) will now be worth 10 points per any article in the topic that you were a major contributor to.
In the news will still be awarded points, however the amount (5 or 10 points) is still being discussed.
If you have any final concerns about the WikiCup's rules and regulations, please ask them now, before the Cup begins to avoid last minute problems. You may come to the WikiCup's talk page, or any of the judge's user talk pages. We're looking forwards to a great 2010 WikiCup! On behalf of the WikiCup judges, iMatthewtalk at 03:46, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
ISS FAC4.
Hello there! As an editor who has posted a comment in one of the recent Peer Reviews, GANs or FACs of International Space Station, or who has contributed to the article recently, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind commenting in the current Featured Article Candidacy with any suggestions you have for article improvements (and being bold and making those changes), whether or not you feel any issues you have previously raised have been dealt with, and, ultimately, if you believe the article meets the Featured Article guidelines. This is the fourth FAC for this article, and it'd be great to have it pass. Many thanks in advance, Colds7ream (talk) 16:42, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
2010 senate election
Sorry about not giving an explanation. The problem is that Bayh isn't the nominee yet, not until the primary filing deadline is passed. If the deadline passes, and Bayh is the only one who filed with the Democratic party, than he is automatically the nominee obviously.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 02:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the fixing the minor errors...I bekeive that the article received GA status because of the main points and how it stuck to the theme of the topic. But THANK YOU for fixing the small and minor errors ShaqSmith (talk) 04:44, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Have addressed your concerns at the GAN. --RedtigerxyzTalk 06:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Mountain ranges
Your logic is twisted upside down. All these mountain ranges deserve own articles, all have several independent interwikis. Merging stubs content to one large generic article is just not the right way to go, it is not how WP works. It's like creating e.g. "Rivers of Liberia" article and merging all related river stubs there. Did you gain or try to gain some consensus for doing so? Instead of doing controversial blankings and redirects like that, you should try to work on expanding the stubs. - Darwinek (talk) 20:58, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I will try to cut down the article per your request it been shrinked. Can you help me point this out? Thanks. One request though; can you give this article your support once it is cut down? Teeninvestor (talk) 23:00, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
The article has already been reduced by about 10 percent.Teeninvestor (talk) 23:19, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
This article has been cut down dramatically; please see, for example, the TOC, which has about 30 headings when it used to have 70.Teeninvestor (talk) 23:46, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Can you review it now without problems from TOC length? Thanks. I believe the current length is more in line with FA requirements (covering both the topic and not being too long).Teeninvestor (talk) 00:16, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
AfDs are typically not first-day editors' handiwork
I'm not sure "Nearly every single article at CSD, Prod, or often AFD was the creator's first edit" (diff) is a true statement.
While this is for the most part true of CSD and probably true more than half the time at PROD, I'm not so sure it's the case at AFD. Just looking at the first 5 AFDs from 12-25:
Roca Skolia has been around since 2006. It was by JamieJones (talk·contribs). The account was over a week old and had dozens of edits when the article was created.
DrawAnywhere has been around since April. It was by Kaziali (talk·contribs). A user-space draft was his first edit. By the time it was moved, the account was hours away from being autoconfirmed.
Eric Python IDE has been around since 2005. It was by Ropez (talk·contribs). The account was almost a month old with dozens of edits when this article was created.
Only 1 of the 5 accounts was a first- or near-first edit. Two of the 5 were 2+ days old and had more than enough edits to be autoconfirmed. The other two easily cleared the mark.
Part of the reason for this is when a patroller tags for deletion, it's almost always speedy or prod. Brand-new articles typically go to AFD only as contested PRODs. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 22:26, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Okay, in a random five AFDs only one was a new editor, but whatever the actual proportion is, both CSD and Prod are significantly by new editors, and AFD still has a good amount. Requiring autoconfirmation, even a very minimal one, to create articles would cut much of the backlog, and I stand by the rest of my statement. Thanks, Reywas92Talk 23:05, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
I didn't check PROD but I did check CSD and the half-dozen in CAT:CSD earlier today were all new or nearly-new editors, even the articles that were years-old. From my past experience patrolling PROD I think more than half are new editors. I wouldn't be surprised if the AFD number was more than 20%, I just stopped at 5 since I was checking for "majority"/"almost all" and 4 out of 5 weren't brand-new and 2 out of 5 would've been autoconfirmed. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:01, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
Debate over whether or not Bobby Jindal and Mark Sanford should be removed the 2012 Rep Primary Page
There seems to be yet another debate over Mark Sanford and now whether not Bobby Jindal should remain on this page. Since you are an editor on this page, I was hoping you would be interested in joining the discussion at the link below.
Thanks a lot for your comments on this FLC, I have now addressed all of your concerns. Thanks again -- BigDom 11:38, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
St Paul's Primary School Bentleigh
This page is being worked on it is just that there are a few schools with that name but that page was for the school in Bentleigh please take off the deletion notice.
from
122.107.239.241
Please reply back
The 2010 WikiCup begins tomorrow!
Welcome to the biggest WikiCup Wikipedia has yet seen! Round one will take place over two months, and finish on February 26. There is only one pool, and the top 64 will progress. The competition will be tough, as more than half of the current competitors will not make it to round 2. Details about scoring have been finalized and are explained at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring. Please make sure you're familiar with the scoring rules, because any submissions made that violate these rules will be removed. Like always, the judges can be reached through the WikiCup talk pages, on their talk page, or over IRC with any issues concerning anything tied to the Cup. We will keep in contact with you via weekly newsletters; if you do not want to receive them, please remove yourself from the list here. Conversely, if a non-WikiCup participant wishes to receive the newsletters, they may add themselves to that list. Well, enough talk- get writing! Your submissions page is located here. Details on how to submit your content is located here, so be sure to check that out! Once content has been recognized, it can be added to your submissions page, from which our bot will update the main score table. Remember that only articles worked on and nominated during the competition are eligible for points. Have fun, and good luck! Garden, iMatthew, J Milburn, and The ed17 19:22, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
