User talk:ExplorerCDT/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Sussex County, New Jersey notables

First of all, welcome aboard to WP:NJ! Feel free to use the group to help with any New Jersey-related goals you may have in filling in the gaps and expanding the details for the state. I saw that you've been adding notables for Sussex County. My only question is if it's justified to do this on a countywide basis, and not at each of the individual municipalities. If it should be done at the county level, presumably it should be done only for the most notable individuals. Have you seen this done elsewhere? Alansohn 01:41, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

  • The reason i chose to do it on the county level rather than the municipalities is that as you may know, new jersey's municipal boundaries have a history all their own...for instance, if someone were say born in 1753 in Newton, NJ (That is Newton Township) when Sussex County was formed, they could be born in practically two-thirds the current county...which would be modern day, Andover borough, Andover Township, Branchville Twp, Byram Twp, Frankford Twp, Franklin Twp, Fredon Twp, Green Twp, Hampton Twp, Hardyston Twp, Hopatcong Borough, Lafayette Twp, Montague Twp, Newton town, Ogdensburg borough, Sparta Twp, Sussex Borough, and Wantage Township. And the municipal lines are redrawn every few years (the last that i know was in 1996). Setting it up by municipality could be deceiving. I don't know about putting such lists on county sites, but practically every university has a list of notable (and some not-so-notable) alumni. I used that as an example. I think as far as municipalities go, there should be lists of notable people for major cities and towns, but for each and every one of New Jersey's 566 municipalities...it could, given the historical oscillations of boundaries, be confusing and demand too much research. —ExplorerCDT 03:37, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Correction, Montague Township wasn't part of Newton Township (1751-1864), it was split off from Walpack Township (which had the other 1/3 of the present-day area of Sussex County in 1753) in 1759. Sandyston was split off in 1762, and Pahaquarry in Warren County in 1824. —ExplorerCDT 03:39, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Nicolas de Gunzburg

Aristocrats alphabetise their names not by the "de" or "von," but by the thing they are of...in this case, Baron de Gunzburg is alphabetized under Gunzburg. Only the lower classes emphasise the preposition in the title. —ExplorerCDT 04:15, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

It is certainly not worth the energy to me at present ot argue about this one. I am most familiar with both European custom and American custom and I can tell you for a fact that it is most often alphabetized by the "de" in this country where titles have little meaning. Check the telephone book for a clear example where even case and spaces are often ignored. Most English speaking persons will look for it under "de" Not "G". Wikipedia's practice is to follow "common" usage. So for a book on peerage you would be correct, but not here. Doc ♬ talk 14:23, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Phone books are so lower-class. I encourage you, in common usage (which does not have to be mutually exclusive from Wikipedia's policy on accuracy) to look at the Social Register as a greater indicator of "usage" in this regard. —ExplorerCDT 14:26, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
I understand your position. Also understand that it is not the social registry that guides policy here on Wikipedia, so unless you are just looking to toot your horn and be out of step with consensus here, I suggest that you follow the norm for the turf you're on. Doc ♬ talk 14:30, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes, but the social register is a more appropriate, and I would think more substantive guide than say your local yellow pages. Especially with regard to social norms. The problem is that there are no established norms on this regard, and even if a norm is popular, it does not make it correct. Last I checked, accuracy seems to be more important around here. Just because some social climbing arriviste emphasises the "de" in their name to toot their horn by saying "hey, my name sounds aristocratic", does not mean that they should be incorrect by thinking their last name starts with "d." Beaumarchais was one of those social climbing arrivistes, adopting and emphasising their title and we still find him under "B." Do not presume that American usage is the only English usage. Further, I find your accusational tone with regard to "tooting my own horn" to be indicative of an unfortunate pattern of incorrect arrogant presumptions on your part. —ExplorerCDT 14:37, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
You prove my point by the suggestion you made: "*People with multiple-word last names: sorting is done on the entire last name as usually used in English, in normal order and not (for example) according to the Dutch system that puts some words like "van", "vanden", etc... after the rest of the last name. Example: [[Categorie:Nederlands voetballer|Basten van Marco]]; [[Category:A.C. Milan players|Basten, Marco van]] → [[Category:A.C. Milan players|Van Basten, Marco]]
" Thus "de Gunzburg" should be alphabetized by the letter "D". Thanks for giving me the direct citation. Doc ♬ talk 14:37, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
You fail to see that Beethoven is the exception NOT the rule. Niki de Gunzburg is not an exception but follows the rule. Doc ♬ talk 15:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Wrong again. See the talk page at the Gunzburg article. Every other European noble follows the rule, from Hindenburg to Beaumarchais (who wasn't really noble, he just married into it) being alphabetized under H and B respectively, and not by "von" or "de"...why do you refuse to let Gunzburg be alphabetized correctly? You are being so OBTUSE it is aggrevating, and you are bordering on vandalism because of your obtuseness. —ExplorerCDT 15:39, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Look in the mirror, you are doing everthing that you accuse me of. The issue here is the Wikipedia standard and you are trying to follow what is given as only an "exception" not the standard. I've listed this for RfC as you are too intent to see what is here. Doc ♬ talk 15:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I've recommended you for Administrator inventervention into vandalism...but in the end, I'll win. The guidelines I've cited show that you are incorrect. Please provide me the link for the RfC—ExplorerCDT 16:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Multiple uses of same sources

I noticed your comment on ElKevbo's page about the issue of sourcing the same thing over and over. Take a look at this diff here [1] (ignoring the edits you made in between my edits). Basically, to sum it up, set a name for the first instance for the source (in this case I named it "years" from Throughout the Years). <ref name="years"> then the whole citation with the /ref at the end. Then for each instance that follows, just put <ref name="years" /> (for some reason there needs to be the / at the end of it, not sure what its purpose is, but...that's what works. I'll try to update a few more like that but I'm on a wiki-slowdown for awhile as I'm in training at my college and have only a few hours to spare throughout the day/night. Hope that helps, Metros232 02:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks, maybe when I'm done I'll try to learn the method and commit it to memory. But if you have the spare time, please save me! :P —ExplorerCDT 02:39, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
    • I'll put my hand to some tonight. Question, I noticed there's been some edits going on with the alma mater and the feminist perspective, now that the alma mater is in WikiSource, do you think it'd be fine to take the alma mater out? It's just going to get some more edits like that, it's already in WikiSource, and it'll save room (well, in terms of kb, maybe like .5 at most, but it's long so takes up a lot of physical space). Any thoughts on that? Metros232 02:44, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
      • I'd prefer to keep the alma mater up there. It is after all, a tradition. —ExplorerCDT 02:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The John Gibson edit you reverted...

... referred to the definition of santorum (little s) created by Dan Savage, which you can [Santorum_controversy#Public_reaction_and_criticism|find here]]. It was most definitely vandalism and you were right to revert it. Cheers, JDoorjam Talk 07:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Princeton University

I agree on the big rewrite - especially getting rid of the neologisms listcruft as I mentioned on the talk page awhile back. I think all the pieces are there, they just need some, well, editing. I am about to move cities so I don't have a huge amount of time the next week or so, but if you take the task I'll help you where I can. Sirmob 08:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

  • I'm in the process of moving myself. Perhaps, we might have to hold this off for a week or two longer. —ExplorerCDT 17:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
  • I've created a page User:Simrob/Princeton to explore changes. I think my plan is to print it out and do some paper editing... Sirmob 18:08, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I thought, frankly, that inserting any single source of ranking invites insertions of other rankings, and soon you have a repetitive series of ranks which add up to ... nothing. But I suppose there are a variety of approaches. We can see what works best. - Nunh-huh 01:04, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Most of those rankings are meaningless anyway, and only designed a.) to sell magazines (namely U.S. News & World Report, a bad excuse for imitating Time Magazine or Newsweek), and b.) for college administrators to market their colleges. It's a symbiotic relationship. Since intellectualism is something rarely quantifiable, the methods by which statisticians derive such rankings is immediately suspect...even before getting to their motives. —ExplorerCDT 01:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC) (Retrieved from "User_talk:Nunh-huh")
Exactly. Which is why avoiding these pseudostatistical ratings makes articles sound less like admissions brochures... - Nunh-huh 01:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rutgers University protected

Hello, I requested and received full protection on the Rutgers University article because of the recent edit warring regarding the alma mater. Please bring discussion to the talk page of the article at Talk:Rutgers University. The protecting admin said:

Protected Rutgers University: Users engaging in edit warring. And everyone, please don't call everything "vandalism". Voice of All.

So please take this to the talk page and hopefully both sides can have a positive discussion. Thanks, Metros232 23:04, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

I have blocked you for 24 hours for incivility on my talk page. You know the drill if you want to ask to be unblocked. Metamagician3000 09:45, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

  • It's not in keeping with blocking policy to block someone when they point out you're wrong. Don't worry, Meta, you're dead wrong, and you're only compounding what will end up happening to you in the end. There's no talking sense with people like you. Eventually, and soon, you'll probably be banned for such nonsense. —ExplorerCDT 15:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • P.S. There will be no apology, because I don't apologise to people who are blatantly in the wrong and unabashedly oblivious to their wrongness. —ExplorerCDT 15:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I've unblocked you - the comment on User talk:Metamagician3000 was inappropriate, but not worthy of a 24 hour block by the person directly involved. violet/riga (t) 15:13, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Catalogs

There are two online catalogs that I find useful for classification and nomenclature issues. The New York Public Library "CATNYP" catalog is at http://catnyp.nypl.org/ & the Library of Congress catalog is at http://catalog.loc.gov/ - Nunh-huh 21:45, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Thank you very much. It will be a considerable help. —ExplorerCDT 21:48, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
You're welcome. I hope they're useful, though of course, sometimes they're not :(. -Nunh-huh 21:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Ivies

Looks pretty ridiculous to me. I'll run it by User:Dpbsmith, who's the closest there is to a guru on higher ed topics on Wikipedia. JDoorjam Talk 02:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

thanks for the heads up on the Afd for New Ivies. Cornell Rockey 19:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Note to self, RE: Rutgers

When unprotected, update to 2005 endowment number, $496,292,000 [2]

[edit] RfC

Hello ExplorerCDT. This user conduct RfC Wikipedia:Requests for comment/D C McJonathan did not meet the threshold for 2 users certifying an attempt to resolve the dispute in 48 hours, and has been deleted. Thanks. -- Samir धर्म 00:18, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A.T. Horsfield

Mr. Thieme: Received your message--I will look at the Paulins Kill page. I was going to add a link to the Theodore Frelinghuysen page. By the way, I am not Nan's husband, but in fact I am her nephew! She is married to my father's brother (my father passed away almost four years ago, by the way). My mother and I were in the area just this past June. Thanks for your message! A.T. Horsfield 07:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edward J. Bloustein Vandalism

Glad too see most instances of this person's vandalism are being reverted almost immediately, but I think some people are encouraging this individual by saying this person is "clever" or "funny" (and you are not the only one). This vandal is on a tear and although the IP address traces back to Griffith University in Australia (and thus likely a shared termninal or server), the peculiar style of vandalism seems unique to an individual; one that apparently thrives on doing this sort of thing several times a day and getting favorable commentary in response.Rblaster 03:26, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

  • I see a lot of shitty vandalism, his I actually liked. Sure, it's not nice to egg him on with compliments, but heck...it's not every day you see vandalism that makes you laugh. —ExplorerCDT 03:42, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] From Guyanakoolaid

You wrote me: Being new around here, you might want to consider that you aren't too familiar with the policies and guidelines, conventions, etc. to be passing judgment on articles at Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion. First off, whoever tallies the votes later probably will not take your vote seriously or give it much weight in considering the keep or delete simply because of your novice status. —ExplorerCDT 11:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, hi! And thanks for the welcome. I am indeed somewhat new, recently challenging deletion for the first article I wrote (and won), and became much more knowledgable about things, although admittedly not as knowledgable as you. Regardless, I will ignore your rude dismissal and continue to contribute as I see fit, judging articles in the future as I have done til now: strictly according to WP guidelines. If you see where I may have judged an article incorrectly, please let me know. Otherwise, the way I've read things, newbies are normally ENCOURAGED to get involved, even in AfD discussions. How else will they become something other than a newbie?Guyanakoolaid 09:47, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

  • I see your point and agree, however. You'll need a bit more experience in editing before some AFD counters will count your votes (far more than contributing to only two articles before jumping into the AFD waters). Forgive me if it may have been rude, but your insertion into the AFD in question, smacked of being ignorant of several policies and guidelines and the applications thereof. —ExplorerCDT 16:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rutgers University

I'll take a look in a coupla days, ok? — Rickyrab | Talk 18:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Fine by me, thanks. —ExplorerCDT 21:06, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
You're doing a lot of good work there! Keep it up! Rolando (talk) 19:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] guess who is back

New Ivies Cornell Rockey 15:27, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] univ. article structures

I like the Cornell article's structure better than the Rutgers one. The main thing I think I would change about the Cornell article is moving the "history" section up to right after the introduction. --jacobolus (t) 20:33, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Grease Trucks

You haven't personally contributed to the Grease Trucks article, but considering your contributions to the main Rutgers University article I thought you might be interested in this. The page was already deleted on March 4, 2006 for lack of notability:

It seems that soon after the deletion, on March 10th, this page was recreated (usually this is ground for speedy deletion). I have put a merge tag on the top of the article and think that this should be trimmed and put into a small part of the main Rutgers article. It alone is not notable enough to warrant an article. I'd merge it myself but I haven't been that big of a contributor to the main article so I think someone else might want to do it. Either way, if it isn't merged within a reasonable amount of time I'll be forced to put this up for afd again and considering that it is recreated material and does not seem to meet Wikipedia's notability critera it will most likely not succeed.--Jersey Devil 01:28, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Len Tower again

The process wonkism to overturn the AfD decision of Len H. Tower Jr. has been successful, and the new discussion, along with my criticism of the process now being followed, can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leonard H. Tower Jr. (second nomination). Please note that previous votes/comments are not being taken into account. See you there. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 08:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Paulins Kill

ExplorerCDT: Looked at the Paulins Kill page and your additions are great--you added more information than what I had! However, I noticed something. You included a wonderful postcard of the Paulins Kill from 1905. On it, it says the location is Baleville, NJ. The postcard got the location wrong--the place is Balesville, NJ, with an "s". It could be that Baleville could be correct, and that it was renamed Balesville, but I doubt it. Find out what you can--I am sure it is Balesville and that the postcard got the name wrong. A.T. Horsfield 02:01, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Balesville is an older usage, a variation based on the fact that the hamlet was named for both Bale brothers who settled...Peter and Henry. However, modern parlance and common usage is Baleville. —ExplorerCDT 15:03, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Interesting, I have always known the place to be "Balesville" and nothing else. My aunt has lived in Sussex County all her life and called it "Balesville," in accordance with the older usage. I do not dispute what you say, just sharing what I know about it! --A.T. Horsfield 05:22, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Crazy Enough, If I remember, the Post Office approved the name "Baleville" in the 1870s (formerly the P.O. was "Pleasant Valley") and the Board of Geographic Names called it "Balesville", or vice versa. Both are still used, don't get me wrong, but more people (including Hampton Township's government) call it "Baleville." That's government for you.—ExplorerCDT 15:34, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Shameless plug on the Shanghai uni

Doesn't it seem awkward that all the 500 unniversities in their rankings have a link on their page to that Chinese uni, while there is no link from Princeton to Oxford or Cambridge? I think that this is a kind of self promotion that goes on my nerves esp. snce I don't know how to stop it (how t start a debate on the entire issue of this ranking thing) and I have serious doubts about anything from PRC. I am 100% that they picked the criteria that will suit them and that they even don't follow those criteria.

Your contributions, such as the ol' navy officer are a grace for the Wikipedia crowd. They will always be more informative, if informative means what you think: tons of words and no selection criteria. I consider the other way around, hence I admit my mistake, which was wasting time for an ungrateful community. I will not do it again. Thanks for the enlightment. Keep up the good work!--Luci_Sandor  03:24, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

  • When Oxford or Cambridge puts together a ranking system, then they'll be linked from University websites. It's not self-promotion. Tons of universities offer a ranking of their peers in certain subject areas, etc. The SJTU ranking is actually more informative and the criterion (Though heavily math/science oriented and neglecting a bit of the humanities) is rather comprehensive...much more so than the oft-cited, yet statistically-idiotic U.S. News & World Report Rankings which are nothing more than a marketing gimmick to sell magazines. —ExplorerCDT 21:13, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

we seem to have a lot in common, ran across you more than once on here, thought I would say hi!--Caligvla 08:44, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Per your request http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Armenia


[edit] Call for calm

I was ready to hand out an incivility warning to CDT until Night GYR overwrote the offending message. So I'll break things down as I see them:

  • Copyright violations are a serious matter. Two-year-old copyright violations that have been corrected are not so serious if the user hasn't repeated the problem in a while.
  • Blanking a comment from one's own user talk page isn't good Wikiquette, but it isn't necessarily a policy violation either. Editors have a good deal of freedom in user space.
  • Gross incivility toward another user isn't an appropriate use of that freedom, even if it's in one's own user space.
  • Blanking another editor's user space isn't such a good thing either, especially when it's overwritten with other material and not acknowledged in the edit summary.

Remember, editing an encyclopedia isn't a matter of life and death. Respectfully, Durova 15:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Biography header

Could you refrain from removing existing headers and replacing them with "biography" until there is a ruling on the issue? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 04:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

  • No. I see no need for a ruling (at least I haven't been pointed to a discussion showing there will be a ruling), and I'm consolidating terribly "chaptered" articles (under the "be bold" policy). You're basically asking me to stop editing "your" articles since you dispute my treatment of articles you've edited (implying "ownership" another policy no-no).—ExplorerCDT 14:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paulins Kill Peer Review

I ran the script and put in the article's talk page. It is not perfect and will sometimes be goofy (I saw it said no images were present). I just read it more carefully and like what is there, but it will need more references if it is to become featured. Zambezi and Larrys Creek are the two featured river / stream articles. Larrys Creek is a similar size to Paulins Kill and may give you some ideas (I am principal author of it, in the interest of full disclosure). Take care, Ruhrfisch 02:21, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

  • I noticed you were the principal author. In fact, your work on Larrys Creek inspired me to try to bring Paulinskill up to that level. —ExplorerCDT 17:11, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Thanks - I was trying not to toot my own horn, but I thought if you didn't know the article it might be a useful one to look at. Ruhrfisch 02:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
    • P.S. I answered the " & n b s p ; " question elsewhere, but it is a nonbreaking space, not just a space. I get most of my maps from the Census webpage (factfinder.census.gov) and modify accordingly. Take care, Ruhrfisch 02:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Thanks for letting me know, i didn't know the difference. Regarding the map, I might do that if i can find the time to reload photoshop into my computer. Thanks again! —ExplorerCDT 04:32, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

When you nominate it, I would put a notice on the Wikiproject Rivers and New Jersey talk pages so people with an interest can weigh in. One thing I was surprised by was how much work it was. It took me much longer than I expected just to nominate it (I didn't want to make some dumb mistake in the process so I double checked everything) and then any comments / requests for changes feel like they have to be answered right away. For example, I had maybe a dozen footnotes in my lead paragraphs and had to take them all out and move them down into the body of the article. I also had to add a section on pollution mostly from scratch and expand the name section. My thought was I wanted to fix problems as quickly as possible to get support votes early so it set a precendent. Even then at the end I had a request for a (sub) article on the covered bridge (which I still have to write). If you are interested, it is all here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Larrys Creek. It is hard to tell what objections people may have. Some of the wikilinks are repeated, but that is OK once per new section. I tried to mention other possible objections in the peer review. One reason to look at FACs now is to get some idea of what current active reviewers are looking for - some people weigh in on almost all the FACs. Hope this helps. Ruhrfisch 05:13, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I think it has an excellent chance of becoming a FA, but am sure there will be things that need to be changed in the process. While it is OK to nominate an article for FA while it is still in peer review if the peer review is essentially done (all concerns raised have been addressed, as is the case here), I think it is considered bad form to be considered for both GA and FA at the same time (and if you get FA, they remove GA anyway - happened to Larrys Creek). If you are eager to get into FAC, I would remove your nom from the GA list (explain why) and submit it to FAC. If you want to wait a little, I will take one last look at the article and my previous comments and let you know here what I think they may raise objections to (I can do this within the next 12-16 hours). This will be my guess only (obviously). Once it is in FAC, it will probably take about 2 weeks (maybe less) for a decision. Look at the Signpost for the recent featured articles and see how long it took them and the changes that were made to them. Ruhrfisch 12:48, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
    • I'll wait until you get a chance to take another deep look at the article, then I'll take your advice of withdrawing GA and aiming for FA. Thanks. —ExplorerCDT 13:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
I have reread it and looked at the refs much more closely, as well as the pictures and their refs. I view these as possible problems - more things to be aware of than "must be changed" (except as noted). Some items I have mentioned before are still concerns: lack of refs (esp. in flora and fauna) and the list-y nature of flora and fauna. New items: There are 6 or so red links in the article. I already mentioned using "ref name=" but looking at the refs I see several that are identical refs, so they may object to that. I also see one book cited that is not yet published and seems to be by you, which raises possible issues of both verifiability and no original research. I think the problem goes away once the book is published. Also be consistent on refs and books - as one example, some books say NO ISBN, others do not have ISBNs but do not say this. Some web refs have access dates, others do not. As long as you are consistent I think it is OK. Finally, two of the images may have source problems. The first image should be easily fixed: just give the source of the federal image (URL). The second is the Schaefer (sp?) house photo - unless it says on the website that the photo is freely available or has whatever free license, it may not be accepted. Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch 04:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Congrats on your book. I think if you put the email on the image page that would likely be OK. As I said, I am not sure this would be a problem, but FAC usually gets some pretty close scrutiny. I am not sure how to make it less list-y, except perhaps to add more descriptive text, but then I am not sure what to add that is not just padding. It may be someone will say they should made into a separate list article with a summary left in the PK article. I would not do this now, just be as prepared as possible. If someone raises the list complaint, ask them what to do ;-). One minor point - are you sure a killdeer is a bird of prey? Ruhrfisch 17:23, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe to grubs. The killdeer thing is a joke between me and another wikipedian. He hasn't had the chance to see it yet. —ExplorerCDT 17:56, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

  • OK, probably want to change it after he sees it. Did not obviously find the Princeton joke. Ruhrfisch 03:34, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Do you read / know the Lenape language? From the article it seems like you might or else have very good references. If you do read it, I have a question for you. Ruhrfisch 03:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
      • I have two questions, both for stream names in north-central Pennsylvania. The first is for two streams White Deer Creek and White Deer Hole Creek (the latter is my next attempt at FA). According to [3] the names are "Woap'-achtu-hanne" (white deer stream = WDC) and "Woap-achtu-woalhen" (white deer digs a hole = WDHC). Basically I wondered if there were other possible meanings / translations, especially of White Deer Hole Creek? It is such an odd name and "white deer digs a hole" doesn't make much sense, so I wondered if it made any more sense in Lenape? I want to add it and a bunch of other things to WDHC. Right now there is an old settler's tale in the article, but since the Lenape name is older, it seems more likely to me the English is a translation. The second question is for Lycoming Creek. Lycoming is a corruption of the Lenape name, but I am not sure what that was. Meginness says it is "Legani Hanne" [4] and the state legislature named part of US Route 15 in Lycoming County along the creek the "Legani Hanne Trail" [5]. So what does Legani mean (I know Hanne is stream)? Some say it means 'sandy' or 'gravelly' (sp?), others 'beautiful'. I tend to believe the former. Thanks for any help with this, Ruhrfisch 03:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
      • P.S. I just assumed Rutgers was a prominent enough figure to have a dorm and a university named for him. I am not able to attend the Wiki meetup in NYC, but thanks for the invitation. Ruhrfisch 03:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
        • I know you think the Princeton thing is a joke, but some would see it as vandalism. If I find or know of an error in Wikipedia I correct it. Sorry to ruin the joke, but I hope you understand my reasons. Ruhrfisch 03:59, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
          • Let me know when Paulins Kill is FAC and I will weigh in (with full disclosure that I have edited it some as part of the Peer Review porcess). Keep up the good work and take care, Ruhrfisch 12:34, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
No hurry on the Lenape things - more something I was curious about and will include eventually. GA review takes a while, just more requests than reviewers. One other idea I had is do you have any idea of the population of the PK watershed / valley? Even if you just said the total population of the townships / towns, that would give an upper limit. As I said somewhere else before, I have also enjoyed the process and got some ideas for stream articles I am working on. I'm sure I'll ask for your comments / input on those when I get that far. Take care, Ruhrfisch 16:42, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
  • You're off the hook. I found another source on Native American place names, Donehoo's "A History of the Indian Villages and Place Names in Pennsylvania", which has more detail on my questions above. The PDF link above cites this as its source, although it is not easy to figure that out. Thanks anyway, Ruhrfisch 02:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Umlauts and category indexing

After you reverted my edits to Erich Mühsam [6], I noticed that you've made this mistake before[7]. According to WP:CAT, accents (including umlauts) should be removed from names when sorting articles in categories. Furthermore, a consensus has been reached [8] for sorting "ü" as "u" and not "ue"; this has the advantages of being intuitive for people with little knowledge of German, and of being consistent with the practices followed by encyclopaedias in both English and German. Please do not continue to restore umlauts to category sort keys. It is not "an ignorant mispelling" [sic]; I am fully aware of umlauts and will insist on including them where they belong. The text after the pipe symbol after "[[Category:…" is never seen, and only serves to put the article in the correct place in a category listing. Yes, "Muhsam" would be a misspelling, but sorting "Mühsam" after "My" would be just as bad. --Stemonitis 15:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

  • I disagree with this consensus as it is perpetuating something completely incorrect. This is not the habit of credible German encyclopedias, and is wholly inconsistent with the recent Rechtschreibreform (with which I also disagree). Perpetuating this error adds an aura of wounded credibility to Wikipedia. If it were a proper transliteration (ü to ue), I'd have no objection. I'd bet the 77% of Germans consider the Rechtschreibreform not to be sensible would consider your intentionally incorrect orthography and a rather shadily-arranged consensus on massacring the umlaut (three or four people is not sufficiently overwhelming to be called a consensus) to be likewise.—ExplorerCDT 16:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
  • FYI, I said "blatant mispelling". If you're going to quote me, quote me correctly. Then again, you seem to have too hard a habit for incorrectness. To defend the use of "mispelling" minus the second "s" was only to fit the entire summary in, as I reached the character threshold. In all reality, I should have just used the ß. —ExplorerCDT 16:10, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Please see my reply at my talk page. It's best to keep all the discussion in one place. --Stemonitis 16:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] meetup

Well, you can go to http://wikipedia.meetup.com/ and click on "Start a Meetup Group". The NYC one is defunct, so you can start it anew. - UtherSRG (talk) 12:23, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I notice that we've been criss-crossing

at places such as Lee Lawrie and Bertram Goodhue so thought i'd pose this question to you. In the Goodhue article i found the following sentence.

In 1915, Goodhue re-interpreted a masterful Spanish Gothic style for the signature buildings on the toylike avenue, El Prado, in Balboa Park for the 1915 Panama-California Exposition, for which he was the lead designer.

What do you think of it? Especially the Spanish Gothic part - though toylike is not great either (opinion).? Carptrash 23:28, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

  • First off, the style sucks. "Masterful" might be POV. "Toylike" isn't a word. Perhaps coquettish or whimsical or flummery would be a better adjective.—ExplorerCDT 23:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the support. I started changing things around, then got called for dinner, [talk about "Masterful" ] but check it out. Carptrash 00:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Banciu

With pleasure. Dahn 13:35, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Upcoming NYC Meetup

You wanted to know when the next meetup was being organized in New York City. Plan for Saturday, 9 December 2006. While you're at it. Come help us decide on a restaurant. See: Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC. Spread the word. Thanks. —ExplorerCDT 22:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Christopher, I made reservations for the meetup at Cucina Vivolo. I hope I'm not being too forward.
I helped organize the first-ever North America meetup in Boston a couple of years ago. --Uncle Ed 18:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
  • You beat me to the punch. I was intending to do that this afternoon...now when my cell phone reminds me to call them, I'll have nothing to do. :-) No need to apologize for being forward(which you weren't)...I appreciate anything that saves me any little bit of time. Thanks. —ExplorerCDT 18:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Please email me your phone number, using this link. Thanks! ^_^ --Uncle Ed 16:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Almost There

The Armenia debate is comming close to a compromise, since you commented before, though you would want to check out this, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Walton_monarchist89#Straw_poll-Armenia --Caligvla 15:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)Bold text

[edit] New Brunswick transportation

Seriously, what's the problem with calling Amtrak service there "infrequent"? If I was editing the Princeton train station articles, I'd call Amtrak service there infrequent too. Consider that almost every non-Acela train stops at Metropark, vs. 10 or less trains a day at either NB or Princeton. In this context, Amtrak service is clearly infrequent. Unlike Metropark, you can't just normally show up at NB expecting the next Amtrak to come within the next hour. Consider also the context of that paragraph, which contrasts Amtrak with NJT service. There's clearly a far higher number of NJT trains that stop at NB than Amtrak. Wl219 21:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

  • "Infrequent" is a tumbleweed town along the Union Pacific that sees a train once a month, if that. Princeton and New Brunswick have daily Amtrak service, that is not "infrequent" by any comparison, connotation, denotation, etc. If you don't believe me, read the definition: here. Amtrak service to NB or Pton is not by any stretch of the imagination "infrequent" considering it happens every day, several times a day. —ExplorerCDT 00:50, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Your GA nomination of [[{{{article}}}]]

The article [[{{{article}}}]] you nominated as a good article {{subst:#switch:{{{result}}} |passed|pass=has passed , see [[Talk:{{{article}}}]] for eventual comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations. |failed|fail=has failed , see [[Talk:{{{article}}}]] for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a review. |onhold|hold=has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See [[Talk:{{{article}}}]] for things needed to be addressed.}}{{{paulins kill}}}


[edit] Rutgers Stadium

Not cool. The least you could have done was copy and paste my text somewhere so I could repost as a PAST event later on tomorrow, which I WAS going to do. Everything I had put in was fact. Just because you love Rutgers and such doesn't mean you OWN the RU Stadium page. Sorry but it is REALLY frustrating to work hard on something trying to let the public know about a major event at the stadium tonight and you just remove the whole thing. Again, not cool. Go ahead and write back how I'm not a WP geek and didn't follow procedures to your interpretation, fine, but when people are just trying to help contribute and aren't using WP as a political, racial or POV tool, just putting in facts, you could think twice next time before you kill someone's work. Judge yourself before judging others, you know? It's kind of a shame because maybe more people would have seen the game was coming up on WP and it could have generated more interest in RU.--Scottymoze 18:43, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I could care less. It'll probably not be notable 5 years from now. Neither is calling a play-by-play encyclopedic. Think about it. Instead of throwing accusations of bias around or making baseless presumptions, stop being a dick and think about it. WP has policies for a reason. —ExplorerCDT 20:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
  • * Rutgers wins the BIGGEST GAME IN THE HISTORY OF THE SCHOOL. Are you CLUELESS OR SOMETHING DUDE?! I was there like a true fan, personally congratulating the team members face to face on the 50-yard line after the game. Where were you? Online, updating your profile, trying to win Wikipedia awards? Enjoy your cynical life. Take a look in the mirror and try not to cry - go have a drink and drive around in your Dodge, D I C K.
    • I was there too, drunk as a skunk and supporting the team, today I'm sober, but you are still an asshole with no concept of what wikipedia is all about. —ExplorerCDT 20:18, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Armenia

NB This poll has now closed, it being Friday 10th November and about 10.30am where I live. The numbers are as follows:

  • Support 6 (although User:Hamparzoum's existence has been disputed by User:Tekleni.
  • Neutral 1.
  • Oppose 10.

As such, no mandate has appeared for making the requested changes to the article. As previously advertised, Caligvla and I are taking a break from this dispute for a week. After this, the case may be taken to the mediation cabal, although I hope to avoid this eventuality. Walton monarchist89 10:33, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NYC Meetup

Is the time and place already set in stone? - crz crztalk 17:38, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Milton

I am in shock!

http://online.wsj.com/public/page/2_1239.html

--Caligvla 19:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Car Problems

So how did it work out?--Caligvla 09:15, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Public Ivy, etc.

I just wanted to thank you for keeping an eye on Public Ivy and some other articles on my watchlist. I am watching them, but not as actively as before, so every time I take a look it appears as if you've gotten there first and taken care of the problems. Cheers. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] fiat panis

Since you know Arabic & Latin, what do you think of this translation? "أوجدوا خبزا!" --Alnokta 18:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NYC meetups

Dear gentlesir:

I noticed you had put notices on a few userpages re: NYC WP meetups, are there any such events scheduled for the near future? I'd be very interested in attending and I'm keen on the idea of organizing regular meetings and perhaps a WMF chapter (and a Wikipedia running club, for nerds like me who like to run.) Please shoot me an email if there's anything coming up. If there isn't anything planned but you'd be up for a coffee/beer and discussing WP and other such great things, let me know. Best, Paul 19:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I know NYU stole Prof Foley

That's why I made Rutgers best in NJ only. Were it only the case that they kept their greedy hands off. Chivista 20:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] White Deer Hole Creek

If you are interested, I have an article at Wikipedia:Peer review/White Deer Hole Creek. Any comments / suggestions/ feedback appreciated. Ruhrfisch 02:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

It is now a Featured Article. If you are interested in seeing the process, look at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/White Deer Hole Creek and the article talk page. Let me know when Paulins Kill is at FAC. Take care, Ruhrfisch 20:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Calm down, please

You might not like or agree with recent changes to the Rutgers article but hostility, vulgarity, and accusations of vandalism over a simple content dispute are way out of line. Calm down a bit, please. --ElKevbo 17:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

And when you're calm, check your voice mail. My phone number is there. --Uncle Ed 21:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New York meetup

Thanks for your note. Did you get my email? --Irpen 04:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your note to me as well. I saw the comment about the check; remind me to do a better job of helping out next time. And speaking of next time, see the talkpage to the meetup page. Newyorkbrad 04:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for organizing it (and, as I found out to my dismay recently, covering the shortfall on the tab--I've been trying to calculate in my head whether I covered my share or not). I had a great time at the meetup, and I'll definitely be following the development of plans for future events with great interest; I would certainly be interested in coming down to the city for something every few months or so. --RobthTalk 04:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, and for organizing the meetup. I enjoyed talking to you, and will watch for the next one! (: -Semisomna 23:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Calm down, and Cite Sources

You need to come up with specific dates of the publications you mentioned. What you did was list the microfilm for every date the paper published within a 60 year period. You need actual article titles with actual dates, so that I (or others) can easily look up the articles at the Rutgers library without wasting any time. I am within 20 miles of Piscataway, so I will verify your sources. They need to be real, and specific. Wise 04:26, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

  • For the second time, stop reverting cited material. Material over a 20-25 year period generates a ton of articles, too many to be cited individually, This citation meets or exceeds Wikipedia guidelines regarding citations in addition to academic standards. —ExplorerCDT 04:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
First of all, haven't removed anything since my last comment. Second of all, we need one solid article here that I can verify. You don't need to list 500, but you do need to list 1 or 2. Wise 04:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • We're talking about four rolls of microfilm, the citation is overwhelmingly sufficient per above. —ExplorerCDT 04:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC

It was good to be there and get a chance to talk with you. Interesting group of people, all quite intelligent, and typically outspoken NYers. You seem to have an interesting taste in topics - and no lack of opinions, if I might say. What I want to know is where you went for a year? —Dogears (talk • contribs) 05:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your note to me. I appreciate your work in arranging the meetup. I got there later than I'd intended to, and apparently too late to meet you, but I still had a fine time. JamesMLane t c 07:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I had a good time; will have to come up for the next one. Cheers, Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 01:50, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User notice: temporary 3RR block

[edit] Regarding reversions[9] made on December 13, 2006 to Public Ivy

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.
The duration of the block is 24 hours.

And the "fuck you" didn't help either.

William M. Connolley 09:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)



[edit] Paulins Kill FAC

I just checked in before logging off - will look closely at the article again tomorrow and the FAC. Would suggest you put a notice on the talk page for WikiProject Rivers (on my watchlist - no notice there yet) and WikiProject New Jersey (if you have not done that one too). Good luck with all this, Ruhrfisch 05:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

  • I read the article closely again and read the comments on FAC (two so far) - thanks for your kind words about me. If I were you I would reply at the FAC and start making edits to address their concerns ASAP. Some should be fairly easy to fix (i.e. TOC and refs size), others will take more time, so I would fix the easy ones first, then say on the FAC page that you have done x and y and are working on the other points. I also see some of the points I raised above (on your talk, not on the Peer Review page) have yet to be addressed. I would work on those too.

    These are just ideas, but you could put the tributary names into quotes (instead of bold). As for the listy flora and fauna, I would cut out the latin names, which will make it seem less long. Can you move some parts around - i.e. the agriculture plants could be put with the section on farms? Not sure if other parts could move up - the fishing maybe, maybe the trees into a forestry part in history? Then is there a way to put some context into the lists that are left - maybe bird watchers like the PK because they can see these species... Hunters commonly kill these.... or list the parks etc. shown on the map and refer to common animals found in them? I did something like this in White Deer Hole Creek. The other idea is just to put the whole section into a sub article and put a few most important plants and animals in the article itself.

    Finally, I will weigh in when you want me to. If now, I will make it a Comment and and say I intend to support once these relatively minor issues are fixed. If later (after fixes), I will weigh in with a Support then. I am fairly busy this weekend, but will check back to see how things are going. Good luck and get to work ;-) Ruhrfisch 15:33, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

    • Added notice to WikiProjs Rivers and NJ. Forgot to do that, thanks for reminding me. Fixed TOC and Ref size. I like the emboldening of the tributary names as I find quotation marks used for emphasize to be distracting. Quotations marks are used for quotations, not for rhetorical notice. Latin names cut out, just don't know how to cut down on it being too listy. I could move the agriculture stuff, but where? It doesn't totally fit in with the discussion of farming in the history section. As for the trees, there wasn't forestry as an industry, just incidental plundering of the stock to build houses, barns, firewood. I refrained from listing the parks because none of the parks actually sits on the Paulins Kill. Feel free to weigh in whenever you want. —ExplorerCDT 17:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Glad to help - I will weigh in this evening (taking a break from work to write this now). I noticed there are still some books with no ISBN and "NO ISBN", others with none given and without the "NO ISBN" tag. Also the fauna has no refs for the first three sections. My thought was to somehow distribute the flora and fauna lists throughout the article to make them more palatable and also to put them into context (like birdwatching). I thought the parks as protected areas would be more likely to have the flora and fauna. The streams I work on in PA were all clear cut, often multiple times, so I assumed the PK had been too. If the flora and fauna section became recreation, and then there was a fishing section, a hunting section, a birdwatching section, and a parks section (with trees you hike through in it), would that work? Could agriculture be moved to Today section (talk some about ag there)? White Deer Hole Creek has plants and animals distributed throughout. Oh, the Green Acres link is to the TV show, not the NJ program. Ruhrfisch 21:14, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
        • I put my suggestion on the FAC page to see what response it would get. I see Nichalp also just replied and has a different suggestion for the list, plus other ideas. I also fixed a couple red links (oil mill is expeller - see the dab link for mill), made the Green Acres link red as Green Acres (New Jersey), and fixed a previously discussed item. Ruhrfisch 05:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Howdy CDT, I had several things to say. If you just use thumb on images (omit pixel sizes), then the user's preferences will size it anywhere from 180 to 300 pixels wide (default is 180 pixels). I did not know this until this FAC - the article Steamtown has images that are mostly thumb sized if you want to play with this. The PK article still needs refs for the Valley and watershed section. Since a lot of it could be ref'ed by looking at a map, for map refs I have seen the DeLorme state atlases used (if you need a ref - ask if this is unclear). I also still note that parts of the Flora and fauna section need refs. I found one on general species in NJ here that may be useful. I also found a list of NJ Wildlife Management Areas here if you want to somehow use them as a way of breaking up the lists. Swartswood State Park was the first in NJ - seems worth mentioning if you want to include parks. I would just mention the two state forests and Del. Water Gap NRA as they are on the edges (again if you want to). Hope this helps, hang in there, Ruhrfisch 23:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  • PS If I can be of assistance, let me know (I figured this was understood but wanted to make it clear. Ruhrfisch 23:31, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
    • I changed my Comment to Support, assuming the remaining issues will be addressed well. If you want some ideas on expanding the lead, ask. Ruhrfisch 14:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
      • First, did you see that User:Choess found a sentence missing a noun (left a question on the talk page)? He also fixed a bunch of minor typos, mostly n dashes and nbsp issues. I also found a few more nbsp (checked with the semi automated peer review script).

        As for the lead, the way I do it is to look at each section and subsection (header and subheaders) and make sure they are at least somehow mentioned in the lead (a word to a phrase to a sentence or two, depending). You might want to add things that address geology and course, perhaps mentioning the Appalachians and Highlands (valley defined by them), and the general direction of the Kill - "flowing generally southwest"). I would put these in the first paragraph.

        The name section is quite large and interesting and not in the lead at all. A sentence or perhaps two on the more interesting etymologies (maybe one sentence on the women named Pauline and one sentence on the Lenape name) in the second paragraph. Also not sure if Commerical and Industrial impact is addressed - if you think it is, fine, if not add a word or sentence.

        Finally, Popular culture is also not mentioned in the lead, so perhaps a sentence something like "the PK and its valley have been the settings for works as diverse as Kilmer's children's book and a Friday the 13th slasher movie" (rough rough take) could be added to the last paragraph. Basically just reread the lead and look at the TOC and ask yourself "where is each line mentioned in the lead?" (obviously do not include See also and refs). Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch 18:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

        • The additions to the lead seem fine - the lead does not have to be a spoiler for the article, it could be something as simple as "Several different explanations have been proposed for the name." I am fine leaving pop culture out. I think the name is more important for the lead, but my guess is the lead is OK as it now is. I do wonder if the lead paragraphs could be more equal in length - the last one is now very short compared to the other two, but am not sure what to shift there.

          You might want to leave messages on the talk pages of those who have weighed in so far and say you think that all issues except the listy F&f have been addressed, but would they be so kind as to take a second look and make sure the edits address their concerns and could they please weigh in on the preferred list remedy (Nichalp's or mine or something else). You might also say you will start working on the list problem by a certain time / date (fairly soon). Might also want to put some of this at the bottom of the FAC page. Take care, Ruhrfisch 00:19, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

          • No problemo - hope this garners some more feedback for the FAC. Ruhrfisch 03:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey, sorry for not replying in time. Real world committments kept me at bay from Wikipedia. =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

  • In the spirit of being bold, I made a version with the flora and fauna incorporated into other parts of the text and added the PAs. Revert it if you want, but I was fairly pleased with it. Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch 02:40, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
    • It works. I couldn't wrap my head around it, so I deleted it (the third option). Thankfully you knew what you were doing. —ExplorerCDT 02:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Glad you like it - I already saw Nichalp's message so I left a notice at his(?) talk page. I also just eliminated repetitive names (woodpecker, owl) in a series which makes birds shorter and less list-y. There are probably some inconsistencies between my style and yours - not sure I did all the dates accessed as you did - are you British by chance? I also added some refs on the protected areas and general refs for the animals and hunting. Feel free to supplement or change these too. If you are happy with it and Nichalp is too, you might want to say on the FAC page and the editors' talk pages that you now believe that all issues have been addressed and could they look at it again. Ruhrfisch 03:17, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  • not british. a new yorker who likes british spellings. —ExplorerCDT 03:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Sorry for any confusion - You wrote: "I second such a nomination...point me to the spot to make it. —ExplorerCDT 19:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)".

      I responded with: "It is here: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, but the image should be on the Paulins Kill article page before it is nominated. Ruhrfisch 19:50, 14 November 2006 (UTC)"

      I was just giving you the link to nominate it once the map was in the article, but I did not nominate it myself and did not mean to give the impression that I did. As far as I know it was not nominated, but I think it is worth a shot there. Ruhrfisch 22:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

      • Thanks for the FPC link for the map. I will reread the criteria and weigh in on it. I ran the new and improved peer review script on the PK article and it caught a few minor things and fixed them. I saw you put a </ref> tag in, but I think it was an error so I fixed it. Please check and make sure. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 03:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
        • The FAC runs as long as Raul654 lets it run. Other FACs have been closed recently, so it is still alive. The holidays make it an odd time - people may be traveling or busy and unable to weigh in - may also make the process last longer. I think it would be good to put a reminder on the pages of people who have already said something there. Might also be a good idea to put an update at the NJ and Rivers Talk pages, and perhaps something on the FAC page itself. In each case make it clear that the concerns have apparently been addressed and feedback is both needed and appreciated. I think sometimes people see a lot of text on an FAC and just don't weigh in - it could be this will have to go through a second FAC (although I hope not). Another thing I did with Larrys Creek was contact anyone who had had a contribution to the article and invite their input (peer review, GA process, other editors).

          I will work on Lycoming Creek next, but it has a very long way to go. I will also be working on getting all the major tributaries of the West Branch Susquehanna River from stub or non-existent to a fairly detailed start class article. My eventual plan is to get all 6 major creeks in Lycoming County PA to FA status and two of Pine Creek's tributaries as well. There are other West Branch tribs that should be able to get to FA eventually, but I am starting with what I know. I am traveling now and on a semi Wikibreak myself, so I will look at Joyce Kilmer next week. Take care, Ruhrfisch 02:47, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

          • Sorry - I was just trying to get the FAC moving forward, not deflate your stand on principles (you can always revert my edit if you want). Happy New Year, Ruhrfisch 21:10, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A friendly suggestion

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thanks, and happy editing.

Xiner (talk, email) 20:28, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

  • TRANSFERRED FROM XINER'S TALK PAGE: Thanks, but I'll continue doing what I'm doing. If i remember to add an edit summary, good for you. If not, victimless crime. —ExplorerCDT 20:35, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Hi. I'm sorry you seem to have taken my note the wrong way. Edit summaries help when sorting legit edits from vandalism. It really does. But I won't bother you again about it. Xiner (talk, email) 20:38, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  • TRANSFERRED FROM XINER'S TALK PAGE: Your reasoning is specious...sounding like someone who doesn't bother looking at the content of the edit, but first off assumes bad faith. ...despite that statistically, as a registered user, the chances of me doing "vandalism" are way far less than say, an anonymous editor. Often, I'm too busy doing the actual edit to think about summarizing it. Priorities. —ExplorerCDT 20:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
I debated with myself whether to reply, as I'd already promised not to bother you again. I decided to post my reply to your latest message on my talk page. You can check it out, or delete this whole thing. No hard feelings. Have a nice day. Xiner (talk, email) 21:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

TRANSFERRED FROM XINER'S TALK PAGE: Edit summaries really help your fellow editors decide whether to check out your edit (they may care only about specific issues on an article). Also, while registered users are less likely to misbehave, they can still do wrong (POV, edit wars, etc). I've found edit summaries really helpful for these and other reasons, and was just hoping to convert a few more souls. I'm sorry if you feel my intentions are less noble. Xiner (talk, email) 21:01, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

  • TRANSFERRED FROM XINER'S TALK PAGE: More specious reasoning: If an editor cares about the article enough, they'll check it, no matter what is said or not said in your precious edit summary. You might find edit summaries useful and like to see them. That's all fine and dandy, but then again, some of us spend time editing the articles rather than thinking of summaries, and spend so much of our focus on editing that we don't care about anything besides the editing. Find a better cause in which you can play "fisher of men", because you just aggravated the hell out of me for no other reason than for your selfish desire to feel like you needed to say something and engage in needless pedantry. No one likes a pedant, especially one thinking he's a fucking missionary. —ExplorerCDT 21:10, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

My fun with this message:

Hello. Interesting Notion: If certain users stopped being self-righteous on other people's talk pages over matters of absolute non-importance, perhaps there would be less stubs on Wikipedia. Thanks, and happy editing.

Gosh. So much resistance and hostility to such a polite suggestion. One wonders why you might be interested in Buddhism... -- weirdoactor t|c 22:51, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Interesting non sequitur. You know, some Tibetans fought the Chinese in the 1950s. —ExplorerCDT 22:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Non sequitur? Hmmm. I would think the following statement would be more of a non sequitur:
Danger! My lamp has no more minutes on its waffle phone!
I was commenting on the seeming disconnect between your hostility to Xiner's polite, non-pedantic comment and your interest in Buddhism. Then again; the samurai were buddhists, of a stripe. Anyway. Happy happy! -- weirdoactor t|c
No, my n.s. association was correct. There's no reason in the tenor of the discussion to immediately jump to "how can you be a buddhist?" That's like having a discussion about waffles and then saying..."how can you eat meat?". The article on non sequiturs isn't one of Wikipedia's best, or most comprehensive. —ExplorerCDT 23:26, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
I didn't actually ask "how can you be a buddhist?"...I was simply pondering your interest, given your hostility to Xiner. Hostility and an interest in Buddhism did not seem to fit together, but there are many examples of hostility and Buddhism mixing together, I'm sure. Also; waffle & meat sandwiches are AWESOME. -- weirdoactor t|c 23:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the recommendation. What kind of meat do you use? I would think the sweetness of the waffle batter would affect what kinds of meat you could use. I am thinking...waffle and mortadella sandwich with provolone and roasted red peppers. It's like a sweeter panini. Or would that go great with corned beef and slaw? Or, still...how about burgers? or club sandwiches? We might have something here. —ExplorerCDT 00:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Could we make a Reuben or a Monte Cristo on a waffle iron? —ExplorerCDT 00:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
I think a waffle Monte Cristo would be wonderful; a Reuben would be odd, but probably good. I prefer thinly sliced rib eye or prime rib, preferably caramelized with garlic, lemon pepper and red wine. As you stated, the contrast between the savory meat and the sweet waffle is a factor, but one I enjoy. I've always like sweet and salty/savory mixed together. -- weirdoactor t|c 17:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Paulinskill WarrenCounty.jpg

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Paulinskill WarrenCounty.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page for more information if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ruhrfisch 05:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Please clarify the status of this photo, you had said earlier it was from a federal site, but I am unable to find that. Please show me where it is so we can take the tag off. Thanks Ruhrfisch 05:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anglicanism COTM

The Anglicanism Collaboration of the Month has been reactivated! Please consider going to the page to either vote for one of the nominated articles, or nominate one yourself. Thanks! Fishhead64 02:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paulins Kill

Hi! I have removed my opposition to the article's candidature. The article has significantly improved, but removing my objection does not necessarily mean an automatic support. I only support articles I thoroughly read, and I haven't got the time to do so for this one unfortunately. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:57, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your GA review of I Not Stupid

Hello. I edit occasionally on the I Not Stupid article and I would like to seek clarification on a few of the issues that you brought up on its GA review. You mentioned that the images were "terribly placed, too many images per word count (refer to image guidelines), aesthetically unpleasant". Could you elaborate on placement and image per word count? I've been reading through WP:IMAGE, WP:IUP and WP:PIC and I'm not sure I understand the issues you have with the images. Thanks for your time. -ryand 07:06, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks your detailed reply, ExplorerCDT. We'll work on your suggestions. -ryand 07:37, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
I have filed a GA review on I Not Stupid, to post, and seek, further clarifications regarding the issues that caused the nomination to fail. Please comment at the GA review. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 07:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA

When leaving GA notes, please leave them on the bottom of the talk page, as thats where they should be placed. thankyou M3tal H3ad 07:10, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Wikipedia New York

Thanks for the invite. However, I do not exactly live near the NYC area. I live in Virginia, several states to the south. It wouldn't be feasible for me to commit to a club when I would be unable to attend a majority of the functions.

Thanks again, ^demon[omg plz] 14:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Funny

So, not only are we both Episcopalian out the wazoo, you're also trying to get the article about one of my great-grandfathers up to GA standard. Weird. Anyway, I probably can't help you much, as he's been dead far longer than I've been alive, but if you have any questions let me know and I'll see what I can do. Mak (talk) 16:49, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

lol, tell my dear aunts I say hello. My parents met in college, where my dad was a religion major, and he later went to seminary and was ordained in the Episcopal church. My mother (the Kilmer) converted. Yes, much of the family is still Catholic (that's part of why there are so very many of us). Miriam and Anne are far more likely to be able to get you good info than I am, so it's good you're in touch with them. Cheers, Mak (talk) 17:15, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Sure, shoot me an e-mail some time, it's enabled. I'm going to be doing some talk page maintenance now, so don't be surprised if my talk page disappears for a little while :) Mak (talk) 17:23, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:WP:NY club

I live in the South, very far away from New York. Sounds cool though, good luck with it!!--CJ King 03:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Put me on your contact list for NYC events. -- Ssilvers 18:17, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Voorhees Mall

If you're going to disingenuously remove the fatdarrell.com citation, which referenced the book fatdarrell.com was citing, and then state to include the original source which was mentioned in the citation you disingenuously removed...it shows you didn't really read all the content that you were excising from the article. Bad form. Very bad form. —ExplorerCDT 15:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I did read every bit of the content of both sources you provided, and did so before I made any edits. I will grant the stupidity that you have a source for this nonsense, which is totally non-encyclopedic. You have a reliable source for a rumor -- which proves very little -- and I'm willing to let it stand at that. But, you simply cannot legitimately use a secondhand reference to a source based on a mention in another source that does not meet WP:RS in any way, shape or form. Rather than adding anything, your inclusion of the fatdarrell.com citation only undermines whatever little credibility exists from using the Daily Targum as a source. Your "I'll have a source in a day or two and stop being a dick." edit summary was not only in very poor taste, but it even further reduces the validity of this meaningless addition to an otherwise tolerably acceptable article. If what I have done is "bad form", I can't possibly describe your behavior. Alansohn 15:52, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, if Wikipedia has a policy called Wikipedia:Don't be a dick and you've been rather dickish in your disingenuously removing cited material, including the citation of a source (a book) which meets the guidelines of WP:RS and if you had read the content of the citation you removed you wouldn't have told me to put in the original source (namely, the book), makes my action somewhat acceptable. So, realizing that your being a dick is intractable and seemingly irredeemable, please be a dick elsewhere. —ExplorerCDT 16:11, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Again, there is nothing in fatdarrell.com that constitutes a reliable source by any stretch of WP:RS. The fact that it claims to quote from a book may be useful in obtaining the original source, but the web reference does not meet WP:RS, and there is no basis on the content of the site to indicate that anything mentioned therein -- including the book -- is reliable in any form. You have a reliable source to your beloved rumor and including this website as a "source" for the rumor only makes the entire subject appear to be even more worthless than it already is. I again encourage you to obtain the book mentioned, perhaps at the Rutgers University Library, a short walk from the Voorhees Mall. Once you have the book and can cite the contents thereof, I would encourage you to add it as a meaningful reference. Your continuing abuse of Wikipedia policy and basic tenets of personal decency will not be further tolerated. Alansohn 18:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
        • Someone obviously woke up this morning without taking his Thorazine. So hot and bothered that he forgot that he was the one who deleted the citation. I don't need to go to Alexander to get the book, I got a copy as a freshman. I added it as a reference, in addition to a website that quotes it...but you, Alansohn, deleted it. I revert, you delete it again. Then, in a point that only comes out of bad Shakespeare or Laurel and Hardy...you tell me to add in the book citation! You're continued abuse, being a dick, talking out of your ass in an episode that could only be a sign of undiagnosed intermittent explosive disorder or a temporal lobe disorder...should be tolerated within the reach you'll have after they put you in a straight jacket and get you back on your meds. Take your craziness somewhere else and tell someone else to add citations after you've deleted them. Geesh. Away, you nut. —ExplorerCDT 19:03, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your extremely incivil comments to Alansohn

A really bad idea. Consider this the friendly equivalent of the stock {{npa}} warning. - crz crztalk 19:30, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Ignore it, gesunte heit, as long as you don't commit any more PA. - crz crztalk 23:42, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Whatever Alan may have done - on which I disclaim judgment at this point - was not a personal attack. Personal attacks are a lot more disruptive than other disruptive things... The truth is that I know we agree on this, so let's drop the stupid matter and just improve the article. Maybe get a discussion going on talk about the whistling statue. I'll give my opinion. I am sure we can get some others. - crz crztalk 23:50, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ITN

I agree that sometimes admins interpret the rulebook too strictly. That shouldn't be a reason to make personal attacks, though. Also, WP:IAR is one of those policies that can only be applied in specific cases. Your reasoning behind IAR gives me the notion that I can put the death of some non-notable person like Ivar Formo on ITN, which probably wouldn't sit well with the rest of Wikipedia. Also, from the looks of your talk page, I'd cut the personal attacks or you may get blocked by some not-so-understanding admin. Nishkid64 21:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Adding my voice as well. Please abide by WP:CIVIL, unless you do not care much about your editing privileges being temporarily suspended. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 22:09, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rating of Joyce Kilmer article

FYI, I bumped the rating of the Joyce Kilmer article back down to B (from A-level). The reason why is that the article has not reached GA status yet, which is the intermediate step between B-level and A-level. See {{Grading scheme}} for more info on the steps. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 03:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Advise you to reread the grading criteria, especially in the line about going through GA is not a requirement for A-class articles. The Joyce Kilmer article is way above the B-Class criteria, and though GA is not a requirement, I will be nominating the article for GA within a day or two (if not tonight). Also, please remember, I was the one who put the WikiProject New Jersey assessment page togetherI, including adding the grading template you refer. You might say I don't need to be given FYIs on issues of grading. Given the quality of the Joyce Kilmer article (which I may say so myself is excellent), and the criteria, I bumped it back up to A-class. —ExplorerCDT 03:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
I stand corrected on the GA vs. A-class issue, I had not noticed that clause before. As for the FYI, I was giving that FYI as a courtesy to you about why I was reverting your change. Nothing was implied by it. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 04:44, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your support on Paulins Kill's FAC

Just wanted to thank you for your support of the Featured Article candidacy of Paulins Kill and your kind words in reviewing of the article. Thanks. —ExplorerCDT 04:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

  • You asked for support on WP:NJ, I read the article before I would comment on the FAC, and I must say (as I commented in the FAC) it's extremely well done. That, and my Thorazine hadn't kicked in yet. Your Joyce Kilmer article is also an excellent article. Alansohn 05:43, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:ANI re Voorhees Mall edits

I sincerely hope you can understand my leeriness regarding whether the existence of a ten-foot tall bronze statue that whistles at passing virgins is encyclopedic. Your initial edit summaries only indicated that this was a "school legend", which did not lend an air of a reliable source being forthcoming. I have seen and removed many edits related to rumors, stories and legends, which often take the form of "it is said..." to introduce patent nonsense. I would hope, that as someone who has created truly encyclopedic articles on multiple topics, that you would appreciate why something like this would set off by Wikicruftdar (to coin a neologism). While I wish I had reviewed your contributions history at that point, it did not seem to be the work of someone of your editing caliber. If your two sources had been entered up front, I probably would have accepted it as is. I still do not feel that fatdarrell.com is a valid source for something so questionably encylopedic. I still do not believe that the "To date the statue has remained silent" quote is supported by your sources and would prefer to see the statement removed. With all that, I am disappointed that you felt the need to resort to the WP:ANI process to address this issue, and I don't think too may rational outsiders would agree with your actions throughout this incident. That you do indeed have a solid track record in creating top-quality articles only makes this both more disappointing and more frustrating that it had to take this course, both in terms of your comments on my talk page and the need to create a WP:ANI. Alansohn 18:22, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] update

I ran the semi automated peer review on Joyce Kilmer (which doesn't recognize images in the infobox) and added some comments to the PK FAC. Happy New Year and all the best for 2007! Ruhrfisch 13:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

  • You are welcome. I will take a look at it in the next few days - just peeked at it yesterday and the lead is still too short for FA. I also noticed the Paul RObeson discussion below and will chime in there. Ruhrfisch 01:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your GA nomination of Joyce Kilmer

The article Joyce Kilmer you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:Joyce Kilmer for eventual comments about the article. Good luck in future nominations. Happy new year! Bob talk 19:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I know it was quite quick - I did wonder about the "stable" requirement, but it hasn't changed significantly in a negative way and as you virtually wrote the article, I'll trust that you won't change it significantly. Also, there isn't anything controversial about the article, and I couldn't find any major faults with it. In addition, I found it quite interesting as well, and the article I reviewed was definitely of "good" standard, even if you're still adding bits to it. Bob talk 20:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations! Mak (talk) 23:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup tags

Hi, best not to subst: these tags (wikify, clenaup, orphan, nn, unref, uncat). See WP:SUBST for more info. Rich Farmbrough, 14:00 1 January 2007 (GMT).

[edit] Milton Friedman and 3RR

Thanks for the heads up, but I'm acquainted with the rule. -- Vision Thing -- 18:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Please refrain from changing elements of poll after votes from other people. -- Vision Thing -- 18:20, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

  • You're the only one who voted so far, and I'm editing my comments only minutes after I made them. Besides, I can add anything I want, since it is *my* proposal and I'm only adding to my proposal...and not messing up anyone else's text. I think I'm done with considerations, though. So your point is moot. —ExplorerCDT 18:23, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Paul Robeson vs. Milton Friedman

Well, I personally don't like your mention of Milton Friedman in the lead paragraph, because he is far, far more closely identified with the University of Chicago than with Rutgers.

I'm not sure if your characterization of Robeson was intended to be a joke, but in case it wasn't... he is closely associated with the song Old Man River, on stage and in the 1938 and 1951 film adaptations of Show Boat, and is probably (weasel words, not acceptable for an article!) among the greatest black singers of the twentieth century. He starred in The Emperor Jones. And he seems to have quite a few things in the Rutgers system named after him: the Paul Robeson Campus Center, the Robeson Library, the Paul Robeson Galleries...

And imdb does not list him as having a role in "How the Grinch Stole Christmas."[10] It is Boris Karloff who plays the Grinch. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Only the 1936 adaptation of Show Boat. In 1951, he was sorta blacklisted (no pun intended) because of his Stalinist views. His work was hard to find even years after his death. Robeson only sang the grinch song, and had no other role in the production. Even if Friedman is associated with UChicago, it didn't stop WSJ and NYT from starting their articles mentioning that he was Rutgers-grown. Even if he was a famous black entertainer, Friedman had a greater impact intellectuall, hence why i'd advocate him more than Robeson. There is a considerable hatred of his name at Rutgers among students and alumni (especially the white crowd), and his honouring at Rutgers with 3-buildings being named was a result of the EOE/Affirmative Action movement. His name leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. If you want to honor a black alumnus of Rutgers, I'd much prefer you replace Robeson with James Dickson Carr. —ExplorerCDT 00:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
    • I went to add something to a discussion above, saw this header and was intrigued. FYI, Thurl Ravenscroft sang the Grinch song, not Robeson. My $0.02 worth, Ruhrfisch 01:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
David R. Mayer
Hardball with Chris Matthews
Thomas B. McCabe
Mason Gross School of the Arts
Mike Glita
Amy Gutmann
Fox Chase, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Straight pride
Orbit (gum)
The Duellists
Benediction (Angel episode)
University Heights, Newark, New Jersey
New World quail
Tristan Corbière
Harry Emerson Fosdick
William Talbot, 1st Earl Talbot
Louis Brown Athletic Center
White pride
Nassau Hall
Cleanup
Sled Reynolds
Community High School, Teaneck, New Jersey
Switchgrass
Merge
Mount Saint Mary's University
Porthos
Illinois gubernatorial election, 2006
Add Sources
List of Princeton University people
Ivana Trump
Philip J. Morin III
Wikify
Adventist University of the Philippines
First university in the United States
Wilhelm Bleek
Expand
Jersey Journal
Mike "The Godfather" Clemente
East Stroudsburg University of Pennsylvania

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 16:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Joyce Kilmer Peer Review

I finally read it carefully, then made some copyedits on the article and made some (hopefully helpful) comments on the Peer Review page. Ask if what I wrote is unclear or revert if my attempts at polishing introduced error or are wrong. Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch 03:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tireless contributor barnstar

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
It appears that you pretty much never take a break from editing! After editing for so long, with contributions that seem of fine quality to me, I think you deserve a barnstar. Green451 17:54, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trobairitz

Yup, it's me. I think what you're hearing is not a metronome, but noise which didn't get filtered out because I didn't have a pop filter. Mak (talk) 07:09, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh dear, so it is. I guess I should re-record it. I didn't hear it until I turned it up really loud. Hm. Mak (talk) 07:18, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please do not upload images in the GIF format

Hello and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you've uploaded a couple of images in the GIF format. In the future, please save GIF images in the PNG format before converting (see Wikipedia:Preparing images for upload). PNG images almost always have a smaller file size, which decreases the amount of time they take to load. There are a bunch of other advantages to the PNG format such as lossless compression that you can read about on its Wikipedia article. ---Remember the dot 19:44, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

See above-captioned question, re: my talk page —ExplorerCDT 19:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
The images I noticed are Image:Festivuspole.gif and Image:Festivusairingofgreivances.gif. ---Remember the dot 19:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Those were updated like 3 years ago. —ExplorerCDT 20:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
I still wanted to make sure you knew so that you wouldn't do it in the future. ---Remember the dot 20:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
And it's really more like 2 years. ---Remember the dot 20:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, I don't think I've done it since. So that's a good sign. —ExplorerCDT 20:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re Paulins Kill FAC

Hi Explorer... I'm sorry your article is stuck in FAC but I'm afraid I'm going to have to decline either supporting or opposing. I express an opinion of that kind only on articles I feel comfortable evaluating and that requires familiarity with the topic under consideration. I have a strict rule of only "commenting" if I don't have independent knowledge. Cheers & good luck, Mikker (...) 21:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

As you'll see, I've added a comment saying you've addressed my concerns. Mikker (...) 22:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your offer

Since it seems that you have some musical and recording expertise, you might be interested in checking out Wikipedia:Requested recordings, which I started in the hopes of getting people together to maybe do some larger works, and also to just generally get more free music content on Wikipedia. Cheers, Mak (talk) 00:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lage Raho FAC

I have tried to address the issues you pointed out, please point out more if you can find other problems. Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 22:03, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Paulins Kill

Congratulations on the Paulins Kill being recognized as a Featured Article. I guess I forgot to take my Thorazine this morning. My fondest hope is that your behavior will one day start to approach the high level of of work you are capable of and have demonstrated in this case. Alansohn 01:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I concur and wanted to also add my sincere congratulations. I am glad to have played a small part in getting it to FA status. Since you collect userboxes, you may like this one: {{User Featured articles}}. Ruhrfisch 03:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

    P.S. Have you let them know at Wikiproject Rivers (and NJ)?

Hi! Congrtas! It's an amazing article, like Larrys Creek and White Deer Hole Creek. Though I could not manage to read the article thoroughly, the exquisite care to detailes was really fantastic. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 05:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gilbert and Sullivan

If you are at NYGASP tonight (you told NewYorkBrad that you might be), I will be there. Come to the "Maslin Room" at intermission and say hello. The SavoyNetters will be hanging out there at intermission and after the show.(http://www.concentric.net/~oakapple/savoynet/) I am also hosting a singalong event on Saturday (Iolanthe and Trial by Jury). If you're interested, e-mail me at ssilversgs@yahoo.com. Best regards, -- Ssilvers 15:42, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I can't be there tonight, much to my regret, but have e-mailed Ssilvers about the Saturday event and/or something in the future. Regards, Newyorkbrad 15:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Original Barnstar

The Original Barnstar
Given with respect and admiration to ExplorerCDT for all your hard work and attention to detail, and especially for making Paulins Kill a great featured article. Keep up the good work! Ruhrfisch 02:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editor Review

I will be glad to give you some feedback and have some initial ideas for suggestions (although I have to warn you I have never done an editor review before, so I will also need to see what other kinds of things people comnment on). I apologize that I was 'brutal' in my comments. It was not my intent, nor did I mean to give offense or cause any pain. I appreciate your kind words to me, and am honored that you want my feedback. It will probably take me a couple days to look at what is done in such reviews, look at some more of your work here, and then make some comments. Take care, Ruhrfisch 02:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

  • You are very welcome - I have read all your talk page and archives and wondered if there were any articles / work you wanted me to look at (besides PK and JK and Rutgers) for the review? I will probably do the editor review, then have to look at OWU again, then can look at Athletics at Rutgers. Take care, Ruhrfisch 05:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Postsecondary education in New Jersey

Hey, I was just staring at the New Jersey article trying to think of ways to chop it down from the 96 kb it is right now and clean up with the massive amounts of lists it has. One thing I thought of was getting rid of the lists at New_Jersey#Education (while leaving the paragraph on education) and split that into a new article about postsecondary education in New Jersey. This seems like something that'd be great to have your input on. I'd envision that it'd have a bunch of "history of" stuff related to the history of postsecondary education in NJ which you're awesome with. I'm not sure what else would fit in the article. Perhaps deeper exploration of the statistics (i.e. 54% of NJ HS students go on to pursue college degrees) and discussion of NJ education initiatives like NJ STARS and the Edward Bloustein scholarship program. Any thoughts on this idea? Metros232 18:52, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Joyce Kilmer

That's actually fantastic. One suggestion - I noticed you made the first reference for a print reference the full one, then farmed the rest off with "Hillis, op. cit., (page)". What you could do, optionally, is make the first one the same form as the others, given the full print source details are in "Books and printed materials" as well. Just a thought, but kudos either way for a great job referencing, Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 07:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

The Working Man's Barnstar
For heeding some pedantically-expressed suggestions and making the large number of tedious changes to incorporate said suggestion, I award you the Working Man's Barnstar. Cheers, and keep up the good work, Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 07:45, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rutgers athletics

I just put a post on the Athletics at Rutgers University talk page suggesting that the article be moved to Rutgers Scarlet Knights (which is currently a redirect to the main university page). Since you're listed as a major contributor, I figured I'd best get your feedback. — Dale Arnett 09:23, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rutgers athletics: response

Point well taken. Will not move. Didn't mean to imply I had "special powers", and I'm sorry if it came out that way.  :) — Dale Arnett 10:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Paulins Kill

Congrats on getting Paulins Kill up to FA status! Cheers!!! =Nichalp «Talk»= 11:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Additional voice of reason

If you find yourself in more editing situations where policy, etc. is on your side and the talk page discussion(s) are headed towards a heated consensus being against you, please feel free to post on my talk page. I would be happy to add an additional voice of reason to a wrongly headed concensus. Kindly, -- Jreferee 03:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kilmer

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. I am leaving this identical message at Alansohn's page as well. Chick Bowen 07:17, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

  • The todo list is an additional tool to help bring the GA page under control. Now, changes to the article also need to be supported by the todo list in addition to meeting Wikipedia policy etc. A change not supported by the todo list would be justification for reverting it. This should help keep some control over the minor changes to the article. Also, I rearranged the Kilmer talk page to help bring the discussion towards improving the article to FA status. I am leaving this identical message at Alansohn's page as well. -- Jreferee 18:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Please feel free to rearrange (delete) the headings that are already met (and add a note to the todo list) and to restore from the archive whatever should still be on the talk page. Also, in the discussions, you might want to mention that you are the only one listed as being active in maintaining and improving the article (which should help give your decisions more weight). Some of the present issues seemed more in line with a pre GA status article, which also may be pointed out during the discussions. If road blocks are put in place to prevent this article from moving forward to FA status, please post on my talk page. Thanks. -- Jreferee 19:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I tried to figure out how to use Wikipedia:NavFrame to minimize the clutter on the talk page, but have not been successful. -- Jreferee 22:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editor Review

I have finally finished my editor review - it took me a long time and I hope it is useful. I can elaborate on points if you want, but am otherwise done with it. I have some ideas for Joyce Kilmer, but will leave them on the PR page later (no time now). Take care, Ruhrfisch 21:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

  • You are very welcome, I hope it is useful. Sorry not be more brutal ;-) Actually, if you don't mind, would you tell me when you felt I was brutal (wikilinks to the edits or brief quotes are fine)? I can think of a few possible places, but am not sure if this is what you mean and would like to avoid or at least minimize such behavior (espeically if unintentional, which at least one thing I am thinking of was). Thanks, Ruhrfisch 04:28, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Joyce Kilmer

Just depends on when people can get their dispute worked out. I'd rather not unprotect until that happens. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 10:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

You mean Culver's? :) Yes we have an article on it. Good place. As for the article, yeah I can see it's a long standing dispute. Well. If anything, giving people some time to cool off might be worthwhile. Has any dispute resolution (request for comment, mediation, etc) been tried? --WoohookittyWoohoo! 11:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Yep. I understand. Btw, Beaver Dam has (I think) the 2nd or 3rd oldest Culver's. Basically started around here. Anyway. --WoohookittyWoohoo! 11:35, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Guido Knopp
Nur für Deutsche
Joseph Déjacque
Sudeten German National Socialist Party
Wolfgang Kapp
Schwabing
Malaspina University-College
Azione Cattolica
Second Trinity Boat Club
Gustav Noske
Karl Shapiro
Trinity Western Spartans
Lake Starnberg
Silesian Uprisings
Bill Dorich
Germanenorden
Newark Express
Thomas Wilson Barnes
Anton Drexler
Cleanup
Maria de Lourdes Dieck-Assad
Enabling Act
Sculpture of the United States
Merge
Friends of Holy Trinity Cathedral Parnell
May Week
First flying machine
Add Sources
Freedom (political)
Denazification
Holy Trinity (Botticelli)
Wikify
Charles Studd
Trinity Valley School
Paul Samuelson
Expand
Logic board
Ekānaṅgā
Basij

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 19:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] When voting...

... can you please use lower case when you vote? It looks very rude when you USE ALL CAPS to say something here. Just a suggestion. Diez2 23:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I prefer voting in caps because it stands out and makes it easier to be counted in the process of determining a consensus, I believe all votes belong in caps for these reasons. —ExplorerCDT 23:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barack Obama FAR

Any suggestions how we can get this thing closed? I admit it's been adding to my wikistress these last weeks, and I need to take a break! BTW, I did appreciate your critique which added motivation and good ideas. Also your kind words at the end. When I found the article back in September it was in a sorry state, so I made a decision to learn all I could about the man and help re-earn the FA honors for the article. It is a big challenge to maintain quality in such a crowded forum as the article has now become, but it's fun joining hands with numerous other well-intentioned editors to make it happen. Hopefully we can keep it up, and in the process provide an effective model for other Wikipedia articles struggling to maintain openness and quality amid controversy. Thanks again. --HailFire 18:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note and the link, Hailfire. Sorry for the delay; I've been traveling. I was going to let you know that the next time Marskell or Joelr31 went through, they would likely close it, but I see there's been a premature close already. Not sure how that will work out - it's definitely a keep consensus, but Joelr31 and Marskell are the only editors who close FARs. At any rate, it's done. Nice job all round ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:43, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Eastern Suburbs & Illawarra railway line, Sydney

Hi, you recently objected to this candidate giving the reason Writing is neither brilliant nor compelling per 1(a) without further explanation. May you care to explain further on the above page, thanks. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 00:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your complaint

I'm sorry - I have no idea what you are talking about - I haven't removed anything from the talk page unless it was by accident in an edit conflict. And please kindly stop being so rude - I am seriously considering making a complaint against you if you don't stop it. JROBBO 08:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: OU Peer Review

I'd appreciate it if you could go back over the article and see if I adequately fixed the issues you brought up. Also, I made a lot of changes in response to another peer review. Thank you very much for the help. I'll let you know when I nominate this for Featured Article so you can voice your opinions there.↔NMajdan•talk 13:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Aline Murray Kilmer

Hi there. I'm not going to get into a revert war with you over on Aline Murray Kilmer, because that would be petty. However, you may wish also to 'correct' the sentence immediately before the one you edited, which reads "...she graduated in 1908", thus keeping usage consistent within the article. Have a sparkly nice day. — mholland 21:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Thanks for pointing that out, must have overlooked it. —ExplorerCDT 22:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fixing your header

Just happened to notice that your header you borrowed from me (which I'm flattered that you'd want to), you had never fixed the link to the "Start a new Discussion." I went ahead and had it point to your page, instead of mine. Hope this is ok by you. :)

Regards, ^demon[omg plz] 01:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/x/p/User_talk%7EExplorerCDT_Archive_2_7c01.html"