User talk:PaulHanson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
This bear was pwned by hunger
This bear was pwned by hunger

Contents

[edit] Louis Freeh promoted

The article does still a couple unsourced statements and could use some expanding in some places but of couse its GA not FA. So I promoted the article. Tarret 19:00, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Federalist Party

The next time you make a free-wheeling change, you may want to have some idea about what you are editing. I know you are a history major and I don't know if it was a simple slip, but Thomas Jefferson's Democratic-Republican Party has no affiliation with the Republican Party at all. To write that it is, is a complete misrepresentation of information. I know that you advocate, "when in doubt it is better to delete" but sometimes it may be better to do nothing. Stevenmitchell 06:52, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the kind words

I appreciate your comments. As for collaborating on projects, unfortunately my time is very limited this summer as I am teaching a couple university courses in addition to my day job. Therefore, my Wikipedia usage will be limited to just sporadic edits for the next few months. Regards, --Jayzel 16:15, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Long talk page

Greetings! Your talk page is getting a bit long in the tooth - please consider archiving your talk page (or ask me and I'll archive it for you). Cheers! BD2412 T 00:22, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Thanks, it is done - cheers! BD2412 T 17:31, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] about deletion of Category:New York University units

Hi, Nunh-huh propose to delete Category:Yale University units, Category:New York University units and any other University "unit" classification. If interested, you can go to the proposed deletion page to discuss. For relevant discussion, see Category talk:Yale University units. Thanks. --Neo-Jay 16:21, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion of Access Business Group

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Access Business Group, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Importance). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree, discuss the issues raised at Talk:Access Business Group. If you remove the {{dated prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Aguerriero (talk) 19:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1.0/Featured

Hi, Paul. You asked my suggestions about articles to work on. I'm partial to articles on countries and continents. Can't do without them and most are in pretty good shape already. (But maybe you were looking for something more challenging. ...) Best, Maurreen 17:28, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

First tell us what kind of topic you are interested in? Then maybe I can help how to navigate. :) NCurse work 18:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
I've found a perfect job for you. :) The Portal:Austria-Hungary is under construction and would need maintainer. This work is just waiting for you. If you need any help, don't hesitate to contact me. I'm maintainer of featured portal medicine. Good work and enjoy Wikipedia! :) NCurse work 19:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Looking at your contributions, I see you tend to like business/financial topics. We are very weak on business articles right now - if you could bring some major corporation articles like Ford Motor Company up to par that would be great. Some are listed here, or you could contact Wikipedia:WikiProject Business and Economics directly. If you are interested in collaborating on Dow Chemical Company (currently a real mess!), I'd love to work with you! (I'm a chemist, by the way). Thanks, Walkerma 03:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for all your hard work. Yes, a great improvement with Dow, I've been watching! I think I prefer your wording of the napalm stuff over mine (and I missed the point you made about it!). I'd like to rewrite the Bhopal stuff (as the talk says, this is tangential to Dow itself, worth mentioning but in a better way). Once we do that, do you think we can remove the "neutrality" tag (see article talk page)?

I've been looking at Dow as well (I usually mull things over a bit before I write a lot, especially with a subject I'm less familiar with). There are a few things I'd like to put in, but I'd appreciate your opinions before I spend a lot of time on them.

  1. The seven major divisions of Dow, and a summary of their main products. To me, what a manufacturing company actually manufactures should be part of the "meat & potatoes" of any manufacturing company's article.
  2. I have a couple of recent articles from Chemical & Engineering News, including a lengthy interview with the CEO, I'd like to incorporate some of this into the article to indicate the current situation at Dow.
  3. From the chemistry point of view, I'd like to have a short section describing some of the major processes developed by Dow, such as manufacturing magnesium metal (used to build ships, aircraft, etc) from seawater. This process is still (I think!) the main way magnesium is made, and there is a lengthy section on the Dow process in the general chemistry text I used to teach from. I think Wikipedia is extremely weak on industrial chemistry, quite sad when you consider that such processes provide practically all of the materials we use in our modern world.

What do you think of these? Please leave comments & suggestions for me, and thanks again, Walkerma 16:51, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Portal

Thanks for supporting the proposal to create a portal for U.S. government (and politics?) topics. The proposal passed, and I copied my draft over the the portal namespace. It's at Portal:Government of the United States. If you would like to help keep the portal updated, feel free to stop by the portal talk page or just go in and make any improvements or changes you see fit. In its current state, the portal is just a starting point. Even the portal name, is open to discussion. I'm not sure if it should be "government and politics" or just "government". -Aude (talk contribs) 02:59, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Fair use" pictures in userspace

Hi there, I removed two "fair use" pictures from your userpage per WP:FU. Hopefully the free replacements are acceptable. Dr Zak 03:32, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Numismatics

Just something to keep ya busy!  :)
WikiProject: Numismatics
Here are some Numismatics related tasks you can do:
view • edit • discuss • history • watch

Joe I 21:50, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello!

Paul is back!!!!!!!!, isn't it? Best, Mxcatania 19:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:United States government publications

Hey, didn't notice Category:Publications of the United States government, I listed Category:United States government publications for deletion and moved everything to Category:Publications of the United States government. Thanks for pointing this out, --Surachit 03:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TCSEC =

Hi Paul, Thanks for pointing out that the leading paragraph was so broken, I Improved it as per your request, can you please:

The article still neds morewikification but at least the intro should be good now.

--JuanPDP 18:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)JuanPDP

[edit] Your move of Great Northern Railway (US)

A few quick questions about this move: Did you gain a consensus on the disambiguation somewhere? Is there a discussion about this article's title somewhere other than the article's talk page? Are you going to update all of the pages that link to the old title to avoid double redirects?

There was previous discussion on this topic where the consensus was to use (US) and not (United States) or (U.S.) for disambiguation in article titles. Was there discussion elsewhere that I didn't see? Slambo (Speak) 18:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

After searching around for a discussion, I don't see one, so I've moved the page back to its original title. Slambo (Speak) 19:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Restoration comedy

I understand that you edited Restoration comedy in order to improve it, but I don't quite see why you removed the nicely and relevantly piped links here, making them point to redirects instead...? And do you see ethos and playwright as useful links in the context? Please compare WP:CONTEXT. Bishonen | talk 21:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Bioguides

Hi Paul, good to hear from you again, I enjoyed working with you on the Dow article. How did the rally go (that was you, right?). Thanks for your posting- I think I'd like to include lots of lists in 1.0, but these are probably not right for Version 0.5 (we finish all reviewing tonight!). We are greatly expanding the scope of our project soon, using bots, and I'll definitely see if we can bring in a nice set of lists/articles like these. Thanks, Walkerma 20:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NYC Meetup

We do have a meeting scheduled in two weeks, at Cucina Vivolo, on December 9th...so far, we could have about 30-35 people attend (crazy!). See details at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC and feel free to e-mail me at cdthieme@gmail.com. I'd be definitely up to putting together a regular meeting WikiClub for the NYC and surrounding metropolitan area....great idea...one we definitely should bring up at the meetup. —ExplorerCDT 19:14, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] John Jay

Hi Paul. I originally attached the classification of American Episcopalian to the category, but realized that no other Episcopalian with their own category had a similar treatment (where their category was linked to personal attributes). I also did a cursory inspection of the categories named after politicians and found that a majority merely classified themselves as a category named after politicians. Wasn't sure whether it was policy but decided it looked better (not advisable to have too many subcategories in things like American Freemasons, etc.) Also, there were very few tags on the actual article itself, which was confusing. Eventually, I just thought it would run smoother. I don't know whether it's actual policy or not. From your northern neighbour. Homagetocatalonia 18:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bess Houdini

Sorry for the mixup about Bess Houdini. You did not delete her name from the Gate of Heaven Cemetery page. Her name was not listed in alphabetical sequence. I have since placed her name in alphabetical sequence on the page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Anthony22 (talk • contribs) 00:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Wikipedia Club of New York

Come see: Wikipedia:Wikipedia Club of New York. —ExplorerCDT 14:29, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Panhandles

LOL. Sorry, I just saw your addition of this to Alaska Panhandle and could only guffaw....long ago the National Lampoon published a routes map for "Panhandle Airways", which connected only airports in the various panhandles around the Union; Alaska's, Idaho's, Utah's, Texas', Oklahoma's, Nebraska's, Tennessee's, West Virginia's, Florida's....I think even Mobile made it onto the map as the "Alabama Panhandle". Can't remember which other states but they went all-out on it; not sure which issue but I couldn't help but think of it when I saw there's a Panhandles Category here....Skookum1 08:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oh goodness I wish I was in Vancouver

NO, you don't. We're having a Pineapple Express combined with heavy winds, and it looks like a monsoon out there (just like it did last night). This is about the twelfth major storm of this season so far and it's been nasty; we're expecting more. Balmy? Well, yesterday for a few benign hours before the next wave of rain came in, but....I can't wait for April...May....June? We're never sure when the sun's going to come back around here. Sometimes it doesn't (e.g. summer of '82, which I remember too well....ever seen a .5'-1.5' slug? 20, 30, 100 of them at once, on windows, building walls? etc?Skookum1 17:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

In the context of climate change, we've been joking this fall/winter that it's a bad sign when "they" (TO and Mtl, and by default NYC) are getting our weather and we're getting this, "this" meaning the new escalation in storm activity. Blame it on El Nina - I hope, meaning that then it's not at least going to be a regular annual occurrence. We've been smug here with climate change thinking that we were just going to get warmer and wetter ("wetter" is a very relative term here); now it turns out we may be due for increasingly harsh weather. It's a few hours later now and it's nice and sunny outside - one nice thing about the Pineapple Express is it's a subtropical airmass; once the rain blows through there's (sometimes) some nice sunshine on its tail end. Not always though....Skookum1 20:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Project Congress Style Guide

I wanted to thank you for your work on a style guide for members of congress. Your (collaborative) work has been lifted and used here. Please feel free to join in on the fun of continuing to flesh it out.--G1076 04:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Categories for New Jersey cities

Re Plainfield, New Jersey, Please note that categories that apply to the city, not to everything in the city (e.g., 1869 establishments, Cities in New Jersey, New Jersey Urban Enterprise Zone and United States communities with African American majority populations) belong on the Plainfield article, not on the Plainfield category. Including them on the Plainfield category would imply that everything in the Plainfield category, say Plainfield Teacher's College, is a City, is a UEZ and has an African American majority, which would be nonsensical. The only category that belongs there is the Union County category; after all, everything in Plainfield is in (or related to) Union County. Alansohn 07:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Honeywell cat

Ok, I'm puzzled. It's fine to create a new Honeywell category, but why did you delete all the others from Honeywell? I've restored them, as they're all legit cats. Akradecki 15:07, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Not so. See Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories. The rule of thumb that I think you thinking of is parent and sub categories, and typicially you only have an article in one place, but, as the guideline says, is not at all a hard and fast rule, and there are plenty of cases where you want it in both. The cats that Honeywell is listed in are major navigational aids, and by removing it from them you impede users' utilize the system as free as possible. Akradecki 15:13, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SPURA

We just went through this, and the proposed deletion was over ruled Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/SPURA. Is Wikipedia supposed to be a constant debate?Juda S. Engelmayer 17:54, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, but if you read the referneces and the article, it is not about Seward Park, it is about the largest area of undeveloped property in NYC going on 35 years already located in the vicinity of Seward Park. The NY Times articles should help explain that. Juda S. Engelmayer 18:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC) I'm not taking it personally, I am just frustrated that's all. Wikipedia can be a full time job if you let it, and this one already passed its test. Juda S. Engelmayer 18:03, 12 February 2007 (UTC) Maybe the article on Seward Park needs creating. Seward Park Housing Corporation See Seward Park

I appreciate your zeal. I will likely put one together.Juda S. Engelmayer 18:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

--- Finally got around to it Seward Park (Manhattan) Juda S. Engelmayer 03:32, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Advice requested

Hi Paul. I've been attempting to overview and tidy up the geography cats which involve the places where people live. There appear to be two useful ways of doing it - by region, and by size. Organising by size is difficult because User:Hmains uses the term settlements to cover all sizes of communities, and has altered dictionary definitions [1] to fit his own understanding of the term - [2]. However, community appears to be the term used most often to describe the places where people live, regardless of size. This is the definition of community - [3]. Hmains has reverted much of my work, and insists on settlements being the term we should use - basing it on this decision, which was a declined proposal to rename Settlements by region to Populated places by region. What do you think? Is settlement the appropriate term for covering human communities ranging from well established cities down to refuge camps? Is Human community a viable alternative? Are there other choices? I have started a discussion here and here, with the above wording, but no response as yet. I have left this message on the talk pages of active Geography Project members. And then on this page. I am a bit lost as the best place to discuss this issue. I don't want to delete or rename any category. And I don't want to get into a revert war. I'd like an open debate to reach sensible consensus. I'm now leaving this message on the pages of WikiProject Category members. Can you advise? SilkTork 19:56, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion taking place at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements)#Settlements SilkTork 11:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Bonjour!

Salut, I attend the D-E. Do you? Orthodoxy 15:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../p/a/u/User_talk%7EPaulHanson_b0e6.html"