User talk:Dan9186

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is Dan9186's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Dan9186.
Archives: 1
Archive
Archives
Archive 1


Contents

[edit] Your opinion

What do you think should be done regarding the religious building infobox template when an article already has a National Register of Historic Places infobox template (e.g. Bialystoker Synagogue, The Actors Temple)? The religious building infobox template has some information on it that's not on the NRHP template, but there's obviously some overlap too. Jayjg (talk) 03:24, 7 January 2008 (UTC)=

Well You have the option of putting both and deeming which ever you want as the more important one to put at the top and putting the overlapping information in only one of the two. Another option that I would not be opposed to is creating a new infobox for such occasions. All of the religious building type infoboxes need cleaning, condensing, and reorganizing anyways. This could be just a step towards drawing all of them together and improving upon them. If you think that would be best over this next week I will try to pull a start of one together. It will be a slow process cause school starts back this week but give me some ideas of what you might want in the way of looks on it and I will try and make it happen. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) January 7, 2008 08:42 (UTC)
It seems to me that the Religious Building infobox already has far more information in it than the NRHP infobox, with considerable overlap. It would make sense to me to incorporate NRHP information into a new section of the Religious Building infobox. What do you think? Jayjg (talk) 03:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't see a lot of problems with it, the biggest thing would be that we not create a new section but incorporate the information into the already existing sections because it would be rather difficult to hide the unused sections with my current knowledge of templates. Past that I really see no issue with adding that information into it for cases where it would apply. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) January 8, 2008 03:34 (UTC)
That makes sense. I look forward to seeing what you come up with. Jayjg (talk) 02:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
I have not made much progress in the way of making it happen yet, but the weekend is almost here. I was curious though what your thoughts were on what parameters should be included from the NHRP box. I would say that the nhrp_type should be set and not optional since it will always be a building. Other than that the ones I know should be added are added and refnum. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) January 11, 2008 14:47 (UTC)
I think you are correct on both counts. Jayjg (talk) 23:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
What section do you think they should go in? Jayjg (talk) 01:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The more I think about it and look at it I think it actually wouldn't be too awful to add in a separate section for the NHRP part and have a parameter that simply sets to display that section or not. Also I wish to apologize for taking so long to get on this, school has been a killer already in the few weeks of this semester. So don't think I have forgotten about this, it is merely a matter of finding the time. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) January 22, 2008 21:51 (UTC)

There we go I have added what we have specified to the template. What I ended up doing is actually making a parameter to make the section optional so that it is its own section. If you put something into that parameter then it shows the section and for the time being the section only has two parameters the added and refnum. If we need to add any more in then we can add to it and such as you see fit. Let me know if you think anything else should be included. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) January 22, 2008 22:43 (UTC)
That's great, thanks, I'll try it out! Jayjg (talk) 02:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
It works great! Would it be possible to make the other sections optional? See, for example, Baith Israel-Anshei Emeth Synagogue where the "Specifications" header is there without any detail, because we don't have that information. Jayjg (talk) 04:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes it would be possible however the way I did it with this section was only by using the paremter nrhp for that. It does nothing more than flag whether to show that section or not. That would be the only way I could really do it easily for the other sections say specs or specifications and have it show if those are set to yes or something. So if that is how you would like to do it then I don't see why not. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) January 23, 2008 14:13 (UTC)
I think that would be a good solution. You'd have to default it to "yes", though, to make sure that it didn't break all the current uses. Jayjg (talk) 02:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Done - I have added the ability to hide the architecture and specifications sections. They should default to yes and I have tested the fact that they hide the desired sections on the above mentioned article that is missing specification information. I specifically did not allow hiding the Basics section because that information should be required I think to include the infobox. However if you think other wise let me know and I will change it. Let me know what you think about all of this. Thanks. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) January 28, 2008 14:54 (UTC)
The changes are great, and I think you're right, the other sections are optional, but there's no point in an infobox if you don't even know the basics about the structure. Thanks! Jayjg (talk) 01:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

O.K., I see one more thing; the NRHP infobox has a "Designated as a National Historic Landmark" variable too. Being added to the National Register of Historic Places is just the first step in getting designated as a National Historic Landmark, and there are a number of religious buildings that have both. Also, it would be really neat of the section heading could change - that is, if it is just registered on the National Register of Historic Places, then the headline would be "National Register of Historic Places", but if it also designated as a National Historic Landmark, then the headline would be "National Historic Landmark". Please let me know if you think this is doable. Jayjg (talk) 15:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

An update, I have the "designated" variable working, but not the changing headline. Jayjg (talk) 16:02, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
As far as doable, not a problem I will add that in if you don't as soon as I can. Right now my eye sight is limited to almost not being able to read due to a surgery I just had on Friday. As soon as my eye calms down I will jump right on it and see what I can do. If there are any other updates just let me know. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) February 3, 2008 18:31 (UTC)
Thanks, I think I would mess it up if I tried. And I hope you recover quickly from the surgery - take your time to fully heal, don't strain your eye! Jayjg (talk) 03:07, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
I hope I'm not nagging, but have you had a chance to figure out how to make that National Historic Landmark/National Register of Historic Places section header work? Jayjg (talk) 02:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Done — I have not had a chance to test it since I did this between classes but it should be working. If you get a chance test it out and make sure that it does what it is supposed to do. It should now be that if you have put in a value for when the place was designated then it should show the (U.S. National Historic Landmark) and if you have not put one in then it should show (U.S. National Register of Historic Places). Let me know if it needs any further work. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) February 15, 2008 17:51 (UTC)
Thank you, but it doesn't seem to work; see, for example, Central Synagogue. Jayjg (talk) 02:10, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
It should really be fixed this time, I checked the article you showed wasn't working and it works now. I had misspelled the parameter, oops. So now that it is spelled right everything should be working as desired. Let me know. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) February 18, 2008 22:45 (UTC)
Looks perfect. Great work! Thanks. Jayjg (talk) 03:35, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: List of Tennessee state symbols

I meant to toss you a message after I found that instance, but I was forcibly torn away from the computer by a rather bad phone call. I shouldn't have removed it in the first place without speaking with you, oops. In short, no, I do not believe that any state symbols should be placed under the project unless there are extenuating circumstances. As far as I can tell, ours would be the only project to do so, despite many items being symbols of other states. Further, looking at the two fish articles that were tagged (channel catfish and largemouth bass), Tennessee isn't mentioned once in the articles. Think of it this way; our project should cover locations, objects, events and other topics that are uniquely Tennessee-related, have a strong bearing on the state, or have been strongly influenced by the state. For example, that is why I don't tag articles of football players who happened to play for University of Tennessee when I am reviewing newly created recommended articles. That's what I view these generic symbols as being: just tangentially related. If a symbol is uniquely associated with Tennessee, maybe that would be okay, but most things aside from seals and songs are found over a wide geographical area and are associated any number of states/countries. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 12:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I will take care of any that haven't already been dealt with then. As for talking with me first, you are the more experienced one and a better decision maker than I am you keep doing what you're doing and I will help out where I can. Sorry for the trouble and inconvenience. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) February 6, 2008 02:11 (UTC)
Huntster something that I would like your oppinion on, these following articles do mention Tennessee in the articles. I will leave them to you to remove the banner from the ones you deem needing it. Otherwise I have removed the banner from the other ones I had tagged.
-- Dan9186(T • E • C) February 6, 2008 03:37 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

Hey Dan9186, allow me to give you this award for your great work on merging the TN county related lists into a single list that contains all the relevant information about TN counties.

The Working Man's Barnstar
For great work on the List of counties in Tennessee, I award Dan9186 the Working Man's Barnstar.
Your contributions helped to bring the article to featured status.
doxTxob \ talk 04:41, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image maps

You will not believe how easy that is! The image map editor can be found on the German Wikipedia (also available in English language): Image map editor. You just need to load the image from the Wikipedia URL and click where you want to have the links. You can use squares, circles and polygons for irregular shapes. Pretty cool and very, very easy to use. The linked areas are shaded in the image while you are editing, so you can be sure not to forget any. Once you are done linking you just copy and paste the code where you want the image placed in the article. There is no need at all to figure out coordinates or calculate anything. Another great feature is that the coordinates are independent of the image size. They are based on the full size image, so if your image is displayed in a frame or smaller than original size all you need to do is: nothing! They adjust themselves. So you can just start making the image map and think about the size later. I wonder how that is done but I like it! Including testing the links I would say it took about two or maybe three hours for the TN counties.

I already found that there are a lot of county maps that do not have the image map feature. It is certainly very useful for that purpose. I did not make any yet because I am not sure which image makes the most sense. The bigger county maps as they are used (e.g. for the Kentucky list) in most county lists have somewhat redundant information when they are linked because the county names are already written on the map. And there is the size issue with the horizontal scroll bar. The population density map has a better size and provides extra information about the population, and I like the colors vs. the greyscale. doxTxob \ talk 22:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

That is a really neat little tool there. You aught to suggest something along the lines of what you've done for the Tennessee county list to the WP:COUNTYLISTS and see what they're response is to it. They might push for putting the population density map on all articles AND using it for the image map, who knows? I'm also glad to see that you're still around and working on stuff, I was afraid you might be leaving all together when you left the Tennessee project. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) February 11, 2008 16:59 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Fit to kill.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Fit to kill.JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Memphis disambiguation

Hello Dan, there is a discussion going on about how the Memphis page should be disambiguated (discussion takes place here: Naming conventions, Memphis). As I know that you are from Memphis, I thought you might like to voice your opinion there, too. doxTxob \ talk 19:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I have made it to the conversation considerably late but I appreciate you letting me know. Whether I'll have anything useful to contribute or not I don't know, but certainly watch and help when I can. I was away on spring break when you posted this but I'm back now. -- Dan9186(T • E • C) March 9, 2008 16:04 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of St. Ann Catholic Church (Bartlett, Tennessee)

I have nominated St. Ann Catholic Church (Bartlett, Tennessee), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/St. Ann Catholic Church (Bartlett, Tennessee). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 21:08, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Countytabletop

Would it be possible to make the Etymology and Origing columns supressable (i.e. have some parameter which turns them off, so that they remain in place by default)? That way it can be used on the Hawaii and Lousianna lists. Tompw (talk) (review) 20:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)