User talk:Jpbowen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please note that I will reply to messages here unless you ask otherwise.


Contents

[edit] Welcome!

Hello Jpbowen, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Lst27 (talk) 22:21, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Archives of old messages


[edit] Redirect of List of Museums in San Francisco

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on List of Museums in San Francisco, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because List of Museums in San Francisco is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting List of Museums in San Francisco, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 11:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Organizations by type

Hi Jpbowen -- I am proposing a rename of Category:Types of organization, which you created, to Category:Organizations by type. It's more in keeping with the other categories in Category:Organizations, and is a bit clearer, IMO -- the category collects articles about organizations, divided by type, rather than articles about types of organizations. I posted a mergeto & discussion about this a while ago and got no objections, so moved it up to CFD. Your thoughts at the CFD would be welcome. 2007/12/31 CFD. Cheers, Lquilter (talk) 07:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I have added some discussion on the CFD page. I think this raises some higher-level issues. Your thoughts and response are welcome. Happy New Year! — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 12:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Your general point about "by type" and "types of" is well-taken, and I'll say so on the CFD page. One question, though: Why use "by type" as an aggregator for all the "by location", "by subject", etc.? Why not just have those at the top of Category:Organizations with the pipe-sort putting them at the front? That seems to me to be the most direct. I'm not sure that people will know to go looking through "by type" to find "by subject", "by location", and so on. --Lquilter (talk) 16:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, this needs a bit of thought. I'm doing a bit of reorganization. Where helpful navigationally, I think having some entries under Category:Organizations and Category:Organizations by type could be appropriate. Let's see how the organization (no pun intended!) and the discussion goes. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 16:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Relatedly, where you one of the folks previously involved in Wikipedia:WikiProject Organizations? I've been trying to get it going again; we desperately need a project to help with that. For me the order of priority is (1) categorization schemes -- right now it's a mess; (2) draft article guidelines -- what's a good article for an organization; and (3) fleshing out notability criteria with more examples and help, and keeping up with AFDs on organizations. If you haven't participated before, it would be great to have someone else thinking through the broad high-level issues with (before we start implementing changes). --Lquilter (talk) 18:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
No I was not involved before, but I have added myself now. I start a new job in January and will have less time for Wikipedia, but you have my moral support at least and time when I can devote it. I'm happy to respond to ideas if I can. Good luck! — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 21:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • FYI - on alphabetical sorting, my understanding is that you can do the pipe trick with a space instead of an asterisk; it sorts the same, but doesn't create a confusing "*" subheading. e.g., [[Category:United Nations| ]] instead of [[Category:United Nations|*]]. --Lquilter (talk) 21:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. Is there any guidance anywhere on " " vs. "*", etc.? I tend to use " " for important single main entries and "*..." for multiple entries a la regular expressions, but that is just from habit and observing use by others. Official guidance welcome if there is any. (Thanks for your "civil conversation" — to quote from your user page — it is refreshing!) — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 22:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay. Yes, Wikipedia:Categorization#Pipe_tricks_and_sort_keys talks about "many readers feel..." So it's not a firm rule, but over time I believe I've seen them migrating towards the space not the asterisk. (The asterisk adds an asterisk in the table of contents, which is a little jarring, while the space doesn't.) --Lquilter (talk) 16:25, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Anyway, I came here to say that the 12/31 CFD is closed. There were as many solutions proposed as people, I think! Feel free to join in continuing discussions at Category talk:Organizations. --Lquilter (talk) 18:59, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the info and pointer. Go luck with any reorganization. I guess it needs some debate! Best wishes, Jonathan Bowen (talk) 22:46, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Footbridge at Folly Bridge, Oxford

Hi.

Nearly two years ago, you added the following to the article Folly Bridge:

A public footbridge was completed next to the road bridge in 2002, designed by Nicholas Grimshaw & Partners.

and I've found several sources that appear to confirm this. But the trouble is the images we have of Folly Bridge on the article date from 2005 and 2007, and show absolutely no sign of such a bridge. I've discussed this further at Talk:Folly Bridge. Can you help?. -- Chris j wood (talk) 14:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Chris: I believe this was a design that was not implemented and have updated the page accordingly, with a reference. Apologies for any misinformation previously. I'll check the situation next time I pass over the bridge, but the photographs look rather convincing! Thank you for bringing this to my attention. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 23:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Aldrich Contemporary Art Museum

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article The Aldrich Contemporary Art Museum, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of The Aldrich Contemporary Art Museum. Yngvarr 00:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I have reverted to an old version which I believe does not have copyright issues. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 00:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry for the nuisance, Jonathan, I was doing other related work when I stumbled up that article. Not having enough familiarity with the article in question, I figured that prod would be a better way to get someones attention. Thanks for taking care of it. Yngvarr 00:15, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
No Problem! I guess for the future it is always worth checking the history of an article in case there is a previous version that is OK. Regards, Jonathan Bowen (talk) 00:17, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Marlow Regattas

Hi JPB

As you created these articles you may be amazed at the inability of another editor to be able to differentiate between them. Regards Motmit (talk) 22:54, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for letting me know. I have removed the suggested merger and added notes to the talk pages. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 21:12, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bump (rowing)

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Bump (rowing), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{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. BJBot (talk) 15:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of PR0

I have nominated PR0, 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/PR0. 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. RogueNinjatalk 01:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A new Oxbridge user box

Jpbowen...I am currently in the process of writing a user box for all of the colleges that are part of Oxbridge. This template is meant to replace your current college template. Please take a look at the work in progress and comment on it. My main concerns are college abbreviations and color choice. I am using scarf colors for the colleges. Thank you. - LA @ 16:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CfD nomination of Category:Theatrical occupations

Category:Theatrical occupations, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Cgingold (talk) 11:45, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bronx Museum of the Arts

Hi! I'm still learning categories so can you explain to me these category changes? I'm not disagreeing at all, I just don't quite understand which are/not appropriate and want to learn this right rather than have to unlearn. Thanks! TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 02:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

In adding categories you should not normally include categories that are above other categories in the hierarchy. For example, Category:Museums is high in the hierarchy — all the other categories with "museums" in their name are below this. In general, try to "narrow" categories as far as possible. For another check, look in categories you use. The article should be roughly comparable with others in the category. I hope this helps and have fun editing Wikipedia! — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 13:18, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Gotcha, so basically all I would need to add (not for this one but for another group I work on) is Category:Children's museums in New York City and it would automagically populate to Category: Museums, Category: Children's Museums in the United States, Museums in New York City, etc? TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 15:18, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Not automagically unfortunately, a new category like this would have to be added and located in other categories manually — and only if there were enough museums in the category to warrant it (which would all have to be recategorized manually too). Creating new categories is something you should leave till you have good experience. Before that, just try to added the narrowest categories that apply to any articles you produce. If you choose a category, that has a more appropriate subcategory (or set of subcategories), use that/those instead. On the other hand, if you (or anyone else) is not sure, and use Category:Museums for example, it is likely that someone like me will spot it and recategorize — one of the wonders of Wikipedia and why it works! Hope this helps. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 19:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Wasn't clear.. oops! The category of Children's museums in New York City exists. I created it because there was Museums in NYC and Children's in the US but the children's museums were 'lost' in both and there are a number of museums that fit in it. It's not yet well populated as museums are one of my personal projects: User:Travellingcari/Museums that I've adopted. I think I started copy pasting categories from MoMA or elsewhere so that explains some of the redundancy. But I also think there's a ton of list/category overlap. I've been known with stubs to just put it as {{stub}} and let someone else find a home for it when I can't. TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 21:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
There are probably just enough NYC children's museums to make the category viable, but notice the speedy rename proposal because the capitalization is not standard. The general rule is be bold with articles but think carefully about categories — and if you are not very sure, don't create. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 21:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
There are at least ten off the top of my head. Don't go by the ones listed in the List of... lists, as neither the NYC or NYS one is complete. If that's not enough someone can delete it but I checked to make sure that seemed to be an acceptable size before creating it. (I'm well aware of WP:OTHERSTUFF, but I don't think that applies to category size.) Didn't think there was anything wrong with adding the museums as I work on the articles. I'm not a fan of creating sub-stubs just for the sake of getting the article there and would prefer to gather materials and write the article/stub. Just a note on this. The external link that you changed it to does not work if the user doesn't have certain scripts (flash?) Is it better to link to the main one just because it's main even if it won't work for some users? TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 03:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
It seems reasonable to me! It is just a bit of a jump from the United States down to New York City — but OK! Re link, I prefer the main link because it is much more stable (e.g., if the internal structure of the website is updated — very likely sometime. Flash is a flash in the pan! :) In any case, if the main website link does not work for some users it is an extremely badly designed website! Anyway, it is always possible to update and add to Wikipedia links if needed. Just my opinions! — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 18:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Do you think Category:Children's museums in New York would be better? I wouldn't oppose as I see your point about the big jump. And no argument on the extremely poorly designed site, I had to rely on a google hit into an exhibit to get in and then be sure I didn't hit something like 'home' and have it lock up again. TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 20:23, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Certainly one would expect a Category:Children's museums in New York category for the state of New York to fill in the gap. And similar categories for other US states with significant numbers of children's museums, if there are enough to warrant this. I guess NYC is probably a special case with a high proportion of children's museums. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 11:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Agreed, however I think I'm going to hold off on that for a bit simply because the only non-NYC children's museum that has an article as of now appears to be Children's Museum of Utica, New York. I know there must be other children's museums in the state (likely in Albany) but I don't see making a category for one article. I'll add it to my User:Travellingcari/Museums to do list. TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 17:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes of course, all very sensible. — Jonathan Bowen (talk) 18:41, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Archives & Museum Informatics

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Archives & Museum Informatics, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Archives & Museum Informatics. TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 02:41, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] EVA Conferences

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article EVA Conferences, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of EVA Conferences. TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 04:16, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Cogapp

A tag has been placed on Cogapp requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 04:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of Museum Store Company

A tag has been placed on Museum Store Company requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company or corporation, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for companies and corporations.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. TRAVELLINGCARIMy storyTell me yours 05:01, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] DYK

Updated DYK query On 28 March 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Catalyst (museum), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Gatoclass (talk) 04:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AfD notice

FYI, since you contributed at one point: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Organ Review of Arts -Pete (talk) 02:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject History of Science newsletter : Issue IV - May 2008

A new May 2008 issue of the WikiProject History of Science newsletter is hot off the virtual presses. Please feel free to make corrections or add news about any project-related content you've been working on. You're receiving this because you are a participant in the History of Science WikiProject. You may read the newsletter or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Yours in discourse--ragesoss (talk) 23:30, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notability of Museophile

A tag has been placed on Museophile requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Kubanczyk (talk) 21:47, 12 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Abingdon coa.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Abingdon coa.png. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 13:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edmund Lenihan

Good work! I edited that one until I got frustrated and quit. Good to see others cleaning it up and adding to it.Trilobitealive (talk) 20:03, 2 June 2008 (UTC)