User talk:Valerius Tygart

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Barbour County articles

Thanks for starting Chestnut Ridge people and Lemuel Chenoweth! I'd been meaning to do those for a while, but you beat me to them. :-) Perodicticus 15:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

You are most welcome... My sister (Lisa) once babysat you!! Do you remember?? -- VT 17 Sept 2006

Yes, I do! Which brother are you? Perodicticus 08:43, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm the older brother....

[edit] Sideling Hill

Hi, according to Allegheny Mountains

east of the Alleghenies lies the Ridge and Valley Province of the Appalachians

ie. the Allegheny Mountains and the Ridge-and-valley Appalachians are separate entities. This contrasts with the Sideling Hill article which now says:

Sideling Hill is part of the Allegheny Mountains of the Appalachian Mountain Range. (Also considered part of the Ridge-and-valley Appalachians).

Is Sideling Hill considered part of both? Which has the best claim? -- Stbalbach 20:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)


Good question... I must admit ignorance, or at least uncertainly... If you look at the Appalachian Mountains article & at the diagram "Appalachian zones in the US", the area in grey labeled "Valley and Ridge" covers the area I've seen on other maps depicting the Alleghenies... What is clear to me is that the Allegheny Plateau abuts upon the Valley and Ridge province with the Allegheny Front embodying the transition between the two... That seems to leave no room for the Alleghenies themselves! My best guess is that the Alleghenies are a subsection of the V&R province... With the Great Appalachian Valley representing another subsection to the east of them... Which would make the statement in Allegheny Mountains inaccurate & confusing... Valerius Tygart 22:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I think the statement in Sideling Hill could stand as it is, & the statement in Allegheny Mountains could be modified... Valerius Tygart 23:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanxs!

Thank you so much for all your hard work and contributions to US Military related pages. If you have any questions, please fell free to leave me a message on my talk page. Keep up the good work and have fun editing! ^_^ Jumping cheese Cont@ct 03:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MRE

Any reason why you moved it back to Meal, Ready-to-Eat instead of keeping it at the common name? Voretustalk 20:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, as stated, full name vs acronym per Wikipedia policy.... Valerius Tygart 02:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Have you seen this? Voretustalk 14:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it applies to acronyms... Would you make the main article on your country "U.S." (it's more commonly used!) and redirect anyone who searched for "United States"?? Valerius Tygart 19:53, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Anyway, I'm sure you also saw this. Valerius Tygart 19:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zanj

Those books you deleted contain the information about the Zanj--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 05:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

You have cited a journal about "African Civilization", a book by the popular author Basil Davidson on "African Slavery" in general and a political tract by the professor Ali A. Mazrui. These are not helpful to someone wanting to learn about historical Zanj. Please be more informational & less political. Valerius Tygart 05:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of WV State Parks

Hi:

Would you mind leaving the caption turned off on the top photo in List of West Virginia state parks. I noticed that some browsers seem to mess up the table and other photo layouts with the captions turned on. The hidden caption was provided to meet ADA requirements for the blind.

Also, do you have any photos from any of the 14 state parks that are without photos? I'm hoping to propose this article for "featured" status as soon as a few more missing photos can get filled in. Thanks, WVhybrid 00:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] List of Norman surnames

An article that you created, List of Norman surnames, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of surnames Thank you. SkierRMH 08:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Luo surnames

An article that you created, List of Luo surnames, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of surnames Thank you. SkierRMH 08:48, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if you took my comments personally. I wasn't commenting on you but on the article, which needs improvement if you don't want it to be deleted.--Niohe 23:48, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
It definitely could be improved, but I don't think it should (or will, based on the majority of "Keeps") be deleted. Thanks. Valerius Tygart 16:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of Old English (Anglo-Saxon) surnames

An article that you created, List of Old English (Anglo-Saxon) surnames, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of surnames Thank you. SkierRMH 08:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Y

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Autoblock of 64.128.36.79 lifted or expired.

Request handled by:  Netsnipe  ►  12:51, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Building 470

Updated DYK query On 13 April 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Building 470, 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.

--howcheng {chat} 20:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PT6 edit

Nicely done, it does read much better now. Maury 00:10, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Mon plaisir... Valerius Tygart 15:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Monongahela NF edits.

Great work! youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 18:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

It's a privilege... Valerius Tygart 18:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cheat Mountain salamander

Hi Valerius Tygart. You are off to such a great start on the article Cheat Mountain salamander that it may qualify to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page under the Did you know... section. Appearing on the Main Page may help bring publicity and assistance to the article. However, there is a five day from article creation window for Did you know... nominations. Before five days pass from the date the article was created and if you haven't already done so, please consider nominating the article to appear on the Main Page by posting a nomination at Did you know suggestions. If you do nominate the article for DYK, please cross out the article name on the "Good" articles proposed by bot list. Again, great job on the article. -- Jreferee (Talk) 18:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Done. Thanks! Valerius Tygart 09:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Updated DYK query On July 4, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cheat Mountain salamander, 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.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Armed Freedom

Could you explain your page move of "Statue of Freedom" to "Armed Freedom"? "Statue of Freedom" seems to be both official and more common. I've posed this question on Talk:Armed Freedom so a response there would be appreciated. Thanks. --D. Monack | talk 21:54, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Certainly. I went to elementary school with a picture of "Armed Freedom" (so called) on the classroom wall. I took it to be the most common name. I notice that commercially available versions of the picture are still called "Armed Freedom". (See [1]. Valerius Tygart 16:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Paul Brandt (disambiguation)

Paul Brandt (disambiguation), an article you created, has been nominated for deletion. We appreciate your contributions. However, an editor does not feel that Paul Brandt (disambiguation) satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Brandt (disambiguation) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Paul Brandt (disambiguation) during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer(Broken clamshellsOtter chirps) 11:35, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

No objection to deletion. Valerius Tygart 15:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Asgari

Excellent job reorganizing Ali-Reza Asgari! It really needed a cleanup after being put together rather haphazardly during all the new revelations. Joshdboz (talk) 20:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Walter Reed General Hospital

An article that you have been involved in editing, Walter Reed General Hospital, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walter Reed General Hospital. Thank you. --BJBot (talk) 20:59, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Geography Barnstar
For improving Wikipedia's coverage of West Virginia's geography, I hereby awards you The Geography Barnstar. Congratulations. youngamerican (wtf?) 21:00, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Invitation

You have been invited to join the WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort focused on improving Wikipedia's coverage of Africa. If you'd like to join, just add your name to the member list. Thanks for reading!

--BelovedFreak 11:09, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Melekeh versus Jerusalem stone

I am not entirely convinced of this move. Hits on the former are far, far fewer in number than hits on the latter, when the other uses of "melekeh" are taken into account. Also, as far as I can tell the latter term is the prevalent term outside Israel. Mangoe (talk) 16:32, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

That is arguable. The term "Jerusalem stone" seems to appear only in commerical sources & of course using Wikipedia for commercial purposes is not allowed. I think the New York Times (Thomas Friedman, no less!) is a pretty good source. (Are you a "Jerusalem stone" vendor?) Also, you did not address why you took out all of my added info. I have reverted your reversion. Valerius Tygart (talk) 14:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm frankly not all that convinced by a passing statement in a travel section article that, all in all, is devoted to a collection of traveller's tales anyway. I'd be a lot more convinced if it came out of the business section in a discussion of the building trade.
It seems to me that your assertion about commercial purposes is overly broad, and I don't agree that it applies in this instance. In any case, the only matter that concerns me is which term is the more prevalent in English. Googling for "melekeh stone" (without the quotes) produces only four pages of hits, and a bunch of them are replications of the same masonic passages or are antique. A number appear to be irrelevant. Searching in the NYT site itself produces eight pages of references to "Jerusalem stone" (see here), and it appears over and over in architectural discussions of synagogues in their pages. It just seems to me that "Jerusalem stone" is by far the most common term. Mangoe (talk) 17:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
On the NYT article: Do you know Friedman? He is not just some travel writer. He is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist & one of the Times best known writers.
On melekeh: When I have travelled in Israel, I have known of the stone as melekeh & never heard the term "Jersulem stone". It is significant that Jerusalem stone appears ONLY in commercial/promotional websites & never in journalistic or academic sites. No doubt there are many hits for it on search engines, but you have to be a bit discriminating. A tally of how much noise is out there is not a good way to decide any question. Valerius Tygart (talk) 18:04, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
But that claim is not true. As I said, I found eight pages of Google results from the NYT website which refer to "Jerusalem stone"; you found a single reference, and while I do not deny Friedman's authorial expertise, the kind of article he has written in this instance is simply not the sort of thing I would take as a definitive reference on its own. So let's go through some of the other NYT references:
  • The first reference is in an article about the construction of a synagogue on Long Island: [2]
  • The next is about controversies over the construction of a synagogue in Litchfield, Conn.; the rabbi is quoted using the term. [3]
  • Another article on synagogue construction, this one from the real estate section: [4]
  • Also from the real estate section, concerning the construction of a Jewish center: [5]
  • From the Arts section, an architectural assessment of the Israeli supreme court building: [6]
  • Here's one from Friedman himself, in the NYT Magazine: [7]
  • Some commercial architure from the business section: [8]
  • Another synagogue: [9]
  • A bridge in Jerusalem: [10]
  • A passing simile in a book review: [11]
OK, the last is a bit stretched. But surely there's evidence enough that if the Times prefers a term, it is "Jerusalem stone". Even Friedman uses that term more often than he uses "Melekeh".

I don't agree with your rejection of commercial websites, but in any case, I have not found it necessary to refer to them in this discussion. Mangoe (talk) 19:01, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

"Construction", "construction", "real estate" "real estate", "business", etc. Nearly all the instances you cite are commercial usages. I am certain that most geologists, archaeologists, ancient historians, etc that mention the stone call it "melekeh" rather than "Jerusalem stone". I will look for [offline] academic references to support that. (I have already put one in the article.) Meantime, you see how many academic (as opposed to commercial or popular journalistic) references to "Jerusalem stone" you can find. If you found more search engine hits for "Coke" or "Coca cola" than for "soft drink"; or more hits for "Tylenol" than for "acetaminophen" would that justify using the commerical names for the generic article? No.
As to the Times preferring "Jerusalem stone" to "melekeh", I'm sure that if you ask the Editor-in-Chief you will be told that the newspaper doesn't have an official position on the matter! More to come. Valerius Tygart (talk) 17:05, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
BTW, you said: "Even Friedman uses that term [Jerusalem stone] more often than he uses "Melekeh"." But I do not see even a single reference to "Jerusalem stone" in his article. (??) Valerius Tygart (talk) 17:10, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
Another argument against “Jerusalem stone” is that it is not very specific. At least four types of limestone underlie Jerusalem and its environs and more than one of them is used in construction. Thus,

Geology.—The strata of the limestone plateau on which Jerusalem stands have a generaleasterly dip of about 10 degrees, and there is therefore an ascending series from the western hill to the Mount of Olives. Dr. Fraas (Aus. dem Orient., p. 50 sq.) has shown that the strata consist of the following in descending order:—1. Nummulitic limestone, composed of soft white limestone with bands of flints and fossils, locally known as Kakúli. 2. Upper Hippurite limestone, or Xeriuaean marble, composed of beds of hard reddish and grey stone, capable of taking a good polish, called Misseh. 3. Lower Hippurite limestone, a soft easily-worked stone, called Melekeh, a name which recalls the bane royal of French quarrymen ; and 4. Zone ties Ammonites rhotomayensis, composed of pink and white strata of indurated chalk. The Melekeh bed, which is from 30 to 40 feet thick, underlies the whole city, and has played an important part in its history. All the great subterranean reservoirs, nearly all the tombs, the Siloam aqueduct, and the caverns at the village of Siloam have been hewn out of it ; and the extensive underground quarries near the Damascus Gate show that it was largely used for building purposes. Many of the large blocks in the walls of the Temple enclosure are from this bed, and the stone where free from flaws and not exposed to rain has worn well. (Smith, William, A Dictionary of the Bible: Comprising Its Antiquities, Biography, Geography and Natural History. Hartford CT: S.S. Scranton, 1908)

Valerius Tygart (talk) 17:32, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Can we take this to the article's talk page? It seems to me inefficient to discuss it in both places. Mangoe (talk) 17:35, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm there. Valerius Tygart (talk) 17:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blackwater

Sorry I didn't get back to you before this. Lotsa excuses, including a power outage. I don't know if you did the rewrite of the history section, as the author used an IP address only, but the references and the rewrite in general seem to be much better now. WVhybrid (talk) 03:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)