User:Clariosophic/Archive2 (2008)

Holy Trinity Episcopal Church (Melbourne, Florida)

Hi. I see that you are involved with Registered Historic Places. Do you know if the aforementioned is or isn't one? -- brew crewer (yada, yada) 03:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

An article you helped edit is now on WP:UNI/COTF

A new round of WikiProject Universities Collaboration of the Fortnight will begin on 04 Jan 2008. Please take a look at our WikiProject article guidelines and help improve the articles. If you have any questions regarding the COTF or have questions/problems on how to improve the article, please place them here. Thanks and Happy Editing! - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 11:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Church of the Nazarene (disambiguation)

Do you really think this is necessary? Are you quite familiar with the Church of the Nazarene? Let's talk! Aepoutre ( talk) 17:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your questions on my talk page. I trust that you did not mean them as personal attacks, although they seem to be such. Yes, I do think it is necessary and yes, I do know a lot more about the church than you seem to think that I do, but really what I know is irrelevant. This is just a disambiguation page, nothing more and nothing less. I do a lot of work on the List of National Register of Historic Places entries and the Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places. A common problem on the list is with churches of the same name.Hence the need for a place of worship disambiguation page. There are at least two Churches of the Nazarene on the National Register. Peace be to you. Luke 24:36 clariosophic ( talk) 21:30, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for responding! No, no personal attack. What made you think it one? What is your connexion with the Church? I'm still contemplating the implications of the disambiguation, so I was curious to find out more. Take care! Aepoutre ( talk) 18:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Carpenter Gothic

Hey, I noticed that you had an interest in the St. Andrew's Episcopal photo that I uploaded earlier, so I went ahead and uploaded a couple more to Wikimedia Commons that may be of interest to you: [[Image:Lowdnesborostpauls.jpg]] & [[Image:StJohnsForkland.jpg]]. I believe that both are based on Upjohn designs, but neither have an article as of yet. They are both in [[Category:Churches in Alabama]] at Commons. Cheers. Altairisfar ^talk 22:22, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm so happy that you liked what I uploaded. I grew up in that area. You know, excavations at Cahaba have confirmed that St. Luke's at Cahaba was identical to to St. Paul's in Lowndesboro, except that the steeple was on the left at St. Luke's instead of on the right as seen at St. Paul's. It was simplified when it was moved to Martin's Station. I used to have copies of a little booklet from ? on the Alabama Historical Commission excavations, but can't find it at the moment. I'm glad to have come across someone with the same appreciation that I have for these old buildings. Also, I have photos, (SOMEWHERE!!!!??!) of Waldwic, a Carpenter Gothic plantation house that continues to stand in Hale County, Alabama near Gallion. If I ever locate them I'll let you know if you're interested. HABS did survey it in the 1930's though, it can be found at Waldwic at HABS. Cheers. Altairisfar _talk 04:56, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Waldwic

Thanks for creating the Waldwic article. I guess that now I'll have to dig out those photos! I have boxes and boxes of prints (I never got around to albums). When I locate them I'll upload and let you know. And I also wanted to let you know that I've enjoyed exploring your userpages, very interesting! Cheers. Altairisfar _talk 22:21, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I've uploaded the HABS photos of St. Lukes & Waldwic to Commons, I'm going to go ahead and add them to their respective pages. Altairisfar _talk 00:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Anna Maria Island, Florida, Hutchinson Island, Florida and North Hutchinson Island, Florida

Do you classify them as islands or settlements? The former uses the bracket convention and the latter the comma (except for New Zealand). Local usage would appear to be immatereal. In some cases there is both an island an a community by the same name. Toss a coin... Peter Horn 18:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Anna Maria Island (Florida) would be more apropreate because there are three settlements or communities on one island. The island naming convention would override the local usage, or is Florida going to be another exception along with New Zealand??? Peter Horn 18:19, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Eureka!!! Anna Maria Island, Three (3) cities on one (1) island!! Anna Maria, Florida, the city on the north end of Anna Maria Island. Peter Horn 18:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, North Hutchinson Island is a settlement without question. Yes, Anna Maria Island has three municipalities on it, but it is really one settlement. Except for city or town limits signs, you can't tell where one ends and the other begins. There have been efforts since the 1950's to consolidate. Hutchinson Island also is really one large settlement despite being in two counties, Anyway, I've already deleted the Florida from North Hutchinson Island, but will have to ask an administrator to delete it from the other two. clariosophic ( talk) 19:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

May be you could look at all of List of islands of the United States#Florida? Peter Horn 00:03, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, but I already have looked at it many times and I don't see that it proves anything. As I said above, each of the three can stand on its own without Florida because there is no other island of the same name. Then we won't have to worry about whether Florida should be in parentheses or with a comma. Anyway it seems problematic that that Anna Maria Island and Hutchinson Island are really settlements since one contains 3 cities while the other contains part of one city and a whole CDP plus other unincorporated areas. Best wishes. clariosophic ( talk) 08:33, 16 January 2008 (UTC) clariosophic ( talk) 09:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Any further discussion of this belongs on Talk:Anna Maria Island, Florida and Talk:Hutchinson Island, Florida, each of which has a place to discuss its proposed move. clariosophic ( talk) 17:24, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

For obvious reasons I changed Orchid Island to Orchid Island in List of islands of the United States#Florida. Peter Horn 23:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Carers

Also what choice does a loving adult child have when his or her siblings either refuse or are unable to assume the role of caregiver for their parent or parents? clariosophic (talk) 12:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC) Yes, thats the whole point - welcome to the carers movement ...call us what you will - you know I had never heard of the "caregiver" word on this side of the pond either. ;-) ! funnily enough, this here fellow carer has also been editing articles on islands, see my new one strangeway - maybe carers need islands to go hide away on.... xxxx Excalibur ( talk) 01:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Chautauqua Institution Historic District

Hi, got your message. I don't have personal knowledge of the Chautauqua Institution and what it is called there, as you clearly do. What i was doing was ensuring consistency between the NHL program names of sites and what appears in the NHL/NRHP infoboxes, for the New York State NHLs. I am trying to clean up all the NYS NHL articles, hoping to bring the List up for nomination to Featured List status.

There are frequently differences between the NRHP names for sites (as reported from nris by Elkman's infobox generator), vs. the NHL program names for sites (as given in individual NHL webpages linked in articles, which is usually the same as the NHL name in the NPS PDF listing of all the NHL sites, linked at bottom of List of National Historic Landmarks in New York). And often current common names for sites are different than when the NHL was declared. I have consistently gone to the NHL name for sites, for use in the NRHP infoboxes, to reflect NHL program usage, at times over-riding the NRHP name. Right now, the NHL name for the site in both NHL sources is "Chautauqua Historic District", and I think that it is fair to represent that that is the NHL name for the site, by showing it in the infobox and as an alternate name (used by some, the NHL people) in the text.

I think you have a problem with the NHL program not with me really, and I am actually sympathetic about that. I see that the "Chautauqua Institution Historic District" name was used in the NRHP registration document linked in the article. Perhaps the NHL program should have used that. I have accumulated a list of other problems with the NHL webpage and/or NHL PDF document names for sites, including some obvious typos, and am corresponding with the NPS, about their fixing/changing those. So far with some acknowledgement from them that there exist seeming typos, but with no actual changes made by them yet.

I wonder, do you want to document that Chautauqua Institution Historic District is the common name or that it should be the NHL name, for correspondence with the NPS? I would be happy to work with you on that. And, if you wanted to footnote or otherwise indicate in the text that the NHL program and/or other outsiders are using an incorrect name, that would be fine. However I would appreciate being able to keep Chautauqua Historic District listed as the NHL name for the place in the NHL/NRHP infobox. This is consistent with all other NYS NHL names in the List article and in the NHL/NRHP infoboxes of all the site articles, I believe.

By the way, the only in-line citations in the article are the NRHP docs that I put in. It seems the referencing of most of the article could be improved.

Does this help? I worry maybe i wrote too much. Sincerely, doncram ( talk) 12:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Carpenter Gothic

Hey there Clariosophic. You seem to take some interest in the Carpenter Gothic article. I am curious to your thinking on your picture editing on the article. The first image is tilted and has telephone or electric cable running through it. The third image, being brick, is stylistically related but atypical of the style. The American Gothic House is both prototypical and quintessential. I will also post this on the article Carpenter Gothic discussion page, which is probably where the discussion should unfold. Thanks. CApitol3 ( talk) 16:13, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Peer review on List of National Historic Landmarks in New York

Hi Clariosophic -- Your input is invited.  :) I've gone ahead and asked for peer review on the List of National Historic Landmarks in New York list, including the List of National Historic Landmarks in New York City (hopefully to be considered by the peer reviewers as well). Open at Wikipedia:Peer review#List of National Historic Landmarks in New York. doncram ( talk) 23:36, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

St. Margarets of Hibernia

Thanks you for straightening out my mess at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Margaret%27s_Episcopal_Church_and_Cemetery_%28Hibernia%2C_Florida%29 It looks so much better now - my html skills have evaporated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HopsMaltYeast ( talk • contribs) 13:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

St. Barnabas Church, Upper Marlboro, Maryland

Hi. Thanks for your edits to St. Barnabas Church, Upper Marlboro, Maryland. Care to participate in the peer review of the article underway? Toddst1 ( talk) 19:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Roman Catholic Church

Dear Clariosophic, This article just failed an attempt to become a Featured Article mainly because of problems in the history section. I invite you to come to this article help create a decent history so it can be resubmitted for FA. Your educated and experienced help would be much appreciated. Thanks!. NancyHeise ( talk) 00:39, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Averill, Vermont

You recently added a .com site which I am about to delete for two reasons. Really against WP:EL policy, but I would stretch a point for a small town (.com site = spam). The other is that I don't see what it contributes that isn't there already or soon will be. Student7 ( talk) 01:53, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

8 people! I do sympathize. But we aren't supposed to be using .com sites. That's one of the items mentioned in WP:EL. I may have read it too superficially. It didn't seem to have a lot of info there. GenWeb, hopefully the .org one, not the .com one, sometimes has town info in it. If that could be found, maybe it could be substituted? Student7 ( talk) 20:47, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Panhandle trip

I'm taking a long weekend trip in a few weeks to Pensacola and back. Any church pics you want me to try and get? That is, that aren't already NRHPs? -- Ebyabe ( talk) 00:27, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Extra-territorial

The word "extra-territorial" sounds like they are outside the proper territory of the Episcopal Church, which they are not; the term is easily and likely confused with "extra-provincial" which has exactly that meaning. Perhaps the word "overseas" would be better? See http://www.anglicancommunion.org/tour/province.cfm?ID=U2 which uses exactly that term. Or at http://www.episcopalchurch.org/visitors_16976_ENG_HTM.htm?menupage=49678 we find "the United States and related dioceses outside the US". Can you find any official TEC or Anglican-Communion resources which use the term "extra-territorial" to refer to these dioceses? AFAICT that term is used only by Wikipedia in this context. Tb ( talk) 14:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I am transferring this the the ECUSA talk page where it really belongs. clariosophic ( talk) 16:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the welcome. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast ( talk) 15:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

South Carolina NRHPs

Hi -- Got ur note about Barnwell, South Carolina works-in-sandbox. Actually, I am working through the List of National Historic Landmarks in South Carolina and note no NHLs in Barnwell County, so I guess i won't be duplicating any of those. As you know, I tend to create stubby articles with the NRHP PDF file sources, and, in South Carolina I am adding links to the very nice SC Dept of Archives and History sources. If there are any NHLs u'd like me to hold off on, let me know and i will work around them, no problem. I was going to ask if u had noticed the Graniteville Historic District article, but poof! i see that you have and that now it is Graniteville Historic District (South Carolina). Yes, after adding my note in Talk:Carpenter Gothic i read the article and was concluding these company town houses definitely qualified. Thanks for adding the pic, too. By the way, at 23 Gregg St. address there is one carpenter gothic house pictured in HABS. HABS has 7 sets of pics returned for search on "Graniteville SC". regards, doncram ( talk) 16:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Millford Plantation and other SC NHLs

Hi Clariosophic -- Sorry about edit conflict on Millford Plantation just now. Your edit to the NHLs of SC list attracted my attention, and i was just trying to add to the article. I replaced your edit by what i perceived to be a larger amount of edits by myself, then i went back to try to add what you had added but i erased. Hopefully i got it all, but please check and re-add if necessary. Sorry if i deleted and did not re-add anything. Thank you also for following up on other South Carolina NHL sites. As you see, I have developed at least stub articles for all of the other SC NHL sites. I am hopeful about advancing the SC NHL list to "Start" status eventually, which would mean that there was at least a stub for each NHL that it covers, but actually there is no rush. Nice to see your work on several articles. Cheerios, doncram ( talk) 02:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I took the liberty of announcing the list-article of SC NHLs at WP:NRHP, just now, as it has reached "Start" rating (pretty much meaning it has an article for every NHL it indexes, although in fact it is missing just one of the churches). KudzuVine has contributed pictures from HABS and otherwise on a lot of the articles recently, too, so it has pics for 30 of the 77 NHLs. I wonder if we three are interested in developing it further, then to nominate it for Featured List? I wasn't expecting to stay working on this list-article for long, when i started with some edits on 12 Feb, but i was encouraged by your involvement, and some others (KudzuVine's additions, and Bedford developed a couple articles too). Thanks again for your developing the church articles especially. By the way, i added HABS external links for several of the churches recently. Cheers, doncram ( talk) 02:39, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The SC NHL list looks better and better, now has 38 pics, due to KudzuVine's continued additions. I am interested in starting an article to fill the one last red-link St. Philip's Episcopal Church (Charleston, South Carolina), within List of SC NHLs. Would u mind getting it started sooner rather than later, or letting me start it? cheers, doncram ( talk) 21:39, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Anglo-Catholic Churches

Another editor has added the {{ prod}} template to the article List of Anglo-Catholic Churches, 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) 19:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

As you have noticed, I have created articles for 7 or more of the NRHP churches that were covered in the List mentioned here. And I chimed in with my "Keep" vote in the AfD discussion. I only got started there because i saw this notice here, by the way.

However, in your edits to St. Andrew's Episcopal Church (Stamford, Connecticut) and other articles, I don't think it helps to add external link to the NRHP.COM website and/or copy in material from the NRHP.COM website, which merely duplicates information in the NRHP infobox. Perhaps you misunderstand about NRHP.COM, and think it is a Federal site and/or public domain? It is not: it mainly serves up material that it takes from the Federal NRIS system which is public domain, as Elkman's infobox generator does, and repackages it. It is a commercial site. To some extent it edits / transforms the material, and it is copyrighted material. For example, in the St Andrew's article I think it converts the 1860 date built to "Period of Significance: 1850-1874, 1875-1899". Technically, I believe that if you cut and paste from there, then you contaminate the wikipedia article with copyright violation. Obviously I don't want to mark these articles with COPYVIO, though. Regards, doncram ( talk) 20:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Got your message back. If the specific statement of significance by 25 year periods is part of the NRIS information, not added by NRHP.COM, then why not cite NRIS directly? There may be no explicit notice of copyright stated in the NRHP.COM website, perhaps because the NRHP.COM is trying to appear as if it is the official U.S. National Register itself. Note their "contact information" section is deliberately vague. I am not sure about how copyright works in all of its nuances, but I believe that material put up on a website often is copyrighted implicitly, and I believe that any formatting or other changes NRHP.COM makes to the NRIS material is copyrighted. I would freely concede that it is unlikely that NRHP.COM would press a copyright violation lawsuit, but that is besides the point. You didn't say, but I anticipate that your other reason for adding material duplicative to the infobox is that it "pads" the article, helping to avoid an AfD fight. However, I believe that padding is not necessary to avoid an AfD. If anyone wants to start an AfD on NRHP articles, that will cause a bigger fight, which I will fight happily in. NRHP notability is unquestioned now as there is so much documentation of national importance performed in the NRHP designation process, and all this documentation is obtainable. doncram ( talk) 20:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Anglo-Catholic Churches

An editor has nominated List of Anglo-Catholic Churches, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also " What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Anglo-Catholic Churches and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 06:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Registered Historic Places in Newton, Massachusetts

Hi, Tom, You certainly are the man. Many thanks for your hard work in redoing and adding tables to this list. Best wishes. clariosophic ( talk) 21:25, 22 March 2008 (UTC) Thanks also for your work on individual articles in Newton, adding coordinates, photo requests, etc. clariosophic ( talk) 21:36, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your support! Do you think the table format works for these pages? I live in Boston, and I'm planning on taking some photographic bike trips through Boston, Cambridge, Newton, etc. during the spring/summer months. I like the tables, because it allows for images and it is just easier to read overall. Any thoughts? tiZom _(2¢) 22:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Registered Historic Places in Uxbridge, Massachusetts

Hi, you've really been busy adding tables. It's great. I've cleaned up List of Registered Historic Places in Uxbridge, Massachusetts and it's ready for a table when you have time. Many thanks. clariosophic ( talk) 13:37, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - didn't realize I missed that one! I wrote a Visual Basic program to help convert them to the table format, so this whole process has been relatively easy.

PS - I would say not to worry too much about the red links for the names - eventually, each of these places should have complete articles (a daunting task!) because they're notable by default (I think...). The red links serve as a reminder of what needs to be done :o) The dates, on the other hand, probably shouldn't be linked... there's really no purpose (and of course we're really not supposed to link the same thing more than once in an article). I wanted to remove those links before, but I couldn't fix the program to do it, so I think I'm going to have to do them by hand.....eventually :o) tiZom _(2¢) 15:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually all dates should be in the format March 26, 2008. The purpose is not to wikilink a date or year; it is so that each reader's "date format preference" is displayed. If you click on my preferences and then date and time, you'll see choices. By bracketing dates and years (as shown above) the WP software recognizes the date pattern and displays according to each reader's preference. It is a common source of confusion.-- Appraiser ( talk) 17:44, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Huguenot Church, etc

Thanks for doing the French Huguenot Church merger. I might have merged to the older article, then asked an administrator to delete Huguenot Church, so the older article could be moved into its place. That way the older edit history would be with the article. Because I don't care so much about my recent edit history when creating lots of new articles, but maybe the previous writers do (although their edit history does still exist at the redirect point). And the result is good, it is a better article for having their stuff and our stuff. I just tried dividing out a new section and saying something about the architecture of the current (1845 on) church, getting rid of the "The SC DAH summary is here[1]" phrase that was still in the article. About that phrase, I have pasted it into a lot of articles as a placeholder to hold a properly formed footnote to the SC DAH summary. If you see the phrase remaining in any articles, please say something else and eliminate the phrase, which doesn't itself add to the article. When I started with the SC articles, I meant to always to add a short quote from, or state some fact from, the SC DAH summary, but it seems I often didn't get around to that.

To repeat myself, I am glad you've been contributing so much on the SC NHL articles. I would have done just a superficial job and scrambled on to another area, but I have been enjoying the cooperation with you and with Kudzuvine. I myself am working on the 5 South Carolina ship articles now, with Clagamore in good shape, Ingham coming along, and NS Savannah in the works in a sandbox somewhere. I'm wondering about putting this up for peer review sometime soon, and going for Featured List. I still don't have any featured articles or featured lists, by the way, do you? Anyhow, thanks about taking care of the church. doncram ( talk) 23:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Mason City Church

Not a problem to fix the Infoboxes. I'm just going through all the lists to make sure the boxes are there and I like to tidy things up. Einbierbitte ( talk) 22:16, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Uxbridge

I've been working on all these lists — adding images, disambiguating, and re-formatting the dates into the {{ dts2}} format so they sort in the table. Uxbridge gave me quite the problem! Seems an editor had created pages for all the Uxbridge sites, but then most of them ended up as a redirect to the list (Now I realize why you removed all those links!). As I mentioned before, each of these places is notable by default, so eventually every one should have its own article (and hopefully not just a stub). So I went ahead and reverted those back to the original [really small] articles. But now I'm thinking maybe we should just delete them. The problem is: We need to keep them linked, but we can't have them redirect to the list page. In this case, red links would be nice, because it indicates that there's work to be done. What do you think - keep the really small articles, or delete them? tiZom _(2¢) 08:23, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Tom, Thanks for your message and for doing the table. I'll see what I can do today to add an infobox and enough filler on each one to make them look better. Best wishes. clariosophic ( talk) 13:32, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, just jumping in here. I'd vote for the small articles. I stubbed the Florida list, with the idea that it's easier to expand existing articles than to create them from scratch. It seems to have worked, too, in a number of cases. My two cents, for what it's worth. :) - Ebyabe ( talk) 14:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Ebyabe, thanks for your input. I've been creating basic articles, 3 or 4 so far. Another editor has been reverting the recreations that Tom did. Best wishes. clariosophic ( talk)

You've started a lot of nice lists. You might want to use the columns and colors used in List of Registered Historic Places in Ramsey County, Minnesota. There are several others using this same scheme, including the state NHL lists. For city lists, I'd just eliminate the "city" column, since they're all the same.-- Appraiser ( talk) 17:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

N. Williams House

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article N. Williams House, 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 N. Williams House. Smartyllama ( talk) 18:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Hotel Thomas

Thanks for updating that; I should have done it ages ago. Before I did my Panhandle trip, I hit Gainesville and got much better photos of the Thomas Center and grounds. Gods, I love that place. :) - Ebyabe ( talk) 00:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

List of National Historic Landmarks in Virginia

Hi -- Thanks for adding a pic to the List of NHLs in Ohio, don't know if that was on-purpose because i was making some edits there or unrelated. I'd like to work on List of National Historic Landmarks in Virginia more instead, have started fixing that up. I'd be very pleased if you were interested in making some additions there. I will invite Kudzuvine also. I note there are HABS pics available for many Virginia NHLs, while there are few for Ohio. (Like there were lots for South Carolina, but few for New York.) Cheers, doncram ( talk) 00:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Great, I am glad you're on board, as is Lvklock, who has contributed in the New York State area and also in Idaho and Florida recently. I don't dislike Ohio, not that u would take offense for sake of your heritage :), but the difference on HABS availability is pretty dramatic, and I am hopeful that KudzuVine will choose to help out, if it is Virginia rather than Ohio. About the NRHP.COM 3 stars and 2 stars, I was actually unaware of their star system. Their website seems to be down right now, unfortunately, but I have more to say. I respond to you in some more detail at Talk:List of National Historic Landmarks in Virginia. Thanks! doncram ( talk) 04:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Martin's Brandon Church

I did start to recreate the article. Hadn't gone very far before, either. Please do add. I was just creating stubs for this and for Upper Brandon Plantation, both NRHPs, as I was developing Brandon, an NHL, which should refer to them. And I had sorted out their relationships somewhat (such as that Upper was split off from the main plantation and is not the same), so I thought i should not leave red-links. Hey, I thought you were going to do more with List of NHLs in VA but we do seem to have articles for all of them created now. Kudzuvine did a lot of pics, and has gone on to George NHLs and Delaware NHLs, i am trying to keep up. :) doncram ( talk) 22:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Florida School for the Deaf and Blind

Uploaded the photos to Commons, added one and a link to Commons to the article. Use whichever and however you think best. :) -- Ebyabe ( talk) 00:31, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Which Way?

I'm torn:

List of Registered Historic Places in Worcester County, Massachusetts

or

List of Registered Historic Places in Providence County, Rhode Island

Which way is best? As you have probably seen, I've been struggling with applying the WP:NRHP format to the NRHP lists in Massachusetts... What do you think? tiZom _(2¢) 15:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

List of Registered Historic Places in Ohio

Hey there, noticed your recent edits to List of Registered Historic Places in Ohio and stopped by to say that the tables look very nice. Keep up the good work and if you need any help let me know! Thanks! §hep • ¡Talk to me! 23:04, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Will do. I live in Lima and my summer goal is to create articles for all the registered places in Lima. I'll put pictures on my list of things to do. Cheers, §hep • ¡Talk to me! 01:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Clari ... just wanted to add to the chorus of thanks for the work you're doing on the Ohio lists. As a native of Massillon, I have the lists on my watchlist and have done some work on them since the beginning of the year. I've been focusing most of my Wikipedia energies recently on photographing all of the NRHP sites in my current hometown of San Francisco and converting the Alabama lists to the table format. Keep up the good work! -- Sanfranman59 ( talk) 23:21, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

May 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to List of Registered Historic Places in Ohio, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Tylerpuetz ( talk) 04:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Here is the reply, I posted on his talk page, which he has since deleted:

List of Registered Historic Places in Ohio

Hi, I find it hard to believe that you reverted four of my edits as vandalism,. I;m working on this article to convert the individual counties to tables. It is way too long and the tables will make it longer. What I am doing is what I have done in other places is transferring counties with large numbers of listings to separate articles. This is standard practice in NRHP lists. Please undo your revert. Best wishes. clariosophic ( talk) 04:37, 14 May 2008 (UTC) clariosophic ( talk) 08:59, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Obviously misunderstood what you were doing. Happens to the best, I suppose. There are those who do appreciate what you're doing. Like, I'd planned to do the Florida list all by myself. Which just goes to show, huh? :) -- Ebyabe ( talk) 22:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Fulton County Courthouse

A tag has been placed on Fulton County Courthouse, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

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 that has been nominated for deletion (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. Ro098 ( talk) 15:12, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Fulton County Courthouse

Oh, that make sense. Feel free to revert me. J Milburn ( talk) 15:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

List of Registered Historic Places in Florida table-ized

Thanks to Elkman's county list generator, and much help from you, the entire Florida NRHP list is now in table format. Now to fill all the photo holes (and summary sections, I guess). Wheee! :) -- Ebyabe ( talk) 17:14, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Moving pages

Hi there, when moving pages could you please check the article talk pages for WikiProject tags and fix them. i.e. remove them from the old page or set class to redirect and readd them to the new articles. This helps keep from having incorrect article tags. Thanks for your contributions. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 00:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Yep, exactly right! §hep • ¡Talk to me! 16:26, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

City of Hawkinsville (shipwreck)

Hello. I just moved the all caps title back to the lower cased title and just wanted to let you know. Generally, on Wikipedia, you will want to go with the most commonly used name, rather than any "official" nomenclature. In addition, you probably don't want to use all caps in any instance per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters) and various other guidelines and policies. Not that I care all that much myself but I thought I would let you know to save you any future headaches. Happy editing. IvoShandor ( talk) 23:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey, y'all. This was one of my early creations, and I did it with the caps 'cause that's the way it's listed on the National Register. But yeah, the non-all-caps version is better. Now back to whatever it was I was doing. :) -- Ebyabe ( talk) 23:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Take that back; I did do it non-caps. I probably didn't need to have the "(shipwreck)" part though, as I don't think there was another notable City of Hawkinsville. But it should be find as it is. And exiting again, stage left. :) -- Ebyabe ( talk) 23:45, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

That's fine with me. I think the NRHP all caps for ships, etc., is a little bizarre looking. I have been trying, though, if possible to use original NRHP names, even if it's just for a redirect. clariosophic ( talk) 19:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Central Avenue Historic District

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Central Avenue Historic District, 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Nazgul533 ^{talk contribs} 03:57, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Centerville Historic District

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Centerville Historic District, 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.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rwiggum ( ^Talk/ _Contrib) 04:02, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

David Van Gelder Octagon House

Thanks for fixing this. The Elkman generator created it without the Van, and I didn't notice it until later. I wasn't sure how to go about fixing it. I should have just asked for help. Thanks again! Lvklock ( talk) 21:44, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

go for an octagonal DYK?

Hey, the List of octagon houses is beginning to take tabular form, and i think it will look real nice. I think the Google maps connection with it is really fun, because you can see the octagonal shape of the individual buildings in satellite view mode.

I wonder, since it was just started on 15 June, about cleaning it up and nominating a DYK for it, something like: DYK "...that there are at least 23 octagonal houses built in the US before the American Civil War that survive to this day?"

Would you like to do it together? It would require creating stubs for all the NRHP octagon house articles, and editing the table to reflect their names, date built, coordinates, and so on. I have succeeded recently with getting DYKs for new list articles List of RHPs in LA and List of RHPs in Chicago, so i am pretty sure this would work, if you/we wanted to put in a quick effort over the next 2 days or so. cheers, doncram ( talk) 07:28, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. clariosophic ( talk) 11:24, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Just thought I might add a friendly reminder that there is a Category:Octagon houses to which these can belong. -- User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 14:41, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi, the list-article is in pretty good shape i believe. Can you now submit a DYK for it? We are running out of time to get it into contention. I think it would work best, in terms of ensuring joint credit, if u submitted the DYK, in the cohort of articles started on 15 June. Perhaps:

Did you know

...that the Wilcox Octagon House (pictured) and at least 58 other American octagon houses were built just before the American Civil War and survive to this day? -- new article created and co-developed by Doncram, article co-developed and DYK by Clariosophic

I think that nomination wording is meaningful, when you read the article, and meets DYK standards for support. You could submit a different version, but it is important now to get a nomination in so that it can be reviewed. Alternate DYK hooks can be suggested directly on the DYK page, too. Let me know! doncram ( talk) 23:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

p.s. i would like to include the Wilcox mention and pic taken, just today, by Lvklock, who has been a big help. doncram ( talk) 00:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

or, if u like the David Van Gelder Octagon House pic better, that would also be fine by me. It might be a better pic, also taken by Lvklock, just not today. doncram ( talk) 00:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Phew, glad u r on-line. I meant to submit the article as new article with date 15 June, which was the actual date of its creation, rather than submitting it as an expansion. Perhaps it should be acknowledged that it replaces an untabulated list section, with no intro, that was in the Octagon house article. doncram ( talk) 01:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes 15th is okay if we get it in right now. I think that it would appear as DYK tomorrow, we are just getting it in, in time. doncram ( talk) 01:17, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

aargh, by my time stamp it looks like it is the 20th already, somewhere in the world. still, if in now it should be okay, the Template talk:did you know page seems to be still open for the 15th, while the 14th is the one labelled "now expiring" or something like that. doncram ( talk) 01:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

it is agonizing, the DYK review continues at Template talk:Did you know#Articles created/expanded on June 15. Knock on wood, an exactly 200 char DYK hook that i just tweaked will be accepted.... doncram ( talk) 00:01, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Yay! the DYK finally went through, and the DYK hook, with no picture though, is on the Wikipedia main page right now. The DYK administrator saw fit to directly award the DYK plaque to Lvklock, not you or me. But, indirectly then...

On 22 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of octagon houses, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Keilana| ^{Parlez ici} 06:44, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

The hook that appears now is, Did You Know: *... that zooming in from satellite view, one can see the outlines of Wilcox Octagon House and most of the 82 octagon houses listed on the U.S. National Register?

Thanks for all you did! It was fun getting the list out. doncram ( talk) 07:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

fourth of July, or bust, drive

Hey, the octagon houses has been a fun distraction. Otherwise, I need to be working on NHL articles. I suggested at wt:NRHP to have a drive to finish starting up articles for all the remaining NHLs nation-wide, as we did for SC and VA not long ago. And then to celebrate by putting in a DYK for the overall NHL list, aiming for it to be nominated 5 days before July 4, so it could be chosen to show during Independence Day (United States). It would be great if you could check out what yet needs to be done (there's a running checklist that Lvklock is adding to), and help out Lvklock, KudzuVine, me and others who are working on this! (but first, do lets get the octagon houses DYK....) cheers, doncram ( talk) 00:17, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

see the prior section about urgent DYK attention! doncram ( talk) 01:04, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

disambiguation vs. "set index articles"

FYI, I found my way to Wikipedia:Disambiguation which includes some relevant passages. Its section on " Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Set index article" describes, perhaps, what you've had in mind with the Octagon House and Octagon Barn and so on pages. That section clarifies for me that there is indeed a need for such "set index" articles, list pages which are different than disambiguation pages, which seem like what you want to do.

Also, its section on " Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Partial title matches" reads:

Do not add links that merely contain part of the page title, or links that include the page title in a longer proper name, where there is no significant risk of confusion. Only add links to articles that could use essentially the same title as the disambiguated term. Disambiguation pages are not search indices.

That passage implies to me that, say for the Octagon House (disambiguation) article, there should only be the dozen or so entries of places actually titled "Octagon House" or "The Octagon", and not the entries for places like "Feusier Octagon House". I am not about to delete Feusier or the others, but that's a difference vs. where you have been coming from with this stuff, so I am sharing these links to you, as food for thought.

Also, there is a whole MOS article, at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages).

Anyhow, knock on wood the List of octagon houses should be DYK-displayed sometime soon, although i haven't noticed any DYK editor approval of any version of the DYK hooks suggested. cheers, doncram ( talk) 15:51, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Octagon Houses & The Glebe

Thanks for the interesting stuff on octagon houses - I've always found them fascinating. Sorry about my mistake in deleting the reference on the Glebe when I was fixing the link - I should have been more careful. Glad it got caught quickly. DavisGL ( talk) 05:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

New Commons Florida church categories

Category:Carpenter Gothic churches in Florida and Category:Gothic revival churches in Florida. The later was an accident, but there's at least a couple that qualify. Anyhoo, if there's any others you think should belong, go and add. It was partly prompted by someone adding this category to a bunch of my photos. Cheers! :) - Ebyabe ( talk) 00:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

NPS NHL photo contest

Hi Clariosophic -- See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#June 30 email deadline for 2008 NPS NHL photo contest. I didn't know about this contest before. You should submit a couple pics! Ten percent of submissions last year (12 / 125) were winners. doncram ( talk) 20:18, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

New Florida NRHPs

These may be outside your area of interest a bit, but they're all at UF. They are The Hub (Gainesville, Florida), Weil Hall, and Yulee Area (Gainesville, Florida). Cheers! :) -- Ebyabe ( talk) 00:14, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Fourth of July, or bust, Thanks!

		The Fourth of July, or bust, Barnstar
		I award you this Barnstar for your solid, witty, creative, supportive, learned, timely, cheerful, eloquent, and/or otherwise generally great contributions on U. S. National Historic Landmarks' articles. Yippee o yay, we pretty much met our goal of a well-started article for each of 2,442 NHLs by today! Thanks, and have a great Fourth of July! -- Doncram, 4 July 2008

It's been my privilege to work with you, before and since, but especially for your work in List of NHLs in SC, which encouraged me immensely about the potential accomplishments when several of us work together. Thanks! doncram ( talk) 17:19, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Florida courthouses

Hey, I see you did Madison County's. Nice! What other ones are on your list to do? I'm sure they're on my list to get photos of, even if they're not NRHPs. How about the one for Gadsden County in Quincy? It's near the middle of the historic district there. I am planning on getting better shots of it, with the digital. I love that courthouse, and Quincy in general. Cheers. :) -- Ebyabe ( talk) 22:26, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

octagonal barns

Hi, i've been coming across sources about octagonal barns, but i lost track of where those are supposed to go now.

For example, http://www.in.gov/dnr/historic/11024.htm which has useful fact of the number of octagonal barns in Indiana.

Especially good on history of octagonal barns (including context with respect to Fowler on houses, and the interesting reason to use polygonal barns to avoid a patent on round barns) is this Indiana MPS: http://www.in.gov/dnr/files/roundbarns.pdf. I think that mentions 32 octagonal barns, perhaps there are 32 now separately listed on the NRHP?

Were we supposed to create a List of octagonal barns or what? I think you said it should stay separate from the List of octagonal buildings and structures, which i agree with, as this is a clearly distinct category.

regards, doncram ( talk) 16:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Okay, good, please just add these sources to what you are developing. Again the 2nd one is really helpful i think. About barns more than houses, it seems that octagonal shaped ones are part of a continuum, including hexagonal, other polygonal, and round barns. That 2nd source makes that clear. So, for barns i wonder if the category/titles should be about polygonal and round barns as well, in terms of defining scope. I notice Robert V. Kline's judgment to include round barns and other polygonal structures, in his bobanna site, reflects his judgment based on long experience that is the useful scope. Just to think about.

I don't see your working list at User:Clariosophic/sandbox14, perhaps it is very much in progress right now. Please do let me know when you want me to take a look at something specific. doncram ( talk) 18:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, okay, i see what you have now. It is missing the Indiana NRHP barns that have "Polygonal" rather than octagon in their names. Running Elkman search I get about 23 hits on "barn" in Indiana that are round or polygonal barns, of which at least some are octagonal no doubt. That second source Section G page I talks about how many existing such round and polygonal barns there are, that 23 to be listed on the register and 88 more being eligible. Section F page 11 lists the specifically Octagonal barns, of which i count 13 being extant, the rest having been razed. I would really lean towards creating an article and list on Round and Polygonal Barns, or Round, Octagonal and other Polygonal Barns. And, at a bigger level, what is written about barns and is there a List of barns covering the notable ones yet? Perhaps these ones, which are clearly notable, should just be a section in a bigger barns list. doncram ( talk) 21:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Wait! Isn't a rectangle a polygon? :)-- Appraiser ( talk) 21:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Er, well, yes, that had actually occurred to me too. I dunno, maybe first, yu got yer basic triangle, then yer sq-u-are / rectangle / quadri-latteral, then b'yond dat, dey r all polygons?  :) doncram ( talk) 23:18, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

OMG, you guys were robbed!!! All I did was take a pic and make some very minor tweaks to the DYK. I'm sorry. Lvklock ( talk) 08:54, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Methodist Episcopal Church (disambiguation)

Crossposted to both user talkpages. Y'all don't edit war now, ya hear? Talk this one over. GRBerry 01:43, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Zora Neale Hurston House

Hi! When you get a break in your busy schedule, might I convince you to get photos of the NHL above in Fort Pierce? I don't think it's that far away from you. Or perhaps someone you know might be able to. I'd love to see more of the photo holes on the List of National Historic Landmarks in Florida filled, doncha know. Oh, and nice work on the NRHP colleges and universities list. Cheers! -- Ebyabe ( talk) 00:17, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

And might you give your opinion of this, please? Thanx. -- Ebyabe ( talk) 00:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Meetup

Wikipedia:Meetup/Tampa -- You're invited! Hires an editor ( talk) 13:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Greetings from the EMS Taskforce

I have seen your edits around Wikipedia and I feel like you would be a great addition to the Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Emergency medicine and EMS task force. We can always use more editors to help with improvement of EMS and emergency medicine related articles!

• I have seen you have taken interest in EMS related articles and we currently will be doing a GA/article improvement on Emergency medical service it will be our first project as a task force and would love your input and editing, Cheers! Medicellis ( talk) 02:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Sumter County Courthouse (Florida)

Photos gotten. :) It rather reminds me of the Lightner. -- Ebyabe ( talk) 01:30, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Carnegie Libraries

Thanks for working on Carnegie Library (disambiguation); it needed some clean up. But I don't understand why you deleted all of the blue links. There are several thousand Carnegie Libraries in several countries. If a reader goes to Carnegie Library, he'll read about the massive undertaking underwritten by Andrew Carnegie and the results. He'll also see "For other uses, see Carnegie library (disambiguation)." I think the DAB page could provide a list of all 2500 libraries sponsored by the program. Or we could create a List of Carnegie libraries, but I wouldn't just delete the entries. Also, I think somewhere on the DAB page should be a link to the general topic, Carnegie Library.-- Appraiser ( talk) 19:22, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

A list would be fine, but see the discussion I just added to Talk:Carnegie Public Library. clariosophic ( talk) 19:29, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

The main article is Carnegie library and is listed in See also. You might want to link it ar rhe top of the two dab pages. clariosophic ( talk) 19:33, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

The blue links should all be at Category:Carnegie libraries. clariosophic ( talk) 19:51, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Further discussion should be on the talk pages involved. clariosophic ( talk) 19:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Lewis House and other disambig pages

Thanks for the heads-up! this is horrible.

I posted just now to editor's Talk page, User talk:Tavix, asking him/her to stop. He/she indicates preference to respond there, so the discussion should take place there. doncram ( talk) 02:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

As you've probably seen, it took several AfD discussions, and discussion at wt:NRHP, but i think/hope it is settled down now. Wow, it sure takes a lot of effort to build an encyclopedia.... :) By the way, i didn't mean to come on too strong about canadian octagons, mainly i really meant to ask why, i wish i hadn't seemed to argue, if i came across that way. Hope you are well, cheers, doncram ( talk) 04:29, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Knox Courthouse

Thanks for fixing this. I wasn't sure where it should live, just wanted the DAB to pick it up. TravellingCari 18:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

No worries. Google actually gets credit for finding it. I googled "Knox County Courthouse" Tennessee to find some info to create the article and the existing article turned up. I don't work too much on NRHP articles on purpose. It usually happens when I'm working on one of "my" museums and it turns out that the museum is on the NHRP. Luckily someone linked me to Elkman's generator which helped because before that I was never really sure how to start the article according to the project's standards. I agree with the need for the DABs, that's why I said I wasn 't waisting yesterday arguing at AfD but I'd rather just create some workable stubs. TravellingCari 19:24, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Just to clarify, {{National Register of Historic Places}} has replaced {{Registered Historic Places}}. So additions should use the new one. I'm not concerned about fixing the existing ones however. Thanks.-- Appraiser ( talk) 21:03, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Cape and Islands Wiki Project

Thanks for joining. Since you know more about the island than I do, feel free to add articles to it. I did add all articles linking to the Nantucket page as well as the county and town categories. I also added the NRHP pages. Well thanks again and if you have any questions, feel free to ask. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 00:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Vollintine Hills Historic District

Hello and thanks for making this article better. -- Contributingfactor ( talk) 23:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Addition of contributing property box for Baron Hirsch Synagogue- yes, that would be great. Thank you. That 1950s building was magnificent. Looking for photos of it. Don't know its current condition since it was abandoned for many years before being sold. It's now a church. Will probably be in Memphis in a couple of months and will try to photograph it and the Historic District if I can. Best wishes. -- Contributingfactor ( talk) 00:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Oxford Wikimania 2010 and Wikimedia UK v2.0 Notice

Hi,

As a regularly contributing UK Wikipedian, we were wondering if you wanted to contribute to the Oxford bid to host the 2010 Wikimania conference. Please see here for details of how to get involved, we need all the help we can get if we are to put in a compelling bid.

We are also in the process of forming a new UK Wikimedia chapter to replace the soon to be folded old one. If you are interested in helping shape our plans, showing your support or becoming a future member or board member, please head over to the Wikimedia UK v2.0 page and let us know. We plan on holding an election in the next month to find the initial board, who will oversee the process of founding the company and accepting membership applications. They will then call an AGM to formally elect a new board who after obtaining charitable status will start the fund raising, promotion and active support for the UK Wikimedian community for which the chapter is being founded.

You may also wish to attend the next London meet-up at which both of these issues will be discussed. If you can't attend this meetup, you may want to watch Wikipedia:Meetup, for updates on future meets.

We look forward to hearing from you soon, and we send our apologies for this automated intrusion onto your talk page!

Addbot ( talk) 19:21, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Requesting your expertise

Hi. Since you are the only Wikipedian whom I know to be Christian and trustworthy, could you please look at this edit? It seems to me that the deleted content is true, adequately sourced, and relevant. Do you agree with the statements? I believe the deletion may be an attempt to "cleanse" the article of negative connotations. If you agree, perhaps you know of an unbiased source in a Christian context that might say the same thing. Thanks.-- Appraiser ( talk) 19:38, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Yeah - I think the compromise was to move it to Assembly of God, which adds another layer of separation between the beliefs and Sarah Palin. You needn't look for another source. The complaint about WSJ not being a good source was probably just an excuse to remove the material. Thanks anyway.-- Appraiser ( talk) 15:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

church disambiguation pages

Hi, I've edited several of the big church disambiguation pages, such as St. Paul's Episcopal Church. I wonder if you could take a look at it. I am not systematically trying to address all the church disambiguation pages, but rather i edit one when i come across an occurence from the New York State NRHPs that i am table-izing. But, I wonder if this should be a new standard.

What i did:

• i merged in separate Saint Paul's Episcopal Church as a variation that should be mixed in (important in my view)
• i organized by state, merging together the NRHP ones and the non-NRHP ones, and identifying which ones are NRHPs. The NRHP ones can be red-links and it is defensible to keep them. Red-links for any others may be challenged. (important in my view)
• i dropped the note at the top that "most of these are NRHPs", as that was not specific enough to be useful in defending any specific red-link. And, now showing which ones are NRHPs it is very clear that currently, yes, most are NRHPs. But that does not need to be said, and the truth of the statement could change if other churches are added. If it is said, it needs to be supported by the identification of which ones are NRHPs, in my view.
• i dropped the separate state headers and just left a note "ordered by state" at top. I think it works fine for a reader looking up a specific place, and i think it is less cluttered for the table of contents, especially when there are many countries listed (not the case here). I don't have strong feelings about this. (not important)
• perhaps some other specific changes which you might notice

Note, the article includes "POWdis" template. It also included "NRHPdis" but that was recently, quietly deleted (or to be most accurate, it was converted to a redirect to "disambig"). The discussion was closed before i noticed it, although I don't think I would have objected really. So I deleted "NRHPdis", which is now unhelpful. You may want to "watch" POWdis in case the same people put that up for discussion, in order to explain how POWdis is helpful (which I am not entirely clear about, as for NRHPdis, by the way, but I don't think it hurts anything).

I'll watch here in case you want to comment here. I do think these church disambig pages are important for smooth functioning of the wikipedia for readers, and in our development of new articles. doncram ( talk) 19:00, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

As you've probably noticed, i did some wholesale editing at First Presbyterian Church and First Baptist Church and elsewhere. I'm implementing, more or less, what I learned from a long and painful discussion at wikiproject Disambiguation's talk page, titled something like "What is NRHP doing wrong with disambiguation?". Among other rules, I am implementing a one-bluelink-per-entry rule. So, if there is an NRHP article, it should show as:

• First Baptist Church (Columbus, Indiana), listed on the NRHP in Indiana

Note that does not wikilink the NRHP info. But if the NRHP article is a red-link as the following currently is, then I add a bluelink as follows:

• First Baptist Church (Muncie, Indiana), listed on the NRHP in Indiana

Technically the bluelink should point to a list-article or other page that has a red-link to the same red-link, putting it in some context for a reader. I am not really checking if the link to the Muncie one appears in List of RHPs in IN or if it appears in a county sublist linked from that article. But my edits appear to comply with the wp:MOSDAB guidelines that govern and they pretty much comply with the practices and dictums of the wikiproject disambiguation members. Whew, that's plenty to say for now. Cheers, doncram ( talk) 01:06, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

September 2008

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Assemblies of God. Calling good faith edits POV is not helpful. Please review WP:BRD as well. Jclemens ( talk) 18:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

In addition, please refrain from re-adding the Wall Street Journal quote to the Wasilla Assembly of God article. This has been discussed thoroughly on the talk page there, and this quote belongs on the main Assemblies of God article, not on an article about a single congregation within that denomination. We do not post this same clause on any other articles about individual Assemblies of God churches, so it does not belong here either. Moreover, this clause appears to be a WP:COATRACK in continuing efforts to portray Sarah Palin in a negative light, which violates WP:NPOV. The truth of the WSJ statement is not in question; the proper placement is the question. - Realkyhick ( Talk to me) 19:49, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of St. Paul's Reformed Church

St. Paul's Reformed Church, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/St. Paul's Reformed Church and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of St. Paul's Reformed Church during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. — Remember the dot ^{( talk)} 00:37, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

First Baptist Church in Newton, and church names

Hey, sorry for causing edit conflict by my butting in on First Baptist Church in Newton article. I'm done there, wasn't going to do any more, though I noticed there is material that might be referenced better and the article could probably be improved in other ways (but i am not knowledgeable about it).

About church names, I think it is always okay to use the official NRHP program name (which is First Baptist Church in Newton), unless one needs to disambiguate by adding (City, State) afterwards. If a name is unique, I don't think it is necessary to add city and state. I grant that my opinion now may not be consistent with past views/edits by me that i don't recall now--sorry if i asserted a different way to you in the past. My thinking now is not necessarily perfect either, but at least it is informed by the long discussions with wikiproject disambiguation people on their Talk page and on various dab articles.

Anyhow, currently i think that only if the common name is different, should a different name be used. Isn't "First Baptist Church of Newton" the common name, too? Since it is both the NRHP name and the common name, i thought renaming to it was the obvious thing to do. I thought your edit on the First Baptist Church disambiguation was indicating that you also thought "First Baptist Church of Newton" was the appropriate name.

By the way, on disambiguation pages, one thing I have come to understand clearly is that it is always appropriate there to show the actual names of articles, and not conceal any actual name by pipelinking. doncram ( talk) 18:32, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, good. Interesting that the event indicated by NRIS / NRHP.COM codes was probably Samuel Francis Smith's funeral in 1896. It would be nice to see more about him and that event in the article. Of course the definitive way to establish the stated reasons for NRHP listing is to get the free NRHP nomination/registration document, by request to the NR reference desk in Washington (nr_reference (at) nps.gov). regards, doncram ( talk) 19:09, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Ohio county courthouses

The reason I'm wanting to keep "current" is that I'm wanting to have this template serve only the current county courthouses. To take your Cuyahoga County example: I assumed that the building named the Cuyahoga County Courthouse was currently the Cuyahoga County courthouse. Since you've shown me otherwise, I've changed the link and moved the template. Nyttend ( talk) 16:40, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

"ECUSA" does not exist

The parens after an article title are generally only there to provide disambiguation from other articles. "Diocese of Pittsburgh (ECUSA)" has the problem that it refers to "ECUSA", but there is, actually, no organization which goes by that title. And since there is no Pittsburgh in Scotland, there is no hope for ambiuguity. Moreover, page moves that may be controversial are discouraged. I would like you to revert the page move please, and we can discuss (on the talk page for the article) a better name if you think we need one. Are you willing? Tb ( talk) 18:12, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and moved it back pending further discussion. BTW, the problem with "ECUSA" is that the Episcopal Church includes a number of dioceses not in the US, and the use of ECUSA suggests to some of them that they are not "real" parts of the Episcopal Church, or are secondary or extra in some fashion, instead of the long-term members that they are. It is politically disadvantageous in their local context, as well, at times, to be part of a church with "United States" in its name, which is why, in fact, the church voted long ago to have a more generic name. So there are people who use "ECUSA", but that is, in fact, incorrect. By contrast, disambiguators in parens, in wikipedia titles, are always compromises, and not ever part of the name of the thing, so there isn't the same difficulty. Putting a disambiguator in parens is not a claim about the name of the page's subject, and that's why it's a useful thing. (Just as A Clockwork Orange (film) does not imply that "film" is a part of the film's title.) Tb ( talk) 18:33, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Octagon Building (Santa Cruz, California)

Based on your interpretation of MOS:BOLD, bolding should be used more in the first paragraph of articles. I don't think this is a good interpretation. Have a look around Wikipedia. We use the bold sparingly especially on small articles of one or two paragraphs. It's distracting.

In such a small article items don't really get lost easily. But lets say you did have a need to emphasize something - maybe something in a really big article - then follow the advice there at MOS:BOLD and "Use italics, not boldface, for emphasis in article text". E_dog95' ^{Hi '} 21:07, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

This is a National Register of Historic Places article in which alternate names are commonly emboldened in the lead. clariosophic ( talk) 15:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Good morning. OK, I'm just trying to "go by the book" (so to speak) to help make the encyclopedia uniform in style. Cheers E_dog95' ^{Hi '} 16:29, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Well this is interesting. I noticed that you have a link to Wikipedia:Lead section here on your talk page. I took a look at some further detail.

The boldings and how they may be used as you describe them (alternate names being boldened in the lead of these types of articles) is OK. But for this article specifically... The article is just the one paragraph and thus does not contain a lead. So in this particular case, would it be correct to follow that line of thinking? E_dog95' ^{Hi '} 16:39, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Every article had a lead. clariosophic ( talk) 21:03, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Florida_Institute_of_Technology_(Jensen_Beach_Campus)

How do you know so much about the current use? I'm local to the Stuart area and have some more photos of the mansion and other buildings. Is there a method to contact you outside of wiki, namely IM? It would be nice to see my pictures used in the article. They are from June/July 2008, the science building, the broken dock, the photography building and the boat construction building (all of them, hehe). I'd hate to add them and have people remove them to get orphaned. -- x1987x^{( talk)} 18:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Carnegie libraries categories

Hey there, Seeing as you're the editor who did all the work on Category:Carnegie libraries in the United States and its sub-cats, I thought you'd like to know that I just finished adding the "missing" parent cats by putting the head category into Category:Public libraries in the United States and each of the sub-cats into its respective state level public libraries category. I do a lot of work improving the category structure, and I find that in almost all cases there are at least two "natural parent categories", although it's easy to forget that when you're focussed on the more obvious one. Anyway, with a second parent cat, readers are twice as likely to find their way to these categories. Best, Cgingold ( talk) 00:26, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

HHoYC

	<font=2> HHoyC (Happy Holiday of Your Choice)! Ebyabe ( talk) 16:56, 25 December 2008 (UTC)