![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
You were the creator of the above article. Do you have any information as to why it is a place of historical interest, which could be added to the text? Thanks. LessHeard vanU 21:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
What would you call a criticism section to limit its inclusion criteria? For instance, National Register of Historic Places, right now, has a section I have called "Academic criticism" but I want to broaden its coverage to include those within related fields. As academic implies "peer reviewed" I cannot well include a non peer reviewed magazine, Architect in the section as is though an editorial in a June 2006 issue contains relevant criticisms. What to do monfrair? IvoShandor 16:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
I hate to always be beggin' for help but . . . another of my articles is just about ready for Good article candidates, Ogle County Courthouse. It needs some copy editors though, any help is appreciated. Shouldn't be any huge glaring errors or omission but if you note anything other than minor copy edits let me know on the talk page. Thanks (if you have the time of course : ) ). IvoShandor 12:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
It is wonderful to find pictures like that -- and I always do so accidentally. Most of those Florida places have no photos whatsoever. A photo makes it all so much more marvelous! Sincerely, -- Mattisse 19:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Category: Registered Historic Places is Florida -- how to find? I just tried with no luck! -- Mattisse 19:57, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Your recent edit to Shake (song) ( diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 18:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
SatyrBot 05:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Here's the evidence that the West Palm Beach Amtrak/Tri-Rail Station and the W.P.B. Seaboard Coastline Railroad Passenger Station are one in the same.
http://www.trainweb.org/usarail/westpalm.htm
Hope you find this informative. ---- DanTD 23:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I just saw your comment now, sorry. : )
From what I have found A-Class reviews are performed at the project level but should require a formalized process, unlike stub, start, and usually B Class articles.
Check out what I have floating around in my sandbox: User:IvoShandor/Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/A class review. That's just the basics. I have this too, but I don't know if there is enough interest, but we could have it set up so the peer reviews here are transcluded into the main peer review page.
The only hurdle I see to starting up an A-class review at NRHP is that we would have to outline, in writing, some kind of criteria based on, a)other projects b)our own projects needs for articles (what they should include) c)what is written about A-class criteria. My basic assessment is that A-Class is just slightly below GA, which means the GA criteria could be useful in formulating our A-class criteria, because A-Class should basically mean, fix these things and go to GA. It would also make the cool way the template at Talk:University of Illinois Observatory all the more useful, i.e. A class assessment and promotions could be added to the article milestones. I am thinking, essentially, a toned town version of GA, based on specific parameters and needs laid out by the project. Any thoughts? IvoShandor 12:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Those plaques are freakin cool. Wonder where the hell they got their capitalization lessons from though, heh. Oh, and have you looked at main article National Register of Historic Places lately. A problem has arisen in the main history article, a complaint about it being too bureacratic. Read it over, edit where you can. It's difficult for me to see the objection because the article is about the history of a giant bureacracy. How about that lame collage I did for Property types, : ) IvoShandor 06:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Why is this article LGBT-related? I see no evidence for it in the article. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi--I've done some recent edits to Lincoln Memorial and saw you edited the info box back in November 2006 to identify the memorial as an "IUCN Category III (Natural monument)" I'm wondering where this info came from. It's not listed in the World Database of Protected Areas; it doesn't seem to fit the description of Category III (cf. article Protected areas); and, as a man-made structure, it's hardly "natural." I don't know much about the IUCN designations; maybe you have additional sources I don't know about. Thanks, RickDC 17:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
How did you do that!? Were you working off of my list? Cuz all the sudden, they were all done! Thanks much for that! -- SatyrTN ( talk | contribs) 06:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
“ | You'd be weird even if you were straight. | ” |
Wikipedia:Peer review/National Register of Historic Places/archive1 We lucked out. Our only peer reviewer is a regular at FAC. Has offered to help advise on the article and left extensive tips to be worked on, which I plan too. Also noted he would name drop some other regs if we needed more help, he thinks this has a good shot once its worked out. I know you are busy on here with your own stuff a lot but might I ask of you this, if you get time, this week, could you stub the following articles (you know this, but at least one reliable source. : ) It would really help me out as I work to bring this bad boy up to FA, and put our main article front and center.
That is all. Thanks senor, much appreciated. IvoShandor 19:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Your last change to its infobox (on March 26) seems to have made the red locator dot disappear. I am not familiar with the parameters for this infobox, or I would have tried to fix it myself. Thought you would like to know. Happy editing! Chris the speller 05:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for helping fix the template. TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio) 16:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
You were the creator of the above article. Do you have any information as to why it is a place of historical interest, which could be added to the text? Thanks. LessHeard vanU 21:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
What would you call a criticism section to limit its inclusion criteria? For instance, National Register of Historic Places, right now, has a section I have called "Academic criticism" but I want to broaden its coverage to include those within related fields. As academic implies "peer reviewed" I cannot well include a non peer reviewed magazine, Architect in the section as is though an editorial in a June 2006 issue contains relevant criticisms. What to do monfrair? IvoShandor 16:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
I hate to always be beggin' for help but . . . another of my articles is just about ready for Good article candidates, Ogle County Courthouse. It needs some copy editors though, any help is appreciated. Shouldn't be any huge glaring errors or omission but if you note anything other than minor copy edits let me know on the talk page. Thanks (if you have the time of course : ) ). IvoShandor 12:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
It is wonderful to find pictures like that -- and I always do so accidentally. Most of those Florida places have no photos whatsoever. A photo makes it all so much more marvelous! Sincerely, -- Mattisse 19:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Category: Registered Historic Places is Florida -- how to find? I just tried with no luck! -- Mattisse 19:57, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Your recent edit to Shake (song) ( diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 18:59, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
SatyrBot 05:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Here's the evidence that the West Palm Beach Amtrak/Tri-Rail Station and the W.P.B. Seaboard Coastline Railroad Passenger Station are one in the same.
http://www.trainweb.org/usarail/westpalm.htm
Hope you find this informative. ---- DanTD 23:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I just saw your comment now, sorry. : )
From what I have found A-Class reviews are performed at the project level but should require a formalized process, unlike stub, start, and usually B Class articles.
Check out what I have floating around in my sandbox: User:IvoShandor/Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/A class review. That's just the basics. I have this too, but I don't know if there is enough interest, but we could have it set up so the peer reviews here are transcluded into the main peer review page.
The only hurdle I see to starting up an A-class review at NRHP is that we would have to outline, in writing, some kind of criteria based on, a)other projects b)our own projects needs for articles (what they should include) c)what is written about A-class criteria. My basic assessment is that A-Class is just slightly below GA, which means the GA criteria could be useful in formulating our A-class criteria, because A-Class should basically mean, fix these things and go to GA. It would also make the cool way the template at Talk:University of Illinois Observatory all the more useful, i.e. A class assessment and promotions could be added to the article milestones. I am thinking, essentially, a toned town version of GA, based on specific parameters and needs laid out by the project. Any thoughts? IvoShandor 12:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Those plaques are freakin cool. Wonder where the hell they got their capitalization lessons from though, heh. Oh, and have you looked at main article National Register of Historic Places lately. A problem has arisen in the main history article, a complaint about it being too bureacratic. Read it over, edit where you can. It's difficult for me to see the objection because the article is about the history of a giant bureacracy. How about that lame collage I did for Property types, : ) IvoShandor 06:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Why is this article LGBT-related? I see no evidence for it in the article. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi--I've done some recent edits to Lincoln Memorial and saw you edited the info box back in November 2006 to identify the memorial as an "IUCN Category III (Natural monument)" I'm wondering where this info came from. It's not listed in the World Database of Protected Areas; it doesn't seem to fit the description of Category III (cf. article Protected areas); and, as a man-made structure, it's hardly "natural." I don't know much about the IUCN designations; maybe you have additional sources I don't know about. Thanks, RickDC 17:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
How did you do that!? Were you working off of my list? Cuz all the sudden, they were all done! Thanks much for that! -- SatyrTN ( talk | contribs) 06:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
“ | You'd be weird even if you were straight. | ” |
Wikipedia:Peer review/National Register of Historic Places/archive1 We lucked out. Our only peer reviewer is a regular at FAC. Has offered to help advise on the article and left extensive tips to be worked on, which I plan too. Also noted he would name drop some other regs if we needed more help, he thinks this has a good shot once its worked out. I know you are busy on here with your own stuff a lot but might I ask of you this, if you get time, this week, could you stub the following articles (you know this, but at least one reliable source. : ) It would really help me out as I work to bring this bad boy up to FA, and put our main article front and center.
That is all. Thanks senor, much appreciated. IvoShandor 19:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Your last change to its infobox (on March 26) seems to have made the red locator dot disappear. I am not familiar with the parameters for this infobox, or I would have tried to fix it myself. Thought you would like to know. Happy editing! Chris the speller 05:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for helping fix the template. TonyTheTiger ( talk/ cont/ bio) 16:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)