![]() | 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 35 | ← | Archive 37 | Archive 38 | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | → | Archive 45 |
![]() Talk page archives Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 Archive 7 • Archive 8 • Archive 9 Archive 10 • Archive 11 • Archive 12 Archive 13 • Archive 14 • Archive 15 Archive 16 • Archive 17 • Archive 18 Archive 19 • Archive 20 • Archive 21 Archive 22 • Archive 23 • Archive 24 Archive 25 • Archive 26 • Archive 27 Archive 28 • Archive 29 • Archive 30 Archive 31 • Archive 32 • Archive 33 Archive 34 • Archive 35 • Archive 36 Archive 37 • Archive 38 • Archive 39 Archive 40 • Archive 41 • Archive 42 Archive 43 • Archive 44 • Archive 45 Archive 46 • Archive 47 • Archive 48 Archive 49 • Archive 50 • Archive 51 Archive 52 • Archive 53 • Archive 54 Archive 55 • Archive 56 • Archive 57 ( template link) ( revert point) |
![]() |
The Photographer's Barnstar | |
For all your help on getting WP:NRHP 75% Illustrated (spread it around!) Smallbones( smalltalk) 02:36, 3 April 2016 (UTC) |
-- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 04:32, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Lassie may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 03:29, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Crişeni/version 2. Since you had some involvement with the Crişeni/version 2 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 ( talk) 12:41, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Nyttend. Replied on my talk page. Regs, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia ( talk) 14:49, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Trinity Lutheran Church (Canton, Ohio) Hi, those links and details are all from various newspaper articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dtsouers ( talk • contribs) 14:08, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
The link mentioning the canton club was in the article it was http://www.cantonrep.com/article/20120321/NEWS/303219878 "...Chuck Schuster, managing partner of the Canton Club Event Center, will book the weddings while offering to cater receptions at the historic Canton Club in Chase Tower in downtown Canton.It really made sense,said Coon, who owns or part-owns some other downtown properties, including Chase Tower and the former Martin Luther Lutheran Church site on Walnut Avenue NE. Now were a one-stop church. Schuster agrees. We just felt it was a natural tie-in with the historical nature of the Canton Club and the historical nature of the church..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dtsouers ( talk • contribs) 14:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
There is no such government exists, it is part of Andhra Pradesh. Only local government or corporation is its administration.-- Vin09 (talk) 07:41, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for removing the comma after Howell. Sandcherry ( talk) 02:25, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
TheCatalyst31 Reaction• Creation 12:51, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Since you helped me before, does WP:HONORIFIC apply to military posts (Capt., Gen., etc.) in the Infoboxes? I keep removing it from The Citadel, The Military College of South Carolina article, but another user keeps re-adding them. I'm just not sure and if they do apply to honorific, then I'll tell to stop and why. Thanks, ☔️ Corkythe hornetfan 🌺 16:01, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Hey There, I am back after taking care of a few million real world things,. I can walk again, AND not be in pain, woo hoo....Had my knee scoped and a few other physical things, but I am able to contribute again. Many Thanks for the message on my talk Coal town guy ( talk) 01:44, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Nyttend. I see you have decided to protect Indian national cricket team in response to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Marchjuly reported by User:Bozzio (Result: Page protected). That's fine and I am not challenging that decision. My question is why you've protected a version of the page that includes File:Cricket India Crest.svg in the infobox. As I stated in that discusison, this file's non-free usage was nominated by me for discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 February 18#File:Cricket India Crest.svg and the close by Explicit was to remove the file from the article. I have no objection to the close being discussed, reviewed or changed by Explicit or other administrators, but saving the article in this version seems contrary to his close. Just curious as to why you've done that. This was not so much a content dispute as is what on whether the file's non-free usage in the article complies with WP:NFCC, and Explicit's close was that it did not. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 13:45, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
At the meta central auth page, if you click on the – in the block section it takes you to the block log for that project. Apparently however this is a wasted discussion as per my talkpage. I await the ineveitable conclusion. Only in death does duty end ( talk) 13:55, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Could you reverse your closure of Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 April 21#File:Constantinople(1878)-Turkish Goverment information brocure (1950s) – Istanbul coffee house.png and the preceding image? I don't think these come from the 1878 book Constantinople -- they (1) are a different style than all the rest of the images (I've gone through the uploaders images and added page numbers to dozens of images from that book) (2) don't have the captions that are characteristic of the book and which the uploader left on for all other images from that book (3) and are the uploader's only images that both reference the 1878 book and a 1950s government brochure. I'm fairly sure they're actually from the latter, which likely wouldn't be public domain and can't be verified in any case. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 15:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm afraid you're wrong. This is the exact same artwork. I have no idea why you would think otherwise. Yes, the tone, orientation and scope are different, but it's the same painting. 23 editor ( talk) 16:55, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hey, I think 2 weeks is a bit much. It's been 4 days, can we call it good?--v/r – T P 01:24, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi! I love how many of us are interested in improving and keeping pages on faith accurate. You asked how the UCC could have 2 million members when it picked at 1.1 million. Well, the UCC uses two metrics for this number. In addition to registered membership on church rolls, the UCC also counts those people who identify as 'UCC' in the Canadian census. The last census reported over 2 million Canadians claiming UCC membership. SeminarianJohn ( talk) 08:50, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Your edit summary on adding to comma to Cal Ripken Jr. said "WP:ENGVAR, American English generally uses commas here; see the article's text". This is pretty clearly not true. See news and magazines. Per WP:JR, we prefer to not use the comma. So I took it out. I've never heard of any ENGVAR connection here before, and don't see it. Dicklyon ( talk) 02:36, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
I was hoping I could get you to change your mind regarding the speedy deletion of this article, because with edits like this one, the article's author is very obviously a sockpuppet of KunoxTxa. Thanks in advance. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 14:50, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
I would like an apology for this edit summary. Before you restored the pre-2016 versions, I had no way of knowing the article had any history before this month; so it is totally unfair to characterize my edit as "Bad-faith tagging". What's more: the 2016 versions are in no way derived from any of the pre-2016 versions. The pre-2016 versions were at first about biblical references to "turtle-doves" and then redirects. So the 2016 versions truly constitute a new article, which is a POV fork of Streptopelia. Not only is does it have the same subject, but it is substantially a copy of that article. — teb728 t c 09:09, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm almost sure they'll have phone booth somewhere. They also have a nice statue of Lois Lane (too bad it's likely copyrighted), and Superman (ditto – maybe you can do it from a distance). You're more likely interested in the fort at the edge of town. Enjoy. Smallbones( smalltalk) 13:39, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Harford, Pennsylvania => Harford Township, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania is a perfectly sound redirect. Not sure if that's what it was when you deleted it, but that's what it should be.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:57, 15 May 2016 (UTC).
Your request has been completed. If satisfied please place a resolve tag on your request entry here, so we may close it. - many thanks FOX 52 ( talk) 23:12, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
You participated in an MfD discussion about an essay by Collect that was in mainspace. The result was userfy and it was moved to user space accordingly. The essay has been moved back to mainspace. There is a discussion as to whether it should be renamed and moved. The discussion is here. Writegeist ( talk) 00:39, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
TheCatalyst31 Reaction• Creation 12:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Acroterion
(talk)
02:43, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
you understand my oa frustration in that other groups get a pass
KeenWh (
talk)
03:26, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm thinking that this account is from the same person that you just blocked. What do you think? 172.56.42.13 ( talk) 03:47, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() | |
historic places | |
---|---|
... you were recipient no. 130 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:23, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Why did you close this thread with a post accusing people of wasting admin time? These kinds of threads to formalise de-facto bans are pretty standard, and had been started and participated-in in total good faith. I'd suggest that you re-close it noting that the ban is in place, and pointing the participating editors to whatever guidance says that formal threads aren't necessary for their future reference. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 11:59, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
A bit disappointed in your close of my proposal. The reason for the proposal was use of rollback tools and, as others mentioned, formalization of a ban. I and others are not permitted to use rollback on socking blocked editors... either we need to change that or put up with some tedious proposals. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 02:39, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Nice to go a full 30 seconds without the orange bar popping up! Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 12:47, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
thank you for your formatting help!
Allaboutjane8181 (
talk)
03:55, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there! I just wanted to explain my revert of your edit in relation to the "discovery" of the black swan. In Australia, it is generally not politically correct to use the term "discovery" in relation to European first sightings of Australian things well-known to the Australian indigenous people. See [1] for some general guidelines related to this. So that's why the article was using the rather cumbersome wording that you were trying to simplify. Kerry ( talk) 08:48, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Template:Assumed license , can you flesh out the details? 18:08, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:32, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
which I'd like you to review..
The first is intended for use where it's reasonably obvious the media would under current terms be considered {{ own}} or self because the uploader either says so or there's other compeling reasons like EXIF, OTRS etc..
The second is for dealing with the sitauon where a 'third-party' other than the uploader has added {{ information}} and has assumed that's it's self work, even though the file information doesn't say so, and there's not other compelling reason. (I unfortunately did this a lot a few year ago, in good faith based on an IRC discussion.) Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 12:46, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Ok, I'm here. :) Yeah, it's obviously User:FrozenFan2, since the edits are the same kind on the same articles. They literally did the same thing on my TARDIS Wikia talk page, which I had longterm semi-protected. Could the same thing be done at my Wikimedia talk page? Also, after deleting my vandalism report there twice, they put one on about me. I added my addendum, here, so that should help. It's amazing how if you treat people nicely, they will be likely to help you back. Who'd'a thunk? Any and all aid would be appreciated. Cheers, mate! :) --‖ Ebyabe talk - Inspector General ‖ 21:12, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Also, that long-term abusive vandal has also harassed me on Simple English Wikipedia ( [2]). Lord Sjones23 ( talk – contributions) 21:13, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Posts like this which are laced personal attacks merit a block. MarnetteD| Talk 17:46, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
This is tangentially related at best, but my all-time favorite
WP:Hatnote was
Whac-A-Mole's {{
For|the avocado-based dip|Guacamole}}
added back in 2011 and
removed the following year. --
ToE
11:41, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
You commented on the requested move for Abia State, which has gone through. But a requested move from Zamfara back to Zamfara State just got rejected. I suppose it is not really important, but it is bugging me.
Yes, there was no consensus. But the original move was made without discussion. I think that since there is no consensus on what the title should be, the long-standing title should be restored. Of the 36 states there are a dozen that now have names like "XYZ" rather than "XYZ State". I have not (yet) proposed moves back to their earlier names, and do not want to waste time. Sort of a nitpicking subject, but ... any thoughts? Aymatth2 ( talk) 13:04, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Aside from being created by a blocked or banned user, what was wrong with the article on Old Union County Courthouse (Blairsville, Georgia)? --------- User:DanTD ( talk) 14:20, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Don't write those type of comments too users who make mistakes. Saying legal threats like that don't solve anything. Don't ever speak too me that way. 50.79.183.249 ( talk) 18:29, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I updated {{ Media by uploader}} to reflect what it what was actually being used for. It may need a little tweaking, but it's a pragmatic approach to the issue of a large number of nominaly self-identfied works that aren't explicitly marked as {{ own}} but where that status CAN be determined from the Meta-data. It shouldn't be used on stuff that's already under a "self" license.
The hope is that a suitable adminitration guideline could be apllied about 'migrating' clearly self images to the appropriate self licenses if the images are "claimed" in some way, see the additional logic I added to the relevant template.
Currently, I am doing {{ subst:uw-imgclaim1|name.ext}} on user talk pages of uploders (as I havent reached May 2006 in the images I am reviewing yet. If the wording could be improved or the advice made clearer it would be appreciated. Adding some advice for patrollers and administrators to the template would be appreciated, even if it doesn't need the full background like the other template you helped improve. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 11:06, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Hey there! So a question about unincorporated towns has arisen and was wondering if you had an opinion. A user has added every former post office and unincorporated town in Portage County, Ohio and I redirected several of them to their township, especially ones like Suffield, Ohio and Shalersville, Ohio, which are just the center settlement of the respective township. I seem to remember that being the precedent since most of these places are just historical post offices and have no history separate from the township. See User talk:JonRidinger#Unincorporated towns in Ohio when you have a chance. Thanks!-- JonRidinger ( talk) 21:42, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Any chance you have a photo of the Carthage Jail? The previous photo was deleted, and while I was able to replace it with an 1885 etching for now it would be nice to have a modern photo. TheCatalyst31 Reaction• Creation 23:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Washington Township, Wood County, Ohio, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Otsego, Ohio ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:27, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
You responded to the speedy deletion tag placed by User:Dodger67 before it could be contested (less than an hour and a half after the post).
As stated to Dodgers67, every currently active competitive junior drum and bugle corps in the U.S. and Canada is and has been included in the Wikipedia. After the activity was devastated by the economic crash of 2007-08, the mere existence of any new drum corps is, in and of itself, notable to the hundreds of thousands of attendees at drum corps competitions.
Please reconsider your action and reinstate the article. GWFrog ( talk) 15:51, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Big Horn County, Wyoming may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 13:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Nyttend, don't remember why I'm watching or "stalking" your page, you're the first experienced editor (besides Jimbo) that appeared on my watchlist and I don't know what to do. Someone added some potential BLP violation and I deleted it saying it needed a reference. They re-added it with a ref but I think the ref is original research and don't want to get into an edit war. Did I do the right thing contacting you or should I have gone to a forum first? (I checked the rules for BLP/N and RfC and it seems to not apply.) Here's the dif for the BLP. Best Wishes Raquel Baranow ( talk) 18:58, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Nyttend!
In Columbus Ohio, several members of Wikipedia Connection are forming the Ohio Wikimedians User Group. Our goal is to expand our efforts beyond Columbus to create an organized group that promotes Wikipedia, puts together events, and forms a better local community here in Ohio. We'd love to have you on-board as one of our founding members! Being a part of the user group will allow easy communication between active Ohio editors, notifications of upcoming events in the Ohio area, and, if you're interested, the opportunity to help organize events such as edit-a-thons or workshops. If our User Group is approved in time, we plan for our first event to be a Wiknic this summer.
If interested, feel free to add yourself to the list at the bottom of our page on Meta. Also feel free to contribute to the page itself, or ask any questions to myself or on the group's talk page. Thanks, ~ Super Hamster Talk Contribs 03:51, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
You write the following: "Those are all news reports, and in history (which a biography is, by definition) news reports are primary sources. Biographies must depend on what the secondary sources say, if for no other reason than determining what's significant in the long run. Proven charges of sexual harassment may be long-run significant, and a long trial concluding in exoneration just might be significant, but we have no business deciding that mere accusations are going to be significant in the long run. "
This statement is baffling to me. If "news reports" are primary sources, then shouldn't we have to delete the articles on, for example, the Orlando shootings, since the only coverage we have of these events is from the news (no one has written any books on these events yet?) I think you are conflating two possible understandings of primary sources. On your understanding, the news is a primary source for historians, since they turn news into history; history is a secondary source. Unfortunately, this may be accurate enough for the use of historians, but it is not suitable here. The more useful distinction is the one between the primary documents with which the historian OR the journalist or the anthropologist or whomever derives information-- say, unsealed legal testimony or decisions, archival records, legislation, anthropological notes, diaries, records of experiments, personal letters, e-mails, etc.--and the secondary sources which analyze and summarize this information, whether this is the work of a journalist or a historian. The distinction between journalism and history is not relevant here, although historians may sometimes make this distinction to erroneously inflate their professional position above journalists.
The real distinction at issue is whether there are sources that analyze primary unalyzed documents, not whether a journalist or a historian is writing, nor whether a source is considered "news" or "history". News vs history is just simply not the same as the distinction between primary and secondary sources, wherever you acquired this false idea. Period. I don't know how much clearer I can be in disabusing you of this misunderstanding. Think about it: if you were correct, Wikipedia would be unable to cover events until historical books on the events were released. While there are additions from the last several months that are plainly Primary sources, such as the primary source in which Pogge has himself responded with a 6 page public statement, and the copy of the letter signed by 200 philosophers including every single tenured member of his department who risked their necks to sign a statement condemning Pogge for his inappropriate behavior with his students on multiple occasions- there are at least 5 accusers of harassment by my count. (And let's not dismiss the opinions of 200 philosophers, for whom assessment of quality of evidence for claims is literally their job, and who have nothing to gain by attacking such a respected colleague and embroiling the field in further public controversy.) I think you are confusing the loose distinction between primary/secondary sources that is sometimes used by historians with that which is appropriate for a reference work that aims to cover recent events.
It is perfectly reasonable to say "200 philosophers signed a letter of condemnation against Pogge over allegations from several former students that Pogge engaged in sexual harassment and misuse of his professorial power, as has been alleged in several notable news reports and sworn testimony within legal preceedings. Pogge issued a 6 page denial of the allegations." In my opinion, that would be adequate to add to the article; to have no mention whatsoever indicates that this encylopedia has become an administrative failure, whose arcane bureacracy has rendered it incapable of impartially covering events where editors may send their devoted friends to protect their pages. Please note that the only non-administrator arguing for exclusion is user:davidcpearce. As someone who has been trained in the discipline, I can tell you with certainty that this is David Pearce, a marginal member of the philosophy profession who is known to be a friend of Pogge's. He is well-known within the Philosophical community to sadly try to edit pages on his own generally dismissed philosophical ideas to gain wider currency for them. Judging from his writings, as well as his edits, in which he made incoherent comments about Buzzfeed to try to justify mass deletion of neutral, sourced content, I'd also place a wager on Pearce being schizophrenic. He has no business editing here.
Furthermore, the allegations against Pogge have been publicly known since 2014. No one is suggesting Pogge is Bill Cosby or should be going to jail, but when there are multiple reports of professional misconduct within one's profession that grossly violate all professional norms (attempting to trade letters of recommendation for sexual favors from young female philosophers, for instance) and the evidence is strong enough to draw public condemnation by a significant percentage of the field (at least 2 percent of all living philosophers by my count), it is foolish to say we need to wait another several years until someone writes a book about this to add in a neutral statement that "200 philosophers have signed a statement condemning Pogge's alleged harassment and sexual misconduct toward female philosophers who were his thesis advisees or mentees."
I repeat: It is perfectly reasonable to say "200 philosophers signed a letter of condemnation against Pogge over allegations from several former students that Pogge engaged in sexual harassment and misuse of his professorial power, as has been alleged in several notable news reports and sworn testimony within legal preceedings. Pogge issued a 6 page denial of the allegations." In my opinion, that would be adequate to add to the article; to have no mention whatsoever indicates that this encylopedia has become an administrative failure, whose arcane bureacracy has rendered it incapable of impartially covering events where editors may send their devoted friends to protect their pages. Please note that the only non-administrator arguing for exclusion is User:davidcpearce. As someone who has been trained in the discipline, I can tell you with certainty that this is David Pearce, a marginal member of the philosophy profession who is known to be a friend of Pogge's. He is well-known within the Philosophical community to sadly try to edit pages on his own generally dismissed philosophical ideas to gain wider currency for them. Judging from his writings, as well as his edits, in which he made incoherent comments about Buzzfeed to try to justify mass deletion of neutral, sourced content, I'd also place a wager on Pearce being schizophrenic. He has no business editing here, and I hope he seeks help for his unhinged behavior. Devotee of Truth ( talk) 18:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Hey, I'm finding it hard to find your block of LavaBaron justified. Could you please explain how their comment at WT:DYK constituted a "hoax"? — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 02:04, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
These changes await review-- Toppolila ( talk) 13:04, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Can you please help me make the article you removed be fixed to appear on Wikipedia, please? Hgmalley ( talk) 01:49, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Please read my new article. Perhaps it should be how we are the world was made for free im 71 and want to get this story out. Please help me. Hgmalley ( talk) 02:50, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
That link would be List of star systems within 25–30 light-years. -- Izno ( talk) 13:38, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
User:Nyttend, you might be interested in this RfC. Thank you. Gerard von Hebel ( talk) 14:22, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello there! You are invited to attend the Great Buckeye Wiknic in Columbus, Ohio on Sunday, July 10th from 1:00 to 5:00 PM! Join us for a day in the park for food and socializing with others from the Wikimedia movement. We'll be meeting up at Fred Beekman Park, a park on Ohio State University's campus.
If you're interested, please take a look at our events page for more information, including parking info, food options, and available activities. If you plan on attending, please add your name to the attendees list. We look forward to seeing you!
If you have any questions, feel free to leave one on my talk page. Thanks! ~ Super Hamster Talk Contribs 05:39, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
(Note: If you would like to stop receiving notifications regarding Wikimedia events around Ohio, you may remove your username from this list.)
![]() | 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 35 | ← | Archive 37 | Archive 38 | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | → | Archive 45 |
![]() Talk page archives Archive 1 • Archive 2 • Archive 3 Archive 4 • Archive 5 • Archive 6 Archive 7 • Archive 8 • Archive 9 Archive 10 • Archive 11 • Archive 12 Archive 13 • Archive 14 • Archive 15 Archive 16 • Archive 17 • Archive 18 Archive 19 • Archive 20 • Archive 21 Archive 22 • Archive 23 • Archive 24 Archive 25 • Archive 26 • Archive 27 Archive 28 • Archive 29 • Archive 30 Archive 31 • Archive 32 • Archive 33 Archive 34 • Archive 35 • Archive 36 Archive 37 • Archive 38 • Archive 39 Archive 40 • Archive 41 • Archive 42 Archive 43 • Archive 44 • Archive 45 Archive 46 • Archive 47 • Archive 48 Archive 49 • Archive 50 • Archive 51 Archive 52 • Archive 53 • Archive 54 Archive 55 • Archive 56 • Archive 57 ( template link) ( revert point) |
![]() |
The Photographer's Barnstar | |
For all your help on getting WP:NRHP 75% Illustrated (spread it around!) Smallbones( smalltalk) 02:36, 3 April 2016 (UTC) |
-- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 04:32, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Lassie may have broken the
syntax by modifying 2 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 03:29, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Crişeni/version 2. Since you had some involvement with the Crişeni/version 2 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 ( talk) 12:41, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Nyttend. Replied on my talk page. Regs, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia ( talk) 14:49, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Trinity Lutheran Church (Canton, Ohio) Hi, those links and details are all from various newspaper articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dtsouers ( talk • contribs) 14:08, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
The link mentioning the canton club was in the article it was http://www.cantonrep.com/article/20120321/NEWS/303219878 "...Chuck Schuster, managing partner of the Canton Club Event Center, will book the weddings while offering to cater receptions at the historic Canton Club in Chase Tower in downtown Canton.It really made sense,said Coon, who owns or part-owns some other downtown properties, including Chase Tower and the former Martin Luther Lutheran Church site on Walnut Avenue NE. Now were a one-stop church. Schuster agrees. We just felt it was a natural tie-in with the historical nature of the Canton Club and the historical nature of the church..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dtsouers ( talk • contribs) 14:15, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
There is no such government exists, it is part of Andhra Pradesh. Only local government or corporation is its administration.-- Vin09 (talk) 07:41, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for removing the comma after Howell. Sandcherry ( talk) 02:25, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
TheCatalyst31 Reaction• Creation 12:51, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Since you helped me before, does WP:HONORIFIC apply to military posts (Capt., Gen., etc.) in the Infoboxes? I keep removing it from The Citadel, The Military College of South Carolina article, but another user keeps re-adding them. I'm just not sure and if they do apply to honorific, then I'll tell to stop and why. Thanks, ☔️ Corkythe hornetfan 🌺 16:01, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Hey There, I am back after taking care of a few million real world things,. I can walk again, AND not be in pain, woo hoo....Had my knee scoped and a few other physical things, but I am able to contribute again. Many Thanks for the message on my talk Coal town guy ( talk) 01:44, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Nyttend. I see you have decided to protect Indian national cricket team in response to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Marchjuly reported by User:Bozzio (Result: Page protected). That's fine and I am not challenging that decision. My question is why you've protected a version of the page that includes File:Cricket India Crest.svg in the infobox. As I stated in that discusison, this file's non-free usage was nominated by me for discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 February 18#File:Cricket India Crest.svg and the close by Explicit was to remove the file from the article. I have no objection to the close being discussed, reviewed or changed by Explicit or other administrators, but saving the article in this version seems contrary to his close. Just curious as to why you've done that. This was not so much a content dispute as is what on whether the file's non-free usage in the article complies with WP:NFCC, and Explicit's close was that it did not. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 13:45, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
At the meta central auth page, if you click on the – in the block section it takes you to the block log for that project. Apparently however this is a wasted discussion as per my talkpage. I await the ineveitable conclusion. Only in death does duty end ( talk) 13:55, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Could you reverse your closure of Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 April 21#File:Constantinople(1878)-Turkish Goverment information brocure (1950s) – Istanbul coffee house.png and the preceding image? I don't think these come from the 1878 book Constantinople -- they (1) are a different style than all the rest of the images (I've gone through the uploaders images and added page numbers to dozens of images from that book) (2) don't have the captions that are characteristic of the book and which the uploader left on for all other images from that book (3) and are the uploader's only images that both reference the 1878 book and a 1950s government brochure. I'm fairly sure they're actually from the latter, which likely wouldn't be public domain and can't be verified in any case. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 15:18, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm afraid you're wrong. This is the exact same artwork. I have no idea why you would think otherwise. Yes, the tone, orientation and scope are different, but it's the same painting. 23 editor ( talk) 16:55, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hey, I think 2 weeks is a bit much. It's been 4 days, can we call it good?--v/r – T P 01:24, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi! I love how many of us are interested in improving and keeping pages on faith accurate. You asked how the UCC could have 2 million members when it picked at 1.1 million. Well, the UCC uses two metrics for this number. In addition to registered membership on church rolls, the UCC also counts those people who identify as 'UCC' in the Canadian census. The last census reported over 2 million Canadians claiming UCC membership. SeminarianJohn ( talk) 08:50, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Your edit summary on adding to comma to Cal Ripken Jr. said "WP:ENGVAR, American English generally uses commas here; see the article's text". This is pretty clearly not true. See news and magazines. Per WP:JR, we prefer to not use the comma. So I took it out. I've never heard of any ENGVAR connection here before, and don't see it. Dicklyon ( talk) 02:36, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
I was hoping I could get you to change your mind regarding the speedy deletion of this article, because with edits like this one, the article's author is very obviously a sockpuppet of KunoxTxa. Thanks in advance. Sir Sputnik ( talk) 14:50, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
I would like an apology for this edit summary. Before you restored the pre-2016 versions, I had no way of knowing the article had any history before this month; so it is totally unfair to characterize my edit as "Bad-faith tagging". What's more: the 2016 versions are in no way derived from any of the pre-2016 versions. The pre-2016 versions were at first about biblical references to "turtle-doves" and then redirects. So the 2016 versions truly constitute a new article, which is a POV fork of Streptopelia. Not only is does it have the same subject, but it is substantially a copy of that article. — teb728 t c 09:09, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm almost sure they'll have phone booth somewhere. They also have a nice statue of Lois Lane (too bad it's likely copyrighted), and Superman (ditto – maybe you can do it from a distance). You're more likely interested in the fort at the edge of town. Enjoy. Smallbones( smalltalk) 13:39, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Harford, Pennsylvania => Harford Township, Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania is a perfectly sound redirect. Not sure if that's what it was when you deleted it, but that's what it should be.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:57, 15 May 2016 (UTC).
Your request has been completed. If satisfied please place a resolve tag on your request entry here, so we may close it. - many thanks FOX 52 ( talk) 23:12, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
You participated in an MfD discussion about an essay by Collect that was in mainspace. The result was userfy and it was moved to user space accordingly. The essay has been moved back to mainspace. There is a discussion as to whether it should be renamed and moved. The discussion is here. Writegeist ( talk) 00:39, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
TheCatalyst31 Reaction• Creation 12:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Acroterion
(talk)
02:43, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
you understand my oa frustration in that other groups get a pass
KeenWh (
talk)
03:26, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm thinking that this account is from the same person that you just blocked. What do you think? 172.56.42.13 ( talk) 03:47, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
![]() | |
historic places | |
---|---|
... you were recipient no. 130 of Precious, a prize of QAI! |
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:23, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Why did you close this thread with a post accusing people of wasting admin time? These kinds of threads to formalise de-facto bans are pretty standard, and had been started and participated-in in total good faith. I'd suggest that you re-close it noting that the ban is in place, and pointing the participating editors to whatever guidance says that formal threads aren't necessary for their future reference. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 11:59, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
A bit disappointed in your close of my proposal. The reason for the proposal was use of rollback tools and, as others mentioned, formalization of a ban. I and others are not permitted to use rollback on socking blocked editors... either we need to change that or put up with some tedious proposals. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{ re}} 02:39, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Nice to go a full 30 seconds without the orange bar popping up! Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 12:47, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
thank you for your formatting help!
Allaboutjane8181 (
talk)
03:55, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there! I just wanted to explain my revert of your edit in relation to the "discovery" of the black swan. In Australia, it is generally not politically correct to use the term "discovery" in relation to European first sightings of Australian things well-known to the Australian indigenous people. See [1] for some general guidelines related to this. So that's why the article was using the rather cumbersome wording that you were trying to simplify. Kerry ( talk) 08:48, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Template:Assumed license , can you flesh out the details? 18:08, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 22:32, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
which I'd like you to review..
The first is intended for use where it's reasonably obvious the media would under current terms be considered {{ own}} or self because the uploader either says so or there's other compeling reasons like EXIF, OTRS etc..
The second is for dealing with the sitauon where a 'third-party' other than the uploader has added {{ information}} and has assumed that's it's self work, even though the file information doesn't say so, and there's not other compelling reason. (I unfortunately did this a lot a few year ago, in good faith based on an IRC discussion.) Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 12:46, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Ok, I'm here. :) Yeah, it's obviously User:FrozenFan2, since the edits are the same kind on the same articles. They literally did the same thing on my TARDIS Wikia talk page, which I had longterm semi-protected. Could the same thing be done at my Wikimedia talk page? Also, after deleting my vandalism report there twice, they put one on about me. I added my addendum, here, so that should help. It's amazing how if you treat people nicely, they will be likely to help you back. Who'd'a thunk? Any and all aid would be appreciated. Cheers, mate! :) --‖ Ebyabe talk - Inspector General ‖ 21:12, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Also, that long-term abusive vandal has also harassed me on Simple English Wikipedia ( [2]). Lord Sjones23 ( talk – contributions) 21:13, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Posts like this which are laced personal attacks merit a block. MarnetteD| Talk 17:46, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
This is tangentially related at best, but my all-time favorite
WP:Hatnote was
Whac-A-Mole's {{
For|the avocado-based dip|Guacamole}}
added back in 2011 and
removed the following year. --
ToE
11:41, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
You commented on the requested move for Abia State, which has gone through. But a requested move from Zamfara back to Zamfara State just got rejected. I suppose it is not really important, but it is bugging me.
Yes, there was no consensus. But the original move was made without discussion. I think that since there is no consensus on what the title should be, the long-standing title should be restored. Of the 36 states there are a dozen that now have names like "XYZ" rather than "XYZ State". I have not (yet) proposed moves back to their earlier names, and do not want to waste time. Sort of a nitpicking subject, but ... any thoughts? Aymatth2 ( talk) 13:04, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Aside from being created by a blocked or banned user, what was wrong with the article on Old Union County Courthouse (Blairsville, Georgia)? --------- User:DanTD ( talk) 14:20, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Don't write those type of comments too users who make mistakes. Saying legal threats like that don't solve anything. Don't ever speak too me that way. 50.79.183.249 ( talk) 18:29, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.
Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I updated {{ Media by uploader}} to reflect what it what was actually being used for. It may need a little tweaking, but it's a pragmatic approach to the issue of a large number of nominaly self-identfied works that aren't explicitly marked as {{ own}} but where that status CAN be determined from the Meta-data. It shouldn't be used on stuff that's already under a "self" license.
The hope is that a suitable adminitration guideline could be apllied about 'migrating' clearly self images to the appropriate self licenses if the images are "claimed" in some way, see the additional logic I added to the relevant template.
Currently, I am doing {{ subst:uw-imgclaim1|name.ext}} on user talk pages of uploders (as I havent reached May 2006 in the images I am reviewing yet. If the wording could be improved or the advice made clearer it would be appreciated. Adding some advice for patrollers and administrators to the template would be appreciated, even if it doesn't need the full background like the other template you helped improve. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 11:06, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Hey there! So a question about unincorporated towns has arisen and was wondering if you had an opinion. A user has added every former post office and unincorporated town in Portage County, Ohio and I redirected several of them to their township, especially ones like Suffield, Ohio and Shalersville, Ohio, which are just the center settlement of the respective township. I seem to remember that being the precedent since most of these places are just historical post offices and have no history separate from the township. See User talk:JonRidinger#Unincorporated towns in Ohio when you have a chance. Thanks!-- JonRidinger ( talk) 21:42, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Any chance you have a photo of the Carthage Jail? The previous photo was deleted, and while I was able to replace it with an 1885 etching for now it would be nice to have a modern photo. TheCatalyst31 Reaction• Creation 23:15, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Washington Township, Wood County, Ohio, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Otsego, Ohio ( check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:27, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
You responded to the speedy deletion tag placed by User:Dodger67 before it could be contested (less than an hour and a half after the post).
As stated to Dodgers67, every currently active competitive junior drum and bugle corps in the U.S. and Canada is and has been included in the Wikipedia. After the activity was devastated by the economic crash of 2007-08, the mere existence of any new drum corps is, in and of itself, notable to the hundreds of thousands of attendees at drum corps competitions.
Please reconsider your action and reinstate the article. GWFrog ( talk) 15:51, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Big Horn County, Wyoming may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 13:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Nyttend, don't remember why I'm watching or "stalking" your page, you're the first experienced editor (besides Jimbo) that appeared on my watchlist and I don't know what to do. Someone added some potential BLP violation and I deleted it saying it needed a reference. They re-added it with a ref but I think the ref is original research and don't want to get into an edit war. Did I do the right thing contacting you or should I have gone to a forum first? (I checked the rules for BLP/N and RfC and it seems to not apply.) Here's the dif for the BLP. Best Wishes Raquel Baranow ( talk) 18:58, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Nyttend!
In Columbus Ohio, several members of Wikipedia Connection are forming the Ohio Wikimedians User Group. Our goal is to expand our efforts beyond Columbus to create an organized group that promotes Wikipedia, puts together events, and forms a better local community here in Ohio. We'd love to have you on-board as one of our founding members! Being a part of the user group will allow easy communication between active Ohio editors, notifications of upcoming events in the Ohio area, and, if you're interested, the opportunity to help organize events such as edit-a-thons or workshops. If our User Group is approved in time, we plan for our first event to be a Wiknic this summer.
If interested, feel free to add yourself to the list at the bottom of our page on Meta. Also feel free to contribute to the page itself, or ask any questions to myself or on the group's talk page. Thanks, ~ Super Hamster Talk Contribs 03:51, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
You write the following: "Those are all news reports, and in history (which a biography is, by definition) news reports are primary sources. Biographies must depend on what the secondary sources say, if for no other reason than determining what's significant in the long run. Proven charges of sexual harassment may be long-run significant, and a long trial concluding in exoneration just might be significant, but we have no business deciding that mere accusations are going to be significant in the long run. "
This statement is baffling to me. If "news reports" are primary sources, then shouldn't we have to delete the articles on, for example, the Orlando shootings, since the only coverage we have of these events is from the news (no one has written any books on these events yet?) I think you are conflating two possible understandings of primary sources. On your understanding, the news is a primary source for historians, since they turn news into history; history is a secondary source. Unfortunately, this may be accurate enough for the use of historians, but it is not suitable here. The more useful distinction is the one between the primary documents with which the historian OR the journalist or the anthropologist or whomever derives information-- say, unsealed legal testimony or decisions, archival records, legislation, anthropological notes, diaries, records of experiments, personal letters, e-mails, etc.--and the secondary sources which analyze and summarize this information, whether this is the work of a journalist or a historian. The distinction between journalism and history is not relevant here, although historians may sometimes make this distinction to erroneously inflate their professional position above journalists.
The real distinction at issue is whether there are sources that analyze primary unalyzed documents, not whether a journalist or a historian is writing, nor whether a source is considered "news" or "history". News vs history is just simply not the same as the distinction between primary and secondary sources, wherever you acquired this false idea. Period. I don't know how much clearer I can be in disabusing you of this misunderstanding. Think about it: if you were correct, Wikipedia would be unable to cover events until historical books on the events were released. While there are additions from the last several months that are plainly Primary sources, such as the primary source in which Pogge has himself responded with a 6 page public statement, and the copy of the letter signed by 200 philosophers including every single tenured member of his department who risked their necks to sign a statement condemning Pogge for his inappropriate behavior with his students on multiple occasions- there are at least 5 accusers of harassment by my count. (And let's not dismiss the opinions of 200 philosophers, for whom assessment of quality of evidence for claims is literally their job, and who have nothing to gain by attacking such a respected colleague and embroiling the field in further public controversy.) I think you are confusing the loose distinction between primary/secondary sources that is sometimes used by historians with that which is appropriate for a reference work that aims to cover recent events.
It is perfectly reasonable to say "200 philosophers signed a letter of condemnation against Pogge over allegations from several former students that Pogge engaged in sexual harassment and misuse of his professorial power, as has been alleged in several notable news reports and sworn testimony within legal preceedings. Pogge issued a 6 page denial of the allegations." In my opinion, that would be adequate to add to the article; to have no mention whatsoever indicates that this encylopedia has become an administrative failure, whose arcane bureacracy has rendered it incapable of impartially covering events where editors may send their devoted friends to protect their pages. Please note that the only non-administrator arguing for exclusion is user:davidcpearce. As someone who has been trained in the discipline, I can tell you with certainty that this is David Pearce, a marginal member of the philosophy profession who is known to be a friend of Pogge's. He is well-known within the Philosophical community to sadly try to edit pages on his own generally dismissed philosophical ideas to gain wider currency for them. Judging from his writings, as well as his edits, in which he made incoherent comments about Buzzfeed to try to justify mass deletion of neutral, sourced content, I'd also place a wager on Pearce being schizophrenic. He has no business editing here.
Furthermore, the allegations against Pogge have been publicly known since 2014. No one is suggesting Pogge is Bill Cosby or should be going to jail, but when there are multiple reports of professional misconduct within one's profession that grossly violate all professional norms (attempting to trade letters of recommendation for sexual favors from young female philosophers, for instance) and the evidence is strong enough to draw public condemnation by a significant percentage of the field (at least 2 percent of all living philosophers by my count), it is foolish to say we need to wait another several years until someone writes a book about this to add in a neutral statement that "200 philosophers have signed a statement condemning Pogge's alleged harassment and sexual misconduct toward female philosophers who were his thesis advisees or mentees."
I repeat: It is perfectly reasonable to say "200 philosophers signed a letter of condemnation against Pogge over allegations from several former students that Pogge engaged in sexual harassment and misuse of his professorial power, as has been alleged in several notable news reports and sworn testimony within legal preceedings. Pogge issued a 6 page denial of the allegations." In my opinion, that would be adequate to add to the article; to have no mention whatsoever indicates that this encylopedia has become an administrative failure, whose arcane bureacracy has rendered it incapable of impartially covering events where editors may send their devoted friends to protect their pages. Please note that the only non-administrator arguing for exclusion is User:davidcpearce. As someone who has been trained in the discipline, I can tell you with certainty that this is David Pearce, a marginal member of the philosophy profession who is known to be a friend of Pogge's. He is well-known within the Philosophical community to sadly try to edit pages on his own generally dismissed philosophical ideas to gain wider currency for them. Judging from his writings, as well as his edits, in which he made incoherent comments about Buzzfeed to try to justify mass deletion of neutral, sourced content, I'd also place a wager on Pearce being schizophrenic. He has no business editing here, and I hope he seeks help for his unhinged behavior. Devotee of Truth ( talk) 18:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Hey, I'm finding it hard to find your block of LavaBaron justified. Could you please explain how their comment at WT:DYK constituted a "hoax"? — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 02:04, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
These changes await review-- Toppolila ( talk) 13:04, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Can you please help me make the article you removed be fixed to appear on Wikipedia, please? Hgmalley ( talk) 01:49, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Please read my new article. Perhaps it should be how we are the world was made for free im 71 and want to get this story out. Please help me. Hgmalley ( talk) 02:50, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
That link would be List of star systems within 25–30 light-years. -- Izno ( talk) 13:38, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
User:Nyttend, you might be interested in this RfC. Thank you. Gerard von Hebel ( talk) 14:22, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello there! You are invited to attend the Great Buckeye Wiknic in Columbus, Ohio on Sunday, July 10th from 1:00 to 5:00 PM! Join us for a day in the park for food and socializing with others from the Wikimedia movement. We'll be meeting up at Fred Beekman Park, a park on Ohio State University's campus.
If you're interested, please take a look at our events page for more information, including parking info, food options, and available activities. If you plan on attending, please add your name to the attendees list. We look forward to seeing you!
If you have any questions, feel free to leave one on my talk page. Thanks! ~ Super Hamster Talk Contribs 05:39, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
(Note: If you would like to stop receiving notifications regarding Wikimedia events around Ohio, you may remove your username from this list.)