![]() | This page 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. |
A tag has been placed on The Journal of Collective Negotiations, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
ukexpat (
talk)
18:04, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 20:51, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
BorgQueen ( talk) 15:36, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
BorgQueen ( talk) 12:07, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
WP:DYK 14:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Tim, as I mentioned in a comment on your blog, I'd like to nominate you for adminship. Before I do, though, I just want to confirm that you're interested and that you'll accept the nomination. Should I go ahead? - Jredmond ( talk) 21:32, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for creating quality articles, you're now an autoreviewer. -- Closedmouth ( talk) 03:49, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject: Did you know? 17:01, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject: Did you know? 03:15, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, was just hoping you'd weigh in again at Talk:McClellan Committee -- can you take a look? - Pete ( talk) 18:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey there. I've removed the {{ refimprove}} tag from Locke v. Karass; I thought I'd sourced the whole article and it's not clear to me what I'm missing. If you could indicate specific spots where it seemed unclear I'd much appreciate it. Best, Mackensen (talk) 15:38, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
1) I'm not going to go into the need for expansion of this article. It's a fine Start-class piece (I'd argue), but could easily by a "B-class" or even "Good Article" with work. Some easy Wikilinking should also be done (for example, to "labor union").
2) In the lead - "...a recent case...": The word "recent" should be removed. What if this article is read in two years? Or 10 years?
3) In the lead - Both sentences need to have citations. Wikipedia's citation guidelines and its verifiability guidelines note that "each fact presented by an article must be concretely verifiable..." Facts which are or might be challenged need citation. For example, Supreme Court agency fee jurisprudence often refuses to find a constitutional basis for these decisions, relying instead on statutory constructions. The lead asserts that the Constitution was the basis for the reasoning in Locke; that should be cited. The lead also states that Locke built on Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Association. That could be challenged; perhaps the Court's decision relied more heavily on Teachers v. Hudson or Abood v. Detroit Board of Education or Beck v. Commuications Workers of America? That claim should be cited. (The challenge might even say that Ellis v Railway Clerks is what is built upon, since that is cited in addition to Lehnert in the "Opinion of the Court" section.)
4) Background section - "Maine State Employees Association is the exclusive bargaining agent..." needs citation. (Unlike federal labor law, which forces representational exclusivity, some state public employee collective bargaining laws do not.)
5) Background section - "Non-member employees challenged the inclusion of national litigation costs in arbitration but the inclusion was deemed lawful." Deemed lawful by who?? I would add a cite here.
6) Background section - "The District Court found the fee lawful, and the Court of Appeals upheld the district on appeal." Aside from the fact that we don't know which appellate court this was (it's in the SC's decision), I would provide citations to both rulings (easily found in the SC's decision, again).
7) Opinion of the Court section - Both sentences in the first paragraph need citation.
8) Opinion of the Court section - "The central question was whether the national litigation fee caused a First Amendment problem." See above; the Court purposefully does not often reach the First Amendment issue. If this was the central issue, that would be astonishing -- and need citation.
9) Opinion of the Court section - "Prior rulings by the court permitted a so-called..." These rulings should be cited.
10) Opinion of the Court section - "Previous rulings, including Ellis and Lehnert, had not resolved this question." That's opinion. It may be the opinion of legal scholars, or lower courts, but it has to be cited.
Wikiproject: Did you know? 17:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject: Did you know? 06:28, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject: Did you know? 06:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
BorgQueen ( talk) 04:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Shubinator 12:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
— Jake Wartenberg 04:43, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
{{User0|Cmadler 20:43, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
≈ Chamal talk ¤ 04:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Dear Tim,
I am not the one who vandalized the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer article. If you have an issue with the changes that were made, I have no problem with you fixing them. I do, however, have a problem with being accused of vandalism and kindly ask that you refrain from doing so in the future. Thank you. SigKauffman ( talk) 16:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
BorgQueen ( talk) 00:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Tim, saw your DYK nomination for this article and had a question about part of the hook and the same bit in the article - "The field formed when deformations and pressures created by the Great Falls Tectonic Zone(GFTZ) created a thrust fault which led to the formation of overlapping rock formations known as "horses.""
I couldn't find this in either of the two sources. From what I can work out, the ADVF is localised over the GFTZ apparently because that remains a weak zone in the crust. It is however unrelated to the thrusting which mainly happens later. Is there another source that links the igneous activity to the thrusting? I won't raise this as a query on DYK, easier if we sort it out here. Thanks, Mikenorton ( talk) 13:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
NW ( Talk) 18:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Very good article. Have you considered working on it for Good Article or Featured Article status? Dincher ( talk) 20:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
NW ( Talk) 18:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Don't forget Halloween ... we need your help Victuallers ( talk) 18:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Tim, the AFL-CIO currently lists the the JLC as an Allied Group on their website. I didn't add LAWCHA to the AFL-CIO template but it is also listed there. I have concerns about the quality of the content on the federation website but I'll list those on the template discussion page so others can participate in that conversation. RevelationDirect ( talk) 16:32, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Haunted Island at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --
Collectonian (
talk ·
contribs)
01:56, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Tim, I am looking for someone who will look after my one nomination for the day as I cannot process my own work. If you have time then all help appreciated but deleting or moving my hook in particular would assist me in moving forward the process? Victuallers ( talk) 15:36, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Chris Massoglia at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --
Collectonian (
talk ·
contribs)
02:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
The Death and Life of Charlie St. Cloud (film) at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --
Collectonian (
talk ·
contribs)
01:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Halloween has arrived for DYK. Thanks! Victuallers ( talk) 01:00, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your contribution to Halloween Victuallers ( talk) 07:00, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Trick or Treat? ... thanks for the treat! Victuallers ( talk) 13:00, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
You were there! Thanks for helping with Hallowiki Victuallers ( talk) 19:28, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
You were there! Thanks for helping with Hallowiki Victuallers ( talk) 19:28, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tim1965 (hint hint) APK because, he says, it's true 22:54, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Well done. Victuallers ( talk) 01:28, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Well done. Victuallers ( talk) 01:28, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Well it would have looked a lot sadder without your articles, I think 1 in 4 or thereabouts was yours. Cheers! 10:16, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Halloween 2009 Limited Edition Barnstar | |
For your contributions to this year's Halloween themed DYKs which largely helped it to be a success. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 13:22, 1 November 2009 (UTC) |
By my count, 7 articles expanded/created by you has gone up. You've beaten me by 1 :P ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 13:22, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
It's actually quite easy — the Geographic Names Information System has over two million places nationwide in its database. Its search page is at http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic. Nyttend ( talk) 13:44, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Hassocks5489 ( talk) 01:57, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
You've added a statement that additional citations are required. You have not indicated any element of the article which this applies to. WOPuld you care to indicate the first thing you regard as requiring a reference, please? The discussion page of teh article would bea useful place for that. Midgley ( talk) 03:46, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
In 11th Street Bridges, I made a clarification to the end of the first paragraph of the history you wrote (nice job!), diff. Please check that it is correct, that the "destruction" and "five decades" refer to 1814. - Colfer2 ( talk) 15:08, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
So Why 01:21, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Gatoclass ( talk) 19:22, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Materialscientist (
talk)
07:15, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 20:36, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:01, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
I saw your GA nomination about Breaker Boy and mistakenly thought for 0.5 milliseconds that it was Balloon Boy. I saw it when I nominated Nokian Tyres for GA, which used to be a stub a few weeks ago until I rescued it. GA reviews take a while, I see. Are you willing to objectively review Nokian Tyres and I will do so for Breaker Boy? Thank you. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 21:43, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Federal Triangle at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Materialscientist (
talk)
08:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Don't know if you can use it at all, but I just uploaded
.
MBisanz
talk
05:34, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 03:28, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi
I noticed your double-entendres on APK's talk page ☺, which led me to your user page, and there I noticed that you had created the article on the ITU, which I'm familiar with. Then I looked around for content on Bert Powers, famous as the ITU president (from 1961 to 1990) that took local 6 on strike against the NYC newspapers during the 114 day strike in 1962-1963. And found essentially none. Since I found more than sufficient sources for a stand alone article on him, I created a place holding stub on him at Bert Powers. I intend to flesh out the article, add cats, and so forth. Since you have added an incredible amount of labor related content and articles to WP, I would be honored if you would check it out and offer any additions or comments you care to. Thanks. — Becksguy ( talk) 03:25, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
A tag has been placed on The Journal of Collective Negotiations, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
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 page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
ukexpat (
talk)
18:04, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Dravecky ( talk) 20:51, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
BorgQueen ( talk) 15:36, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
BorgQueen ( talk) 12:07, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
WP:DYK 14:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Tim, as I mentioned in a comment on your blog, I'd like to nominate you for adminship. Before I do, though, I just want to confirm that you're interested and that you'll accept the nomination. Should I go ahead? - Jredmond ( talk) 21:32, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for creating quality articles, you're now an autoreviewer. -- Closedmouth ( talk) 03:49, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject: Did you know? 17:01, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject: Did you know? 03:15, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, was just hoping you'd weigh in again at Talk:McClellan Committee -- can you take a look? - Pete ( talk) 18:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey there. I've removed the {{ refimprove}} tag from Locke v. Karass; I thought I'd sourced the whole article and it's not clear to me what I'm missing. If you could indicate specific spots where it seemed unclear I'd much appreciate it. Best, Mackensen (talk) 15:38, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
1) I'm not going to go into the need for expansion of this article. It's a fine Start-class piece (I'd argue), but could easily by a "B-class" or even "Good Article" with work. Some easy Wikilinking should also be done (for example, to "labor union").
2) In the lead - "...a recent case...": The word "recent" should be removed. What if this article is read in two years? Or 10 years?
3) In the lead - Both sentences need to have citations. Wikipedia's citation guidelines and its verifiability guidelines note that "each fact presented by an article must be concretely verifiable..." Facts which are or might be challenged need citation. For example, Supreme Court agency fee jurisprudence often refuses to find a constitutional basis for these decisions, relying instead on statutory constructions. The lead asserts that the Constitution was the basis for the reasoning in Locke; that should be cited. The lead also states that Locke built on Lehnert v. Ferris Faculty Association. That could be challenged; perhaps the Court's decision relied more heavily on Teachers v. Hudson or Abood v. Detroit Board of Education or Beck v. Commuications Workers of America? That claim should be cited. (The challenge might even say that Ellis v Railway Clerks is what is built upon, since that is cited in addition to Lehnert in the "Opinion of the Court" section.)
4) Background section - "Maine State Employees Association is the exclusive bargaining agent..." needs citation. (Unlike federal labor law, which forces representational exclusivity, some state public employee collective bargaining laws do not.)
5) Background section - "Non-member employees challenged the inclusion of national litigation costs in arbitration but the inclusion was deemed lawful." Deemed lawful by who?? I would add a cite here.
6) Background section - "The District Court found the fee lawful, and the Court of Appeals upheld the district on appeal." Aside from the fact that we don't know which appellate court this was (it's in the SC's decision), I would provide citations to both rulings (easily found in the SC's decision, again).
7) Opinion of the Court section - Both sentences in the first paragraph need citation.
8) Opinion of the Court section - "The central question was whether the national litigation fee caused a First Amendment problem." See above; the Court purposefully does not often reach the First Amendment issue. If this was the central issue, that would be astonishing -- and need citation.
9) Opinion of the Court section - "Prior rulings by the court permitted a so-called..." These rulings should be cited.
10) Opinion of the Court section - "Previous rulings, including Ellis and Lehnert, had not resolved this question." That's opinion. It may be the opinion of legal scholars, or lower courts, but it has to be cited.
Wikiproject: Did you know? 17:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject: Did you know? 06:28, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Wikiproject: Did you know? 06:35, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
BorgQueen ( talk) 04:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Shubinator 12:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
— Jake Wartenberg 04:43, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
{{User0|Cmadler 20:43, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
≈ Chamal talk ¤ 04:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Dear Tim,
I am not the one who vandalized the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer article. If you have an issue with the changes that were made, I have no problem with you fixing them. I do, however, have a problem with being accused of vandalism and kindly ask that you refrain from doing so in the future. Thank you. SigKauffman ( talk) 16:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
BorgQueen ( talk) 00:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Tim, saw your DYK nomination for this article and had a question about part of the hook and the same bit in the article - "The field formed when deformations and pressures created by the Great Falls Tectonic Zone(GFTZ) created a thrust fault which led to the formation of overlapping rock formations known as "horses.""
I couldn't find this in either of the two sources. From what I can work out, the ADVF is localised over the GFTZ apparently because that remains a weak zone in the crust. It is however unrelated to the thrusting which mainly happens later. Is there another source that links the igneous activity to the thrusting? I won't raise this as a query on DYK, easier if we sort it out here. Thanks, Mikenorton ( talk) 13:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
NW ( Talk) 18:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Very good article. Have you considered working on it for Good Article or Featured Article status? Dincher ( talk) 20:50, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
NW ( Talk) 18:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Don't forget Halloween ... we need your help Victuallers ( talk) 18:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Tim, the AFL-CIO currently lists the the JLC as an Allied Group on their website. I didn't add LAWCHA to the AFL-CIO template but it is also listed there. I have concerns about the quality of the content on the federation website but I'll list those on the template discussion page so others can participate in that conversation. RevelationDirect ( talk) 16:32, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Haunted Island at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --
Collectonian (
talk ·
contribs)
01:56, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Tim, I am looking for someone who will look after my one nomination for the day as I cannot process my own work. If you have time then all help appreciated but deleting or moving my hook in particular would assist me in moving forward the process? Victuallers ( talk) 15:36, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Chris Massoglia at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --
Collectonian (
talk ·
contribs)
02:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
The Death and Life of Charlie St. Cloud (film) at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --
Collectonian (
talk ·
contribs)
01:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Halloween has arrived for DYK. Thanks! Victuallers ( talk) 01:00, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your contribution to Halloween Victuallers ( talk) 07:00, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Trick or Treat? ... thanks for the treat! Victuallers ( talk) 13:00, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
You were there! Thanks for helping with Hallowiki Victuallers ( talk) 19:28, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
You were there! Thanks for helping with Hallowiki Victuallers ( talk) 19:28, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tim1965 (hint hint) APK because, he says, it's true 22:54, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Well done. Victuallers ( talk) 01:28, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Well done. Victuallers ( talk) 01:28, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Well it would have looked a lot sadder without your articles, I think 1 in 4 or thereabouts was yours. Cheers! 10:16, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Halloween 2009 Limited Edition Barnstar | |
For your contributions to this year's Halloween themed DYKs which largely helped it to be a success. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 13:22, 1 November 2009 (UTC) |
By my count, 7 articles expanded/created by you has gone up. You've beaten me by 1 :P ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 13:22, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
It's actually quite easy — the Geographic Names Information System has over two million places nationwide in its database. Its search page is at http://geonames.usgs.gov/pls/gnispublic. Nyttend ( talk) 13:44, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Hassocks5489 ( talk) 01:57, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
You've added a statement that additional citations are required. You have not indicated any element of the article which this applies to. WOPuld you care to indicate the first thing you regard as requiring a reference, please? The discussion page of teh article would bea useful place for that. Midgley ( talk) 03:46, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
In 11th Street Bridges, I made a clarification to the end of the first paragraph of the history you wrote (nice job!), diff. Please check that it is correct, that the "destruction" and "five decades" refer to 1814. - Colfer2 ( talk) 15:08, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
So Why 01:21, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Gatoclass ( talk) 19:22, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Materialscientist (
talk)
07:15, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 20:36, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:01, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
I saw your GA nomination about Breaker Boy and mistakenly thought for 0.5 milliseconds that it was Balloon Boy. I saw it when I nominated Nokian Tyres for GA, which used to be a stub a few weeks ago until I rescued it. GA reviews take a while, I see. Are you willing to objectively review Nokian Tyres and I will do so for Breaker Boy? Thank you. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 21:43, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Federal Triangle at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Materialscientist (
talk)
08:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:07, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Don't know if you can use it at all, but I just uploaded
.
MBisanz
talk
05:34, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 03:28, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi
I noticed your double-entendres on APK's talk page ☺, which led me to your user page, and there I noticed that you had created the article on the ITU, which I'm familiar with. Then I looked around for content on Bert Powers, famous as the ITU president (from 1961 to 1990) that took local 6 on strike against the NYC newspapers during the 114 day strike in 1962-1963. And found essentially none. Since I found more than sufficient sources for a stand alone article on him, I created a place holding stub on him at Bert Powers. I intend to flesh out the article, add cats, and so forth. Since you have added an incredible amount of labor related content and articles to WP, I would be honored if you would check it out and offer any additions or comments you care to. Thanks. — Becksguy ( talk) 03:25, 14 December 2009 (UTC)