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.

Thanks for your good work on the above article. I'm surprised we haven't met before. I do a lot of work on school articles, mostly bloat reduction like you've done here. I agree it needs much more. The history section is puzzling. It seems like it would be better in the district's or the community's article. And I will be cutting the athletic section much further. Happy editing! John from Idegon ( talk) 04:30, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I edit a fair amount of school articles too, mostly doing like you do in removing excess and boosterism or adding in things like the infobox and pictures where I can or just doing general cleanup. The only reason I even looked at Ironwood Ridge was because a friend of mine just moved to Oro Valley, Arizona and one of her kids goes there. I lived in Oro Valley briefly as a missionary in 2002 right after IRHS first opened, so I remember hearing about its brief history in being built. I remember several years ago editing the Canyon del Oro High School page, which also suffered from many of the same problems as the IRHS page, on top of having some overzealous and protective editors who added every "successful" graduate into the Notable people regardless of notability.

As for the IRHS page, yeah, the athletics section not only needs further reduction, but really an entire rewrite. I'm OK with mentions of the state championships and runner-ups they have in various sports, but that's about it. The history section needs consolidated and edited as well. It doesn't need all the subheadings. For a school that is now only 14 years old, it doesn't have much of a history section at all. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 19:29, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

Guidelines now actually say we are only supposed to mention state championships, not runners-up. I only have access to a PC a few times a week and I will get at it shortly. Happy editing. BTW, my ex-sister in law is currently attending BYU-Idaho. John from Idegon ( talk) 20:12, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

That's cool...I was at BYU-Idaho from 2004-07. Small Mormon world :). As for the guidelines, don't forget they are just that: guidelines, not official policies or requirements. It really depends on how they're used in the article. The main point is just to make sure athletics doesn't completely dominate an article with every state finish mentioned in great detail. But mentioning that a team has won this many state titles and this many runners-up (meaning they lost the state title game or finished second in a tournament) can be useful in giving the reader a general idea of the program's success. In my own alma mater, I made a small chart for state championships and runners-up and it fits nicely along with general mentions in the body of the text (which would likely be trimmed down if it ever goes to FAC)...had no problems getting to GA status. For some schools, though, especially those with a large amount of athletic success, I can see why not mentioning every runner-up would be useful. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 20:35, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Ohio Stadium page, your edit caused an unsupported parameter error ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:18, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of Kent State Golden Flashes men's basketball seasons, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Jim McDonald and Harry Adams. 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) 09:46, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. We always appreciate when users upload new images. However, it appears that one or more of the images you have recently uploaded or added to a page, specifically File:KSU seal.png, may fail our non-free image policy. Most often, this involves editors uploading or using a copyrighted image of a living person. For other possible reasons, please read up on our Non-free image criteria. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Special:Diff/644349133 is a violation of WP:NFCC#9. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 21:17, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Stefan2 ( talk · contribs), that file just needs deleted. No need to wait. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 03:19, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

You may still not violate WP:NFCC#9 on the file information page. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 22:35, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Stefan2 ( talk · contribs) It's the FIRST TIME I've ever posted an SVG version of an existing one, so no, I didn't come there specifically do violate NFCC, and honestly, after dealing with you, can't say I'm all that excited about ever taking the time to update a file to SVG again. Good lord. Considering it was on the information page of the exact same image, I hardly think we were in danger of being sued for copyright infringement, and obviously didn't see a problem (I actually still don't even after reviewing NFCC#9...I personally think you're overreacting like too many on here who deal with copyright issues) when I posted the convenience link to the new replacement file. Really, the issue is the SVG replacement template. THAT is what you should be after for violating NFCC #9. I simply placed the link to the new SVG file which I've seen done on countless images for replacement. Just delete the file and be done with it, which is what I was hoping would happen ASAP anyway, which is why I put the SVG template there in the first place and was sure to update every article that used the file to the new SVG file AND made sure the new file has the same Fair Use templates on it for each article. Save your lectures for someone who needs them. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 03:43, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

There are no exemptions from WP:NFCC#9 for pages like this. If the template you want to use doesn't comply with WP:NFCC#9, then you simply can't use that template. -- Stefan2 ( talk) 20:58, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

That's great. The sad reality is you've taken absolutely no chance to just say "here, next time, just use this template in this instance or make sure to do this" so that I actually feel like I want to do another file update to SVG. What this tells me is you're more interested in just pointing out other people's errors than actually helping them to avoid the same issue later. If you truly are concerned about copyright, you'll want to educate editors who make simple errors like this. Just saying "you violated this" tells me little and your subsequent replies have been anything BUT helpful. It would've been one thing if I uploaded a new image with no source info and no license, but I didn't. Both the PNG and SVG versions have all the required info; it simply was a case of using the wrong SVG update template to let other users know that a better version had been uploaded. If you really are about making Wikipedia better, a great place to start is not discouraging editors who actually try to follow the rules and are actively trying to make the encyclopedia better, but it seems you're more interested in exercising dominion over some self-created fiefdom. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 04:01, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Volume 8, Issue 1 • Winter 2015 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features Be part of the turnaround... now become part of the solution Raising the speed limit on KML creation RCS coming for the Texas FM/RM routes The bar is set for 2015	State and national updates CA, DE, MI In other project news...
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

— MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 ( talk · contribs) 18:37, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

I apologize for taking so long to respond to your comment on the talk page. In theory, I agree with you on the changes that should be done, but I also think that changing all of the info on the page over to their own pages shouldn't be handled by just one or two people, or at the very least should be considered a long-term project. Also, if the decision is made to turn the past conferences list into their own separate pages, it might not be a bad idea to have a statewide template that would go on the bottom of every conference's page, then you can open that and move between conferences (Indiana has a template like this, and it does come in pretty handy). This is all just my two cents, as long as the research I come up with (and I realize I'll have to re-find the sources for a lot of the past conference pages) doesn't just get dumped, then whatever the consensus is with how to run the pages is fine with me. Mtndrums ( talk) 00:58, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Mtndrums ( talk · contribs) one suggestion I have to make sure your research isn't dumped is to use your sandbox (should be a link to it at the top of the page). Not only is it a great place to experiment with different layouts, but I've found it's a great way to store research that may not be quite ready for the main article space. Then, when it's ready to be published, the movement is pretty simple. You could also create your own subpage like User:Mtndrums/OhioHSConferences or User:Mtndrums/conferences (I did that for two high school rivalry series, seen at User:JonRidinger/KentRavenna and User:JonRidinger/RidersStatesmen). -- JonRidinger ( talk) 13:11, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

I generally don't put anything up here until it's ready to go live, most of my research is saved onto text files on my laptop and flash drive. I probably have more than 30 files on conferences that haven't been put up yet, due to either time or needing additional research, but I try to get things complete before they go up. I was more referring to stuff I already posted being taken down if it isn't available on a page for that specific conference. If we can get a few people on board, we could probably get that page cleaned up in short order. Mtndrums ( talk) 05:41, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

After a couple of false starts, I was able to break down the main page info into regional pages. I decided to do redundant links on the main page for conferences that span multiple regions, but put the conference info in the region with the most schools. I also merged the East and Southeast regions, since the SE would only have two or three conferences on its page. Let me know what you think needs to be fixed up or any improvements that are needed. Mtndrums ( talk) 14:59, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Mtndrums ( talk · contribs), fantastic work! I love the organization and it just makes it so much easier to find information! I think the only thing left would be to add graphics that identify the scope of each region (like which counties are in each region). I agree in combining the East and Southeast region pages too. Kind of makes me wonder why OHSAA has the regions separate in the first place! Thanks for all your efforts! -- JonRidinger ( talk) 16:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I can make up a map graphic, but I'll have to find some time to get on the wife's conputer to finish it (the red channel on my monitor is fried, so I'll have to finish it on there to make sure the colors look right). It may take a little time, but I'll get it up there before too long. Mtndrums ( talk) 04:03, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

I've finally created a map for the page. I ended up shading counties split into different regions in gray (I wanted to make the county striped with the colors of the two regions, but the program I was forced to work with wasn't able to produce results of any quality). Unless there's something serious I need to fix with the page, I'm going to focus on updating current/new conference changes and splitting the Defunct conferences page in a similar fashion for time being, as well as continuing research into the defunct conferences. Mtndrums ( talk) 01:00, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

hey just wanted to let you know this is not true, and there's no citation/source. http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Brigham_Young_University%E2%80%93Idaho&action=history

and you dont go to either of these schools

reply on my talk page thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A601:585:A101:FD0E:7055:A104:C00E ( talk) 21:55, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

2605:A601:585:A101:FD0E:7055:A104:C00E ( talk · contribs), I replied on your talk page, but just FYI, going to a school doesn't really matter in terms of being able to verify information. In this instance, though, I actually did attend BYU-Idaho (as seen on my user page) for three years and frequently dealt with approved housing and the school's housing policies. Even so, I was able to find the housing page fairly quickly and posted a link on your page and in the article. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 22:35, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

you wrote a lot

anyway, "Approved" seems different from byu contracted, and unsure if byu-i has a specific contract as well

also you shouldve just source the article instead of giving me a link — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A601:585:A101:FD0E:7055:A104:C00E ( talk) 19:40, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

I apologize for having taken months to essentially ignore talk:Cincinnati (or Cincinnati, for that matter), and thereby, in effect, having had not replied or even acknowledged your generously detailed reply to my reply, at the time when I rather hotly pointed out the suburban ATP/WTA tennis in the Cincinnati lede, etcetera. With the benefit of cooling down and letting things be, I have now a couple of observations to make about your edits. Yes, your edits, not mine. ;)

I think that had you not merely removed text from the article where I spent my labors on, but actually thought to transfer it to the article Greater Cincinnati (I realize, having visited it for the first time ever, that it is only a redirect to essentially a botic entity of a skeletal demographics kind ;), and not the carefully tended Wikigarden of "prosodic" human contributions), our nascent collaboration on Wikipedia as Ohioans and editors of stuff we both find ourselves editing, Ohio connections being immaterial, would have taken a more fulfilling and cooperative turn. However, your pointed remark about being willing to go through Cincinnati and remove all remaining out-of-scope content that belongs to Greater Cincinnati — only amplifies in my mind my label of "selective deletionism" I implied to saddle your edits with, as your just deserts. I am bringing this back as a reproach, because Greater Cincinnati was then and remains now an abject absence of article, if you get my plaint.

Please consider making amends, and then we will be golden. I remain respectfully yours, Your Marek. Mareklug ^talk 11:12, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

It's interesting I find this today as I just returned home from a trip that included, in its last leg, driving through Cincinnati today.

I am sorry you appear to have decided to take my edits personally, because I make edits based on relevant Wikipedia policies, guidelines, and precedent, not due to any personal feelings I may have towards any particular editor. In this case, the specific policy was that of WP:TOPIC and the initial edits I made that specifically affected you were made after reading the article for some other reason; they just happened to be soon after you added them apparently. I did go through the Cincinnati article at the time and trim out info that was not appropriate for that article because it dealt with things that are in the suburbs; for instance, the listing of Catholic schools, several of which are not located in Cincinnati. I consider it merely keeping the article on topic and removing "border creep" so that the Cincinnati article isn't merely a duplicate of the Greater Cincinnati article (there will obviously be a lot of overlap between the two but they shouldn't be duplicates of each other). I've done that on many dozens of similar articles as a member of the WP:CITIES project. Sometimes I add the info to the appropriate article whether it be another city article (like that of a suburb) or the metro area article. Sometimes I don't because I either don't have time or forget. I've done similar things on Greater Cleveland and Northeast Ohio which used to be one article but was later split.

Please do not take my edits personally or think that I'm simply out to remove info I simply don't like. If I remove info it's because I think it's inappropriate for a given article; that doesn't automatically mean I think the info is worthless or has no place on Wikipedia at all. My failure to place it in the Greater Cincinnati article is more than likely simply a matter of time as I edit Wikipedia in my spare time, so many times that happens only in small spurts during the day if at all. But I'm someone who has written several articles and added quite a bit of content to existing articles, so I'm by no means some kind of deletionist. Both the Cincinnati and Greater Cincinnati articles need quite a bit of work on them, both in terms of adding appropriate info, but also in cleaning up existing info or even removing.

As always, though, if you have questions or are unsure about whether or not something is appropriate, feel free to ask here or on the article talk page. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 23:43, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the sermon I added to Lucas Oil Stadium without realizing it. I must have pasted by mistake. Indyguy ( talk) 02:17, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Indyguy ( talk · contribs), you're welcome! I was actually going to ask if you had any reasons behind that, but figured it may have just been a paste error too (happens to a lot of us!). It was embedded within the citation so didn't show up in the article text. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 04:09, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Vjmlhds ( talk · contribs) thanks! -- JonRidinger ( talk) 23:43, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

I see you added several categories to National Register of Historic Places listings in Portage County, Ohio by hand. An even better way is to add an NRHP template to the commons category with the reference number ( NRHP template on Commons), see the one I did for your Mantua_Center_School category. That allows a bot to add the category to this list: Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/Missing commons category links, where someone (often user:TheCatalyst31 but can be anyone) will add it to the list using a semi automated tool ( User:Dudemanfellabra/AddCommonsCatLinks). You can still add the commonscat by hand in the county list, but using the commons NRHP template in the category will also allow other interlinking feats in the future (or it may already do so, I'm not an expert). Generic1139 ( talk) 15:09, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Generic1139 ( talk · contribs) Thanks! The ones I did are the ones I have done articles and photos for (meaning I know they have categories on the Commons), but good to know for future additions! Until you added those today, I didn't even know the Commons Category link was an option. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 15:15, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

I just noticed that a year-and-a-half ago the information about the cancelled Ohio State Route 435 in the Kent vicinity was removed due to being "likely unverifiable", probably because the commons graphics supporting it had been removed/deleted earlier. I'm letting you know since you probably can find the verification necessary fairly easily. I'd contact the user who originally added all of the info, but that person appears to have retired from WP without actually declaring it. Mapsax ( talk) 12:45, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Mapsax ( talk · contribs), thanks for letting me know! I have seen maps from the 1960s and 70s online that show the planned route, so it's definitely not a case of it being "likely unverifiable". ODOT has a page of old maps available. While I can't access them now due to the format they're in, they more than likely have the confirmation of the planned 435. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 11:43, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

The ODOT maps are a no-go. Since I have all of them saved, I rechecked 1964-1976, and, as I remember, there's nothing there. I guess the route wasn't far enough along in the planning to be included. Mapsax ( talk) 12:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll look at my Portage County bicentennial atlas when I'm home as I know it has proposed SR 435 in some of the maps. I know I've seen maps showing 435. The details removed from that article explaining its route clearly came from a map. Somewhat irritating that an editor would simply conclude that it couldn't ever be verified. Where do they think that information came from in the first place? -- JonRidinger ( talk) 14:02, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Mapsax, I finally got around to adding that info back as I found the atlas that at least showed the plans in Portage County as of 1975. I've seen a map of the Stark County route but have not been able to find it again. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 03:04, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the research. I split that off into a subsection to distinguish it from the current 435's history. I tried to change the template to "cite map" but I'd need the names of the maps; otherwise, it just calls the whole atlas a map. I also put a "cn" in the sentence about the widening; I know that 43 wasn't widened until after the 1990s when I moved away, so I'm guessing that it wasn't directly related to 435 being cancelled since that had happened long before. Mapsax ( talk) 23:31, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Mapsax, Seemed easier to just make the citation from the book than make two separate citations for each map, but if you prefer, here's the data: One map just says "1975 Highway Map of Portage County, Ohio". Best I can find based on the next page is it was published by the county. The other map is from AMATS (Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study). It is called "Five Year Plan / Portage and Summit Counties". The note at the top of the page says it was published in the Akron Beacon Journal on June 24, 1974. The earlier graphic that was deleted ("Kent-thoroughfare.jpg") also showed the route of 435 and was from the 1960s.

As for the widening, yeah, you're correct in that they aren't really related at all. 43 was widened to 5 lanes from just south of 261 to 76, but that wasn't until the 2000s. It has since been widened to just south of Tallmadge Road (former SR 18, aka County Road 18) in Brimfield. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 01:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I guess leaving it as "cite book" is OK, since atlases are a type of book. I just figured that "cite map" would be better especially since Template:Cite map lists an atlas entry, albeit a road atlas, as an example. Sorry to make you go through the transcription above...at least it's recorded on WP somewhere now. Mapsax ( talk) 22:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

It's not a problem! I always used cite map when that's all it was, like I have an online map or just a loose document. But either way, I don't mind how it's cited. The key is that we have the proper information cited in the article. Can't say I'm thrilled it was removed with the comment of unlikely to be confirmed. Usually when I see statements like that in an article, particularly non-controversial statements, I figure it's probably documented somewhere, otherwise someone wouldn't have taken the time to include it. Oh well. Problem fixed! -- JonRidinger ( talk) 22:01, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Template:Akron-Kent State Result has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes ( talk) 21:52, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Volume 8, Issue 2 • Spring 2015 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features Route description 101 The nitty gritty of in-depth research	State and national updates Editor updates In other project news...
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

— MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 12:14, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I've went ahead and split the info on this page into regions as well, following the current conferences ideal. I do have a couple of issues I would appreciate your input on. First, while I can edit a map to illustrate the regions easily, I'm debating what to do with counties on the Central Region periphery. I've included schools from Marion County in the Central Region and am fine with that decision to balance the pages out, I'm not sure what to do with Fairfield and Pickaway counties. While sake of geographic fairness they would be in with the Central schools, the lack of conferences in the East/Southeast regions would hint they should probably end up there.

My second issue is whether to list the former conferences in the main article (like on the current conferences article), or to just list the counties in the region (like I do currently). My main concern is that we would end up with an extremely long page listing conferences (similar to the problem we had before), since we now have 100 conferences in the defunct section, with many more to be added. Any input you have is greatly appreciated. Mtndrums ( talk) 07:48, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Mtndrums, as always, thanks for all your work! Hopefully I'll be able to contribute a little more, though you are doing a great job getting it all organized. As far as the balancing goes, I wouldn't worry too much about it. Ohio's regions aren't balanced in terms of population, so the conferences will likely reflect that. It's not bad if there isn't geographic fairness; as long as it's general, makes sense and is clearly defined in the article. In the cases where a county has conferences that go in an adjacent either region, I don't think it's a crime to list the conference in both regions. For the list of counties in each region, just include "and part of xx county". I've had to do that with a lot of school districts that cover most of a particular city or township or with cities that cross county lines.

For the second part, I like the current setup that refers the reader to the defunct conferences article. No reason to list the defunct conferences since they no longer exist. The only thing I would add is a small summary explaining it instead of just having the link. In both the current and defunct conferences articles, we also need an explanation of how conferences work in Ohio, basically that schools set them up and can join and leave, just like NCAA conferences. In many states, the state athletic association simply assigns schools a region and that acts as their conference for the regular season. It's not uncommon for the state to switch up the regions and the schools have no say in where they go.

Again, overall it looks great! Thanks again! -- JonRidinger ( talk) 15:17, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Describing how membership works is a great idea, I'll do a writeup for both main pages later tonight or tomorrow. I just need to figure out how complicated I want to get (a la Lima Central Catholic being removed from the Northwest Central Conference, the Chagrin Valley staging a mass exodus to force Aurora and Kenston to leave, etc.) without going on forever. Once I get writing, I should be able to figure out how deep into the info is enough.

As for county placement, after looking at what conferences I have to still be entered into the list, I've decided to stick with putting Fairfield and Pickaway in the Southeast, since almost all of their current schools are in that region. Virtually all of the split counties are from having one school (ie; Marion, Lancaster, Vermilion, etc.) being in a conference with a neighboring region, so they get included in that region. I also think that sticking with placing a conference where most of its members resided would be best, just to eliminate redundancy, though I'll place a note that members on the edges of a region may have participated in conferences in other regions. If someone else would want to go through those conferences and paste them into other pages, that's perfectly ok, but I've got enough on my plate with putting what I have saved on here, as well as getting needed links. Mtndrums ( talk) 02:04, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Please check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Collegiate sports (USA)... GWFrog ( talk) 21:25, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! I opened a discussion here to try to get an NPOV resolution. So add your arguments -- Cs california ( talk) 06:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Would you be able/willing to help with illustrating unillustrated municipalities and townships in northeastern Ohio? I've created a tracking page for unillustrated jurisdictions, and I'll soon be adding a map for each county showing which spots don't yet have photos. Nyttend ( talk) 01:08, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@ Nyttend: sure, I can definitely help in this general area, like Summit and Portage Counties and any other areas I may be in. I'm assuming it's just a general type of photo like the town square or a notable building? -- JonRidinger ( talk) 02:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, basically that, or just a representative scene like a street full of houses. In townships, you could get an interesting and perhaps-representative building ( example), or typical open countryside ( example), or a small unincorporated community ( example). The goal is to treat townships and municipalities separately, with new township pictures coming from unincorporated areas; I'd like to have something like the corresponding Pennsylvania list with a representative photo for each place, and it would be odd for the list to have an image that could reasonably appear in multiple entries. Thanks! Nyttend ( talk) 02:08, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

But then, you'd have a town square in every Western Reserve township. How could I forget that? Nyttend ( talk) 02:10, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Volume 8, Issue 3 • Summer 2015 • About the Newsletter
Departments Assessment roundup Portal selected articles and pictures	Features Road to the past: Some tips on researching history sections Getting to know the editors behind the lenses	State and national updates State updates In other project news...
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS

— MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) delivered on behalf of Imzadi1979 05:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

I'm writing an essay at User:Trackinfo/sandbox/NHSL on a subject you might have an interest in. Please add your input either to the essay or contact me at my talk page. Trackinfo ( talk) 01:35, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 ( talk) on 23:58, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Kent, Ohio -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 19:54, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Can you deal with the marked dead links? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:54, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

—delivered by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979 ( talk) on 22:59, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the FirstEnergy Stadium (Cleveland) page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:23, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Memorial Athletic and Convocation Center, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jethro Tull. 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) 09:15, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

I know you are a Kent State fan so I thought I'd ask before updating: which source would you go off of for colors? Source 1 or Source 2? Personally, I'd go for Source 1 because it looks closest to the color they use (from what I've seen on the website). Source 2 lists both hex codes. The colors are as follows: Thoughts? 🎄 Corkythe hornetfan 🎄 02:01, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

• Source 1:  #0A0D6F   #FFAB1B 
• Source 2:  #002664   #EAAB00 

It's somewhat confusing, that's for sure. The first source is the more recent, but is apparently only for the logo itself. The PDF source is slightly older (title page has it at October 2014). This is the most recent source directly related to the colors, and it uses  #002664   #EAAB00  for the web. That's what the colors currently are in most KSU articles. In the end, it doesn't make a huge amount of difference as they're virtually indistinguishable to any viewer. My best guess, based on the page, is that the university uses slightly brighter colors for the sake of the logos only since it's only on the page with the official logo, but nowhere else. No idea why, but that's what it seems. Both variations are the same print colors (PMS 281 and PMS 124). So, long story short, I'd keep them where they currently are, at least those that use EAAB00 and 002664. -- JonRidinger ( talk) 03:42, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Sounds good, thanks! 🎄 Corkythe hornetfan 🎄 03:48, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! And thanks for all your work verifying and correcting the school colors on the various college articles! -- JonRidinger ( talk) 14:07, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Congrats on the TFA! Nicely done! :) A belated Merry Christmas... Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:40, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

@ Neutralhomer: Thank you! Hope you had a Merry Christmas and have a safe and happy 2016! -- JonRidinger ( talk) 04:31, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Precious

local history

Thank you for quality articles, Jon, such as Kent, Ohio and Stephens City, Virginia, for teaching us local history and culture, such as Theodore Roosevelt High School (Kent, Ohio), for a nice infobox about yourself, - as noticed already on 10 August 2010: you are an awesome Wikipedian!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:20, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

[[

File:Happy new year 01.svg|140px|right]]

Happy New Year!

JonRidinger,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. Levdr1lp / talk 04:00, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to user talk pages.