I looked at the Colebrook page. jimi 184.153.154.74 ( talk) 00:38, 7 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi. On the castle in the clouds page, when you say a published reference do you mean a book or a website sort of thing? I might be able to get a journal or something, MAYBE, from my relative, but I'm not sure. I know other relatives often used journals, so I'll see. But the thing is, I'm not trying to disagree with you, your point makes sense, but I got this information from a relative who would actually go to visit her grandparents (the tobies), & sleep there as a kid. Once again, I'll see what I can find. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.138.184.180 ( talk) 22:54, 7 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi - thanks for getting in touch! The issue has to do with Wikipedia's policy that the encyclopedia is a compendium of published knowledge rather than a venue for posting original research. I wonder if any of the curators of the Castle might have already published some sort of history of the estate which would make reference to your reminiscences? Failing that, the next best thing would be some sort of journal, as you suggested. Best wishes, -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 13:46, 8 January 2015 (UTC) reply

Greeting Ken, Pardon any greenness, want to treat Wikipedia etiquette with utmost respect. Writing you regarding a redirected page dating back to 2013 that is causing confusion with consumers. Writing this from work so my work IP can be logged using an account associated with my work email so my identity can be verified if called into question.

The page in question is http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Realtor.com&action=history which was redirected to the National Association of Realtors page back in 2013. The confusion comes in when a consumer searches for Realtor.com in Google and the NAR wiki page displays in the right rail Knowledge Graph suggesting the site is a trade union, displays the wrong CEO, wrong social media accounts, logo etc.

The sites are affiliated, but Realtor.com is run by Move Inc which was recently acquired by News Corp of which I am an employee, see: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-1001-newscorp-realtor-20141001-story.html We'd like to see the redirect removed so the page can be updated to be more accurate. I am well aware that we should avoid editing the page ourselves but reversing the redirect seems like the proper starting point.

Looking forward to your feedback and/or questions. I apologize in advance if this was the wrong approach.

Regards rbucich -- Rbucich ( talk) 22:24, 3 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi, thanks for getting in touch. Just to be clear, the redirect has been in place since 2010. I reverted the change in 2013 because the new text appeared to be promotional. If having the redirect is causing confusion, though, I don't see any problem with your starting an article. There's not an explicit ban on conflicts of interest, but you do need to be scrupulous about not saying anything promotional. The solution is to start it off by keeping it as short as possible. You could start with exactly what you said above: "Realtor.com is a website run by Move Inc. which was recently acquired by News Corp", etc. Add an "External links" heading (see the bottom of the NAR article for an example) and put in the official link to realtor.com. Give the article one or more categories (again, see how it's done at the bottom of the NAR page). Then let it grow from there. Best wishes, -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 13:19, 4 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks Ken! I just want to do everything completely above board. Will get started as you suggested, thanks again! Rbucich ( talk) 17:36, 9 February 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, and thank you for correcting my grammatical errors. I wanted your opinion on this: The article lists the city is being incorporated in 1751, however that was before the US. After that it was incp'd in 1846, and that is what the city lists on the seal. Should we change it to 1846, leave it, or put up both? Pretzel4 ( talk) 05:09, 19 February 2015 (UTC) reply

I took a look at some of the other cities in New Hampshire, and it appears that the practice around the state varies. Concord and Nashua are in the same situation as Manchester, where they started life with a different name and a different form of government. In each case, the earliest date is the only one given in the infobox. However, I see that the Portsmouth and Dover pages list a second date for their incorporation as cities. I suspect you could add the date of city incorporation to the infobox without getting any pushback, as long as you don't take out the date of original incorporation. I anyway won't object. Thanks for getting in touch! -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 15:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC) reply

How do I add both dates to the infobox? I can't figure it out... Pretzel4 ( talk) 19:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Portsmouth has a good example. After the "established_title" and "established_date" lines, add two more lines: "established_title2" and "established_date2". Portsmouth's infobox uses "Incorporated" for the first title, then "Incorporated (city)" for the second. You can adjust as needed. -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 12:03, 31 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Thank you. I will do that. Pretzel4 ( talk) 20:13, 31 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Do you know of a reliable source that lists the high points for U.S. counties? Also, does the county's elevation on GNIS refer to a mean elevation? Bms4880 ( talk) 15:57, 16 March 2015 (UTC) reply

I don't know of any source that gives all the high points. When I did the high points for New Hampshire towns, I simply consulted the USGS topos. That's obviously going to be a lot more problematic for X thousand counties nationwide. In the GNIS, it appears that the elevation is given for the geographic centroid of the county, i.e. the same place for which the lat/long is listed. -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 19:15, 16 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Have you looked at the County Highpointers website? I've only given it a quick glance, so I don't know if they've hidden a list in there. -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 19:19, 16 March 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Ken, thank you so much for taking on some copyediting at Goodlyfe Crew. It really is an absolute stinker of an article and I have more than once reeled away from it clutching my head. I am glad that you are made of sterner stuff. All power to your elbow! Cheers, DBaK ( talk) 20:30, 27 April 2015 (UTC) reply

I just wish I knew what someone's "provence" was... -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 12:24, 28 April 2015 (UTC) reply

Thank you for your interest in the Irish Willow. In your opinion, should this Talk:SS Irish Willow (1918)#Lucky - thanks Lugnad ( talk) 14:32, 4 May 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi, Ken. Been a while. Always a pleasure.

Just a note to explain my image retsore at the Mt. Madison page. You changed it ( here) after another user incorrectly misidentified it as being Mt. Adams.

As you can see on this Google Earth image here Mt. Madison is indeed the peak one sees directly from NH Route 16 from the vantage point it was taken. (From a purely NPOV perspective, I also know as I took the image and climbed the mountain that day.) Mt. Adams is behind and to the left; if it's not obscured in this image I cannot say with certainty that it is in it.

Further, the summit of Madison may not be depicted, as it may be obscured by the prominent ridge line leading up to it (forming the triangular feature seen at center). The route doglegs to the SW at the top of that ridge (seen starting at the 'n' of Madison in the Google Earth rendering in the resolution sent on).

It's been a while since we worked together on pages on NH mountains, but it's great to see from your contribution log you are busy as a beaver ranging far outside it. Yours, Wikiuser100 ( talk) 12:33, 25 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Brief add: The left to right upwards slope of the ridgeline mentioned (running SE-NW) is covered by the rugged Osgood Trail, seen here. It's a rough rocky business above the treeline ( like so). I've some images of my own I never uploaded taken descending it, having ascended the less photogenic mainly wooded Daniel Webster-Scout Trail (seen also on the above map) that takes a more direct approach straight from NH 16. Yours, Wikiuser100 ( talk) 12:48, 25 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi there - Thanks for the detailed explanation! The other user and I were misled by what appears to be a peak on the right, but I assume must be the ridge the Osgood Trail climbs. I wonder if you could tell me the approximate coordinates of the spot where you took the picture. That would help confirm it for me. (I don't have Google Earth set up, so I can't do any 3D roving around.) Or of course I should just take a drive up there! I've been up the Daniel Webster and down the Osgood myself, but it was about 6 years ago. -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 12:23, 27 July 2015 (UTC) reply

I just looked at your photo again, with the USGS map in front of me, and I can see now that it is definitely the Osgood Trail ridge on the right. The bump to the right of the main summit, which is the top of the Howker Ridge Trail, is quite clear. So I don't need the coordinates of the photo spot after all. Thanks for putting things straight! -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 12:27, 27 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks so much for all your help!!! Would you kindly move iersarge House to Kearsarge House? OrganicEarth ( talk) 14:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC) reply

You're welcome! Did you mean Kiarsarge House? I have gone ahead and moved that to Kearsarge House. -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 14:43, 28 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Great! Thanks. Do you know if Honeymoon Bridge (New Hampshire) is over Goodrich Falls? In the pics is looks like a bridge appears.. And the bridge article says it had lighting powered by the plant. I just can't tell if that's the bridge for sure.. Thanks again for your help. OrganicEarth ( talk) 16:50, 28 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Oh, and would you please move Black Mountain Ski Area (New Hampshire) to Black Mountain Ski Area? OrganicEarth ( talk) 16:56, 28 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Honeymoon Bridge is in the town of Jackson, about a mile north of Goodrich Falls, so it's plausible that it got power from the falls. I'm going to leave the Black Mountain Ski Area article alone, because I don't what it to be confused with other Black Mountain ski areas, such as Black Mountain Ski Resort in Maine. There are no other Black Mountain ski area articles at this time, but in this case I think it's better to specify the state right from the start, and not have to change it when one of the other ski areas finally gets an article. -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 17:02, 28 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Okay, but then it would be better as a disambig page.. But if there are only two articles I think they can be disambiguated at the top of their pages? Anyway, I will just redirect for now. Thanks again for all your help!!! OrganicEarth ( talk) 17:12, 28 July 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the updates/clarifications of the article! I am brand new to Vermont and New England (just moved to Brattleboro 3 weeks ago), so am still learning the history/context of the space -> I misread the governor reference :P Where in New Hampshire are you at? I tried to organize a WP:meetup in Vermont a few months ago, and didn't get anyone to show up, but got interest in holding something closer to Burlington and somewhere in eastern New Hampshire. I would love to find ways to include more members of the community! Sadads ( talk) 15:18, 18 August 2015 (UTC) reply

I'm over in Concord. Just drove through Brattleboro yesterday, in fact. Let me know of any meetups you organize! -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 15:23, 18 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Brilliant! Do you have any WP:GLAM connections in your area? Though I can't take the lead in facilitating at GLAM-Wiki partnership (because of time commitments and COI from my WMF job supporting the Wikipedia Library), I have many years of experience working in the Education Program and GLAM-Wiki partnership space and would be happy to advise, and help get one started. I find that GLAM-Wiki events are great ways to pull people out of the woodwork, grow more volunteer communities and benefit the local organizations with (the New Hampshire Historical society for instance, would be a good host, I would image). I plan on presenting at a Vermont Librarians conference this fall as well, so might have a good chance to engage one of those orgs as well. Sadads ( talk) 15:40, 18 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Hey Ken, wanted to see if you had any thoughts about GLAM, and also: it would be great to see you at WikiConference USA: http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/2015/Main_Page , Sadads ( talk) 16:28, 27 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Question regarding this edit and many like it — where/how do you get the information? No matter what I do with factfinder.census.gov, I can't figure out how to get information about any specific locations, let alone anything comparable to the wonderful population-estimate CSV files that they had for the 2000 census and succeeding years. It doesn't help that they've apparently changed their URLs lately, since the citation that you gave for this edit is no longer working. I'd love to have a table with all Ohio townships' populations and areas, if it exists. Nyttend ( talk) 13:52, 27 August 2015 (UTC) reply

The data are all from American Factfinder. I'm surprised the link isn't working for you, because just now it came up properly for me. I wonder what is different about our setups? Anyway, here's the general workflow for getting, let's say, all the townships in Ohio.

You were right to start at factfinder.census.gov. Click on "Advanced Search", then "Show Me All". To get all the townships, click on "Geographies" on the left, then select "County Subdivision - 060" from the dropdown box. Select "Ohio" for your state, then "All County Subdivisions within Ohio", then "Add to Your Selections" at the bottom. Close the "Select Geographies" box. You're left with a long list of tables to choose from. At the top of the list, type "G001" into the "Topic or table name" box. This will give you all the tables of census geography for your Ohio townships. Scroll down a bit and click on the "Geographic Identifiers" link next to "2010 SF1 100% Data". (All the ACS tables that are listed first don't have the geographic info in them that we need.) Trying it on the Ohio townships, I get a table with 1,604 records. You can then click on "Download" and choose the type of file you'd like to get.

All highly intuitive, right? I hope this works for you! -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 14:05, 27 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Everything works right until I click "Geographic Identifiers", because this brings up a page that doesn't even mention Ohio, even though I was careful to select "All County Subdivisions within Ohio" earlier. I see "Download", but whenever I click it, I'm almost instantly told "Your download was cancelled", even though I didn't do anything. Otherwise, the only reference to a table that I'm getting is a phrase The table contains a total of 14,052,071 data columns, which makes me suspect that it's much more than Ohio. Since "An error has occurred in American FactFinder" is the result whenever I click the link you supplied for Lee Township, I'm wondering if there's some sort of browser problem. What are you using? I'm running IE11. Nyttend ( talk) 14:28, 27 August 2015 (UTC) reply

I'm using IE 10. The "error has occurred" message usually shows up when the URL is wrong (for instance, if I've put the wrong FIPS code into the URL), so something must be happening to change the URL I've put into the reference. I suppose I should check the link on a different computer and network, to make sure I'm not the only one who can see all these links in the references! The 14 million columns sounds like you're getting all possible records from the Census database rather than just Ohio. When you select all the county subdivisions in Ohio and click "Add to Your Selections", it should then display "All County Subdivisions within Ohio" in the upper left of your page, in the box titled "Your Selections". -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 15:10, 27 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Whenever I pick G001, it dumps the geography. I've also tried picking G001 first (so at top right, it says "Search using.../Search:/G001/clear all selections and/start a new search") and then picking geography, but that clears the G001 and makes me pick from all 28,508 tables instead of retaining the table number. I'll try clearing my cookie settings and see if that works better. Nyttend ( talk) 16:28, 27 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Update: yes, it was the cookies. Everything worked fine once I dumped all my settings for census.gov cookies, and I was immediately able to access the Lee Township results page, too. Nyttend ( talk) 16:36, 27 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Awesome! That was going to be my next suggestion. Happy data mining, -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 17:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC) reply

There is a White House.gov petition to change the name of the great peak that is active because it is a micro-aggression to African-Americans to honor a man who owned over 300 slaves. Links were provided (1) to support Washington's slavery ownership and (2) to the petition itself. These are third party facts, so why is it being censured? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taxed2death ( talk • contribs) 13:03, 3 September 2015 (UTC) reply

To be blunt, anyone can do a WhiteHouse.gov petition. Even if it were signed by so many people that some reliable news outlet decided to cover it as a controversy, a petition is not an action, but only a pointer to a possible future action. It's basically non-notable information at this point. If you're serious about changing the name, you should skip the White House petition process and go straight to the U.S. Board on Geographic Names. That is the way that Mt. McKinley's name was changed back to Denali. (I'm generalizing a bit, but the BGN process was the key element.) The BGN website is not coming up right now for some reason, so try it a little later and let me know if you can't find the link to propose a name. -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 13:15, 3 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Okay, the BGN website is back. A quicker link is to their Domestic Names page, then click on "Propose or Change a Name". Be aware that the Board relies heavily on local support for any name change, so you should make sure that there is strong support for your proposal in the state of New Hampshire and in the towns of the White Mountains region if you want your name change to be successful. -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 13:19, 3 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi Ken- I was checking out the Wikipedia MOS, and do you think its overkill to have West Virginia in the title, in the lead, and the info box name as well?? Not a complaint, just wondering if there was a point. Coal town guy ( talk) 23:49, 8 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Especially when it's a short name, such as "Rhoda" or "Power", etc., the name without the state just seems to hang there in the infobox title and could mean anything. I think we've discussed this before; I believe people don't actually look all over the article, and having the state name in the infobox title is a good, non-distracting way to avoid the "Huh?" factor of just seeing a common word in the title without context. But you're right, it's not addressed in the MOS. -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 10:12, 9 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Just another thought: the incorporated places articles, which were done earlier, all have the state name in the infobox title already. Having the tiny unincorporated communities match makes sense, first, for uniformity of style, and second, because they're such small communities. The "place, state" form is nearly universal in the US (not just in Wikipedia), and the cases where just "place" is common are typically the largest cities, not the smallest. But please don't think I'm asking you to change your own methods when creating these articles; like you say, it's not a requirement. -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 10:19, 9 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Mr. Gallagher There is an error in the site about Mirror Lake NH. The church listed s/b Community, not Congregational. I am an officer of the church. Hope you will correct that.

Virginia Cole Treasurer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.54.155.124 ( talk) 13:46, 15 September 2015 (UTC) reply

All set. You are welcome to edit the Mirror Lake, New Hampshire article yourself, and correct any other errors that you notice. Thanks for getting involved! -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 12:20, 16 September 2015 (UTC) reply

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Trinity Baptist Church (Concord, New Hampshire). Since you had some involvement with the Trinity Baptist Church (Concord, New Hampshire) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. BenjaCamp ( talk) 04:07, 29 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Ken, I wondering if you might want to weigh in here, I noticed you made some edits to this Trinity Sex Scandal page and have also had some conversations about other redirects on here. I don't think this redirect is necessary anymore (since the article is about the event not the church) and it is confusing Google's knowledge graph (Equating Trinity Baptist Church Concord NH with Trinity Baptist sex scandal) Trinity Google Result. I'm trying to be careful to avoid COI (as Jytog is accusing me of), but this definitely seems like something that should be changed. -- BenjaCamp ( talk) 04:13, 29 September 2015 (UTC) reply

		100000 Edits
		Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that only 334 editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!

If you like you can add this userbox to your collection.

This user has been awarded with the 100000 Edits award.

. Buster Seven Talk 15:12, 4 October 2015 (UTC) reply

You are invited to join the Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA on October 16! (drop-in any time, 6-9pm)-- Pharos ( talk) 18:28, 14 October 2015 (UTC) reply

You have a point, Ken, about the incorrectness of "Tenney" in all caps in the name of the article. I asked the people at Tenney what exactly what they will call themselves, and they replied, "TENNEY Mountain Ski Resort", which is why I did that. However, I wanted to let you know that I agree with you that it should not be in caps on WP. Thank You. Pretzel4 ( talk) 15:57, 19 October 2015 (UTC) reply

I'm looking forward to the new information about the resort as it comes out! And like I think I said in the edit summary, if there's a new logo, readers will be able to see the stylization Tenney prefers without having to copy it in the article title or text. -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 16:30, 19 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi, Ken. (I never used talk before so I hope I'm doing it right.) I won't contest any of your changes to my edits yesterday except one. I don't understand the inclusion of both the demographics and the Town Center section. It seems so overdone for a tiny village of 6200 people to make such fine distinctions. Can't some of thie be condensed into a single piece half the length? The amount of space given to this topic seems so excessive. Jdietsch ( talk) 15:51, 9 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello - I agree that the CDP (town center) info seems excessive, but at the moment it's the standard approach for CDP data in New Hampshire and in some other places in Wikipedia. New Hampshire's CDPs all used to have separate articles, even if they had the same name as the towns that they were in. This led to confusion, with editors posting info about the entire town in the CDP articles, for instance. Eventually, five or so years ago some editors suggested that the CDP articles be merged with their parent towns if they had the same names. So the current situation eliminates the confusion but produces a lot of verbiage. Deleting the info entirely is not an option, because the CDP data is one of those sets that Wikipedia has complete article coverage on. It's not an ideal situation, but perhaps better than the two-article situation that preceded it. (Having done the gruntwork of combining all the CDP articles with the town articles when the group of editors agreed on the change, you can guess that I'm not too keen on re-separating them all back into paired articles...) You'll notice I added some geographic info about the CDP to better define it for readers.

Thanks for all the good information you added, by the way! -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 16:02, 9 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Questioning the undo on deletion of the excessive detail by having CDG and entire town demographics on a tiny village. Can these two sections be combined? Jdietsch ( talk) 16:14, 9 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Oh, I see your answer now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdietsch ( talk • contribs) 16:14, 9 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Thanks for uploading File:Penacook Lake 2015.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. -- ImageTaggingBot ( talk) 23:05, 27 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Done. -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 03:02, 28 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Hey Ken! Check out a new article I created: New Henniker Bridge. Would love to know what you think. Steve Lux, Jr. ( talk) 15:14, 16 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Great article. Well sourced, formatted, etc. I've linked to it from the article List of covered bridges in New Hampshire. If you can think of other articles from which you could link it, that would be good. Maybe a sentence in the Hopkinton article. (Or might you feel like creating an article on West Hopkinton?) -- Ken Gallager ( talk) 20:36, 16 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Oh a new article for West Hopkinton?! Hmmm, I will have to mull that over and challenge myself very soon! Steve Lux, Jr. ( talk) 21:29, 16 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Hello, Ken Gallager. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{ You've got mail}} or {{ ygm}} template.

Steve Lux, Jr. ( talk) 11:26, 18 December 2015 (UTC) reply