I've put in all the info I have on the Chili Bowl. Unfortunately, I've never been there, and the race isn't televised every year, so I don't have much first-hand knowledge on the race. All the info I have is what I could gather from the Chili Bowl's website, which wasn't all that much. If you'd like to add more, go ahead. If you have any pix of drivers at the Chili Bowl, that would be great. Even pix of some of the previous winners would be awesome. JLG 2701 20:38, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

No offense taken. I didn't think it sounded all that promotional when I wrote it, but re-reading it, it does sound a bit "preachy," don't it? BTW, GREAT pic of TS!!

I think it looks great, and should be ready to be published. As far as your DYK idea....I think that would be ultimate hook. BTW, what, if anything, do you know about POWRi? About all I know is that they have Midgets, mini-sprints, and micro-sprints, and that they run Macon Speedway 2 or 3 times a year. JLG 2701 17:38, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Is there any way you can stop by this page: Wikipedia:User categories for discussion#More racing categories, and give your thoughts? JLG 2701 19:58, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! There's quite a bit more that could be written about matching the mechanical impedance of the damper to that of the line, but despite the analogy between mechanical and electrical impedance, I am an electrical engineer, not mechanical, and so that lies outside my sphere of expertise. This being Wikipedia, maybe some day someone with the appropriate knowledge of vibration or aerodynamic effects can add some mathematical analysis to the article. Once again, thanks! — BillC ^talk 00:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

He he! I was just asking for someone else to credit me for this one after I flipped the group, and I see that you took care of all of the crediting. Royal broil 16:59, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

;) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 17:01, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

All I have is a single sentence....just about him being born in 1960, and being from Springfield. The rest is just links to info on him (I think one of them is one of the ones you gave me). I've been wanting to do it for a while, but I just didn't have the motivation, nor the early history on him. I can upload the pic, no problem, if you want to go ahead and write the article. JLG 2701 19:22, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I got the pic uploaded no problem (even without the Flikr Mover Tool...or whatever it is called). I think I got the tag right, but you might want to double check it, just to be on the safe side. It's at Wiki Commons, under Timwilkerson.jpg .

Whoops...forgot to sign a bit ago... but, anyway, I was messing with my Tim Wilkerson page, intending to do just a little (add an infobox, tidbits here and there, etc), and before I knew it, I had almost a full-blown page....mostly just stats. Check it out, and put your spin on it. JLG 2701 22:18, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I wikified that article, but I will need some time to source it. I also added the infobox I had on my page, so it looks a little more presentable. I'm also going to add an external links section. If it's ok, I will take down the deadend tag that's on the page since it now has links to other pages. JLG 2701 04:17, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Both. If you check my contributions I don't think you'll find I've made any POV biases in my edits. I'm pretty eclectic in my interests. Calindreams ( talk) 15:00, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

The tag on my talk page says that I'm part of the Wikiproject:Atheism, not that I'm an atheist. Calindreams ( talk) 15:01, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I have always liked Kevin Prosch's music, it just seems a shame that his page looks like an advert. Calindreams ( talk) 15:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Good cleanup - even more ruthless than my previous edit. As for adding references, no I haven't done it before, but I've looked at the example of your reference addition on the page and I think I can do it. Saying that, as for citing references to the fact he has influenced Matt Redman, etc.. I'm not sure but I'll have a look around once I've got the chance. We don't wan't to be sued for slander by Kevin for saying he has inspired Delerious and Matt Redman do we! Calindreams ( talk) 14:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

You'd need to find a reliable source that states it. I don't see how saying that someone inspired someone else would be slanderous. It's positive, not negative. Royal broil 14:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

There's a great tool for referencing that I wish everyone knew about. Click "My Preferences" on the top of any screen. Click the "Gadgets" tab. In the "Editing gadgets" section, add a check to "refTools" (adds a "cite" button to the editing toolbar for quick and easy addition of commonly used citation templates). While editing a page, look at the little toolbar above the editing window. There will be a CITE button. Use it to add all of your citations. It's very slick. Royal broil 14:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Someone made a comment on the Christian Music project talk page about Kevin's notability. I suppose his extensive discography suggests success or popularity rather than notability. The inclusion of many of his worship songs into hymnals might be an argument for notability do you think? Calindreams ( talk) 14:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Notability means that he has had numerous articles written about him in reliable sources. With so many albums, it's very likely that he is notable. Right now, his notability is somewhat asserted but not proven. I doubt inclusion of his worship songs in hymnals would be good enough argument for notability. Royal broil 14:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I've looked at various sites and the best thing I can find is that Crossrhythms says he is a pioneer in contemporary worship music, but like you have said, it is just asserted rather than proven. Apologies for the slander comment -it was my awful attempt at a joke. Calindreams ( talk) 08:08, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

You got me to chuckle about it now! If someone says that he's a pioneer, then there's probably enough reliably sourced content to prove notability. There was already one! I added All Music which is widely considered reliable on Wikipedia. Most other websites at google look like they're trying to see his CDs, so they're not reliable. This might be enough to prove that Hawk Nelson was inspired by him. Royal broil 12:41, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Unfortunately with it come a few little things to cause trouble. D.M.N. ( talk) 15:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Usually my hooks are short. I had to count the letters on this one because I knew it was close to 200. It was the only way that I could make sense. Royal broil 20:02, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I responded in the WP-Wisconsin talk page.The Wisconsin Historical Society has a Dictionary of Wisconsin History with 3 browse links-people, places, things.The historical society is an agency of the Wisconsin state government and therefore is a reliable source for verifiable information.I am not worry or concern that the 160 Wisconsin unicorporated communities articles will be deleted anytime soon.You have to look and dig for the information.The Wisconsin government keeps track of its unincorporated communities via the Dictionary of Wisconsin History.Many thanks- RFD ( talk) 12:51, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm surprised that I didn't think about that website. I've used it many time before to add things like old names for towns. Royal broil 12:54, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

There was something else that came to mind on Wisconsin local government.In the 1978 election-I am not sure if it was April or November, there was a proposed constitutional amendment that would had permitted the towns to have more then "one system" of government.Article IV, section 23 that is. That got voted down by a lopsided majority.The people in the Wisconsin towns are conservative and not open to change. Several of the towns like Richfield, Washington County, Wisconsin, Sumaico, Wisconsin, etc. voted for the option of becoming villages in order to provide for services not possible for them if they had remain towns and the one system constitutional requirement for the town government.Many thanks- RFD ( talk) 13:26, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Very interesting - I didn't know that. Thanks for the comment. Royal broil 14:31, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

This is a SOS!Someone put the article about the town of Green Bay (town), Wisconsin up for deletion! The town of Green Bay in Brown County does exist but it is not adjacent to the city of Green Bay.Thanks- RFD ( talk) 20:27, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I love my name too.. Good to meet a fellow trichophilic.. Thanks for the DYK update; when no one commented on my hook on the talk page, I was feeling a little left out.. -- Longhairandabeard ( talk) 05:26, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I thought your name was cool, not a fetish of mine. I always think that no news is good news! Royal broil 05:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Not sure if I will be around, but you are perfectly welcome to flip it anytime after I have taken the "inuse" tag off. Gatoclass ( talk) 03:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Since it was due by the time I finished, I flipped it myself. You are welcome to do the credits if you want tho :) Gatoclass ( talk) 04:45, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) It took me a while longer than I anticipated because I took time out to verify some hooks on the fly myself, and then there was lots of room on the mainpage so I added some extra ones, since we have a growing backlog. Gatoclass ( talk) 04:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, buddy! Been a long time since I've had a DYK and I've never had a feature under this present username. Might be time to tackle one of those...! As for Wild Bill, I'd hoped to be able to hook up with him earlier today, but I wound up busy on some other projects. Perhaps next week. I can get some additional biographical info and maybe a photo or two if he'll release some to Commons. -- PMDrive1061 ( talk) 06:07, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Alphageekpa ( talk) 14:27, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou for the DYK Stonehenge Cursus addition you made. By the time anyone had commented on it, it had almost slipped past the five day mark, so thanks for getting it in there at the last minute! Cheers Psychostevouk ( talk) 17:28, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

I'll let you know the moment I do another...which I might soon. There's another racer of my acquaintance from the mid-60s who doesn't yet have an article and who happens to be Bill's neighbor. I found pix of the L.A. Dart on Flickr, but none which I could use. If you have any free use pictures of that car, it would be awesome. -- PMDrive1061 ( talk) 04:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I just saw your message on Gwen's talk page, and I would just like to offer my input, please read that notability is not inherited.— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs / _Improve 05:01, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Did the article assert why he was notable, besides the fact that he was apart of a notable group?— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs / _Improve 05:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

The Tighe Scott article was lacking reliable sources, but that's not grounds for a speedy deletion when someone is part of a notable group. We don't delete (much less speedy delete) professional sports players articles just because they don't have reliable sources. We understand that they can be provided, so we apply maintenance tags like {{ notability}}, {{ unreferenced}}, {{ wikify}}, etc. Reliable sources would have been provided had I been given a chance. There's lots of consensus on keeping NASCAR driver's articles - I've never seen a professional race car driver article at his level fail any type of deletion. I created a stub article back in 2007 because I had a great picture on him. Looks like I should have spent more time creating an awesome DYK article on him! Royal broil 05:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Note to myself - some reliable sources that I found in 5 minutes: [2], [3], [4], [5] . Royal broil 05:43, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

You still haven't answered my question.— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs / _Improve 05:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I know you can't see the article like I can. There was one reliable source so it had " objective evidence". Even if it was felt that the article wasn't notable, per Wikipedia:NOTE#Articles_not_satisfying_the_notability_guidelines reviewers should "consider whether notability is established by the article, but whether it readily could be". I am contending that it readily could be. Royal broil 05:56, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Can you please stop evading and answer my question?— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs / _Improve 07:07, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Notability standards say that "A topic is presumed to be sufficiently notable to merit an article if it meets the general notability guidelines below, or if it meets an accepted subject-specific standard listed in the table at the right." So meeting WP:ATHLETE means that it meets the notability standards. That's why your question keeps getting indirect answers. Are you asking if it meets the general notability standards? That's at least debatable. It only had one significant coverage in a reliable source independent of the source and more than one is preferred. Usually that second source is requested instead of nominating something for deletion. Speedy deleting is definitely wrong in this case. I spend time some time speedy deleting nominated articles. I took notes above so that I can add additional reliable sources after the article is returned, or so that I have a solid case at deletion review. Royal broil 13:03, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

My question was clear and concise. Did the article state why the subject was notable, or did it not?— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs / _Improve 22:17, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

A simple yes or no will suffice, it shouldn't be that difficult a question; did the article state, the subject is notable because of reason A or not?— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs / _Improve 22:18, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Make your own judgment. The article is back and you'll have to look in its history because I have significantly modified it (last diff before deletion). No article uses the exact wording "the subject is notable because ...". Notability is the sum of the content of the article not a specific statement. Be aware that I am currently doing a significant expansion of the article. Be also aware that all recent AFD deletion discussion about NASCAR drivers and teams have led to speedy keep, mostly for drivers that were far less notable that Mr. Scott. None of them had Top 5 or even Top 10 finishes, which are the strong indicators of a successful driver in NASCAR-land. Royal broil 00:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

It isn't my own judgment, it's consensus that for speedy deletions, if an article does not assert notability(and this is judged by a sentence, or paragraph, not content, in reference to A7s of Criterion for Speedy deletion), then it can be speedily deleted. This article, the revision you noted, did not say why he was notable, it did not say why he deserved an article, and was thus deleted by policy.— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs / _Improve 05:36, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

I could in fact note several articles which directly state/assert the notability of whatever they're on, if you need examples. Either way, that doesn't change the fact that that is why it was speedied.— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs / _Improve 05:37, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

(deindent) Well, no wonder it got speedy deleted. People are making up their own rules. I read WP:CSD. No where in that guideline does it say anything close to what you're saying. An article doesn't have to have a perfect lead. It doesn't have to be a GA to be ineligible for speedy. There doesn't need to be a "magic sentence" that sums up the article. What do you think a stub is? A perfect article? No, of course not. Show me copious examples where consensus has determined what you are saying, because I have to see it to believe it. Royal broil 12:47, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Speedy exists for clear and obvious deletion cases. Obvious vandalism, extremely short articles, etc. It should not be a case where an admin decides that they don't feel that an article belongs. If an admin feels that way, then they should prod or AFD it. It should not be used in cases where there might possibly be opposition to a deletion. CSD or prods should not be used in cases where other simular AFDs have resulted in keep. I'm going to ask one of the RFA candidates and see what they have to say. Royal broil 12:56, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Why didn't the sentence "He later moved up to NASCAR's Winston Cup series, competing in 89 events in his career between 1976 and 1982." assert notability? All one has to do is click on the link to the NASCAR article and read the second paragraph to see that it is professional. Royal broil 13:53, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

An article about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant.

Are you sure you read that thoroughly enough? I can see it plain as day right there. Secondly, many may not know what the winston cup is, and the amount of races one competes in is not a sign of notability, just that that person has been in many races, just like google hits doesn't indicate notability.— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs / _Improve 04:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I understand that you do not know what the Winston Cup (now Sprint Cup) was. If you did, you wouldn't be saying that he is non-notable. Now take my viewpoint. Assume good faith, for the sake of argument, that I am not lying to you and that NASCAR is a fully-professional sport. I am here to build an encyclopedia, not to make up content on things that are even marginal on the notability scale. I have better things to do with my time that that. How should I, working on an article about a driver who very easily meets WP:ATHLETE as fully professional athlete, having Top 10 finishes in the highest stock car series in the world which is televised in 150 countries, clearly state to your satisfaction that he is notable without leading the reader? Anyone who would read the article understands what the Winston Cup was, and even if they don't, I state that it is now called the Sprint Cup. The author has to expect that a reader has at least a basic understanding of the topic and context. I don't see authors of articles in other professional sports create content that explain what that sport is! That's why there is wikilinks - so that readers can click on them to find out more about the context if they don't understand. I have to be neutral, without leading the reader into viewpoints by telling them about how popular NASCAR is right now.

WP:ATHLETE says that a person only has to compete professionally at any level or in the highest levels of college sport. It doesn't say that they had to be the winner in an event. He would have met WP:ATHLETE back when it said that the athlete had to compete in the highest level in his sport, because NASCAR is the highest level of stock car racing in the U.S. Speedy deletion exists for administrators to delete content that clearly does not meet notability standards. It does not give administrators the leeway to delete content that is even close to the borderline. I can understand that the administrator did not understand the sport. That's fine. There are lots of things that I don't understand. Since the driver did meet the standard I immediately complained to get it returned. The content may have not been written well enough for you and many other people to be able to determine that he meet the standard. As someone who understands the context, I think it was determinable. Do you hold the belief that auto racing is not a sport? I have read your last comment over and over and I don't understand how he could non-notable. It's not plain as day to me, so please expand on that point. AFD consensus over the past year or two has determined that all NASCAR drivers are notable, no matter how many races they have competed in. Royal broil' 13:32, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, this isn't really my topic, so I have no counter argument. Instead, if I find a stub on a NASCAR driver, I shall refer it to you, instead of speedying it. Does that sound good?— Dæ dαlus ^Contribs / _Improve 21:51, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

I saw your comments regarding musical genre of Britt Nicole on Horsegirl's userpage and I have since reverted the changes.-- Kevin586 ( talk) 17:42, 27 October 2008 (UTC)]

I appreciate your kind words and advice. I will work on the Barney Oldfield article, I have a lot of references and have been researching him for the last five years. Markdill ( talk) 17:59, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for trying to improve the Red Blanchard article. I vaguely heard of him but then I am not into country music. I did managed to find 3 citations for the article. RFD ( talk) 18:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your statement, I wish that I hadn't wasted my time taking pictures of these unincorporated communities, [6] I hope you don't still feel your time was wasted. The pictures can certainly go into whatever article incorporates (sorry! ;-) those communities. - Freekee ( talk) 01:45, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to stick to taking pictures of incorporated communities or town halls after this. I didn't think that anyone would find separate articles on unincorporated communities objectionable just because they happened to have the same name as their town. Royal broil 02:16, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I wish you would have commented earlier instead of now, several months later. Your opinion as a well-established contributor carries much more weight that (possible) single purpose accounts. Royal broil 13:51, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

If there is a discussion about redirecting all unincorporated community article because they happened to have the same name as their town, please let me know. If there is enought reliable source material to maintain an independent article on any topic, even unincorporated community articles, then there should be an article on that topic, particularly if there are photos. Feel free to send such deleted unincorporated community articles to DRV, where I think you will receive a warm reception. -- Suntag ☼ 14:44, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

There has been several rounds of discussion at WikiProject Wisconsin about this topic. Wisconsin has somewhat unusual political subdivisions. I'd prefer to keep the discussion limited to WikiProject members and state residents for that reason. None have been deleted so far to the best of my knowledge. We were mainly discussing what direction to head - should they be allowed to have their own articles or should the content be merged into articles on the town which is the real primary form of government in the area. We appear to be at "no consensus" right now. There had been consensus of a small group of WikiProject members when I started uploading pictures. Royal broil 14:52, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Left a note for you at Template talk:Did you know. Gatoclass ( talk) 05:03, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

You added that his middle name is Dempsey. Now a new user is protesting that it is Timothy. Please provide a reliable source on his middle name, or else I might challenge it by removing it. I'm not calling you a liar, just asking for a source. Royal broil 02:07, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

In Miley Cyrus' Breakout album's liner notes, she refers to her older half brother as Tracey Dempsey Cyrus...? chant essy 14:27, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Action Sunday is better known as Action Advertiser [7]. Action Advertising publishes the twice-weekly Action Advertiser, got into trouble with the law, and then were bought out by USA Today Parent Gannett. [8] Action Printing is a division of Action Advertising, Inc. Jim Carew founded Action Advertising. [9]. If of interest to you, perhaps create an Action Advertiser stub so that your cites in Octagon House (Fond du Lac, Wisconsin) can be linked to an article. -- Suntag ☼ 14:39, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! More power... - AnakngAraw ( talk) 23:03, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Can you delete my sandbox page User:JLG 2701/maora. I finished it, and published it to Wiki. you can see the finished project at Mid America Off Road Association. (BTW...the red and yellow colored logo...that actually was my own work...donated to MAORA.) JLG 2701 02:33, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I saw the discussion on the deletion of the Tighe Scott article. I'm glad to see that it was re-instated. As far as having people not understand racing, I went through that all through school. They thought those of us that raced were a bunch of un-educated hicks, who got their kicks tearing up cars and going around in little circles. Maybe my MAORA page can stay up for a while. MAORA is just big enough to draw names such as Randy Eller, Steve Federico (whom I beat in points in 1999, the only year we raced each other), Scott Taylor (years ago, before or during the SODA (Series) era), Chad Hord, Mark Oberg, Scott Schwalbe, Larry Kreiman (along with Steve), Kevin Schragge, and a few others, but it is also small enough that is doesn't get much coverage, other than it's own website, and the occasional one-off spot on Trucks! or Off Road Adventures on the Outdoor Channel.

I didn't mention that WSORR/ CORR regular Don Ponder got his start in MAORA also. I've watched him since he ran an almost bone stock Ranger in MAORA's class 7. He's a really great guy, as are Federico and Eller, all of whom I know personally. Hord and Oberg I met at a race in Iuka, Illinois (site of 2 of my event wins, in the 2 class 11 races ever run there). BTW, I was wrong on which show MAORA was on. They weren't on Trucks!, MAORA was featured on an episode of Xtreme 4x4. I corrected the article the other day.

I have another deletion request for you. I started a project, more or less for the heck of it, and I decided not to go ahead with it. If you would, could you please delete this linked page? Thanks!! JLG 2701 21:37, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Royalbroil, are you interested in helping with that Dispatch? There is a very rough start at User:How do you turn this on/Dispatch. I can't keep rounding up writers if there is no interest. If there is interest, please weigh in at WT:FCDW; I don't enjoy hounding editors for input when they have asked for coverage at the Signpost newsroom :-) Help appreciated. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 15:03, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Can you flip it in an hour or so? We're trying to flip it every four hours to get rid of the backlog. I'd do it myself but I'm not sure if I'll be up that late. Gatoclass ( talk) 14:37, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Sure. Royal broil 15:02, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks :) Gatoclass ( talk) 15:12, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the official notification and the DYK 200 medal. I want to thank you and all of the other admins at DYK for all of your efforts to make DYK work so well. Alansohn ( talk) 12:39, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that you've been active at T:TDYK, and I just wanted to let you know that I've been working on making a template for notifying users when there are issues that need to be addressed with their hooks (ie, when you've had to mark it with ). The template is at {{ DYKquestions}} if you want to take a look or try using it, and RyanCross started a discussion here to request comments about it. — Politizer  ^talk/ _contribs 14:55, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I did notice it but I haven't used it yet. I should start using it. Thanks for the prompt - it will be easier to find with this message. Royal broil 15:18, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

No problem! If enough people think it's useful, I could add it to the TDYK or some other page like that, but I don't want to go messing around with things without consensus. — Politizer  ^talk/ _contribs 16:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Be bold and add it. I doubt anyone would remove all trying to make things easier. It's the only option available, right? Royal broil 17:47, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Royalbroil, I got your message and responded on Jessie's talk page. Thanks Koplimek ( talk) 18:55, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

• I added to the discussion on Jessie's page. Glad you viewed some of the websites. These websites need to be correct so that people 'can' trust the info on them. There are a lot of lazy editors and admin people who throw up a site knowing they have errors and then expect to trust the info they have to offer. Im tired of these kind of websites. Makes what I do harder 'cause I have to check behind everybody for the best possible verification. Koplimek ( talk) 23:27, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment and the DYK plug. — Swpb ^{τ • c} 20:52, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the update, I had no idea the bridge had closed. I have updated the article accordingly. -- TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction• Creation} 21:41, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I was just about to create a new article for Riley Armstrong (the CCM musician, not the hockey player) when I noticed that a previous Riley Armstrong page had been deleted some months back (ref: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Contemporary_Christian_music). Could you put a copy of the deleted article in my sandbox to give me an idea of what the article looked like (i.e. what may have led to the deletion) and also in case there was anything worth scavenging? Preferably the Wikitext language version if possible. Thanks
Petersent ( talk) 02:04, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Restored, replied on your talk page. Royal broil 06:06, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Royal. Most kind, and fast. You must have saved the old article while I was still editing the draft, resulting in the first edit conflict that I ever came across. Big surprise. Not a big issue as it turned out given the versions had nothing in common. I put bigger bits together in Notepad before pasting, which is why the draft could appear so quickly. Expect to have a presentable start class article -- the short-term target -- by the end of next weekend. Regarding the nominations for deletion spree, I had suspected something of the sort was happening but slowly and on a small scale. Having seen the old article I'm not surprised that it was nominated. Might have done the same. Thus far my CCM edits have been weighted towards awards, interviews and reviews... specifically to address the notability criteria. Even if the articles do end up looking like lists! Expanding text can follow on afterwards.

Petersent ( talk) 06:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. I was pleased with the progress when I looked a few hours ago. All Music Guide has an article and being listed there used to be considered a great indication of notability.

Wow, first edit conflict. I've been irritated hundreds of times already. Fixing the conflict is frequently a huge pain. They made the template {{ inuse}} and {{ underconstruction}} when you think there's a high chance that someone will edit conflict you. I wouldn't use it on a sandbox - only on active articles.

It is critical that we add awards, review and interviews - so it is critical that you keep doing them. They substantiate that the subject of the article is notable as you have indicated. I'm sure that there are MANY notable CCM articles that should be written although none are in my mind right now. Royal broil 07:06, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointers. I expect to get a copy of Powell's Encyclopedia of CCM fairly soon. Would be nice if he was to publish a revised and expanded edition. There are a couple of artists I am doing research on, but don't expect another article this year. At least not before Christmas. Blessings,
Petersent ( talk) 03:50, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

YEA, It's about time - I can finally say that one of my thousands of images made the main page! I'm so excited! The image is one of my favorites and I submitted it for a photography contest (but didn't win). Royal broil 04:40, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Great photo. That was what caught my eye today. Best. - SusanLesch ( talk) 05:51, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. I hope to get the 50 DYK one in the future ;-) — sephiroth bcr ^{( converse)} 05:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

And a thanks from me too! -- Bruce1ee ^talk 05:40, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

You're both welcome. I realize how much work you've put into making so many articles! A small token to show that your work is appreciated. Royal broil 05:44, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for your comment. I just sent an e-mail to you- RFD ( talk) 17:43, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

hi! just thought i'd say thanks for the meadal. Ryan shell ( talk) 18:39, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Royal broil 07:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for supporting me at my successful Rfa! Hope to work with you in the future!-- Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:14, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Without the list formatting itself, the page still has over 2,900 chars of WP:V cited text, which was hard work finding all of the entries and appropriate WP:RS citations (in many cases multiple cites for each entry). Respectfully request that it be considered for T:DYK. Cirt ( talk) 07:09, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

... since I became an admin, with your support. I hope that I've lived up to your expectations, but please let me know if you see room for improvement. Regards, Bencherlite ^Talk 12:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Royal, you all mentioned the Christmas mainpage at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-11-08/Dispatches; should we put out a Dispatch to encourage submissions ? Sort of like we did with Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-03-03/Dispatches? If so, we could aim for the December 1 Dispatch. If you're interested, you can sandbox something at WP:FCDW/December. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:41, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, actually, it was I who mentioned the Christmas main page plan in the article first time round. – How do you turn this on ( talk) 11:35, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't get your racing diaper in a bunch. I moved it back two minutes after moving it in the first place, a day before your threat.

Oldpantsnewjersey ( talk) 20:43, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

The new lead pic isn't showing up. I'll do a little research to find out why. JLG 2701 17:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I was hoping it was something simple, like a typo or something, but it is more involved than that. JLG 2701 17:52, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Great picture!!!! I find Commons to be screwy most of the time. I'll upload a pic, and then like you, it isn't there 30 seconds later. I think my problem can be attributed to the Flikr tool.

I, too, have somewhat of a friend in publishing. We used to race with Rick Standridge, husband to Stock Car Racing Magazine contributer, Joyce Strandridge. A picture of our car at Springfield Speedway was used in one of her articles in the April 1985 or 86 issue. It was an article on caution flags. The picture was of a car sitting sideways in the middle of the track, with my dad about to nail him. I, myself, have had a Letter to the editor published in Circle Track. It appeared in an issue in 1988. I can't remember which issue though. I also wrote the MAORA Newsletter when I was Secretary and Vice President in 2001. JLG 2701 19:07, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I have undone your change to the hatnote on Plymouth - in the past there have been some unfortunate disputes about what should be at Plymouth, how to disambiguate the various Plymouths in the world, etc. There is a recent thread on the talk page about the cars and the hatnote, I do feel it would be best to seek consensus there before making such a change. Best wishes, DuncanHill ( talk) 03:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I figured it would immediately be undone. I didn't look at the talk page, just did what I think makes sense in the worldview per WP:BOLD. I don't want to talk about it any more, so don't reply back. Royal broil 03:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi!Would you please take a look at a new article Marie Maas? I feel it is a possible COI plus the editor wrote an article about herself.Thanks- RFD ( talk) 20:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I did let the editor know about my concerns.Thanks again- RFD ( talk) 20:11, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the COI concerns, so I added the COI template at the top. It's a very thin notability assertion (at best). I bet that User:Orangemike would speedy it, so if you want it gone ask him to look at it. I'm more on the inclusionist side, so I don't care if it remains. Royal broil 03:47, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks-I let Orangemike know.- RFD ( talk) 12:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I thought you wanted an independent review of the article, so I suggested that you should go to him. It looks like your goal was to see it speedy deleted. You should have went to WP:CSD. There you could have looked up and found that the {{ db-bio}} tag probably would apply to the article. I figured you knew about this and I didn't want to insult your intelligence. Admins routinely review the articles nominated here and in many cases delete them. Since there were numerous sources, I probably wouldn't have done the speedy deletion on it, but I would have left it nominated because they are not independent. You can still nominate it - I won't argue against you on this article. Royal broil 13:32, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks-On Marie Maas it look like this was a self written article about herself.No harm in having Orangemike taking a look at it especially if the editor wrote the article about herself.The photos at the Ellison Bay article was very nice.One of my first cousins has a summer cottage not too far away from the explosion.My cousin said the explosion shook her cottage but was not damaged. RFD ( talk) 14:58, 23 November 2008 (UTC)PS I will go back to Orangemike and clarified about the independent review.

Hello, an article that you said contest speedy, need full delete discussion ( Martin Randall Travel) is up for deletion review. Please feel free to join in if you would like. SpikeJones ( talk) 13:56, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar, and also thanks for taking all the pictures of the various small communities I created articles for. Those have really been helpful. -- TheCatalyst31 ^{Reaction• Creation} 17:58, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Your welcome. I took the pictures completely independent of what you were doing! I usually noticed that you started an article and then I looked to see if I happened to have taken a picture before. I often had taken one while passing through. I still have to take a pictures of Millhome, Wisconsin which I pass through several times each year and I frequently visit family in nearby Kiel, Wisconsin. Royal broil 18:30, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

I e-mailed you an article that appeared in the Friday, November 28, 2008 edition of the Taylorville, Illinois Breeze-Courier about Fond du Lac, Wisconsin resident, and Taylorville, IL native, Randy Hopper, who was recently elected to the Wisconsin Senate. I would have just sent you a link, but you have to have a subscription to view the online version of the paper. If anyone is interested in doing the article, that would be a decent source for some verifiable information. JLG 2701 17:14, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi Royalbroil, Sandy asked me to check on whether there will still be a December dispatch for DYK. I'm not sure what the consensus is on the DYK talk page now - whether for a more inclusive DYK push, Christmas only, or perhaps just encourage people to write holiday-themed articles that would fall into the normal rules. What do you think is likely going to be done? Karanacs ( talk) 16:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd call it no consensus, so I'd say don't run the article. There was plenty of strong opposition plus plenty of strong support. I don't plan on working on it except if things change. Royal broil 04:16, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

So, we'll keep WP:FCDW/December on hold in case it gets a second life? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 04:03, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, exactly. I brought it up on the DYK talk page and said that someone else could pick it up if they want to. Royal broil 05:14, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

The author removed the prod tag on this article. I agree that there are BLP concerns and have listed it at AFD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joel Case. Regards, Espresso Addict ( talk) 15:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

It's deletion looks imminent, so I'm satisfied that the BLP concerns are being addressed. Thanks for the notification! Royal broil 03:28, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll bet that's the first time in history that someone characterized Fulghum's wonderful advice as an attack.

Telling someone to quote "GROW UP!" and not act like a kindergartner is definitely a personal attack. Royal broil 15:35, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting the vandalism of my talk page. RFD ( talk) 15:27, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

This wasn't the first such message: I got a similar message yesterday from a different IP who is clearly the same person: see here before I cleaned it up somewhat. Nyttend ( talk) 15:30, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for paying attention to the substance of my edits. Nyttend and RFD have been reacting in a very knee-jerk manner to my edits, reverting them automatically. They have accused me of being 12.76.152.161, which I'm not. They seem a bit paranoid. They even have some sort of conspiracy theory that 12.76.152.161 is following them around. (See this.) When I see sloppy writing, I fix it. That's all. 69.120.182.161 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.198.217.105 ( talk) 15:45, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Sigh. We appreciate cleanup of sloppy writing. We don't appreciate people who won't work with others. We need people who are willing to discuss things. They are right, we did discuss CDPs vs unincorporated communities vs villages vs cities in Wisconsin. Municipalities in Wisconsin are unusual, so applying national consensus to Wisconsin doesn't work. I respect Nyttend and RFD A LOT. They were enforcing the consensus that we came up with! If you have a problem with previous consensus, discuss it first and don't revert. The appropriate thing for you to do with wait out the block even though it's on a different IP address. A range block can be arranged if you don't stop logging in an our of your ISP. Then create an account. You'll find that we ALL WILL be reasonable if you give us a chance! We've all seen lots of people that come here trying to rip apart what we did without understanding what we've discussed. You are showing that same pattern. Royal broil 15:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

FYI, the CDP format that brought up this whole business is not national consensus; Michigan CDPs are this way, largely due to Bkonrad's beliefs, and there are some scattered ones nationwide, but they're very few. Even in New England, where CDPs are seen least favorably by geography editors, few fit the CDP format that brought this up. Nyttend ( talk) 16:09, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Not exactly clear what you mean: Wisconsin CDPs are just like CDPs in the rest of the country, and they already have their own category. Or do you mean something that I'm missing? Nyttend ( talk) 16:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

According to the Census Bureau's announcement in the Federal Register, "This Notice announces the Bureau of the Census' (Census Bureau's) final criteria for defining census designated places (CDPs) for the 2010 Census. CDPs are statistical geographic entities representing closely settled, unincorporated communities that are locally recognized and identified by name." --from the Federal Register, February 13, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 30), emphasis added. The Federal Register is the official forum for publishing federal government rules and regulations. Wikipedia is not. The Federal Register further states: 'CDPs were referred to as "unincorporated places" from 1950 through the 1970 decennial censuses.' With only a few exceptions, all CDPs are unincorporated places. Their boundaries, and even their names, change with every decennial census, at the whim of the Census Bureau. In the 2000 census, there were some CDPs with 0 population. Note also that CDPs are statistical entities, not physical or governmental. That is, they are simply a means of enumerating population in an area. They have absolutely no status beyond that. Census Bureau definition: "Statistical geographic entity--A geographic entity that is specially defined and delineated, such as block group, CDP, or census tract, so that the Census Bureau may tabulate data for it. Designation as a statistical entity neither conveys nor confers legal ownership, entitlement, or jurisdictional authority." -- Federal Register

Wikipedia gets a bad reputation because of its uninformed articles. The CDP issue is a perfect example of this, as well as of not letting the facts interfere with opinions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.76.135.41 ( talk) 19:05, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I've filed a sockpuppet case in regard to all the recent IPs with which RFD and I have been involved. Could you look there and offer an opinion? Nyttend ( talk) 21:10, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi RoyalBroil-Because of this anon editor-I will be taking a short leave of absence.This individual questione some of the articles I wrote-I mentioned 2 Roman catholic bishops- Alessandro Maggiolini& Ernest Kombo and now this individual changing those articles.Ernest Kombo was ordained a Roman catholic priest for the Jesuits this editor changed it to Kombo being ordained a Jesuit priest implying the jesuits are a separate religious group.With some ongoing health problems I do not need the added stress.Would you and Nyttend place watch my user page, etc. I will return-Thanks- RFD ( talk) 22:07, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

See my note on RFD's talk. Nyttend ( talk) 22:11, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

For the record

No one ever stated that Jesuits weren't a Roman Catholic order!!!!!! In fact, I stated that since they were a Roman Catholic order that "Roman Catholic Jesuit" was redundant. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!! READ MY EDITS; DON'T JUST RELY ON INNUENDO. All of my edits have been contributions: copyediting of sloppy, ungrammatical, awkward writing.

Which of these sounds better to you?

Kombo was ordained to the Roman Catholic priesthood for the Society of Jesus.

Kombo was ordained a Jesuit priest.

Which of these sounds better to you?

On April 7. 1983, Pope John Paul II appointed Maggiolini Roman Catholic Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Carpi, Italy, and he was ordained a bishop on May 29, 1983.

On April 7, 1983, Pope John Paul II appointed Maggiolini Bishop of the Diocese of Carpi, Italy, and he was consecrated a bishop on May 29, 1983.

RFD has trouble writing. I helped rephrase some of his work to reduce wordiness. Is that vandalism?

Nyttend has gotten into a tizzy because I've blanked my user pages (which is perfectly legitimate per WP talk page guidelines) and have expressed opinions he disagrees with. I've engaged in NO vandalism whatsoever. So stop harassing me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.76.154.120 ( talk) 00:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I was using an absurd example which had no relation to what you said. I didn't review any of these edits in question. As to which is better, I'd have to see them in context. If there's enough context, the second version is more concise in both cases. RFD does a fine job of writing. There are Wikipedians that do copyediting for featured articles and even these people find their work being improved occasionally. Everyone's wording could be improved, including my own, so you shouldn't be complaining that someone is a bad writer. RFD has done a lot of work developing articles on Wisconsin topics. I've never heard him complain about others like you do. By the way, you're the one leaving messages on my talk page - I've only left one message on your talk page. I'm far from harassing you. How about we try to forget about each other? If you would be willing to stick to copyediting and stop complaining about everyone who volunteers their time here, I'll stick to working on an article for 2008 CORR Pro-2 champion Rob MacCachren. Royal broil 04:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Semi protection would be fine! Keep an eye out for the Kombo\Maggiolini articles.I am a little bemused that this anon editor said the 2 articles were creative then took after myself with bad grammar-spelling-Many thanks- RFD ( talk) 22:29, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

RFD, remember that everyone's work can be improved, and I think this IP does have good intentions on this topic. Remember the whole "edit relentlessly" thing. Royal broil 04:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

RFD should know that writing is not everyone's forté. I do not mean to be critical of RFD for his efforts, but here are a few examples of his writing from just the past 3 days:

• "CDPs are more important then unincorporated communities."
• "this anon editor changed it to Kombo being ordained a Jesuit priest of which is not accurate"
• "It has been distress for myself"
• "I did apologized to that registered editor"
• "we reached the consensus in the preparing of the Wisconsin county articles and templetes that they were to be rank as"
• "all editors of Wikipedia should be require to be register"
• "It gets very stress when you have one anon editor using several IP numbers"
• "There is any reason why you yourself am not register with Wikipedia with an account?"

Few people would call these examples "a fine job of writing." My efforts have only been to help improve his writing. I'm not picking on him. I do the same thing for many other articles. Isn't that what WP editing is for? I volunteer my time here, too. And my time would be much better spent in writing articles than in copyediting awkward writing, so it would help if editors would pay more attention to their writing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.76.130.220 ( talk) 19:26, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

It comes across as you picking on him when you point out his faults and complain about his writing. When someone looks through all of someone's edits to find fault in their work (not saying that you're doing this), it's consider a form of wikistalking and people get cranked up very rapidly. I'm far from perfect and I know that others are imperfect too. Everyone has their strengths and weaknesses. How about you look positively at RFD's abilities to organize things and to bring up relevant topics that need discussing, which is how I see his strengths. Also, I get much worse at writing when I'm upset, especially if I feel that someone is trying to irk or stalk me and I'm sure that RFD feels that way right now. I know that I rarely review my prose for edits when I'm leaving a message on someone's talk page, so I'm sloppy here too. That's why people who volunteer like you are needed, 12! If anyone thinks that 12 is a tough/difficult copyeditor, then you should try getting a featured article. This is child's play compared to pulling out your teeth. Thoughts continued below...

I have the perfect example of why you need to register for an account. I have a problem with one of your reversion of my reversion. You don't understand exactly how categories work, and I need to explain it to you, 12. The article is the Peshtigo Fire. You added the article to Category:Disasters in Wisconsin which is not how we do it. The article is already in the Category:Natural disasters in Wisconsin, which is a subcategory of Disasters in Wisconsin. So if an article is in ANY subcategory is it automatically in every parent category of that subcategory. You can find the guideline at Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories. Royal broil 03:24, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

That's probably the way it's supposed to work, but it doesn't appear that's the way it does work. Look at the Category:Natural disasters in Wisconsin list - except for Peshtigo, none of the items in it appear in Category:Disasters in Wisconsin. So it's not working hierarchically. The reason I added Category:Disasters in Wisconsin to the Peshtigo Fire is because it wasn't showing up on Category:Disasters in Wisconsin, and given that it's probably the biggest disaster Wisconsin has ever seen, I thought it should. BTW, if following people around WP and reverting their edits is wikistalking, then several people have been wikistalking me for the past week. 12.76.128.210 ( talk) 23:34, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

You don't understand about the categories. A member of a subcategory, like all of the rest of the members of Category:Disasters in Wisconsin, are automatically in the parent category ( Category:Natural disasters in Wisconsin). So this means that the group "all disasters in Wisconsin" can be subdivided by "NATURAL disasters in Wisconsin". So everything but the Peshtigo Fire article is done right, which is why I have a big problem with your change. That's how it always works. There are no counterexamples, just mistakes. Show them to me and I'll fix them.

About your wikistalking comment, I'll give you a Strong Support. I wish this incident was over. When someone new (especially an IP) draws attention to themself, like you apparently did to yourself, their edits are watched carefully by established editors. I do that too. People want things to be done right and new people have a tendency to things without completely understanding how things work. Things like the subcategorization issue. Time and time again, I've seen people behind IP addresses to cause major problems. Only a small percentage of IP edits are productive anymore. I know you don't want to register for a name (and you don't need to), but it shows a level of dedication that slows down questions about your intentions and it helps smooth out problems like this. A peak behind the scenes. Royal broil 03:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Peer review?

12, would you be willing to give a high level peer review on an article that I tried for featured article. I would greatly appreciate it. I request this format in the peer review: you to do the review and have me to do the edits (except real basic prose issues). You just leave the comments on the article's talk page. This way forces me as the "expert" on the topic to ensure that what you change makes sense. If I undo or decide not to do a change then you leave it alone because there's a reason why I did it. Then we'll negotiate any problems that you find until we are both satisfied. The article is a biography of a dead Wisconsinite who is not well known anymore except in certain circles. There's a good chance that you never heard of this person. The perfect situation for a prose review! I'm looking to have the prose reviewed, not the technical aspects of this person's occupation which was already reviewed by other "experts". That being said, I'd like to know what areas are difficult for a non-expert to understand so that they will get improved. Leave me your thoughts and we'll go from here. This request is another perfect example of why you should register for an account. It's very difficult for me to keep leaving messages on my own talk page hoping that you'll find them. You IP changes so I can't leave you a message. Royal broil 03:24, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'd be willing to do that, however, it's a lot harder to write comments than it is to mark up an article (e.g., redlining or substituting or adding words or phrases phrases). How about if I leave the article alone, but put a marked up copy on the article's talk page, or your talk page, if you prefer? I'd add comments, too, for copyediting whose purpose wasn't obvious. 12.76.128.210 ( talk) 23:34, 9 December 2008 (UTC) I'm curious as to who the mysterious Wisconsinite is.

I wish we had redline capabilities in Wikipedia. I've copied the Alan Kulwicki article to User:Royalbroil/Sandbox for you to edit there (minus the categories). I'll change the real article with cut and paste if I'm satisfied. You can start a section on my talk page with comments and questions. Section headings start with 2 equal signs, then the heading (how about calling it "Alan Kulwicki article peer review"), then 2 equal signs. If the article is written right, you should be able to figure out who he was by the lead paragraphs. The rest of the article should explain relevant details about his life without being bogged down. I left a message on my sandbox giving you permission to edit it. It's not always okay to edit someone else's sandbox. This article should be written by the book in the Manual of Style, so there's probably a reason that every Wiki-format item is done this way. It's been reviewed by many well-established Wiki editors when I nominated it for featured article, but there's always room for improvement (especially since it failed)! Royal broil 03:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

There's now a marked-up copy of the Kulwicki article and my comments in your sandbox. I used footnotes to record my minor editing comments, but it was impossible to find them within all the article footnotes, so I created a separate copy of the article sans footnotes from which I worked. This is appended to the full article in your sandbox. You should be able to figure out what I did. Let me know if it's useful.

12.76.144.169 ( talk) 01:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

AWESOME changes! These are significant improvements to what I had written. I wish I had asked you to edit the real article or edited the copy. I was anticipating that you would edit the copy in the sandbox, not create a copy below it. I didn't have to read through your footnotes to understand the reason for most changes. Your wording is MUCH cleaner and you did a much better job with varying the sentence structure. My immediately laughed and said "duh!" with the "He turned around the car" phrase. I saw the problem without reading your comment. He didn't stand outside the car and spin around the car or anything like that (LOL!). I'll leave comments below your markup. Thank you so much! Royal broil 02:51, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Done. I left messages on the version in my sandbox. Please review and change the original as needed. Thanks! Royal broil 12:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I made a few more changes to the article. See what you think. 12.76.129.140 ( talk) 21:18, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

The 12.-series IP user has changed references to Ashton Corners to refer to "Ashton". Looking at the GNIS, I found a really confusing situation: BOTH have entries! Look at Ashton and Ashton Corners. Looking at Google Maps, it seems that they're about a mile away from each other, along the same road. Are they really big enough to warrant separate articles, or should they be merged; and if they're merged, under which title do you think we should list the combined communities' article? Because the article is now entitled AC, I'm putting the notes back to AC for the moment, but we really need to get this decided at some point :-) Nyttend ( talk) 21:34, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

You really shouldn't believe everything you find on Google. I changed Ashton Corners to Ashton because that's its name. There really aren't two places, just one. There may be an Ashton Corners on some antique map at the USGS, but no one in that area refers to the hamlet as "Ashton Corners." Google "St. Peter's Ashton," for example, and you'll see that the school and church say they're located in Ashton. I was actually stunned to see Ashton referred to in WP as "Ashton Corners." I asked my aunt who was born in Ashton if she'd ever heard it referred to as "Ashton Corners," and she said never in all her 90 years had she ever heard it called that. This is confirmed by the Dane County Department of Planning and Development. See Unincorporated Hamlets of Dane County, Wisconsin, for example. Also check the state's official Dane County map. You'll find an Ashton there, but no Ashton Corners. Stop reverting perfectly good edits you know absolutely nothing about. 12.76.129.166 ( talk) 21:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, Google supports Ashton. Nyttend ( talk) 22:05, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't know that area. I do have a highly detailed 1998 DeLorme topographic map of Wisconsin called the Wisconsin Atlas & Gazetteer ( ISBN  0-89933-251-X). Every mile is about a 1/2" x 1/2" square. It lists both Ashton and Ashton Corners. So both locales are verifiable by a reliable source. Ashton is shown at the intersection of Church Rd. and County K. Ashton Corners is listed at the intersection of County K and U.S. 12. Looking at the map in my area, it does list some places that aren't commonly known but are historical names. For example, I used to live in Sheboygan. The map lists a former unincorporated community called Erdman at the north edge of the city (at the intersection of County J and WIS 42 by Menards) that now is part of the city. The map shows it separate even though it isn't anymore. So there's some issues even with relatively reliable sources. To answer your dispute, both locales should be eligible for an article. If they are combined, the article could contain text about each locale. There could be separate sections for each. Otherwise write an article about the larger one (Ashton) and include a sentence about a nearby historic locale called Ashton Corners. There's lots of ways to approach this. Surely you two can come up with a solution that's agreeable to both of you. My choice would be to have the article at Ashton, with a section on Ashton Corners, and have Ashton Corners redirect to the Ashton. Use the Commmon name. Royal broil 02:37, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I've driven past the intersection of County K and U.S. 12 dozens, perhaps hundreds, of times, and I've never noticed Ashton Corners. The community is located in Ashton, because that's where the church, school, and cemetery are. If there are a few houses at Ashton Corners, it really doesn't qualify as a community. (Blink and you've missed it.) So I'd have the main article be Ashton, with references to Ashton Corner. 12.76.128.210 ( talk) 23:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi! There is a new article in WikiProject Wisconsin- Town of Raymond. The problem is- there is an existing article about Raymond, Wisconsin which is a town in Racine County.Can this be merged or deleted?Thanks- RFD ( talk) 12:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks like an article mainly on the unincorporated community. I think it should be separated by town vs community, cleaned up, and kept. What do you think? Royal broil 13:00, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree-the title needs to be change.The unincorporated community of Raymond, Wisconsin does exist according to my DeLorme atlas.Right now-I am getting ready to leave for Iowa and Christmas with my family-Thanks- RFD ( talk) 13:53, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the new article appears to be about the Town of Raymond, not the unincorporated community, as it refers to the "town of Raymond," has the Town of Raymond population (updated), and links to the Town of Raymond website. It appears to be a duplicate article that doesn't add much info, and probably should be deleted. 12.76.128.62 ( talk) 21:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I changed it to a redirect without deleting it. It's possible that someone could type in that term looking for the town's article, so I kept it. Usually we err on the conservative side with redirects. This way the article's history is available if anyone wants to look at the previous article. Royal broil 03:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Royalbroil-I am considering taking retirement.User Dual Freq has an very good point-let the anon editors do the editing.and I agree.Eventually-Wikipedia will have to require the anon editors to sign up for accounts.I will e-mail you once I get back home-Thanks- RFD ( talk) 20:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't get it. Why do you care what someone else thinks about you? You have so many supporters here who genuinely respect you, like me. Why do you worry about one person who doesn't even want to register? How is this person bothering you? Royal broil 04:04, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Anon. 12.76.xxx. must be a professional copy-editor. Seems to know about wikilinking, so I wonder whether s/he is a disenchanted WPian who wants a little privacy. Whatever the case, it would be great to have this spark on board. 12.76, you'll encounter less of the senseless resistance we see all too often if you opened an account with a username (takes 3 mins, is anonymous). People give anons less quarter (regrettably but understandably).

Please keep in touch with Royalbroil and anyone else whose writing skills and topics take your fancy. Tony (talk) 06:28, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

12: I asked Tony to recommend areas for your go where you could channel your skills. I'm thinking that WP:FAC commenting would be a good direction. Do you want me to try to find Wikipedians who would appreciate your copyediting skills?

If you are a former Wikipedian, give yourself a fresh start. No questions will be asked. Thanks, Tony! Royal broil 12:55, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I've popped in on your user page from time to time since you asked for a peer review from me, just to see how work on that article was going. I also monitor the recent changes to WikiProject Wisconsin and sometimes the edits of those contributing to WikiProject Wisconsin, making it appear as if I'm wikistalking, although I'm not.

I'm not a professional copyeditor, and have no interest in copyediting per se. I work primarily on articles with content in which I have some knowledge or interest (e.g., The Holyland; Roxbury, Wisconsin; Max Kade, which I translated from the German WP). Secondarily, I edit articles I find painful to read (e.g., Edgewood College, which still needs tremendous work; Ernest Kombo) or that have clear POV issues, rampant commercial messages, or obvious inaccuracies. While I appreciate the flattery and interest in my work, I'm content with my current WP editing and really have no interest in expanding the breadth or depth of such by working on articles in which I have no knowledge or interest.

I still fail to see any benefits to registering. I recognize that some have knee-jerk negative reactions to anonymous editors; that's their problem.

12.76.129.140 ( talk) 21:33, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

I review your edits of the notable alumni and faculty of thw University of Stevens Points. These people need articles to established notability.Also one edit this anon editor made of Pete McCann a jazz musician was link to some one by the name of Gordon 'Pete' McCann who was from the United Kingdom and has no connections with UW-Stevens Point.Royalbroil-you should revert these edits and tell these anon editor to use the UW-Stevens Point talk page to explain why the edits were made.Thanks- RFD ( talk) 14:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, and I wish all who read this a Merry Christmas! For those who do not have Christian culture/beliefs, I wish a Happy New Year! May 2009 be a great year for all. Royal broil 17:41, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Royalbroil, did anything happen after all with December DYKs, and if so, could we update and use Wikipedia:FCDW/December, to make it similar to the Halloween Dispatch? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 01:36, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't involved at all. I started a thread at Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Signpost_article_for_Christmas_DYK.3F to see if anyone is interested. Royal broil 04:44, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Royalbroil (I'm trying to stay away from Talk:DYK right now ... ugh). SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 05:14, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Re: Suntag's RFA. Each question gives supporters a reason to oppose, and opposers a reason to support. Sure, there are people who will see a show-stopper and oppose and that's final, but in general, if I'm neutral, the more questions asked, the more likely I am to get off the fence. As it happened, I stayed on the fence throughout Suntag's RFA, but I did follow all the questions and they were helpful. davidwr/( talk)/( contribs)/( e-mail) 05:52, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

A few months ago there was discussion about the RFA process and why people don't want to run. One of the major reasons was because so many questions get asked. This RFA is a great example of too many questions being asked. Back and forth, lots of followups, etc. I usually only comment on RFAs when I know the contributor's work. Otherwise I sit on the fence. Anyone can be made to look good or bad by the tone and number of questions, so I respectfully disagree with you. I think that questions should not be the primary basis used by commenters. Royal broil 06:52, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Questions very rarely impact the way I vote. I make my decisions based upon the edits that the user has made in the past. Only when those edits don't satisfy me, will I look at the questions... and that is generally to get a specific answer to a specific question I observed during my review.--- Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon Take the CSD Survey 21:03, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I was going to oppose, but changed my mind. I feel it is unfair to put people up for adminship who have been on the project such a short time. Six months is not in my opinion long enough and nominating such people is practically setting them up for disappointment. I don't think I could support any candidate who has not been on the project at least nine months, and preferably twelve. Gatoclass ( talk) 13:48, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Gato, that's a very sensible reason to oppose. Royal broil 00:12, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again for your hard work on DYK! YellowMonkey ( bananabucket) 05:03, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

I thank you back, YellowMonkey, for all your help at DYK and your helpful advice for FA. Royal broil 05:15, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

OK. OK. You've finally convinced 12. to register. I'm now Sift&Winnow. You mentioned some things you wanted reviewed. I'm working on something right now, but can take a look in a few days. Let me know what you're interested in. -- Sift& Winnow 20:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I made some changes to the MacCrachen article, but I had a hard time with it. The entire article seemed to be one sentence after another saying "He won this," and "He won that." I got a little dizzy trying to follow it, and because I don't understand the lingo, had a hard time trying to figure out how to possibly combine some things. I commented a couple of questions in the article. Please look it over.

To flesh it out a bit, is there some way you could:

• Explain how he fits into the world of racing, other than the fact that he's won a lot of races?
• Explain the type of racing he participates in (e.g., What's off-road racing? What's the difference between SCORE, SNORE, and CORR? How is it that trucks and motorcycles race in the same events? etc.)
• Put all his awards in the Awards section without being redundant? (There are a few mentioned in the Career section.)

Overall, it just needs more context to make it interesting to a non-racing addict. SNORE :) -- Sift& Winnow 03:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello, you are the one who reviewed the article Lockdown (2008) for GA. I want to say thank you for taking the time out to review it. It recently was promoted to FA and the comments you left for its GA review and taking the time out to read the article helped get it there. Thank you very much for promoting the article, because in the long run it helped alot.-- Will C 05:52, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome! I'm glad to hear that my thorough review style was helpful to you. Royal broil 13:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Happy New Year RB. I was hoping you might know if antone is organising a Darwin200 DYK event? Its mid Feb. I got very confused after Halloween. Cheers Victuallers ( talk) 12:05, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi there - that's interesting about the artist articles. There's actually a whole heap of Christian music pages at es.wikipedia that haven't been created, which I started doing, but I think I'll let off some over there (since I'm only barely learning some Spanish) and stick around here more. Whenever I'm not preoccupied with any major project here on Wikipedia, I sometimes I listen to the radio and try to create album articles for a string of songs I hear. ;-) As for updating CCM topics, today I just discovered some work that I'll be doing; the Grammy nominees were announced, and so those articles of the gospel categories need to be updated, and this is a decent ref. Happy new year to you too! Jamie ^☆ S93 02:30, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping this in sync, however at the next update interval, please allow the bot one hour to do its update. (I will be watching it trying to figure why it won't do it) I am trying to figure out why the bot won't run, it thinks it has no need to update when I run it. —— nix eagle 15:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey, Royal; there's nothing else I can do, no one would help. Wikipedia:FCDW/December will run as is, unless someone can add some information about the hooks that actually ran. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:39, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I am quite disappointed too. I copyedited it and added the POTD for December 25th. I think you should run it as it is. Let me know if you need admin help to cleanup WP:FCDW/December. I'd prefer if you moved it to preserve the edit history. Royal broil 03:21, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Ral315 or Ragesoss will move it when they publish (on the 10th); it is what it is :-) Thanks for all your help! SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 03:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome, and thanks for all that you do to keep the Signpost published! I've always enjoyed reading it (ever since I found it), and I read it every week. I'm glad that you're pushing to keep it running. Royal broil 03:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi,

I noticed you voted oppose in the flag revs straw pole and would like to ask if you would mind adding User:Promethean/No to your user or talk page to make your position clear to people who visit your page :) - Thanks to Neurolysis for the template   «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l»  (talk) 06:55, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't like to use my userspace for political adds. Royal broil 13:15, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

-- Dravecky ( talk) 11:28, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

RoyalBroil-I was adding Colonel Robert Bruce McCoy's name to the Sparta, Wisconsin article when I notice the WikiProject Wisconsin templete was taken off the talk page of the Sparta, Wisconsin article talk page.Is there a reason why this was done?The previous editor mentioned something about orphan articles-Thanks-

I looked at the deleted edits with the mop thingie. The original Sparta article had been for the town, and Tshilo12 moved the town article to Sparta (town), Wisconsin and deleted the main article. So at that time, there was no article named Sparta, Wisconsin. Another admin deleted the talk page because there was no article associated with it. In other words, don't worry about it. You did the right thing by creating the page. Royal broil 14:50, 10 January 2009]]

Many thanks- for your messege-I may had accidentally rerased your signature of previous comments-my glasses got fog up-I had some errands tp run- RFD ( talk) 16:30, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your help with the list. I'm really getting the impression that it's going to be a huge article, probably added to incrementally as needs be for years to come. Aptery gial 05:44, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to guess it's not eligible for DYK, if not, "tank-slapper" could get us a good entry... Aptery gial 03:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I had thought about it! Lists need to have a 2000 character introduction, so it won't be eligible for DYK. I was looking at sandbagging for the DYK fact. I had to Google "tank slapper" because I never heard of it before. Royal broil 04:26, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

2000 characters? Give me a couple of hours, and I'll use my mad prose skills to come up with it. We'd have to split credit about five ways at the moment! Aptery gial 04:53, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

You do realise this is complete rubbish - it's already been speedily deleted once if you check the logs. I can't see any advantage to having this crap floating around for 5 days - can you? Exxolon ( talk) 18:11, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

"I've heard of it" violates so many policies it's not even funny. WP:RS, WP:VERIFY, WP:OR - if admins think "someone's heard of it" is reason to keep something we are in deep shit. Exxolon ( talk) 18:20, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I've posted on WP:AN asking for feedback on your/Acroterion's actions. Exxolon ( talk) 18:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

(I replied on my talk, but will add here.) A case for the vandalism case file. :) No, I have no idea about the block issue. Hope somebody does. :) Cheers. Proofreader77 ( talk) 20:52, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S. vandalization of dates (and software solutions)

Do you know if the Wikipedia developers have done any work or thought about (or dismissed the idea) of confirmed data (e.g., dates)?

E.G., some kind of template etc. for certain kinds of information -- especially dates -- that (would almost) never change -- information that could be verified and "locked" in a database -- and could be click-verified in the article by readers.

BECAUSE: As a recent-changes patroller, I see it wastes a lot of time re-verifying dates (especially in a world in which many sources copy Wikipedia's version of the date).

P.P.S. If I could have a cup of adrenaline instead of coffee, I'd chose that. :) Proofreader77 ( talk) 22:18, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I've never heard of this idea before. It sounds interesting. I think you should propose it, but I don't know where. Royal broil 23:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

I'll make that a back-burner project ... which if it ever comes to fruition ... will come to be known as the Wikipedia technological advance .. inspired by the Great Midwest Trivia Contest cheating scandal of '09. Cheers! Proofreader77 ( talk) 01:18, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I started this article some time ago and noticed that you have made some significant contributions. I'd like to invite your further input please, as I plan to submit it at WP:GAN. Thanks. Johnfos ( talk) 00:40, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Sure I'd love to help. Right now it's VERY FAR from Good Article status. I'll add it to my watchlist. Royal broil 01:04, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

FYI, the bot is apparently routinely running 50 minutes overtime ATM, so don't sweat it if you see it's a few minutes late :)

We've notified nixeagle about the problem and hopefully he will be able to sort it out soon. Gatoclass ( talk) 12:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

If you look closely, you will see I only posted the photo and the caption (I think I fixed one other caption). Yes it took me many tries to get it right, but that is only because I am a beginner at this. According to the Wikipedia copyright rules, the author of the article (Nuts4art) could not post an image of my painting. What good is an article about a visual artist without an image? But when the person with the copyright steps in to help post the image, the artist, then there is a conflict of interest warning posted. It a classic catch 22.

I posted the image using my own name, so I openly disclosed that I was the one who posted it. I was very upfront and honest about the whole thing. I did not write the article or edit it.

Please consider removing the COI warning from the article... David Lenz ( talk) 16:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

One of the editors made a suggestion on the town of Sparta, Wisconsin talk page about merging that article with the city of Sparta, Wisconsin article.I did make a response on the talk page.This remains me of herding cats! I just want to let you know-thanks- RFD ( talk) 16:00, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Sorry about the blank lines - I had to go take break as eyes were getting crossed!

thanks for clearing them up lol-- Chaosdruid ( talk) 23:54, 31 January 2009 (UTC)