This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs U.S. Route 60 Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Boonesborough, Kentucky Hallmark, Louisville John Burgee Central High School (Louisville) Western Coal Fields World citizen Austin Kearns Moore Observatory Shawnee, Louisville Indiana University Southeast Kentucky State Highway 61 Kentucky State Highway 210 Duncan Hines Northern Kentucky University Spencerian College Kentucky State Highway 80 Interstate 74

Cleanup Bill Plaschke Campbellsville University Eighty Eight, Kentucky Merge Kentucky River Fayette County, Kentucky South Fork Kentucky River Add Sources Floyds Knobs, Indiana I-85 Corridor Exposure (magic) Wikify Huntington Hornets Presentation Academy Neighborhood of Make-Believe Expand Frankfort, Kentucky Endpoint (band) Sheba, Baby

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:15, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I noticed that you made comments about Lousville about mine. I do not have any hard feelings toward you, and I hope that I have not upset you. I was a bit confused about the situation (even after reading some of the archives) and I just requested assistance. I am sorry if I have caused problems. Ajwebb 21:33, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not personal. I just thought it would be beneficial to read all the archives concerning this situation before reheating the debate again. Besides, the article already addresses the point that Louisville is either 16th or 26th, depending upon the perspective. And indeed, the Louisville article is about the consolidated city, not the balance, which is covered by a separate article. In short, people who are residents in the interior cities are also residents of Louisville; they vote for two mayors and so forth. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 21:37, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

It may not be personal, but show your disagreement with a little more respect because on another talk page, I precieved your responsee to my proposal as an "attack" as well. -- Moreau36 21:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

It's clear that you have a particularly thin skin, and there's not much way I accommodate this kind of request. I was straight and to the point, and that's the way I always will be. Capisce? —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 03:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Why are you accusing me of having a thin skin, Stevie? because, quite frankly, I was nowhere near angry, just aking a question and saying my opinion, Can I at least state my opininon without offending you? (once again I'm not being angry, just asking you a question) -- Moreau36 21:13, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Because you are very easily offended, that's why. I am not offended in the least--I laugh at your hijinks. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 21:43, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

One, I'm not that offended at all, besides, I really don't care what others think of me because I went through that early in life and learned a very valuable lesson about "pleasing others" and two, "laugh at my hijinks"? I don't get it. -- Moreau36 21:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Oversensitivity is a passive-aggressive approach used in discussion sometimes, and I've noted your occasional use of it. I laugh at that approach. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 22:51, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Oversensitivity. Far from it. -- Moreau36 02:01, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

How is U of L not refered to as "The Ville"? Is there not a "Welcome to the 'Ville" poster on the silos? I have and have saw many people wear "The vill" shirts on campus. 65.138.71.135 21:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

That's the beauty of Wikipedia. If you think I'm wrong, change it back. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 21:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know that the phrase "The Ville" is used to describe the University of Louisville athletic teams.

The phrase was originated by former Louisville basketball player Poncho Wright during the run to the team's 1980 national championship.

The University of Louisville's Athletic Department currently markets its teams and sells merchandise containing "The Ville".

As a former Louisville student-athlete and spouse of a former member of its Athletic Deportment, I just wanted to make sure you were aware of this.

Have a great weekend. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimsimo ( talk • contribs)

Thanks. Make sure you provide a source for that in the article in case somebody else who hasn't heard of that (or can't remember) challenges it again. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 19:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I noticed on this edit you removed Category:Living people from Bob Edwards. Why? By the way, it was re-added today by another editor. -- rogerd 18:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

For a short period of time, I was under the impression it was a superfluous/joke category. I must've forgotten to revert some of the changes I made in that regard. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 23:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining. Yea, it does seem kind of a dumb category, but Jimbo thinks it is needed. -- rogerd 00:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Do you have any information regarding the K&I Bridge's conversion (auto lanaes) to a rail trail? I can't find any information for that for the rail trails page. Thanks! Seicer ( talk) 23:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know of any central resource for the upcoming changes to the Big Four Bridge. You could conduct a search on the LouisvilleKY.gov site, but the information is quite scattered. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 14:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't find anything, however, I can do a C-J search once I am back on the UK library system (wahoo, free archives). Is there another name for the bridge to make the searching easier? Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 03:08, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't know of any alternative names. I think it has been called the Big Four bridge from its inception in the late 19th century. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 03:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

The official name of the Big Four RR was the Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis Railway. I doubt if the bridge was ever referred to by that lengthy name, but you could try. -- rogerd 03:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello Stevietheman, This is Janet L. Boyd, Special Projects Manager at the Louisville Science Center. I recently edited the Science Center entry becuase it had incorrect information and I decided to expand the information while I was at it. I would appreciate it if you could let me know why the entry was removed. I assure you it is not a copyright violation as your note suggested. I have just now corrected the previous name of the Science Center in the entry that is currently posted. I hope that will be left intact. Please reply to my email address (Janet.Boyd@louivilleky.gov), if you don't mind. Thanks, Janet —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JanetLBoyd ( talk • contribs) 09:20, July 20, 2006 (UTC)

The text read as if copied from a potentially copyrighted source. I have learned over two years of editing Wikipedia how to spot these kind of violations. Are you testifying that the material you added is your own writing? —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 05:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

By the way, I don't respond to people's email addresses, as I believe all conversations about articles generally need to stay here in the Wikipedia. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 05:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to butt into your talk page Stevie, but I'd like to try to clarify a bit. The article posted by Boyd does seem to have been copied and pasted from http://www.louisvillescience.org/about.shtml. Wikipedia articles must be released under the GFDL, which means (basically) that they can be freely modified/redistributed and even sold... so when it's copied from a page that claims a copyright (as this page does) it's a matter of course to remove the copied version. Anyway, if you'd like to release it into the GFDL (and have the authority to do so) great, but it will need to be rewritten to be more consistant with the style and tone of other Wikipedia articles. This can seem a bit bewildering, I'm sure, but Stevie removed the copyrighted version for a perfectly good reason. -- W.marsh 21:28, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for butting in.  :) You, as always, are much better than me at dealing with these kinds of matters. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 21:38, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand why you continue to redirect web application to weblication. Please explain yourself. If I don't hear from you within a week, I will be reverting the page back to the original definition that was posted.

Signed, MediaResearcher

Because "web application" equals "weblication". They are the same thing. Further, your approach here with "EXPLAIN YOURSELF" is rather nasty, don't you think? —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 21:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

By the way, weblication redirects to web application, not the reverse, as you state. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 21:39, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Just to let you know, I reversed your edit to the Supper Fire article, it looks like you may have accidentally deleted the remainder of the article. -- LBMixPro ^{<Sp e ak|on|it!>} 03:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. Thank you. Wikipedia occasionally has this glitch where it wipes out a bottom portion of an article before I submit my changes. Cheers! —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 03:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I happened to notice this exchange. I had the same problem and it turns out to be caused by a combination of Firefox and the Google Toolbar (see this bugzilla report). Apparently there is a new release of the Google Toolbar that has fixed this bug according to the bugzilla report. I deinstalled the Google Toolbar and will now download and re-install the new version. Are you a Firefox and Google Toolbar user? -- rogerd 03:41, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Indeed I am. I'll go ahead and install the new version. Thanks for the info! —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 04:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Stevie, regarding your oppose to CheNuevara, while I don't begrudge someone for opposing, I'm not sure it's fair to do so in this circumstance just on his number of edits. His response to the DU situation and his responses to questions indicate (at least to me) that he is anything but a newbie. I'd humbly request your reconsideration.-- Kchase T 07:25, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

If someone doesn't meet my minimum requirements, and this person doesn't meet them by a mile, then I believe it is unwarranted to look at any additional information. Also, you're asking somebody with over 9,000 main space edits who isn't an admin to support somebody with just over 300--this is frankly an unnerving proposition. But I have to say that by his early activities it is evident that this individual will be suitable at a later time, but in my opinion, not today. Cheers! —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 07:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reconsidering, Stevie.-- Kchase T 07:45, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

somebody with over 9,000 main space edits who isn't an admin Are you waiting for someone to nominate you?-- Kchase T 08:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

More or less. But I'm not sure I'd pass muster due to several conflicts with other editors, plus being blocked for a 3RR a year and a half ago. Also, I don't want to self-nom, as that goes against my grain. The most important thing is that I'm not sure I have the time to do a lot of admin-like work right now. Since June, I've been trying to build up WikiProject Louisville, and that has been taking up a lot of my Wikipedia time. If I were an admin, I'd probably act more like a project coordinator who concentrated more on building a great reference than doing the administrivia of things like closing xfD's and dealing with vandals. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 15:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

The Original Barnstar For your continued excellent work on the PHP article! --james // bornhj (talk) 10:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Shiny, huh? :) --james _{// bornhj (talk)} 10:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure is!  :) Thanks! —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 15:54, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I edited the above article to remove as much NPOV / redundant material as possible. I'm happy to remove the NPOV tag on it but as you added it I thought you should get a say - think its good to go?-- Phl3djo 10:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it looks great. I just made a couple minor fixes and then went ahead and removed the NPOV tag myself. Thanks for helping out! —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 16:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Stievie! Cool thing that you have joined on Mount Olympus. I'm absolutely convinced you are The Man. Exclusive greetings from Munic - Sebastian 20:51, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I have already declared myself an Exclusionist for a long while, and I thought I was already signed up, but apparently, the list moved to a new page and my name was lost. Therefore, I signed up again. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk | Work} 21:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

If you didn't mind. I added the Louisville WikiProject Template to the remainder of the incorporated places in Jefferson County, Kentucky due to the relation. If you want me to help out with Louisville-related articles, let me know because I'm more than happy to help. Cheers -- Moreau36 22:25, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't mind at all--in fact, I am grateful that you did that. Yes, of course, please join the project and help out wherever you desire. Like all WikiProjects, it's open and there are pretty much no restrictions on what anyone wants to work on. Have at it, and cheers! —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk • Work} 23:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

You're quite welcome, glad I could help. Ckessler 04:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Is so OTT and in-your-face... Feels agressive even!?! Please, have a read of WP:SIG and consider joining the reasonable world! :)

And when editting comments you're faced with this monster blob of text: [[User:Stevietheman|<span style="color:white; background-color: green;"> '''Stevie is the man!''' </span>]] ^{[[User talk:Stevietheman|Talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Stevietheman|Work]]} 18:01, 31 July 2006 (UTC) , argh! / wangi 22:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, if I could achieve the exact same output with fewer characters, I'd be happy to use those kind of suggestions. Otherwise, I like how my signature looks and I don't want to change it. Thanks for your input. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk • Work} 04:22, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Just reduced by seven characters. —  Stevie is the man!  ^{Talk • Work} 05:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

To be honest the length wasn't my main concern, but thanks for the change! It's that horrid green that jumps out of talk pages... "look an this comment, it's more important than the rest"! / wangi 08:49, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

That's not the intent of the design of my sig (it's green b/c green is my favorite color), but the same could be said for many other sigs. But I see what you mean. I think I will revert to the design that didn't use a background color. — Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorted, much better! Thanks for listening ;) / wangi 14:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Since you mentioned in an edit summary that this was your first time doing an RfC, and the RfC main page was recently completely reorganized and partly rewritten, I would be interested in knowing if you had any problems or suggestions about the process. — Centrx→ talk • 08:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

It was just a matter of getting accustomed to formatting the RFC. Other than that, I'll have to wait and see what else happens. Thanks for asking. — Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:22, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Stevie, thanks for the conciliatory words. I am surprised at your belief that there is consensus about this issue. I point out that the David Oberst's 'complete revamp' was quite extreme, and made in advance of (any apparent) public consensus building. Further, his reasoning for his 'complete revamp' remains obscure. I cannot find evidence of his explanation. Indeed, if the editors there were to actually make an argument explaining the 'complete revamp' I may still agree. As things stand, I was left out of the process leading up to this drastic 'complete revamp'. And, reviewing the eight questions I asked on July 31st, about eight were left unanswered. Perhaps you can agree that, from my perspective at least, it does not look like a built consensus, it looks more like a bullrush. Two to one win a 3RR game. Can't we use reason instead of revert war? BruceHallman 17:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Mediation remains an option. I don't agree with your description of events. We asked you multiple times to back up your position, and you didn't. Not even one example. There's nothing else we can do outside of mediation. I remain open to working with you on other articles and projects. — Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 18:46, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I have not taken a position, other than that I beleive that there is likely ambiguity associated with the search term 'democracy' that is not addressed in the present DAB page. So, I am not sure what 'back up' has been asked for. I have consistently asked, about a dozen times to no avail, that we first agree to a criteria for inclusion on the DAB page, then we can proceed to discuss the individual pages that meet that criteria. How could I be more clear? Why do you misunderstand me? BruceHallman 21:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I will continue discussing this subject once mediation has begun. As for now, it's taking up too much of my valuable time, in Wikipedia and otherwise. Start the mediation, and we'll go from there. Thank you. — Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

In your recent creation of the Burbage article you put a link to the article. If you put #REDIRECT infront of a link it will redirect users to that article.

Just a tip -- Abstract Idiot 02:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, after 2 1/2 years as an editor, I made what is known as a mistake, which I quickly corrected. :) — Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 02:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

It looks like your correction beat mine. If you weren't so quick on the draw, I would have corrected it. Oh well. — Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 03:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if I came off like that, with this account being new. I didn't check your age and I was just trying to help, in haste. -- Abstract Idiot 03:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem. It gave me a chuckle. — Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 03:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm also kicking myself for You Can Redirect Article. Hehe -- Abstract Idiot 03:05, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

• There was an RfC that I brought regarding this very matter. You may wish to see it at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Durin and fair use image removals. The consensus from that was that no notification was the best way forward with the current tools we have at our disposal. I readily grant that no notification is anti-community. I really wish there was a bot to handle this work, as a bot would be able to leave messages as appropriate without incurring human time to do so. I've made requests, and so far nobody has stepped forward to write a bot to do this work.
• On whether Louisville would sue; we can't operate on an assumption that X group will not sue. Eventually, we'll be wrong and the costs will be too great. We have to operate on the assumption that copyright holders wish to protect their rights unless we have positive confirmation from them stating their intentions to release their copyrights and place the image under a free license of one sort or another. All the best, -- Durin 15:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Since the image from Louisville's flag is being removed, why are the images found at Gallery of flags of United States cities remaining? If Louisville's flag supposedly falls under copyright law, is the same not true of all the other flags? Chris24 04:23, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
    • This crossed my mind as well, as other WikiProjects are reusing seals and flags. If WikiProject Louisville cannot use them, then the others need to stop using them as well. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 04:30, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Per our discussion, I'm making an exception in this case :) You have a fair use image on your userpage in violation of Wikipedia:Fair use criteria item #9. The image in question is Image:Colbert-truthiness.jpg. It needs to be removed. Thanks, -- Durin 15:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

This is getting insane, but OK. — Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 15:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

• The policy was established to give a clear dividing line between acceptable and unacceptable use. At Wikipedia, we'd far prefer free images over copyrighted images. But, some copyrighted images are going to be inevitable. While there might be legally sound reasons why a given copyrighted image could appear on Wikipedia outside of an article dealing with the subject of the image, having an environment in which we have a dizzying array of exceptions, clauses, etc. would create an untenable situation; we'd have violations left and right. The policy as it is, is clear and easy to understand; if the image is copyrighted and used under fair use here, it must be used only in article space. That creates an environment that is manageable. Thus, we do not allow exceptions except under extreme cases decided on broad consensus. Such exceptions are very rarely granted. So, it might seem insane...but to allow an environment where fair use images could be used anywhere would be several orders of magnitude more insane if we want to avoid eventually being sued. -- Durin 15:06, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

There was no need to explain that here. Let's move on. — Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 15:09, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Stevietheman, I'd be delighted to help. I have already enhanced or created (N) and nurtured several Louisville related articles, including original photography for Enid Yandell N. Some others: Belle of Louisville, Max Abramovitz, Gideon Shryock N, Robert Henry Boll N, The Brown School, Stephen Bishop, Pope Lick Monster N, R. Albert Mohler, Jr. N, Justice Sunday (conservative Christian event) N, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary N. I adore Louisville and am fascinated by her history, from the illustrious to the ignominious. I'll check out the project and see what needs doing. Alan Canon 21:53, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, thank you for your previous work and to all the great work to come. I'm happy you're joining us. Cheers! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:58, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

steve . . . is that you? i just tried to post an edit for ATL and i know i screwed up by dropping a couple of versions in before i understood what's going on. [not sure i do, yet, actually . . . ] i joined ATL in 1969 and remained a company member for 36 [or is it 37?] years. i hope you can incorporate my corrections and additions. as written the article left out a number of important facts and had some things dead wrong. i do not quite get how to underline, among other things. give me a holler and let me know when the edit will appear. thanks, adale o'brien

It might work out better if you just listed the facts that were left out or gotten wrong on the article's talk page: Talk:Actors Theatre of Louisville. Then, other editors can pick them up and fix the article. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 23:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

In case you didn't keep republican democracy on your watchlist, there is a current (actually, appears stalled) AfD discussion for a related article constitutional republic. In commenting there, I also found constitutional democracy which is again covering overlapping ground. It looks like there is a logical argument for consolidating these three at constitutional democracy (with appropriate distinction of republics vs. non-republics, and whatever might turn up on how/where the phrases are used). This would prevent multiple independent (and conflicting) treatment of related phrases, since most of the key information is common to liberal democracy. - David Oberst 02:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate this being brought to my attention. However, I'm afraid I don't have the time or knowledge to faithfully parse this one out. Sorry. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

AH! I see you've started looking at the Kentucky Regions articles and pulling them into WikiProject Kentucky. They don't seem to line up with the ones I remember from School. (Of course that was 35 years ago;). I've been working on WikiProject Community stuff and at Meta quite a bit lately but I've noticed some more WikiProjKy members have join. Yay! I'll try to jump back in soon. Good work, Stevietheman. CQ 02:59, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, we in the WikiProject Kentucky (even as we've grown) haven't done much work heretofore to catalogue all Kentucky-related articles, so I guess I'm taking it on a bit at a time. Re: regions, I have to say I'm not very knowledgeable about that, but for now, it doesn't hurt to catalogue the articles under our project. Cheers! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 03:15, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the category Kentucky in the Civil War. I created similar cats for my native Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Massachusetts and New Hampshire. I really appreciate your efforts. I tended to add the politicians that served during the war years, leading generals and naval officers, civilians that made an impact on the war, places and events. Also take a look at Ohio in the Civil War as an example of a main article that you can use as a template for a similar article on Kentucky. Good work! Scott Mingus 18:26, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the very good advice. Also, thank you for your cleanup work in the Beriah Magoffin article. I'm currently working on the upcoming Louisville in the Civil War article, so sometime after that, I will see what I can do about Kentucky in the Civil War (unless somebody beats me to it). Cheers! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 19:58, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

In fact I had attempted to add a comment, if your comment was deleted it was a computer error.→ R Young { ^yakł _talk} 04:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Yep, it happens sometimes... As I said, I hoped it was a mistake, either computer or human. :) Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 05:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Good job on this.

When I first saw the cat removal on a page on my watchlist, I was startled. I did some digging and found out the American Civil War cat is waaaay overpopulated and so sub-cats are being urged. So, again, good gnoming!

I would suggest in the future that you consider mentioning something about this in a somewhat more specific manner in your edit summaries or even on the talk page. A more knee-jerk-ish response than mine could result in some needlessly ruffled feathers.

Just a thought. Twisted86 20:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I understand where you're coming from. I was just being bold, as usual, with my gnome-like updates. I should realize that some subjects are more sensitive than others, and expand my edit summaries accordingly. Thanks for your input! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 20:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I noticed you now seem willing to run for adminship... so... Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Stevietheman now exists.

Don't feel obligated to accept it, only my wikistalkers will ever see it so you can decline and nothing much will ever be thought of it. And I assure you, despite the length, I didn't spend so much effort in writing it that I'll be bothered at all if you don't want to accept right now. Also if you need more time, you can wait a few days before accepting the nom. By the way, if you didn't know, RfA can be a bitch so I can't guarantee it will be a pleasant experience for you...

That said, the nom is up and I suggest if you're interested that you take your time answering the questions first, then list it or WP:RFA (a simple transclusion) and follow it and check your e-mail regularly over the next few days. Answer additional questions promptly but don't challenge oppose voters should there be any - if you reply to them it should just be to correct false claims or assumptions they've based their vote on. Of course that's just personal advice, but many an RfA sinks over petty stuff like that.

Anyway good luck, I'll be following the nomination too of course, and you can contact me by e-mail. -- W.marsh 01:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much W.marsh! I am humbled and honored. I am inclined to accept although I need to research a little what kinds of tasks I would like to cover as an admin, and perhaps brush up on policies, as there still may be some I'm not fully knowledgeable of. I would like to be a "project-oriented admin", if there's such a thing, where I help projects bloom and help develop common best practices for project implementation. I strongly believe that projects are the future of the Wikipedia, especially in helping to round out coverage of areas that have heretofore been lacking. Cheers! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 02:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Well the main areas of admin work are at WP:AIV and similar (dealing with vandals and other problematic users), WP:CP, WP:PROD, CAT:CSD, WP:AN/I, requests for page protection, and closing discussions at WP:AFD and other deletion areas. But in general, admins should just be willing do issue blocks, protect pages and delete articles when needed. It helps to be willing to work specifically on one of the "admin backlogs" but really maybe 10-15% of admins spend meaningful time there in any given month. Most admins just use the tools as they go about their normal editting, and watch the other pages and chime in when they have time. Or at least that's what I do. Hope that's helpful. -- W.marsh 02:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Very helpful. Thank you. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 06:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Count me in as a supporter. I don't know if you remember, but you welcomed me in March 2005. I have been an admin since January 2006. As a admin, you will probably continue to edit what you edit, but be able to intervene in situations that W describes. -- rogerd 04:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Weeeellll, I don't quite exactly remember, but I do recall we have crossed paths quite a bit, and the caliber of your contributions has proved the welcome wagon. :) Thank you very much for your support. Cheers! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 06:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey man! Nice surprise to see your RfA. Not sure if you remember, but we took same side on a heated debate a while back. You handled that well. I hope you succeed in this. Best regards! JungleCat talk/ contrib 17:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that was the most passionate delete debate I had ever been involved with. Both sides could hardly contain their "thoughts" for the other side. Thank you for your support, and I look forward to more transpartisan teamwork. :) Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 18:09, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I know RfA is a grueling process, and I do believe that you're a good user. I just can't find any evidence that you really need the tools. Adminship isn't a trophy and it isn't an elevated status; it's an extra responsibility given to those who actively take part in admin-like tasks. I think, personally, that adminship isn't necessary for you - you are a great contributor, but you don't frequently fight vandalism, explain things to newcomers or take part in mediation or take part in XfDs. You do a lot of other things, though: you run a great project, you prod articles, and you work hard on copyediting and wikifying articles. However, any registered user can do these things. I just don't see a need on your part for the "mop and flamethrower", as they're sometimes called. Your experience is more than sufficient and you are a wonderful contributor to the encyclopedia, but I can't see the point in forcing you to do janitorial tasks rather than allowing you to continue to write, copyedit and wikify articles, since you do such a wonderful job with those tasks. Please understand that I think you are a wonderfully talented contributor...I'm just not sure if custodian^read:admin is the career for you. (Boy, do I ever sound like a high school guidance counsellor saying that!)

Anyway, I know RfAs are stressful, and I just wanted to let you know that I do think you're a great person and a great editor. Please drop me a line on my talk page or send me an email if you ever need anything. Srose (talk) 19:13, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

No sweat. I fully understand what you're talking about. I do have to say, though, that I am sincerely hotly interested in processing prods, and heretofore, as a regular user, I didn't have the tools to do that. I sincerely want to help clear out a good deal of the clutter in the Wikipedia. At any rate, thank you for your very thoughtful expression of your well-considered views. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 19:20, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

• I'd like to echo much of what Srose said above, except with regards to the need for tools. I respect Srose's opinion, but do not feel an editor must have a very strong demonstrated need for the extra tools in order to be an admin. From what I have read, adminship was never intended to be an exclusive club where you have to use them; Jimbo wanted all trusted users to have the tools, regardless of need. Thus, many people have the position of evaluating candidates strictly on whether they can be trusted to use them appropriately. I agree, with the caveat that admins, even when not using tools, carrying some influence in discussions and have other roles not easily defined by simply noting having the extra buttons. This creates extra burdens for an admin, some of which are entirely unanticipated by the prospective admins.
• That's where the crux of my oppose vote lays; the combative attitude that I saw coming from you is very likely to lead you into significant difficulties as an admin. Admins have a magnifying glass perched over their heads, and with good reason. If you acted as an admin similarly to our debate in some debate regarding a Wikipedia policy, it is considerably more likely that you would find yourself the target of very heated commentary. I don't want to see that happen to you. People regularly call for an admin's head on a platter if they are ever involved in contentious situations whether their role was acting as an administrator or not. Being an administrator is not a status symbol; it's an extra burden, one that must be handled delicately with patience and equanimity regardless of provocations.
• From what everyone else has been saying about your contributions and what I have seen them, you are otherwise an exceptional contributor to Wikipedia. Regardless of whether your RfA passes, I would heartily encourage you to be more patient in debates and make less demands and accusations. We're working in a collaborative project towards a common end; building the greatest collection of knowledge the world has ever seen and make it free to everyone, everywhere. We have to work within the community to achieve that, and we do that by trying hard not to be combative.
• If you RfA does fail, I hope you run again in the future after you have taken the lesson to heart. I'd recommend you wait about three months before running again if it fails. If in the intervening time, I see no evidence of combative, non-collaborative work, I will gladly, gladly support. As I noted above, you seem to otherwise be an exceptional wikipedia. Please don't take a failed RfA as a condemnation of your other very fine efforts here. It isn't, and any conclusion that RfA is an evaluation of all of your contributions is a false conclusion. If you make that conclusion, I'll come down to Louisville and slap you with a wet noodle :)
• I have no grudges against you, and hope you have none against me. I just want to see you take these lessons to heart, for your own good as well as that of the project. Respectfully, -- Durin 13:25, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I finished that task. It was manual since you could not simply move the articles since not all of them were about mayors. I also created mayor categories for all of the states that did not have one and added the articles that I could find. The "Leaders of cities..." categories are still valid in a few places since there are people other then mayors who are listed. I'm not sure what is best there to deal with the empty categories. One option would be to add the Mayors of places of into the leaders of cities as a subcat. However given the small number of states with other leaders listed, I'm not sure that is worth the effort. In the end, both the mayors and leaders wind up in a local political leader cat. However, the mayors also wind up in a world wide mayor category. This was not the result of a CfR, it was something I felt was needed to correctly list the US mayors in Category:Mayors by country. Leaving them in leaders of cities was not correct for that category. I did wait till after the rename of Mayors in the US was decided on for the format of the name. So everything I created follows what was approved from the CfR. Vegaswikian 21:19, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the explanation. I had gone ahead and detached "Leaders of cities in Kentucky" from "Kentucky politicians" as there were no articles listed in it. Would you see any issue if I submitted it for a speedy delete? Thanks. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I hate to say it, but in my expert opinion of RfA herd mentality, you should probably withdraw because the nature of RfA voters really isn't to support after there are a lot of oppose votes. I'm not the nominator to really challenge opposers either really, though I do think their reasons are kind of lame (but typical RfA stuff, it's best just to be an android and hide any signs of a personality until you're done with RfA). I doubt I'd have any luck changing their minds. Sorry... sometimes the herd just goes the wrong way.

I can't withdraw the nomination though (that would require me to in good faith no longer think you'd make a good admin), but you can withdraw the application. From a purely political perspective it makes your next RfA more likely to succeed, because your first one will not have dragged on for so long and be in everyone's memory so much. But I can't blame you if you just want to see how this one turns out.

I'll nominate you again in 3 months (standard safe turnaround time). Sorry about how this RfA has turned out so far... it's really not your fault at all, many people feel that the longer a candidate has been around, the harder RfA becomes... more time for people to build up the inevitable grudges and so on. But again you can keep the RfA open if you want, and I'll participate in it if I have anything to say. -- W.marsh 14:12, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I will go ahead and withdraw. The process has become too distracting to the work I would like to accomplish in the Wikipedia. I hope there will be no hard feelings in that. I'm happy to have been nominated. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:22, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry... I really feel bad about how it turned out. It's really convinced me that RfA's broken, if there was any doubt. -- W.marsh 14:27, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

It's all right. We'll just continue on as before, collaborating and building a great reference work. Cheers! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Another RfA fail for such minor thing, sigh. Wish you'd let it go the full week though.-- Andeh 17:42, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the sentiment. I just felt that the process was distracting me from working on the things I felt needed attending, especially in a couple WikiProjects. A few individuals decided to extrapolate a narrow, short-lived disagreement (without looking at any other actions I've taken) to publicly declare that I don't care about enforcing Wikipedia policy. It's only sad to me because it's the opposite of reality. At any rate, after thinking about this a bit, I most likely won't seek adminship again for about a year, if not longer. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 18:04, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Stevieman, those opposed in this RfA had some good points to work on, but more than that, take a look at the positives said about your impact on this project. You have done outstanding work, and we all notice. Focus on all the good. See you around man! JungleCat talk/ contrib 20:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm very happy about what I and many other contributors are doing in the Wikipedia. I was happy about the positives well before this adminship nomination. I'm afraid though that the biggest lesson to learn from the Opposed is that if I think that an admin is being Draconian, inconsiderate, or uncooperative with a simple request, I need to hold my fire. This saddens me. I am not claiming to be an angel by any stretch. But I do assert my individuality and freedom of criticism. Don't get me wrong though--I'm not angry at all. Perturbed yes, angry no. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your support on my RfA. Give me shout if I can be of help. And you'd have had a support from me! Thanks/ wangi 00:28, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I very much appreciate your thoughts. Looks like your RfA is going to sail through. Glad I could help. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 00:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I commented out that image, it didn't show up in FireFox last night so I thought it may have been a bad image. I loaded up the page in IE today and it showed up fine, after a little digging I realized what was the problem. FireFox has an adblocker extension and it looks for images with "Ad" in them and blocks them, which was why it didn't show up for me. You might want to rename the file, it's a pretty common FireFox extension. Sorry for the mixup, thanks for reverting it! Happy editing. DrunkenSmurf 02:25, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I'm happy you investigated that, and now the file is "renamed". I actually had to upload it again using a different name, but that's no sweat. It's fixed, and that's all that matters. Cheers! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 06:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I have an article in Word format that I have been working on, about Walnut Street Baptist Church in Louisville. I figured it was relatively worthy of being in wikipedia given the size and influence that this congregation has had. I have edited somethings on wikipedia but I have never actually created an article. Format and what not is an issue. I've run across you on some Louisvile stuff before. HELP !!! :-) please. I am not a member of this congregation (anymore) and it is so farvery neutral. I have about 6 sources including some academic ones. Any help and/or advice would be appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.101.179.35 ( talk • contribs)

You can go ahead and create it even if it isn't "wikified" yet. Just type "Walnut Street Baptist Church" in the Find box and then click "Go". Then, on the page that loads, click the link that reads "create this article". Then, after that page loads, enter your article in that big entry space, enter "new article" in the "Edit summary:" box, then click "Save page". Then, leave a note for me here, then I'll take a stab at wikifying it, and I may even bring others into the process as well. I definitely want to get that article started, as it's definitely a notable church in the area. Hope this helps. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 05:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with your decision to remove the links to the Confederate generals from these articles. I think that because these two governors served while the Confederate governors were "in office," some mention of them should be made in their articles. Perhaps a sentence or two would be more appropriate than a "see also" link, but I think there should be something there.

Cheers, Lamont A Cranston 13:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, perhaps the removal was too hasty. I suppose that where the Union and Confederate governors' terms intersect, it would be appropriate to discuss that. And that would be better than a See also. Hope that helps. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 05:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

steve . . . i still can't figure out how to edit the actors theatre page. can you give me a few pointers on how to get into the page so that i can rewrite and add info. i really feel this needs to be done as there are inconsistancies and misinformation thruout. but there's no hurry. work on your other projects until you get a free moment. whenever you can give me some info, i would appreciate it very much . . . adale o'brien . . . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Valkyada ( talk • contribs)

Pertaining to [1], what tag should I use? This is a photograph taken by myself not long ago but I thought I had introduced the right tag. If that is corrected, should I reapply it to that subheading? Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 06:09, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Really the only way to fix it is to re-upload it with a different name, and give it a GFDL, Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 2.5 license, or make it Public Domain ("You created this yourself..."). Then, include the image in the article again. Hope this helps. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 06:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Fixed. I removed the message (per instruction) and replaced it with a new tag. I wonder why this policy is in effect for... Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 06:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh yes, that's right... I was thinking in terms of a file rename. Very good then. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 06:25, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

The Original Barnstar I award this Barnstar to Stevie for his tireless efforts in WikiProject Louisville and because he has received entirely too few barnstars for his hard work.

-- Carl ^{( talk| contribs)} 06:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, and many thanks to you as well for your ongoing very good work on Louisville-related subjects. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 19:00, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

no problem i'll get to it within the next few days Betacommand 18:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 19:02, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I can certainly do that for you. Do you use a template to tag the articles? Do you want to? It can help people find the project. If so, WatchlistBot can be run regularly to put the tag on the talk pages. For now, I'll put creating a watchlist from the articles in those categories on my to do list (I have no idea when I'll get to it -- could be tonight, maybe not for a week or two). I'll post here when it's done. Ingrid 03:11, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, both WikiProject Louisville and WikiProject Kentucky have templates for tagging (what I call cataloguing) the project articles, and these templates automatically place the talk pages for the articles/templates into the categories "WikiProject Louisville" and "WikiProject Kentucky". Both projects also already have a watchlist page (/Watchlist) but they are for watching specific articles that get frequent edits or are frequently vandalized. I would like to add another watchlist page for each (/Watchall) where all articles/templates in the project are linked to. This is the file I need generated for each project. That's all that's needed for now, as I'm employing another bot and using manual processes to catalogue the articles. Please let me know if any of this is confusing. I will go ahead and create the /Watchall pages for each project now. Thanks very much for your assistance. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 03:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, in that case, I don't even need to do anything custom for your projects. I've added them to the list of projects which are updated regularly (not on any set schedule -- if you ever want me to update it and I haven't for awhile, just leave a note on my talk page). The lists are generated from "What links here" for the templates. Ingrid 04:33, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, sounds great. I guess just make sure the links get dumped into the respective /Watchall files for each project, and all will be good. Thanks! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 04:43, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Greetings. This user page is currently showing up in many article categories due to the templates on the page, and user pages are not supposed to be categorized in that manner. One possible fix would be to subst all the templates on this page, and then remove all the categories, or you could also ask an admin for a speedy delete of the entire page if you don't really need it. Thanks for working with me on this, and if you should have any questions, please don't hestitate to ask. This is just a part of my ongoing effort to clean up Wikipedia categories. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 02:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Stevie,

Thanks for your note. I specifically placed the templates on that page so that my reorganization of some articles would be easier. The project will be complete in a week or so, and I won't need the assistance of an admin to delete the page when the project is complete, as I am already an admin. Happy editing! :) Firsfron of Ronchester 03:19, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I realized that you were an admin after I placed that there. Whoops. :) By the way, congrats on becoming an admin recently. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 03:39, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Thanks also for your concern regarding the use of article-space templates in userspace, and good luck with your project. Take care, Firsfron of Ronchester 07:04, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I noticed your category edits for Georgia in the Civil War. When you add a battle article to a category you should provide a sort key so that they do not all sort under the letter B. Example:

[[Category:Georgia in the Civil War|Honey Hill]]

Hal Jespersen 16:33, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I didn't think it was necessary for this category. I think it best that the battles be grouped together. But you can change them if you want to. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 16:34, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

The August 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot -- 12:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

No worries!-- Rballou 02:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

The new developments section is under dispute. One IP user wishes to introduce a statement with no citations that contains original research. Despite my ^{citation needed} statement, which was removed, multiple deletions by myself and others, and general ad homiem attacks in the talk page, I would like to hear your opinion on how to proceed. I planned on to letting it slide as a general error in editing (if he/she was not familar with the procedures), but it seems as if the user does not read what is provided through his talk page. Thank you Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 11:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I've been doing some general cleanups, moving some information to sub-pages and requesting some sections be expanded. Looks like Lexington has a great future ahead of it :) Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 15:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

The IP is going through my user contribution list, so be on a watch for other Louisville or Kentucky articles for needless edits. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 03:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Yep, looks like he's on a tear again. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 03:44, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I had a request at the Mediation Cabal but my internet decided to go belly-up and I had to restart, losing those changes. I'll put one in tommorrow if this continues. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 04:18, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I think this will get faster results. This nonsense has to stop. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 04:28, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I will support this. He keeps adding easily refuted things, and I do find that to be garbage vandalism. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 04:36, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

I put in a request. I can't remember how this goes. (crosses fingers) Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 04:44, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

It needs to be filed under WP:ANI. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 05:08, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Filed: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#70.35.237.67. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 11:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh shoot. Despite my internet connection going out on me while submitting it, see Mediation Cabal: stalker. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 04:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

We can rest easy for 24 hours. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 00:31, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, that is a relief, so we can concentrate on constructive activities here and elsewhere. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 00:47, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

70.35.237.67 seems to add inaccurate sources to his/her vandalism in the attempt to appear legitimate (and I will not even start on all of the ^{citation needed} insertions). This is obvious vandalism, so please let me know if I may be of any help to stop it. Thanks... Chris24 02:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Please add info about where this image came from. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 17:40, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

This image came from my camera and is licensed accordingly. ≡ DISHWASHEЯRAT ↔ (TALK) 18:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

That's great. But that is supposed to be noted on the image page, not here. Please update the image page. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:10, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

As previously stated, I licensed the image accordingly when I uploaded it. (i.e., "I, the creator of this work, hereby release it into the public domain.") Cheers. ≡ DISHWASHEЯRAT ↔ (TALK) 14:18, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

It's always expected that the user include a statement about where the image came from. The image is at risk as long as a statement like that isn't included. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

In regards to [Image:Humana.jpg], in the lower right corner (under the loggia of the Humana Building) there is a sign for Citizens Fidelity Bank, which became PNC in the late 1980s. I am not stating that the image is not licensed correctly, but cannot help but question the use of an image that is obviously 20 years old. Chris24 03:21, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

How did you go about adveritising your WikiProject to find interested editors? -- Chris Griswold ( ☏) 17:24, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Here's a list of things I did:

• I think I announced it on the Village Pump.
• I announced it on the Wikipedia:U.S. Southern wikipedians' notice board's talk page; you could use Wikipedia:U.S. Northern Wikipedians' notice board.
• I did a search of user pages with the word "Louisville" on it; then went through the listing determining who was a current resident and also a somewhat active Wikipedia user--I left those users a message on their talk page inviting them to join.
• I dropped messages into local discussion boards and mailing lists about the project.
• Probably most important, I spent a *lot* of time cataloguing most Louisville-related articles by placing the project template on the article's pages. That's very good continuous advertising.

Also, it helps it have a major event occur related to your city. Once it happens and the event article is created, placing the project template on its talk page when the event is fresh can really boost interest. This happened recently with WikiProject Kentucky and the recent unfortunate Comair accident.

Hope this helps. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 17:40, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

at Cave Hill Cemetery. I did a smash-and-grab number on it earlier and knew, i just knew, that the title that i gave that section was not real good, but, i did it anyway. So here's a carptrash thumbs up award for your efforts. Carptrash 06:55, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Always my pleasure. :) Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

When you commented out the wikitable for List of graded stakes at Churchill Downs as "incomplete" it was incomplete because I was still in the midst of editing it. When you changed it from a wikitable and moved it, it was due to "common format for list articles", I was willing to defer to your greater experience editing here. Yet, I note lists like List of schools in Louisville and Kentucky Derby winners. Would it be okay if I wikitabled the stakes races, poss adding whether they are run in the spring or fall meet and the most recent winner? Thanks UnseemlyWeasel 09:23, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Sure, go ahead. Note that I had no way of knowing what you were intending to do. I'm sorry I inadvertently got in the way of your plans with that. As a suggestion, you could create a userpage (/pagename off your userpage) to work on complicated pages before officially creating them. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Here is a tag I recently discovered that would help out a lot. I remember me and Stevietheman had a similar occurance a while back. Hope this helps! Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 14:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, {{ Inuse}} is useful, but it should be used for short periods of "under construction". For long periods of development, working it out on a userpage is best, IMHO. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

True, I wasn't aware of the original timeline, but the inuse tag would only be approperiate for short durations. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 15:00, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response and I will use the in-use idea in future, I can get that page done in a couple of hours, but it will have to be in a day or so, as I am off to the ER, My S/O just called from there, yikes! Also I think we may need a disclaimer on that page that the list is subject to change as commercial sponsor's (i.e. Humana) change.and I'm guessing that we are all agreed that especialy for the Kentucky Derby that we do NOT use the presenting sponsor in the title? UnseemlyWeasel 18:07, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know of official policy or guidelines on this, but as far as I'm concerned, I will remove any sponsors that are added to the names of races (or anything) with longstanding traditions. It's not like we can rename the Civil War the "Papa John's Civil War". :) Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 18:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Have you heard about this? It's a project I just now heard of but is something that might be good for inclusion (if Cityscape was split off), along with information on the east Louisville district? Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 15:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

It probably should go here: Geography of Louisville#Future development projects. We're trying to keep expansive Cityscape information in this article. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 15:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Oops. I should have read what I wrote. Sorry about that! I'm going to try and dig up more information about this before I post. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 02:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, sorry I missed where you restored the link at George Rogers Clark before. I initially removed the link because the IP address, along with some others, added more than a hundred links to that site and continued after being warned. I don't object if you think that particular link is valuable. Wmahan . 22:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem. As said in the talk, it's worthwhile to keep until we can find a free image of the same thing. Cheers! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 22:08, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, StefenTower! You've indicated through various means (a userbox, membership in a category, etc) that you are part of the Wikipedia LGBT community, or are interested in Wikipedia's LGBT related pages. Welcome! You may not know that Wikipedia has both an LGBT Notice Board and an LGBT Studies WikiProject. If you haven't yet done so, take a look at both of them. They sorely need attention and participation! Some things on the "To-Do List" that merit particular attention include: Identifying topics/pages that need attention Identifying problems that need addressing Adding the LGBT template to appropriate pages Categorizing LGBT pages Please feel free to participate in any or all of these activities! And if you feel like it, add yourself to either the Noticeboard Members or the WikiProject Participants - or both!

Glad you're a part of Wikipedia - and Thanks!

This invitation posted here by SatyrTN -- talk Please remove it if you so desire.

Consensus or not, a cheesburger is a derivative ogf a hamburger. There is no contreversy sourrounding that. Just because Louisville wants special recognition doesn't mean that cheeseburger gets its own page. It's completely and utterly rediculous, and any idiot could understand it.

nlarocca3 21:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I think your user page got tagged with some nonsense. Lamont A Cranston 22:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted your user page. If this was in error, I apologize; I just hate to see vandalism stay for any length of time. Lamont A Cranston 22:39, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance on this. That user seems to have an obsession with cheeseburger redirecting to hamburger. It's actually kind of funny. Cheers! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 23:25, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Since I view your editing as trustworthy and unopinionated, I ask for your views about the placement and mention of religion at Talk:Jerry_E._Abramson. Chris24 05:25, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello.. I reverted the article for Festa Italiana to a date prior to the addition of the Louisville church festival, removing your prod notice. Milwaukee's Festa Italiana is quite notable and I'll be adding notability information to the article shortly. If your feel my removal of your prod is bad form, I apologise. Take care! Sulfur 20:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Removal isn't bad form if notability info is added. But here in Louisville, even though I'm about to go to Festa Italiana tonight, I don't think it's a long-lived festival and I can't think of anything really notable about it. Perhaps just remove the Louisville stuff and we'll be fine. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 22:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I wanted to let you know that last night I made an article for Fort Duffield, a fort built in 1862 at West Point, Kentucky to protect Louisville. It needs filling out, and I wasn't sure if your Louisville in the Civil War article should include it or not.-- Bedford 16:58, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, ultimately, Louisville in the Civil War (not owned by me :)) should cover Louisville-area fortifications. I think it's in the todo list. Thanks for creating that. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 17:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I just started one for Fort DeWolf, but I don't fill like filling it out tonight (I've just taken almost 60 pictures in the past 2 days for Wikipedia; I need a break ;-) )It's rather interesting. I also created a Category called Civil War Images of Louisville as it seemed handy.-- Bedford 03:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary wasn't deleted by accident as you thought. It was deleted for copyright violation [2]. Thanks for creating a new article! -- Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) ( Talk) 19:03, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll have to remember to use that method to find out about such things in the future. Thanks! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 20:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for notifying me of my mistake on User:Anthony5429/The Idle Villagers. -- Anthony5429 04:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

You are invited to join WP Bluegrass Region, a WP project aimed at improving articles within the central Bluegrass region of Kentucky. I just set the project up not long ago and will be making improvements on it (it's still greek to me!). Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 15:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Is this basically a project to cover Frankfort and Lexington? If so, that's wonderful! I don't really have the extra time to be a member, but I definitely support the effort. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 15:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

More along the lines of central Kentucky as a whole, from Frankfort to Mt. Sterling, and from Cynthiana to Nicholasville. Since it is a loose term, it can be expanded granted there is support. It was originally titled Inner-Bluegrass Region, but that was too limiting. Thanks for the comments! Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 15:31, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll be in Bardstown tomorrow for the Bourbon festival, and will try to take pics of everything on the Registry of Historic Landmarks. I'll also get the Civil War Museum. I'll be going past Berheim and coming back through Mt. Washington. What should I go try to get for photos?-- Bedford 03:08, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I assume My Old Kentucky Home State Park is on your list. Also, downtown Bardstown pics, including the church in the traffic circle would be good. A pic of the Bernheim Forest sign would be good for that article too. Good luck, and have fun! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 06:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

new ACW task force Userbox!

Fix Bayonets! 13:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Where did you see the bureau referring to them as "cities"? Kaldari 23:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

What does the bureau call them? Whatever it is, let's use that. As long as the template and list say "U.S. Census Bureau-designated" before it, I'm OK with it. Otherwise, it's original research anyway. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 01:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Good catch on my omitting the "not" from the descriptions of consoildated cities on the dab pages. older ≠ wiser 17:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

What do you think of the pilot project I'm working on: Roads of Lexington, Kentucky and Roads of Ashland, Kentucky? I'm going to expand this to Roads of Cincinnati, Ohio and Roads of Louisville, Kentucky to try and bring more local coverage to the transportation network (road-wise) and get a listing down, especially for major throughfares that could be supplmented by maps. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 02:02, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, and it can be linked to from Transportation in Louisville, Kentucky. Thanks for your work on this. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 02:09, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

No prob. I also did as much as I could in one sitting to Cincinnati, Ohio. I reorganised it to the format that Louisville and Cincinnati but the leads to the pages need expanding, among other things. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 02:39, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Went ahead and did a basic outline of Roads of Louisville, Kentucky. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 04:36, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 15:19, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

What are the criteria for being a "major employer" in Louisville? Specifically, what is the threshold value for employment? -- Carl ^{( talk| contribs)} 04:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Using List of major employers in Lexington, Kentucky as a rule of thumb, I would say companies in the Louisville metro area with 1,000 or more employees. That doesn't mean each of those would necessarily deserve their own articles, but they would appear in the list anyway. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 04:42, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Would you then include Walmart, as it does not have 1000 in a single place, btu definitely has more than 1000 in the local stores? I know each employs at least 300.-- Bedford 04:48, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Why not? If it's a major employer in Louisville, that would seem notable. At any rate, hopefully the list article would be based on hard sources. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 04:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

UPS is number one with more than 20K, [3]. If you include government agencies, JCPS is #2 with about 14-15K. Ford is #3 at 6-7K (there's a chart in last week's Courier-Journal, I think it was Friday), and I believe GE is #4 with 5K. If I remember correctly, LMPD has about 1K, and I don't know what the employment numbers are for Walmart and Kroger, which each (I believe) have at least 1K in Louisville. Additionally, with there being something on the order of 20 McDonald's in Louisville, there are probably at least 1,000 McD employees (if I remember right, staffing for a typical McDonald's is around 50 or more -- but don't quote me on that). If you were to include all of metro government, you can probably get another thousand there. -- Carl ^{( talk| contribs)} 05:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the research. Looks like we could get a good start on the article already. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 15:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Creates Bardstownboaters, Bardstown boaters, Whitewater Clubs - and spams Bardstown, Kentucky. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 15:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

The best I can tell is this person is trying to use Wikipedia to brazenly promote their business. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 15:56, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

+ Whitewater Club. Hes doing redirects now to List of kayak clubs, which may be approperiate for Whitewater Clubs, but not for any others and not for Whitewater Club. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 16:01, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Now hes on a Vandalising spree. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 16:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't most of the other canoe clubs listed on wikipedia be deletd as well? Canoe Clubs

Not necessarily. Many of those articles appeared to show the notability of those clubs. At any rate, requirements for "speedy deletion" of those weren't met. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 17:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

The Bardstown Boaters is a non-profit organization invovled with river cleanups and getting a park built at the Beech Fork of the Salt River in Bardstown. Those are our main modes of operation. I guess when the group becomes notible enough by you, you can list us yourself.

Or you can contribute to Wikipedia without violating WP:EL. Note that adding links to your site from various articles is considered link spamming and is not tolerated under policy. Now if you want to make your club notable, then I suggest you expand upon the article in the sense of incorporating the above comment you made (greatly expanding) and leaving it all on one page. Ask yourself this question: What makes your club that much more encylopedic that isn't covered under the List of kyaking clubs? You had vague information at best, and minimal detail. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 18:24, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Would like to engage in a third-party peer review. I did a cleanup of the page and moved the blurb about "Race Relations" to History of Cincinnati, Ohio where I felt it was approperiate due to its text on the Underground Railroad, historic race relations, and former race riots. An article is linked to the 2001 race riots, so discussing that on Cincinnati, Ohio or even at History of Cincinnati, Ohio is redundant.

Appearantly someone is not too happy and accused me of glossing over the information to portray the proponents of the race riots in a bad light. I moved it to History as I saw fit (because the entire article was one huge mess), to which it was moved to Government and Politics, which is now named Society. Just needing some opinions on it. Thanks Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 03:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey Stevietheman. I'm using popups so I didn't get a chance to explain. If you'll check out Category:Festivals in the United States by state, you'll see that all of the festivals are in the state's Culture cat. Not sure why you'd want to bury it further than that? -- Hobbes747 15:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

A festival is an event. There are other events that will fill into the Events category. No burying, just better organization. There's no requirement for all states to be exactly alike in their categorization. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 15:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Having only a category with only one entry is fine when it is a part of a series. Vegaswikian 05:47, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

OK. Let's restore it then. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 05:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

The September 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by Grafikbot - 20:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

from USS Cole bombing:

(rv to last edit by Stevietheman; these need a source; rephrase the Bush comment)

So how do you decide what needs sources and what doesn't? -Crunchy Numbers 20:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

It depends upon the seriousness and potential controversy of the statement being made. And if a statement doesn't seem to fully ring true, that is usually cause for requesting a cite. I have no "formula" for this though. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 22:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I have had enough of your constant accusations that I am "pushing a bias." Go to an administrator with proof that I am pushing a bias or apologize. My contributions are well-reasoned; where you disagree, you can debate my arguments on their own merits -- but the personal attacks stop right now. Bartleby007 01:37, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I have yet to personally attack you. You, however, suggested I have some kind of love affair with al-Qaeda (an extreme personal attack). Nevertheless, pointing out the narrow focus of your contributions and how it portends your bias is not a personal attack, but rather a conclusion based on evidence. Further, I did indeed debate changes on their merits, but you keep pushing right-wing bias with regards to what al-Qaeda did or didn't do, and that's inappropriate. Apparently, you are Cyrus Nowrasteh or a close associate. It's clear from your focus. I will not apologize for that conclusion. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 01:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Would the Cat. Kentucky in the Civil War be assisted by breaking it down further to include Kentuckians in the Civil War? Or possibly Kentucky Confederate Veterns/Kentucky Federal Veterns? Soldan 14:20, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. How about "People from Kentucky involved in the Civil War"? And make this a subcategory of "Kentucky in the Civil War" and "People from Kentucky". Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 18:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Do we want to break it down into Confederate and Federal lists? I'm fairly certain we have enough for both. Soldan 18:32, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that sounds good. Not sure about the naming though. All people involved aren't veterans. Perhaps we should bring this up in the Civil War task force, since this will apply to all such state categories. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 18:59, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. I will repost the original question there. Soldan 19:01, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

One vote an emphatic NO! Please be consistent with the other state categories. No reason to make Kentucky different than the other ones. Scott Mingus 22:21, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

If anyone is wondering, I am reducing my project and work load to the point where I'm mainly working on Louisville-related subjects. This is due to a combination of time constraints and Wiki-burnout. Besides, I already feel I've made a large contribution to Kentucky-related subjects by building up its wikiproject, fixing its category system and securing its place in Civil War history--beyond that, I have to let it go. There's a lot of work to do for my hometown of Louisville and the metro area, and I want to concentrate most of my time on that from here going forward. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to say thanks on behalf of Wikiproject Kentucky. I wish we had our own barnstar, but we never did drum up enough interest to justify it. You have done some great work, and have set an example for the rest of us. Lamont A Cranston 12:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for all your many contributions to the Civil War task force! Please feel free to rejoin us in the future if you still have an interest and time in further editing Civil War / Kentucky articles! regards, and best wishes... Scott Mingus 22:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I ran across this article today in the H-L. Do you think it would be fitting to include that in the Bardstown entry? Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 13:55, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that looks notable to me. Bardstown has the oldest retail store in the state. Gotta mention that. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 17:51, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Do they have any connections to the Spalding to whom Spalding Hall was named for?-- Bedford 20:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

For all you have done for Wikipedia, especially in regards to the Louisville Metro, I award you, Stevietheman, the Editor's Barnstar. Keep up the awesome work! -- Moreau36 16:48, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Why did you revert the edits to Muhammad Ali? Gimmetrow 16:07, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Because whatever it was you were doing, it included the misplacing of a comma. I didn't see any purpose to the edit. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 16:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

IThe current version has one note before a comma, and one note after a comma. I was making this consistent after Anger22 made an edit apparently solely to make it inconsistent. Per WP:FN, footnotes are supposed to follow punctuation. Please self-revert. Gimmetrow 16:18, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Denied. The comma was misplaced. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 16:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

One comma is misplaced, the other isn't. I've adjusted them to be consistent, again. Gimmetrow 17:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I self-reverted as I misread the change and corrected another misplaced comma. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 17:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

"Some scientists believe..." is not appropriate. If you want that paragraph to remain in the article, then recast it.

It will stay whether it's recast or not. I'm sure somebody can find a cite to back it up. It's common knowledge that some scientists believe that. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 06:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

You can't say "some scientists". You just can't do that. I'm not even going to get into the discussion of whether MSG or glutamates are considered harmful or who considers them harmful. Which scientists? Where? When? In what document? How is that relevant to KFC? Language like "some scientists" or "some people" or "some countries" is weasel-wording. If you're going to act like an editor, please read the Wikipedia guidelines on how to do it, and in particular about weasel wording. Weasel wording isn't allowed in a high school essay, let alone a reference work. Please write factually and neutrally and encourage other authors to do the same. Joseph N Hall 07:03, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

That's why I asked for a cite. Enough with the lectures. Censorship is not always the answer to paragraphs not perfectly written or cited. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

It's not censorship to remove text that does not have any verified or cited factual content, that is controversial and "loaded," and that is written completely contrary to the standards of Wikipedia. It's "good editing." Furthermore, it is inappropriate for you to protect the article from changes that you don't like except in limited cases like obvious vandalism. It's not your article. It's not "Stevietheman's Views on KFC." Do not treat it as such. If some other author makes a change, and it's an even partially reasonable change, do not revert it. Discuss the change in the talk page and try to obtain multiple opinions and some kind of consensus and improved quality.

I could write "some scientists believe the oils and proteins in fried chicken will help you grow healthier hair," and without a citation, that's precisely as specious as the paragraph in question. Joseph N Hall 19:29, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Would you please take a look at what's going on with the article? I feel like it's being taken over by non-Wikipedia people with an axe to grind. Nareek 20:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I am the author of the content on the KY Musuem of Art and Craft. Please don't suppose you know more than you do. I am making changes to the reference from my own articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clinkers2 ( talk • contribs)

Even if it's in your own words, it is brochure copy and uses the word "we". Don't dump a lot of content into an article expecting others to clean it up. You may wish to use your user space for developing the content for encyclopedia use in your user space. If you need details on how to do this, I will be happy to help. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:45, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

The frequent Louisville article poster using IP addresses beginning with 4.224, 4.225, and 136.165.88 are all associated with this vandal (a/k/a Brando03, Brandon03, The Br03, and other sock puppets): Wikipedia:Long_term_abuse#Unemployed.2C_living_in_basement.2C_aka_Brando.28n.2903.2C_aka_Louisville_Vandal. The entries using the IP address 136.165.88.21 to vandalize the same user pages as he or she has previously vandalized further confirm this users true identity. I thought I would let you know which Louisville and Kentucky contributions may be worth a bit more scrutiny. Chris24 03:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Hey Stevie - I know that you keep a eye on the Colonel Sanders. I have proposed on the talk page that we either eliminate or severely pare down the trivia section in that article (as a start, I feel that many trivia/popular culture sections are getting out of hand). How do you feel about it? -- rogerd 23:14, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to let anyone who visits here know that I'm taking some time off (probably just a few weeks) to launch a new Louisville-oriented discussion board as well as work on some other things.

Regarding the board, I am close to announcing a beta version of the new "Louisville History & Issues" discussion board. This will be an open, nonpartisan, democratic (small 'd') discussion board for discussing Louisville-related history and current issues.

I have worked on the board's software off and on for several years, so any glitches should be minimized from the start.

As far as topic areas are concerned, early participants will get the special opportunity to help me shape the names and topics of the various forums that will be included on the discussion board. I've already put together a first draft of my own choices, but feedback is very much welcome.

To join the mailing list for developments about this board, send an email to steve@stevemagruder.com -- all email addresses will be kept confidential as all notification emails will be sent to me with sendto addresses as "bcc". Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 19:48, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

The Louisville History & Issues discussion board is now LIVE. I should be returning to work on Wikipedia articles within the next couple weeks. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 19:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

The October 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:32, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi, the KFC page got vandalised and I noticed u once fixed it, I will attempt to do so but if I mess up please help me out. Just let me know if I did it right.

Thanks GuardianOfTruth 15:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Somebody Aldready fixed it. Thanks anyway. GuardianOfTruth 15:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Stevie - I noticed you user page was just vandalized. If you would like, I could semi-protect it. Would you want me to do that for you? This would not semi-protect your talk page, although I could do that as a separate action, too. However that would limit the ability of new/unregistered users to communicate with you. -- rogerd 22:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I was checking the change in articles in my watchlist and found out that your page was partially blanked. If you didn't mind, I reverted the vandals edits to your last version. Just giving you a heads up -- Moreau36 23:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

The category shift for participants in WIkiProjects is a massive job, and takes a while. Please be patient.-- Mike Selinker 16:12, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

All right. But I was alarmed that the last changes were from late last night. I don't like when things are left hanging for a long period of time. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 16:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but there's not a lot of us involved in the maintenance of those categories, so it takes some time. I encourage you to come help out!-- Mike Selinker 19:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

When will you move Phoenix to number 5 ahead of Philly? Pinusjaponicus

Sorry to interrupt, but the list is based on the July 1, 2005 estimates, in which Philadelphia still outedged Phoenix by a very slim margin. The ranking order will likely change when the next U.S. Census estimates are released in July 2007. -- Moreau36 20:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I've removed Category:Pasadena, California from the Cheeseburger article again. Please respond at Talk:Cheeseburger#Pasadena category. Judging from your edit history of the page and the talk page, you may want to read WP:OWN as well. Mike Dillon 01:39, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

It's restored and I gave the rationale on the talk page. Keep your judgments to yourself. I own no article in the Wikipedia. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 16:58, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The November 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 23:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Could you examine the article for Southeast Christian Church and see if it is objective enough? I edited it after someone splashed a bunch of scripture all over it. Other people have deleted a bunch of information and emphasized the Catholic statue controversy from a few years ago. I feel there are two sets of people with opposite agendas who are abusing this article; I hope it seems fair now. Opinion? Mazeface 14:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks like you cleaned it up nicely. Be sure to let others (esp. admins) know if editors keep trying to come in and insert junk like you describe. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:40, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061206/NEWS01/612060527/1008

I had no idea the project had progressed this far! I'll update the article probably tonight or tomorrow. Looks like Louisville has a good shot at getting a tall skyscraper! Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 17:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, looks exciting a project and an economic plus for Louisville, although I still think that in terms of aesthetics, it's not very pretty. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's my main complaint with it since it is such a radical design. But I see not only an economic benefit, but a tourism benefit from those who just want to see the darn thing. Miles upon miles of nothing on each side (you can't see much from the interstate in Kentucky, after all) and it'll be on their stop. It would be better if the 8664 plan was enacted though... Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 01:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I've been on wikibreak, and am just trying to catch up. Do you want to have two templates for WikiProject Louisville? If not, I can use the bot to switch to the newer one for you. The bot only looks for articles tagged with one tag. I suppose it wouldn't take much effort to allow it to look for two, but I'm not sure when I'd get around to making the change. For now, I've finally switched the watchlist page to using the newer template (although I haven't updated yet -- I expect to do that later tonight after some other tagging is done). Sorry for the delay. Ingrid 02:46, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, if you want to switch all the ones with {{ LouisvilleWikiProject}} to use {{ WikiProject Louisville}} instead, that would be much appreciated. I'd rather have all the Louisville-related articles use the latter template. If your bot can handle this switch, then I'm all for it. Thanks! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 02:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem. It's done, and the watchlist is updated. I didn't realize you wanted me to do it before or I would have. Feel free to ask if there's anything else I can do to help (and thanks for your appreciation). Ingrid 00:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

It's no bother at all. It won't affect the bot. On some projects, I've used the bot to help with the assessment. For example, mark all non-article pages with "class=NA", or all articles in a stub category with "class=Stub". Of course, it can't do any of the real work, but can sometimes take care of some of the repetitive stuff. Ingrid 19:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Stubs are all marked. Ingrid 22:33, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Much appreciated! Happy Holidays! Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 01:18, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

But it was a BIG mistake! Sorry about making it, and thanks for having caught it. Badbilltucker 20:56, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Hehe. No problem. Thank you for doing this work. It had to be done sooner or later. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:04, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

I found a website which states that Louisville is w/i 100 miles downwind of 5 of the nation's most polluting power plants. This information should be put in the city's article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.225.122.62 ( talk) 18:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

If it can be sourced, go for it. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 19:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Funny edit summary (TLC). I like you. — Scouter Sig 06:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Magruder, do you not believe in objectivity in editing Wikipedia? You recently submitted a recommendation to delete the article for J. Kristian O'Daugherty that I posted. Considering your history and former domestic partnership with Mr. O'Daugherty, and considering the scandal you nearly caused for WikiNews in 2004 related to The Piano Man, which Mr. O'Daugherty had to issue a public statement denouncing your interview and claims, I question your objectivity in making your recommendations. Could you be abusing your position with Wikipedia to retaliate against your former partner over personal issues? I believe the evidence would suggest yes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ilsonlakosky ( talk • contribs) 07:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC).

My recommendation for the deletion of this article was made using objective standards set up by the Wikipedia. I could pick out a couple kernels of truth from the mess of untruth you just wrote, but again, my recommendation is based on objective Wikipedia standards. I would apply these standards to any Wikipedia article. I recommend that you follow Wikipedia standards for article inclusion. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:42, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

You may also want to review Wikipedia:No personal attacks. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 15:33, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi,

Sure, if you want to get the newsletter delivered, no problem. However, you need a formatted list of members somewhere on your project page (e.g. like this). It is also highly advisable to have an opt-out page/section somewhere (like in Outreach for milhist project), for those who would choose not to recieve the newsletter.

Cheers, Grafikm ^(AutoGRAF) 16:42, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your quick response, but I think I'm going to delay implementing this in favor of a simple alerts system. There's not enough active members to make doing a newsletter worthwhile at this time. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 02:11, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• working on it , to be copy/pasted to the template space when finished. -- Ling.Nut 20:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
  • mmmmmm I think it's done. See Talk:Kentucky for the small version. -- Ling.Nut 20:54, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
    • I'm moving it into template space now. -- Ling.Nut 20:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it's too complex and too thick. You really didn't give anyone time to respond to what you were wanting to do. I won't revert it, but I might do some surgery on it in the near future. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:36, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Too thick? What did you have in mind? There are so many different options, the thing needs to be thick. Are you talking about the visible text, or the template logic? -- Ling.Nut 21:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I already expressed my concerns in the template talk. It's best discussed there. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:41, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing the error in Template:WikiProject Egypt.

-- Meno25 02:31, 31 December 2006 (UTC)