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

On the basis of the discussion at WikiProject Council, I have been BOLD and set up WikiProject Measurement. I hope you are still interested and that you will join the discussion as to how to progress from here. Best wishes, Physchim62 (talk) 11:33, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:LadybugWingsClose.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. howcheng { chat} 18:58, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Please use {{ ncd}} and not speedy for these cases. Be sure to give the new filename. Thanks. MECU≈ talk 00:38, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. — Zaui ( talk) 14:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I guess the dual cover image is better historically but maybe it could be of a higher resolution.

J B

• At the size it's displayed at, the resolution is sufficient. Besides, for us to use the covers on Wikipedia, they cannot be high-resolution reproductions - see Wikipedia:Non-free content 3(b). — Zaui ( talk) 14:51, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Whats the highest resolution that can still be called "low resolution"? -- J B

Good question - 3(b) states "high resolution/fidelity that it could be used for piracy" so, in this case, if the image could be printed the same size as the book cover and look like the original, then that's too high of a resolution. — Zaui ( talk) 21:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

(P.S. remember to sign your comments on talk pages - use four tildes: ~~~~ or the signature button.)

I've been marking my photos previously uploaded to WP that are now on Commons with {{subst:ncd}}. They have been tagged with "This image does not give credit to uploader Zaui on Commons." First, I'm not sure what this means. The name of the uploader is shown on the image page on Commons, is this what is meant by 'credit'? Second, I uploaded most of them to Commons anyway and my user name (Zaui) is already there. What more is needed? Thanks in advance. — Zaui ( talk) 16:39, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Whoops, that's a bug in the bot code. If the same person uploaded it, then there's really no need to give "credit". Thanks for letting me know. — METS501 ( talk) 19:56, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I know the portal itself adds the month, but when someone clicks on the More anniversaries... link from the portla it does not give the months and I think it would be good to be able to work in headers there, what do you think? Aboutmovies 16:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

It just seems redundant. The More anniversaries... page lists the month and date before each entry already. There aren't that many, so the contents box that appears when there are headers isn't really necessary. I'm just using my experience in getting the Utah Portal featured - someone will comment on the box header and content both listing the month.

But if you want to keep the headers, we could remove the month from the box header - so it reads 'Selected anniversaries' instead of 'July selected anniversaries' and put the headers back. — Zaui ( talk) 16:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

		WPOR Award: Sponsored in part by the Big Gold Dude.
		You are hereby granted this shiny object for all your hard work at WikiProject Oregon! Great job with getting the portal up and running! Aboutmovies 17:38, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Please discuss major changes to the direction of the portal at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wisconsin. It's a part of the WikiProject. While the portal was neglected for several months, I had been updating it this year. You will find a better product if a group input is used. I bet there are more articles that should be included in the bio for example. The redesign of the layout that you made cause major wrapping problems on my 1024 x 768 monitor. Royalbroil 20:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the formatting - is the selected image too wide? — Zaui ( talk) 21:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes. PLEASE do a group discussion, especially about the selected article, DYK, & Bio sections. I updated the portal because it was neglected for a long time (May 2006 to Feb. 2007). I bring up major changes like this for our fellow group members to discuss... For instance, we should create a rotating list of DYK nominees... Royalbroil 21:44, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I've set up a to-do list based on what I had to do to get the Utah portal featured. I also dropped a note at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wisconsin. Portals are just supposed to highlight the 'best of Wikipedia' for a topic, so we should focus on using FA, Good, A and B-rated content in the article and bio sections - we can make a list of potential entries in the to-do list. Other interesting stuff can have a DYK entry & we can include DYKs that have been on the main page, even if it duplicates an article or bio.

Also, I couldn't reproduce the wrapping problem when I changed my monitor to 1024 x 768. Do you have the same problem when you view the Utah portal? — Zaui ( talk) 21:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

The wrapping now works properly for Portal:Wisconsin and Portal:Utah. I had the same problem with Portal:Illinois, and I worked with someone who was improving the portal to featured status until it worked for me. Several other people had commented about the same problem on the "featured portal" nomination page.

Thanks for bringing up the portal changes on WikiProject Wisconsin! Royalbroil 02:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Greetings WPOR member, we are starting a weekly collaboration project where we will announce two articles that are currently stubs that we hope to work together to improve. No pressure to help, but if you would like to, just stop by one of the articles and see if you can find information to expand the article with, copy edit what is there, help with formatting, or add some images. This week’s articles are: Alis volat propriis and Fusitriton oregonensis. Aboutmovies 22:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Greetings WikiProject Oregon employees. Well a big thanks to all those who helped improve Alis volat propriis and Fusitriton oregonensis last week. This week’s Stub improvement are: Government of Oregon which should be easy, and Miss Oregon. Again, no pressure to help with the collaboration, choose one, both, or neither. Also, feel free to opt out of the notifications at the new page dedicated to collaborative efforts at WPOR (newsletter is in R&D). Aboutmovies 19:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello again WikiProject Oregon team members, its time for the next Collaboration of the Week. First a shout out to Sprkee for putting together some templates for this project. Now, in honor of Labor Day weekend and the outdoor nature of the activities that often accompany the three-day weekend, this week’s item is to de-redlink as many parks from the List of Oregon State Parks. Some may even by going to one of these places, a great opportunity to take a picture or two for an article. As always, participation is not required, though it is appreciated. And if you are caught, we will disavow any knowledge of your existence. Since we don’t want to waste any effort through duplication, please make a note on the talk page of which park article you are going to start. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. Good day! Aboutmovies 19:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello Zaui. Good article on the Wendover field. In about 1994 I was working on a photo project tramping all over the field. Not much commercial airline stuff going on back then. Found on the far east side, a brand new piece of equipment, shiny white paint, surrounded by very new chain link and razor wire. Fence was maybe 45 ft. in diam. The equipment itself was on stilts, had a large dome on top. May have been radar. I'm pretty sure it was not related to the commercial airline activity because it was far off from the runway. Always wondered why active equipment would be built in all that desolation and deserted buildings. What was it for? Any ideas? User:Xoxoxoxoxo —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xoxoxoxoxo ( talk • contribs) 06:40, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, I've visited the old Wendover AFB, but I don't think I've made an edit to any of the articles. I don't know what the white thing was that you saw. — Zaui ( talk) 16:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

First off, great job to all WikiProject Oregon folks for last week’s List of Oregon State Parks work. We pounded out six new state park articles: Sarah Helmick, Bald Peak, Bob Straub, Sumpter Valley Gold Dredge, Tumalo, and Peter Skene Ogden. Plus numerous other edits to improve the existing articles. As a reward, we are introducing the COTW award {{ WPOR COTW award}}, and this time it goes to User:Woodstein52 for starting three of the articles.

On to this week. We are back to the usual two Top importance Stubs: Sunstone and Oregon, My Oregon. Both are stub pluses, so it shouldn’t take much to upgrade them both. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. Good day! Aboutmovies 22:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

All righty WPOR ladies and gentleman, great job last week with our state song and gemstone. I have bumped them up to Start class. I haven’t looked at the contributions, so the COTW award will be later. This week’s articles are Darlene Hooley, by special request, and another Top stub, our very own state rock, the Thunderegg. Yes, apparently we have a state rock and state gemstone. No word on whether there is a state stone too. Hooley basically needs some sources to make it to the next level. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. In the words of Beaver Joe, whoop! Aboutmovies 18:14, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to autmun and the weekly COTW news. Great job to those who helped out with last week’s articles: Darlene Hooley & Thunderegg. Both made great improvements. This week, something a little different. With fall upon us, the photo ops are going to be harder to get, so we have a photo request fulfillment drive. Take a look at the requested pictures for Oregon category or the graphics subproject for what’s needed. Then go take a picture, or search online for a free picture to upload (US gov sites are great and there are links available from the above links). If you fill a request, be sure to remove the request template from the article’s talk page. Our other item is another red link removal drive, this time on the flagship Oregon article. Like the state parks red link drive, try to coordinate on the talk page. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. Aboutmovies 02:00, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I know everyone has been waiting anxiously for this week’s COTW, so here they are: Barlow Road and Columbia River Plateau. Both are almost Start class, just some formatting and referencing, plus a little expansion and they will be there!

As to last week, it is difficult to track the items we were working on, but I know some pictures were added and at least three red links were removed from Oregon, so thank you to all those who participated. The award winner will be GoodDamon for their creation of the Oregon Forest Resources Institute article. We have now worked through all the Top class stubs and are into the High class stubs. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. Happy editing, and remember if you see a downed power line, don’t pick it up. Aboutmovies 20:22, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Greetings WPOR world. Last week was great with the Barlow Road seeing lots of improvement, maybe even B class. Columbia River Plateau also saw some improvement, maybe enough to bump it to Start. On with the countdown, another two Stubs in the High category, both happen to be people: Don Schollander a multi-gold medalist; and then world-renowned bridge architect and all-around swell guy Conde McCullough. Schollander needs sources more than anything, and McCullough needs more of a bio, plus maybe a nice chart for the bridges with type/year/location/length. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. This week’s safety tip, stranger=danger. Aboutmovies 18:12, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Greetings once again WikiProject Oregon members. Thank you to those who help out with improving Conde McCullough and Don Schollander last week. This week is a Stub break, with a Ref improvement drive for Oregon and a request for work on Portland Police Bureau. For the ref improvement, this means sourcing tagged statements and standardizing all existing citations, both of which are needed for GA and FA status. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. Aboutmovies 18:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Howdy doody ya’ll WPOR poke, time for more COTW. Thanks for the work on Portland Police Bureau and improving the references at Oregon. This week we are back to Stubs with Eastern Oregon and Fort Vancouver National Historic Site. Both need just a little TLC to make it to Start. Again to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts click here. Aboutmovies 01:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Ladies and Gentlemen its time for another episode of Collaboration of the Week. Last week’s show starring Fort Vancouver National Historic Site & Eastern Oregon received high ratings. This week’s show star two more stubs, Johnny Kitzmiller & John Wesley Davis. As always, to opt out or suggest future collaborative efforts, click here. Don’t delay, act today! Aboutmovies 18:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

		The COTW award from WPOR.
		Thanks for leading the way in last week's Collaboration of the Week! For your work with Eastern Oregon. Aboutmovies 18:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)