![]() | 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 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
Hi, Rschen7754. I noticed you set up Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York State routes to be automatically archived by a bot. You may not have noticed that TwinsMetsFan and I were discussing whether or not to do so on that very page. I didn't want to seem rude by reverting it (and not knowing how Werdnabot works, I didn't want to muck something up). Would it be troublesome to ask you to remove the auto-archiving until we come to a consensus? You're welcome to participate in the discussion, of course! Powers T 13:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Any chance of running these past WP:WSS/P prior to creation, as per WP:STUB? Alai 03:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Uh what? Mitchazenia 21:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, yes, we are essentially waiting for one of the admins to close the poll. Just strike out votes made after the official closing of poll. -- physicq210 00:17, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I contacted an admin who will make sure the discussion is closed and protected. The participating admin have been notified, and I let them know they have until 23:59 UTC on September 4 to make their vote. --Willy No1lakersfan ( Talk - Contribs) 02:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
fair enough. out of curiosity, what's the purpose of the separate administrator sections? — Dan | talk 21:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Hey, someone pointed out to me that you protected this page. I see your name all throughout the history of the page. You should get another admin to do this for you when you're that involved with a page, or else it appears a conflict of interest; and we're trying to get away from that. Thanks! Bastique▼ parler voir 21:18, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
How does one "transclude?" Don't know how to do that, and I'd like to in regards to WP:OHSH. Homefryes Say• Do 18:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I am transcluding I just haven't gotten to it yet. Stratosphere ( U T) 19:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Rschen7754! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Computerjoe 's talk 11:55, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
What poll are you talking about? I have been very busy lately. Raccoon Fox • Talk • Stalk 23:57, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
No I am not aware of this. Please enlighten me about this issue. Thanks! -- physicq210 03:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, can't we just have all the state highway articles use the same infobox? -- physicq210 04:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, just bring the junctions thing up when the infobox thing crops up. -- physicq210 04:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Is this good for you? Teke ( talk) 02:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
If this is being done in classic Albanian democratic fashion (all citizens must vote for the only choice provided) then why bother voting. If you take a gander at Wikipedia:WikiProject New Jersey State and County Routes/Completion list, we have article created for every exisiting state highway in New jersey, with redirects from virtually every other meaningful alternative. The only articles that don't exists (or have redirects) are a limited number of proposed and defunct roadways. There seem to be about as many people working on New Jersey articles as participated in the original poll, yet other than SPUI (for whatever he's worth representing our state), I didn't see any other New Jersey participation in the process. A consensus is inly worth it's name if it encompasses a sufficiently broad cross-section of participants, and that just does not seem to be the case as far as the participants in WP:NJSCR are concerned, including myself. Alansohn 02:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Hopefully, this'll hold so that there won't be a next time when it comes to road name debating. In any case, I'm back (needed a couple of days away to clear my head and enjoy the Labor Day holiday), hopefully for the long run. -- TMF T - C 16:18, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
This has finally come to an end. All we need now from the WP:NCSH project members is a vote on which convention we should use at the National State Route Naming Convention Poll. If you feel you have enough knowledge in the area, please go to Wikipedia:State route naming conventions poll#North Carolina and cast your vote. -- TinMan 17:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Why foment conflict where none need exist? If nobody was contesting the names of NJSR pages (and apparently nobody was), why would you feel the need to create an issue over it? Just let them be. You're making this harder than it has to be by insisting on "foolish consistency" on non-contentious pages. By trying to force the issue, you're creating more enemies and stimulating more opposition. If there's existing naming conventions chosen by state WikiProjects which have not been objected to, I'd recommend they be left alone. Otherwise this is just going to snowball. FCYTravis 04:01, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Please note at [1] that I had not placed the discussion for the latter two at the right place. KY X and Kentucky State Primary/Secondary/Supplemental Road X was meant only for discussion for within the body of the text. I withdrew both from voting to remove any further confusion, and added an option for Kentucky State Route X. Sorry about that. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 18:31, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Can I vote only for New Jersey or can I vote for all 50 states? Who is eleigible to vote within a particular state? Alansohn 02:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Is that supposed to be only states that are mostly P2, or just any state that has a mixture of conventions? -- NORTH talk 06:36, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Stratosphere's got it already. It's fairly simple to do; just open the image up in Inkscape, click a state, click the red swatch at the bottom of the screen, then save and upload. — Scott5114 ↗ 04:31, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
Thank you for your work and patience at the state route naming conventions poll, in helping bring a general consensus to this long-standing debate even at the risk of one vocal opponent to the entire process. Your work on various transport related pages is of high quality and improves the quality of the encylopedia. Kudos and thank you! Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 19:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC) |
This user is a sockpuppet of Randallrobinstine, a long time sockpuppeter with many puppets. I would recommend an indef block (as a sockpuppet) instead of the 3 hours, but that's just me. — Whomp ( myedits) 02:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
How is Interstate 244 not an article? — Scott5114 ↗ 18:58, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
I think it would be better off to have each state split off. Texas alone will eventually have over 3,000 articles, will be a pain in the ass to have to sift through every other states articles to find the ones I need. The bot doesn't seem to have a problem with it now when it counts the assessments. -- Holderca1 04:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I know I shouldn't be editing highway articles, but I found the article Interstate 335 (Minnesota) and I noticed a few things that needed to be corrected on it. Please review my change and let me know if there is anything wrong with it. If so, please revert it as soon as necessary. Again, I know it's bad form for me to edit highway articles, but "Minneapolis" was misspelled. -- Elkman - (Elkspeak) 02:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry if I interfered with your editing. Next time, please put {{ inuse}} or {{ inuse-section}} on the page before editing to reduce such edit conflicts. Again, I apologize for my confusion. -- physicq210 23:09, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I said prior to Part II voting that we already agreed at WT:NCSH (now archived info) that "NC x" would be used as the common name for linking and article text. If you look at Part II under North Carolina, you can see at the top that I stated that. As for South Carolina, I don't think it was voted on, so reverting that is fine. This poll was for the article titles anyway and not for text words I believe. I don't think that that was stated anywhere and was for Part III. Besides, I asked twice how to use brackets to get "NC x" in the voting option, but nobody said anything. Reguardless, "North Carolina x" was not chosen under any poll or any concensus, so I really don't know why that's listed under the style guide. -- TinMan 23:29, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
I don't have a problem with the convention. My only reservation is that the proposal seems incomplete, but in a subtle way that as of now I cannot describe. -- physicq210 04:07, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello, Rschen7754. Since you have commented on the design of exit lists in the past, you may be interested in contributing to the newly-formed exit list guide. Please give your input regarding the page as soon as possible.
Regards, TMF T - C 22:33, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Are you aware that Jonathunder changed your exemption, and is now trying to change Wikipedia:Manual of Style (U.S. state highways) to match? -- SPUI ( T - C) 19:13, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Please do have a look at this. As SPUI was told on our Minnesota highway project, "Minnesota State Highway X" is accepted as common name by the Minnesota editors, and there is plenty of external evidence for it. Regards. Jonathunder 20:06, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Hey. I've updated the instructions over at Template:Infobox road. Feel free to make any changes you see fit. Regards, TMF T - C 04:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
{{unblock|Wait... what did I vandalize?}} -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 06:25, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi – question: as I was working on moving Ohio SR pages, I came across a boadload of unused redirects, most of which were created in Nov. '05. I found them here, and wondered if it's proper and acceptable for me to request their deletion. Please advise — Homefryes Say• Do 17:42, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I just noticed that we finished Oregon and California about the same time. If you'd like, I could take care of Washington, since it seems like you have more work to do than me. -- NORTH talk 20:58, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I am in the process of making a more detailed version of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory, and would like to know if you want the maps task force listed. Please tell me if you would like to have the task force listed separately, under the main Highways entry, on the final version of the directory. Oh, and per conventions, it would help a lot if there were a place on the task force page for someone to add their names as a member of the task force. That's just a small point, however. Good luck on working on the highways. Badbilltucker 19:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
When I added "mostly" I meant that I have moved all the pages and made "most" (actually almost all) of the necessary redirects. You may remove the entries. Peter O. ( Talk) 02:06, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Question: What should we do if there's a redirect in the way of a move? Should I just notify you or another admin? Should I post it to WP:RM normally? Should we create a special requested moves page as a subpage of WP:SRNC? I'm sure some other non-admin has run into this problem already; I just need to know what I'm supposed to do.
The specific move I'm having trouble with is Route 18N (New Jersey) → New Jersey Route 18N. The page used to be titled "Pre-1927 ...", so the redirect at the P1 name has an edit history. -- NORTH talk 22:07, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
Deleted -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 21:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Take it to ANI. I'll be gone for a few days, but I will easily say that you will have a lot of support. I'm reverting the talk page. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 03:30, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Or at least that's what User:David Gerard thinks on WP:AN/I. JohnnyBGood t c VIVA! 18:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
I am in the process of determining whether the five shields for Great Lakes Circle Tour (visible at The Great Lakes Information Network but I am concerned and unsure of the copyright for them. The site (and its parent have copyrights on them so I believe that I cant post them in Commons under any free use license. I am unsure if fair use comes into play here. I have not uploaded the images I made to Wikipedia either until I can be sure this does not violate copyright. Can you give me your honest opinion of what the best approach would be - is it a fair use, or a free license? Thanks --• master_son Lets talk 00:26, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand the edits your bot made with this edit summary, changing U.S. Highway 1 to U.S. Highway 1. U.S. Highway 1 is a redirect, not a disambiguation page, and these edits are a bad idea for the reasons given in Wikipedia:Redirect#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken. -- NE2 03:30, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
According to Wikipedia:Redirect#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken, you should in fact stop the bot:
In fact, your bot's edits should probably be reverted. -- NE2 03:51, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
Do you mean Iowa Highway xx, since that's what's on WP:USSH? If so, I agree, as long as the text itself is changed, not just the page being linked to. In this case, Iowa State Highway 1 is actually worse than Iowa State Highway 1, as someone checking "what links here" will think it has been fixed when it actually has not. -- NE2 04:21, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
For the vandal that persistantly disrupted my discusiion page. By the way, are you going to make an article about the interstates/roads in Montana? That would be interesting since Montana doesn't have speed limits? Bearly541 04:16, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
My apologies. I had removed it because I thought the problems had been resolved. NE2 was the only editor involved who had lost any content due to his edit conflicts. Please be aware that you have accidentally duplicated the entire page. -- NORTH talk 22:34, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
You had some questions on RFAr about users getting off probation. I've compiled the complete list of users on Probation from which it is easy to identify those who are behaving themselves and contributing. Have started a thread about it at WT:RFAr. You may wish to contribute. Fys. Ta fys aym. 13:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
Apparently, yes. Thanks if you unblocked me. Thanks anyway if you didn't. =P -- 210 physicq ( c) 01:54, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
D'oh! Sorry, mised that part. :) That said, seems a few of the articles don't meet the convention either, but I don't really want to get involved in that fight. 81.104.170.167 04:45, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Oh yes, I almost forgot. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(assistance)#User:Albertotineo10 when you get a chance. Any input is appreciated. Thanks! -- TMF T - C 04:41, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
It appears this user is back at it again. See Pennsylvania Route 987 (the unnecessary linking and his inability to use the preview button) and Airport Road, Pennsylvania (bad name and poorly written; its purpose is unclear as well). I don't know what to do with this user, as I'm not going to bother to leave a message on his/her talk page (as the user doesn't read it anyway), and the mess that this user has created on PA-related articles will take weeks and multiple users to clean up. Any thoughts? -- TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 21:11, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the encouragement. To be honest though, I don't know why I even need a mop. All it would do would give me more work closing XfD's and whatnot. :-P -- NORTH talk 20:57, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you very much for your support in my RfA, which passed on October 17, 2006 with a tally of 53/6/0. I am equally elated and humbled by my new capacity as administrator of Wikipedia, and I send my heartfelt thanks for your unflinching support. If you need me for anything, just ask me! With gratitude, 210 physicq ( c) 04:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC) |
And, of course, thank you for your efforts to defend my history during my RfA. I look forward to editing Wikipedia in the capacity as an admin: more maturely and more civilly. -- 210 physicq ( c) 04:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm just taking a little break from major contributions right now. The only ones I have left to do are the ones that don't actually have to be done right now (the all-P2 exceptions). If I were you, I'd take care of your Tennessee sign-up first, then see what's going on with User:Xxpor and Maine.
Once Tennessee and Maine are done, feel free to help me with the extra states. If not, I'll get them done within the next month or two. Either way is totally fine with me. -- NORTH talk 16:04, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
The information about the storm dammage is important because it is history of the road. This is not your average closure, it's been at least 8 months. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Redtroll ( talk • contribs)
Rschen7754, you are invited to participate in the (definitely less structured than WP:SRNC) WT:CASH infobox discussion. Please feel free to share your thoughts and ideas. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 01:17, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
I've been told they've been fixed. Was the problem recent? Do you have a diff? — SCZenz 04:48, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Yea, I'm still interested. I've been busy these past few weeks. Thanks for reminding me :D xxpor ( Talk| Contribs) 19:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
The stub category Rhode Island State Highway stubs is up for deletion at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion from Oct. 24. If you don't want it to be deleted, please explain there why not. Eli Falk 10:46, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
Finally finished New Jersey, except for these two problem redirects:
Thanks a bunch, and also thanks for supporting my RfA. -- NORTH talk 16:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
If you get a chance, could you move Missouri State Highway 133 over top of Missouri Route 133? It looks like the redirect got created backwards for that one. Sam8 17:23, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the revert. I appreciate it... -- Mhking 02:13, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
I didn't receive any email from you; can you resend it? -- Geopgeop 11:01, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Rschen,
Your edits to the above templates broke the browse box in the articles using {{ Infobox CA Route}}. I know that template was created by that certain user, but hold up on editing them until the project has a "final" infobox to use. Though I must say, this isn't like you to edit them without even an edit summary. -- Geopgeop 12:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
I've finished Connecticut -- cleaned up a number of double redirects left behind when other people tried to help as well -- except for one rogue page, Connecticut Route 15.
Also, I've decided that rather than let you know every single time I find a rogue redirect that needs to be deleted, I'm using one of my sandbox pages to maintain a list. It's up to you whether you want to put it on your watchlist, or I'll just let you know when I'm all done.
Also also, if you want me to tweak the browsing for California, I'd be happy to help. -- NORTH talk 21:38, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
As far as I know, there's no sort of U.S. roads WikiProject at Spanish Wikipedia. (I haven't rooted around in their Wikipedia: namespace too much though.) I translated some of the basic information for Interstate 35 and Interstate 40 mainly to see if I could (I'm still learning basic Spanish). Aside from some categorization, nobody there's touched them. — Scott5114 ↗ 05:23, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
Could you fix up OK-108? You moved it to Oklahoma State Highway 107. Oklahoma State Highway 108, where it should be, is some sort of broken redirect now. You'll have to delete that redirect to move the page. — Scott5114 ↗ 19:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
See: Roads of Charleston, West Virginia. Not satisfied with screwing up the redirects to it, the IPuser is suggesting it be merged. Can you imagine the page of roads being squished into an already lengthy city page? I left him a warning on his user page about his redirect screwup, but let's nip this one in the bud and vote to decline. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 00:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Youngamerican suggested that too, but it would make them unsearchable for the moment on my hard-drive. They are currently sorted by date, so I am copying them over into new directories where they are sorted by State, then Route and then County. All future uploads will be in a more descriptive manner. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 01:54, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghost ramp has been inactive, and the majority through lengthy discussions has resulted in a 9 to 5 vote, with 1 neutral. Included is 1 keep but rename. Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 03:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Ghost ramp. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, your reasons on how or why you did so will be greatly appreciated in the above review. -- W.marsh 14:44, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I left a message on the talk page. Please respond there. THANKS! Royalbroil Talk Contrib 01:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for informing me of that. By the way, would you be so kind as to handle the permission requests for me? If you can, I could email you the email address and phone number of the guy at NevadaDOT I talked to. Thanks either way. -- Geopgeop 07:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
I thought you read about what I posted on WT:USRD -- I just want a reaffirmation for the permissions that I received to do the shields, as say, Commons:Image:Nevada 604.svg, or the others, as I put phone call from NevadaDOT as reason for permission, which now, I don't think, is reason enough. Actually, http://www.nevadadot.com/contact/ is a place to start. -- Geopgeop 08:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
That's right. Let me give you the email; I'll email it to you. -- Geopgeop 03:34, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Probably a "Dear sir, I haven't received a reply regarding the use of Nevada shield images on Wikipedia..." (not the specifications, the images), and a summary of past conversations if needed. -- Geopgeop 04:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
User:Albertotineo10 has resurfaced again, doing much of the same things the user has done before: making multiple edits in a row, using atrocious grammar/spelling, and, the most troubling: continuing to steal images from state-ends.com, which the user admits in this edit. I would say something on their talk page, but as you and I both know, the user doesn't read it. After two previous blocks of 24 hours, I think it might be time for a longer block or some other course of action. Any thoughts? -- TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 18:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Can you actually block someone for not following the manual of style? -- NE2 04:31, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Are you going to finish moving the Texas highway pages or are they going to remain like that until someone else comes along. I was under the impression from the naming convention thing that Texas was giving an exception until someone came along, notified the project via the project talk page that they were going to start moving the pages and then they would procede to move them all, not just part of them and then move to another state and start moving them. Please finish moving the Texas articles before you start moving another projects pages, this is precisely what I didn't want happen. -- Holderca1 22:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for doing all the Texas highways moves! It is appreciated. I have one small issue. Can we get Texas State Highway 1 Loop moved to Texas State Highway Loop 1? This is how TXDOT names them. I went ahead and redirected the rest of the redirect pages, but when I tried to move the main page, it wouldn't let me. Hopefully I didn't mess anything up. Thanks. 25or6to4 04:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
It should be Texas Business State Highway 24. [3] -- Holderca1 04:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Oops forgot to log in.
Doing my best to get them up to standards of wiki :). some info on the pages was added by me, not sure if online or offline mode, plus i have found more in detailed information, which i am replacing the old with the better i found :)) Odyssey19 01:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Any administrator may ban him from any area he disrupts, If he does not respect the ban, he may be blocked. See [ [4]]. Fred Bauder 03:15, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Hey ... finally got a username and such.
One day I hope to be like you on wikipedia. Haha
Anyways, just trying to figure it all out, hopefully I didn't screw up your page posting this.
Ryan
21:45, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Here ya go: Ryan Moore 21:45, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Yay.
The link from your myspace page.
Anyways, I already spend way too much time on here so I figured why not actually contribute and spend even more time?
Ryan Moore 10:56, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
I see what you are proposing with the California hwys project and like. We do need a consistent routebox for the state highways for sure. My question is - Many states do use IBR already, but there are several other states that have their own routeboxes right now as well (i.e. Minnesota, Missouri, Virginia, Kentucky, Oklahoma, North Carolina, to name a few.) Are we planning on deprecating these altogether? I would suggest such as they all are pretty inconsistent with the suggested style outlined by IBR. Could I also suggest getting a taskforce together for enforcing use of proper templates? Lastly - what about County routes, Interstate Routes and U.S. Routes (I do see that the I and US routes pretty much Mirror IBR) Thx --• master_son Lets talk 18:49, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I added a NJ Route 24 to the Interstate 78 major junction box, is that irrelevant?
Nextbarker 05:25, 13 November 2006 (UTC)nextbarker
Seeing the unsuccessful response given, what do you suggest? -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 04:14, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Howdy, Rschen. I'm back after a bit of a break (and I'm still "breaking" from the Florida State Roads ones after writing several dozen stubs and others), and I've gotten involved in TV series list articles. While I was able to start one from scratch in my userspace and moved it over ( List of longest running U.S. cable television series), the next two ( List of longest running U.S. primetime television series and List of longest running U.S. broadcast network television series), I'd rather edit from the original List of longest running U.S. television series - but I cannot simply copy the entire list onto User:B.Wind/sandbox1 or User:B.Wind/sandbox2 without losing the history of the contributions. Could you, as an admin, make a copy of the original list and set it up in one or both of the "sandbox" pages and maintain the history, or are there some instructions that I can follow so these two lists can be created... and enable me to update the original list with information that basically has to wait until to other lists are prepared? Many thanks for any help/advice/etc. B.Wind 06:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
I noticed you've rated the above article as start class. Could you please explain? I'm trying to make it GA class, and a few suggestions would be nice. Thx.-- LBMixPro <Sp e ak| o n|it!> 03:12, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
The assessment code you've added to a number of state highway templates are causing very strange-looking redlinks when applied to category pages; e.g., Category:California State Highway stubs. I hesitate to suggest that what it needs is yet another conditional parser function, but it's probably a matter of either one more, or about seven fewer... I don't know if this is "standard" assessment code, but yours are the only templates I've noticed this happening with... Alai 07:37, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
I've now removed the problem code from all of the obviously-affected templates, and from the "template template" on Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Assessment. Alai 20:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I'm aware that I formatted the page wrong. I tried to redirect it to the correct one, and I ended up doing the opposite of what I had intended. ---- DanTD 18:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Just FYI, your top-of-talk-page templates overlap in a most icky manner in the Safari browser (so probably also Konqueror; they share much of the same codebase). By moving them around in the code, you can fix that, and I don't think it will affect their display in any other browser, because of the CSS positioning that the Archive box uses. Demo here, which looks fine in Safari: User:SMcCandlish/Temp/Rschen7754. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ contrib ツ 07:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Why was Punarama ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2006 November 24#Punarama) Speedily Deleted? It only had two responses (one of which was one of the deleting admins - conflict of interest!) to the AfD, which was only just filed, and both of them were nothing but notability claims. Aside from the specific topical notability guidelines enumerated as actionable under Policy at WP:DEL, non-notability alone is not deletion-actionable in and of itself, and even WP:NN is currently Disputed, so it isn't actionable either, only topical ones are. Aside from all of that, even the WP:DEL-blessed notability criteria do not justify WP:SPEEDY deletion. If something else justified Speedy Deletion it should have been recorded in the deletion log at the link above. I haven't even seen the article, but if the only identified problem with it was that the nominator thought it was "non-notable comics" then this article should be undeleted and subject to a full AfD. — SMcCandlish [ talk] [ contrib ツ 07:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
It needs to be deleted from the commons end as it is a commons image. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 04:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
You speedy deleted Weatherford International today. It was an article about a large NYSE listed company, and listed in S&P 500, and as I remember, the article was as good or as bad as most articles in Category:Companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange. The article was linked to, and didn't include copyvio material. Could you please revert the deletion, and submit a regular AfD if you believe it is spam. Thanks. -- 69.19.14.20 22:09, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
That is not what is being discussed at WT:USSH. He changed [[Route x (Rhode Island)|Route x]] to [[Rhode Island Route x|Route x]]. -- NE2 03:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
WP:USSH very clearly states: There is nothing wrong with linking to a redirect; do not "fix" these "pipe-tricked" links. The discussion is about links that started out as [[Rhode Island Route x|Route x]]. -- NE2 03:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Can you please look at his edits before pretending that you know what I am doing? -- NE2 03:48, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't see anything wrong with that link, but if you care to change it to [[Route x (Rhode Island)|Route x]] despite Wikipedia:Redirect#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken, go ahead. -- NE2 03:51, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for retracting your objection. -- NE2 03:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I noticed you deleted the page EA Link without deleting the page that redirected to it, EA Downloader. I personally do not feel that this page should have been deleted, and so I have undeleted it. Feel free to discuss deleting it again. I understand that you were deleting because of the speedy tag, but please take more time on your decisions in the future, and review the tags to make sure you're making the right choice. - Mysekurity 04:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I tried the standard interstate infobox, but the main shields wouldn't show; I subsequently posted with the other one...-- Mhking 04:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Beatgr 18:43, 25 November 2006 (UTC) Regarding the speedy deletion of the WIUW article by User:Calton. I have no control over webmasters of Intenret web pages -- that improve their web pages by lifting Wikipedia content (sometimes 'wor for word') to improve their web pages. Wikipedia has no policy (or copy protection for itself) that I have found in this policy or administrative area. Editors, such as Calton seem to blindly assume that the Wikipedia volunteer writers and contributors are always at fault, never considering the possibility that its was a reverse copy. The original Wikipedia writer has no easy method to know that change to the web page reference has occurred. This guilty, until proven innocent approach is not in the canon of Wikipedia or its earlier GNU ancestors. This is an area that Wikipedia adminsitrators need to examine. Beatgr 18:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
Just wanted to reiterate my apology for unintentionally jumping down your throat. We're all overworked on Wikipedia -- and even moreso in real life. -- NORTH talk 00:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments on my recent additions to some of the road articles.
Yes, I am the creator of efgh.com, and I am starting to post some of the material to Wikipedia, with appropriate changes.
Up to now, I have been editing pages by following the style of existing pages.
I started the page County Route S1 (California), and I'm still working on it.
Perdelsky 04:04, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Nope. I've seen votes with links. Link away! -- 210 physicq ( c) 01:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
'Gone' is also a Rapture movie that would interest Left Behind readers. Over 600,000 people have seen 'Gone'. What part of this is not relevant? If you're a Christian, you need to look at the Apostle Paul's words of being extra kind to fellow Believers. You're hindering the Lord's work by deleting 'Gone' from the Left Behind site. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MovieFan02134 ( talk • contribs) 23:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC).
I posted this on WT:USRD, but you may have missed it since it was a couple of sections up from the bottom. Is there a legitimate reason (other than status quo) that California uses "Route" instead of "SR" in the browsing? As far as I can tell, everywhere outside of New England uses an abbreviation (either SR, SH, or the postal abbreviation), and it doesn't appear that the same logic that applies to New England would apply to California.
I'll fix it once you give me the green light, hopefully it'll only require one template edit. -- NORTH talk 18:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
I prefer to work with straight markup rather than infoboxes because the markup offers much more flexibility. See my user page, for instance. But if you want to use infoboxes instead, it's fine with me. Casey Abell 20:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
![]() ![]()
The New York State and
County Route WikiProjects Newsletter
| |
The Beatles WikiProject has been running a newsletter for some time now to great success, and, after some consideration, I've decided to launch a similar effort for the New York County Routes and New York State Routes WikiProjects. This could prove to be a very effective medium of communication between the members of the groups, and with increased communication comes the possibility of increased production. For the most part, this first issue will be a "dry run" of sorts, to work out any bugs in the system. The first serious issue with permanent sections will most likely be January's issue. Nothing as elaborate as the Wikipedia Signpost is planned, but the amount of information that will be found here will more than make up for the lack of framework. |
This is a work-in-progress and likely will be for some time. As we get settled with a format, I'll begin to make some improvements to the barebones structure and give a little more life to this page. Your feedback on the content and format of this newsletter is greatly desired. With your help, we can make the newsletter better and more informative! Don't be afraid to comment! Lastly, remember that this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 002 – January 2007). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing! Happy holidays to everyone, regardless of how you celebrate.
|
|
I Will make corrections per request. Sorry they were out of format.
Will go over them and refer to NV SR 28 for further reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Odyssey19 ( talk • contribs) --09:13, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
![]()
The New Jersey State and County route Newsletter
|
WikiProject New York State routes has started running a newsletter for now to great success, and, after some consideration, I've decided to launch a similar effort for the New Jersey County and State Routes WikiProject. This could prove to be a very effective medium of communication between the members of the groups, and with increased communication comes the possibility of increased production. |
|
|
Mitch azenia (8600+edits) 19:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello Rschen7754, I hope that you are having a happy holiay season. I have recently been nominated to become an administrator here on Wikipedia. I am asking that since I have worked with you in the past that you stop by my nomination page and consider entering a vote, hopefully in support of my becoming an administrator.
Thanks for having requested an editor review. A month has passed since it has been posted there, and it has been archived. You can find it at Wikipedia:Editor review/Rschen7754/Archive 4, where you may read last minute additions. We would really appreciate your help in reviewing a random editor. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 23:26, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Just curious - since I think its nothing a null edit couldn't fix - I noticed that the Wisconsin Highway articles for STH 40 - 794 were categorized under the letter 'H' in Category:U.S._Roads_project_articles_needing_maps and gathered through the history of Wisconsin Highway 100 that you put the "mapneeded=yes" on these articles prior to renaming them per WP:SRNC. Is it imperative to make sure they fall under W instead of H? - I added the "mapneeded=yes" tag to the remaining WIS highway articles with AWB (I'm not sure yet if AWB can handle null edits to fix the rest :|) on 12/25. • master_son Lets talk 04:08, 26 December 2006 (UTC)