User talk:Appraiser/Archive4

Umm, I'm guessing you really wanted to put your archive in User talk:Appraiser/Archive 3, not in mainspace.  Acroterion  (talk)  19:21, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Archive3

 * I just had another look, looks like a mistake. Phgao 19:24, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I removed the warning, lol, I make mistakes too! "To err is human". Phgao 19:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank You
Thank you for editing my page on the summation generator. It is my first page contributed to Wikipedia. NathanKP 15:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Featured List nomination
109th United States Congress has been nominated for Featured List status. Please comment here. I've read your comments, but do you support or oppose?—Markles 13:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Our preparation for the first contribution
Hi, we are Los Pancakes team from the Wiki project of Thelmadatter's class. This is the partial of the semester in which we are planning our formal contribution to Wikipedia. We started by making a plan about changing the México (state) page. We want to change the "Geography" section and we already posted a proposal in our page.

This is the link where you can find the proposal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/ITESM_Campus_Toluca/Los_Pancakes

We want to know your point of view because your opinion as an expert of Wikipedia is very important for us. See you later.

Wiki Help
Hi Appraiser, would you mind checking the information we just uploaded in our talk page for some changes we will do in the TOLUCA page(ZYANYA06)??. Thanks. Yacopop 00:07, 9 October 2007 (UTC)YacopopYacopop 00:07, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Reply
What FLC are you speaking of? 1a1 states that an article SHOULD have blue links for most of the list, but 1a3 states that if a topic covers a "significant topic of study", then a lack of links is excuseable. I'm not quite sure how to answer your other question. I do think it's easier to get an article to FL status than FA status (MUCH easer), and articles usually do get a lot more credit, but since they are both considered to be featured content, they are generally held in the same regard. -- Scorpion0422 02:33, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Generally, people prefer to see a list full of blue links, and occasionally, people will withhold support until a page is created, but lists rarely fail because of a small portion of red links. Besides, in this case, I don't think the people in question would qualify for their own page. And like I said, 1a3 does excuse a lack of blue links if it's a "significant topic of study". -- Scorpion0422 11:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Alexander Ramsey House
I noticed you've had Alexander Ramsey House on your to-do list for a while. I just started an article on it, mainly as a reaction to seeing so much crap on Special:Newpages this afternoon. I figured you'd be interested in working on the article. I'll probably add some material too, if I have enough to add to it.

By the way, I mentioned that I had a list of NRHP articles I wanted to create stubs for. The list is at User:Elkman/Todo, so if you have anything you want to start, that would be cool. I've uploaded images to commons:Category:Registered Historic Places in Minnesota. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 21:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks!--Appraiser 21:25, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out with these articles. By the way, you might want to add the new articles to WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/New articles so others on the project can take a look at what you've done. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 19:23, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

2007 Midwest flooding
Hi, I was wondering if you might have more input on casualty numbers in the above linked article. See this talk page section. Thanks. IvoShandor 03:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Bots on the loose
Hi Appraiser. Take a look at WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/minnesota.publicradio.org. Apparently some bot monitors users' usage of links in order to detect conflicts of interest. There is some way to to "whitelist" which apparently calls off the bot, but as it has not yet annoyed us it might not be worth it. As MPR is the only major comprehensive local news source which does not delete its news articles it would be strange to question our preference for this reliable source. Regards, Kablammo 02:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello. Just a rambling note that WikiProject Spam has a big job so I am cautious but they stopped me twice in the last week or so. Once for linking to a National Geographic news article. The second issue was for trying to Undo vandalism on a page that had a blacklisted link (that action triggered a "Spam protection filter" that stopped the save, and showed a link to a list of blacklisted sites that were unfamiliar to me and I didn't know how to sort them just to unblank the article). Does WikiProject Spam/LinkReports/minnesota.publicradio.org mean any article linked to minnesota.publicradio.org can't be quickly reverted? -Susanlesch 03:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * It appears as if they have minimized any problems with MPR. See User talk:COIBot.--Appraiser 16:55, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I hope you are right. Google Book Search found its way into "What links here" so I asked about that too. -Susanlesch 00:09, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Wesley church
Hi, Appraiser. Wesley Methodist Episcopal Church probably should be moved to Wesley United Methodist Church. I almost did but stopped to ask because there are so many references. -Susanlesch 03:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

More NRHP pictures on Commons
I was browsing through commons:Category:Buildings in Minnesota and I noticed that there are a lot of buildings in there that are on the National Register but that we may not have articles for yet. Not all of the images in Commons are in commons:Category:Registered Historic Places in Minnesota yet, either, so I started doing a little bit of that sorting. The Houston and Rice County courthouses have pictures there, but no articles here yet.


 * I added and changed a lot of the categories on the pictures in commons:Category:Buildings in Minnesota, so I believe all of the Registered Historic Places in Minnesota are now in commons:Category:Registered Historic Places in Minnesota. Also I added links to the images in List of Registered Historic Places in Minnesota to help us prioritize the task (new stub articles with a photo are better than ones without).--Appraiser 22:28, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll see if I can get the rest of my downtown Minneapolis pictures sorted and posted somewhere, along with my recent trips to Chaska and Red Wing.

Also, I just started an article on Summit Avenue, so if you want to help out with that one, feel free -- there's probably quite a bit that can be said about it. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 04:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Minnesota RollerGirls
Hey there, Appraiser! With all your awesome experience on all things Minnesota, I was just wondering if you'd be willing to give Minnesota RollerGirls a quick look-over for me to see if you have any suggestions. Thanks, I appreciate it! --Marumari 20:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Just saw your changes; they're excellent. Thank you!  Missing things like that are always found much easier with a second set of eyes.  You rock!  I did add some extra stuff after your changes, mostly about sponsorship.  I was hoping to get the article up to at least B-Grade; I'm not sure who exactly does the assessment for WP:MN articles. --Marumari 21:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Church of the Redeemer (Cannon Falls, Minnesota)
Hi Appraiser. Your new contributions announced at WP:NRHP are awesome. I love the pic of Church of the Redeemer (Cannon Falls, Minnesota), a hairy small Gothic church. BTW, I recently created an article of a similarly beautiful small Gothic church in Mississippi, without growth over it, somewhere amongst List of National Historic Landmarks in Mississippi. Mine however lacked a direct photo, only linking at its article to photos of it (available from National Park Service because it was a NHL). A very minor point: In the Redeemer article and in your same-time-announced "Church of St. Stephen" (somewhere else in Minnesota) you include 2 separate NRIS references. Surely those could be combined into two invocations of one reference at the later date, as the earlier-available info was surely still available at the 2nd date. Anyhow, keep up the good work, really nice job you are doing. Cheers. doncram 04:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The small Gothic church that I meant to refer to was St. Andrew's Church (Prairieville, Alabama), among Alabama NHLs.doncram 18:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Got your reply. Hmm, now, i see your two references ARE substantially different.  The fact that the title was pretty much the same, "National Register of Historic Places" appearing saliently in both, and little differentiating them except where they go to when you click on them, had me fooled.  :)  So I think the description of the references should be more differentiated.  One of the references in fact is a State and County specific report and it is appropriate to reflect that specificity in the reference.  Looking at it more carefully I see some other issues with your referencing.  I just revised your Church of Saint Stephen (Minneapolis, Minnesota) article to show you what I mean, leaving Church of the Redeemer (Cannon Falls, Minnesota) for you to revise similarly if you like.  The revisions I made include:


 * 1) revise the description of the State-County report to reflect that it is for Minnesota's Hennepin County.
 * 2) revise the date of the NRIS reference back to 2007-01-23. You weren't being "sloppy", that was accurate.  I am presuming that your NRHP infobox is generated by the Elkman infobox generator which reports on NRIS data that Elkman downloaded on that date, and that you did not separately go to the NRIS system and collect the fields of information on Church of St. Stephen's on 2007-10-26.  This is a small point, but I think it is misleading in a minor way (a matter of "false precision" or "false appearance of timeliness") to replace the Elkman download date with a more current date.  The vast majority of new NRHP entries created in wikipedia now show the 2007-01-23 date, which is fine and fair, reflecting the use of the Elkman infobox generator.  (Aside: perhaps use of Elkman generator should also be referenced more explicitly, in general, but that is going even further into precision of references and would be a topic to raise at WP:NRHP, not there.)
 * 3) add back the "Et al" that went with architect Corser's name. The sources we have indicate that it was designed by Corser and others, not by Corser alone.  (Aside: I also am trying wikilinking Corser's name. Hmm, previewing shows that it is a red-link for now.  By other searching I see he also designed a building within University of Minnesota Old Campus Historic District, an article by Elkman.  Someone could start an article on Corser as an architect eventually.  Feel free to de-wikilink this one if you like.)
 * 4) move the NRIS footnote location from the Reference field to the Date added field within the infobox. The Elkman generator puts it on the Reference field, with what I believe is intent to imply that each field of information in the infobox is from the NRIS report.  However, your infobox differs now, as you provide a different source for the construction date (Archiplanet), and you have added an image.  I commonly add additional information to Elkman-generated infoboxes, for example adding NHL designation date and source for National Historic Landmark sites.  When I do, I move the NRIS footnote to the Date added field, to clarify that the NRHP add date is supported by this source, in contrast to the NHL date being supported by the NHL source.  The reference number is not a matter of controversy, and does not need to be supported separately.  It would be excessive to separately footnote each field of data, and I choose to attach it to the NRHP date added field, which is perhaps mildly more "controversial" or subject to question than other fields.  This move of the footnote attachment point is a matter of my personal taste in this.
 * 5) Change the nrhp Date added field from October 15, 1991 to August 15, 1991. The Elkman report and the Archiplanet report both show it is August.  The Hennepin County report does not show month and day for date of NRHP registration.  Somehow you changed it accidentally in your editing.  As if to illustrate that the date field is more questionable than others.  :)
 * 6) On second thought, drop the Archiplanet reference supporting the date the church was built. Archiplanet is not an independent source from NRIS, it is merely a vast parallel universe to what we are creating in wikipedia, but one that is devoid of human activity.  The Archiplanet data on this site is merely the NRIS information.  The 1891 date appears in the Elkman output.  Again you could attach a duplicative NRIS footnote to this field, but I prefer to leave it implied.


 * This is perhaps overkill, but you asked, and I have detailed opinions on these matters. :) I hope you understand my intent in spelling this out here is to be helpful in a positive way.  I do think you are doing great work.  On the St. Stephen's church, I like your choice of main photo being that one, taken from a distance, and with the frieze of leaves coming down from the top.  Perhaps you could add other closeup images, further below, even though they would descend well beyond the length of the text for now.  Again, keep up the good work! doncram 18:34, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


 * My ears are burning! (Actually, I just have Appraiser's page on my watchlist.)  The download date I have for the National Register database is 2007-01-23 because that's when they last updated the data at their download location.  I'd like it if they updated their system, but even their main page says the data was last refreshed on January 9.  I don't think they make many changes to data once it's listed (for example, a building wouldn't change from Colonial Revival to Richardsonian Romanesque), but the database download doesn't include new listings or listings that have been removed from the National Register since January.  As far as the citation to the NRIS goes, I think I made a rather arbitrary choice to put the citation next to the reference number because that's the official number they use in their system.  It also works out to be near the bottom of the infobox, so people can tell that all the data came from the NRIS.  It's no big deal as far as I'm concerned.  Actually, nothing about my infobox generator is a big deal, but I just thought I'd explain the design decisions.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 20:30, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Elkman -- Great, now I finally know how to reach you. :) Thanks for followup, you are saying pretty much what I understood. I get that attaching the reference to the refnum appears towards the end, I haven't come up with any specfically better advice for how the generator output should be shaped.  Like I said, on NHL sites or others where I have a different source to add/modify fields within the infobox, I always move the attachment point.  Possibly the generator could do that up front for sites which are NHLs, but the NRIS data field on NHLs seems to be only about 90% accurate as to whether a site is an NHL, when it is one, and the number of NHLs is not too great to handle this manually.  We're over 59% of all NHLs having articles already, too.  I am very happy with how it is working.  By Appraiser's response on my talk page just now, I gather he does not use the generator.  I would really just want to say, USE IT.  Just go to Elkman infobox generator, search on your site name, cut and paste the output over to your article.  It is easier and more accurate than any other approach.  And do not use or cite Archiplanet!  Cheers, doncram 06:24, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Photo is Copyright Violation, Please Try to Remove
Appraiser -- Thanks for the consideration and your effort, very honestly, but the photo you uploaded to the commons and added to the St. Andrew's Church (Prairieville, Alabama) is not in the public demain, and needs to be deleted from the commons. Just because the source is located at a government site does not mean it is public domain. There has been some discussion of this at WP:NRHP. For this one, I understand that usage would require getting permission from one or perhaps both of Frank L. Thiemonge III, the photographer, and the Alabama Historical Commission. Do you have the power to remove it from the commons? I am not familiar with procedure in this situation, and I don't want to slap a copyvio notice on it myself causing I don't know what follow-on actions. Too bad, because it is a nice pic, nicely punctuating the article, and I really do like the effort you made to fill that gap which was bothering me. Sincerely, doncram 06:24, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * There are more pictures of the church at the Historic American Buildings Survey at . HABS/HAER is a great source for public domain pictures of buildings.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 15:13, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Elkman -- Thanks for noting that. I myself have not gotten around to learning how to use HABS or other photos.  Actually, many of the NHL nominations and NRHP inventory/nomination documents that I have been linking to NHL articles do mention or include HABS photos, so I know that there is plenty of progress to be made along these lines in illustrating the NHL articles. doncram 00:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Appraiser, Thanks for replying. My information on the copyright status of NPS photos is the discussion I had read at Talk about NPS photos copyright status at WP:NRHP, where it is explained by IvoShandor that photos posted at NPS which were not taken by government employees are not public domain, based on email correspondence with NPS.  I see you had added your comment in that discussion about a notice at a NOAA server, and your question/supposition "Does the term 'government server' apply only to NOAA? I doubt it. I bet the photos on the NPS servers are covered by the same rules—the e-mail above notwithstanding.--Appraiser 00:42, 24 September 2007 (UTC)".  I guess I don't what to say or do, in the case of this photo now, if you disbelieve what appears to me the best available information that we have on the copyright status of photos like the one in question.  I guess I think you should continue the discussion at WP:NRHP, and explain why you should disbelieve the information there.  Believe me, I would be happy to learn otherwise, but I think wikipedia needs to have better information on the legality of using the NPS photos before proceeding in disregard to NPS's communications.  I do think your intuition could possibly be correct that the email information is incorrect, as I can imagine that an NPS employee writing an email could possibly err on the conservative side in stating what others have free use of.  I don't really have any evidence to say, though, that it was merely an NPS employee who didn't know what he/she was talking about, who wrote whatever he/she said.  For the case of this photo now, I believe that there is very substantial doubt for now that it is legally available.  Given such doubt at least, I think it would be best for you to remove it. doncram 00:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

To let you know, I began the process for copyright violation review of the photograph. Beforehand, I posted to WP:NRHP talk page discussion, but discussion there was not leading towards resolution in any rapid manner. So I judge it is best to let an administrator decide. doncram 10:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:St.AndrewsChurch-Alabama.jpg
An image that you uploaded, Image:St.AndrewsChurch-Alabama.jpg, has been listed at because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. doncram 10:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * That's fine. I put a "speedy" tag on it.  An admin can delete it at any time. I had forgotten that there was an e-mail contradicting the statement on the NOAA page.  Maybe I'll try to get some clarification from a government employee.--Appraiser 12:53, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for being nice about this. See my followup in the discussion thread of Talk at WP:NRHP.  I do remain hopeful about eventually getting permission from Alabama Historical Association for use of the specific photograph and others, but, as I note in that followup, I want to get the List of National Historic Landmarks in Alabama in somewhat better shape first before making inquiries.  Your interactions on this topic have definitely been helpful in informing my perspective.  I am in particular noting your pointing out the indication "Public Domain" when one searches at the National Register site for the PDFs of text and photographs.  The public domain status may apply to the text but not the photographs, but I agree it is not clear in that display.  While other disclaimer notice may govern, I am definitely taking note that, at a minimum, the National Register is being sloppy in having that "Public Domain" indicator displayed.  Thanks again for your help on this.  Sincerely, doncram 22:59, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Category:Visitor attractions in Minnesota
This is part of a series of categories of like named categories and it should remain and be populated. Please do not empty categories without a nomination and discussion on WP:CFD. Vegaswikian 21:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, don't add parent categories to the individual articles, articles should not be in a category and also in a parent of that category. That is the purpose of categories and parent categories. You may want to discuss your opinions on Wikipedia_talk:Categorization. Vegaswikian 23:46, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Crazy politiks
I support your move to include a brief summary of Federal politics in each suburbs page. Since Kline p0wns half the metro area, if you have time and would like to create a template paragraph of Kline relevant to burbs I can disseminate it throughout all the affected articles. .:DavuMaya:. 20:46, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * If you can point me to your unmodified blurbs (maybe in your tools section of your userpage) or active ones currently out there for each candidate in the metro then I can grab em later. .:DavuMaya:. 20:59, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Article Creation
Hi! we are now writing an article for Wikipedia about La Perra Brava, which is a fan group of Los Diablos de Toluca Football Club, it is very important here in Toluca and we wanted to let other Wikipedians know a little more about Toluca. Do you think this topic would be good for writing our article???We look forward from hearing your answer. Thank you.

ZYANYA06 18:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)ZYANYA06ZYANYA06 18:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your fine tuning at
Lee Lawrie. I saw that last night (or was it earlier today) and was considering removing the picture - which is mine - or at least offered by me, now it belongs to everyone - and got all tied up in mental gymnastics and just thought "Well I'll get back to it after I've decided" and then there you were. life is good. Carptrash 22:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

About Table-Lists of NHLs
Hi. Got your reply to my comment in Talk for List of NHLs in MN]. Yeah, putting geo-coordinates into the NY list would be a good idea, i had almost forgotten.  Unfortunately for Daniel Case, Dmadeo, and myself, we were a bit ahead of the curve, had the NYS list into shape and perhaps already into table form, before the new table format report by SEWilco et al. came out, with its geocodes.  To add the geocodes now would be, well, a good amount of work by hand-editing.  It sure is cumbersome working with a list of 257 NYS NHLs (110 within NYC).  I am bogged down currently in adding HABS links to the articles, am about halfway through them.  (The HABS effort is identifying a whole lot of photos to add for many, perhaps the majority of those missing photos, though.) And geocodes are not part of any proposed criteria for achieving Featured List status, either. :) Cheers, [[User:Doncram|doncram 00:36, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

List of members-elect of the United States House of Representatives who never took their seats
I've created a new article, but I'm not sure of a succinct way to categorize it. Please see the discussion at Talk:List of members-elect of the United States House of Representatives who never took their seats.—Markles 13:25, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

HELP
Hello, we will soon upload the article we are writing,we would be glad if you could check it and help us a little, thank you!!

132.254.137.235 19:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)ZYANYA06132.254.137.235 19:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

NRHP houses in Chaska
I've uploaded some pictures from an NRHP tour I did in Chaska a few weeks ago. They're listed at User:Elkman/Todo along with links to the photos. Most of the ones in Chaska (maybe even all of them) are part of Carver County MRA. The Carver County MRA document goes on forever, so you might have to scan through 90 pages to find the useful bits.

I still need to get around to uploading and linking some pictures I did in Red Wing, Shakopee, Henderson, and Faribault. I'll post links on the todo page when I finally get them uploaded, but I've been rather pokey about getting that stuff done lately. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 22:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

 I hope your Skies are Blue and your Days Sunny


REDYVA  hopes that you are joyful! Joy promotes WikiLove and hopefully this little bit has helped make your day better. Spread the Wikilove! I hope your skies are blue and your days are sunny. If you get a chance, please take a look at Falls of Neuse Road. I would enjoy some Good Advice on how to improve the article. Master Redyva (talk) 20:14, 21 November 2007 (UTC)  Thanks+

List of United States Representatives from New Jersey
Hi! I was cleaning up the NJ US Rep Delegation and came across the aforementioned list. Was going to add/fix links on the New York List as I had time but had a thought before proceeding. Is this type of list kind of duplicative if all the reps are alphabetized already under Category: United States Representatives from New Jersey?????? The list is not as colorful, but most of the same type of info is availale there? 1 less thing to maintain??????...Pmeleski (talk) 12:27, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the background info........I'll try to chip in a little it whenever I get the notion.......Pmeleski (talk) 01:52, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

NRHP infobox coord
I was wondering about that. infobox nrhp is using coor dms, but that won't be detected by the toolserver for wanted-pictures? We'll have to figure out how to make the toolserver and Googlebot detect those embedded coordinates. For the Governor's Mansion it soon shouldn't matter, as I'm going there today to make pictures. -- SEWilco (talk) 16:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh, darn. I photographed the MN First Ladies portraits, but don't know if those were published.  Just being on display is not publication.  So can't tell if they are PD or not.  Same thing for the 1910 photos of the Mansion.  Well, I'm wading through the detail shots I got (I don't have a wide angle lens and couldn't get room-wide shots.  -- SEWilco (talk) 05:16, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Ohio Congressional Delegation - New Congressman
Hello, I noticed you did a lot of word on the United States Congressional Delegations from Ohio page. Bob Latta was Sworn in today as a member of congress from OH-5. I can't for the life of me figure out how to add him to the chart on this page. I figured you would want to help out.--CastAStone//(talk) 04:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

National Natural Landmark cats
You're fast. Good job. Kablammo (talk) 17:46, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

St. Anthony Laboratory
Hi, Appraiser. Today a young woman at the laboratory said that a tour might be arranged sometime in the future. I wonder, would you and your daughter and girlfriend and whomever and Elkman and whomever and whomever else I didn't get a chance to speak to at the Minnesota Wikipedia meetup would be interested? I will be in Minneapolis until mid-January. -Susanlesch (talk) 20:27, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Changed my mind. I think the three of us should go, if that is possible (unlikely) and all right with you and Elkman. They said they opened in the 1930s. By the way, today the Mississippi looked like it was flowing upstream, but maybe it looks that way every day? Link to the laboratory. -Susanlesch (talk) 08:03, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Congress change
Appraiser, I am sorry to upset you and very much aware of the corrections you have made. I can assure you that when I finish my editing of the changes I made all your edits will be restored. I am checking them one by one. It is simply easier to load them then check, but in the future, in deference to your feelings, I will not load the data until all the edits are complete. In fact I was doing the edit check right now. It was a shortcut I took, knowing well I would have to fix it.

Regarding the notes about changes, please recognize that I am building supplemental articles on each Congress with this information. It simply doesn't fit on the main article unless we return the format to one column. stilltim (talk) 18:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Season's Greetings
Season's Greetings from my hometown, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Boy times have changed since, I think it was about 1994. So much overhead to lug around, but nothing the woman I met in the San Diego DMV couldn't write around in about 2 seconds with something called "ST Include" for Windows. Only kidding, I forgot the program's name but writing around an operating system would be quite easy for someone who completed studies in India recently. Best wishes for the new year from someone who recognizes your name from Wikipedia. And you helped me so much in about one email. -Susanlesch (talk) 19:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Adminship
 Dreamafter would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Dreamafter to accept or decline the nomination. A page will be or has been created for your nomination at Requests for adminship/ . If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so. Dreamafter ⇔ 23:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I accept; thank you for the nomination and voice of support.--Appraiser (talk) 02:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay! Just answer the questions, and write that you accept the nomination, and one you're done, I will list it! Dreamafter ⇔ 02:59, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Artists' Quarter
Hi, Appraiser. Again I wouldn't really consider this spam as defined by the speedy deletion tag, which says "would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article". Even if the article in its present form look a bit like an ad it certainly looks rescuable by editing, and the list of notable musicians who have played there looks impressive. Good luck with the AfD RFA! Phil Bridger (talk) 21:39, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

of vs. in.
Hi Appraiser, yes i was following the discussion somewhat, and did start using the "in Pennsylvania" convention. I was assuming that "in" would win out over "of" as soon as it was suggested, as "in" is obviously preferable, I thought. I have now chimed in on the WP:NRHP discussion. But, in your message to me, i also did not understand what you meant by the following: "(I decided to go through the list because some of the articles on the list are not actually NHLs, and it will be much easier to correct them before modifying the infobox template.)" What list?

And I also did not understand: "I was also thinking that the state landmark categories ought to have Category:Registered Historic Place in XX–then that category can be deleted from each individual article." What are state landmark categories, to start with? For example?

I respond here, and commented in the main discussion, because you asked me to. If you want to clarify these questions in the main discussion and/or "privately" with me, either would be fine. Cheers, doncram (talk) 22:05, 4 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Got your message back. I follow now, but you need to be careful about assuming Landmarks in Alabama or wherever are either NHLs or NRHPs.  For example, consider List of Chicago Landmarks:  it lists many landmarks designated by City of Chicago that are neither.  I know that there are NYC-designated landmarks that are neither.  Also, local groups other than governments may define a list of landmarks.  Landmark, anyhow, is not a term limited to the National Historic Landmark program of the U.S.  It is perfectly possible to have a legitimate category Landmarks in Alabama that can include significant tourist attractions (deemed to be significant by someone, perhaps by a business association or whomever) and so on.  And, also, any site that is an NHL also should be listed in any list of NRHPs, as every NHL is an NRHP.  It is both.  As you know.  But you were implying you might want to strike the NHLs from the NRHP list or vice versa.  And, you may not be recognizing that there can be a NHL name for a site which is different than the NRHP name for the site.  For example, there are many sites that are one NHL with one name and refnum, that are comprised of 2 or more NRHPs with 2 refnums, one of which may be the same refnum as the NHL refnum.  For example, a NRHP is created.  Then it is added to, with the addition getting a second refnum.  An NHL designation could have either refnum.  Or a new refnum, i think has possibly sometimes occured.  So it is messy, and you cannot easily divide the NRHPs into NRHPs that aren't also NHLs vs. the NRHPs that are NHLs.  They are different animals.   Hope this helps.  doncram (talk) 22:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Lunch Sunday
Hi, Appraiser. Welcome back? Do you and Elkman have time for lunch Sunday? La Cucaracha in Saint Paul just off Grand Avenue or in Minneapolis somewhere in the West Side Milling District or near the University. I can tolerate more people but four max. -Susanlesch (talk) 17:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I will be at Market Bar-B-Que at 2:00 pm. Not everyone's favorite but a safe spot and they have a jukebox. 1414 Nicollet Avenue Minneapolis 55403. (612) 872-1111. No reply necessary if you can or if you cannot make it (I am just going there no matter what, heh) -Susanlesch (talk) 18:45, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I have tentative plans for Sunday afternoon (1/6), but I'm not sure what time I'm committed for (perhaps after ~4:00 would be OK). Thanks for the invitation. I'll let you know for sure when I know more.--Appraiser (talk) 19:04, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I will be there approx 2:00 to 3:40 PM. -Susanlesch (talk) 18:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Follow up AfD
I've just asked you a follow up on question 6 in your afd. DGG (talk) 10:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

National Historic Landmarks
That one massive request was moved to the regular discussion. There were some issues with the names proposed. Most of these will happen as proposed but some will not since they are were not the correct targets. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:42, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
 * OK. Thanks.--Appraiser (talk) 20:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Unblock please

 * Thanks. I don't see any vandalism by User:Happy Couple2.  Maybe it's an old issue.--Appraiser (talk) 19:34, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it was a sockpuppet issue that JoshuaZ was working - I encountered Happy Couple myself a few months ago and wasn't surprised to see the name again. However, I've learned a little more about autoblock, and I apologize for the inconvenience in the middle of your RfA, no less.   Acroterion  (talk)  20:11, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
 * thanks--Appraiser (talk) 20:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)