User talk:Bkonrad/Archive 20

__NOINDEX__

Orange Township
In regard to Orange Township, Cuyahoga County: I redirected that link because (1) it has almost no unique information, (2) it doesn't appear any more notable than the majority of paper townships, which the Ohio Townships Wikiproject guidelines say shouldn't have their own articles, and (3) the defunct townships page was intended to serve all of the defunct townships. One could easily place the few bits of unique information onto the Orange, Ohio page or the defunct townships page. I would do it, but I don't want to get into an edit war. Nyttend 05:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * If you don't mind, I'll ask the opinion of User:EurekaLott, who linked the renewed Orange Township page to the defunct townships page. Nyttend 05:59, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't mind at all. I don't object to merging the information. I only objected to turning it into a redirect without merging the details. The main reason I noticed is that there was a link on the James A. Garfield which someone had piped a link on Orange Township to the village of Orange article, when what was meant was the portion of Orange Township that became Moreland Hills. Seems clearer to link to an individual article than a mass article in such a case, but not a big deal either way. older ≠ wiser 22:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Would you be willing to expand the defunct page page on the defunct townships? I've added short bits on three townships and want to do more, but I'd appreciate help.  Nyttend 18:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

hilary Duff
I am a huge fan of hilary duff an when i looked here at her name it said her middle name was erhard and I know her middle name is ann. I tried to edit the page to make it right but it said only you guys can do it. please help this ptoblem.

brettany demier —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.218.140.209 (talk) 14:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

thanks for fixing revert
Sorry about that on the Big Bay Point Light article. I think I missed one edit... Thanks for fixing it :) Sincerely, Sir intellegent - smartr tahn eaver!!!! 22:21, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

it takes a village
hey. quit changing my work, pls., without discussing. villages don't have to be incorporated to be villages. go read the village entry in wikipedia. now, i am going to change it back, unless you convince me why. the people who live there certainly consider it a "village," even though it's not incorporated. so does the official county of leelanau website.Journalist1983 12:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * A village has a very specific statutory meaning in Michigan. Unless the term is qualified, it is inaccurate and misleading. older ≠ wiser 23:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

pls cite this "statuatory meaning." what is this language? cite it, pls.

the state of michigan repeatedly cites this as a city or village. let me know if you want examples. Language is to communicate; this is not a law article. Everyone in the world but you sees this as a small town or a village, even though it's unincoporated. Even the state of michigan agrees with me.

if you don't work out a compromise, i will take this dispute to wikipedia, and they can settle it.

meantime, your vandalism to ford fraker is an unfortunate response. the person and i already amicably resolved this disagreement; you merely leapt into this to bully, a sad response.Journalist1983 23:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * pls cite this "statuatory meaning." what is this language?  cite it, pls. See the Michigan Constitution and the Michigan Compiled Laws.


 * the state of michigan repeatedly cites this as a city or village. let me know if you want examples. Sure. I don't doubt there may be some tourism-related sites that describe it as a village. And historically, it was probably even platted as a village -- but it is not incorporated as a village. It is a significant distinction. I'm sorry if you're unfamiliar with it. I suggest you do some reading.


 * Everyone in the world but you sees this as a small town or a village, even though it's unincoporated. Um, everyone but me? Really? I'd like to see a citation for that. heh.


 * if you don't work out a compromise, i will take this dispute to wikipedia, and they can settle it. You are free to do what you see fit, but you might want to get your facts straight first. The place is not an incorporated village and that needs to be clear. If you insist on the term village, then I insist on qualifying the term as unincorporated.


 * Re Fraker, I just happened to notice that. I've no idea what you mean by a "spot news article". There are many ambassadorial and judicial pages that include the specifics of when they were nominated and when confirmed. If you want to expand the article, go right ahead, but generally that isn't done by removing well-sourced, non-obvious details. older ≠ wiser 00:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * re village -- the only place that the word "unincorporated" must appear is on the entry for the unincorporated community of lake leelanau. i have my facts straight, but thanks for double checking.  the county, the state, and numerous other citations call this community a village, and as long as it's clear on the entry itself that the village is unincorporated, a casual reference to a village does not need to cite whether the village is incorporated or not.

And i am still waiting to see the citation; i read the constitution, and i saw no reference. I found references in the Compiled Laws to which cities, town and villages are incorporated, but I didn't find anything saying it was agains the law to call something a village if it was unincorporated.

Most people know that villages can be incorporated or unincorporated, and for those who want to know which it is they can go to the entry, which i have conceded to you should say the community is unincorpated.

I tell you what, will you concede the point if i show you ten references, including 8 official govt ones, that call this a village? how many sources should i have to provide to satisfy you?

Journalist1983 01:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * re Fraker -- wikipedia has 14 potential entries for previous ambassadors to saudi arabia. NONE of them, except fraker, has dates you put in. so if you're going to add for fraker, add for the others.  please respond to fraker article discussion page so we can carry this on there.


 * You must not have looked very hard. Article VII § 20 Article VII § 21 Article VII § 22 Act 3 of 1895 Act 278 of 1909 Act 285 of 1931 Act 222 of 1943 -- those are just the most salient I could find in less than ten minutes of searching.


 * Like I said, if you insist on using the term village, I insist on qualifying the term with "unincorporated". You want accurate, that is accurate.


 * Re: Fraker, the absence of information in one set of articles is not sufficient justification to remove it from another. I've no especial interest in digging up that information for the others, but I don't see that removing well-sourced details from another article as any improvement. older ≠ wiser 01:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Re your comment added above after my response: I didn't find anything saying it was agains the law to call something a village if it was unincorporated -- I never said that it was against the law. Only that the term village has a very specific statutory meaning in Michigan. Yes, there are lots of colloquial uses of village. But I don't see that there is any good reason not to be precise here. older ≠ wiser 01:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * village -- for precision's sake, are you going to insist that all the other villages say "the incorporated Village of Tedium"? Let be reasonable.  I think we can use village in some references, as long as the page itself makes clear whether or not it is incorporated.
 * Fraker -- you said "There are many ambassadorial and judicial pages that include the specifics of when they were nominated and when confirmed." Do you stand by this?  I have looked at every saudi ambassador, and i have looked at other countries, and haven't found a single one.  in order to build a better article, i respectfully ask you to voluntarily remove the [spot news] references (definition provided per your request).Journalist1983 01:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * First point, no of course not, because village in Michigan is by definition a type of incorporated municipality. It is the casual uses that need to be qualified.


 * Second point, I really don't care all that much about the article. If you really want the details gone, then I won't revert again. But such details are common in judicial and ambassadorial pages. Whether such details are ephemeral or part of a comprehensive article I suppose are matters of style. For a short article without much other information, there is little point to removing the details. If you are successful in growing the article, then such details may eventually become superfluous. Out of the first six blue links on the list of current Ambassadors from the United States, four have some level of detail concerning their appointment, confirmation, or swearing in: Eduardo Aguirre, Robert Stephen Ford, Robert McCallum, Jr., Susan McCaw. older ≠ wiser 02:01, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

J. Wright Gordon
I finally found an. I wasn't sure if I sourced it correctly since it was copied and cropped from a book off a website. I was wondering if you could take a look at it since you were more familiar with sourcing from books. Jjmillerhistorian 12:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The citation looks just fine. Thanks. older ≠ wiser 00:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

M-35 article
Can you take a look at it, suggest some edits? Imzadi1979 03:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Yoghurt
I want to start out by saying I'm really sorry that this happened - I did my best to stop it, but sadly I have been overruled by 4 people who are obsessed with name changing (regardless of whether or not I agree with them), and there is a new debate on the Yoghurt talk page about the move - I just felt it would be best if most people who had voted in the past knew about this. daniel folsom 00:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

San Diego-Tijuana Metropolitan Area.
On the article "US. Metro Areas" you stated that San Diego-Tijuana are not considered one metro. area because there is no free labor flow. While technically true, to and extent. There is free flow of traffic into Mexico but there is a border inspection when entering San Diego.

You should change the foot not to state that there is free flow into mexico and that a large amount of people come from the Tijuana area each day, about 50,000 people. That is why The San Diego-Tijuana Port of entry is the most crossed border in the World.

Cooljuno411

STARBASE is not an Acronym
Yes, Bkonrad. I'm an anonymous user on Wikipedia. I'm not in much of a mood for registering at yer another website. However, visit http://www.michigan.gov/dmva/0,1607,7-126-2361_3114-11669--,00.html and you will see that I am, in fact, a co-founder of STARBASE. (I'm the then university college student mentioned.) True enough, I could just be making this claim, but why would I waste my time on such a petty claim? I'm just trying to get the most accurate information out about our program. STARBASE, despite what some of the other sites out there print, is not an acronym. It is true that in the infancy of the program we associated this acronym with STARBASE (hence why some sites refuse to let this go). This was strictly for legislative purposes. We chose to print STARBASE in all upper case letters. As a result, during the drafting of legislative language, the staffers insisted that if it's a military program and if it's in all upper case, it must be an acronym. So, we simply appeased this request to get the authorization language for STARBASE to pass through congress. Later, it was removed from the record. In fact, there was a time in congressional language when it was listed as "STARBASE (not an acronym)." If you don't believe any of this, visit http://www.starbaseone.org/ Click on contact us. I will respond, verifying that I am who I say I am.

I thank you in advance for your understanding.


 * If that is true, then you will need to produce a published source that explicitly says that. Otherwise, there are published sources that say it is an acronym. older ≠ wiser 20:26, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Chris Chocola
Thank you for thinking to add the note to the Mike Pence part of the Chris Chocola infobox. It was the perfect subtle way to address the evolving issue. Craig R. Nielsen 19:37, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

STARBASE, yet again....
It's technically not my business what other STARBASE sites are publishing. If you were familiar with the program, you would understand that each operates rather independently of the other and no one site can tell another site what to do. (This can only come from the various commands: National Guard Bureau, the Department of Military Affairs for each state, the US Navy, and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs). With the exception of the federal STARBASE programs that fall under the Navy, we are each our own entity. But when someone is making a false reference to MY particular site, I take offense and issue with it.

Don't be so adamant on this issue. Do you believe everything you read? Companies and organizations are making changes all the time to their names, logo designs, etc. Apple, Inc.--for example---is no longer Apple Computer, but you can still find many references to Apple Computer.

I've clearly made my case for who I am. You don't work at the STARBASE program at Seflridge. I do. Myself and another co-founder run THIS program. It is our responsibilty to make sure only the most accurate information is made available to the public. Your claim is truly as absurd as me telling you your birthdate is a date other than it really is just because I read a different date somewhere else for a different person who happens to share the same name as you.

This STARBASE error means nothing to you but means a lot to me. I'm not trying to be mean or disrepectful of you, but I really wish you would understand my position. Place yourself in my shoes. How would you feel? If you truly want the Selfridge page to be as accurate as possible, you would not revert this change.

Bedford Senior High School
See User_talk:JPG-GR.

List of municipalities in Michigan (by population)
Bkonrad,

The List of municipalities in Michigan (by population) is not just the top 30, I just stopped after 30 hopping someone would, at least, take it to 50. It's really quite easy. The census fact finder has every city, township, and village listed by population, I just got lazy. So, please remove that this is only meant for the top 30 cities. --Criticalthinker 04:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


 * If/when anyone is inclined to add the rest of the list, the statement can be removed, until then, it is what it is. Unlikely as it might seem, I wouldn't want anyone mistaking that for a complete list. older ≠ wiser 12:01, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


 * If anyone is inclined to mistake that for a complete list of Michigan cities, than they'd be fools, period. --Criticalthinker 02:13, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Perhaps so, but Wikipedia has users from around the world, some who may not even know what or where Michigan is. Seems best to describe what the list actually is rather than imply it might be something more. older ≠ wiser 11:20, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for photo edits; let me update text
Bkonrad - Good Morning! Thanks for photo edits for Geo Crockett. I'm new to Wiki and trying to update my grandfather's page. May I processed with text update without edits yet. It's hard enough being new to wiki without seeing unexpected changes. Many thanks! Glad to see all your other Michigan entries. Best, Kyra

Thanks
Good afternoon! Thanks for your note. I really appreciate seeing how you updated the photo. I'm still learning, but having fun updating Granddad's page. He would have gotten a kick out of the Wikipedia! Kyra

America Move Thing
Though we disagree on whether America should be a redirect or not, I would like to thank you for placing a notice about the debate on the talk page for the United States. I was planning on doing the same thing to get more people involved.

And also, I just have to point out that your signature was confusing to me at first, but then I noticed the note about it on your talk page.


 * Have a Good One  Black Harry  07:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes (Israel)
Why did you move the page unilaterally? Yes is a trademark, not the company name. --Shuki 16:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Use Common Names. If it is commonly known by the company name, then perhaps, but it seems that nearly all of the links to the page are through piped links that refer to it with some form of "Yes". Seems counterintuitive to have the article name say one thing and most of the links to it say something else. While there is a guideline to use the most common name for something, there is no similar rule about using the official name. older ≠ wiser 17:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Soy...
WP:MOS says there should be uniformity in an articles spelling, meaning soyoghurt should be used. Second, popularity does not determine which spelling should be used (your google hits).-- daniel folsom  21:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Look at the entire edit -- Ah, I see you just discovered that your reversion included more than just the soygurt bit. The edit that I initially responded to simply removed the term altogether, (as well altering the title of the cited article) describing it [soygurt] as a "non-verifiable neologism". I restored the term as it does in fact have some currency as a commercial product. However, "soyghurt", IMO, does qualify as a neologism, as the use is almost negligible. The thing is that the term soygurt is based on American spelling. I don't see how we should torture that usage based on the WP MOS. It is a different word. older ≠ wiser 21:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Soyogurt is based on the American spelling - it's not a different word from soyoghurt. Do they mean the same thing? Yes. Period. Secondly, the mos does not say that we should use yoghurt throughout -it says we should use British spellings throughout. -- daniel folsom  21:43, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * There's a point at which adherence to the MOS becomes slavish and foolish. While the occurrence of any form of neologistic soy yoghurt is pretty slim in all cases, the use of either soyghurt (18) or soyoghurt (21) is vanishingly small compared to soygurt (279). soyogurt comes in second at 130. While the name of the soy product is certainly derivative from yogurt, there is no good reason to insist on using almost unheard of neologisms in preference to merely uncommon ones (uncommon in that it is a niche market). older ≠ wiser 22:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The mos is a guideline - wether you like it or not. Google searches are not what determines spelling. Now you've done 6reversions 3 of which were not me, so at this point you have to either gather support for having 2 different spellings in an article or just let it go. -- daniel folsom  22:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Alright - I still think that it's insane - but I'm going to mos to make sure my opinion is backed up, because I'm 99% positive that the guideline stressing consistency does not succumb to how popular a word is. -- daniel folsom  22:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, try to pay attention now -- the forms "soyghurt" and "soyoghurt" are for all practical purposes nonexistent variants. Why should they be used in wikipedia in preference to a form that at least has some appreciable level of usage? That is not what the MOS is about. 00:23, 7 June 2007 (UTC) BTW, I only left "soyghurt" in the article as an attempt to appease the spelling fanatics. I'd be just fine with listing only "soygurt". And FWIW, the more common prefix is soy-gurt, not soya-gurt. older ≠ wiser 00:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok that's my bad - and did I do a typo - I know that it's soy not soya ... anyways, I thought you were trying to put in soyogurt - and I kept thinking it was a typo (I thought you were just leaving out the o by accident). I'm fine with that then, sorry for the confusion. -- daniel folsom  00:39, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, I meant to type soyo-gurt. The variants with an "a" are even less common than the "o" variants. older ≠ wiser 00:42, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Vovlo or Vulvo? Idk
Hey, so sorry about my failed attempt at a compromise on the yoghurt page - I honestly haven't come across either terms before, so it was probably not a great idea for me to try to initiate the compromise. It just seems like I've seen the change made a lot - and obviously it's preferable if we don't start a revert war. Again though, sorry -- daniel folsom  14:36, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Dabs
Would you please stop the reverting, BK? This is a WP:POINT that Viriditas has been engaged in for about a year, solely in an effort to bury Animal Liberation Front on that page. Here is the disambig page as he wanted it: mostly red links and things no one has ever heard of, and no evidence most of them really do use that acronym. This kind of thing shouldn't be supported.

The reason I created Alf (disambiguation) was not simply because of a difference in capitalization, as you wrote in an edit summary, but because one is a man's name, and the other an acronym. It makes more sense to me to separate them for that reason. The clearer the disambig pages are, the more use they are to readers, so there's no sense in having a confusing jumble. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The discussion is here if you'd like to join in. SlimVirgin (talk) 19:17, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Abuse of admin tools
You've just used your admin tools in a content dispute in which you're one of the main participants. Please revert yourself. SlimVirgin (talk) 20:22, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but no. What you see there is nothing more than the artifact of moving the page back over a redirect. older ≠ wiser 21:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


 * YOu're wrong. You deleted it to make way for a page move. Check your deletion log. Please undo the move and the deletion.


 * No, when a page is a redirect, you can move the page over the redirect. WikiMedia records a deletion of the redirect. It does not require a separate deletion (and in the case where the redirect is to the target page, I don't think it is even necessary to check the box on the move page). older ≠ wiser 22:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


 * You are wrong about this. It is specifically prohibited. I have moved the page only where admin tools were not needed. You used your tools. Your deletion log; my deletion log. Please undo your move and your page deletion, as it means we have lost a lot of history. SlimVirgin (talk) 22:28, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I was mistaken about this, I did have to check the box. But I'm not about to revert myself on that. If you want to raise a bigger stink than this steaming pile already is, be my guest. This whole matter is utterly ridiculous. older ≠ wiser 23:33, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


 * You've now also violated 3RR. Please undo your last revert to avoid a report. SlimVirgin (talk)  22:09, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Very well, although the current status of that page is totally unwarranted. 22:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Unwarranted or not, you can't violate 3RR and misuse your admin tools to gain the upper hand in a dispute. You should know better. SlimVirgin (talk) 22:29, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for revising the comment. I appreciate it. :) - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  03:31, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Constantine Township, Michigan
Ok, indeed, sorry about the misplaced tag. --Edcolins 18:46, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

List of United States companies by state
This is the first article I have tagged as a candidate for deletion, so I would appreciate it if you could help me. If prod is not the correct mechanism, would you please explain what I should use. I thought I was following the process described in Deletion policy. Thanks. Truthanado 23:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Try WP:AfD. The reasons that you gave apply specifically to categories rather than articles. older ≠ wiser 00:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Throwing a Little Rock
On what do you base your information that Alf, AR is not a city? - Arcayne   (cast a spell)  18:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The U.S. Census Bureau collects data for all incorporated municipalities. Alf, AR is not listed. The USGS Geographic Names Information System identifies it as a Populated Place (which is something of a euphemism for anyplace where people lived that may have had a name at one time or another). If you look at location in Google Maps or in TerraServer, you can see that there really is no there there. older ≠ wiser 19:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Michigan ships
At least three of the ships you just took the Michigan catagorey off of were all built in Michigan.--J Clear 16:55, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, but the category doesn't indicate that -- it only mentions the names of the ships. older ≠ wiser 16:56, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Now that I've read the text on the cat page, I agree with you. Which means to me that the category is poorly named or the text is wrong.--J Clear 17:03, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The name is unclear and it is arguably a poor basis for categorization in any case. These were nominated for deletion previously and only barely kept . older ≠ wiser 17:09, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

This ship and several others were build in Michigan. Those of us here in Michigan consider them to be Michigan ships. 68.61.35.13 22:35, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, but by the description on Category:United States Navy Michigan-related ships, being built in the states is not one of the criteria for inclusion. As an alternative, how about Category:United States Navy ships built in Michigan? older ≠ wiser 21:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

numbered list
Regarding Township (United States), wouldn't prose be better than a numbered list? --Ttownfeen 23:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Why? Two short items, elaborated upon below. Seems clearer as a list to me. older ≠ wiser 00:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Copyright violation in Kuyper College
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Kuyper College, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Kuyper College is unquestionably copyright infringement, and no assertion of permission has been made. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Kuyper College, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note, this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion, it did not nominate Kuyper College itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 01:21, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Images and licenses
Hi, I don't know where those images of the governors originally came from, the author etc. I wanted to get images from this site but it looks like I would have to pay for the images. I can't seem to find a good tag to replace the PD-US ones you removed. Every time I find one that sounds good there seems to be an issue when I read the whole tag. Do you have any suggestions on how I should add a new tag? Jjmillerhistorian 19:37, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You might try asking at Wikipedia talk:Image use policy or Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. There may be a basis for fair use of the images, since the subjects are deceased. But I don't really keep up with what is or is not currently being considered as acceptable use of images -- if I upload an image, it is either one I took myself, or something that I know for certain is PD. older ≠ wiser 19:43, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Hansen Clark
There is a picture of Sen. Hansen Clarke on his page that was taken from his website. Is that a legal picture, and if so, does it apply to all of the Senator's pictures on the Senate website? Chflitwick


 * It is not a work of the U.S. government and the PD-USGov licensing tag is inapplicable. older ≠ wiser 21:06, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Michigan article assessment
I've been assessing a lot of Michigan articles. Assessing the importance is pretty subjective. Since you started the Michigan WikiProject, and you do a lot of editing of Michigan articles, would you mind giving me some feedback? I want to make sure that somebody is in general agreement with me. Also, I'm pretty sure I'm not going to make it through the nearly 1000 article that need assessment. Thanks. --Elliskev 17:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)