User talk:Jmabel/Archive 57

Working Group login
Hi Jmabel, just letting you know I've sent an email (via the English Wikipedia email function) to you with details about your Working Group wiki login details. Be sure to change your password once you log in, for security reasons! If there's any problems with the login (passwords, username not working, or anything), fire me an email and I'll try and sort them out for you. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 04:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Ten Minute Warning
Sorry if this is wrong, I wasn't sure if this should go on my talk page or yours. I did in fact create an article on Ten Minute Warning, but it's under the name 10 Minute Warning because that's how the band name was written on their 1998 CD, the most 'official' source I could find. I've since assumed that was correct as all the other contributors, including their singer Steve Verwolf have accepted it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danikat (talk • contribs) 23:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
 * That's fine; there should be a redirect. I'll add that. - Jmabel | Talk 02:14, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Solidaridad Obrera
I'm surprised they didn't give you one of these, so here it is! Murderbike (talk) 04:36, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:King-Richardson
A tag has been placed on Template:King-Richardson requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:17, 10 February 2008 (UTC)


 * If it's not being used, that's fine. If it's needed again, it can easily be recreated. - Jmabel | Talk 18:59, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Buna!
Ce faci? I seriously suggest you join the Romanian Wikiproject, if you have not already done so. Noroc, Basketball  110   i'm not yik ginlyùn  00:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've been pretty busy, so not too much to bring to it, but, sure, I'll join. - Jmabel | Talk 01:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Great. Basketball  110   proof that this user is crazy  23:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Urgell Flag.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Urgell Flag.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:42, 12 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Rationale now provided. But I still think this is probably PD. - Jmabel | Talk 17:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Blackface
Hi Jmabel. I've got a tough call here. Your efforts to cite the article have been great, and I agree that some of the points on the FA review are invalid. But there's genuine POV concerns from good editors and it's hard to ignore removes. Are you planning more surgery? Would you be terribly disenchanted if it were removed? I don't mind leaving it open, as we do that all the time now. Marskell (talk) 19:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't be "terribly disenchanted", but, yes, I'm still working on it.


 * Part of the problem is that as I'm making suggestions on the talk page, there is little response. Instead, I'm mostly getting reiterations of the same complaints that try to keep raising the bar on citation beyond what I think is reasonable (e.g. absolutely no synthesis of sources at all). - Jmabel | Talk 23:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


 * It would be very helpful to know which concerns you consider valid. - Jmabel | Talk 23:38, 14 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, if "terribly disenchanted" was poor word choice.


 * I've commented briefly on the article. Just keep working away, and when you feel it's ready, say so. I would look over that Legacy section. Cheers, Marskell (talk) 17:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Circus Maximus Neverland Revisited.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Circus Maximus Neverland Revisited.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Non-free use rationale now provided. The bar has been raised since this image was added: at the time, the generic template I used was considered sufficient. - Jmabel | Talk 23:28, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

DYK

 * Thanks! - Jmabel | Talk 06:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back, even partially...
Hi Joe, I had no idea that you were even partially active until I was perusing a copy of the Wiki newsletter and I noticed your name as an "observer" in a dispute committee. Well good luck with that. I am not sure how that function would tally with your desire to be only partly active. What if all hell breaks loose somewhere and you are called to put out the flames? Well let's hope it doesn't happen. Things at the main WikiProject Judaism have been good and lots of articles are getting added to Judaica topics with lots of new editors joining all the time. However, one of the projects that you were involved with, WikiProject Jewish culture has become inactive, awaiting a "white knight" to rescue it from dormancy. But I am really so glad to see that you have been finding the time to get even a little involved. I always tell frustrated editors never to quit entirely, just try to to do what you can, as Wikipedia is here to be enjoyed after all! Hope to see you around. Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 10:04, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Observer on the committee, not a participant. If all hell breaks loose, I observe that all hell breaks loose.
 * I'm not the "white knight" for WikiProject Jewish culture. I might do some work in that area, but it's not at all my current focus. I'm mostly working on matters of local concern (Seattle), and occasionally dropping in on articles I've edited in the past. I did get pulled into the current FAR of Blackface; I'm not sure I'm glad about that, but I think I've been helping the article. - Jmabel | Talk 16:20, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Joe. I know what you say. But I still think that an "observer" status is laden with potential. They are lucky to have you. I did notice that you are writing up stuff about Seattle. As for the Jewish culture project I was mentioning it in passing. It seems that it takes one good active member to hold a small project together and keep it going. If that member leaves the project goes to dormant pretty quickly. Just an observation. Best wishes with whatever you do. Sincerely, IZAK (talk) 02:35, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

25 dyk

 * "Nearly" 50? I'm well past 50. - Jmabel | Talk 18:50, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Pudz Leader Cover.jpeg
Thanks for uploading Image:Pudz Leader Cover.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair use rationale added. - Jmabel | Talk 18:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Pudz Maria Cover.jpeg
Thanks for uploading Image:Pudz Maria Cover.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 05:28, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair use rationale added. - Jmabel | Talk 18:59, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

List of Registered Historic Places in King County, Washington
Hey Joe, I don't know how much time you have for this, but if we're interested, discussions are being had over at the NRHP project about standardizing the tables for these lists. I've started doing Pierce County's in my sandbox if you want to see what we've come up with. Oh yeah, have you been following the Ballard Denny's story? Hope you're well, Murderbike (talk) 00:24, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks good, but I'm probably not willing to put this amount of work into the King County list in the near future. - Jmabel | Talk 18:43, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Feature article review notice
Che Guevara has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

Hello Jmabel -- I realize that you don't spend much time on WP any more (nor do I), but thought you might be interested to know about this FAR. -- Polaris999 (talk) 01:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but what time I have to put into FAR in the near future is probably going to go mostly to Blackface. - Jmabel | Talk 18:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I was afraid that you might not have time, but dared to hope otherwise. Your participation will be sorely missed. Best wishes, -- Polaris999 (talk) 00:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Boodles
No need to pussyfoot around the trolls. Will (talk) 22:23, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Fine, but no need to curse at anyone, even a bona fide troll. - Jmabel | Talk 22:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Reign of Terror
When you get done with the competing efforts to impose POV on Che Guevara, would you have a look at Reign of Terror? It is an appallingly sourced mishmash of extremists on both sides, concentrating on Robespierre's speeches. Presumably at some point it was closer to R. R. Palmer, but I would prefer to leave this to someone whose actual subject this is.

If you don't have time, let me know, and I'll try to wade in. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Replied at User talk:Pmanderson. Short answer: nope, too many things I'd doing already. - Jmabel | Talk 18:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * OK. What would you recommend as current, neutral and reputable sources? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * My talk page is fine. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Wiki projects at UW
''Comment moved from user page. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:36, 4 March 2008 (UTC)''

Hi, I'm part of a group at UW working on building tools for Wikipedia. I spoke with Lukobe, and he said that you might be willing to talk to us about Wikipedia and perhaps provide some amount of feedback for what we are trying to do. If so, I'd LOVE to talk to you :). You can reach me by email through my webpage or though my talk page. Thanks! Kayur (talk) 07:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Since I'm still in school, Evenings and weekends work well for me. However, if you can get time off as a recruiting talk and would like to do it that way, I can arrange to meet during the day. I'm currently working on this project with one other person and she might join me when I come and speak with you. Are you free sometime this week? Kayur (talk) 15:40, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

What do you think?
Biruitorul's article Barthélemy Boganda is considered for featured article. Given that, his numerous DYKs, and his record of 31,000 edits, including 26,000 in the mainspace, I am considering to propose him for RfA. However, I think you had such idea before I had a similar one a year ago. How about doing it together (or maybe 3-4 of us)? I have written similar messages to Illythr and Dahn.:Dc76\talk 17:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I have made the proposal: Requests for adminship/Biruitorul 2. Could you, please, read and edit it as you wish, then sign it, as well. Since I am not a native speaker of English, I am bound to make strange formulations and bad punctuation... You can also erase/reformulate/add whole phrases or even paragraphs, I will have no objections. Illythr will also get a similar message from me. Dahn was slow to answer, but I guess there'll be no problem if he joins later.


 * I also have a second request: after you and Illythr sign, we should inform Biruitorul, for example use A couple users that sign below ~ (which is easy), and to transclude the nomination page to the RfA page (which is super-complicated for me). Could you, please, help with this. I am already puzzled by this WP jargon: Once they have accepted, add USERNAME to the discussion page, and add their edit stats. Best regards, Dc76\talk 18:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * You actually did an impressive job. Soon, I am going to leave for the night, but I'll be back tomorrow. :Dc76\talk 20:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Photo question
Hi and many thanks for your support. I had a question regarding the CFR. Our article on it (promoted to FA almost 3 years ago) barely mentions its employees, the ceferişti - no mention of how many there are, or of their not insignificant impact on Romanian culture. Leaving the larger question aside for the moment, let me show you some pictures - I'll leave it to you to pick one, suitably alter it (if needed) and upload it; they're already in the public domain. At least I think it would be a good idea to have a picture of a ceferist in there, right? They're taken at Gara de Nord, if you'd like to add a caption. Biruitorul (talk) 03:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Image cropped and uploaded at Commons:Image:CFR conductor 01.jpg. For some reason, it's not showing well on that page (but if I click through, it clearly uploaded). I leave it to you or someone else to decide what to do with it in the article. - Jmabel | Talk 06:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Excellent - I've put in the image. About the building: if it dates to 1898, I doubt Eminescu read anything there, as he died in 1889; maybe there was another building on that site? Anyway: I'll try calling them up early next week to see what I can find out regarding your questions. (For the record, the number seems to be (021) 3156073 - I will let you know what they tell me.) Biruitorul (talk) 22:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Mulţumesc bine! - Jmabel | Talk 22:01, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Update: I just called the UAR and the lady on the line immediately recognized my questions and said she didn't know offhand but was working on an answer for you. I said (for lack of something better to say) that I was helping you out because your Romanian wasn't perfect but she said she knew English too. So if you don't get a reply soon, that number (which I believe would be 01140213156073 from the US) is the one to call. Biruitorul (talk) 14:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Mulţumesc foarte bine! - Jmabel | Talk 17:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Logo parti radical.png
Thank you for uploading Image:Logo parti radical.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 13:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Dealt with: added Non-free use rationale. Again, why aren't these clearly legitimate images that predate the current high bar for justification somehow grandfathered in? - Jmabel | Talk 17:25, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Cluj-Napoca
Am propus articolul pentru a primi statutul de articol de calitate, însă cererea mea a fost repsinsă. Au existat multe obiecţii (chiar multe care nu aveau nicio legătură cu criteriile pentru WP:FA), şi le-am îndeplinit până acum pe toate (mai puţin unele dintre ele care erau păreri personale, şi nu ţineau strict de criteriile pentru articole de calitate). Acest lucru îl poţi vedea pe această pagină, unde se află conţinutul de la Featured article candidates/Cluj-Napoca/archive1, la care am adăugat comentariile mele despre ce s-a făcut şi ce nu. A mai rămas doar textul articolului (proza), care după cum relatează ceilalţi utilizatori nu este foarte corect (calitatea limbii engleze folosite este slabă). Am înscris articolul pe pagina WikiProject League of Copyeditors/Requests, numai că va dura destul de mult până ce se va găsi un corector ortografic, care să verifice articolul. De aceea dacă ai timp, te invit şi pe tine să faci unele corecturi la articol. Cu mulţumiri, --Danutz (talk) 10:53, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Seattle map
Since nobody's creating one (my request has been languishing for a couple of years), do you think the City Clerk's comment here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Seattle_downtown_neighborhoods.jpg) means we can just use their overview map in the main Seattle article? --Lukobe (talk) 05:23, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds reasonable if they say it is public domain. Also:
 * Given that it is public domain, it ought to go on Commons.
 * Someone might want to rotate it a little to align it; do you want me to do that, or do you have the tools?
 * I believe that the (largely languishing) Seattle Portal is the only thing using Commons:Image:Seattle map 2.png, which I did at your request (exchange at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Seattle/Archive2).
 * I wonder, then: to they consider all of their maps to be in the public domain? If so, we should make up a template for this, and we should be able to import the lot of them.

- Jmabel | Talk 16:44, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, I either forgot or hadn't noticed your update. Thanks for doing that. I don't suppose you could remove the extra 's' in Magnuson? Do you think we should put that map back in the article, or was it meant as a placeholder?
 * It would seem that they consider all the maps in that series to be in the PD, but should we get confirmation? If they are, yes, we should import them all and put them on Commons.
 * If you can get that confirmation, that would be great. Ideally, if they would email permissions-commons AT wikimedia.org we would have that permission on record.
 * Oh, and the map is updated. - Jmabel | Talk 03:39, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've sent a mail. --Lukobe (talk) 07:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I forwarded it to your personal e-mail. Looks like they are all PD. --Lukobe (talk) 06:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I've added two relevant templates on Commons: Commons:Template:PD-Seattle-Neighborhood-Atlas to use as a license tag and Commons:Template:Seattle Neighborhood Atlas disclaimer to use in the description. - Jmabel | Talk 17:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I've moved Image:Seattle downtown neighborhoods.jpg to Commons, as the first file using these templates. - Jmabel | Talk 19:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Lukobe (talk) 22:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Catalan language
A tag has been placed on Template:Catalan language requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (&lt;noinclude>&#123;{transclusionless}}&lt;/noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:15, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not being used, I promise -- see Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Catalan language. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:27, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

category name
Any reason shouldn't be just  ? --Lukobe (talk) 07:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I can't think why not. But I've had nothing to do with that category: you might want to contact whoever created the category. - Jmabel | Talk 19:34, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Goodness (band)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Goodness (band), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Goodness (band). Gavin Collins (talk) 15:56, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Montlake Spite House
Kudos for getting photos of the Montlake Spite House. At some point I will add my Skinny House photos to the category you created on Commons. - House of Scandal (talk) 02:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Cheers
Damn, mate. I came over to your user page to learn about you after your contributions to the punk rock Talk. I was saddened and moved to read your statement at the top there. And I agree completely with the sentiments you express. At any rate, if you have further observations, suggestions, or direct improvements to make to punk rock, I look forward to that. P.S. Anyone who lists Aguirre among their four favorite movies is definitely on my planet. I'm seeing The Saragossa Manuscript for the first time this weekend. All the best, Dan.—DCGeist (talk) 00:56, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It's nice to get the occasional bouquet mixed in among the brickbats. - Jmabel | Talk 01:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

RfA musings
If true, that's a sad reflection on the mentality of today's regular RfA voters. At least you're grandfathered in, so to speak. The Piarists' Church now has its own page - it could use some inline references in the future, but I'm glad we have something on this pretty important building. By the way, let me ask your opinion on the paragraph beginning "In terms of religion..." in the "Demographics" section. I'd like to add a sentence to the end: "The main reasons for these shifts were the extermination and emigration of the city's Jews, the outlawing of the Greek-Catholic Church (1948-89) and the gradual decline in the Hungarian population." Danutz complained that's uncited, and I grant his point. However: a) this isn't an especially controversial assertion; I don't think you'll find anyone disagreeing with the statement; b) most readers from outside Romania will probably have only a vague idea how the religious shift took place, and some explanation is warranted. Of course it would be great to find a source saying this outright, but barring that, I would say this is a rare case of WP:IAR trumping WP:V. Anyway, I'd appreciate your input, either on this page or the Cluj-Napoca talk page. Thanks. Biruitorul (talk) 14:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm with you. None of this is controversial, but sources would be good. I suspect that it is far easier to cite for each of these demographic events having occurred than for them being the "main reasons", but the last seems self-evident once the numbers are there. - Jmabel | Talk 16:54, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * http://www.jewishgen.org/databases/Holocaust/0127_Cluj-survivors.html is a citation for the fate of most of the city's Jews (though it doesn't go into Ceauşescu "selling" most of the remnant of Romania's Jews to Israel). http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35722.htm from the U.S. State Dep't is an easy citation for the emigration of nearly all the remaining Romanian Jews (though it oversimplifies the story). It also cites for the great reduction in the number of Greek-Catholics in the years that church was banned, although it says nothing about whether this was due to emigration or conversion. - Jmabel | Talk 17:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you - I added a sentence with three citations. Biruitorul (talk) 17:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

5th Avenue Theatre not a landmark
Indeed it is not a landmark by the definition set forth in the article. I apologize for not doing more research before making the changes. The reason it does not appear on the list the article is based on is explained [here]: "The city was unable to protect it as a designated landmark because of its unique position on the site of the original territorial university grounds owned by the state of Washington."

Sadly, these historical zoning problems are what hold the 5th back from being designated a landmark which would allow for inclusion in List of Landmarks in Seattle‎. I wonder what other significant locations in Seattle are not included in this list. For me, this severely lowers any utility the landmarks article may have as it becomes only a "technical" article which simply chronicles records kept by the city rather than being a comprehensive list of places of interest in Seattle. Does such a "places of interest" article exist for Seattle? If so, I will add te 5th to that list if it is not already there. Regardless, I have removed the 5th from the List of Landmarks in Seattle‎, thus keeping it "pure".--Skotywa (talk) 17:50, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The theater (well, the building) is already in List of Registered Historic Places in King County, Washington.
 * The problem with trying to put together a general list of "significant locations in Seattle" is that there are no objective criteria for what is significant, and hence it would be exactly the type of subjective list that Wikipedia does not allow. Just for a few examples of the sort of places that some would find "significant" and others might not:
 * Pretty much every pier on the downtown waterfront.
 * Pretty much every pre-1900 building in the city (there are hundreds)
 * Almost every school (some are uncontroversially landmarks, but probably none is uncontroversially not a landmark)
 * Virtually every building on every college campus
 * Dick's Drive-Ins in Wallingford (the original) and Capitol Hill (probably the best known, and the one that shows up in a Sir Mix-a-Lot song
 * Homes (or one-time homes) of any of hundreds of musicians, ranging from luminaries like Quincy Jones, Jimi Hendrix and Kurt Cobain to lesser lights (but who still figure prominently in some people's worlds) ranging from the U-Men to the aforementioned Sir Mix
 * I could go on, but I imagine the point is clear. - Jmabel | Talk 19:08, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I must admit I'm surprised that one would group the 5th Avenue Theatre with any other pre-1900 building in the city or any pier on the waterfront or every building on any college campus. I would have grouped it more like Safeco Field or QWEST Field which are also strangely absent from List of Landmarks in Seattle‎.  Clearly it's a different perspective.  Oh well, "what's one man's treasure..."
 * I don't disagree with the need for standards. In this case though, the standard chosen appears (to me at least) to reduce the broadness and overall value of the article.
 * Nevertheless, your point is indeed clear, and I'm done dwelling ont it. Sorry for messing up the list in the first place.  I should have read more carefully. --Skotywa (talk) 20:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * As an aside, if you can come up with an objective criterion, you might start a different list (in addition to the two we have). But do keep in mind that there are certainly over 600 buildings (maybe more like 1000) that the Department of Neighborhoods has said would probably meet the criteria of the NRHP or the city landmark statute and that it's probably an unusual month in which none of these is demolished or seriously altered. The recent demolition of the Nebar Supply building leaps to mind: most people didn't even notice. (The sports arenas, by the way, would meet almost no one's criteria for landmarks, because they are not even the 25 years old that tends to be the absolute minimum for landmark designation. Similarly, the Central Library.) - Jmabel | Talk 04:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Image:Alex chilton 1990s. jpg
Hi. As it looks that you were pondering the accuracy of the uploader's license for Image:Alex chilton 1990s. jpg per discussion a few years ago at User talk:Eddhurt (which from what I saw doesn't seem to have been resolved), I wanted to give you a heads up that I've listed that image and two others by the same uploader for deletion consideration. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 20:34, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Notes From The Sandbox
My friend and I would like to apologize for our little act of vandalism. We did it for no other reason than to probe how the site works and see what your response time would be. I actually have contributed constructive edits in the past and I am a great fan of the site. I think it's a great experiment, representing all that is good and great about the Internet. I have to admit I feel a tinge of shame right now as I write this response, knowing that in my own small way I have undermined the exalted ideals upon which this website flourishes. And so again, my sincere apologies and I leave you with the words of my father who upon seeing his apartment building defaced by graffiti artists for the first time said, "brain garbage!" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.67.100.142 (talk • contribs) 18 April 2008


 * So should I assign you a penance of correcting 6 typographic errors? - Jmabel | Talk 02:29, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Gran i General Consell
Ran across this article today and realized that the translation's been abandoned. Would you be interested (and have the time) to translate the bit that's left? Thanks, Yupik (talk) 08:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Did what I could on this. The three words I couldn't do anything with are discussed on the talk page (and in comments on the page itself. - Jmabel | Talk 00:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I've left some links to definitions in Catalan on the talk page. I'll try and dig out my dicts from the moving boxes if I can remember which one they're in. Thanks though for the translation! -Yupik (talk) 17:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Rocklahoma + Rolling Stone
I left you a note on the Rocklahoma talk page but then realized I should probably ask you here... do you know about when that Rolling Stone article came out? I can look it up on EBSCO Host or something...

Ziggy the Hamster (talk) 08:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Response from User:ArglebargleIV
Looking at it, it's obviously not a reversion of vandalism. It's screwing up a reversion of vandalism and/or BLP violations by my choosing the wrong version to revert to. Fortunately, I later removed all that crap, but I should have been more careful in the first place. Thanks for bringing it to my attention, and I'll try not to do that again. -- ArglebargleIV (talk) 19:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)