User talk:Lordkinbote/Archive 4

This archive page covers the third quarter of 2006.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

Please add new archivals to Talk:Lordkinbote/Archive05.

Your article, Battle of Beecher Island, was selected for DYK!
Thanks for your contributions!  + +Lar: t/c 15:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:1937 Super Chief-2 observation.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:1937 Super Chief-2 observation.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. JeremyA 19:21, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

--Sorry, forget it -- an anon had removed your tag. JeremyA 19:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Union Station (San Diego)
Wow. I'm extremely impressed. If you could get out the cite.php and thumb through your references for some inline citations, there's little doubt in my mind that this has real featured article potential. There's lots of sources, lots of pictures (old and new), image licensing is great (it's nice not to have to fall back on "fair use"), and there was obviously plenty to write about. I reckon you ought to have a go at getting this ready for WP:FAC, having put all the effort into it. TheGrappler 17:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Profile
I'm curious as to why you moved Profile (engineering) to the See also section when, by MoS:DP guidelines, it should be in the main section. --Usgnus 06:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Not quite a standard disambigation page, but looks good to me. Thanks! --Usgnus 07:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Proposed Merge at Roaring Camp Railroads
I don't see much of a problem with merging the two; I'll hold off on adding the project banner to the merge candidate until a decision is made. Just be sure to put mergefrom on the proposed destination so readers there know too. Slambo (Speak) 19:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Infobox added to Lynton and Barnstaple Railway
Thanks for upgrading this article to the GA category, however I was surprised that you have added the infobox, especially as, with the inclusion of Reporting marks, that particular infobox appears to be specifically for USA-based rail systems, wheras the L&B is most definitely in England! Please can you explain the reasioning for this - or Perhaps there should be an infobox specifically for UK Heritage Railways - if there isn't already - which would, I feel, be more appropriate.

regards, Lynbarn 20:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Please bring my article back from the dead
Hello, my name is Jared Eimicke and I have recently created an account on your website using the name Knickf2j and the password gundyf2j. I created an article called "Jizzfest" on July 8th. A "random updater" on the same day went on the talk section of my page and cited it as "patent nonsense" and suggested it should be deleted. Shortly afterwards, it was, by you.

Jizzfests are parties that I actually do host, and have become famous amongst many in my tiny hometown of Metuchen, NJ. Many people are constantly asking me about them, and I figured it would be fun and informative to create an article on Wikipedia, so everyone could look at it. The random updater also seemed to think my article was some kind of self-promotion. I suppose I could see how one could interpret it that way, however that was definitely not my intention, and if the page was put back on, then I wouldn't hesitate to edit the article in order to limit self-promotion if necessary. I spent a lot of my time creating the article, and it would mean a lot to me if you could find it in your hearts to allow the article on your site. Many people in my town would be grateful. So in summary, please let me, user Knickf2j, continue to update and oversee the creation of the recently deleted on July 8th article "Jizzfest." Thanks a lot for your time. You can contact me at jeimicke@syr.edu

Knickf2j 07:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC)Knickf2j/Jared EimickeKnickf2j 07:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

California Southern Railroad
In putting Union Station (San Diego) up for the week's selected article on Portal:Trains, I noticed that California Southern Railroad was still a redlink. So, I created an article for it based on a couple refs I had. I've got a bit more to add to it, but there's a start. Slambo (Speak) 13:54, 9 July 2006 (UTC)


 * One book that I'm sure I've got but can't find is Chard Walker's book on the history of Cajon (I found the picture book, just can't find the history book). I want to see just how much of CSRR is mentioned in it; I fear that it's buried under all the piles of magazines and everything else under the layout that I still need to go through and sort out (I did find a couple Milwaukee Road books that I had forgotten about, tho).  The Serpico book so far has been the most valuable for this article.
 * I noticed the entry on the stamp issue too, just after the image was removed from Super Chief. Rail subjects on stamps is one of the more popular topical areas to collect.  Perhaps this would be a good subject to try the "task force" style of subprojects much the way that the Military History project splits out regional and conflict task forces to work on articles. Slambo (Speak)  19:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Los Angeles, California
I attempted to demonstrate that this nickname shows misunderstanding of the original Spanish name, but my comments were consistently removed. I'm not the vandal. (unsigned comment by User:Dawz)


 * I suggest that you take up a discussion at the article's talk page as has been suggested above (you may want to have a look at WP:POINT as well). Also, it is customary to use edit summaries and to sign your posts.--Lordkinbote 19:59, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

"various other pseudonyms"
was formerly known as, which is based upon his real name, which is apparently anglicized as "Andy", hence the name "Andy123" which he uses on the Freenode IRC network. He requested a non-obvious change of his Wikipedia username because he got tired of his dad browsing through his contribs list. From the user renaming log: I can see how you might have misunderstood and thought he might be editing from multiple usernames at the same time, but he's not. I hope this satisfactorily addresses your concerns. — freak([ talk]) 03:09, Jul. 30, 2006 (UTC)
 * 10:54, June 2, 2006 Essjay (Talk | contribs | block) (Renamed the user "Anirudhsbh" (which had 2371 edits) to "Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington")

Welcome to the Military history WikiProject!
 Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:


 * Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
 * The announcement and open task box is updated quite regularly. You can [ watchlist it] if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including WPMILHIST Announcements there.
 * Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is recommended that you [ watchlist it].
 * The project has a monthly newsletter; it will normally be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.

There are a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:


 * Starting some new articles? Our article structure guidelines outline some things to include.
 * Interested in working on a more complete article? The military history peer review and collaboration departments would welcome your help!
 * Interested in a particular area of military history? We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, or periods.
 * Want to know how good our articles are? The assessment department is working on rating the quality of every military history article in Wikipedia.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Kirill Lokshin 23:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Orange revert
What the hell is this about? I gave proper editing reasoning. Please see this for some insight on how to deal with edits. Somerset219 05:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * First off, "What the hell is this about?" is no way to open up a dialogue. I suggest that you step back a moment, take a deep breath, and allow the article to develop organically, as opposed to the scattergun way you are making wholesale edits. Your rude behavior and reaction in this regard demonstrates that you are the one who feels "ownership" for the article.--Lord Kinbote 22:07, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes I was mad, considering you gave no reason for reverting all the work I did on the article. I don't understand what you mean by "organically" or why being bold is bad. You had no reason to revert, and you still give no reason, which makes me thinks one of two things; either you have ownership issues, or you vandalized the article. What does "scattergun" mean? whats with all the bizzare analogies? Somerset219 22:12, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Careful with saying the word vandalism so much. Style disputes aren't considered vandalism and people usually just get madder when you suggest that's what they've done. -- Ned Scott 22:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * insertion of nonsense or irrelevant content: I took out irrelevant content, by his revert, he put it back in, which is vandalism. Please see all parts of the argument before interjecting your opinion on someones talk page. Somerset219 22:35, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I assume that you meant to indicate that you were angry, and not demented, over the revert&mdash;granted, I probably shouldn't have used VP to revert the change, that way I could have left a more meaningful edit summary. MarsRover has tried to give you some sound advice above (and on the article's talk page) and has asked that you be more careful in your endeavors so as not to disrupt formatting or unnecessarily delete material (you as much admit this is the case in your statement "Sorry for barging in here and running a muck [ sic ] "); you don't seem to have taken that to heart, yet. By your own admissions much of your reasoning when editing appears to be based on whether or not you personally are familiar with something, which is not an encyclopedic basis for the same. There is nothing wrong is being bold, just so long as some forethought is applied as well. When you've got some more time under your belt here this should become apparant--Lord Kinbote 22:41, 8 August 2006 (UTC)


 * So again, you give no reason for your revert. Iv'e read the discussion page, and edited accordingly, it seems you did not. much of your reasoning when editing appears to be based on whether or not you personally are familiar with something -- You are refering to the "plaza fountain" which is the only thing that was based on familiarity, plus I thought it unnecessary due to all the other pictures. Also there is nothing wrong with that type of editing, as you can see with the first discussiong on the talk page: "often" referred to as Plaza City?!?... Somerset219 22:52, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

this is a really stupid argument. Just next time, say something when you revert so much info, and I'll try to make my edits more clear. I'de hate to make an enemy over something trivial like this. Somerset219 23:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Do you ever sometimes get the feeling that you are talking to a wall? Mr Snrub 23:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

... or that they don't sign in when making personal attacks. Somerset219 01:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

ENOUGH. I have grown weary of this exchange.--Lord Kinbote 04:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


 * A contrast of my contributions . What the article looked like prior and after: . Boy was I way out of line?.... Somerset219 01:39, 9 August 2006 (UTC) &mdash; comments posted from User talk:Somerset219 by Somerset219 19:28, August 9, 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry for editing your majesty... Somerset219 22:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election - vote phase!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will select seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of eleven candidates. Please vote here by August 26!

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot - 11:53, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:ATSF San Diegan in Del Mar.jpg
HI, Can you give a source for this image? It's an important, wonderful image but is unsourced. Thanks. :) Dlohcierekim 13:23, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue VI - August 2006
The August 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot -- 12:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikihalo
Been noticing a lot of your edits lately, so I present the above in recognition of all your fine work. Keep at it! Mdhennessey 23:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Changing History of Calif article titles
Lordkinbote, please see below:

Title of the California history articles We will have to rename the two sections of the California history articles. Any suggestions?

Sincerely, GeorgeLouis 11:19, 26 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree. Is there a WPedia reason for the "History of California" format as opposed to "California History"? Should we just keep the titles simple like "California History (to 1899)" and "California History (1900 to present)"? The blue category box already uses these terms. NorCalHistory 17:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * There was a major discussion some time ago and consensus reached for across-the-board consistency for these types of articles, which is why they now begin with "History of ..." I believe if you go back far enough on the edit history that you will find the article was, at one time, entitled "California History."--Lord Kinbote 17:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Interesting - thank you. Should these two articles then simply be re-titled to "History of California (to 1899)" and "History of California (1900 to present)"? Again, as noted the blue box with the poppy already uses these terms. NorCalHistory 19:05, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that makes the most sense, with History of California then becoming a disambiguation page.--Lord Kinbote 19:18, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Hearing no objections, there seems to be consensus that the articles should be re-titled. Lordkinbote or GeorgeLouis, would you like to do the honors? NorCalHistory 19:33, 30 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Done.--Lord Kinbote 21:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you - appreciated! NorCalHistory 00:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)