User talk:Mattximus/Archive 2

Newfoundland and Labrador
I understand what you are doing and agree that is the title that article should be at, but a copy and paste move over a redirect loses edit history as a consequence. I'll place a request to delete the redirect to make way for the move. Hwy43 (talk) 04:52, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, thanks. I didn't realize that would be the case. I'm doing little things to the remaining provinces/territories that are hopefully time savers when it comes to cleaning them up properly. Thought this would be one of them. Mattximus (talk) 04:55, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I've requested what I anticipate will be an uncontroversial technical move. This process is explained at WP:RM/TR. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 05:50, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Tiruchirappalli FAC
Hi, would you mind having another look. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  06:51, 6 December 2013 (UTC) From what I've read, it's pretty good. Much better than many of the other pages for cities in Tamil Nadu. Unfortunately I do not have that much time at the moment to read the whole article (it is quite long!). If time permits I will try for another section. 15:18, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure you can have your own time. But could you strike out the resolved issues, so that I can understand if everything is fixed. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  17:16, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've responded to your queries there. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  08:11, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, but I'm very busy in real life at the moment, no time as of yet to go through the whole article. So far it looks very good! The prose just needs minor clean ups, like the ones I've been making so far in the first 3 sections. Mattximus (talk) 19:07, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hope you'll re-visit when you get time. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  08:28, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, since your comments may have been resolved, would you mind re-visiting the page. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  07:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi, looks like you're back after the vacation. The nomination has been sitting up for a while, awaiting your responses. Happy new year too :) &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  10:53, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry I've not had much time here, and to be honest, it's a bit daunting to read such a large article. I do believe it's close to pass, it just needs some minor tweaks like the ones I've been suggesting. How long before it's booted off the featured list? I will try to maybe do a section or two if time permits. Mattximus (talk) 22:00, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. Though I'm not forcing, you could collapse the comments if you feel that they're addressed, else there is a chance that delegates might think they're not resolved. Two of the three reviewers who had took part earlier are yet to respond. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  13:31, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Falun Gong (run, just run)
Trust me. It's a bad article and it'll probably never improve. I've seen user accounts deleted over this article, ip blocks established, epic edit-wars and it never really gets any better. I'd say just try to minimize the damage by removing links into the FLG article wherever you find them. Simonm223 (talk) 19:19, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Talkback
Herald  talk with me 06:00, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

DA Neuron diagram
Hi Mattximus, I'm planning on re-nominating the diagram I drew for FP again, but I was wondering if you could review it at your leisure prior to the nomination. I just noticed your follow-up comments on the closed FP nomination - Featured picture candidates/TAAR1-Dopamine neuron. I made a slightly different tweak to the image to expand upon its ability to diffuse through membranes and uploaded it to the unused png version: File:TAAR1 Amphetamine Dopamine.png (current annotated SVG version: Amphetamine pharmacodynamics).

Do you think I should use this version, or just move both entry points to the right side? Should only take me around 10 minutes to move everything if it's better on the right.

Also, thanks for all your feedback so far! It's been quite helpful in improving the image.  Seppi  333  (Insert 2¢ &#124; Maintained) 20:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, also, here's the references again just incase: my file locker.  Seppi  333  (Insert 2¢ &#124; Maintained)


 * Yes I would think it would be most logical if all amphetamine points of entry are beside/near each other. Specifically, it would reduce the number of pathway arrows that cross over each other, since I'm assuming the amphetamine that diffuses across the membrane and the amphetamine that passes through the dopamine transporter have the same pathway once inside the cell. The changes you made already considerably improve the image, so the rest is just nit-picking. Mattximus (talk) 21:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Codrington Library
Hi Mattximus- I have added an alternate version to my FP nomination. I hope the crop makes the presentation of the facade less ambiguous. Thanks.--Godot13 (talk) 19:52, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

FLN
Hi, I implemented the change you recommended at Featured list candidates/List of currencies in North America/archive2, please can you take another look at the article? Thanks, Mat  ty. 007 16:32, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings in Portland, Oregon and crystal
As you seem to have a thing against the "future" buildings section, note WP:CRYSTAL is not applicable. I know many people are confused about what CRYSTAL means, and generally they think it is some sort of prohibition on future things. What it really is, is a prohibition from Wikipedia editors speculating. As in I can't come up with my own ideas about the future and added them into an article (in many ways CRYSTAL is repetitive of OR). But we can regurgitate the speculation about the future found in RS, which should be clear by the very first sentence of CRYSTAL: "Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation." (emphasis added) So we can have a section entitled "Tallest under construction, approved and proposed" and not run afoul of anything. Individual entries may run afoul if not sourced, but the section itself does not. Aboutmovies (talk) 04:08, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I have went through a few of the list of tallest buildings pages and removed approved/planned not normally because of wiki crystal ball, but because they are either completely unsourced, or the source is out of date, and the projects became stale. I would say this accounts for 95% of the cases. Consider the alternative. Every architect's plan should have it's own wiki page? What criteria would you use to say a plan is worth writing about, or just one in a million of plans that never see fruition? In going through the lists for "approved" buildings written usually around 2007 I noticed almost none were actually built or under construction 5 or 6 years later. So approved is not a criterion for inclusion. Because of this, I firmly believe that unless something is being constructed, it's speculative or worse, advertisement. Mattximus (talk) 20:40, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * "Every architect's plan should have it's own wiki page?" - No, and that's not what anyone would argue except as a strawman. Instead we generally do what we always do, reliable sources from sources independent of the topic. To which, the architect's plan would not be. Should they be removed if nothing has happened after a few years, certainly. But that's not all you did on the above list, where you removed the entire section, including one in which construction had begun, just to later be stopped. By the time you removed it and the entire section it had already been announced construction would resume, and it has. Aboutmovies (talk) 03:51, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Coeloplanidae
Please note that the species are now listed on the genus pages. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:26, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah I did see that, but if you delete them all, then it's just a stub with nothing on it. Why not keep the links there for now, until more actual content is added. This way it's useful in the meantime. Mattximus (talk) 20:04, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Review of scallop diagram
Hi, I read your comments on my illustration of neurology of a giant scallop, and believe I have addressed all of your very good points. Any chance I can get you to vote "Support" for the image now? Am hoping so! KDS 4444 Talk  16:11, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

All and none.
Not sure I understand your reversion about lower-tier municipalities. If all of them are lower-tier, it should go without saying that none of them are upper tier, right? Like, if you have five cats and all of them are black, you wouldn't need to say no white ones are present. Or orange or anything. Because all cats that are present are black. Same deal, or no? InedibleHulk (talk) 21:43, October 15, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply InedibleHulk! I was hoping you would discuss to make sure my reasoning is correct. My logic is that since all municipalities are single-tier in the north, then they are either all lower-tier or all higher-tier. So you have a bifurcation, and that's why there is the phrase "upper-tier municipalities are not present" is present. So in your metaphor you have five cats and some are long haired and some are short haired. Sure they are all cats, but if you cared about the length of hair you would have to add "short hairs are not present" to "all the animals are cats". But you bring up a good point, would it be more clear to say "and all are lower-tier municipalities?" I would go for that change, just to get rid of the negative. Mattximus (talk) 00:58, 16 October 2014 (UTC)


 * No, you're right. Just realized I was seeing "single-tier", but reading "lower-tier". I'm not completely stupid, but when I am, I really am.


 * Sorry to waste your time! InedibleHulk (talk) 01:47, October 16, 2014 (UTC)


 * Not at all, I enjoy the collaborative aspect of wikipedia! Mattximus (talk) 01:54, 16 October 2014 (UTC)


 * You're welcome, then. That proposed change sounds OK, by the way. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:41, October 16, 2014 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 1 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:30, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * On the List of municipalities in Prince Edward Island page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=632071748 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F632071748%7CList of municipalities in Prince Edward Island%5D%5D Ask for help])

Canadian election timeline featured lists
Hi Mattximus. I've done a bit of investigating after your posts on my talk page, and it turns out that none of the lists (from what I can tell) were ever actually demoted. The demotions you are referring to appear to be related to this discussion that resulted in the delisting of a featured topic. That appears to be because a related list didn't pass FLC, not because of faults in any of the other lists. Even if they had been mentioned, a decision made at the featured topics process doesn't govern whether a particular list is featured. I also looked at WP:FLRC archives at Template:Featured list log and found no FLRC discussions for any of the lists. Therefore, they are still featured, although they don't appear to meet current FL standards. My suggestion is to take one of the lists to FLRC for a community discussion, and go on to post other lists if reviewers favor delisting. Giants2008 ( Talk ) 02:17, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your prompt reply! Mattximus (talk) 03:07, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

List of municipalities in British Columbia
Mattximus, yeah I generally view Wikipedia using a 14"(?) laptop. As such, the images as currently laid out at List of municipalities in British Columbia (and also List of municipalities in Quebec, for example) do definitely "break" the page layout (by "pushing the list table down the page while leaving a lot of blank white space") when viewed on my laptop... So, something for editors of those pages to keep in mind – images are well and good, but WP:NOTGALLERY and all that, and it's probably best to try to design page layouts that will work on the maximum number of screen sizes (which is why I suggested switching to a Gallery at the bottom of the article)... Just thought you should know. --IJBall (talk) 05:25, 14 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks, we had discussed this earlier actually and decided to keep. Since you are on a laptop with a small screen, you can fix this problem by changing the zoom on your browser. The fastest way is holding the control button and scrolling one tick with your mouse wheel (or however your laptop scrolls). Then going back if you find it too small. We can't design a wiki page that's perfect for every laptop/computer screen, but this seems to work on most screens. Mattximus (talk) 16:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Minor request: Any chance you can add a picture of Victoria to the gallery of List of municipalities in British Columbia then? It seems odd that that one is missing a picture of the capital city! Thanks! --IJBall (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
 * They are actually in order of population beginning with the largest municipality and going to the lowest. Same format for all other list of municipalities in Canada pages. To get to Victoria we would have to add another 7 cities. Hmm possible, but I'm not sure if there are any good ones for places like Saanich or Langley. Mattximus (talk) 18:08, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah... point taken! --IJBall (talk) 18:47, 14 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I did not see that you had been previously questioned about the photos, with reference to Ontario. This is obviously a project you are keeping a tight grip of, and I mean that in a positive sense, and so I will not disrupt this again. Thanks. Secondarywaltz (talk) 20:00, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

TFL notification
Hi, Matt. I'm just posting to let you know that List of municipalities in Yukon – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for March 27. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008  ( Talk ) 21:22, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

New Brunswick Incorporation Dates
Hmmmm, there's no single document that's easily found. Regulation 85-6 doesn't include the date of incorporation.

You can get the Municipalities Act from the Government of New Brunswick website, which will list the villages incorporated 1966-11-06 in one of the appendices (second one, I think), but the online version includes only the villages from that Act that still exist. The appendix does list what status each such village had before 1966. The Act and its Regulations are at http://laws.gnb.ca/en/BROWSECHAPTER?listregulations=M-22&letter=M#M-22

I don't have my files with me on my laptop, so I can't provide more detail than that. I can take a copy of the page home and add the dates, but with two blizzards in the next four days, it could be awhile before I get it done.G. Timothy Walton (talk) 13:55, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks G. Timothy Walton! I used your link and added the specific date to any village mentioned in the document, assuming that means their day of of incorporation is all the same (the year is cross-checked and should be accurate). I'm still searching for proper references for the remaining incorporation dates, but I'm wondering if you have time to take a look at List of municipalities in New Brunswick for any inaccuracies that might be present. Mattximus (talk) 02:09, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

FLC
Thanks for your comment at Featured list candidates/List of nearest exoplanets/archive2. If you have some time I would really appreciate if you could take a look at the list and let me know if there is anything that the list would need to receive your support for the FLC. Nergaal (talk) 19:50, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

FLC removal
You have my permission (in case it's needed) to nominate the rest of the lists, but I recommend doing so in separate FLRCs. I'm not sure how closings would go if one giant FLRC was done for all the lists, and there's no precedent for such an event anyway. Better to have a bunch of nominations and let reviewers copy their comments if necessary. Giants2008 ( Talk ) 22:07, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

You've got mail!
-The Herald • the joy of the LORD my strength 04:13, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppets
Hi Mattximus, I've filed a sockpuppet investigation regarding the recent POV pushers on airport lists and other articles. See Sockpuppet investigations/Instantnood‎. Feel free to add your comment. Cheers, -Zanhe (talk) 18:50, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Talkback
Tomandjerry211 (Let's have a chat) 00:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Featured List - Parks of Madagascar
Hi Mattximus, thanks for your comments on my FL nominee, List of national parks of Madagascar. I've provided some responses and look forward to your feedback. - Lemurbaby (talk) 01:06, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! I opened a discussion here to try to get an NPOV resolution. So add your arguments --Cs california (talk) 06:35, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings in Brooklyn
, thank you for your comprehensive and thorough review of this list! I've responded to each your comments and suggestions at Featured list candidates/List of tallest buildings in Brooklyn/archive1. Please let me know if you have any other changes that need to be incorporated to this list. Thanks again! -- West Virginian   (talk)  22:12, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi West Virginian, you addressed all my concerns, the only thing I didn't do was a comprehensive reference check, but I gave my support already. Hopefully a few more will support as well. Great article! Mattximus (talk) 21:10, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Mattximus, thank you for your guidance, support of the list for FLC, and kind words! -- West Virginian   (talk)  22:19, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

HK in international situations
HK is referred to as "Hong Kong, China" is every international organisations including the International Olympic Committee, and is recognised by the Central Government of P.R. China as "The Olympic Standard". Even the Central Government of P.R. China referred to Hong Kong as "Hong Kong, China" in international situations. Please withdraw your pathetic patriotism and follow the standard approved and followed by every parties (including the government of P.R. China) in the international situations. The same goes with the HKSAR Flag. And to make it more clear, country, which Hong Kong certainly is (as an independent economy), is not the same as sovereignty state, which Hong Kong is not. And the Chinese translation of "country" used by the government of P.R. China should be 「国家或地区」. Also, Hong Kong is not a province of P.R. China, but a Special Administration Region. It enjoys independent currency, border, legal system, etc; and is has joined dozens of international organisations along with signing international treaties with other countries and economies, which none of the provinces of P.R. China can. Please accept the fact that Hong Kong is a country (in your understanding, region, if you would like to call it so), and can use its SAR flag with approve from the central government of P.R. China and recognised by the international society. Groverlynn (talk) 14:35, 9 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Here are the key points against your argument:


 * Hong Kong is not an independent country, it is Special administrative region of China. And so does not match any of the other flags on the list.
 * Hong Kong is a second tier administrative unit, like an American State, or Chinese Province, and does not match any of the other flags on the list.
 * The Olympics is not an authority on what is a first level administrative unit. People of Hong Kong are represented in the United Nations by China, which is the first level administrative unit.
 * Listing Hong Kong flag only is inconsistent with other flags, you would have to change all to include the state/province flag of each country. Why have only 1 flag that is not consistent with all the others? Mattximus (talk) 14:38, 9 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Lets focus on just one of the arguments. Why should Hong Kong be the only second level administrative unit to have a flag on the list. Why not Texas? Mattximus (talk) 14:41, 9 August 2015 (UTC)


 * For your third, fourth and last question, because hong kong is not at the same level with a province in China or a state in US. Hong Kong is a 1.5 level administrative level, and is of the same level with Puerto Rico, which is ALWAYS represented with its only flag. For your first question, an independent economy is sufficient to be an independent country without sovereignty, which HK is with HK Dollar as its currency with independent border and customs control. For your third question, UN doesn't include all COUNTRIES; it only include SOVEREIGNTY STATES, which is very different from countries. All countries that are not recognised by UN (ROC/Taiwan, Puerto Rico of US, etc) use its own flag, and why couldn't HK? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Groverlynn (talk • contribs) 14:50, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Puerto Rico is very different than Hong Kong. Puerto Rico elects nobody in Washington and is locally administered. Hong Kong is very much tied to Beijing as you probably know. That is a big difference. If you want to use semantics, the flags on these lists are all sovereign countries, the question remains why should we include 1 non-sovereign country in a list that includes only sovereing countries? Mattximus (talk) 15:44, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

List of British Columbia general elections
Hi, Mattximus. Earlier this year, you had pretty much all of the Featured topics/Canadian election timelines articles, except List of Alberta general elections, delisted as Featured lists – and rightly so, as those articles were all pretty much lacking inline reference sourcing. Well, I've started working on improving List of British Columbia general elections – e.g. I've fixed the formatting on the election tables (WP:SALORDER), and I've stared adding inline sourcing (though I'm definitely not done yet); and I will probably revise the election table to look a little more like the Alberta one. But I'm wondering if you know what else needs to be done here – any suggestions you've got for me to further improve List of British Columbia general elections would certainly be welcome. Once this BC elections article is mostly back on track, I'm going to try to send it back to Featured lists to see if I can get it relisted... Thanks in advance! (And I hope you're still around – I notice you haven't edited in over a week...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:47, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * IJBall, sure I will be happy to take a look when you nominate to featured list. I think modelling after Alberta is a great idea, and I notice that the table formatting is better in the Alberta one, is there anyway to change it? Hope to support you in this venture soon! Mattximus (talk) 15:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Mattximus, thanks for getting back to me! I don't know if you've taken a look yet, but I have revised the B.C. table to look a lot more like the Alberta one – there are some "quirks" to the Alberta one that I don't care for (like the colored column headings), but outside of that I think the two tables are now very similar with the number and order of the columns in the table-list now the same between B.C. and Alberta. (I just added sortability to the B.C. table, but there's an issue with that, so I'll have to fiddle around with it some more...) So far, though, I've only added inline citations for the B.C. article – the only sources there, so far, are direct from BC Elections. I think I'd like to try and find at least one secondary book source too, if I can find one... Anyway, you can take a look now, and let me know what you think, or you can wait until I try to submit it to Featured lists (and I'm not exactly sure when I will do that, but I'm hoping soon – maybe in the next couple of weeks...). Note that I've now also put the lists at Saskatchewan and Manitoba in proper chronological order, as per WP:SALORDER, and hope to do the same for the other provinces' election list articles soon. Thanks again! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:12, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

CDPs in Alaska
As you appear to be working on this topic, you may wish to peruse User:RadioKAOS/Sandbox/Misc/CDPs. It took a little while to find the proper census documents (in the meanwhile, the state labor department may have put it all online, but I haven't taken the time to go through their website). Considering that we have tons of holes in our coverage of things like former cities and former CDPs, I've tried to trace the differences between the 1980 Census and today. I figured that 1980 would make a good starting point because it's the first appearance of the term "census-designated place". Equivalents in prior censuses (referred to as a "village" or "unincorporated community") are murky, especially since many are not enumerated separately today because they were annexed by cities. It's still incomplete; I didn't make the kind of progress I hoped for considering how many years this has lingered on already. I'll keep trying when I have time. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 19:30, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

List of cities in Alaska
Hi Mattximus. Thank you for your work on the List of cities in Alaska article—it looks really good! I noticed that while editing the article you attempted to move the page to a different title by copying its content at the old title and pasting it at the new one. This is known as a "cut-and-paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history. Wikipedia's content licensing requires that we attribute all content to its authors—this is typically done through the page history function. When you do a cut-and-paste move, the history of the page, along with all the author names, remains at the former title, thereby denying the authors the legally required attribution.

In the future, if you need to rename a page, use the "Move" dropdown menu option, or if the title you want to move the page to already exists (thus preventing you from using the dropdown menu option), you may request that an administrator help by deleting the problematic page and completing the move for you at Requested moves/Technical requests. In the meantime, I have requested that an administrator merge the histories of List of cities in Alaska by population and List of cities in Alaska to remedy the situation. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 20:06, 1 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your help, Mz7. I posted this request in the talk page for quite a while but I was ignorant of how to do it formally. I think the change in title is rather subtle, so there should not be much resistance. Mattximus (talk) 21:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I think Mz7 had it right with the gallery. On my phone, the images scroll down the page with nothing but whitespace to the left, with the table picking up after the images end.  I suspect that it renders differently on a real computer;  I'll try and find one today to see.  Even so, the table needs an additional field for year of incorporation.  That may crunch too much in horizontally if the images correctly render to the right of the table in most displays. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  21:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * That's actually why I changed it to a gallery initially. The whitespace you mentioned also shows up on my computer—just a whole lot of nothing to the left of the images, and aesthetically it doesn't look very good. The gallery puts the images on a horizontal plane so screen-space is used more efficiently. Mz7 (talk) 21:59, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Another thing: the current total of cities is 148, not 149. It's unclear whether your intention is to reflect the current situation when appropriate (especially since I provided sources) or only reflect census years.  Petersburg dissolved its city government and reincorporated as a borough nearly three years ago.  There were also changes between 2000 and 2010, such as the incorporation of Adak and Gustavus, among others. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  22:16, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks User:RadioKAOS and sorry for the confusion on the total numbers, I added the one you added to the lead into the list with a note stating that it was incorporated after the 2010 census. To avoid confusion, I think it would be best to have the correct current total number of cities in the lead and the list as per other list of cities. But we should also only stick to census data and not estimates (a note can be added if the incorporation was after the last census). Please let me know if you can help with the correct present number of cities in Alaska. It is now returned to 148 with the removal of Petersburg.
 * To be consistent with all the other lists of cities that are featured lists (see California, Alabama, Ontario... etc), the gallery was removed and images formatted to the right. It would be odd if Alaska was the only state that did this. Mattximus (talk) 23:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
 * User:RadioKAOS, do you have a full citation for the year incorporated reference? I'm planning on taking this list to featured status and they require all complete citations. Thanks for adding that useful column! Mattximus (talk) 00:54, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The full information for that source is found in the reference added to the lead. Each municipality is on a separate page (except Anchorage gets two pages).  These were added to the infoboxes of the city articles earlier this year to accompany the mayor field.  As the book isn't published for consumption by the general public, there's no ISBNs or anything like that.  However, its lineage dates back to the directories published by AML's predecessor organization, the League of Alaskan Cities, starting in the early 1950s.  The state published its own directories for a while, then co-published this directory for many years with AML, under the Department of Community and Regional Affairs (now the Division of Community and Regional Affairs under the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development).  DCRA's website has the Community Database Online, which contains the same information as found in the book.  Alaska-Community-External-References was created to link to CDO, but the template is essentially long-abandoned and I haven't tried it lately to see how well it works.  DCRA's website should also contain copies of incorporation certificates and other documentation.  Also, some while back, I also added to the infoboxes of the city articles exact incorporation dates, with the most recent source I could find which mentioned the exact date rather than just the year.  So if more precise information/sourcing is needed for each field, that can be accomplished, even if it means more work and copying over things from elsewhere. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  17:13, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I left another hidden comment in the Former cities section, but it may be more appropriate here. I've seen other articles use The Alaska Almanac as a source.  I believe there's an edition on Google Books.  It contains a table of communities, which I'm pretty sure also give incorporation years and expressly reference the dissolution of various Bethel-area villages in the 1990s.  There's also places such as Haines, Skagway and Wrangell, which were cities in the 2000 Census whose status had changed by 2010.  To fully cover the topic of former cities may require some research legwork, but it's not an impossible task. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  17:56, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I think it might be better to create a new page called List of former cities in Alaska and link to that from this article. The reason is that it's already a very long list and essentially complete. What do you think? Mattximus (talk) 17:59, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, sure. Like I said, it may amount to more work in the end.  Even so, there's good enough record keeping to where it can't be that difficult.  It would help to patch in readers' understanding of the topic.  The various consolidations and unifications left many former cities.  Port Alexander and Tanana both incorporated prior to statehood, dissolved those respective governments, then reincorporated under statehood.  In the 1950s and 1960s, the local government structure loosened up to an extent not found before or since, resulting in a proliferation of cities which were really little more than neighborhoods (a few persist as cities to this day, such as Kachemak).  Given what I said about record keeping, at least we can verify that places such as North Haven and "John F. Kennedy City" existed, even if precious little other information exists.  Then there's Lost River, a "development city" created by the state legislature with a "city council" more closely resembling a corporate board of directors.  The North Slope Borough had just been incorporated to tax the Prudhoe Bay Oil Field to fund schools and infrastructure in surrounding Native villages.  I believe Lost River was a proposed major gold mine near Golovin, and the legislature feared a repeat, potentially losing revenue from any local incorporation.  In summary, there's some good shit to be had for a topic like that, even if it's "ancient history" to many. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions  18:52, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Two things. First, from checking the links attached to references which were already in the article, I'm coming up with a lot of dead links. Anything on the DCCED website is likely still there, just moved to a different location. Second, I started adding exact dates with references to the Incorporated field. I'm sure there's a less clunky way to format those references, but I haven't played around much with those citation templates. There were sources missing from a few, but those cities are really the easiest to source otherwise. Cheers. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 20:22, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

List of British Columbia general elections follow-up
Hi, Mattximus! I'm just dropping you a note to let you know that I am not ignoring, nor have I forgotten, your comments on the List of British Columbia general elections FLC page. It's just that I'm juggling several priorities right now (some of them work-related!) so it may be several days before I can get to them. But I've already been given them some thought over the past couple of days, and I'll hopefully come up with something soon, and post them over at the FLC page when I do! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:31, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
 * --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:53, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I finally got a chance to follow up on your most recent critique (work's been busy this week!). Thanks! --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:25, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rapid transit in Canada, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victoria Park station. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:10, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Rapid transit in Canada
Why do you remove the details about station numbers that are under construction? It is perfectly valid information that should be included, and is well referenced. If there are Vancouver stations that are under construction, I hope that someone adds them. Okseroc (talk) 17:17, 06 February 2016 (EST)

What are thinking? None of the detail about individual systems, most of which is duplicated, belongs in the general article. Much of it you simply cut and pasted from List article! If you feel tables are required, please update those system articles. Secondarywaltz (talk) 13:11, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Secondarywaltz: It's not much duplication actually, all the tables but the first three are new, and I added new summaries for the lines, and improved the text in a few places. Still working on it. The TTC table is written by myself and I uploaded it to the main list TTC article, and I also made the skytrain map. If you feel like deleting it, please express it at the talk page to see if others agree with you, then we can delete it and return the page to the confusing stub it was before (it was out of date and had buses in it for some reason?) Mattximus (talk) 20:51, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Exactly! The same tables already exist. Why would you duplicate them? Why would you not add the new tables to the transit systems? Everything you have added is irrelevant to a general article about rapid transit. Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:25, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
 * So take out the tables or move them to the proper article/create new article? Did you see the article before I made the change? Half of it was on bus routes! Since when is the CTrain not rapid transit (even though sources show that these systems are "rapid transit")? Since when are bus routes that share the road with cars (not even BRTs) considered rapid transit? The data was also out of date. Mattximus (talk) 22:31, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

PR request
Would you mind leaving some comments here when you find time? &mdash; Vensatry (ping) 08:20, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:29, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

FLC
Hi, hope you're doing well. I nominated List of tributaries of Bowman Creek for FLC a couple of weeks ago. Since you provided excellent feedback in my last FLC, I was wondering if you would have time to comment on this one? --Jakob (talk)  aka Jakec  23:22, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Wonderful holidays


Merry Christmas and a happy New Year! --Tremonist (talk) 15:23, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Cantons of Costa Rica, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tarrazú. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:26, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year Mattximus!


Happy New Year! Mattximus, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. --Jakob (talk)  aka Jakec  13:09, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to user talk pages.