User talk:Mitchazenia/Archive9

Manitoba Roads
I'm not sure what type of info you are looking for. I'd start at http://www.gov.mb.ca/tgs/map/index.html Hope that helps. Mersperto 23:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Shields
-- T M F Let's Go Mets - Stats 21:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

County routes
Please be aware that there's a discussion going on at WT:USRD right now about county highways. It looks like consensus is slowly forming that minor county routes are not notable. -- NORTH talk 21:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I've finished all the shields for Camden County. Like I said, rather than making articles for each individual route, your work might be more appreciated on expanding the list articles, at least at first.  Also I urge you to take part in the official USRD IRC meeting on Friday where we're going to discuss the issue of county routes. -- NORTH talk 00:22, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

MB Highways
Good work on the template. I've been cleaning up the naming conventions used in articles about Manitoba Highways. I applaud your additions to the article on Manitoba Provincial Trunk Highway 23. However, the accepted abbreviated naming convention for Provincial Trunk Highways is PTH and Provincial Roads is PR. I corrected the names in the Major Intersections table. If you have any questions, let me know. Mersperto 15:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I also just noticed though that the template has two 21s in it... Mersperto 15:59, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

User Edit Count Templates
Per this tfd discussion, the user edit count boxes you have on your userpages are being removed and merged into User contrib. I am unable to update yours due to how they're listed. Could you find a way to clean that up in a way that you'd like, yet would remove the transclusions to the templates we're removing? ^ demon [omg plz] 23:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

GAC backlog elimination drive
This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all members, and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :GAReview underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. --Nehrams2020 00:55, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Request for adminship
 JohnnyAlbert10 would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact JohnnyAlbert10 to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Requests for adminship/. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
 * I have closed your RfA early since had no chance to succeed. I suggest you build on the opposers comments and I hope to see you at RfA in a couple months, if that is your goal, to become an administrator. --Evilclown93 12:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Evilclown93 is right, unfortunately: it's a little too soon for an RfA request. But please do not be discouraged, and definitely do not take it personally. You may want to consider submitting yourself to Editor review for feedback on where to get some good experience, and when you're almost ready for RfA again, there's a great Admin coaching program. Best of luck to you. -- Satori Son 13:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

PASH newsletter - Issue 001

 * Want to help on the next newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it transcluded next time? – It's all here.  J A 10 Talk • Contribs 19:34, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:PASH newsletter - Issue 2

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. --  J A 10  Talk • Contribs 02:06, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Meetup/Philadelphia 4
Job-related issues have forced me to change my mind; I won't be going. Sorry. --Core desat 02:45, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

User:Mitchazenia/Hurricane Twelve (1975)
You might want to redirect or delete that, seeing as I created that article. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 02:03, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

July 2007 GAC backlog elimination drive
A new elimination drive of the backlog at Good article candidates  will take place from the month of July through August 12, 2007. There are currently about 130 articles that need to be reviewed right now. If you are interested in helping with the drive, then please visit Good article candidates backlog elimination drive and record the articles that you have reviewed. Awards will be given based on the number of reviews completed. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :GAReview underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the drive's talk page. Please help to eradicate the backlog to cut down on the waiting time for articles to be reviewed.

You have received this message either due to your membership with WikiProject: Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Good article candidates/List of reviewers. --Nehrams2020 03:26, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

US Roads will thank you - and so do I
 master son T - C 02:55, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Few things
Few things:
 * 1) I'd suggest you remove the praise for Rappaport. I know that you hate Proenza but bear in mind WP:NPOV, the sentence above might give people ideas that some of your edits may be biased, even if they aren't.
 * 2) Please, don't write a Cosme article until there's actual impact. At the moment there's none except for some rain and wind.
 * 3) Please adjust your signature to make it obvious who's signing the post (i.e. make sure your name is at least partially in the sig). It makes it easier for others who come across your posts. – Chacor 15:45, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Uhm, from Emilia... "It rained for a 1½ days in Baja California, blowing winds up to 125 miles per hour."
 * Firstly, "a 1½ days"?
 * Secondly, "blowing winds" doesn't make much sense to me.
 * Thirdly, it was a TS that peaked at 65 mph. Gusts would not have exceeded 65 kt (75 mph). Did you mean 125 kilometres per hour? – Chacor 15:55, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, I am not convinced of the need for a "notable Pacific typhoons" article. This basin is rather unlike the Atlantic, most typhoons here easily cause a lot of damage or make unusual landfalls, so I don't think it's worth it. Emilia's sources also need to be spread out, and there's absolutely no need to chunk 10 sources at the end of the storm history. – Chacor 15:58, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I had no idea that was even you on my talk page; please fix your signature so we have some idea. As for a Cosme article, I really hope you would reconsider. If you must do something with the storm, could you just add the (little) impact to the season article? I didn't read what you and Chacor said, but the storm history has been menial, notability largely nonexistant, and impact very minor. If you really want to do a modern article, what about Man-yi? It's just that I doubt there's enough info out there, and (no offense) but I'm not sure you'd be able to write a good enough article with such little material. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Weird, OK. Just curious, what are you planning with the 2006 PHS? (I saw the sandbox) Hurricanehink ( talk ) 01:12, 23 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I was just curious. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 01:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's a good idea. For all intents and purposes the EPac and CPac are essentially pretty much the same basin. No need to split them IMO. – Chacor 02:23, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Re: 1986 PHS
Are you so sure 1986 is a good idea? Why did you pick those four (random) hurricanes to have an article on? With only those, the nomination would automatically fail, per the first FT criterion. Wouldn't it make more sense to try and make the season a GA (or maybe, eventually FA)? Welcome back, though. Hope you had fun on your vacation (where'd you go, BTW). See you around. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 22:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Ah, ok, just checking. (whoops) I guess try the newspaper archive a lot, and if you're up to it maybe some Spanish sources. Hurricanehink ( talk ) 23:02, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

IRC
Perhaps start-up your IRC and join that way?  master son T - C 03:17, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Saskatchewan Highway 8
What are your reasons and arguments for nominating Saskatchewan Highway 8 for deletion? Thank you. Ultraflame 23:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Re newsletter reply from talk page
I cannot find your talk page where I would look for newsletter subscribers, I am baffled today. I will remove it. I have no reason why you received it. Sorry about that. Most curious.SriMesh | talk  00:38, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I see it now...You had shown a sign up member interest in Saskatchewan Roads and Highways Wikiproject WikiProject Canada Roads/Saskatchewan - are you still a participant? And if you are...do you or not want the newsletter.SriMesh |  talk  00:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Rainfall maps for storms
I need a complete dataset from the countries in question to create a map, including latitude/longitude of the sites. One would hope for enough to capture the distribution. I would think a couple dozen evenly dispersed around each country could be enough. Thegreatdr 01:45, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 11

 * Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? – It's all here. —Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 23:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks a lot for reviewing the article- Geology of solar terrestrial planets. I was waiting for this moment for past few weeks. thanks again, Sushant gupta 16:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)