User talk:Morgan Riley/Archive 1

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, Morgan Riley, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Portland Art Museum. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 04:28, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

[bot generated post removed]Morgan Riley (talk) 21:38, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

VMFA
Just want to say that you have really done a very fine job of improving the article in a short time. I know you put in a lot of work and it should prove to be very useful information for many people especially now with the Picasso Exhibit... So I'll say thanks for everyone who reads it and benefits from your time. Agadant (talk) 02:36, 23 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks! It really was a labor of love (and getting tired of trying to individually explain the museum, when folks should be able to just look it up from a third-party-vetted source). Admittedly it's not done (but when is a WP article ever "done"?) -- I've turned my time to articles on other museums, architectural and historic sites in Virginia that are also in desperate need of work -- but I hope to get more citations, summary details for the collections to make it less list-like, spinning off a separate article about the Civil War veteran's home that preceded it (as it has two+ individually NRHP listed sites, and is also contributing), and a good and thorough copy-edit. Any suggestions for improvement would be appreciated. Thank you again for the encouragement-- it's quite a boost to morale. Happy edits! Morgan Riley (talk) 12:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Glad to hear all this and I'm very much impressed after looking at your credentials on your user page. Wikipedia will certainly be enhanced by your contributions. I don't have a lot of free time right now but I'll add information and referencing to help out every chance I get. :) Agadant (talk) 20:44, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Architecture
Hello and welcome to the WikiProject Architecture - here's the bulletin - if you don't like it just delete it from your talk page, otherwise, it automatically updates. Please give me or one of the other project members a shout if you need any help. Kind regards Elekhh (talk) 21:36, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Italianate
I really think that is pushing the boat just a little too far. Does your source state quite how "occasionally" this term is used? Giacomo Returned 23:15, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The source in question is in fact the glossary of said book, not the body text, which is one of the more comprehensive architectural glossaries I have ever seen, by a notable architectural historian, covering many styles never even found in Virginia, despite what the title suggests (e.g. Manueline). I see no harm in keeping it though, as it is an accurate description of one of the sub-styles of Italianate, and is verifiably sourced. As to its occasionality, no, but the author uses it. Morgan Riley (talk) 23:26, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

If you would like, I can source it to the individual author.Morgan Riley (talk) 23:26, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
 * No, no matter, I had just never come across the term before. Perhaps it there ought to ba a page Barryesque architecture. Giacomo Returned 23:50, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Importance
Where are the "project guidelines" you cite for edits like this. It is absurd to have the Pergamon Museum, with actually a very small collection but known for one showstopper, in "Top" & the NG, London, Prado, & Gemaldegalerie in High. Johnbod (talk) 23:39, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Is it here? 12 "top importance" articles is far too few for a project with nearly 8,000 articles. A small group of major museums with supreme international significance should certainly be in there, also more thematic articles. Johnbod (talk) 23:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I was merely going by the article classifications given (as for the Pergamon, given that suggestion, it would be decreased). That said, insofar as most of those are still not G.A. status, the purposes of the list, i.e. have the most critical articles in place. Many of the ones that were listed, while significant, did not appear to meet the criteria given. I suggest that the classification scheme be discussed and further revised to reflect this. Morgan Riley (talk) 00:02, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Well it is indeed extremely vague. A project with 7,800 articles might normally expect 50-100 to be top importance, though many allow theirs to inflate well beyond. I have made some changes, currently giving 23 I think, which is still very low, but to my mind gives some sort of coherent group as to the really top collections. Museum Island, a better article to give the top spot (includes the Pergamon Museum) was not even tagged for the project. Johnbod (talk) 00:18, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed on the Museum Island pick. I also think some sort of decision or criteria may have to be addressed as to what constitutes, as suggested, "supreme international significance", as that could potentially be very subjective, though is likely the right criteria to use. I've begun a new discussion of importance criteria on the talk page here, though some of the thoughts there (i.e. size) you addressed above in the interim. Either way, the current list seems a bit skewed towards museums of European art, so it may warrant expansion to include key works of the other museum genre (e.g. the most noteworthy of science & tech museums, natural history, history), as the project encompasses the entire field of museums and museology. Cheers! Morgan Riley (talk) 00:32, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

a total aside question
but I have been trying to determine who the sculptor was who did the over the entrance (around a clock?) work at the Richmond VA old train station. Any ideas? Leads? Theories? Rumors? Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 20:24, 9 May 2011 (UTC)


 * There are two old Union Stations in Richmond (and a smaller two, but with no sculpture), so I'll try for both. The clock at Main Street Station (Richmond, Virginia) seems to be terra cotta, which is easily manufactured off-site and mass-produced (like ornamental cast-iron) Several of my guidebooks which feature it, and the NatReg Nomination, give no clue there : (. The other is the Broad Street Station (Richmond). While the National Register is silent, "Buildings of Virginia: Tidewater and Piedmont" has the sculptor for the building as one U. Ricci (it notes the figures are Progress and Industry). Given the time period in which the building was done and the scale of the commission, I am taking it to be this guy: Ulysses Ricci, which in a strange (or perhaps not so strange) coincidence, the page history shows that you yourself created! ; ) Hopefully this is of some use? Moreso, do you want a full citation for it? Morgan Riley (talk) 20:50, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Life is good. I did indeed create the Ricci page, but had no idea that he did the station until you, star of the day, informed me. More to the point, i am involved in this project http://www.archsculptbooks.com/home.htm and we had tentitivly attributed the work to Adolph Alexander Weinman. But Ricci works too. In fact, better. Can you send me the page number from the book so that I can update our page on that building. Carptrash (talk) 23:05, 9 May 2011 (UTC)


 * The citation (in informal format) is: "Richard Guy Wilson.Buildings of Virginia: Tidewater and Piedmont. Oxford University Press 2002, ISBN 0-19-515206-9; p. 261). That is an awesome project! In my humble opinion from what I see, your photographs are superb, particularly in capturing shadows in very shallow bas-relief work which, having been trained as an architectural photographer myself, I know how hard that can be to time it just right. I hope it goes well. I've been a casual fan of architectural sculpture, especially allegorical or symbolic depictions, I will definitely have to get me a copy. Let me know if I can try to help with anything else! Morgan Riley (talk) 00:08, 10 May 2011 (UTC)


 * P.S., if you are ever in Richmond and looking for architectural sculpture, while perhaps likely from local sculptors, you might find the following interesting (as illustrated from random web images) the Thomas Jefferson High School, the Belgian Friendship Building a.k.a. Barco-Stevens Hall at Virginia Union University (aka the Belgian Pavilion from the 1939 World's Fair, with its two relief panels)); the West Hospital (the history of medicine on metalwork grills); and a particular Art Deco parking deck on 6th Street decorated with 1920s wheels and eagles clutching radiators as if they were shields. Morgan Riley (talk) 00:26, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Great stuff. I've got some work to do figuring this stuff out. The high school is great. Meanwhile, what do you know about the sculpture on the Jefferson Building (1956)? It's a state office building. By 1956 there was not a lot of arch sculpt being done. I tried contacting some state office about the building to learn an architect or sculptor or both, but to no avail. When I was there 5 years ago there was a lot of construction going on so I could not get very good pictures, but I can send something if that would help. Walt and I have the Belgian building in out guide and there are a lot of different sculptors associated with it. Dinner call. I'm outta here. Carptrash (talk) 01:11, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for the welcome, and the offer of help! I definitely could use some, actually. I'm trying to clean up the page on Hugh Mercer Apothecary and add the same kind of side bar that the other Preservation Virginia sites have, but am not sure how to. Any suggestions?

Thanks! Alexiskferia (talk) 18:36, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Quick question regarding article on vessel Godspeed
Hi there! I noticed that the article on Godspeed of the Jamestown expedition had been edited to reflect that the vessel was rigged as a brigantine. I was wondering where you'd read that? At the time the most recent replica had been launched, no specific plans or drawings for Godspeed had been discovered, which is why the replica was outfitted with the more common carrack-inspired three mast rig (bowspritsail, course and topsails on both the foremast and mainmast, lateen at the mizzen). I hadn't heard that plans had since been discovered, and it would be most exciting if they revealed that she was, in fact, a brigantine. Thanks! E.S. Fleming (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:51, 22 July 2011 (UTC).


 * Greetings! When I constructed the infobox, I simply used what was already in the article, which listed it as a brigantine, without any external research (honestly, when I made it I was paying more attention to the version of the flag, which reflected James I's union of crowns, but I digress). Sadly that means no grand discoveries, at least on my part. Feel free to change it to reflect the level of documentation, and I apologize for any dashed hopes. :P Morgan Riley (talk) 19:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Location of distance Graphic on Richmond, Virginia
Hey Morgan, I see you've done a lot of work on the Richmond Virginia article. I noticed you just moved the infographic I made (File:DistancesToRichmond2.gif) from the very top down into the transportation section at the end. Let me tell you my rationale for putting it nearer to the top and we'll see if you think maybe we can move it from where it is now... The way I see it, someone with no familiarity with Richmond is going to come to wikipedia looking for "big picture" information first... opening paragraph has (and *should* have) basic description of the city, its reasons for notability, and the "big ticket" things you would want to know about the city. One big thing that is missing from that paragraph is *where* Richmond is in comparison to other cities. I understand that the standard city info box template has a tiny map with a red dot of Richmond, but I think there should be, somewhere upfront, a pic like the one I put there. A picture is worth a thousand words, and someone (from Copenhagan, perhaps) who has no idea of what a US State is, might want to know what other population centers are near Richmond. what do you think? MPS (talk) 23:20, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey MPS! As no other articles on cities do it regardless of the size (bigger or smaller), I personally think it would look rather tacky at the top -- and I'm thinking exactly in terms of the spike this page is going to see over the next 24 hours ). These readers will then wonder why is there this image up there, rather than a grand montage of the city like all the others. The top of the article should be devoted to the city as a whole for what it is in itself, rather than defining it in relation to that around it. However, moving it to and replacing the "Richmond-Petersburg" graphic at the top of the Geography section might do it much more justice, very near the top of the article, and would be the space that anyone wondering "where it is" might look. What do you think?
 * Hey Morgan! I just added some words in the intro 'graf talking about approximate distance to DC... feel free to massage those words as necessary... also, I considered what you said and went looking around at some other major cities... Chicago has more than one picture in the infobox... notice the one that looks like this File:US-IL-Chicago.png ... perhaps we could add my pic just above the ugly red-dot-pic of Virginia ... I def agree that we don't want to look tacky... but I also think people should know right away where RVA is in relation to other cities. The Richmond-Petersburg pic is decent (I admit, I was the one who originally made it a long time ago), but if people don't know where Richmond is, they definitely won't know wheere P-burg is... is my thoughts on it. What do you think about trying to add another pic to the info template? Regards, MPS (talk) 23:53, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
 * For all my love of infoboxes, I was unaware of that function! The Chicago one models it well, and when I punched it all into the Richmond page ((citiesmap)->(statemap)->(USmap)), it actually looks pretty good IMHO -- we definitely needed the national level. I've saved a version with the changes, let me know what you think! Also, did you make that graphic? If so, a.) neat, b.) would it be too much to ask/request for a few modifications (such as including metric measurements (km) for the international readers?) and c.) for my own curiosity, what software do you use for it?)
 * yes I made it... with Microsoft PowerPoint... I like the look of the infobox... lemme know if you want any other modifications and I can def make them all at once. Peace, MPS (talk) 21:01, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Richmond NRHP pictures
Morgan - thanks for the message regarding the pictures I posted; didn't mean to scoop anyone! I haven't taken any others so far, so if you have anything else feel free to add it. I'd like to get the list completed, but I agree we should coordinate so we don't overlap. Perhaps this would be a good time for me to get started on Henrico/Chesterfield, as I've been planning to do, at least until I hear from you again. Also, I don't know what the etiquette is on this, but if you worked particularly hard to get a certain shot that turned out well, feel free to replace one of mine - I wouldn't mind. -Russ Crazyale (talk) 04:01, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Good catch
at that funky link of mine to George Washington, that you amended to (Houdon). It was a failure of imagination on my part to not realize that there might be an article on that statue and as I keep learning, imagination plays a huge role on wikipedia. Ot is just usually one or two layers deep, so gets missed by most folks. Keep cool & drink a lot of liquid. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 21:29, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Though until about a few hours ago, the "article" consisted of little more than two sentences and a single url reference (there was more on it on tangential pages!). Given it's place in American art history, I'm surprised to find it didn't exist sooner.Morgan Riley (talk) 21:33, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

We are kicking a**. Carptrash (talk) 18:52, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Doesn't the statement "The statue has been interpreted as invoking the ideal of the Ancient Roman dictator Cincinnatus." It sort of begs the question "Interpreted by whom?" Carptrash (talk) 23:18, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Fixed with citations!Morgan Riley (talk) 23:41, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Silk Road
The maritime stuff was original research, but a maritime section seems to be greatly needed - see the sources I've added to the talk page. Dougweller (talk) 18:13, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Iron and steel
Thank you for producing the box. However I wonder whether "cast iron" is really the result of of refining. "Secondary processes" might be better. I also wonder whether we do not need a third line for further processing, including slitting mill, rolling mill, tinplate, galvanised iron, and a few more. Possibly also a further line for manufacturing processes or finished products, such as nails. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
 * "Secondary" it is! Also, I agree that a third line would be quite proper, if you can help think up a selection of stuff to go there. Morgan Riley (talk) 14:52, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

DYK for George Washington (Houdon)
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Cultural Management (resources-heritage) : Merge Talk redirect
Hi, I see you’ve redirected the merge discussion to a section in the talk page of the article to be merged (Cultural Resources) (and not to the ad hoc section in the other article (Heritage)). I understand your point somehow (sorting things out will warrant merging according to you and well, maybe so) but I think leaving in the tag the link to the actual merge debate is much (much much) clearer. I trust you will understand which is the clearest method and amend links according to it. Best,-- Caleb Crabb 09:49, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 6
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Capitol (Williamsburg, Virginia), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Williamsburg Historic District (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:28, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Richmond NRHP Pictures
Just wanted to say great job with the recent additions. I've been too busy with work to add anything lately, but I'm glad the project is in good hands! Crazyale (talk) 05:38, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 18
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.


 * Governor's Palace (Williamsburg, Virginia) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Williamsburg Historic District


 * Raleigh Tavern (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Williamsburg Historic District

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:51, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year Questia online library account is approved ready
Good news! You are approved for access to 77,000 full-text books and 4 million journal, magazine, newspaper articles, and encyclopedia entries. Check your Wikipedia email! If you need help, please first ask Ocaasi at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com and, second, email QuestiaHelp@cengage.com along with your Offer ID and Promotional Code (subject: Wikipedia). Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi EdwardsBot (talk) 05:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Go to https://www.questia.com/specialoffer
 * 2) Input your unique Offer ID and Promotional code.  Click Continue. (Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive).
 * 3) Create your account by entering the requested information.  (This is private and no one from Wikipedia will see it).
 * 4) You'll then see the welcome page with your Login ID.  (The account is now active for 1 year).
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Questia article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Questia pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Questia/Citations.
 * Questia would love to hear feedback at WP:Questia/Experiences
 * Show off your Questia access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check the applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Your Questia online library codes failed to deliver
We tried to use Wikipedia email to deliver your account access information but you either did not provide an email address in your preferences or had it set up not to receive messages from other editors. You can change both on the first page of Special:Preferences. To fix the situation directly or to let me know you've changed your preferences, just email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers, Ocaasi 05:30, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Great Work

 * Hey Rachel! Welcome to Wikipedia! I wasn't sure whether or not you are following this page, so I've begun a conversation over at yours. Cheers. Morgan Riley (talk) 20:02, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wagon, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Wainwright and Muleskinner (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:17, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Rees's Cyclopaedia
I've just sent you an email in response to the message you left on my talk page. Kind regards. Apwoolrich (talk) 11:27, 8 February 2013 (UTC)