User talk:Orlady/Archive 19

Need your eyes
The next goal, List of Wisconsin Counties to FL...Problem, I need a set of eyes to look at one thing: please. Wisconsin has 5 renamed counties and 1 proposed. This I did not know. In fact, there are undiscovered peoples on this planet, who have a knowledge base about Wisconsin that exceeds mine. Could you, pretty please with sugar on top, look at the able for the renamed and proposed counties and tell me what you think?? I have the refs, which I will add. BUT, you would be able to look and say, hey you didnt etc etc or hey you did etc etc. Also, I need to change the refs to Google books, I own one of them, not all. I am in the process of getting the regular table up to speed as well with the help of some great folksCoal town guy (talk) 15:50, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I was going to suggest Royalbroil and RFD as collaborators with local knowledge -- and extensive knowledge of Wikipedia. However, it looks like both of them are already engaged with efforts to bring the article to FL class.
 * I took a quick look at List of counties in Wisconsin. One thing I noticed was apparent inconsistency in format of the reference citations. I'll look more later. --Orlady (talk) 19:32, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * GROOVY, they do indeed know their stuff. I appreciate your help, I am very pleased with the group effort. I have 4 more states on my radar, I am trying to get a category as good or featured US Counties of course......I really got into learning about Battle Ax County. THAT is a cool name...IMO. Learning as much as I canCoal town guy (talk) 20:02, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Question about Davy Crockett semi-protection
I think maybe I don't under semi-protection status, so maybe you can clarify for me. By the way, thank you so much for semi-protecting Davy Crockett. The article was edited today by User:Kgrad, redlink user. It looks like the edits were good edits. However, as far as I can tell, this user is not autoconfirmed. In fact, that user page was deleted in 2010, and that user has just continued as a redlink editor. I'm not indicating there is anything wrong with this editor. But if this one can edit Davy Crockett, what about vandals? IMO, the absolutely worst and most total junk on that article came from a redlink editor several years ago. And I think the talk page has lately attracted a fringe element looking to vent, but I see that the talk page is not automatically protected along with the article itself. I guess I don't understand the protection level. Can you help me understand it? — Maile (talk) 19:24, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. The semi-protection on that page seems to be working like it's supposed to. Kgrad doesn't have a user page (that's all that the redlink indicates), but the user has been around for several years and is autoconfirmed. See Special:Contributions/Kgrad for the edit history.
 * As for the talk page, it's only in very rare circumstances that an article's talk page gets protected. The idea is that non-autoconfirmed users should be given an opportunity to suggest changes for the article. --Orlady (talk) 20:23, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Sam Boaz
Hi-I started an article about Sam Boaz. He died recently and had served in the Tennessee Legislature and was a judge. You are more knowledgable about Tennessee politics then I would be. Sam Boaz was also an United States diplomat so he was an interesting man. You may want to look at the article. Thanks-RFD (talk) 20:01, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

2
Your and our --Tito Dutta (contact) 15:44, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 18:32, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:22, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Precious again
  support

Thank you stepping in wherever you see that you are needed, and that is a lot: translation, improvement of wording, understanding, and now coming to the rescue of an article a fighter for Human rights left us, - repeating: you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:40, 4 March 2012 (UTC) A year ago, you were the 46th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style. The human rights fighter is back, I miss the photographer, again, and put "Letting go of the past" on top of my talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:29, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Sam and Cat
I see that you having been protecting the page alot lately. Can I suggest that you just protect it untill the fall. I have not put up the refference at this time, but the show will start in the fall. It has been announced it Nick's upfrniot this past week. I hope to but it up soon, when I get the time. WP Editor 2012 (talk) 13:32, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I added the reference to the article. It may help since ips seem to want add the cast and other unsourced info. Also would this link work for Cameron Ocasio http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sCUT3ZfvtY, he did link it from his twitter, but I am unable to view it. https://twitter.com/CameronOcasio/status/302615521428398081WP Editor 2012 (talk) 18:05, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for First Congregational Church, Salt Lake City
— Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:02, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Speaking of the Natchez Trace...
...have you read Lois McMaster Bujold's The Sharing Knife books? They're set in a far-future (?) version of the eastern US, and the rivers and the Natchez Trace play a prominent role in the second two books.-- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:27, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds interesting. Thanks for the recommendation! --Orlady (talk) 19:35, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Spelling: Theatre District, New York
The move discussion was closed without alerting editors at the relevant Wikiprojects to join in. It has long been the consensus at WP:THEATRE and WP:MUSICALS to spell the word "theatre", in part because theatre professionals prefer this spelling throughout the English-speaking world, and because this spelling it is not wrong anywhere, while "theater" is wrong in many places,such as the UK. BTW, I am an American from New York City. Note that nearly all of the Broadway theatres are called "X Theatre". Would you kindly return to the talk page and see if we can get a wider consensus on this issue? Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:46, 5 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Sorry you feel that way. The people who write about theatre on Wikipedia were excluded from the first discussion.  For 6 years, the article had the name Theatre District, New York, and then one editor moved the title and campaigned to make it stick without notifying anyone who actually writes about theatre in New York.  That was not legitimate.  I wish you would weigh in again, as I think it will become clear that the consensus of editors who edit in this field is to use the -re spelling. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:28, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Church of St. Wenceslaus (New Prague, Minnesota)
I did a second (edit conflicted with the first) review of this article and have some reservations: Template:Did you know nominations/Church of St. Wenceslaus (New Prague, Minnesota). Espresso Addict (talk) 21:09, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Arbitration/Requests/Case/Doncram closed
An arbitration case regarding Doncram has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

For the Arbitration Committee, ( X! ·  talk )  · @277  · 05:39, 12 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Discuss this

Article Feedback deployment
Hey Orlady; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:39, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Lenzites warnieri
Orlady, it looks like you did heroic work on this article, but the one objection I had about the text has not been addressed, so I've put a ? icon on the review. Can you please do something about that "gathering" sentence and the "Ferme de Kandouri area" description? I've noted my issues in the review template. Once that's set, I'd expect the new hook to work nicely, and another "re-review" icon can be placed. Many thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Lenzites warnieri
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Shu-Park Chan
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Map controversy
Thank you for trying to explain. I was running round in circles and, as the person who proposed deletion, was probably never going to get far. There is a lot of confusion regarding OR/SYN and the Commons/en-WP relationship, aggravated by the mistaken impression that I am from "rival country India". I'm involved in that many disputes at the moment with relatively new conributors that it is wearing me down. - Sitush (talk) 23:20, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

John Dewey Academy
Hey there, I was wondering how best to paint the entire picture of John Dewey Academy. I think it is important to remain objective and inform the reader of criminal actions which have occurred by faculty to students. Troutbum898 (talk) 05:42, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Let's discuss this at Talk:John Dewey Academy. I have started a discussion there. --Orlady (talk) 15:27, 21 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey Orlady, I was wondering if you still wanted to engage in this conversation? I had several people look at it and they all agreed that it was relevant, unbiased but then after several thumbs up another person I asked for advice deleted it once again.  What advice do you have so we can make sure that the best, un-biased, informative and complete JDA picture is painted?  Seems like a rape/abuse cover up is happening to me and talking to a lawyer he said my posts were 100% O.K. Thanks!  Troutbum898 (talk) 14:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Christian Bible College alumni ‎
Given all your work on unaccredited schools, you might be interested in the debate at Categories for discussion/Log/2013 March 15 SalHamton (talk) 03:35, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you
for your recent input to Mykola Melnyk. Wishes, Ukrained2012 (talk) 03:59, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

P.S. I replied to your remarks at the DYK nomination. Your further help is very welcomed. Ukrained2012 (talk) 04:17, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

We'd like your opinion
A question for people who commented in the RfC at "Probationary Period" and "Not Unless". (Or feel free to reply on my talk page, if you prefer.) - Dank (push to talk) 19:09, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Margaret C. Snyder
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

A DYK Centurion

 * thx 4 the thx Orlady - Do you know that I just saw a "she" in a description of you and realised you were female. Not sure if I get a badge for ignoring your gender or a trout for not spotting "lady" is your user name! Cheers stalwart Victuallers (talk) 00:56, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You didn't commit the error of calling me a "he" in the medal citation, so you're not at fault on that count. :-) And there's some potential for ambiguity in the meaning -- and gender connection -- of my userid. When I first created that moniker back in 1998, I was totally unaware that "Orlady" is some people's surname. --Orlady (talk) 03:06, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area
The Office of Management and Budget issued OMB Bulletin No. 13-01: Revised Delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Micropolitan Statistical Areas, and Combined Statistical Areas, and Guidance on Uses of the Delineations of These Areas on February 28, 2013. The OMB uses the name North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton, FL Metropolitan Statistical Area for the MSA. While you may find the use of the ISO 3166-2:US code FL for Florida offensive, that is how the OMB names all MSAs. Many MSAs extend into several states, e.g., Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV Metropolitan Statistical Area, and my guess is that the OMB uses the ISO 3166 codes to keep these MSA names from becoming (even more) ridiculously long. I don't think we should change official MSA names.

Your thoughts? Yours aye, Buaidh  00:25, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I think the situation is pretty clear-cut. This is an encyclopedia, not an official U.S. federal government statistical report. Wikipedia's standards, including the Wikipedia Manual of Style, apply here and have precedence over U.S. government usage. As discussed at WP:TITLEFORMAT and WP:ACRONYMTITLE, abbreviations are not appropriate in article titles unless the subject is known primarily by its abbreviation and that abbreviation is primarily associated with the subject. The state of Florida is known primarily as "Florida", not as "FL", so the abbreviation is not appropriate.


 * An additional important consideration is that the U.S. postal abbreviations can be ambiguous and confusing, particular to people outside the United States, but also to some Americans. For example, "CA" may mean "California" to the U.S. Postal Service, but in some other contexts it means "Canada". And you probably know that "CO" is a standard abbreviation for things other than "Colorado". Many Americans get confused about abbreviations like "AR" (Arkansas, not Arizona) and "AK" (Alaska, not Arkansas); "MO" (Missouri, not Montana) and "MS" (Mississippi, not Massachusetts or Missouri) and "MA" (Massachusetts, not Maryland). --Orlady (talk) 00:43, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The Office of Management and Budget defines statistical areas for the use of federal, state, and local government. A metropolitan area can have many definitions.  A Metropolitan Statistical Area has no meaning other than that defined by the OMB.  If you wish to give your own spin to a metropolitan area, then you should use a generic name such as the North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton metropolitan area.  Creating an official/generic mashup is far more confusing than using ISO 3166 codes.  We can have articles about generic metropolitan areas, and we can have articles about officially defined statistical areas, but I think we do a disservice by creating hybrids.


 * My only real point is that we should only use the capitalized Metropolitan Statistical Area, Micropolitan Statistical Area, and Combined Statistical Area for OMB defined statistical areas, and we should use the lower case metropolitan area for other areas of the U.S. that do not strictly follow the OMB definitions.  Buaidh  01:17, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Your last paragraph confuses me. You objected to my changing "FL" to "Florida". I didn't change the "Metropolitan Statistical Area" part of the title. I do not object to that part of the title, so there's no benefit in starting a discussion on it. However, I continue to contend that for an article about an OMB-defined area, if the Wikipedia article title is going to include the state identifier, then it needs to be the actual state name per WP:MOS. Do you see a need to take that question to Wikipedia talk:Article titles (or possibly to an RFC at Talk:North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton, Florida Metropolitan Statistical Area)? --Orlady (talk) 02:48, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I object to using the term "Metropolitan Statistical Area" with a name that is not the OMB designated MSA name. If you want to rename the article to something other than the OMB MSA name, then please choose something that does not resemble the OMB MSA name.  Almost correct names merely create confusion over the proper name.  If you cannot live with "FL", why not just create a REDIRECT for your own use?   Buaidh  04:20, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


 * It looks like it's time for a broader discussion on a general noticeboard. I'll open a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Article titles. --Orlady (talk) 04:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * See [[Wikipedia talk:Article titles. I hope I didn't misrepresent your perspective. If I messed up, I hope you will feel free to correct my statements. --Orlady (talk) 05:35, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Church of St. Wenceslaus (New Prague, Minnesota)
Hello! Your submission of Church of St. Wenceslaus (New Prague, Minnesota) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:22, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Orlady, I just added a citation for the one paragraph that was missing one (the NRHP single-sentence one). I think this needs a response from you on whether this is set (if Espresso Addict's issues have been addressed), at which point I imagine it'll be ready for approval. Please stop by when you can. Thanks! BlueMoonset (talk) 02:22, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I had overlooked Espresso Addict's concern about the lack of an in-text citation for the National Register listing date, which was sourced in the infobox. Thanks for copying the citation to the text. --Orlady (talk) 02:52, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Glad to see the review moving again. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:15, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the note at my talk page re. the PD status of NRIS. I appreciate your taking the time to leave it, the more so since I've had some back-of-the-mind worries about whether Doncram's and my exchange over the matter could be regarded as an edit war. I think both of us have behaved ourselves fairly well to date; but I suspect that most people who get into edit wars think that of themselves. Your note gives me some assurance that I'm not just chasing a personal obsession here. Thanks &mdash; Ammodramus (talk) 16:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for letting me know about the DKY acceptance of Josiah Gregg and also thank you to you(?) or to whomever made the great change to use the photo of the plant instead of the picture of Dr. Gregg. That is a really nice change. I have been under the weather with the flu the past few days and didn't pay attention to the nomination perhaps as I should have. I am very happy that someone has shepherded it through the last steps to finished. Again, thank you! Ellin Beltz (talk) 03:04, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Glad to hear that you approve of the way that DYK ended up, since there were some last-minute decisions on it, as I described at Wikipedia talk:DYK. Thanks for your work on the article! --Orlady (talk) 16:49, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The DKY was perfect when it was done! It was a lot of confusion in the early days, I am sorry if I created any confusion in the process.  I will be extremely careful to nominate any article with work from other editors on it in the future, the little articles I wrote for DYK before were started by me and a lot less troublesome than poor Dr. Gregg!  The photo of Dr. Gregg first appeared in a reprint of his "Commerce of the Prairies." It was in the family collection until its first publication in one of the reprints of his book.  I have no idea if it's provably in the public way, but it had to have been taken before 1849 when Dr. Gregg died. It may be a professional image from when he was in New York for his book, or it may be from when he was learning to make daguerrotypes himself.  Perhaps the story of his photo may be in his published letters.  In any case, the family had the image so it was either in their hands before he left for California, or was one of the things that his former partner returned to the family after Dr. Gregg's death (from the papers which were left with him before the final trip). No matter, I like the plant photo better!  Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:06, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Church of St. Wenceslaus (New Prague, Minnesota)
Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Washington Bogart Cooper
PanydThe muffin is not subtle 00:03, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

RE. April 2013
I'm not really sure how the source I added on Sam & Cat wasn't reliable since it was coming directly from the person saying that they got a role on the show. Jjj1238 (talk) 22:10, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Jjj1238 that was for a guest spot. Not a regular member.WP Editor 2012 (talk) 15:35, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. I couldn't tell from the video what kind of role she had. --Orlady (talk) 15:38, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Bircham International University
Dear Orlady, I write to you as one of the senior editors of the article about Bircham International University. I have seen at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unaccredited_institutions_of_higher_learning that this place is listed linked to Oxford International University and sourced on the Oregon DOE list. If you check the Oregon list you will find out that this connection was removed quite some time ago. Please update the mentioned entry of BIU without the reference to Oxford according to what is actually referred by the Oregon DOE list. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.152.210.154 (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I've added an additional citation to the list to clarify that the information is from a different source ( pages 192–193). --Orlady (talk) 16:41, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Mackerel
I enjoyed that DYK piece! Can you tell me how the DYK process works? Appreciated, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 17:09, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Happy to do so! DYK highlights newly created (or recently significantly expanded) articles that meet certain minimum criteria for content (mostly related to length, sourcing, and absence of copyvio or plagiarism), and it does so with teasers based on interesting facts found in those articles. As a reviewer at WP:AFC, you are likely to see articles that are candidates for nomination for DYK. Also, you may find (as I have) that DYK motivates you to develop some of your stub creations into articles that qualify for DYK. There's a lot of documentation at Did you know, Did you know/Supplementary guidelines, and Did you know/Reviewing guide. The review process is always on display at Template talk:Did you know and the development of the main-page DYK section is visible at Template:Did you know/Queue. Reviewers are always needed, if you want to try your hand there. --Orlady (talk) 18:57, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that! Is is relatively painless to propose an article? There are a few I have in mind. I'll have a look. Thanks again! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 19:13, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The nomination process isn't hard. There's a template at T:TDYK that walks you through it. Before you nominate, though, it's a good idea to satisfy yourself that the article qualifies for newness (created or moved to main space within the last 5 days, or a 5x expansion began within that period), length (at least 1500 characters of prose, not including blockquotes, bulleted lists, etc.), citations (throughout the article -- I find that many new articles have unsourced paragraphs or sections, and thus don't qualify), and lack of plagiarism/copyvio, and also that the fact(s) in your proposed hook is/are supported by a cited reliable source (or sources). --Orlady (talk) 19:25, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Close SPI
Thanks for the clarification and userpage fix. – S. Rich (talk) 22:31, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I see you removed the newsletter. Although you did not specifically sign up for it, I included you in the distribution this month because you were credited for relevant article improvements in it. Would you like to continue receiving it in these circumstances or would you like to opt out of it next month?-- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 18:42, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

I can do that I'm going to add the people mentioned manually next month anyway so ok.-- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 19:46, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Claire Nader Page
Hi Orlady, Thank you for taking the time to review Claire Nader's page. I am editing this page for her sister and all the information I am adding is accurate. Everything that is able to be recovered online regarding Claire Nader's work has been added to the page, although the bibliographical information that I added needs to stay the way I edited it since it was changed to accommodate the way Claire Nader would like it. I understand that the information does not have all the citations yet, but many of citations on the page originally were incorrect or irrelevant, which is why I removed them. Please let me know why you changed it the citations back to how they originally were. I would like to make sure the correct information gets back on the page asap. This is per request of Claire Nader's sister, Dr. Laura Nader.

Thank you, Cameron — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.248.194.46 (talk) 16:01, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The deal is that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a venue for posting autobiographies or CVs. Importantly, content must be verifiable, which means that it must be supported by reference citations to reliable sources. This edit to Claire Nader, which I largely reverted, deleted several reference citations and removed most of the Wikipedia-standard formatting in the article. The content you added appeared valid, but it was not supported to reference citations, so I tagged it as needing sources.
 * From your subsequent edits, I infer that she doesn't want her birth date published. That's understandable (and at this point I can't say where I got the birth year when I created the article back in 2009). Some of your other additions are of unsourced details of a type that would not normally appear in an encyclopedia biography; I am referring here to unpublished writings, grants received as a graduate student, and very short publications. It's best to provide a selected publications list that includes her most significant work. --Orlady (talk) 16:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Please opine
Care to weigh-in on Talk:Higher education accreditation in the United States? – S. Rich (talk) 16:41, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I've definitely thought about it! I guess I need to... --Orlady (talk) 18:28, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

United Bates of America
Anyone can read and see that there aren't any multiples for the Bates. I am going by the "Children" section for the Duggars, where the kids are just listed.

Besides, look at the birthdates and you'll will see none are merged, unlike with the Duggars.

Why do you feel the need to mention they're all "singletons", when it's obvious for anyone reading/looking and not needed? BBB76 (talk) 23:35, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I could ask you (1) why you persist in deleting a valid citation to a valid reference and (2) what you have against prose. Deletion of sources contravenes Wikipedia's core policy on verifiability of content. As for the prose that you don't like, please note that this is an encyclopedia. Encyclopedic content normally is primarily prose, meaning sentences with nouns, verbs, and punctuation. Encyclopedia articles don't normally consist solely of section headings followed by long data tables, and readers shouldn't have to study data tables and draw their own conclusions. The "Children" section of United Bates of America really ought to have some summary text about the children. That one sentence that you have repeatedly deleted is admittedly not much of a summary, but it was a start that could be expanded upon. Not all readers are as fascinated by lists of birthdates as you might be; readers might appreciate a summary of the salient information about the children, rather than having to extract it all from the table. That fact about the children being singletons that you keep deleting is one that has been stated by multiple published sources, presumably because large families often include multiples -- as does the Duggar family. --Orlady (talk) 04:49, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Drop the prose, prose, prose, prose. I have no idea what that means, since I don't use it normal everyday conversation.

You want to keep the reference? Fine, but we don't need to point out the Bates are "singletons". Who says that? As I've said, anyone can read that the Bates' births are not multiples, like the Duggars are. BBB76 (talk) 05:10, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * If you want to contribute productively to the English Wikipedia, you may need to work on your vocabulary. (This isn't Simple English Wikipedia.) The word "prose" is used in Wikipedia guidelines; see WP:PROSE, which presents one of the points I've tried to make repeatedly. As for "singletons", this is a standard term for children whose births occur one at a time. That particular word may not have been used in the cited source, but Wikipedia avoids parroting the words and phrasing of its sources.
 * Note: Your hostility to the content created by other users is not an attractive trait. --Orlady (talk) 13:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Do you have a job that requires you to use big/fancy words? You certainly don't talk like the average person, that's for sure. As for being hostile, I really doubt it, you're reading between the lines, for some reason. BBB76 (talk) 17:48, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * This is an encyclopedia, a reference work, and is not supposed to be written at the third-grade level as you seem to want. As Orlady points out, there is a separate Simple English Wikipedia for people who don't understand "big/fancy words". -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  00:53, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Again, you're wrong. Apparently you cannot read what I write, or you read between the lines. I said talk "normal" and besides, "prose" doesn't have more then one syllable. I haven't been on the last few days, so if anything's missing, it wasn't me. BBB76 (talk) 01:40, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for LEO Zoological Conservation Center
PanydThe muffin is not subtle 00:02, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Unblock of Kevin McE
I was not that thrilled to see your unblock of this user, as I am not sure he has adequately understood what he did wrong. Regarding your statement here, as opposed to your statement "The Daily Mail is not the kind of unreliable "tabloid" that the policy warns against": multiple discussions at WP:BLPN and WP:RSN are clear that the Daily Mail very much is a tabloid (a glance at our article on it would also have told you that) and should never be used to verify BLP material. The danger is that as a result of your statement, Kevin could go off and do the same thing again, and get blocked again, which would be a shame. If you would consider modifying your statement, I'd be grateful. --John (talk) 17:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Jean Bureau
PanydThe muffin is not subtle 08:03, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Merger/move proposal
I have proposed a "merger/move request" between List of U.S. state partition proposals and List of proposed states of the United States, because I feel there is considerable overlap. If you are interested participating in the discussion, please feel free to do so here. Thank you. Green Giant (talk) 22:20, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

County government
I have begun to wade into the county government situation, and it is not a simple matter. Up until this point it had been neglected. It's just local enough to be under the radar for people wanting to contribute content, and just regional enough to warrant notability. Most people don't really care or pay attention to their county government. They know who the mayor is, but couldn't name a single county commissioner that ever served from their area.

There is a bit of variability in the 50 states (parrishes, boroughs, and then there's Connecticut and Rhode Island with no county government at all, etcetera.) However, by and large, county government is an arm of the state government. The officials are locally elected (i.e. not statewide), but the actual government itself is a state agency. The politicians are local politicians and elections are local, but the government itself is state government. So, like I said, it is not a simple matter. Greg Bard (talk) 21:07, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I believe you are seriously misinterpreting the facts. Counties in the United States are a form of local government. It is true that county government exists under the authority of the state, but the very same thing is true of city and town governments -- they exist under the authority of state law, as subdivisions of the state. Counties are local governmental entities, they are not branches of the state government. --Orlady (talk) 21:33, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * No, I am afraid you are completely mistaken. Cities are not forms of state government, but counties are. It isn't merely a matter of "existing under the authority" of the state. A city isn't a "subdivision" of the state, but a county is. I am very well educated and experienced in county and local government in different areas of the country and in different forms (i.e. California, Connecticut, and Florida, specifically) . I took graduate level classes in state government, and in local government. I was very involved in politics at the local and county level, including as a campaign advisor for a county commissioner candidate. While the articles about county commissioners belong in the "local politicians" category, the actual county government belongs under state government. Greg Bard (talk) 21:43, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, I also happen to believe that I have been thoroughly educated on the U.S. political system. Additionally, I have worked in several different professional capacities in and around various levels of government -- in several different states with very different governmental structures -- for more decades than I care to count, and I've received in-service training on topics like governmental structures, intergovernmental relations, and related laws.
 * Here at Wikipedia, though, we don't demonstrate the accuracy of our information by showing off our credentials; instead we need to rely on reliable sources to convince one another of the validity of our arguments. I think the National Association of Counties is a good source. NACO's overview of counties uses the term "local government" in a context that strongly suggests that they consider counties to be a form of local government (indeed, in many states, the county is the only local government that many residents interact with). Consistent with your viewpoint, that page does note (and this one explains in more detail) that the shires of Old England from which the American county descended were simultaneously both local governments and extensions of royal (centralized) authority, and it states that "early state constitutions generally conceptualized county government as an arm of the state". Further, that second page I cited does state that the "essential dichotomy" of "an agency of central authority acting in practice as a unit of local government created a tension that persists into the 21st century". However, that second page also continues on to describe the structure and function of counties in the United States, with an emphasis on Dillon's rule, which held that local governments do not possess inherent powers, but have only those authorities granted by the state or that are necessary extensions of that state-granted power. Since NACO is interested primarily in counties, the NACO page discusses Dillon's rule in the context of counties, but the very same legal rule applies to cities the same way it applies to counties (see the discussion of Dillon's rule, home rule, and related topics on this National League of Cities webpage). Bottom line: In the United States, all local government (whether city, county, borough, village, hamlet, or parish) has the authorities and responsibilities assigned to it by the state, and the nature and scope of those authorities and responsibilities varies greatly from state to state. This does not, however, indicate that a county or city government is really a form of state government -- both counties and cities are truly "local governments". --Orlady (talk) 23:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Further to the above, check out Britannica Online. At this page, it states: "There are some 85,000 local government units in the United States. The largest local government unit is the county (called a parish in Louisiana or a borough in Alaska)..." --Orlady (talk) 00:03, 18 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Your points are well articulated, and you have certainly made a supported argument for your perspective. However, that does not change the fact that a county is an arm of a state government, not some outgrowth of local government. A county is not some federation of cities, nor is it using powers originally conferred to it by the consent of the people locally. The powers of county governments are derived from the fact that states have the ability to delegate them. Although counties and cities both may be chartered by a state, the charter of a city is different than the charter of a county.
 * Our situation here is another unfortunate one that occurs on occasion in wikipedia. I am sure that you feel quite confident in your view owing to your education and experience. However, I actually studied this issue formally. In Wikipedia, everyone thinks they are an expert, even with very little education or experience. Non-careful use of terms by reliable sources lead to a situation where a person with little bit of knowledge is dangerous. County government is not elected statewide, and it is in that sense that it is "local government." However the powers they exercise is the power of the state government. Unfortunately, the Wikipedia on Local government reflects the imprecise view and should be corrected. I think the compromise that makes sense is to put articles about persons (officers) under "local politicians" and put articles about the commissions, and boards (i.e. offices) under state government. That is what most accurately reflects reality. At some point, if necessary, I may find all the sources I need to support my view if necessary, if it comes to that. However, I hope you consider the idea that you have just learned something new about county government from someone who knows. I'm not really able to reconsider my view because I was taught formally in no uncertain terms that a county is an agency of the state government.Greg Bard (talk) 00:38, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Say listen, do you think we could take this discussion to the United States WikiProject and the Politics Wikiproject, and not have 50 discussions please?!Greg Bard (talk) 00:38, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Folks, the main legal divination is YES or NO, does a local county government have home rule? In the instance a county has home rule, YES, they can indeed have their own governmental functions. Name town, make taxes etc etc. If the answer is NO, they have no Home Rule, then NO they are a total sub part of the state government. Its a fact all you need to do is consult the local state constitution of ANY of the 50 for the US...Does this help??Coal town guy (talk) 00:41, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * When you put it that way, NO they don't have home rule. The whole "home rule" movement is a joke, and if it ever came to a head, they would see very clearly that the county is a state agency. When county government was abolished in Connecticut, they did it at the state legislature, not at the local level. So that pretty much puts the fork in it.Greg Bard (talk) 00:52, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Sadly, NO. You may recall Alaska and Hawaii? I would STRONGLY suggest a reading of their said state contitutions, they do indeed permit home rule and government functions. Sorry, It is in no way done.Coal town guy (talk) 00:55, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Your view is a rather political POV. ESPECIALLY Connecticut. Tsk tsk. No neutrality, NO article.Coal town guy (talk) 00:58, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * MY view is POV, and you are hanging your hat on home rule. Are you serious!? My view is based on the facts, and I defer to academic sources. I should read Alaska and Hawaii's what constitutions? Oh state constitutions. If you were correct what would reading them tell me, other than that I should be paying attention to what the state government has to say about it. Greg Bard (talk) 01:17, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It is beyond the pale as you are certainly aware that I was stating STATE constitutions. AND YES, yu have a POV JUST LIKE everyone else. ALASKA, decided from the late 60's and part of the 70's to have several forms of government within its state. Unorganized Borroughs, Census, independant places. Mainly Money, distance, native poeples, etc etc. Much like, Virginia and its pile of independent cities etc etc I am not here to spoon feed you. You canvassed and now you are being uncivil, "IF I am correct why read" well why not guess? Hey make it up and claim you are right and they are wrong!. No, sorry. I can and will honestly assist. BUT. YOU have the onus if YOU want to prove the point. As my prof would say as you have claimed to be educated to know the diff, DO THE READING....Coal town guy (talk) 01:37, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you are in violation of the canvassing policy at this point. I am more than willing to enter into a wonderful, civil, informative discussion, BUT NOT 50.Greg Bard (talk) 00:49, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Gregbard, when I started posting at other talk pages, you and I were both at 2RR at Category:County government in the United States. That was the beginning of an edit war -- and it all occurred in about 4 hours, which does not bode well... The page in question is a brand-new category that you created today -- and that presumably had not yet been noticed by almost everybody else at Wikipedia. The only discussion was occurring here on my user talk page; although this page is watchlisted by an astonishing 180 users, user talk pages are not good venues for content discussions. I did not start discussions at other pages; rather, I posted notifications of this discussion at a bunch of pages about sub-state units of government, as well as user talk pages of a couple of users whom I know to be interested in and/or knowledgable about this kind of topic. I did not WP:CANVASS; I didn't choose people based on their opinions (I don't know what they would have to say) and I didn't tell people what to think; I merely told them about the discussion. IMO, notifying people of this discussion was far more responsible than continuing to revert. --Orlady (talk) 01:49, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I have posted this issue to WikiProject United States, and WikiProject Politics. So please stop spamming the issue everywhere.Greg Bard (talk) 01:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't post to WikiProject United States because I've not found that talk page to be effective for attracting meaningful input, but maybe we'll get lucky this time. --Orlady (talk) 01:49, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, Gregbard managed to get a brand-new discussion going at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_United_States, so I've copied the above discussion to that page, and I guess we need to continue there. --Orlady (talk) 04:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

I have replied there. No, the home rule movement is not "a joke". Some states kept the county as a state entity but allowed cities to overrule them etc., some made it local, some kept is as a state entity but in reality made it local. California kept the county as a state entity, but made them locally chartered (like "local" cities) that can be overruled by cities in certain circumstances, but not in others. So is a chartered, locally elected California county "local"? Not according to California case law as I understand it, but in reality (and in academic literature) they are. So... Int21h (talk) 10:21, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!
Mmm, thanks! Now that it's suddenly become summer (after a prolonged winter), that beer looks really, really good -- but I find that drinking beer doesn't always help me remain patient! --Orlady (talk) 02:39, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree, but when you have enough of them, you ENJOY being impatientCoal town guy (talk) 02:42, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
 * LOL. --Orlady (talk) 03:04, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Recent Post
Orlady you have recently revised my corrections on the page of Appalachian Bible College. You claimed these changes were a violation of copyright laws and policies. I serve with ABC and have the authority to use the content directly from our site. In addition, I sited each with an appropriate link. I do appreciate your instruction on the quotes being included to indicate direct quotes. Based on your encouragement I have moved through and reworded but still maintained appropriate citation, I believe. I am working diligently to provide correct information through sites like Wikipedia and welcome your assistance. My desire is to present the school accurately in the same way multiple colleges and universities updated their Wiki page. Again, thank you for your help in making our page better and providing a measure of instruction to the new guy. I'd prefer if you could reach out on my talk page if further corrections need to be made rather than just deleting what has gone into the page. Thanks.LifeisforService (talk) 18:10, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I have previously posted on your talk page to inform you about Wikipedia policy with respect to both promotional content and copyright violations. Also, you should be aware that Wikipedia is a encyclopedia, not a free public bulletin board. No one, and particularly not the subjects of articles, owns and controls article content. Furthermore, verifiability of our content depends primarily on citations to published sources independent of the article subject.
 * It should be possible to write about the college without copying content from the college website (I appreciate your efforts to reword the content in your most recent edit), but if the college wishes to permit use of its copyright materials, Requesting copyright permission outlines the procedure to authorize such use.
 * While you consider the content you have added to be correct and accurate, much of it comes across as promotional, or at least nonencyclopedic in tone. The college may make statements like "They focus on developing students to Think with a biblical worldview, Live with the Word of God as their authority, and Serve the way Christ did in Philippians 2" and "the college continues to press forward in training young people for ministry" in its own literature, but they are inappropriate in an encyclopedia. Statements like "one of the most affordable accredited Bible Colleges in the US" must not be made in Wikipedia unless they are attributed to an reliable source that is independent of the college and has some sort of authoritative basis to make that judgement.
 * You may be relieved to discover that content removed from the article still remains in the article history (see this link).
 * As for continued discussion of the article content, the appropriate place for that is Talk:Appalachian Bible College, not a user page where other interested contributors are unlikely to find the discussion. --Orlady (talk) 18:36, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Do not contact me further
I have been patient and civil with you up until this point. I am sure that you are aware that I have been doing a lot of tedious work, and you have been creating more work for me. You have behaved immaturely making untrue, disingenuous and disparaging remarks, you have an entitled attitude, and you have no respect for the education and experience of others. I recently looked back into some other discussions, and realize that it was you that was creating problems in the state government categories too. It is very clear that you have supreme confidence in your own beliefs, even in areas in which you have no special education or experience. I have stated to you that I do have education and experience in these areas, but you took that as you cue to disparage that fact that I mentioned it. For myself, I value and defer to others who contribute in areas of their own expertise, and do not bother them. So I am contacting you now to inform you that I have lost respect for you, and perhaps we should just go straight to ANI with it right now. I will explain to them that you spammed a dozen talk pages and then tried to portray me as the one starting new discussions. That's being disingenuous. I am the mature adult here, and you can either join me in the role of the mature adult, or continue to behave like it is a competition. You need to drop the attitude. My preference would be for you to stop editing in areas where I am working for at least a week, and let me get some work done. If later, you still feel that there are issues, we can address them at that time. Greg Bard (talk) 19:40, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * As I promised on your talk page, I will be taking the matter to WP:ANI if I see you moving any more long-existing categories outside of the WP:CFD process. The Internet doesn't know if either of us is a dog or a god, so Wikipedia necessarily depends on reliable sources to assure the quality of its content, not contributors' assertions of superior knowledge and academic qualifications. Furthermore, the community requires all of us to collaborate and seek consensus, rather than barging around and imposing our will on the encyclopedia. Like you, I am often annoyed by having to engage in consensus-building discussions, but that is the way Wikipedia is. If you can't live with that, then Wikipedia will have to survive without you. (I hope that's not going to be the case. That is, I hope you will see clear to working within the system.) --Orlady (talk) 19:50, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It's fascinating to see people who describe themselves as "cab driver and pontiff" on social media websites (and formerly signed here as "Pontiff") -- and who apparently consider that declaring other people's comments to be "not helpful" is being "patient and civil" -- assert that they possess superior personal maturity. --Orlady (talk) 03:32, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

I've finally gone to the trouble of looking up the history to remember just what it was that Gregbard was referring to above when he said "it was you that was creating problems in the state government categories too." Here's the discussion: Categories for discussion/Log/2013 March 15. That discussion was pretty benign. It would appear that "creating problems" is defined as having the chutzpah to (1) disagree with Gregbard and (2) refuse to quietly acquiesce to his claims of superior knowledge and intellect, as indicated by statements like "Folks, I don't know how much experience and education people have in state and local political science here, but those in the know use the way I propose to organize these things." --Orlady (talk) 18:44, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

American Conservatory of Music
Given the absence of recent discussion on the site, do you think it would be okay to remove the two tags at the top? One might even make the case that the tags, when they were first placed, lacked merit based on the accompanying citations. Eurodog (talk) 14:41, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree. I removed them. --Orlady (talk) 14:43, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

question
I would like to put the sam and Cat wikia in the external link section for the page. Can I just add it or do I have to go somewhere to get it added. The wiki is controlled by many of the users of the iCarly and Victorious wiki.Also I thought ou didn't want to use cameron twitter for a refference. . That has been on the page since he created that. WP Editor 2012 (talk) 14:48, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I corrected my mistake in the article. I had managed to forget that Ocasio is not a known celebrity. As for the wikia, you need to consult WP:External links. --Orlady (talk) 15:33, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I just wait untill it becomes more active.WP Editor 2012 (talk) 17:40, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Comment
I am getting unhappy and irritated at Gregbard's attitude especially towards yourself. Please let me know if I can do anything to help. ThanksRFD (talk) 15:54, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

This FL list candidate, promising
Hey there, could you take a look at this Fl candidate? I am not very familiar with the area, beenm there a few times, had a roommate who made my German passable from there, BUT, the list as it exists has some promise. There are however historical challenges in it (founding dates ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE) AND he needs to get some more refs for the intro. I have offered to look over a German copy of a Netherlands Constitution, they do exist, although, a French or Dutch one would probably be more "exact". ANY help, your eyes could lend would be appreciated.My French, is basic, and my Dutch, not so much, its all spoken.Coal town guy (talk) 12:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

AFT5 re-enabled
Hey Orlady :). Just a note that the Article Feedback Tool, Version 5 has now been re-enabled. Let us know on the talkpage if you spot any bugs. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 00:57, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

WOW, your input would be VERY appreciated
My trick knee and constant migraines tell me you SHOULD REALLY THINK ABOUT contributing, maybe, of courseCoal town guy (talk) 00:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

William Thwaites DYK nomination response
Thankyou for your edits and suggestions for the William Thwaites Article. I have added the the point about "embarasing blockages" from ALT 5, had another look at the referencing, and added some additional citations.Garyvines (talk) 01:41, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

County (United States)
I've replaced your reference to obsolete Census Bureau document Local Governments and Public School Systems by Type and State: 2007 which counted 3,033 county and 107 county-equivalent governments and replaced it with a reference to County Totals Datasets: Population, Population Change and Estimated Components of Population Change: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2012 issued by the Census Bureau on March 15, 2013. The new document correctly counts 3,007 counties, 64 parishes, 18 organized boroughs, 11 census areas, 42 independent cities, and the District of Columbia for a total of 3,143 counties and county-equivalents. Please let me know if you have any questions. Yours aye, Buaidh  18:47, 27 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for correcting my error. I tried to copy the most recent references into the sections I was editing, but apparently I messed up. Thanks! --Orlady (talk) 19:36, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Christianity Newsletter (May 2013)
Hi, I thought I would drop you a note to say that I mentioned in this month's issue of Ichthus. If you wish to receive the full content in future, please drop me a note on my talk page.-- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 18:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notification -- and the link, which worked fine for my purposes. --Orlady (talk) 18:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Christian Science
One editor seems to be a "consensus of one" in the past  and fails to understand statistics v. surmise. I would have thuunk including bothe the USCB pulication and the unnamed scholars cited by the NYT was sufficient, but it appears not. Cheers. Collect (talk) 23:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

ANI notice
Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:47, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Howdy - here's my admin response to the above. As stated - you are duly administered with a stern wrist-slap for this comment. It wasn't a privacy violation, but it was (arguably) within shouting distance, and you probably already know it wasn't helpful. So smack, smack, naughty, naughty.


 * Apart from that, there's nothing else relevant to you personally in this AN/I complaint to respond to. Manning (talk) 01:22, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

What personally offensive comments have I made
What comments have I made that were personally offensive? I have tried to avoid attacking anyone or directly insulting anyone. I have tried to calmly respond to attempts to malign me on various grounds. I am unaware of any comment I have made that is personally offensive, but will gladly remove any that can be found.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:18, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Actually, it seems like any calm attempts at anything get me attacked. For example there is the discussion at Talk:Rochelle Alers. There I only ever argued that Alers should not be in Category:American novelists when she is in Category:American romatic fiction writers a sub-cat of Category:American novelists, and for holding that postion I have been accused of being racist and sexist, and told that my postion of dispersing the category into its by genre sub-cats has been widely derived. It has not even been dealt with at all in a constructive manner, other than to personally insult me and accuse me of doing things I am not doing.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:40, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * [EC] What I perceive at Categories for discussion/Log/2013 April 24 is that the sheer volume of your comments (66 edits to the page, mostly in that one discussion), the high level of irritation that you often express, and your allegations about the ignorance of other discussion participants have made you a target for attack. Here are a few diffs that gave me the impression you were beginning to lose self-control:  - Getting testy;  - Going off-topic;  - exasperatedly defensive. Then this more recent diff starts to get more personal (admittedly, in response to personal allegations against you). That was followed by this off-topic digression -- I don't think it helps matters to bring so much LDS history into the discussion.  Then there are these edits that kind of attack the critics of the category.


 * I suggest backing off for a while, if for no other reason than to preserve your own mental health. You've made your case effectively, IMO. --Orlady (talk) 19:51, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * You might be right. However I think you underestimate the sheer offensiveness of the attack suggesting that because I am a Latter-day Saint I am biased.  The constant attempt to imply I have some sinister, alterior motive here is quite disturbing.  I am not going to promise to not make any edits to the discussion for a given amount of time, but I will try to not participate more than neccessary.  I would note that I was disparaged in the CfD discussion on Category:American women novelists before I even made one comment to it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:03, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * People do know how to get under your skin, don't they? I've been disturbed to see how some long-dormant user accounts suddenly have become active in that discussion; I don't know if they showed up to attack you personally, or to attack Wikipedia in general. I suspect the latter, actually, but you've gotten caught in the crossfire. --Orlady (talk) 20:21, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * This remains the most offensive comment to date "Comment Are John Pack Lambert's personal Mormon beliefs getting in the way of his gender neutrality? Looking at his edits, he seems to be a repeat offender when it comes to ghettoizing women into secondary, separate, and implied-to-be-lesser categories. Editors must be impartial and this is disturbing.Claudelemonde (talk) 23:07, 25 April 2013 (UTC)". I am of half a mind to post a response directly on that talk page, but I am afraid I will not really be able to word it calmly enough.  Half of me things maybe I should just ignore it.  I am really not sure what the best response is.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:41, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I have decided to try making a request that such personal attacks cease.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:42, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, the user has no edits since your request. But since this was a user with few recent edits, they may not show up again for a long, long time. --Orlady (talk) 02:09, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Quiz results
Sorry to say, but you flunked the quiz :(. I'll ping you here when I close it out and reveal the answer key - but suffice to say, your categorization changes (or omissions rather) would have left you exposed to charges of both 'sexism' and 'racism'. Sorry! :) --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 01:39, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

The Atlantic
LOL, it seems Amanda Filipacchi thinks you're a sexist because you switched one category with another.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk. cntrb. 23:05, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up. --Orlady (talk) 03:21, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

SP?
Does Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Henry Siebrecht look like User:Jvolkblum? I have done no SP-related work, and I noticed the previous attempt at this biography was marked as being his work, but the "pretty correctly formatted article on the first edit" thing is always a little bit of a flag. Cheers, --j⚛e deckertalk 05:14, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Political subdivisions of Wisconsin
Hi-I added a comment to the Political subdivisions of Wisconsin article that I thought you would be interested in. Thanks-RFD (talk) 14:42, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

NCBC-based list
I thought that the edit summary here might interest you. I was not completely stupid a few months ago! - Sitush (talk) 06:04, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Smile. --Orlady (talk) 14:55, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Unblock ASAP:
Per: Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents


 * There is a history of the above user violating rules against me which are listed on my page. I do not have a shared IP regardless of the IP look up source used. It is also put on there in spite. This was resolved a long time ago. This user is hounding me and was disruptive on prior articles. He also did not inform me of this noticeboard prior to me typing this up and is seeking to drive me away. I do not need the IP to be productive on Wiki, as I can and will continue to edit without it. This is an issue of principal and even if it gets blocked, will not affect me. I know it will be a short-lived block anyways, and I made it clear I am retiring from the IP. This user is just trying to get some kind of revenge and cause me distress. He is in fact the one violating policies he has blamed me for. Due to conflict of interest, he needs to stop leaving messages on my page! Thanks... 99.129.112.89 (talk) 16:50, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * [EC with Hell in a Bucket] Nothing to see here. Floquenbeam unblocked you (else you couldn't have posted here). Regardless, if you were as innocent as you claim, you wouldn't be announcing "Little do all of you know, I have admin credentials via my account." --Orlady (talk) 17:17, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I typed this as the UNblock was being done. I explained this on another editor's talk page who closed the dispute on the noticeboard (mop). I have a wireless keyboard and it doesn't always type the correct characters since I type so fast. What about the benefit of the doubt on here? 1st: the topic of this section should state: "Unblocking ASAP!" since I knew it would not stick. 2. that was a typo, it probably should state: "I've had" or "I had". This was complete nonsense and not even the reason for the Shared IP tag being posted. I am "innocent" as you stated (tongue-in-cheek), and I resent the poor attitudes in this matter, including not having good faith and ASSuming. Good day! ("I said 'good day'!" Hehe...) P.S. I also wanted HIAB and the others to just leave me alone... 99.129.112.89 (talk)


 * Yes I have interacted with the user on one other page the only times I have posted to their page is reformatting text comments which included removing comments [] and the warnings for removing the template on ip notices. Their idea of no notice is a little off base too [] As pointed out on the ANI board though 3rr exemption doesn't count for user talk in this situation so I screwed up there in fairness. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * You are just wrong/guilty about all of this, move on and leave me alone! :) 99.129.112.89 (talk) 19:11, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Copyrights
You only *think* it's copyrighted. It's not and just because you say so, doesn't make it true. I have never copyrighted anything and I'm not about to start. BBB76 (talk) 18:31, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Under US law, web-published content is copyrighted unless it's explicitly identified as being freely licensed. This isn't a matter of my personal opinion. I've responded further on your talk page. --Orlady (talk) 19:57, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Time to start listening, BBB. Drmies (talk) 20:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

To a broken record? No thanks! Especially one that makes no sense and chooses to not talk like a regular person. BBB76 (talk) 02:37, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Have it your way. Drmies (talk) 03:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

John Netherland
How I misread all three biographies I have no idea. I hope you didn't lose too much cred at DYK. Bms4880 (talk) 13:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Not to worry -- not about your own head nor about my credibility. It's amazing how easy it is to make those kinds of errors. This kind of thing happen fairly often at DYK... (That's why there's so much emphasis on reviewing things.) --Orlady (talk) 13:37, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, and have some pierogi!
Thanks Piotrus, I love pierogi! Better luck next time (I hope there will be a next time). --Orlady (talk) 14:55, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Christian Science RfC
Hi Orlady, just letting you know that I left a question for you here, in case you missed it. Best, SlimVirgin (talk) 21:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Dogwood Arts Festival
The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Inside U.S.A. (book)
The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Wisconsin Barnstar
Thanks. It's an attractive barnstar design, too! --Orlady (talk) 14:59, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

McBurney v. Young
Hi-I need some opinion by an administrator/the foundation, etc., about an US Supreme Court case. SCOTUS announced McBurley v. Young that would allow state and local governments to block out of state requests for information made by residents from other states. I use databases from various state legislatures websites to start articles about various state legislators. And our fellow editors also make use of other materials from the various states for different articles. I don't expect you to do anything about it. I just want to open some sort of conversation and see what the foundation has to say about this issue. There are other editors that have who probably have the same concerns. Again my thanks for what you do for the project-RFD (talk) 11:09, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I live in a state that requires state residency for open records requests. However, I've never thought of making an open records request for Wikipedia purposes... --Orlady (talk) 22:16, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response.RFD (talk) 23:36, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

IP edit warring
Hi. The IP that I reported back in February made a sneaky rv on Stepan Shahumyan in March, which I did not notice. I rolled him back again, and I will let you know if it returns. Regards, Grand  master  21:34, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * See the SPI case. --Orlady (talk) 17:40, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Grand  master  18:14, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for John Baxter (judge)
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK help request
Could you help me by finishing the review for this nomination? It's already been waiting for a while: I identified several issues, and the nominator's schedule meant that he had to wait a while before responding. He's just responded, but I'm going to be on the road all day tomorrow and Tuesday and won't be able to help him in a timely fashion. Nyttend (talk) 02:45, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I assumed that it would require just a little bit more work and not much effort on your part. I'm sorry that I got you into a time sink, and I'll definitely be willing to go back to reviewing it.  Nyttend (talk) 20:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * That's just the way it goes sometimes. It's difficult to predict... --Orlady (talk) 22:39, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Political subdivisions of Wisconsin-changes
Hi-In the last few days the Wisconsin Legislature passed a law changing the Milwaukee County Board of Supervisor powers, term of office, salary, etc. One of the changes is to reduce the term of office for the Milwaukee County Board from 4 to 2 years and increasing the power of the Milwaukee County Executive. Once the bill is signed by Governor Walker who said he will signed it-I will have to make the changes in the Political subdivisions of Wisconsin article. The bill also mandates a referendum reducing the salary of the Milwaukee County Board. The bill only affects Milwaukee County. I wanted to let you know because of your involvement with the article. Thank you-RFD (talk) 14:51, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Glad to know that you are keeping things so thoroughly up to date, RFD! Thanks for the info. --Orlady (talk) 15:17, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Many thanks-also the article about the Milwaukee County Board will also have to be updated-RFD (talk) 15:50, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

WP Tennessee in the Signpost
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Tennessee for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 13:28, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK Sam Fullbrook
Woo-hoo! Thank you Orlady, Manytexts (talk) 00:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK
Hey Orlady, are y'all hard-pressed to get articles approved? I review Template:Did you know nominations/Pheng Xat Lao and five minutes later it's on the front page... Drmies (talk) 00:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * If you were being honest, you would admit that it was slightly more than 5 minutes! There does seem to be dearth of reviewed hooks at DYK. I happened by DYK, and noticed that there weren't any approved queues. Next I reviewed and promoted the only completed prep area to "next queue" status -- it included the hook you had approved. I also reviewed a 3-week-old nomination in hopes of helping to build an inventory of approved hooks, but sadly the hook fact didn't check out... So it goes! --Orlady (talk) 03:31, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Let me see if I can tackle one or two while I'm being dragged off to DR, haha. Drmies (talk) 03:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Template:Did you know nominations/Di Genius, Template:Did you know nominations/Ain't It Funny (Murder Remix), Template:Did you know nominations/June 20, 1985 bombings in Nepal. Drmies (talk) 04:48, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * You are making me look lazy, Drmies. --Orlady (talk) 16:24, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * As it happens, those three old ones were fairly easy. You'll note that I stopped at number four. Have a great weekend, Orlady--I hear it's lovely up in the Smokies this time of year. Drmies (talk) 17:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK? Nomination
I now made some improvements here--Template:Did you know nominations/Historical racial and ethnic demographics of the United States. I need to fix some more things but please tell me if my changes so far are good. Futurist110 (talk) 08:13, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I still have some pretty serious concerns there. When do you propose to fix the bare-url references? That's a basic qualification criterion for DYK. --Orlady (talk) 16:51, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll fix the bare URLs either today or tomorrow. What are your serious concerns? In regards to the other articles, I merged three of them into one, but I don't really see much other improvement. In regards to the racial/ethnic categories, I simply built my table on the style of the U.S. Census Bureau (such as here: http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/tab01.pdf). If you want, I can make the differences between the ethnic group options on various U.S. Censuses clearer. Futurist110 (talk) 00:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, I made some more improvements (by following your suggestions). In regards to the terms Black vs. Negro, I'm pretty sure that these terms can be used interchangeably. For instance, look at the data for Florida from the 1970 U.S. Census Historical Statistics (here: http://www2.census.gov/prod2/statcomp/documents/CT1970p1-02.pdf, page 26) and look at the data for Florida from a 2002 U.S. Census Working Paper (here: http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/tab24.pdf, from here: http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/twps0056.html), it is fairly obvious that Black and Negro mean the same thing, considering that the Black and Negro populations for Florida listed in both of these sources is the same. Thus, I think that it is fair to substitute the word Black for Negro in this article of mine. Futurist110 (talk) 02:28, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I've commented on the DYK talk page. Content discussions shouldn't happen on user talk pages. --Orlady (talk) 02:45, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'll keep the discussions on the talk pages next time. Also, I responded to you on the talk page for this DYK? nomination again right now. Futurist110 (talk) 07:57, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have now responded to you again. Futurist110 (talk) 06:28, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I responded to you again right now. Futurist110 (talk) 18:51, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Introduction
As one OR lady to another, I want to meet you. My granddaughter was reading Wikipedia and thought I was now an editor there. I live in Oak Ridge, educated in biology, worked at ORNL (primarily as a manager), care deeply about reproductive rights for all women, and need I go farther? We have a lot in common. Contact me via email at caroloen@aol.com or phone 865-242-6250. 74.96.90.39 (talk) 20:52, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

James Chadwick
If you could have a squiz at the DYK nom for James Chadwick, that would be great. It has been frustrating for me that this has been languishing despite two reviewers finding no fault with it. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:03, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I've weighed in there, and provided revised hook wording that I think is better than the others that had been proposed. Along the way I expanded the article Doramad Radioactive Toothpaste. --Orlady (talk) 04:27, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! A tube of radioactive toothpaste will be forwarded to you as soon as I can find one. Hawkeye7 (talk) 06:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for John Netherland
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:42, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your note
Will use templates in the future. Didn't know those things regarding bots, etc. Mostly it was a matter of not having the time to go find the template. TimidGuy (talk) 15:59, 23 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Orlady. I'll check out Twinkle. TimidGuy (talk) 09:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:World Communion of Reformed Churches
Category:World Communion of Reformed Churches, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. JFH (talk) 19:54, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for James G. Spears
The DYK project (nominate) 00:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Kensington University
Dear Orlady You have indicated that the editing I did on Kensington university has to be properly cited. I have entered appropriate web sites and all I have written is true. In any case and if presumably that is not enough I prefer, if possible, to contact you by email, as the matter is quite complicated and very important. Thank you J379 — Preceding unsigned comment added by J379 (talk • contribs) 15:35, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I responded on your talk page. --Orlady (talk) 16:01, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Dear Orlady,

I would like to clarify that I was not simply told by the BPPE that Kensington was approved between the years 1976 and 1996 and that degrees earned during that period are valid and legitimate. I have it in writing from them. So I think it would at least give a more precise content to the article on Kensington, if at least we can mention that it was approved by BPPE as I just explained. I could cite the letter I have received from BPPE yet it bears my name and I don't want to do that, unless I can cover the name. Can I do that? Moreover, it must be clarified that the Court decision in Hawaii does mention that degrees earned before 2003 are valid. Can I add that? This is not reflected in the article, one has to read the entire Court decision, to spot it. Finally, mentioning that an honorary degree was awarded to an ex Prime Minister and is displayed among his relics, again is trying to give negative connotations. Probably honorary degrees were awarded to Hitler too, does that punish the universities which did it? I know Kensington was not accredited yet it was approved and while operating it was awarding legitimate and valid degrees, as BPPE confirms. Finally, what's wrong in citing Prof Roden's web page that does mention he has earned a degree from Kensington and why is it wrong to cite John Bear who does mention in his books what I have stated? Will appreciate if you can assist me in editing the article to reflect the above points. Thank you very much, J379 — Preceding unsigned comment added by J379 (talk • contribs) 16:56, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


 * As I told you on your user talk page, the article talk page is the appropriate place for this kind of content discussion. Please do not continue to try to conduct this discussion here or by e-mail. Briefly, however:
 * 1. A letter to you from a state agency is not a published reliable source suitable for use in Wikipedia. However, if you would like to discuss the details of its contents on the article talk page, please do so. Note that the article nowhere contradicts your assertion that degrees awarded before 1996 are valid in California.
 * 2. Where do you get the notion that the report about the honorary degree is an attack on the school? This is simply factual information.
 * 3. Professor Roden's experience at Kensington is worth adding to the article, but this should be based on the LA Times article where he is quoted.
 * 4. I haven't seen that particular passage in John Bear's book. I interpret your statement about it as meaning that pre-1996 degrees are legal to use in California. That is likely true; until the 1990s there were no regulations in California that could possibly have made these degrees illegal in the state. Statements about legal matters need to be quoted carefully. --Orlady (talk) 17:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Dear Orlady, Tried to locate the talk page on kensington but I am not certain which that is. If you guide me to it, I promise I won't conduct any further discussion here. That is why I need to communicate my thoughts here again, please sincerely pardon me for that. The article now says: 'After the California Bureau for Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education (BPPVE) was created in 1989 to regulate higher education institutions in the state, Kensington was required to obtain state approval' which implies that before 1989 it was not operating under any approval, which is misleading because before the BPPVE was created, approval was granted by the California Education Department, (and the confirmation I have from the BPPE clearly confirms that, and I don't realize how a state agency confirmation is of less importance to a newspaper article). And the kensington failed to comply with the additional requirements, so it was eventually closed down. It is very important that this point is clarified, as well as that between 1976 and 1996 degrees earned are valid and legitimate. Even in Hawaii, the Court decision considers degrees earned before July 1, 1999 as valid and legitimate. Moreover, not only John Bear does mention that pre-1996 are legal and valid, but for your information I have personally contacted Dr bear a few days ago, and I have received his personal confirmation. So please let me know if you would like to effect these clarifications, or if you like me to edit the article to reflect them. And one more thing: the reason I insist on these, trivial for you or others, clarifications, is because my emaployment, believe it or not, might depend on what this article says! Thank you very much. J379 — Preceding unsigned comment added by J379 (talk • contribs) 05:32, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I gave you the link to the Kensington talk page in a post on your user talk page, prior to the above discussions. It looks like you've found it now. --Orlady (talk) 14:29, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:American Latter Day Saint hymnwriters
How exactly does this category not violate the rules against splitting off at the last rung by ERGS characteristics, these are ethnicity, religion, gender and sexuality. We should only per these rules subdivide Category:American hymnwriters by religion if we can subdivide it by some other trait.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:59, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Before you revert
The deletion from the Warnborough lead, could you please address this issue on the Talk page? In my mind it's not obvious this should be in the lead. It's not a name associated with Warnborough; it was allegedly a separate but related institution. TimidGuy (talk) 10:07, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Randal Heymanson
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Randal Heymanson, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/heymanson-sir-sydney-henry-randal-12629.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) MadmanBot (talk) 05:27, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't see a copyvio here. I'm going to delete the template. --Orlady (talk) 05:33, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Oak Ridge, Tennessee
Oak Ridge, Tennessee In fact i was correct on my edit to that the Zip code 37931 has a small area in the south east section of the city along Melton Hill Lake. Jesus Lover0000 (talk) 04:39, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * }
 * I live in Oak Ridge and I am unaware of any area of the city outside the 37830 zip code (the 37831 zip code is used for post office boxes and federal government organizations), although I know that some areas outside the city are in 37830.
 * If you are "in fact correct", what is the source of your information? --Orlady (talk) 04:45, 3 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks for explaining. I don't think that Google Maps of zip codes are reliable sources, since it's not clear where Google Maps got their data, and since users can upload some information to Google Maps. Anyway, I looked at the map. The area on the Oak Ridge side of the river that is shown in zip code 37931 is federal government property that is unoccupied, has no public roads, and doesn't receive mail service. Also, if you look at the Google Maps zip code map for 37830, you will see that a lot of Oak Ridge (including some areas where there are roads and residents and mail delivery in the 37830 zip code) isn't shown to be included in any zip code. Bottom line: Don't believe everything you see on the Google Maps zip code maps.
 * When you add factual information to Wikipedia articles, you are supposed to cite a source ("say where you got it"). See WP:Citing sources for details.
 * NOTE: When you post on a talk page like this one, you don't need to use Wikilove to start your message. Just scroll to the bottom of the page and type. Use the ==Title== format to create a new title (if you are starting a new topic). To thread your messages, use colons (: for one indent, :: for two, etc.) to create indents. --Orlady (talk) 11:49, 3 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Ok Thanks for your help Orlady and ok i will do that next time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesus Lover0000 (talk • contribs) 04:50, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * you could always use this link by the USPS You have the chjoice of listing all post offices by state or county and you will be provided zip code founding date etc etc. Best of all its by the USPSCoal town guy (talk) 22:22, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Randal Heymanson
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Bircham International University
Hi Orlady. I've added a comment on the Bircham International University talk page and would be grateful if you could assist me. There are a number of improvements that can be made to the article. Vivj2012 (talk) 15:39, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Orlady. I've responded to you on the Bircham International University talk page. Thanks Vivj2012 (talk) 13:26, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello again. I'd appreciate it if you could review my comment on the article Talk Page regarding a recent statement issued by John Bear. I'd like to get some advice on how best to proceed. Thanks Vivj2012 (talk) 11:57, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. If you could please review the John Bear statement as mentioned above. I'd rather not involve senior editors and enter a dispute. Thanks Vivj2012 (talk) 16:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Mark Andrew DYK
Hey there. I've done some fiddling with the Mark Andrew (politician) article and was hoping you'd take another look at the DYK nom. Thanks! Bob Amnertiopsis ∴ChatMe! 22:26, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

KumiokoCleanStart
Do not feel bad about the comments of KumiokoCleanStart, who is a mere busybody caricature of the productive editor that was once Kumioko. In general these days, his commentary, which is almost always negative (especially when it concerns admins), can safely be ignored. It's a little sad, but it's true. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:34, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm well aware of the situation. It's clear that Kumioko feels he is being persecuted here, so he is taking the side of everyone else who looks like they might be a victim. Further, I assume he is resentful because of my past criticisms of WikiProject United States and because of recent interactions at Template talk:WikiProject United States. Regardless of any of that, my concern is not with Kumioko, but with the assumption that "where there's smoke, there must be fire". I am tired of people assuming that I must have said or done some truly awful things to certain other users because those same kinds of accusations have been repeated so often. --Orlady (talk) 04:06, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Hartsville, Tennessee
You may want to check the recent edits. I'm not sure past-tensing everything provides an accurate description. Bms4880 (talk) 19:57, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

I responded to your post at Talk:Hartsville, Tennessee, and I think I found something that cleared this all up. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 04:33, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Phillips Academy
And I am amazed to see what you were able to do with the links I listed on the talk page. Impressive! --Orlady (talk) 04:28, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, it was easy to whip together something after the hard part (finding the stuff) was done. Curious how you did the searching? I hunted earlier but did not find much. Did you use special algorithms? What search strings did you use?--Tomwsulcer (talk) 10:54, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I've found that when you add words to a Google search string, you can often find good (and interesting) content that will never appear in the results of a more basic search. I searched for sets of keywords like "Phillips Andover Exeter", "Exeter Andover metaphor", and "Exeter Andover preppy". I think I may have also used "Exeter Andover Grottlesex". I imagine you could also have fun with combinations like "Exeter Andover Holden Caulfield". I set the search settings to return 100 results, so I'm not induced to focus on just the top hits. --Orlady (talk) 15:15, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * The "Andover Exeter metaphor" -- I never woulda thunk -- a rather enlightened approach. Grottlesex -- first time I've heard that term, again good idea. Thanks for sharing.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 14:38, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=561613999 your edit] to Roberto Carnaghi may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry, just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20-%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:22, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * de la Cultura" |trans_title=Roberto Carnaghi declared "Outstanding Personality of Culture" |work= |date=August 11, 2012|language=Spanish |publisher=Asociacion Argentina de Actores|accessdate=

Did you know nominations/Tuya Soy
Sorry, I need this removed off the list. Your edits weren't shown on the original page as I was promoting it and it showed up only after I had saved the page. Mea culpa. Ashwin147 (talk) 18:18, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ I have pulled the hook out of the prep area and restored the nomination to the noms page. --Orlady (talk) 18:30, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Diva   Knockouts   13:10, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Talkback
Diva   Knockouts   01:46, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

A Beka Book
Could you take a look at the claim that this is an academic publisher? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 05:27, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I edited the article statement about "academic publishing" and I removed it from the university presses category. It appears that there are many more issues there that I haven't looked at yet. I hadn't watchlisted this title, so your message was my first indication that it was no longer a redirect. Sigh... --Orlady (talk) 13:58, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Christianity/Outreach/July 2013
Per your request. -- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 20:42, 30 June 2013 (UTC)