User talk:Orlady/Archive 9

Block
Feel free to block me for screwing up. I think Doncram would enjoy seeing me blocked, and you might win some points for doing so. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 19:01, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:AN3
Hello Orlady. From a quick look it appears that both Doncram and Polaron would have to change their behavior to end this dispute. Both people are doing good work, and perhaps there could be an editing restriction that would allow them to do normal editing but would prevent the stuff on which consensus has not yet been reached. What would you think of a 1RR rule on any of the contested articles? Doncram and Polaron would each be limited to one revert per article per day on any article covered by WP:NRHP? I gather you are not uninvolved here, but since you're a participant in past NRHP issues you might have some idea if this would make any sense.

In lieu of a restriction, blocks for both parties might be considered, but blocks on major content contributors have caused dissension in the past. EdJohnston (talk) 16:54, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've stepped back from the 3RR case, feeling that I can't go further without some direction from NRHP members. The whole dispute would probably go away if there were a clear enough guideline within the project. Since project members seem divided at present (at least they haven't adopted an exact principle for the historic districts) it is hard to block people for going against consensus. (There is no consensus that I can see). If you disagree, please let me know. EdJohnston (talk) 03:27, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for restoring the library section even if it is as a smaller amount. Per Hippo's comment that all library sections on city articles are trivia I hope you keep an eye on him removing the information again, especially as it is unsourced as it stands. Per my last comment I am retiring from Wikipedia. Since you were the closest to being "on my side" would you please delete my user and talk page from wikipedia, or whatever is done when someone retires and doesnt wish to contribute anymore. I wish someone could just see what I see. If its all in my head then leaving Wikipedia would do me some good, if not I hope someone else speaks up. If you have interest please check the past posts by individuals on his talk page, contact them, I do believe you will see the pattern and know. Sorry to bother you. Have a good day.Camelbinky (talk) 23:07, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I have to quit, this stuff with Hippo has been ongoing for over a year. As the latest posting on the ANI thread shows, people are just looking at the latest incidents and not his history of doing this over and over, that poster looked only at the Administrative divisions of New York and came to the conclusion that Hippo is not rampaging. There are many many many more instances just in the Capital District articles. He has never added information, a reference, or increased the knowledge in an article. He is disruptive and his vendetta is because I have worked hard on the Village Pump and OR and RS noticeboards and at the IAR talk page on interpretations of policies that would restrict and/or discourage the kind of "editing" he does, which I do find disruptive. This latest edit at the Albany, NY page is a direct result of me informing him that, at my request, another editor (a very respected and upstanding member of Wikipedia) created a warning template to be issued against editors who remove information that is not sourced but seems factual and has no other issues and is not problematic, such as POV, or libel without taking it to the talk page first, and the warning template also encourages and points to existing policy that states it is common courtesy to first find a source yourself and if you cant then put a "citation needed" template on the info instead of removing first and not asking questions. For well over a year he has attacked and reverted any information found on any Capdis article that he thinks he can get away with. I have seen other editors have admins ban them from directly reverting another editor because of similar complaints and I have seen editors get banned from entire topics of articles for disrupting. He is not a benefit to any Capital District article and to put a ban on him editing at those articles would not hurt them in the least. My loss from those articles would set many of them back and allow vandals to creep onto them since few if any watch many of the articles I have created and maintain. I am sorry to sound self-centered and dont mean to. But it is him or me, and it seems he won again, I cant stay here on Wikipedia with him around. He claims I dont know what he knows or doesnt know, but if he knew anything about the Capital District he would have contributed and added information, he doesnt need to live anywhere near it, I personally live over 1,000 miles away and yet thanks to the Internet and knowledge from living there previously I am a great boon them. He doesnt want to add any information, he wants to enforce his view of Wikipedia policy strictly and any threat to that (including my work at the noticeboards and Village Pump) is not acceptable to him. Perhaps my leaving will keep him from his disruption on the articles, and hopefully my Wikifriends will look out for my orphaned articles. This is my last post, I cant continue to watch this crap. Good luck, and again I beg you to keep an eye on him, I know you will notice the same stuff I did if you just watch.Camelbinky (talk) 00:25, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Re: MTSU and UTK
Hmm, interesting. So Fall 2008, MTSU had higher undergraduates, then in Spring, UTK apparently took first, and so this fall MTSU won it back? Odd back and forth. But I agree with you, especially if the numbers are going to be that unstable. — Huntster (t @ c) 00:14, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Coltsville
Hi. Could you look into the details of the relationship between Coltsville Historic District (NHL designated in 2008 from an expansion of existing NHL Armsmear) and Colt Industrial District (NRHP historic district). A look at maps of both districts seems to indicate that the boundaries are the same although a couple of buildings may have been added/excluded on the edges. Thanks. --Polaron | Talk 01:59, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Referencing in Ida Tarbell House article
You changed one reference in the Ida Tarbell House article to show a corrected title from what is the actual title in the source. I am not sure how mispelling in source titles should be handled (show it as "Ida Tarbel (sic) House", instead of the parenthetical note i had added), but it seems wrong to show the title different than what it is. But also as you will have seen, an intended correction to the NHL webpage is noted at wp:NHL info issues, so this does not matter much. I am willing to assume the source will be corrected to comply with wikipedia eventually.

Also u changed the NHL nom text and photos links for each to use "cite web" rather than "citation" and "PDFlink". The photos should always have been one combined reference as they accompany the text; this must have been one of the earlier NHL nom references that i put into articles, before i was advised / figured out how to combine them. The use of citation with two PDFlinks at least allows showing the text and photos in one reference.

I am aware that I don't have the best reference format available for these and would appreciate your advice, or demonstration, if you can do better in some way that keeps the two links together in one reference. Further, the original advice i was given to use PDFlinks in that was was when there was a PDFbot running occasionally that would update the PDF filesizes. That PDFbot no longer runs. So I really do want to have a better reference format for these to put into my toolkit/crib sheet of references. doncram (talk) 19:44, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Heartland Series
Hello! Your submission of The Heartland Series at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that 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! -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 02:12, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Denver neighborhood dispute
I respect the fact that you are attempting to mediate this situation and it could appear that I am causing problems. I have an intimate knowledge of some of these subjects because I live in some these neighborhood and am a productive member of this community. I hate to see information published that is inaccurate and in some cases biased. I suggest that since you decided to get involved that maybe you research some these disputes and contribute some accurate edits. Also I do not see the problem with my contributions mostly since they are all true and unbiased. I find it unfair that the majority of these articles are unsourced and I am held to a different standard and must produce hard to find sources and am not aloud to contribute to Wikipedia because someone who is your friend and is misinformed disagrees with me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.71.248.140 (talk) 01:28, 19 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments. I am not necessarily questioning the truth of your contributions (they sound plausible enough), but Wikipedia policy requires that content be verifiable by citations to reliable sources. I am not interested in researching the geography of Denver's Jewish community or the demographics of the West Colfax neighborhood, but I am interested in ending unproductive edit warring by repeatedly reverting the articles. This is why I hope that you and the other interested contributors will discuss the articles on the talk pages -- and come to some consensus agreement on what should be done. I share your concern that the articles are unsourced, which is one reason why I question whether one of the articles should be in Wikipedia at all.


 * If you are concerned about lack of respect at Wikipedia, I suggest that you create an account. This will not ensure respect, but it should encourage other users to take you more seriously. --Orlady (talk) 01:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

HDs
If you have any further comments concerning HDs or Doncram's comments, please add them at your convenience (I understand if you're taken up with other things, I have the same problem). I'll start trying to boil it down a little and propose resolutions.  Acroterion  (talk)  18:25, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Re: your comment to Mjroots: I think the time for mediation's about up - everybody's had their say, and it's time for arbitration. In such a case, the more outside comments, the better. I was thinking of formatting it along the lines of an Arb opinion, with a series of statements in small chunks, rather than a big summary. This might make it easier to apply.  Acroterion  (talk)  04:45, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Your accusation of plagiarism
On this page, you state, “Indeed, quoting text in this manner can be considered plagiarism.”

The Wikipedia plagiarism page says, “Plagiarism is the incorporation of someone else's work without providing adequate credit.” The page also says, “An accusation of plagiarism is very serious.”

The page defines plagiarism (quoting Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary) as, “1) to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own 2) use (another's production) without crediting the source.”

Because I included the text from another source within quotation marks and attributed it, no plagiarism occurred. Your gratuitous and false accusation is hurtful and posions my contributions. I request that you retract your false and hurtful statement.Denverjeffrey (talk) 20:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I didn't say I thought it was plagiarism. If I had thought that, I would have deleted it. I understand that some people consider that to be a form of plagiarism, which was the intent of my statement. I do think that paragraph-length quotations of that sort are poor form. I realize you were trying to work quickly, so it is understandable that you quoted text rather than rewriting. I do hope you will take the time to recast the material in your own words (citing sources, of course). --Orlady (talk) 21:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

List of recessions in the United States
List of recessions in the United States has been listed at FLC at Featured list candidates/List of recessions in the United States/archive2 for a while, and I know you vehemently opposed the first nomination. It's coming up to ten days and I was wondering if you had any opinions on it this time around. Best, Matthewedwards : Chat  04:51, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Colonial architecture
Just saw your comment on Doncram's talk, and I wanted to note that I don't like the idea of Category:American Colonial architecture. Your idea sounds good (better than the current system), but I think that Category:Colonial architecture in the United States would fit other category names much better. Nyttend (talk) 02:59, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

jpg from pdf
Thank you for your hints/comments on ripping a single photo from a pdf file that containing many photos. Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 20:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC) 20:57, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Redirects and NRHPs
Having read the current RfD for Downtown Norwich, is this an issue which needs raising at WP:ANI? Mjroots (talk) 08:48, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Template_talk:Did_you_know
Replied to your comments. Please take a look. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:07, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

NRHP photos question/proposals
I've opened the discussion on NRHP photos at Media_copyright_questionsand hope that you'll comment there. Smallbones (talk) 16:54, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

RE: Congratulations on the promotion!
Stalker! You must have my userpage on your watchlist or something. I haven't even had the chance to spam my friends yet.

Thank you, I've been waiting for this for quite some time.  bahamut0013  words deeds 15:18, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Canter & Siegle
According to this resource, the name of their law firm was: Canter & Siegel, Immigration Attorneys

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.pub.coffeehouse.amethyst/msg/477832eb09859797

I think we ought to consider moving the article back.

Also, the subject of the article appears to be a law firm, not two individuals, and I found no evidence that the name of the law firm was "Laurence Canter and Martha Siegel".

It was a dark and stormy night. (talk) 04:03, 2 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads-up. I replied at Talk:Laurence Canter and Martha Siegel‎. --Orlady (talk) 05:13, 2 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Since the article is about two individuals, not a law firm, I tweaked the opening sentence.  It was a dark and stormy night. (talk) 15:46, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Jacob Leisler
Thanks for the info. I hadn't consulted the history page, and didn't know the source of the odd additions. I will just delete the uncited material. I hope the Wikisource anchors will help it stay on track in the future. Bob Burkhardt (talk) 16:46, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of cats with fraudulent diplomas
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of cats with fraudulent diplomas. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/List of cats with fraudulent diplomas. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:11, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Downtown Norwich
Creating a permanent red link is not useful at all. If it has no value as a dismabiguation page then it should redirect to the most common meaning with an appropriate hatnote to other common uses. My preference would be to target it to Downtown Norwich Historic District as that is the primary use of the unqualified name. --Polaron | Talk 05:17, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Pickett State Park and Forest
Just curious, why remove the link to the forest, as state forests are generally considered notable? Nyttend (talk) 03:08, 14 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Because Pickett State Park and Pickett State Forest are fundamentally the same place. The "state park" is the part of the tract where there are developed visitor facilities. Most of the 19,200 acre tract is officially part of a state forest where timber cutting theoretically could occur (see Pickett State Forest webpage), but it isn't being managed that way. Many of the hiking trails (notably the long backcountry trails) that are generally described as part of the park (see Pickett State Park webpage) are actually on the "state forest." The Wikipedia article about the park described (and still describes, with my expansion of the article) the whole tract. --Orlady (talk) 03:33, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay, makes sense. I don't see anything in the article about the forest, so I didn't know the situation at all.  Nyttend (talk) 03:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You may want to update some numbers: the text says 19,200 acres, but the infobox says 17,372 acres. Nyttend (talk) 03:36, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I suppose I should do that! When I look at articles, I often pay little attention to infoboxes. I know that several thousand acres were added in the last few years, and I've been trying to find sources telling about that... --Orlady (talk) 03:44, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Hult International Business School
Hi Orlady,

Thank you for your note and advice. I will try to correct the issues you have addressed (this is my first time on Wikipedia so was unsure how to do certain things. Please do let me know of any further issues you find.

Thanks 16:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)HultIBS16:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by HultIBS (talk • contribs)

Hi again Orlady,

Also can you please advise why it still says at the top of the page that citations are needed even though I have rectified citations from the previous page.

Additionally, can you please advise why it is not possible to write "top-ranked" international business school even though a)I have cited the rankings and b) other pages i.e. London Business School has written "leading international business school"?

Many thanks, HultIBS (talk) 17:13, 18 November 2009 (UTC)HultIBS


 * I've replied on your talk page. :-) --Orlady (talk) 17:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I like your cleanup of the article. Thanks. I came across it a week or so ago (a student of mine is applying there) and meant to come back to it--you beat me to it nicely. Drmies (talk) 20:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Well?
? Wknight94 talk  15:31, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * And ?  Wknight94  talk  23:49, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

John Bear
The Chronicle of Higher Education reference link requires a login. So you logged in I take it? Also, when does the opinion of a journalist constitute someone becoming an "authority" ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Degreeoftruth (talk • contribs) 23:33, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I cannot find any mention of "authority" on the CBS article either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Degreeoftruth (talk • contribs) 23:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

The BBC article says he is "widely acknowleged to be an authority" but this is POV. On what evidence were the BBC assuming this was so? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Degreeoftruth (talk • contribs) 23:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Seeing that the same comments have now been posted on Talk:John Bear, I will reply there. --Orlady (talk) 00:08, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Papineau13
I have blocked and unblocked  per user preference, and counseled him regarding editwarring. Fred Talk 14:29, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

need help
I'm asking you because you seem to know a lot about how Wikipedia works. What are the chances that Special school will be renamed? I'm hoping no one rejects what I recently responded so it can be treated as silent consensus. Rovea (talk) 16:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You gave me a list of schools that are special schools and special education schools. But not a response to what I said. If we don't see rejections, then it can be treated as silent consensus. Rovea (talk) 17:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

List of city nicknames in the United States
No problem. Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 18:55, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Worldenc's charts
I would just like to inform you that I've started a thread here about Worldenc's charts. If you could take a look, that'd be great. Killiondude (talk) 20:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Done
Hi, Orlady. I replied at DYK and on my talk page. Thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 05:48, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Admin's Barnstar

 * Thank you for your thoughtfulness in bestowing that barnstar, Hu12. However, if there is any one administrator who deserves credit for being "on the case" regarding the askgeo-mapzones spam, it's not me, but you (or perhaps Ohnoitsjamie -- on whom I see you bestowed an identical barnstar). Thanks are due to you for your efforts. --Orlady (talk) 19:01, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK Review - Spoon River College
I have been through several changes on my DYK nom for articles dated Nov 24, and now have an alt that has passed muster, and wanted to know if I you could review it and give a thumbs up, or suggestions on how to change it to get a thumbs up. I t can be found at Template_talk:Did_you_know. ThanksIlliniGradResearch (talk) 20:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your assistance and input on the SRC article. Also, I appreciate your question regarding the Community College template I am working on. Yes, the City of Chicago does fund its colleges separately than the other districts, which are generally independent. Your thoughts?IlliniGradResearch (talk) 23:33, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Made the changes you suggested to article. Does it work with Alt9 as written? —Preceding unsigned comment added by IlliniGradResearch (talk • contribs) 01:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the assist in bringing the article further up to spec. Please feel free to offer any tips you may have so I can improve the article. To be safe, I went through each of my refs to double check the links and information where possible. I hope that the changes will help get the DYK nom to go through. Thanks IlliniGradResearch (talk) 03:06, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your inputs, I responded on the DKY page. Also, thank you for helping me with the article. I will make sure to put the article together better next time, and ensure a better DYK nom if I do so again. IlliniGradResearch (talk) 15:49, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Good catch on the mammals of the Caribbean that I had placed as the lead hook. I was planning on adding the picture as I did with The Sexes Throughout Nature; however, after looking at the article, it doesn't fit. Always appreciate another pair of eyes and assistance or a slap with a trout if I miss something:) Again thanks. Kindly Calmer   Waters  05:43, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Extra thanks for checking our hook compositions - especially these days when I'm in a robot-like WP mode. (Well, I saw that the Ozzie rodeo hook was poor, but was hesitant to mention Bushmen - the article is interesting though). Materialscientist (talk) 01:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Edgewater CO Vandalism
The Edgewater article is in the middle of a edit war and has been for sometime. Anonymous IP address have been adding some false information that has been very degrading and negative. It seems that the intent of the vandalism is to portray the City of Edgewater as a dangerous gang and crime ridden place, when in fact it is far from that.

The alleged vandalism is now being sourced, but when the source's are checked the source's have nothing to do with Edgewater or have almost opposite information or are totally unreliable.

What is worse is that I believe that this vandalism is coming from an Edgewater Police Officer. The reason I believe this is because some of the vandalism is from IP 70.90.117.254. IP 70.90.117.254 can be tracked directly to the an Edgewater Police computer. All the vandalism since are from anonymous IP address's and the vandalism is very similar in content as 70.90.117.254's contributions and are mostly crime and police related. IP 70.90.117.254 has also vandalized Mountain View, Colorado 's article and attacked the police department. Also some of the source's entered from these IP address's are from law enforcement websites.

The defamation should be taken seriously, because one of Edgewater’s only representations on the internet is Wikipedia. Attacks like these are serious because it is possible for it to have a direct negative impact on its reputation and the economy. It could affect home values, local businesses, people’s reputations, ect…

The Denver Neighborhoods articles (IE Montbello, Baker, Sun Valley, West Colfax) have also been vandalized by the same IP addresses in similar manners.

I'm asking you as a Wikipedia Authority to step in and help with this problem come to an end and for the content of these articles to be accurate, fair, and unbiased. Dbkilo (talk) 02:43, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Orlady, do you think it might be time to add longer-term semiprotection to Edgewater, Colorado? Clearly there is editwarring by IPs who do not participate on the talk page. I suggest one year of protection, based on how long the problem has been going on. I haven't checked out all the details of the above complaint, but it's easy to observe that the IPs do not discuss or make any attempt to get consensus for their changes. They don't even leave edit summaries. Many of the changes are of a POV nature, and they seem to provide no sources. If the IPs have a change of heart, the protection could be lifted. EdJohnston (talk) 03:46, 3 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, a year of semi-protection for Edgewater probably is in order. When I responded earlier on Dbkilo's talk page, I was misled by the fact that some of the recent IP edits looked semi-responsible, when it appears to me now that probably they were just reverting each other. I didn't look at the Denver neighborhoods articles (that Dbkilo also mentions) very closely yet today. I did see that the same IPs are editing some of them, but the edits I looked at in two neighborhoods didn't look as bad as what's been happening to Edgewater. --Orlady (talk) 04:01, 3 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the speedy response. I agree it'd be a good idea to remove the crime stats from that page, It does seem to deviate away from the format of other cities articles. Dbkilo (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:30, 3 December 2009 (UTC).

MfD:Downtown Norwich
A page you have contributed to is being discussed at Miscellany for deletion/Downtown Norwich. Cnilep (talk) 03:14, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Correction: Discussion moved to Articles for deletion/Downtown Norwich. Cnilep (talk) 03:41, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
A8 UDI  04:48, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

"15 miles southwest of Tazewell"
Good catch on the community location for the Union County property listed for Tazewell. This reminds me of a site in southern Clermont County, Ohio that was listed as being in the county seat of the next county to the north; to get to the place where it was listed as being, you had to go through half a dozen communities, including the Clermont County seat. Nyttend (talk) 07:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Interesting; I like the wording of "In the summer, the children of Sharps Chapel are released out of school, and bon-fires become more frequent. Children laugh and play energetically in the large pieces of land that they were blessed with." :-)  Nyttend (talk) 16:09, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was a writing style that is seldom encountered in Wikipedia. --Orlady (talk) 02:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Your wording didn't convey the sense of 1/5 of a mile away, and anyway why do you think you should trust the coords over the description? No complaints if there's another source that I missed here, but I didn't see anything cited here that says that the initial description was wrong.  Nyttend (talk) 15:45, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand better now. Nyttend (talk) 23:07, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm surprised that neither you nor the nominator could find Sharps Chapel in the GNIS. Was the system down?  I ran a search for all populated places in Union County, and Sharps Chapel appears in the list.  Nyttend (talk) 23:15, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I looked up Sharps Chapel in GNIS and I put the GNIS coordinates in the article Sharps Chapel, Tennessee. There are several GNIS entries for features within the community that have "Sharps Chapel" in their names. I've never been a big fan of pro-forma Geography sections, so I confess that it didn't occur to me to create one. (Thanks for doing that...) My guess is that the nominator misspelled something when running the search. --Orlady (talk) 23:49, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I wasn't planning to include a separate Geography section; my goal was actually to include the GNIS reference, essentially to prove that there was one. If there had been something in the article that it could have referenced, or if there had been a more logical place for the information I added, I wouldn't have bothered with the separate section.  And now I understand your AFD comment better; I'd thought you were agreeing with the nominator in saying that there wasn't one.  Nyttend (talk) 02:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks-
Many thanks for your kindness and graciousness. I started an article about William B. Slaughter and with the help and encouragement from Royalbroil and a fellow Wisconsinite I submitted it to DYK. You may want to see Royalbroil's talk page. I need to give you credit and my thanks, appreciation, and encouragement. The Tommy Burnett article-very helpful. Thank you again-RFD (talk) 16:41, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Many thanks again-in appreciation-RFD (talk) 17:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks again-
Mant thanks again-the DYK came through= William B. Slaughter. I will probably wait and start an article for a future DYK. When I read and research Alexander P. Field, I found he was a heavy drinker, was married 3 times. Also when he was Secretary of State in Illinois he was gone a lot. Even, the histotian Ralph Stevens who wrote the article for the Illinois Historical Society was not too impress. Even the Field Family tree was not too impress with Field. Royalbroil caused myself on thhe article. Many thanks again-RFD (talk) 19:50, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Alexander Arthur
If you know of a comprehensive source on Arthur, let me know. I can't find one. His name pops up every time I research an E.T. article, so I can piece an article together from scattered tidbits, but I prefer something comprehensive. Bms4880 (talk) 15:59, 8 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the barnstar. I had long been puzzled as to why Arthur didn't already have an article, but now I see it's because there is scant source material on him, especially on the web.  As far as I know, our Wikipedia article is the only comprehensive source on Arthur.  Bms4880 (talk) 16:30, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

White Brazilian
Orlady, you're a sharp reader who's unafraid to be decisive and whose opinions (if any) on Brazilian matters are completely unknown to me; can I invite you as either editor or administrator (preferably not both) to look at Talk:White Brazilian (also currently near the top of WP:AN/I)?

(I'm sending a related message to DGG.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:52, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

protected areas
You may also notice what is happening to Category:National Monuments of the United States; I don't know what to do. Hmains (talk) 05:08, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

edits Grantham University
Hello Orlady,

Your comment "sourced "oldest" statement since I know that some other distance education schools claim to date to the 1890s (notably including Penn Foster).

I disagree that Penn Foster and I would like to see some reliable source that Penn Foster is the "oldest' online university. To date, Grantham is the oldest "online" university to date over Penn Foster. I wanted to know what is your opinion about this.

thanks!

Virusunknown (talk —Preceding undated comment added 00:50, 17 December 2009 (UTC).


 * Orlady,

Whoa! I like to think I learn something new everyday. Today, my dear, I've learned a lot! Point well made...thank you. --Virusunknown 01:34, 17 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Virusunknown (talk • contribs)

An easy question (I hope)
Hi Orlady! I was going to post this question on the PA project talk page and ended up reading that very long and disturbing discussion of what is and is not a PA, so I am here with my simple question instead. I'm trying to understand the IUCN categories in the context of my state's PAs of all types. I'v read and copied the PDF Guideline to no avail. A " strict nature reserve" to me would be a "ecological reserve" but what if hunting is allowed in the reserve? Maybe I'm trying to pigeonhole too much. Sincerely, Marcia Wright (talk) 03:06, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

RfA
Hi there. Happy new year and thanyou especially for your support on my RfA. I do tend to dip in and out of various areas of wikipedia and have a very busy life but I will do my best to be back as an admin candidate as soon as possible. Polargeo (talk) 13:06, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
iBendiscuss 06:05, 31 December 2009 (UTC)