User talk:Ruhrfisch/Archive11

Welcome to my talk page. Please leave me a message below and I will typically reply on your talk page. Please be aware that although my email address is enabled, it is not an address I check often (so I may be slow in replying to email). Thanks for stopping by and happy editing! Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 15:25, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Francis Bok
I just nominated Francis Bok for GA. Could you check and make sure I took all the proper steps. Thanks as always for the help. Dincher (talk) 20:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC).
 * Thanks for your statements on the talk page. I was searching for the arguement that you presented. Dincher (talk) 01:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I placed a request for comment on the Francis Bok issue. Could you check and make sure it has been done correctly? Dincher (talk) 02:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the corrections. Now I wait. Dincher (talk) 18:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I just figure out that your little fish is the link to your talk page! D'oh! Anyway. Could you take at look at Francis Bok and make sure I removed all the Abdullah's? Dincher (talk) 21:56, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Found a great resource for Black Mo. More birds. Dincher (talk) 00:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I will now add "according to Bok" to the article. Thanks for moving the conversation over to the bio notice borad. Dincher (talk) 15:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * He was forced to convert to Islam, but never took it too heart. I have no problem with the elimination of the categories in question. Thanks for checking. Dincher (talk) 04:18, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The third paragraph of the life as a slave section touches on his forced conversion to Islam. But forced conversion is an oxymoron isn't it? Dincher (talk) 04:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * On second thought I am adding the former muslims category back. I think it is relevant. Dincher (talk) 04:44, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. I think I made the changes you suggested. Dincher (talk) 14:23, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I just eliminated the Books section altogether. It is basically repeated info and I don't really think the article needs it. As for the refs to the book. I only have it for a couple of for days. I think I will leave them as is. Not sure. I do not plan on taking it to FA. Again I am not sure. Dincher (talk) 16:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, I went ahead and did the page number deal. Does it look good? Dincher (talk) 17:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I nominated it back on February 21st. Or at least I think It did. See the talk page. It has been taking a long time to hear about it, a long time. Dincher (talk) 19:40, 24 March 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem with you not being able to review it. The article is slowly making its way to the top of the list. Dincher (talk) 00:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Godcharles
Godcharles looks pretty good. If I think of a hook I'll let you know. Good night. Dincher (talk) 03:45, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I monkeyed around with the problematic ref in my sandbox and fixed it. Not sure how. I had a similar problem with a ref in the Bok article. Dincher (talk) 21:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The article looks good to me. I don't see how it could be better referenced. It might be too short for GA, but other than that I can see no problems. I will give it the "red pen" examination at some point. Off to Black Mo for now. Dincher (talk) 23:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Answers
Looks like you did the right thing with Image:MEsaad.jpg. Policy certainly says you can speedy delete ads, spam and the like. If nobody complains, then you are home free. Don't be afraid to stand your ground and don't be to stubborn to reconsider what you've done if necessary, and always remind them they can take the issue to deletion review if they don't like your final decision. Never get upset and be vindictive no matter what unpleasant name they call you (and I think I've been called about all of them). On WP:PUI, you can always start with the "softballs." If an image is nominated at PUI and the uploader is informed and takes no action to correct the situation, it is pretty cut and dried to go ahead and delete the image (even easier if the image is also an orphan). If there is a discussion, you have to make a decision based on Wikipedia policy first and then consensus if there is no policy violation. The policy usually involved on WP:PUI is non-free content criteria. When you close a hotly debated nomination, always give the reason you made the decision one way or the other. Just be bold and go for it and realize you are going to probably make some mistakes and you will most likely be verbally abused. Let me know if you have any other questions in general or about specific nominations -Regards Nv8200p talk 03:50, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Map of DC
I appreciate your work on state maps, which I use daily when working on historic sites. Would you have time to create one for the District of Columbia? Many articles on historic sites there show the US map, with the locater dot on DC, but that is not nearly as informative as a "local" map would be. Thanks.--Appraiser (talk) 15:49, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

List of municipalities in Sullivan County, Pennsylvania follow-up
It occurred to me that you might not have read my reply to your proofreading request on my talk page, but reply there I did. (WP's talk and reply protocol is certainly suboptimal given the wide user variance in who posts what where.) I'm not sure if my remarks are a help, but of the items listed, I think the inconsistent period issue is the most noticeable and in need of change. -- Michael Devore (talk) 00:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Good work, I think all your changes improve the article. Possibly the original use of both was correct, but it scanned "funny" to me. However, if an experienced en-5 editor contradicts me, go with them; I don't argue against language pros. In fact, an en-5 made a deliberate change to the wording of an FAC yesterday which still looks wrong to me. Native-speaker I may be, but English is a weird language with way too many rules to know them all.


 * I did know about the no periods on caption phrases MOS rule, but I figured the table field should be either all or none when using full sentences for the sake of neatness and consistency. It's a stylistic choice, perhaps. And good work, again, on trimming back the parentheses. Maybe that will help inspire me to stop abusing them so badly, myself. -- Michael Devore (talk) 11:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Fanny Imlay
You wanted to know when FI was up for FAC... :) Awadewit | talk  00:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

History of Lycoming County
Well I finally was asked to split up the History of Lycoming County, Pennsylvania artcle. I did it and created another monster at History of the Townships of Lycoming County, Pennsylvania. Ugh. I am going to let it slide until somebody else says something. I am done with Black Mo except for the intro. I'll keep you posted. Dincher (talk) 02:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Juniata County Map
I noticed and confirmed a problem on the Juniata County map. It is labed "East Rutherford" when it should be labled "East Waterford" Penn Dot map here. Perhaps someboday was watching the Giants or Jets while making a map of Juniata County =)? Dincher (talk) 03:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Wow! I am surprised that the census made a mistake like that. They must not have checked it over very well. Makes one wonder. Oh yeah, List of municipalities in Sullivan County, Pennsylvania just made FL !! Dincher (talk) 20:41, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

A change of pace
Hello. If you are interested in a slight change of pace for your recently-acquired admin abilities, could you check the article Larry Sinclair to see if it has been previously deleted? I came across the article during a vandal reversion run. The backstory is a claim was made in-article, since removed, that the article was previously deleted. Without access to deletion records, I cannot tell if this is true for an active article, although the related title Larry Sinclair's Allegations was G10 speedied by WJBscribe. Can you tell if the two articles have the same content which lead to the latter's speedy?

Through several editors, of a pro and con Obama slant, the article has evolved into something rather...goofy. It currently appears to be a BLP attack page against Larry Sinclair, and is aggressively maintained at that state. On the other hand, the original version posted might qualify as a BLP attack on Obama, another of a zillion unsourced attacks against presidential candidates. But if the article has been recreated over an admin+bureacrat's deletion, then there is a quick option to delete the whole mess.

I considered posting on AN/I, but it is a small matter and, anyway, my last post there on a slow-motion vandal sailed through without notice (possibly due to the high-traffic drama AN/I has experienced of late). -- Michael Devore (talk) 22:35, 1 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, WJBscribe agreed with the basic idea that there were no WP:RS, and that it was an attack page, so you made the correct decision and are on solid ground with it. That's typical of crappy articles, three different admins might legitimately come up with three different criteria to delete. Or, heck, throw caution to the winds and just go with WP:IAR, I see that every so often.


 * Incidentally, did you see that our new friend 138.32.32.166 vandalized post-block and was warned by another admin? I predict a longer block coming up, unless the penny drops there on how to behave. -- Michael Devore (talk) 12:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism prevention
I swear I'm not going to keep doing this to you, but since you were so fast resolving the Sinclair issue, and because I mentioned that my last post to AN/I went unresolved, I am going to ask your indulgence a second time. The slow-motion serial IP vandal 138.32.32.166 has vandalized again, although this time someone else caught and reverted. Here's my original AN/I report on 2/28/07:


 * This IP address is a slow-motion (i.e. not now) vandal with a thing for Gino Vanelli, along with several other articles. There have been multiple warnings, including two level-4s, since a 3-hour block in October, and the IP has recently vandalized again at Vannelli and, two days ago, Barnsdall, Oklahoma. Perhaps a block extending over several days would be noticed and prevent further abuse—unlikely, I know, but obviously the continuing warnings aren't helping to curb the behavior and simply posting more and more level-3 or level-4 warnings starts to become a little silly. (WHOIS shows it in a range owned by ConocoPhillips).
 * This IP address is a slow-motion (i.e. not now) vandal with a thing for Gino Vanelli, along with several other articles. There have been multiple warnings, including two level-4s, since a 3-hour block in October, and the IP has recently vandalized again at Vannelli and, two days ago, Barnsdall, Oklahoma. Perhaps a block extending over several days would be noticed and prevent further abuse—unlikely, I know, but obviously the continuing warnings aren't helping to curb the behavior and simply posting more and more level-3 or level-4 warnings starts to become a little silly. (WHOIS shows it in a range owned by ConocoPhillips).

Unfortunately, there is no clear path against a slow-motion vandal who is not vandalizing right now and who has only one short block, other than AN/I. It fails the requirements of WP:AIV, WP:ABUSE, and WP:LTA. I'm not asking you to implement a longer block, unless you feel comfortable doing so, but perhaps you could suggest another solution. Retry the AN/I post from last week and hope it gets action this time? Is there another avenue to take? Anyway, I promise I won't bug you again on an admin-related issue for a couple of months. -- Michael Devore (talk) 11:20, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Just reverted more Vanelli vandalism from the IP. Guess they're not yet receptive to your polite suggestions. -- Michael Devore (talk) 03:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Larrys Creek
The additions to Larrys Creek look good to me and only add to it. I didn't see any obvious problems. Little Round Top might be linked to Little Round Top at Gettysburg by somebody who isn't familiar with PA geography. Perhaps a Litte Round Top (Lycoming County) would be a good idea. I don't know if it is a true worry or not. Just a maybe. The additions about Natural Gas are also very interesting. I am watching that story myself. Cheerio. Dincher (talk) 19:15, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I like the hidden comments. Good idea. Dincher (talk) 22:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Best of luck with the DYK. I am sure that it will make FL if you want to go for it. Black Mo is about done from my end. I will wait to nominate it for GA or maybe just FA until I hear back on Francis Bok. Dincher (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

FPC
By the time I got there it had been withdrawn, but thanks for letting me know. (I had wondered how they were chosen, but I won't be submitting anything anytime soon!) Ben MacDuiTalk /  Walk  17:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

How are you enjoying your new administrative duties btw? Ben MacDuiTalk /  Walk  19:44, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Conversions
Bleakcomb changed some areas from km sq to ha on some PA state park articles. I will probably need help explaining why sq km's are preferred over ha.Dincher (talk) 01:27, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * In a minor miracle, I am able to access wiki today at school. I am afraid the the conversation at Oil Creek State Park has gone over my head at this point. I probably won't have much to say and will follow its progression. Dincher (talk) 17:26, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Little Dog Run is hilarious! It could be a command. Little dog, run! Does it merit its own article? Dincher (talk) 17:42, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Not to pester you...
I was wondering how the Jane Austen map was coming? We're about ready to proceed to WP:FLC with Timeline of Jane Austen at this point. The map is one of the last things we need. Just curious... :) Awadewit | talk  03:09, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Woody Allen filmography
I wanted to thank you for your active participation in the Woody Allen filmography. The nom was failed recently, and with due cause, but I really appreciate all of your feedback. I just ran out of free time in the past week or two to implement your suggestions satisfactorily. I'll renominate it whenever I have a bit more free time, but in the mean time, thanks for not letting me sneak by with an article that was clearly below standards. Keep up the good work! Drewcifer (talk) 08:29, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

DYK update
Any chance you could post it? It's ready to go and its three hours late. Gatoclass (talk) 12:26, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response :) Gatoclass (talk) 13:11, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Black Mo Map
The map looks good to me. I am going to do a bit of research on the airport and find out if it has anything to do with the park. I think maybe the CCC built it. Dincher (talk) 10:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * This says that the airport is located in the park. I haven't found a reference that says anything about it being built by the CCC but I do know that the CCC built an airport at Cherry Springs State Park. Dincher (talk) 11:02, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, Black Moshannon State Park is stable. I have pretty much added all that I can find. Thanks for asking. I am looking forward to the changes. Dincher (talk) 16:08, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I will be away, from the real and wiki world for a few days this week. Tues-Thurs. So I guess on Friday. And could you keep an eye on Francis Bok, too? Just incase anything every happens with it. I will look at the changes soon. I did glimpse briefly yesterday. I am sure they are fine. Happy Easter. Dincher (talk) 16:18, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Just looked at the copy edits. They are fine and dandy thank you very much. And thanks for the additional refs. They are always helpful. Dincher (talk) 16:23, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

GA fail: Mr. Stain
Sorry to bother you after such a long time but just wanted to inform you that Mr. Stain failed the GA review a few days ago. Thank you for your help with the article. I also wondered if you could look into the Reception section, it needs some rephrasing to meet WP:MOS, Thanks alot Binarymoron (talk) 14:35, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

thank you for your comment I will make the changes shortly Binarymoron (talk) 18:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

DYK
Hey, thank you! appreciate that! Coincidentally, I just went out there today and took a bunch of pictures, and just about five minutes ago added one to the article. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 01:57, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

DYK – Portage to San Cristobal
Thanks for that. I really appreciate it. --Bruce1eetalk 07:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

DYK: List of tributaries of Larrys Creek

 * Congrats. Dincher (talk) 19:51, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review dispatch
Hi Ruhrfisch: as you may be aware, peer review is going to be featured in next week's Wikipedia Signpost. A draft of the dispatch can be found here. As you are much closer to the action than me, you may be able to add some useful insights to the dispatch. Do you have any comments? Geometry guy 18:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Protected areas issues
Hi, I see you participated in the past at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Protected areas. I wonder if you could take a look at last two discussion topics there, and chime in. I personally am on the edge about proposing and advocating for deletion of all wikipedia categories on protected areas in any given state, etc., or going in the other direction and joining up with the IUCN to use wikipedia to ferret out and define a good list of IUCN-recognized Protected Areas (IPAs). Your perspective would be welcome. doncram (talk) 20:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

JJonz Sock Puppets
Thanks for the prompt blocking on this guy. However, I highly suspect he is going to continue this nonsense. Is there a very quick way to get an admin's attention over issues like this in the future? Derekloffin (talk) 04:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

PR stats
Hi Sandy, based on the number of semi-automated peer reviews I ran each month, in December 2007 there were at least 156 peer review requests, while January 2008 had at least 180 and February had at least 171. I am also trying very hard to make sure no one has a peer review request with no responses. Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 13:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Ruhrfisch; would you mind updating the stats monthly at WP:FAS ? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 14:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks !! Sandy Georgia (Talk)
 * Since you are trying very hard to make sure no one has a peer review request with no responses, perhaps you could review Flag of Singapore and Homerun (film)? --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 01:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thanks for the Barnstar and very kind words. I appreciate your efforts to list the oldest unreviewed peer reviews, and I continue to enjoy helping out reading new topics. I'll keep trying to tackle 2-4 per week to help out. Biomedeng (talk) 03:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Tenacious D
Thanks for the peer review recommendations. I'll get to work. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 16:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Block for 63.88.37.33
Two week block for User:63.88.37.33 is not enough. They are vandalising despite having a two week block in January and another shorter block in October. IMHO they should get a much longer ban. They should also receive a schoolblock. --TimTay (talk) 17:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * See what happens after this block expires. Make the next block a long one. And see if you can get in touch with the school in question ... from the edits seems like it might be easy to pin down. Daniel Case (talk) 18:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Additionally
Additionally (re in my talk pg), please have a look at the article & try enhancing it (if actually need something). As you can see in the history, I’m doing a one man show here and not much additional contribs are editing. -- Avinesh Jose  T  05:39, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
For the suggestion about peer review. I did review two others that were lacking reviews. I'll admit that I mainly put it up to have the bot check it, and see what happened. If I was really in a hurry, I'd ask a volunteer, but I can always ask some other of the medieval writers to look it over also, which is what I usually do. He's not going to be ready to go to FAC for a bit, I still have some sources to mine out to expand the article some. I really appreciate the note though, makes me feel a bit less lonely with poor old Hubert out there... I think it's just par for the course for the poor guy, he always got ignored in history too! Ealdgyth - Talk 17:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review request: archives?
Just got your message re increasing peer review rate. I'm happy to do it but, since the articles in this month's (till now) list are not in my field, I'll just hang around and check in. (Right?)

Then I thought I'd go to the archive of previous peer requests, but found no archives. Where should I look?

Best regards, Shlishke (talk) 00:44, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer Reviews
Sounds like a plan. I'll take on a couple - I need to lay a guilt trip on a few more people to review Saruman anyway! Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 04:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review
Thanks. I had a plan about reviewing articles extensively after March but since you mentioned I reviewed one article anyway. I will ask some more editors to do independent reviews as well. CSumit (talk) 09:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC) Sumit

RE: PR backlog
It's a great idea, I have always seen the peer review system as something that hardly works (no offence, it is not the fault of users) but this is a step in the right direction. I have done two for you SGGH speak! 13:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

PR backlog
Hey Ruhrfisch, thanks for your message and kind words. I've made a start, knocked three reviews off this afternoon. I think it's a great idea and feel free to nudge me if I miss it getting stacked up... All the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 15:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Shrewsbury
Hey, thanks for doing a little peer review on Shrewsbury! Sorry I haven't really done much to the article recently, just I've been busy IRL. I'll try and get round to doing some of these bits gradually, as I seem to be the only editor interested in promoting the article! Thanks again. Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 21:23, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Photo Upload
I am new here and I have been working a bit here and there on articles. Tonight I found this photo of the Great White Fleet from the Sri Lanka Embassy web site. I would like to add the photo to the USS Virginia Great White Fleet article as it has a good photo of the sailors in Ceylon. One of the sailors is probably my grandfather.

I uploaded the photo with an unknown license as I could not determine the copyright status. Below is the link:

http://www.slembassyusa.org/srilanka_us_relations/historical_context.html

Could you please let me know if this photo is OK to use at Wikimedia.

thanks,

MDaisy MDaisy (talk) 04:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for sending the Writer's Guide as it will be a BIG help in learning how to do things right here. I have done some minor editing and added to a stub. I figured working on stubs would give me practice as I would be learning from another poster what is expected.

I solved the photo problem. As the page I found the photo does provide attribution, but a general one, I decided not to use the photo directly. I did add an external link to the web site so people can take a gander at my grandpa and the rest of his buddies. I hope this is OK.

Thanks so much for all your help,

MDaisy MDaisy (talk) 21:54, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

re: peer review feedback
Thank you for the suggestion. --Teemeah Gül Bahçesi  06:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Let me know how I did
If you have time, please let me know how I did on expanding and updating http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fijian_people Fijian People. It was good to be doing some intellectual writing once again.

Many thanks,

MDaisyMDaisy (talk) 04:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

DYK
Thanks for helping with the crediting. I did catch your late addition and I notice that you added it to the mainpage. Royal broil 01:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review: Veronica Mars
Thank you so much for reviewing the article! I will be sure to take in what you have said. Thanks again!  Corn.u.co.pia'''  Discussion  10:35, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for polishing up the Fijian people article
Thank you so much for polishing up and editing the Fijian people article. It looks sooo spiffy thanks to your expert edits.

I will do some more research and try to find other sources to flesh the article out. I probably won't get to it until over the weekend as the next couple days look pretty busy.

MDaisyMDaisy (talk) 19:30, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Here is the source for the Fijian immigration to Rotuma: http://www.fiji.gov.fj/publish/history_culture.shtml which the Fiji government web site.

I will continue to look for more links.

MDaisyMDaisy (talk) 06:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Confusion
There is an interesting debate going on here. I am barking up the wrong tree? As an admin, perhaps you know more about the ins and outs of this topic. Dincher (talk) 01:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, no problem. It just seems like I am spinning my wheels over there. I have no problem with removing the road sign pic in question, but deleting the whole page seems pointless. Still spinning. Dincher (talk) 01:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for weighing in. I am pleased with the results. Your insights were a good read too. Dincher (talk) 02:53, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Commons images on the main page
Hello! When placing a Wikimedia Commons image on the main page, please remember to first upload it to the English Wikipedia and tag it with the c-uploaded template. Otherwise, it will not be protected, so a vandal can replace it at the Commons and change what appears on our main page. (I've protected Image:Alvin T. Smith House 1.jpg at the Commons, so no further action is necessary in this instance.) Thank you! —David Levy 01:49, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I am sorry - I had followed the image link from DYK Next Update and uploaded Image:Alvin T Smith House 1.jpg from Commons to Wikipedia and protected it. I am not sure why it is not the right image. Thanks for protecting it on Commons - I have an account there, but am only an admin here. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:53, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Aha, my upload has no period after the T, the Commons image does. Not sure how that happened, sorry and thanks again, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:56, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * No worries! As time-saving tip, I'll point out that it isn't necessary to manually protect an image after uploading it here; our cascading protection will automatically cover that as soon as the image is placed in any of the main page templates (provided that it is not being displayed from the Commons).  —David Levy 02:05, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

PR backlog ec
Heh, that's funny. We're both so desperate to clear the backlog! Anyway, all good. I've managed to clear us now. Maybe you should extend the scope to include things on there for, say, more than five days? I dunno, maybe it's just me being too keen...! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

PR backlog
Should I remove the date if I empty the last backlogged PR from it? I haven't been doing so thus far because I wasn't sure how you liked to run it. SGGH speak! 17:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Columbia River re-nom
Hi Ruhrfisch, recently we've had quite a surge of activity on the Columbia River article, as you may have noticed. Lots of really good input from editors from OR, WA, and BC, and from experienced WP editors and newcomers. I just checked against your GA concerns, and am pretty sure we have corrected all the substantial concerns -- along with lots and lots of additional improvements. There are still a few that remain, but I don't think they're a problem for GA...at least, I hope not! Do you have the time to take another look at this article? Thanks again for all your feedback, it was very helpful in improving the article. -Pete (talk) 18:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks! -Pete (talk) 20:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Woo-hoo!
Man, am I glad I swung by! I was jazzed to see the Ernest Beaux article over at DYK! That's two so far since I came back under the new username. Thanks so much for the consideration! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 22:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Sorry about that. I used to go by "Lucky 6.9" back in the day.  Too many bad memories associated with that name, I'm afraid.  --PMDrive1061 (talk) 00:04, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Buck Up! Spring is finally here...
--Cinemaniac (talk •  contribs  •  critique) 03:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Marion track map
Thank you so much for uploading that map. It looks wonderful! Thanks, Southern Illinois SKYWARN (talk) 12:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Towamencin
Look I asked Towamencin to revert your changes. Why don't you direct your focus somewhere else? You are no expert, just another unpaid meddler. Why is it as soon as one of you guy becomes an administrator you go nuts? Please play in your own back yard, and leave us to ours. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ailde (talk • contribs) 12:50, March 21, 2008

You say your not a rookie, this place is full of them. I had no idea how full. That is why I turned over my work to someone else. But, I still look sometimes, and I am never surprised. First Leebo, now you.

You have no understanding of Towamencin, you probably couldn't find it on a map. But you want to decise what is important and what is not. Who is lying, who is not.

I don't like your style, you are another Leebo. My first suspicion is you are Leebo. Get your third opinion; obviously it will be you using another id. Guess who wins. Surprise.

I am going away now, communicate with Towamencin. (the id not the township) There is more patience there for you rookies. Ailde (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 14:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

You are a piece of work; you call what I say personal attacks while you use pointing out my spelling mistakes in a way that accomplishes the same thing. Yes spelling is my cross that only shows here because Wikipedia doesn’t provide spell check; great software huh. And than you try being dismissive and holier than thou, I see right through you, I know what you are.

You just like to be or think you are being clever. Then you have to show off your wiki accomplishments; who cares how many maps you stole from the census; big deal. Oh yeah, and you speak German too, whoopee. If you’re not Leebo, you are his clone, two peas in a pod, or considering your generation, that would be an ipod.

You are a product of cyberspace, and nothing more. When you walk out your front door into the real world, no one sees you. If you really had anything to contribute, you would not be here all day long wreaking havoc on what others are contributing. I turned my work over to someone else; it is there problem now what you and the likes of you do to it. I have a life; I’m not going to spend it here.

P.S. Towamencin (the id not the twp) is kind of pissed, you deleted the trail map pic when the rules clearly say warn the creator first and give them a chance to correct it; naughty, naughty. Oh yeah, you’re an honorable person. Give me a break. Bye, bye. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ailde (talk • contribs) 17:59, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I wanted to make my position clear. In the Wiki-world we are all unpaid volunteers. I was here specifically to update the Towamencin article, and little more. You and Leebo, etc are here to do whatever it is you do. As administrators you have taken on responsibility for truth justice and the American way in the world of Wikipedia. Since it was available, all I wanted to do was take my knowledge of my Township, and transfer it somewhere where it could do some good for the Township and its citizens. I view your role as bureaucrats, just getting in the way of progress by putting up your road blocks for information, enforcing a whole lot of minutia. And your not even professionals, just volunteers, like me, except with a little authority, which I believe has gone to most of your collective heads, and you are almost gleeful to wallow here all day like the preverbal “pig in the mud”, making arbitrary decisions based on confusing rules, while shooting down the poor unsuspecting contributor. This is why I turned my work over to someone else. I can not abide your meddlings and arbitrary decisions. Trying to be heard (figuratively speaking of course), to reverse a change is almost impossible and takes more time than I wish to spend here in cyberspace. Obviously you all are doing a terrific job for the owners of Wikipedia and making them lots of money, for which I am sure they are eternally grateful. So, all that being said, I will return to the real world where I feel more at home and get paid to do what you do for free and, therefore, enjoy a whole lot more because of it. Ailde (talk) 14:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Nice to be back. :)
Glad you happened to catch me! I was just signing off and I'm not likely to be back for a few days.

Many thanks for the nice welcome-home. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:01, 22 March 2008 (UTC)



PMDrive1061 (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Columbia River
Thanks so much for the detail-oriented review, complete with excellent suggestions as we move toward FA. As I've become more familiar with your work and your reputation, I'm particularly gratified by your kind words about the article, and the barnstar. It's truly been a community effort to get to GA though, and Skookum, Northwesterner1, Pfly, Finetooth, and others were instrumental in getting it there. They've all brought expertise and energy that was much needed. Your initial review was a key part, as well, in getting that all to happen. So, thank you! -Pete (talk) 00:17, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Passions
Hi, I just wanted to thank you again for reviewing Passions. I think I've implemented some of your ideas but I'm still working on it. I would appreciate it if you continue to provide tips for making the article better. Thanks again! -- Dougie WII (talk) 20:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

PR backlog
Hey Ruhrfisch, going well at the moment, don't you think? Edit conflicting over who gets the last of the backlog! Don't how long it'll last but more power to it! All the best, hope you're having a good Easter. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think given the increase in interest, you could safely go to three days. What an improvement, though, I remember when peer reviews could go for weeks without so much as a sniff, and how demoralising that what.  So this is good, and which should set our sights high...!  The Rambling Man (talk) 13:50, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Maps
Hi, on the FAC for Glorious First of June you created this excellent map Image:First of June 1794 Map.png. I was wondering if you had the time to do another one for the Battle of Tory Island? I'm afraid I am hopeless at this sort of thing but I did (sort of) create this map Image:Battle of tory island location.png illustrating the battle's location which you might be able to use as a guide. Let me know if you can do something, it would be gratefully appreciated.--Jackyd101 (talk) 11:07, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thankyou very much, please take your time, there is no rush. If you can do the same colours then that would be great and it might be better to show all of Ireland to help locate it for those unfamiliar with the Irish coastline (although I leave it to your discretion). All the best.--Jackyd101 (talk) 19:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

In-universe vs jargon etc
Hey Ruhrfisch, glad to see we're fighting the good fight still and you've been brave enough to dare to review the Simpsons article! I know all reviewers have their favourite policies/guidelines, and I think one of yours is WP:IN-U - and rightly so! - but I wondered if there was a decent factually analogy to this? I've often been asked to review wrestling articles which are completely rife with jargon and "in the know" descriptions of situations and events. I was curious if you had suffered similarly during reviews of factual articles and if you had a good, succinct policy or guideline to point at? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for archiving the Charley peer review. I was thinking the bot had simply messed up in not doing so automatically, geuss I did something wrong somewhere. TheNobleSith (talk) 03:54, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Deletion review
I'm not up on image copyright matters a ton (all my pictures I put in the public domain, so I don't have to wonder what I'm permitting and what I'm requiring and reserving), but I would tend to go with saying that the image could possibly be restored, depending on its usage. The prime thing is the "no free equivalent" clause; as long as the picture was being used to illustrate a section on the observatory, I think it could pass all other parts without difficulty. The key part is the old edition in the corner: with people, we don't permit a fair use image just to identify a live person, since there's a chance that a free one could be created, as the person's still alive. Similarly, if it's on private property, someone who is allowed on the grounds could easily go there and take a picture, or the school could release a picture, or something like that. However, with dead people, we sometimes allow a fair use image: if there's no free one now, we can't create one, since the person's dead. Similarly, we can't create a new image of the pre-repair observatory. Therefore, as long as it's being used specifically to illustrate the construction, I think it could pass, but if it's being used simply to depict the observatory, that's not enough. Of course, it needs a proper tag: regardless of its passing the fair use criteria, it can't be allowed to remain with a PD-self tag, for it must be tagged with a fair-use tag and a proper rationale. Nyttend (talk) 04:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That seems reasonable. Thanks for the compliment :-)  Nyttend (talk) 04:17, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch!
You da man. Any chance you could post the DYK update? It's a couple hours late. Gatoclass (talk) 12:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)