User talk:SSW9389

Welcome to Wikipedia! I had seen your contributions a number of times, but hadn't got round to saying hello until now.

Please feel free to update our articles if you have more accurate information: see Be bold. I notice you often say things on talk pages rather than making the changes directly. Best if you cite a source, of course.

Any questions, feel free to ask - here, or in email (morven@byz.org). —Matthew Brown (T:C) 13:52, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Merge CB&Q 9901 to General Motors Electro-Motive Division
Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. - CobaltBlueTony 15:42, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: P&LE/SSW Alco PA/PBs
Do you think that we ought to re-add the P&LE/SSW units as distinct entries and subtract them from the NYC/SP totals?--Foxhound 02:11, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

List of Texas railroads
Your recent edit to List of Texas railroads broke links to existing pages and is not consistent with established article naming guidelines followed by WikiProject Trains. The article naming guidelines have been developed based on consensus discussions dating back a few years at the WikiProject Trains talk page and are summarized on the WikiProject Trains manual of style page. Slambo (Speak) 19:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind comment
I'm glad my work hasn't gone unnoticed, I'm just trying to "fill in the blanks", when and where I find 'em. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 21:42, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

ALCO FA
In regards to your revisions of my edits to ALCO FA, while I would agree with most of your revisions, I disagree with your dates on the launch of the FA2. According to Steinbrenner's book, the first locomotives produced were in the fall of 1950, except these units were a shop order for demonstrators. Quote from the book, "Initial production of the FA-2/FB-2 began on two shop orders, which were completed in October-December 1950.  And in reading the passage over again, it seems that the first locomotives delivered were these same units, at the end of demonstration runs, sometime in 1951. "In early 1951, this set underwent testing on the Southern Pacific and Rock Island. At the conclusion of these tests, the demonstrators were sold to the Chicago & North Western and Great Northern." Please let me know your thoughts on this. Thank you. C628 (talk) 13:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

EMD Timelines
Thanks for the comment! I know there are some inconsistencies. Unfortunately, I don't have a decent spotters guide (or other book with production dates). Thus far, I've had to use the individual Wikipedia pages to try to collect the date information. This is particularly hard in the later series (post-SD50) as there isn't a good breakdown for the production of SD70's vs SD70M's vs SD70MAC's, etc.

I hope to find a good book with production dates and quantities for all models. If/when I find this, I place to update not only the timelines, but the specific model pages too!

-Frontrange —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frontrange (talk • contribs) 16:52, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

References on Crowley's Ridge
Please not that other Wiki articles are not valid references. I've used the references from the section of loess to support your addition to Crowley's Ridge. Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 15:04, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

RE: Daniel Upthegrove
How is this person historically significant or relevant to Greenville, TX or anyone outside of the city? This person is not famous or noteworthy enough to have a biographical page on Wikipedia or any where else and should not be mentioned in this section anymore than other common people from this area. Please find and cite referenced facts with more substance to them. Other people in the,"Notable residents and natives", section are or were recognized by a broad spectrum of people from and outside of Greenville, TX during and or after their career. Your insistence of adding Daniel Upthegrove to the Notable residents and natives section seems biased and aggrandizing as if this person was a relation to you in some form. I admonish you to reconsider your edit.Thank you. Ntmg (talk) 06:52, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

The President of a major railroad that went through Greenville is not historically significant? Carol Taylor's article about the Upthegrove's contribution is not historically significant? Daniel Upthegrove is more historically significant than most of the folks listed on Greenville's page. If I lived near Hunt County I'd have all the information to write his bio. You need to consider what you consider historically significant. How many books do you have in the Greenville Library? I'd cite my own book as a reference, but that would be aggrandizing. Dr. Conrad wouldn't want me to do that. --SSW9389 10:26, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't think that Upthegrove has the due weight needed to be notable. There is no significant coverage of this person anywhere. He doesn't appear to have done anything notable or outstanding in his industry that would make him have importance in the historical record other than being the president of a railroad. Please consider this from a neutral point of veiw and not from a biased affinity of all things railroad centric. If you have verifiable refrences to cite that validate your claims it would be most helpfull. As for this Dr. Conrad person I am not aware of them and do not see how they figure into this discussion. Mentioning your own work is somewhat aggrandizing wouldn't you think. Perhaps starting with an article you refrenced by Carol Taylor would be a good start for building a verifiable refrence. Regards, Ntmg (talk) 13:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC) I'm assembling the necessary information to write a wiki page on Upthegrove. He presided over the most tumoltuous time in Cotton Belt history. The railroad likely earned revenue upwards of $500M during his tenure. The railroad was sold by the Gould Family to the Rock Island Railroad, then sold again to the Kansas City Southern, then sold again to New York Investors and finally sold to the Southern Pacific in 1932. Cotton Belt went bankrupt in 1935. Upthegrove oversaw the rebuilding of the line post WW1, the conversion to oil fuel on the southern part of the Cotton Belt, the establishment of the Blue Streak Merchandise fast freight train and modernization during the later part of the Great Depression and into WW2. This included new super power steam in the form of 20 L1 northerns, initial application of ABS and then CTC to the mainline, air conditioned passenger cars, and the beginning of dieselization during WW2. Thousands of employees worked for this railroad. Upthegrove saw the Cotton Belt through some very rough times and kept the company together. He is easily the most influential man ever born in Greenville, Texas. I'm contacting Dr. James Conrad, former head of the Special Collections Library at TAMU-Commerce for help in contacting Carol Taylor. They both helped with my first book and will help with Upthegrove's biography. --SSW9389 13:45, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Please stop adding this person to the Notable residents section. They do not belong there. Your continuous adding and editing this entry is bordering vandalism and trolling. Once again I admonish you to cease and desist any further entries of this person into aforementioned section. There are no known verifiable or citable encyclopedic, biographic articles, news entries or otherwise on this person. Furthermore to call him the "Most influential man ever born in Greenville" is again aggrandizing, highly subjective and arguable. Many residents and historians would argue the people who built what was at the time the world's largest cotton gin to be in contention if not already having that honor. There are other people who are from and or lived in Greenville who are CEO's and presidents of large corporations however that does not warrant their inclusion into this section. Perhaps you could add them to a railroad history stub? That would be more suitable, wouldn't you agree? Sincerely, Ntmg (talk) 10:02, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Every single one of those CEOs and business Presidents should have their names on Greenville's page. They are easily more important than any of those glamour and sports folks. That is except for Audie Murphy, he killed lots of National Socialists for President Roosevelt. Read Fred Frailey's Blue Streak Merchandise pages 9-23 for a glimmer of what Upthegrove did for his hometown railroad. Upthegrove was an railroad innovator: The Blue Streak Merchandise, the fastest freight train of its time secures Upthegrove's place in history. Upthegrove's Cotton Belt employed 8,577 people and had a payroll of nearly $22.8 Million in 1945. None of the other folks listed on Greenville's page had that kind of continual buying power. Were there no other famous folk in Greenville born the 19th Century? To dismiss Upthegrove is to dismiss history. --SSW9389 15:45, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Fred Frailey, formerly of Sulphur Springs, Texas, was the Editor of the Kiplinger Financial Newsletter. He is also an author of numerous magazine articles and books detailing railroad operations and history. He is currently a Special Correspondent for Trains Magazine. His book Blue Streak Merchandise details the entire history of that famous freight train up to 1990. The Blue Streak Merchandise was first authorized by Daniel Upthegrove in September 1931. The train broke with conventional railroading in that it competed with trucks. It first operated from St. Louis to Pine Bluff, AR. The first Texas section of the Blue Streak passed through Greenville in December 1935. By 1946 the Blue Streak Merchandise began operation from St. Louis to Los Angeles, CA over Cotton Belt and Southern Pacific tracks. --SSW9389 16:11, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Daniel Upthegrove will be covered in Chapter 1 of my next Cotton Belt book.--SSW9389 23:08, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for the offer, I think my E-mail this user works, but I don’t recall using it. Actually, I’m impaired, this is fun/rehab, but I’m not really a believer. I generally try not to change/delete other people's stuff, when I reword I try to use what is already there. Maybe I should try harder, but I’m in over my head now. Having someone correct my stuff is not offensive at all.

I thought Dorin (72) C&NW Power was a picture book, it has been collecting dust, but there are drawings in the back, so I’m doing infoboxes. I’m fair at tables and drawings, and understand machinery (an ex-truck driver). I was going to keep at it, and expect we’ll see each other around. Thank you for your time. Sammy D III (talk) 03:07, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Is wheelbase between outside axles or bolsters? In my world it's both, government or manufacturer. Thank you. Sammy D III (talk) 20:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I just checked the Diesel Shop website and they show from the center outside wheel to center outside wheel. For example the F7 wheelbase is 39'. A Cotton Belt Folio diagram shows the same 39' for the F7. --SSW9389 22:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Outside to outside it is. Thanks. Sammy D III (talk) 22:24, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * sammydthree@gmail.com Sammy D III (talk) 22:43, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

EMD SD50
I hurriedly took the erroneous figure from EMD SD50 (huge, 20-cylinder engines). Now if you know the actual number of cylinders or if you can readily find that, just insert that number when you get a chance to do so. Peter Horn User talk 15:00, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Found it myself: EMD 16-645F3B implies V16 & 16 cyliners. Peter Horn User talk 15:17, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Typo, cylinders Peter Horn User talk 15:20, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

sorry about that
I'm glad that I got an exact date of it being built. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.83.60.230 (talk) 17:26, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

The February 8, 1943 date is in both the article and the Talk page. --SSW9389 04:30, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Electro-Motive Diesel reverts
Can you please elaborate on ? "You've gone too far" is not an explanation, and a revert without an explanation is bound to be reverted. --Deeday-UK (talk) 17:30, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

You removed historical names and content on something you don't know much about. Why? --SSW9389 17:41, 31 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Any chance you can be a bit more specific? I did a number of separate changes, and I did it for the sake of clarity and encyclopaedic style, and you wiped them all out in one go, which is kind of blunt and, let me say, somehow lazy. I removed from the lead information that is already present in the body and is not lead-worthy, per WP:LEAD. 'Historical names' removed? If you are referring to the paragraph about the company history, see how it read before my edits:
 * Electro-Motive Diesel, Inc. traces its roots to the Electro-Motive Engineering Corporation, founded in 1922. In 1930, General Motors Corporation purchased the Winton Engine Co. and Winton's primary customer of gasoline engines, the Electro-Motive Company (a manufacturer of gasoline-electric self-propelled rail cars), combining the two to form GM's Electro-Motive Division (EMD) on January 1, 1941.
 * it could hardly be more convoluted: are Electro-Motive Engineering Corporation and Electro-Motive Company the same company? are they related? The reader has to read on to understand, which means it's a poor summary. Equally poor is peppering the lead with minutiae already present in the body, such as that the 1941 merger took place on January 1; how can the exact date of such remote events be lead-worthy? Same story for the 'Inc.': the full legal name is already in the infobox; repeating it four times in the lead is just a waste of readers' time (especially those who have to rely on screen readers). And so on, like the redundant 'of America' when referring to the US, all reverted now.
 * I'm going to reinstate my changes; if you disagree with some of them, then please address them individually; this steamroller-style blanket-revert is not constructive. --Deeday-UK (talk) 22:59, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

All this gets back as to whether this should be a single stand alone article or two articles. The article is a train wreck as it stands. The old company and the new company are not the same. You're edits prove the point that keeping the old history with the new is incompatible. Thank you for destroying history and proving my point. I'm calling the rail boss.--SSW9389 10:45, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Canyon Diablo, Arizona
My apology for not adding a more detailed edit summary. I created the article Two Guns, Arizona today, and it's 3 miles from Canyon Diable (the ghost town). However, Two Guns was redirecting to Canyon Diablo. The article on Canyon Diablo has a photo of Two Guns, and the line about Two Guns is confusing doesn't really fit in to this article. I added a paragraph about Canyon Diablo in the Two Guns article, but there was a context for it. I hate edit waring so I hope this explains my edit. Magnolia677 (talk) 02:08, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Two Guns is pertinent because you have to exit I-40 at Two Guns to get to the east side of Canyon Diablo. The west side is accessed off of Buffalo Range Road. Been there and done that from both sides of the Canyon. The Canyon Diablo article may need an "access" section, I haven't been there in nearly 30 years, but doubt the road is any better. --SSW9389 02:36, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Talkback
The Wicked Twisted Road (talk) 00:37, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Your signature
Per WP:SIG, your signature should link to either your user page or user talk page at minimum. Your signature does not link to either of them. Please correct this. Mjroots (talk) 15:42, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I have no idea how to do that. It works on some and not on others. And I don't know why that is either. --SSW9389 15:46, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Test: SSW9389 15:52, 12 March 2017 (UTC) Test four do dah things SSW9389 15:53, 12 March 2017 (UTC) Testing click the signature button --SSW9389 15:54, 12 March 2017 (UTC) Test SSW9389 16:06, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Mjroots: Any ideas on how to fix this? I've tried typing the four tildes and clicking the signature button. Both yield the same result, no link. But it does give my screen name and generate a time stamp. I really don't know how to fix this. --SSW9389 16:09, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You can change your signature via the preferences tab. Mjroots2 (talk) 06:48, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Test SSW9389 09:05, 13 March 2017 (UTC) Testing SSW9389 09:06, 13 March 2017 (UTC) Test 3 SSW9389 Test 4 SSW9389 09:10, 13 March 2017 (UTC) Test --SSW9389 (talk) 09:28, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Looks like you've cracked it. Well done. Mjroots (talk) 21:22, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Reverts
I see you are reintroducing a lot of edits I reverted. That's fine, but note that you are explicitly "taking ownership" of those edits. I was wholesale-reverting a bunch of edits from a block-evading sockpuppet. --Yamla (talk) 17:29, 19 November 2018 (UTC) Putting the term road switcher in every hood unit article is redundant. It belongs in the info box if anywhere. Cluttering up the lead sentence with too much language doesn't make any sense to this diesel historian. --SSW9389 (talk) 17:32, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to you reinstating those edits, so long as you understand you aren't reverting but introducing the content. No big deal here, just means you are taking responsibility as though this was new content. --Yamla (talk) 17:49, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 16
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited EMD F9, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Chesapeake and Ohio ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/EMD_F9 check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/EMD_F9?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:43, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Regardless
The edit you reverted was by a sock of a LTA vandal. Lupin VII (talk) 21:05, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

EMD GP9
Hello, you had mentioned the information is from EMD documents, however I have not been able to locate or identify  which documents those are. The information we include here couldn't be based on our own analysis of published information; or analysis by an author or a source that is not reliably published whose meaning you can read about on Wikipedia policy on verifiability. So, rail fan type websites or the webmaster's interpretation of published information generally shouldn't be used as sources or external links here. Graywalls (talk) 12:56, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Graywalls do you recognize the name Don Strack? He is a well known western railroad historian, you can verify that with the Union Pacific Historical Society. Strack's website is encyclopedic in nature and historically accurate. Andre Kristopans is a locomotive historian, not as well known as Strack, but known to diesel researchers for its accuracy. Mr. Kristopans' work is based on EMD Product Data Cards, which are very closely held. Nearly all the EMD diesel rosters on Wikipedia are based on Mr. Kristopans' work. Your edit of the GP9 article is vandalism to me as both Strack and Kristopans have been recognized on Wikipedia for years. You haven't suggested an alternative to Kristopans' documentation of EMD serial numbers. There have been errors found in Kristopans'data that have been edited: very few omissions, and a few transpositions. These are reported to Mr. Strack for correction. Do you want Mr. Strack's or Mr. Kristopans email address? They could tell you how the information was developed from closely held EMD documentation. --SSW9389 (talk) 14:08, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

The January 1, 1959 edition of EMD Product Data is titled, "EMD Locomotive Reference Data". It was compiled by the EMD Service Department. Its contents are every EMC/EMD diesel locomotive built up to the end of 1958, with engine, serial number order number, road number data. Of particular interest are the wreck rebuilds which are often ignored in a pure serial number inventories. There is also a GMD version of this document for those diesels manufactured at London, Ontario. --SSW9389 (talk) 14:54, 3 November 2019 (UTC)


 * see WP:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard and WP:USESPS. Reliably published means that somene's been recognized as an expert, not by some people that likes to talk about trains, but recognized as expert and seen as such in something published by publishers with a reputation for fact checking and all of these must be independently verifiable via published items.Graywalls (talk) 19:38, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Don Strack and Andre Kristopans are both recognized experts, who are you? Don Strack has been published multiple times over decades of historical work. He is hosting Andre Kristopans EMD work because it is highly accurate and extremely beneficial to the understanding of EMD production records. Your attack on subject experts like Strack and Kristopans is noted and continued attacks should be considered vandalism of accepted historical work. --SSW9389 (talk) 11:22, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Per the guidelines at WP:USESPS, it isn't about who you say are experts. These people need to be established as experts on subject by reliably published material in the relevant field. Graywalls (talk) 12:35, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

November 2019
Hello, I'm Graywalls. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Cotton Belt Freight Depot, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Graywalls (talk) 07:34, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

You made a mistake and continue to make them. Everything written on that page is true. --SSW9389 (talk) 11:18, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Cotton Belt Freight Depot, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. ''You have been continuing to add contents into the article without proper citations. Citations need to go within the article in proper format, not the edit summary so that they are available for anyone to check Please refer to WP:Tutorial/Citing_sources if you need assistance with how to do so. '' Graywalls (talk) 12:26, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Except every bit of it is true, quit wasting my time. --SSW9389 (talk) 12:27, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not here to debate whether it is true. What you're claiming to be true needs to be reliably verifiable through something published. That is the policy on verifiability on anything you re-add to Wikipedia. Graywalls (talk) 12:39, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Please stop adding unsourced or poorly sourced content, as you did on EMD E9. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ''Continuing to revert removed contents that lacks references directly supporting the inserted material despite being reasonable aware of the policy through communications in the past weeks by myself, and by others over the years. As you did here in this EDIT'' Graywalls (talk) 12:01, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

ALCO PA
Your recent change to the article was not supported by reliable sources, as required per our verifiability requirements. Please do not add information that can not be proven through a reliably published (per wikipedia definition) materials. Graywalls (talk) 07:52, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

I don't think that primary source by some rail fan dude is an acceptable source whatsoever, but I have started a discussion at Reliable_sources/Noticeboard Graywalls (talk) 08:04, 6 December 2019 (UTC) R Craig Rutherford publisher owner of The Diesel Shop website is a published author, landscape architect and not anyone's railfan dude. --SSW9389 (talk) 08:21, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
 * how does being a landscape architect mean anything to rail related topic? Also "published" does not mean a thing unless it's on a related topic and it is published through a publisher with a reputation for fact checking and the person in question is considered an expert on the subject. Graywalls (talk) 08:31, 6 December 2019 (UTC) R Craig Rutherford's occupation allowed him the income to pursue his "hobby" to a great degree and to keep up his website with a lot of help, myself included. R. Craig Rutherford's book is "Running in the Shadows" and is about Alco FA locomotives. It is very related to Alco. Many of the rosters on The Diesel Shop are based on information from Extra 2200 South. --SSW9389 (talk) 09:05, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

GE B36-7
Please see the article's talk page. Graywalls (talk) 23:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

March 2020
Please do not add or change content, as you did at GE B36-7, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. ''All contents on Wikipedia must be verifiable through reliable sources whose definition is in the link above; and uncited contents can be removed when challenged and it is on the editor reinserting them to properly reference them. On Wikipedia, contents generated by users, such as train fan site forum posts, personal websites, Flickr images do not satisfy these requirements. From the notices left for you in November 2019, it is assumed that you're familiar with it as you didn't raise any questions about them. '' Graywalls (talk) 00:38, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

St. Louis Southwestern Railway
You had an objection over the phrasing "Cotton Belt system" which pre-dates my edits. I added sources to support the statement, but left some of the original wording as is, however I changed the phrasing and more precisely paraphrased the source to resolve this issue. Your full reversion of my edit however restored original research and contents sourced to a reference that do not meet our reliable sources guidelines, then I noticed your subsequent edits were on the contents that shouldn't have been restored. I am going to defer you back to the discussion at Talk:GE_B36-7 and WP:ONUS. Verifiability is not optional. It is required. Graywalls (talk) 21:33, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

EMD Product Reference Data Card
Hello, could please explain to me what this reference you keep adding is exactly, and how it satisfies WP:PUBLISHED and WP:PUBLISH? From what I have found by looking up this reference you are using, it is an EMD internal document that was never published or distributed to the public, which would make it unacceptable as a reference for Wikipedia. I strongly suspect this reference you are using violates Wikipedia's policy on accessibility, which states: "A source is considered accessible if it is available to the public to review in some manner." If you can demonstrate this reference meets these policies, I will drop the issue. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

A belated welcome!


Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, SSW9389! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:


 * Introductory tutorial
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Writing an article
 * Five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Community portal
 * Help pages
 * The Teahouse (newcomer help)
 * Main help desk

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

If you don't already know, you should sign your posts on talk pages by using four tildes ( ~ ) to insert your username and the date.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! – S. Rich (talk) 16:32, 10 November 2021 (UTC)