User talk:Tim1965/TalkArchives11

John C. Truesdale
Hi- The former chair of the National Labor Relations Board John C. Truesdale died on July 3, 2011-he is listed at the Recent Deaths section. I was wondering if you could do an article about him? Otherwise, the editors who edit the Recent Deaths section will removed his name after a month. You have far better experience with labor unions and labor relations and therefore can do a better job with the Truesdale article then I could. Many thanks-RFD (talk) 12:54, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Wow, I'd not seen this. I'll check it out.  Thanks!!! - Tim1965 (talk) 13:31, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

July 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 14:12, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for John C. Truesdale
PanydThe muffin is not subtle 00:20, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of C. M. Russell Museum Complex
Hello! Your submission of C. M. Russell Museum Complex 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! Gamaliel (talk) 17:16, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Congressman John Mills Houston
You edited] to twice say he took office in 1933. Even though the article in one section says he was elected in 1934 and the sources for the article also corroborate this.- William 14:17, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and change it. I don't own that article; nobody does. - Tim1965 (talk) 19:22, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for C. M. Russell Museum Complex
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Monte Dolack
Pls visit: User_talk:Montanabw Pumpkin Sky  talk  22:23, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * A bit more for you there. Pumpkin Sky   talk  19:12, 12 August 2011 (UTC)...fixed typo there.  Pumpkin Sky   talk  19:47, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * And I added more there too.  Montanabw (talk) 22:32, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * In the list you his DOB as 1978, so I changed it to 1950 as that seems to be correct. Pumpkin Sky   talk  01:43, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * D'oh! I copied incorrectly from a previous line. - Tim1965 (talk) 12:54, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you putting this up for DYK? There's a time limit of 5 days. You have more time to find a photo due to how long DYK reviews take, which BTW have gotten much more bureaucratic lately. Pumpkin Sky   talk  13:17, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I self-nominated for DYK. Without a Commons image, I can't see an image going on the DYK nominations page.  And you're right:  DYK has gotten so hyper-bureaucratized in the just the last three months, it's nearly impossible to get something through. I like that nominators have to review another nomination to get things through; that helped clean up the backlog.  But between early June and now, DYK also added several new templates -- even though the rules for DYK didn't change.  Now nominations are getting held up for the stupidest things (a non-hook sentence not being cited, or minor issues of copyediting).  It's a nightmare.  I am just shy of 300 DYKs.  But I am seriously considering not nominating anything else, I'm so mad at what's happened to DYK.  (Did you see the results of the "new user poll" a while back?  One of the major complaints was that Wikipedia is too bureaucratic.  I guess everyone over at DYK forgot to read that report!) - Tim1965 (talk) 00:57, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I put article in for DYK for a bit but a few weeks ago I bowed out and I told the DYK crowd why. A big part of this is the FA crowd (mainly Tony1 and SandyGeorgia) put enough pressure on DYK to turn it into mini FAs and now few people submit or review. I did not see that poll. Where is it? I looked at the DYK backlog today and only 16 of 240 noms are approved. The backlog is a month long. They don't even have enough approved noms to fill the queues now. I got treated like crap my first few days but finally some admins with sense saved the situation otherwise I'd have left in a few days. There are a lot of good eggs on wiki but I'm getting the impression there's no effective way to control the meanies or the powerful cliques. Pumpkin Sky  talk  01:03, 14 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree with your assessment of Tony1. He's nasty in the way he handles people.  And, frankly, I don't believe he's actually following guidelines; he's just imposing his own vision.  As for the "bitten newbies" reports and polls, see this week's Signpost. It's got a brief article, and lots of links to the previous research. - Tim1965 (talk) 01:10, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * (watching) open secret: you don't have to use a template. Someone nice reverted it's addition twice on one nom for me, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:29, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't use that idiotic reviewing template on DYK; it's useless. I follow the DYK nom rules, instead! But plenty of others are using that template, and they are using it to delay DYK noms because they are nitpicking new articles (the vast majority of DYK noms are new, not expanded) for issues of quality that are clearly not part of the DYK criteria. Have you noticed that use of that template is wreaking havoc with the DYK Talk page?  If there is just a single CSS code mark erased by accident or out of place, it affects vast numbers of templates below it and causes the whole page to display noms incorrectly. - Tim1965 (talk) 13:01, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * If you have time, just go over the discussions page and look for my name, saying again and again that a template is good in certain cases, very few cases, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:18, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, Iván Erőd looks like it is ready to go! - Tim1965 (talk) 16:37, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding and review! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:41, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Convention centers in Montana
Category:Convention centers in Montana, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you.  Purpleback pack  89  ≈≈≈≈  01:23, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Template:Did you know nominations/Andrew Gower (actor)
Just so you know, your nomination of Template:Did you know nominations/Andrew Gower (actor) is not complete. You still haven't done step III of the instructions. r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 07:27, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I sure did. Go to August 13.  The code is there, but it's not pulling the nomination subpage onto the DYK page for reasons I can't explain. - Tim1965 (talk) 12:48, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I can explain it now: I see that you yourself had to fix the code for inserting nom subpages on the Template Talk page. You did it this morning.  Thanks for doing that. - Tim1965 (talk) 13:10, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see now. Yes, sorry about that; I changed some things around recently and forgot to change all the instructions, it looks like you posted your nomination right around the same time. r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 14:29, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion for WikiProject United States to support WikiProject Montana
It was recently suggested that WikiProject Montana might be inactive or semiactive and it might be beneficial to include it in the list of projects supported by WikiProject United States. I have started a discussion on the projects talk page soliciting the opinions of the members of the project if this project would be interested in being supported by WikiProject United States. Please feel free to comment on your opinions about this suggestion. --Kumioko (talk) 01:52, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

The articles you edited being of GA or FA quality
I, the user Jim856796, have been looking at the pages you edited about Washington D.C., Montana, Motion Pictures, U.S. Supreme Court cases, and gay adult film. I have noticed that most of the articles that you have edited are probably of GA or FA quality (except for the articles which are currently stubs). Few of those articles could actually have GA status. The question is:Can Wikipedia have too many featured articles or good articles? Or too many articles of any quality? Jim856796 (talk) 15:27, 17 August 2011 (UTC)


 * LOL! Honestly? The reason I don't seek GA status for many articles is two-fold. First, I know I'm doing good work, and want to expand the number of articles rather than leap through hoops to actually get them to GA status.  Second, I find that the GA process is haphazard, frankly.  One reviewer may focus on style, consistency, completeness...while another demands the oddest things you'll ever see.  (Like "What's the name of the artwork in the building?" or "You mention the artist's son, but provide no name".)  I find the GA process to be incredibly stressful, because it puts immense pressure on me to find new sources (even though I found most of the ones I could already), new information (even though I think all the revelant info is there), and fill holes (even though I couldn't fill those previously).  All as soon as possible (without allowing for real life to intervene).


 * I'm very, very flattered that you think my articles are high quality. It makes me very happy to know that someone else finds them to be of such high caliber.  My preference, though, is not to nominate my own articles for GA or even FA status.  (I've never tried to get an article to FA status!)  If others want to nominate them, I'm happy to have them do so.


 * I did a massive amount of work on Green Line (Washington Metro). Then someone else nominated it for GA status.  A group of people worked to bring it to GA status.  (I helped a tiny bit.)  That was the most pleasant GA experience I've had on Wikipedia, and I'd love to replicate it for other articles that get nominated for GA.


 * And to answer your question more directly: No, Wikipedia cannot have too many GA or FA articles. - Tim1965 (talk) 15:41, 17 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey Tim, if you want to try getting your Pryor Mountain article or the spinoff I did from it on the Pryor Mustangs to GA, I know a couple WPEQ editors who could give them a responsible pre-GA review and then put a tippo into the hat of some responsible reviewers. I DO agree with the haphazard nature of the gauntlet, and I hate it, myself, but I know a few people who seem to have the process mastered.  That said, I think it took a team of about four people a couple of years to get Appaloosa to FA.  =:-O  Montanabw (talk) 21:46, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Monte Dolack
Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Andrew Gower (actor)
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 20 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I rolled my eyes at that hook. Well done! Bradley0110 (talk) 07:00, 20 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm glad I got away with it! I watch that show, and vampires on that show can appear in daylight.  They don't like it (dress in overcoats, sunglasses, etc.), but nothing prevents them from being exposed to intense sunlight.  I was terribly worried purists about the show would complain!  LOL!  - Tim1965 (talk) 13:20, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Michael Socha
Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:03, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

DYK nom for Stanley plan
Hi Tim, I have reviewed your nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/Stanley plan and I have an ALT suggestion before approving it. Could you please see the nomination page and reply there? Thanks. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:45, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Reverting edit of "utilize"
Why did you revert my edit of replacing two instances of "utilize" by "use"? The matter is simple: opinions are split on "utilize". Some people think it's just a more formal way of saying "use", but other people including me think that "utilize" has a different meaning as a word, and can cause confusion, as to whether it's used in its original meaning (to use something in a different way than how it was intended to be used, e.g. using a watch to determine which way north is), or whether it's just being used to sound smart/formal, when the actual meaning of the word "use" is intended. However, the meaning and usage of the word "use" is 100% clear, 100% non-ambiguous, hence replacing instances of "utilize" by "use" where that is its meaning, clarifies the meaning of the text, and makes it easier to read, since more people will be familiar with the meaning of "use" than "utilize". There are perfectly rational and explainable reasons why utilize is the devul. I understand (though despise) that someone might use the term "utilize" out of habit or because they think it looks pretty, but I have yet to hear a rational justification for it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.197.216.61 (talk) 15:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Why did you change my utilization of the word "utilize"? The matter is simple:  Opinions are split on "use."  Some people think it's just a more informal way of saying "utilize", but other people including me think that "use" has a different meaning as a word, and can cause confusion, as to whether it's utilized in its original meaning (to utilize something in a different way than how it was intended to be utilized, e.g. utilizing a watch to determine which way north is), or whether it's just being utilized to sound smart/formal, when the actual meaning of the word "utilize" is intended. However, the meaning and usage of the word "utilize" is 100% clear, 100% non-ambiguous, hence replacing instances of "utilize" by "use" where that is its meaning, confuses the meaning of the text, and makes it less easy to read, since more people will be familiar with the meaning of "utilize" than "use". There are perfectly rational and explainable reasons why use is the devul. I understand (though despise) that someone might use the term "use" out of habit or because they think it looks pretty, but I have yet to hear a rational justification for it.

Your opinion. My opinion. Your lack of a rational justification is interpreted by me to be a completely rational justification. Wikipedia's Manual of Style says that articles should not be edited simply because one word is preferred by one editor or another, or because British spelling is different than American spelling, or because colloquialisms vary. I find your justifications for distinguishing between "use" and "utilize" to be specious. Webster's defines utilize as "To put to use, especially to find a profitable or practical use for." That's the context in which the word was employed. (Or is "employed" a word that causes confusion, and sounds pretentious, too?) I understand, but I despise, the rationale you're making, and find it irrational given the evidence of published dictionary sources. - Tim1965 (talk) 15:20, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! :) I'm done self-nominating for DYK, though. It's just too difficult to do any more. If someone else would like to nominate that article for DYK, more power to them. - Tim1965 (talk) 00:13, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 02:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Input request
Any comments to the comments by VioletRiga at Featured list candidates/List of athletes from Montana/archive1? Pumpkin Sky  talk  20:41, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Holter Graham
Materialscientist (talk) 00:05, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bac logo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Bac logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 04:44, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Nice edit
Just wanted to say thanks for the nice improvement to the Granolithic page you recently made. Fx6893 (talk) 19:17, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you! I came across the term in a book, and had no idea what it meant.  And the article was kind of unhelpful, so I took 30 minutes to do a little research in Google Books.  I also wanted to get rid of the jargon.  If the article were bigger, it could be more technical and technical terms could be added back in.  I'm glad someone noticed the changes, and that they are helpful. - Tim1965 (talk) 19:28, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Stanley plan
Orlady (talk) 12:03, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi
Hi, I was thinking about your latest edit on the plot twist and the conclusion of the Human Centipede 2. Perhaps it would be better to have the interpretations of the ending in a separate section. something like "interpretations of the ending" or "theories about plot twists" or something similar to that.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:15, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I havent seen the new film, but there is some parts missing in the plot description, when the pregnant woman escapes its unclear how she was able to escape as she was a part of the centipede. cheers--BabbaQ (talk) 17:24, 7 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm unclear how much detail we should include in the article, as it is fairly graphic. What is mentioned there now has been mentioned in mainstream newspapers.  There's a fine line, too, between describing the film's every twist and turn and making the plot segment too long for the article's size.  Right now, I don't think it matters just how she escapes (so does another victim), but that she does and she gets into the car.


 * As for the "final scene interpretations": Right now, that's all there is to say about it.  I don't think there is enough to make it a separate section or even a sub-section.  We can't engage in original research (our own interpretations about the plot don't count), we can only report on those that have made it into published sources.  And so far, just the one has mentioned the plot twist and that it's open to interpretation.  Maybe once there are more articles, that could be broken out into its own section? But right now, I would suggest leaving it where it is.  The media has reported that there is no clear interpretation of how the film ends. - Tim1965 (talk) 17:44, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Reportedly haunted locations in Washington, D.C.
I've nominated for GA. Most fascinating and superbly written.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:13, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

It passed GA. I've also nominated Stanley plan and Benjamin Ogle Tayloe House.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:34, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * You know, I hope, that that has to be the fastest GA I've ever seen! All the other ones I've been part of took weeks! - Tim1965 (talk) 20:24, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Awesome. Benjamin Ogle Tayloe House also passed. You've produced so much high quality work Tim, your articles should all be GAs! I would love to see another article like the D.C. one on say London or something.♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:38, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Colonial Revival garden
Thanks for fixing it up! The article had been on my watchlist because it had some wikifying concerns and titling issues. It's a much better article now! Raymie (t • c) 02:06, 14 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I wish I knew more, so the article could have gone more in-depth on the issue.  I don't have access to real landscape architecture textbooks or journals.  I saw many works cited in more general books, but I couldn't get hold of them.  I think the article could be a lot longer, and talk more about the kind of plantings that would go into a Colonial Revival garden.  There should also be sections on "kitchen garden vs. flower garden," parlor gardens (flower gardens in front of the house), pleasure gardens (which the wealthy often built), and the use of parterres (which sometimes were used). - Tim1965 (talk) 13:28, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Frances Senska
New article on ceramics prof at MSU-Bozeman, if you care to help. Pumpkin Sky  talk  17:16, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice job! If you want to DYK and list both of us, go for it. Pumpkin Sky  talk  22:22, 15 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I tried to help out! Fascinating woman.  I had no idea.  Cohabiting with a female "friend" (and, from what it seems, commingling finances and co-owning a home) seems more than just "life-long and deeply committed friendship," but I couldn't find anything that says they were lesbians. Oh well. Some books with references to her are not available on Google Books, so I couldn't use those as sources.  Bummer... - Tim1965 (talk) 22:25, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You found out way more than I. Want to DYK it? Pumpkin Sky  talk  22:27, 15 October 2011 (UTC) I don't see in ref 4 or 8 where it say she was trained as a pilot. Pumpkin Sky   talk  22:30, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. What fact do you think would look best on DYK? Sorry! That "learning to fly" fact is in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle obituary, which I neglected to add to that sentence.  Added now! - Tim1965 (talk) 22:35, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Maybe something about being trained in art, learning to fly with the navy in WWII, and teach internationally famous students? Pumpkin Sky   talk  22:46, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe "although she herself had just two academic quarters of training in ceramics, Montana State University educator and artist Frances Senska trained several internationally known ceramic artists?" - Tim1965 (talk) 23:09, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Works for me! Let me know when you file the DYK. Pumpkin Sky   talk  23:13, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
 * DYK is up. - Tim1965 (talk) 18:38, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice. I move it to 15 Oct vice 16. 15th is when it was created. I also set a watch. Pumpkin Sky  talk  20:23, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * D'oh! Well, chalk that wrong date up to my "living for the moment!" LOL - Tim1965 (talk) 20:36, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Two things. You put Missoula as pod in the infobox but it's really Bozeman, so I changed it. I only found a couple of pics of her and none seemed free. For me, too much hassle to mess with nonfree images. Pumpkin Sky  talk  00:03, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * DYKnom needs your input. Pumpkin Sky   talk  01:01, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
SchuminWeb (Talk) 21:00, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Yogo sapphire
I'd like to do an article on the Yogo sapphire. Do you have or can you get one or more free images of them? I can't find any. I have, or perhaps used to have, a Yogo mounted in white gold, but I'll be darned if I can find it. Pumpkin Sky  talk  22:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I've got two small Yogos, about .25 carats each. One is square, one is diamond-shaped.  Both are blue (I wish I had a violet!), and neither is mounted.  I have to get them out of my safe deposit box, and photograph them.  Give me a couple of days. I might have this by Friday, maybe next Monday (Oct. 31). - Tim1965 (talk) 23:12, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * That'd be awesome. Darn I wish I could find that ring. Or at least recall what I did with it! Argh ;-) Pumpkin Sky   talk  23:14, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * There's a lot of info on the mine itself. Should we call it "Yogo sapphire", "Yogo mine", "Yogo mine sapphire", "Yogo mine and sapphires", etc? Pumpkin Sky  talk  00:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It's about the sapphire. There have been two mines in the past, which merged into one.  In the future, there could be a third, fourth, fifth, etc., mine.  So I'd call it "Yogo saphhire," and include a section about mining the sapphire.  (If there's enough on the mine itself, do two articles and get two DYKs!) - Tim1965 (talk) 00:26, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * There's a fair amount about the mines, but let me work through it more before I start writing. Would love to have your help. I've made a subcat of Montana minerals on Commons called "Yogo mine and sapphires". See uploads from just a few minutes ago on Commons. Pumpkin Sky  talk  00:38, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I got the two gemstones today. I'll take photos this evening. - Tim1965 (talk) 13:47, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool. This is in my Sandbox2. I'm essentially done with web refs and now working my way through the Voynick book on Yogos that I have. I guess another week, so there's still time to upload your photos and maybe even get more. If you don't object, can you add carat and quality info on your Yogos? Pumpkin Sky   talk  02:05, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * See Sandbox2 especially the "other sources" section. Pumpkin Sky   talk  23:46, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice pics! Turns out within the next week I'll have two Yogos I can take pics of too, so the article willhave nice sample pics. Thanks for taking them. Pumpkin Sky   talk  09:22, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I would have been able to do better ones if I knew how to do that 3D, high-rez photography where you rack the focus a couple times and then layer the image to do a crystal clear image. I just don't have the software to do that. (Probably the lens, too, but that's another issue.) - Tim1965 (talk) 13:06, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I have uploaded a photo of a purple Yogo. Let me know what you think. Middle of next week I'll be able to take pic of cornflower blue one and that's roughly the time I hope to be done adding material to my sandbox2. Pumpkin Sky   talk  22:57, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Purple yogo? Man, those things are rare! - Tim1965 (talk) 23:01, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You mean on wiki: Sandbox2. Or did you mean where did I buy it? I bought it via phone from an honest dealer. If you're interested I'll email you her contact info. Pumpkin Sky   talk  23:04, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Article created
I've moved my Yogo sandbox to mainspace. Posting to Montanabw's and Tim1965's talk pages. A few thoughts:
 * Unless Montanabw objects, I'd like Tim1965 to do the DYK nom BUT please wait til I get a Creative Commons release on a photo I have a lead on (it's a very good pic) AND let's throw our noggins together on good hooks. This is FULL of hook possibilities. Let's do this discussion on the new article talk page
 * There are almost 80 numbered refs and it's over 41K big, not bad for a new article
 * On the DYK mention it was moved from sandbox 6 NOV, so they'd won't say it's overdue. I started OCT 25. log here
 * Copyedit help from all and asssistance in meeting all wiki policies greatly appreciated.
 * Let's centralize all discussion on the new article talk page.
 * the mine and the gem are so intertwined I lean to leaving it all in one article vice a separate mine article
 * Pumpkin Sky  talk  19:37, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure of what to do with the Tidbits section, move it around or just rename or what? Pumpkin Sky   talk  19:56, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I've put up a different photo of the purple Yogo. Do you think it's better? Pumpkin Sky   talk  20:25, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Got the photo release and put the pic in the article. DYK is a go once we have a hook(s). Pumpkin Sky   talk  00:53, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Time is running out for the DYK nom, so I'm going to nom it now. Hope that is okay, not trying to cause any issues, just not miss the deadline. If you can improve the nom, feel free. There has been discussion on the Yogo talk page.  Pumpkin Sky   talk  22:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

First Peoples Buffalo Jump State Park
First Peoples Buffalo Jump State Park looks fanstastic at first glance. I think it may be ready for GA or even FA. Adding a more detailed infobox may help and of course a peer review of it would be good. If you are interested. Gerry D (talk) 22:45, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Frances Senska
The DYK project (nominate) 12:06, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * OohRah! Pumpkin Sky  talk  22:51, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Issue not showing up
See User:PumpkinSky/Sandbox2. In the Zapata ref, I've tried both issue and number for issue=3, but the three does not show up after saving the entry. Do you know what is wrong? Pumpkin Sky  talk  22:51, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The journal title is missing. I added the self-aggrandizing "Tim's Test Journal" as a temporary title, and it worked.  - Tim1965 (talk) 00:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Fixed, thanks.01:59, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm clueless with it comes to the templates.  I don't use them, because I don't like their formatting and the way they force out certain information.  So I lucked out when guessing at that one! - Tim1965 (talk) 02:06, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * HeHe. What's odd is that me leaving out the title caused the issue number not to work. Go figure. Pumpkin Sky   talk  02:17, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism Report
Hi, you marked on the talk page of my IP address that I had been vandalising the Cinder Toffee page. An addition to the "see also" section is hardly vandalism, even if you disagree with the reason I put it there, which I now agree with. Whatever happened to assume good faith? 89.80.22.25 (talk) 12:44, 13 November 2011 (UTC)


 * What I added to your page is not a vandalism report tag. It just says where your IP address comes from.  The tage does say, though, that if someone using that same IP commits vandalism, it could be reported to that ISP. - Tim1965 (talk) 13:19, 13 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, I understand now, thanks for the explanation. What a horrible piece of wording in that template! 89.80.22.25 (talk) 12:07, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Hall Sapphire and Diamond Necklace
I just created this. Care to try to add to it? I can't find much on it. Pumpkin Sky  talk  13:29, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Transporttradesdept aflcio.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Transporttradesdept aflcio.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:


 * I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a template, along with your question, beneath this message.
 * I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
 * If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
 * To opt out of these bot messages, add  to your talk page.
 * If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:42, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Yogo DYK today
See T:DYK/Q. Yogo sapphire is in queue 1 and should appear as the lead dyk with photo at 11am today, eastern US time. I think this is the best new article I've ever worked on and truly appreciate all the help. Pumpkin Sky  talk  10:55, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Awesome article! - Tim1965 (talk) 14:13, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. And thanks for the help. Someone told me we should take it to DYK. Pumpkin Sky   talk  15:47, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I always encourage people to submit to DYK, especially if it involves a Montana article. - Tim1965 (talk) 16:42, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, I meant someone said we should take it to GA. Thoughts? Pumpkin Sky   talk  21:35, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Yogo sapphire
Orlady (talk) 05:04, 23 November 2011 (UTC) 16:02, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Great article and nice number of DYK! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:58, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Yogo sapphire GA nom
OK, I've listed this for GA. It's the only one in it's category. Any help would be appreciated. We should look at its current state with GA-level in mind. I don't have any experience to speak of at this level, so help would be great. I think we need to expand the lead. Pumpkin Sky  talk  20:04, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
 * the DYK had 22,100 hits, holy cow! We made the DYK stats page! Pumpkin Sky   talk  14:17, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm astonished. That's huge!!! Oh my, I hope you didn't just cause a jump in demand for Yogo sapphires! LOL!!!  - Tim1965 (talk) 14:43, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I was surprised too! Happy though, of course. I'm not sure how to incorporate the Piegan Blackfeet and state gem things into the body. I'm using Synthetic diamond as a model as it's the only gem related FA. Seems good leads, as summaries, don't need refs. Pumpkin Sky   talk  14:46, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's a major change from past Wikipedia policy. In the past, any challengeable fact (even in the leads) had to have a cite.  But since leads are basically summaries of what's in the article (or should be), the new policy is that the lead needs no citations (if the fact is mentioned below in the article). If you can't incorporate stuff into the body, don't worry about it.  Good writing is more important to GA than strict adherence to the rules. - Tim1965 (talk) 15:08, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Good thoughts. See Gerda and my talk pages. She got good ideas too. Pumpkin Sky  talk  15:26, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
 * YeeHaw! Pumpkin Sky   talk  01:04, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
 * WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! - Tim1965 (talk) 15:16, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
--Kumioko (talk) 03:59, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Actovegin edit
Hi Tim1965: I'm wondering about the actovegin article, including an edit you made in September. Perhaps you will look at my questions here Talk:Actovegin. Thanks, Wanderer57 (talk) 22:21, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I looked at it, but the question you asked is way outside my area of expertise. - Tim1965 (talk) 00:01, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks. It's off the radar for me as well but just did not sound right.  Wanderer57 (talk) 01:57, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Women in Military Service to America (WIMSA) memorial
Regarding the WIMSA Memorial article, I do not understand your aversion to having a link to the unofficial website listing extensive information about Arlington Cemetery. You have deleted it twice, stating that it is private and personal, neither of which is a bar to being used as a external link. Also, the paragraph that you deleted attempted to detail what was actually in the Memorial itself. The article as currently written deals only with the history of the site. If you do not like the writing, it would be appropriate to edit it instead of deleting it. - Mhjohns (talk) 17:26, 20 December 2011 (UTC)


 * In Wikipedia's guidelines to external links, #11 under "Links normally to be avoided" reads: "Links to blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc., controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.)"  As informative as the arlingtoncemetery.net site is, I don't see how it meets the "recognized authority" criteria.


 * As for deleting the second paragraph in the lead, Wikipedia's guideline on patent nonsense defines patent nonsense as "Content that, while apparently intended to mean something, is so confused that no reasonable person can be expected to make any sense of it. If the meaning cannot be identified, it is impossible to accurately copy-edit the text." The content in question had so many spelling errors, capitalization errors, grammatical errors, and punctuation errors that I myself couldn't figure out what was being said.  So I deleted it.


 * Another reason for deleting it was because there already is a section in the article which describes what the memorial looks like. The second and third paragraph in the section "Development of the Women in Military Service for America Memorial" discuss at length the shape, size, look, and of the memorial.  So rather than editing the very confused second paragraph, which appeared to add nothing to that description, I just deleted the problematic text.


 * I think this article needs expansion. I strongly encourage you to improve it!  It certainly is not "my" article by any means.  Everyone should work on it.  I'm hoping to add some inline references to the article.  But if you think the descriptive paragraphs are inadequate, perhaps those should be expanded and improved upon rather than a confusing, run-on paragraph added to the lead. - Tim1965 (talk) 18:21, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

TUSC token f0fafa6e6c46cd99e3e0bcc4d5dd643e
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Frohliche Weinachten und Gluckliches neues Jahr
Photo from Baden_Wurttemberg, Germany. Pumpkin Sky  talk  12:35, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * God jul og godt nytt år! (Good ol' Norwegian for "Merry christmas and happy new year"). - Tim1965 (talk) 17:42, 25 December 2011 (UTC)