User talk:Tinlinkin/Archive 1

Welcome from Redwolf24
Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We as a community are glad to have you and thank you for creating a user account! Here are a few good links for newcomers:
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

Yes some of the links appear a bit boring at first, but they are VERY helpful if you ever take the time to read them.

Remember to place any articles you create into a category so we don't get orphans.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome.

Redwolf24 (Talk) 00:39, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

P.S. I like messages :-P

Anonymous Vandalism
Thanks for your message. Indeed, the biggest difficulty with addressing anonymous vandals is that I can never be sure that the right person will get the warnings. I'm sorry that you recieved the message intended for a vandal, and I hope it didn't confuse you too much. Happy editing! --Canderson7 01:20, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

Not at all. People with broadband connections usually will have static IP addresses; it's dial-up users and other users who can manipulate IP addrs for their computers whom you'll have the most trouble with. I guess you know that already, though, per your experience. --Tinlinkin 01:34, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Port Jefferson Branch
Thanks for kicking off the Port Jefferson Branch article. I had worked on the Far Rockaway Branch and Port Washington Branch articles, which seem to have become useful templates to get the other branches going. I found that once you've set up a template and created the article for one of the stations on the branch, the rest come pretty eaily. Thanks again! Alansohn 21:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It's your template and I just followed it. But unlike other rail systems (those that I listed on the LIRR talk page and others), I don't see addresses and transit connections in the branch pages. They're present in the station pages (if at all). So that's my primary objection with the template. Otherwise, you've done a nice job. I'm going to think about what other changes I would do with the style of branch and station pages soon. --Tinlinkin 20:20, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * You're doing good with the additions to various Long Island Rail Road articles. Keep it up. Pacific Coast Highway (blah • lol, internet) 23:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Let me add my compliments on grabbing the bull, improving the template and creating articles for the other branches. I'd suggest standardizing a station template and soliciting volunteers to create the individual stations. Alansohn 20:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

re:Reversion of Regis Philbin vandalism
Thanks for telling me, that was my mistake there. I'll try not to let such things happen again. Actually, I think this was caused by me hitting the "save" button before the page finished loading, as I too was trying to version 61051469 by 65.60.70.163. me waiting a few more seconds should fix the problem though, anyway, i'll see you around. MichaelBillington 03:58, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

WCAU, WPVI, and KYW
Hello. I created:
 * KYW-TV Anchors and KYW-TV Reporters
 * WPVI-TV Anchors and WPVI-TV Reporters
 * WCAU-TV Anchors and WCAU-TV Reporters

They all have the relevant bios or a short bio with link to the person's article if noteworthy. I think that is a much better solution to the problem and then the "Perssonalities" articles can be gotten rid of as they are redundant and not as specfically targeted. Kramden4700 03:59, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Philadelphia
Sir or Madam, having Philadelphia go to the Pennsylvania city is pure geographic bias and also assumes that most people in the world are Americans and searching for American topics. This is a definite violation of WP:NPOV, as it favors one nation's point of view of what is most important. When in doubt, figure what is the most neutral thing and do it! I also placed the Pennsylvania city properly in alphabetical order in the list if places in the United States. Kramden4700 14:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Philadelphia
Thank you for making your blatant violation of WP:NPOV with the page Philadelphia on Wikipedia. Your lack of neutrality has been noticed, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the neutral point of view page if you would like to learn more about being neutral when contributing to our encyclopedia. Kramden4700 10:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Anchor AFD
Based on your participation at Articles_for_deletion/Angela_Russell, I thought you'd like to know that the AFD has been restarted and moved to Articles for deletion/Angela Russell (second nomination), where you can vote on it a second time. JianLi 17:13, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, please see Articles_for_deletion/WPVI-TV_Anchors JianLi 17:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

re your apology
''Hello Scott. I'm very sorry if I caused you any inconvenience over the antics of a user you know who I'm talking about. And I appreciate your boldness in reverting his edits. I hope I have done nothing wrong, and I don't intend any harm. I was just trying to defend Wikipedia's spirit of openness and discussion, and trying to revert any major changes that came without consensus. Again, I repeat, I don't believe I did anything wrong, and I hope you'll agree with me.''

I have opened an inquiry on Suspected sock puppets, and I'm inviting you to comment on them, if you please.

''I can try to pipe Philadelphia (and other similar) links if you like me to, but that would be when I have time, and I'm stressed out now. Thanks so much for reading this message, and please reply on my talk page. Tinlinkin 06:36, 24 July 2006 (UTC)''


 * No worries. I responded politely to the first change I saw on Philadelphia, as I made a similar mistake when I was new to either Lake Albert or Lake Victoria (don't recall which). By the time I discovered the extent of the activity and reluctance to discuss, I wished I'd come later so I could just block and clean up. I have no idea whether it would be "better" to have Philadelphia redirect to the disambig page, but I'm certain it's worse to make the change without disambiguating all the links into it first (and there are over 4000). If a discussion arose and decided to change the status quo, there are bots around who can do the manual labour, or AWB to facilitate a person doing it if there are many that should not point to Pennsylvania. At the moment, I have not seen any significant push by experienced editors to alter the status quo. If you happen to be editing an article with a link to Philadelphia (or any of the other redirect city names), fix the link to Philadelphia (piped link) if you can, but at this stage there is no reason to go and do it for articles you are not otherwise editing. If the change is made to point to the disambig page, then someone needs to clear out the links every now and then (see Disambiguation pages with links). Thanks. --Scott Davis Talk 08:04, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Kramden4700
I don't really have anything to say on the matter of sockpuppetry, because I have no opinions or knowledge on the subject. Sorry. User:Zoe|(talk) 23:31, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Succession boxes

 * I have seen the succession boxes in some other articles (such as in WEPN), but I hadn't seen then in a television station article until I found it in WNET. I plugged them into all of the major New York stations' entries as a feeler of sorts, to see if they'll fly.  Perhaps there isn't any use for them here (mostly due to possible redundancy with the Infobox), but we'll see how it goes.  Rollosmokes 08:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I accept your apology
I accept your apology, but you apparently drove User:Wrath of Roth away. I found some of the things User:Rekarb Bob said in his discussion about The Price Is Right were valid and were something that should be expanded upon elsewhere. If anything I am guilty of being inspired by another user and maybe going a bit too far in the name of neutrality and bias elimination. Kramden4700 16:10, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the apolgy
I guess that sometimes people can be caught up in the heat of argument and see things somewhat askew. Rekarb Bob 16:54, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Philly
--evrik 14:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

NW at EWR
I reverted the user's edits once, but I realized the project page hasn't been updated in some time so doesn't state the standard that's actually been in use. I proposed to add it, and since I don't foresee any objections, I'll be able to add it in the next day or two. After that it can be used to justify the removal of those destinations. Because of the wording of the project now, he's able to use the project guidelines to support his edits. Dbinder (talk) 13:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Bushwick and East williamsburg
Thanks much for your lead in getting Bushwick the type of Wiki it deserves. I will continue to add to it. Also thank you for your assistance in teaching me the wiki rules. I am still unclear on the policy regarding sourcing books. As I am right out fo college, I am still pretty concerned about properly citing sources. Is AMLA citing appropriate?

Northwest BotW logo
I have nominated Image:Northwest Airlines Logo.svg for deletion at Images and media for deletion/2006 August 10. This Brands of the World logo doesn't seem to be resampled from the official Northwest Airlines logo at all. This may be a copyright violation, but that's not my reason for deletion&mdash;it's that it's just a very poor imitation. See Talk:Northwest Airlines for more details. Tinlinkin 05:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Your replacement is great. Thanks! Tinlinkin 08:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Do you think the old Image:Nwa logo.PNG should still be deleted? NWA uses the logo with its name "Northwest Airlines" on its aircraft (see Image:NW A330 323 in flight.jpg). I doubt this is of any significance to the NWA article, but I just want to check with you before I retag that logo for deletion. Thanks in advance. Tinlinkin 09:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It should probably be deleted, but it should be checked that there are no instances elsewhere.--Keeleysam 18:07, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

hello
Sorry about the delay, I just realized how to edit this page. As far as East Williamsburg goes, I have a feeling the page is going to devolve into evidence for calling ti williamsburg and evidence for calling it Bushwick. Without revealing to much about myself, i am a 23 year old male who is a recent addition to East Williamsburg. I am one of those yuppies. I chose to live on the J train, as I used to take it to work downtown. I guess I have an agenda in that I want to keep the neighborhood as low priced as possible until I can buy a place. As far as the article goes, I question whether east willaimsburg should even be recognized as an independent neighborhood, or if its mention should be part fo the williamsburg wiki. In either case, i'll probabaly start dividing up the article into a pro williamsburg and pro bushwick camp. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noremacmada (talk • contribs)


 * I don't have time to respond as fully as I'd like, but I'll get to some points. First, I posted a message at Talk:Williamsburg, Brooklyn to try to get more people to see the East Williamsburg article and review it.


 * Secondly, I sympathize with you, by your admission of your age, as I would almost be in the same boat. But if you think that East Williamsburg (henceforth as EW) will gentrify faster on account of Wikipedia, I think that's ridiculous. Bushwick itself is getting the same attention as EW in regards to artists, hipsters, and people like you and myself. But the broader picture is that in NYC, regardless of any gentrification issues, it's perfectly acceptable to have some communities be part of larger communities, and to have overlaps.


 * Finally, I have spent considerable time in Barnes & Noble researching references to EW. Many maps and books don't mention the name, and that's understandable. But in other sources I found the name as I expected, within the boundaries as I say in the Williamsburg talk page. Also, in the neighborhood map in my nearest station, DeKalb Avenue L station, the name East Williamsburg appears in the Morgan Avenue area (and as it so happens it is in the map of Bushwick). So I think there's no doubt that the name exists, and I say keep the article as it is for now.


 * A final note: I'd still appreciate it if you can write the captions for the pictures you uploaded for Bushwick. Thanks. Tinlinkin 10:15, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Long Island Rail Road
I've been caught up with other articles, but I do want to get back to the LIRR. You've done most of the work with creation of the branch articles. Now these articles need to be tied in to the parent article, and work needs to be done on the station articles. I'll do what I can, but let me know if I can help with anything in particular. Alansohn 12:55, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Closing a recent AfD
When you closed Articles for deletion/Omaha, NE (Comic), you missed Mooble, or: the Rise and Fall of Modern Logic (Comic). I have already merged that article into The Stony Brook Press. Tinlinkin 08:48, 26 August 2006 (UTC)


 * When you closed Articles for deletion/Shamin Mohamed Jr., you missed Children's AIDS Health Program, whose AfD points to it as well. (Hey, these multiples are a PITA, ain't they? :-) --Dennette 08:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)


 * The votes could have been highlighted or even placed in to the title of the AfD discussion. They can be missed sometimes in the mass of comments that you have to read through and assess! Regards,   (aeropagitica)    (talk)   12:40, 26 August 2006 (UTC)


 * According to WP:AFD, it says to nominate the first article for deletion, and then, in step 3, to add a note under the original nomination. And in the edit summary for my AfD, I identified that there was another article for deletion, related to the article under the heading above. With only one article can be added and shown on the heading of the AfD. Tinlinkin 12:57, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Regis Philbin
You asked for some comments on the Regis Philbin article. I've done a copyedit, please review the changes (mostly minor) and by all means revert any you disagree with. A few other comments:
 * The article lists some "dead celebrities" he has interviewed - this seems rather perverse to me. Can't we just list some of the most important celebrities he has interviewed, rather than focusing specifically on people who were killed in dramatic ways?  (Remember if rewriting, we need to show respect to the dead, too, for the family's sake.)  This also has an unwanted side-effect, it could be read so as to mean "Regis interviewed them then they were killed" - implying some sort of curse!  I tried to rewrite it a bit, because "now-dead" seemed a rather crude term to use, but that didn't solve the problem.  Can you see a better way to do this?
 * It mentions Katrina work, but this is really vague, can you explain in a phrase or two exactly what he did?
 * The phrase explaining the Letterman picture seems very long in how it explains that some viewers wouldn't see it - could this be made much more succinct?
 * "During CNN's New Year's Eve special, hosted by Anderson Cooper, revelers in Times Square told CNN's Jason Carroll that Philbin was all right filling in for Clark, even though they had Cooper and Carroll, as well as Erica Hill and Deborah Feyerick." I don't think "all right" is correct here, and I don't really understand what this sentence means!
 * "His ex-wife and Amy are rarely or never mentioned." It seems cruel to point this out explicitly, so I took it out - it's still there implicitly.
 * "It has been rumored that Philbin once dated Barbara Walters in the 1960s, but that has yet to be proven." The source of these rumors should be cited specifically, or the rumor should be removed.  If it's just a juicy bit of showbiz gossip, remove it as well, see Biographies of living persons.  I would remove any rumors from this article, unless they had a profound effect on the person's life, in which case you need to cite sources.  I presume that the National Enquirer rumors fall into this category.
 * "Whenever he visits the University of Notre Dame, Philbin usually mentions on Live that he would coincide with a duck." I assumed at first this must refer to this kind of duck in a Notre Dame game, but apparently not - I think because the word "coincide" is completely wrong here.
 * In an FAC review I suspect the "Trivia" and "in Popular Culture" sections might take a hammering as being "too much like a fan site". This is a common criticism for pages about celebrities - they are usually written by people who admire the celebrities, as you might expect.  Just take care with that, and I would take out things that look like fancruft in case the GA reviewer picks on them.
 * You should DEFINITELY clean up the refs section so each one reads as a more formal reference, not just a list of numbers. Source, date, that sort of thing.

Hope this review helps you to turn this into a GA! In my experience, getting a B-Class article is relatively easy, but getting it to GA or A-Class takes a lot of work - but this one is close. Thanks for all your work on the article. Walkerma 07:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Glad it was helpful. Yes, I was definitely aware that you wouldn't have written many of the things I'm criticising, even though I was writing as if speaking to you.  I think it's often good for someone to "take charge" of an article - at least temporarily - because to be well written in needs the flow of one writer so it doesn't read as if written by committee (as so many WP articles read!).  A single writer can also do things like avoid duplication (not a problem here) and provide an overall structure.  Before you submit for GA I would look over the headings just to make sure they lay things out the best way (though they don't seem bad to me).  When I've done this major overhaul with chemistry articles (as with hydrogen peroxide a year ago), the response was not "How dare you" but overwhelmingly "Thank goodness!"  People will revert any minor errors you might introduce.  Good luck, and if I see it appear later as FAC when ready, I'll almost certainly support it. Walkerma 06:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Eric's other poll
On your MfD for the City Naming Strawpoll, you haven't commented on Ericsaindon2's other poll (Communities strawpoll) which is still ongoing. Since he is banned, who is in charge of it? And should it still be open until September 18, the date set by the poll? Tinlinkin 05:13, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * In all honesty, I don't know anything about that strawpoll. I notice there are people actually participating in that one so maybe it has some use.  The one I brought to MFD had only one quasi-supporter and even he expressed that the poll was going in the wrong direction. —Wknight94 (talk) 10:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: The Millers
Thanks! I will try to get on that when I get some time. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c)  12:52, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Show me the copyright..
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Just_the_Way_You_Are&action=history

Lyrics being copyrighted means I cant use it for commercial interests..doesnt mean I cant recite them!!!!

L.A. Vote
Since you recently voted on the Philadelphia article name change, I thought you might be interested in participating on the vote to make a similar name change for Los Angeles. See Talk:Los Angeles, California. Also, if you put my user page on your watchlist, you'll see notifications of other similar votes. --Serge 18:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

New Orleans move
Could you please close the proposed move at Talk:New Orleans, Louisiana? It should have been properly closed as no consensus a while ago. Thanks in advance. Tinlinkin 05:16, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I closed the move request. Note also you can close a move request by just removing the template from the top and, optionally, adding   some result. ~  before a section and    after it. --  tariq abjotu  05:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, okay. I thought closing a contested move request required administrator intervention, and is done by selected people, as with WP:AFD. Tinlinkin 05:32, 22 October 2006 (UTC)


 * As far as I know, administrators are not the only ones allowed to close move requests. I'm not an administrator, and I've been doing it for a couple months now. No one has stopped me yet (most likely because WP:RM often gets backlogged and so the help is appreciated). I have gotten at least one complaint regarding a move request close, but that got resolved. --  tariq abjotu  05:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)