|1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7|
- 1 Geocode sourcing
- 2 Thanks
- 3 Wood shingle merge
- 4 Hickory Ground
- 5 Merge discussion for Otciapofa
- 6 Huh ?
- 7 Talkback
- 8 How US county subdivisions are placed
- 9 Third Saturday in October
- 10 Reference syntax out of article text
- 11 Ellicott's Stone
- 12 Editor Help
- 13 Comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/WLM-US 2013 discussion
- 14 thanks for nice Presbyterian church pic
- 15 Hand-coding
- 16 ip editor adding metro areas
- 17 Valhermoso Springs, Alabama map picture
- 18 Roll Tide
- 19 Timeline
- 20 FYI on duplicate diff
- 21 AFT5 newsletter
- 22 Strawberry Hill
- 23 New Article Feedback version available for testing
- 24 Lowry House
- 25 Help or adoption needed
- 26 Bay Shell Road Mobile, Alabama
- 27 Alabama statistics
- 28 AFT5 update
- 29 Invitation to WikiProject Breakfast
- 30 Request for comment
- 31 Links from NRHP lists
- 32 Timeline of Mobile
- 33 Former Masonic buildings in X
- 34 FYI - new article
- 35 BACKLOG OF THE WEEK Category:Pages with broken reference names
- 36 New REFBot
- 37 Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
- 38 Say what?
- 39 Take a look?
- 40 The Wikipedia Library Survey
- 41 YGM
- 42 Talkback
- 43 A barnstar for you!
- 44 Crown snake
- 45 List of wineries and vineyards in Alabama
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sitush/Sandbox3 - Which lists some coordinates sourced to Wikimapia which was
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_with_unsourced_geodata - These articles HAVE coordinates, but
a concern has been raised that they don't appear to be sourced.
Wood shingle merge
Hi, you closed the Wood shingle/Shake (shingle) merger proposal with the comment "no consensus". I see quite the opposite on the Talk page. Three editors support the merger; one editor says it "may be useful to merge them" but is not sure; no one is frankly opposed. Sounds like a consensus to me. These are closely related things, and much of the article content is the same. --Macrakis (talk) 22:06, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, I totally missed that one. There wasn't any discussion at the other page. But, since the merge tags were over a year old, why hasn't someone merged them? Altairisfar (talk) 22:16, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for starting this article. I was actually working on writing it at exactly the same time, so my attempt to save was met with an edit conflict :) I've tried to merge my text into the article you wrote; please check that I've not got anything wrong, and please feel free to copyedit etc. Fences&Windows 17:08, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- The last two paragraphs — "Building on the site..." and "Formerly owned by..." — could do with merging I think. Fences&Windows 17:19, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hey, yeah I'm trying to do it now and consolidate the two. Altairisfar (talk) 17:24, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
An article that you have been involved in editing, Otciapofa , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Uyvsdi (talk) 02:28, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
How US county subdivisions are placed
You did two reverts that didn't make sense for Pima and Carroll county pages. Most of the 3100+ county pages have cities, towns, CDP and unincorporated communities in separate headings on the same heading levels. These two are not conforming to the norm and the edits you reverted had made them more closely agree with the large majority of the rest of them. Please don't get into an edit war over my reverting your reversions. TMLutas (talk) 21:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that you're confused, since your changes to Carroll County, Arkansas have placed the communities and townships under the Demographics header. That's not standard. My only change to that page was a revert of what appeared to be simple vandalism by an anonymous IP, evidently that was you. Since that was my only contribution there, I find your edit war warning to be premature at best. On, Pima County, Arizona, I should paid closer attention and should not have reverted. Altairisfar (talk) 03:22, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Third Saturday in October
Thanks for straightening out that mess! Looking into the issue a little further, I've come to the conclusion that Nuggets56 (talk · contribs) is a clear sockpuppet of Bt8257 (talk · contribs) and I have blocked both accounts indefinitely. Hopefully the discussion can now move forward without interference. --auburnpilot talk 18:42, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you for figuring that out. I suspected as much from Nuggets56, but the other party shouldn't have closed down the discussion on what seems to be a legitimate issue. I'm actually leaning toward leaving the title where it is myself, but wanted to see what others thought so this can be put to bed for good. Altairisfar (talk) 18:49, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
Reference syntax out of article text
Hi. I'm curious why you felt the need to move reference syntax out of the References section and back into the article text? It's extremely rare that I find any editor wanting to do that, so I'd like to know more about your objections. One rationale for my edits is that simplifying article text by excluding reference minutiae makes it easier for the casual editor to make edits. GFHandel ♬ 20:03, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
- Rather than your assertion that it is easier to use, it seems to me that it adds complexity to editing. I do not find it advocated in the manual of style or help pages. Can you point out where it is demonstrated to be preferred over standard formatting? Altairisfar (talk) 21:24, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
- I guess that I (and many other editors now) are at the cutting edge of a movement to standardise references, with the aim to make article text less disruptive due to Wiki-syntax—hence making it less daunting for the casual editors that we are trying hard to encourage. Those casual editors don't have to know how to add reference syntax, however they have a much easier time skipping over the short references left in the article text. Have a study of articles such as Sean Combs and Bob Hope and try to envisage just how disruptive to the text it would be if the reference syntax was in there as well. In articles where references are reused, you get a similar split of reference syntax, so it does very little harm to go the whole way and remove the single expanded ref component from the article text. BTW, I believe that you do need to consider your strategy regarding reference formatting, since (by undoing my edits) you have reintroduced disparate date formats in the rendered references (something that is against policy). Anyhow, I hope this is some food for thought, and since you seem to think that it adds complexity (which I assure you is not an issue), please don't hesitate to contact me if you have more questions. GFHandel ♬ 21:52, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
- Hi. I do this a lot and find it very helpful. I've been thanked many times for re-organising references this way, too. The core issue is that full citation details inline turn into half the wikitext, making the prose fragmented and essentially unreadable in the editbox. It drives n00bz away quite regularly as they can't read it. Wikitext with a high proportion of plaintext in it is much more approachable.
- There's not a consensus that this is preferred; no accounting for disparate opinions. But it is popular and being used more and more, everyday. You know the history of this? When ref tags with names were first introduced, the ref definition /had/ to be at the first usage and the other invocations had to follow. This often put them in things like infoboxes. Later, the parser was made two-pass, which allowed them to be invoked above the definition, and later-yet (2009) things were changed again to allow references to actually be defined /in/ the reference section. That there are many articles written with them defined high up is simply due the fact that at the time the articles were written, the refs /had/ to be done that way. And people learned that approach and then closed their minds to further learning.
- This isn't even cutting edge; see articles like Franz Kafka, Lynching of Jesse Washington, Pedro II of Brazil, or Avery Brundage; they don't have a single ref tag in them; they're using even better referencing mechanisms. Br'er Rabbit (talk) 23:11, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Re a link to an NRHP site: Isn't there any way to link directly a particular historical site on the NRHP website? A user following the link at Ellicott's Stone will find no information about it using the given link, as I did. •••Life of Riley (T–C) 00:14, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
- It's a long-standing and well-known problem, but no. You have to do a search each time to get to the information. There is no way to form a permanent link to it. That NRIS link is in all of the many thousands of National Register of Historic Places articles on Wikipedia. So far no one at WikiProject NRHP has figured out an alternative, so it comes up again and again. Altairisfar (talk) 00:34, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
- Typical of a government website: abysmally slow and difficult to use. When I tried the search you suggested, it took at least two minutes for the results to appear. After a second search, I got tired of waiting and gave up. •••Life of Riley (T–C) 01:01, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
My name is Shannon Fischer, and I am revising a wikipedia article for an English project. I have been working on some research for the Cahaba River page. I noticed that you have made some edits on this page, and I was hoping you could help advise me through this process. I look forward to hearing from you!
- I would be happy to help in any way that I can! Just let me know. Altairisfar (talk) 14:29, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/WLM-US 2013 discussion
thanks for nice Presbyterian church pic
It's always a pleasure to browse in the Alabama historic site listings and find your beautiful pics. Is the light so great, or is it your camera, or what? Anyhow, thanks for helping kick off new List of Presbyterian churches. Any interest by you in helping there or at List of Methodist churches would be very much welcomed. Cheers, --doncram 23:40, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
- I think it was the light, most of mine don't turn out like that. I'll see if I can find a few to add. Altairisfar (talk) 15:28, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for all your work in List of Presbyterian churches. Could you possibly please comment at Talk:List of Presbyterian churches#development, split? I think it is time to split out a U.S. list and would like your opinion on some options. And I'd defer to you starting the split article if you like those honors, or I could start the split. There's another discussion item there too. Thanks, --doncram 04:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Hey all :).
I'm dropping you a note because you've been involved in dealing with feedback from the Article Feedback Tool. To get a better handle on the overall quality of comments now that the tool has become a more established part of the reader experience, we're undertaking a round of hand coding - basically, taking a sample of feedback and marking each piece as inappropriate, helpful, so on - and would like anyone interested in improving the tool to participate :).
You can code as many or as few pieces of feedback as you want: this page should explain how to use the system, and there is a demo here. Once you're comfortable with the task, just drop me an email at okeyeswikimedia.org and I'll set you up with an account :).
If you'd like to chat with us about the research, or want live tutoring on the software, there will be an office hours session on Monday 17 December at 23:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office. Hope to see some of you there! Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:02, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
ip editor adding metro areas
I see you have started reverting edits that were made by that IP already. I was waiting for AIV to block him, but I am glad you got started. I will help. I'll start at the bottom of his contributions, if that is ok with you. Gtwfan52 (talk) 23:58, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, what a mess they made. Happy to have some help, thank you! Altairisfar (talk) 00:00, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Valhermoso Springs, Alabama map picture
I know that you didn't make the article for Valermoso Springs, but I figured you would know how or know someone who could fix the location on the map that is given in it. This has just bugged me, since Morgan County is not that far south. If I need to inform someone else, just let me know. Also, sorry about the header capitalizations. Thanks! Dofftoubab (talk) 06:29, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey, how's it going? I noticed that List of University of Alabama people is a mess, and that lots of people who have articles aren't represented one way or another. I suppose we need separate articles lists) on the ADs, coaches, etc. I started by creating Presidents of the University of Alabama and can use your help in expanding and cleaning up (President of Harvard University was kind of my model--perhaps the title should be singular, or it should be "List of"). Anyway, your help here and in general is appreciated: the various articles need cleaning and synchronizing, and maybe the categories as well. And of course I need to be added to one of these, haha. President, preferably! Drmies (talk) 19:53, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hey, Roll Tide back at cha! I'll add both to my to do list. I think the title of the new one is fine. I'll try to find some sources for it too. It may take me a while to get to them though, real life has been consuming a great deal of my time as of late. Altairisfar (talk) 14:25, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
- Good for you, I suppose! ;) Did you see this article? That makes supporting a winning program a lot less cheerful... Drmies (talk) 14:46, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
If I'm not mistaken, SarekOfVulcan (talk) 05:24, 19 January 2013 (UTC)and were before I had any contact with Doncram. --
- One two sentence article. Okay. Altairisfar (talk) 05:44, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
FYI on duplicate diff
The last diff in the list you posted on the Doncram Evidence page is a duplicate of one you listed earlier in that same list. Thought you would want to know... --Orlady (talk) 14:09, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Hey all; another newsletter.
- If you're not already aware, a Request for Comment on the future of the Article Feedback Tool on the English-language Wikipedia is open; any and all comments, regardless of opinion and perspective, are welcome.
- Our final round of hand-coding is complete, and the results can be found here; thanks to everyone who took part!
- We've made test deployments to the German and French-language projects; if you are aware of any other projects that might like to test out or use the tool, please let me know :).
- Developers continue to work on the upgraded version of the feedback page that was discussed during our last office hours session, with a prototype ready for you to play around with in a few weeks.
Hope you're doing well! I've been doing some research on Strawberry Hill and Rosemount, trying to compile information on both estates, and noticed you uploaded a photo from in front of Strawberry Hill back in 2008 (File:Strawberry Hill Plantation.jpg). I was curious to see if you were able to enter the home and take any photographs of the interior as it was in 2008. I've seen the Library of Congress's stash of images from decades ago, but I've been unable to find anything more recent. Best, --auburnpilot talk 22:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hey, I am well and hope you are too. I'll send you an email about them. Altairisfar (talk) 22:42, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
New Article Feedback version available for testing
As promised, we've built a set of improvements to the Article Feedback Tool, which can be tested through the links here. Please do take the opportunity to play around with it, let me know of any bugs, and see what you think :).
A final reminder that the Request for Comment on whether AFT5 should be turned on on Wikipedia (and how) is soon to close; for those of you who have not submitted an opinion or !voted, it can be found here.
Some eager new editor has created an article for Lowry House (Huntsville, Alabama) but it's a clear copy of the house's official website and I'm about to slash it down to a stub. Could you give this a look, next time you feel like writing about historic houses? Thanks. - Dravecky (talk) 20:22, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
- Sure! I'll add the standard NRHP stuff right now. The NRHP nomination forms aren't available for Madison County yet from the Alabama Historical Commission, but I'll revisit it (and lots of others) whenever they get the "M" counties online. Thanks for letting me know. Altairisfar (talk) 12:35, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Help or adoption needed
I found your name on Adopt-a-User page. I need help with my first wiki article Urban Sketchers - it has a lot of problems, some of which I don't even understand. I would like to make it right, but need help. If you are availabe and interested, please let me know.
- Sorry Alex, but I am currently not able to be online enough to adopt anyone new. Please keep on trying. It looks like your new article will not be deleted, though. Altairisfar (talk) 16:10, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
Bay Shell Road Mobile, Alabama
Hi, I noticed you had a historic home featured in a photo. I found you by searching on bing for Bay Shell Road Mobile, Alabama. The reason I was looking was because I have come across some old photos that belonged to my grandmother. There was one that had Bay Shell Road Mobile, Alabama written on the front of it and also it looks like the word/name Zadeks? I believe this may be the photography studio. Also written on back is "road way in front of camp 1911-1912" This photo was also among several of photos of my grandmothers family and extended family at a large camp set up with tents. They had no writing on them so I am assuming they are associated with the Bay Shell Road photo? I remember asking my Mother before she passed away about these and she said her Mother told her they lived in town Mobile but they would all spend every summer at the camp. My question is you mentioned in your photo that the road the house was on used to be referred to Bay Shell Road, and I was wondering what it is called now? My sisters and I are planning a trip to Mobile this May and wanted to see the area where they used to camp. Thanks! 126.96.36.199 (talk) 02:57, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- Hey, you must be talking about the Martin Lindsey House. That small remnant of the Bay Shell Road is now called Bayfront Road. I'm not old enough to know any of this first-hand, but from what I understand the Bay Shell Road once left downtown Mobile from Goverment Street and closely followed the western edge of Mobile Bay all the way to Dauphin Island. A large part of the road, just outside of the old Mobile City limits, went by Monroe Park, a large pleasure park, and the country club. All of that and much of the road was destroyed long ago in a hurricane. The Brookley Aeroplex covers much of what was the park and country club property. The rough coarse of the old roadbed starts with the southernmost portion of South Broad Street, then, after it enters Brookley, the old roadbed is called Old Bay Front Road. It ends at the southern end of one of the runways. It doesn't connect directly to the next part of the old roadbed (where that house is) on Bayfront Road, which itself ends again at the Buccaneer Yacht Club. From here you would have to get onto the Dauphin Island Parkway for a short distance to cross Dog River and then head back east toward the bay to get back to the old roadbed, now called Bay Road. This ends at the Theodore Industrial Canal. The remainder of the old road to Dauphin Island no longer exists. Hope this helps! Altairisfar (talk) 05:01, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
First off, thanks a lot for your help at my sandbox. I haven't yet announced at the project page that I have started this tally, but it seems you found it anyway haha. I am going to move the page into project space soon (although I have to find an admin around here somewhere to split the page history... stupid me didn't think about that before I started) and then I'll announce it and let everyone fill in their own states. I'm also compiling all the data and making a map similar to the one shown at the top of WP:NRHP which will scale from red to green based on how illustrated/articled each county is. I'll add in the Alabama data to the map on my personal computer, and if you'd like to see it, I'll email it to you (just send me an email using the link on my user page). I don't want to upload it to Wikipedia until we get all the states done.
There is one thing that I would like to mention, though, that I will also mention when I announce the page. I kind of want to keep the refs about duplicates somewhat standard, and as you may have noticed from the other complete sections on the page, I would like which articles are duplicated to be included in those refs. By doing this, it is easier to keep up with whether or not these duplicates are illustrated/articled, something that I notice you didn't take into account when you were tallying up the total for Alabama. Because one of the two duplicates in the state is articled and illustrated, your totals for those columns was off by one (i.e. it counted that site twice). I corrected that for this state, but if you end up helping out with other states, keep that in mind.
Hey Altairisfar. I'm sorry to say that some bugs in code that the Article Feedback Tool is dependent on have resulted in us still not being able to deploy the latest version to en-wiki - although one advantage is that, because it's functioning on the German and French Wikipedias, the eventual release here will contain fixes for several newly-detected bugs without us having to bother you with them :P. At the moment, we're talking about several weeks of wait, I'm afraid - although the fix itself is not complex, it's dependent on Platform freeing up time to make and deploy it, and they're currently rather busy. I'll let you know when I have more news. Thanks :) Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:44, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Invitation to WikiProject Breakfast
Request for comment
Hi Altairisfar, there is an ongoing discussion regarding the copyright status for images of “signs” that have been uploaded to Commons. The discussion can be found here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Pinemere_sign.jpg Some of your images, such as [here] and [here], may eventually be affected by this deletion proposal. Consequently, you may wish to add a comment regarding the deletion request. Regards Woodlot (talk) 12:12, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Links from NRHP lists
I see that you recently changed the target link for a listing in Tuscaloosa County, Alabama. While this is technically fine to do, according to WP:NRHPMOS#Naming conventions, the actual NRHP name should at least be a redirect to the article. I just created the redirect for this one, and it appears a few articles already link to it. To keep things consistent across the encyclopedia, please try to make redirects in the future rather than changing the lists. Thanks!--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 15:37, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
- Okay. I didn't realize that this aspect had been added to the naming conventions, I don't believe that I've looked them over since they were expanded. Altairisfar (talk) 16:27, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
Timeline of Mobile
Former Masonic buildings in X
Sorry for the confusion ... but thanks for your help in sorting it all out. I think we have a workable solution... but I am sure there will be a bit of disruption while we generate the new by STATE categories, and link them appropriately to other categories. We will get this right eventually. Blueboar (talk) 23:25, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
- Sounds good. I'm glad that we can (hopefully) put this matter to rest. Altairisfar (talk) 03:40, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
FYI - new article
- I saw that page yesterday, but I don't think it passes muster. I considered an AfD for a minute or two. There are several in Mobile that claim oldest, the one mentioned (Vincent-Doan House, which was so extensively altered and repeatedly restored that I don't know how much of it can claim to be as old as they say the house is), the Conde-Charlotte House (part dates to 1822) and another that I can't remember the name of right now (it's unrestored and not listed on a register, but is downtown, a few blocks west of the Cathedral). This list, if it is to exist needs a scholarly source that specifically makes a case for these claims. You find the claims in NRHP documents all the time that turn out to be erroneous, which is where the article data came from in most cases. IMO, this should be more than a collection of Wikipedia-based article claims, if it should exist at all. Altairisfar (talk) 03:52, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
BACKLOG OF THE WEEK Category:Pages with broken reference names
Hello - some editors fight off the vandal hordes, as I do repairing pages with citation errors. If I didn't - there would be a large backlog in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting and in Category:Pages with missing references list as in Category:Pages with broken reference names (more than 1500 yesterday). But it is impossible to work it alone. Do you know how to do a "Blitz" (excuse the comparision) to find willing editors to work on it. It is much more easier to repair references if you do it one hour, one day or one week ago after the errors were made instead of months and years after the error was done. Very, very difficult to find these errors.
There is a suggestion on Wikipedia:Bot requests for a new REFBot working as DPL bot and BracketBot do. I beg politely for consideration. Please leave a comment if you wish. Thanks a lot in anticipation. --Frze > talk 03:57, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
- Thanks, I wish it was due to too many good things. I've just grown tired of the Wikiproject in general. Altairisfar (talk) 14:38, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Take a look?
If you get a chance, would you take a critical look at Daphne, Alabama? I'm waiting on a GA review but since that could take a while I want to keep on working. Your thoughts and experience would be helpful I'm sure. JodyB talk 11:57, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
- I'll try to take a look in the next few days. So glad to see that you're back on here! Altairisfar (talk) 15:22, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:20, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|The Writer's Barnstar|
|For the articles you have written. I am particularly impressed by the Vine and Olive Colony article. Historian (talk) 00:26, 14 June 2014 (UTC)|
I added a category venom to the southeastern crown snake,This snake does have a mild venom and it is true that it is harmless to humans and to my knowledge rarely bites humans.i have brought this to you're attention because i dont want you to remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BamaPride628 (talk • contribs) 15 July 2014
- Thanks, I may get around to writing one on Perdido eventually, real life has substantially curtailed my activity here for the last year. Altairisfar (talk) 02:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)