User talk:Magicpiano

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
User page: This is a Wikipedia user page, not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at
| Magicpiano | Talk Page | Leave Message | DYK | Recognition | Topics |

Finishing up Virginia[edit]

I have access to the Virginia Landmarks Register through my university library, so I can help with the finish-Virginia project. I've just created Hidden Valley Rockshelter; I'd appreciate it if you'd tag and rate it. Although I got the core of the article from the VLR, much of the material was actually online already; if you're interested in trying to Google for sources on the other sites, you might want to check the references I've used. Nyttend (talk) 00:33, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

That looks really good. One thing that frustrated me in particular about Hidden Valley was that I was able to find mentions of it (the dog burial thing notably) but no good descriptions of the actual site. (A similar thing happened with the Leesville Dam site -- there seem to be multiple archaeological sites in that area, but nothing that really described something identifiable specifically as the NR-listed site.) Magic♪piano 00:58, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Okay, makes sense; I've not even tried to look for online stuff about the others, and I wasn't clear if you had. I did have some big advantages with the dog burials: I wrote the Carlston Annis article, I have Claassen's Feasting with Shellfish, a critical work in the theory of Archaic shell middens, and I've visited many of the Green River shell mound groups that includes Carlston Annis. As a result, I've seen other literature on Archaic-period dog sites, and these sites quickly came to mind. Nyttend (talk) 01:08, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Henry Bousquet Three-Decker[edit]

Could you fix your citation, which has gone slightly awry? Choess (talk) 00:07, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

D'oh! Thanks for noticing. Magic♪piano 00:35, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Great! Thanks. Choess (talk) 01:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Daniel Shays[edit]

Bubble Tea.png Re: reverting my erroneous edits. Thanks for the catch! Safety Cap (talk) 13:13, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

South Arkansas NRHPs[edit]

Hey, thanks for all of your edits to the NRHPs in South Arkansas. I wanted to let you know I am in South Arkansas for a few days and will be trying to photograph as many of these sites as possible. It will take me a few days to get everything uploaded. Thanks for helping to get Arkansas's NRHP coverage up to par! Brandonrush Woo pig sooie! 12:45, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Good luck finding the crater! Magic♪piano 13:49, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Captain Robert Bennet Forbes House[edit]

I think this is an interesting home. Thank you for adding some details on its design. Candleabracadabra (talk) 20:54, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you![edit]

Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your continuing high quality, tireless contributions, it is time for you to receive this award again. Good work! Donner60 (talk) 05:32, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I also am interested in history. Donner60 (talk) 05:32, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Paul Revere[edit]

fyi, you were mentioned at Social Dramas of Wikipedia, by Sara Marks. discussion at Wikipedia Weekly. [1]. cheers. (talk) 19:53, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Precious again[edit]

Cornflower blue Yogo sapphire.jpg

American Revolutionary War
Thank you for quality articles as a member of the American Revolutionary War task force, such as Battle of Quebec (1775), for guiding to magic composer articles, and for a a DYK I might call hintersinnig, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:36, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 535th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:09, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Town Hall and Courthouse listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]


An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Town Hall and Courthouse. Since you had some involvement with the Town Hall and Courthouse redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. AlexTiefling (talk) 15:51, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

What to do: Alaska Highway[edit]

Hello, on July 4 you added two banners to the talk page for Alaska Highway, requesting a new image. I have added the image and removed the image request banner. Should the other banner, {{WikiProject National Register of Historic Places}}, stay or go? Mandruss (talk) 03:52, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

No, that's just a project banner. Magic♪piano 13:56, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Call me stoopid (wouldn't be the first time), but is that a stay or a go? Mandruss (talk) 16:21, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
The project banner should stay. I added it because of the National Register listing. Magic♪piano 20:15, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Gotcha, thanks. Mandruss (talk) 22:21, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Watch Rock Camp[edit]

Hi - I'm not sure actually what the correct address of Watch Rock Camp in Holderness, NH is. Your article originally said US Route 113, which I changed to NH Route 113, but I overlooked the street address, which you recently corrected. The address might well have been 414 US Route 3 (Google Maps is not helping enough here). NH 113 runs along the northwest side of Squam Lake, and US 3 runs along the southwest side. Do you have any way of finding the geographic coordinates for the site? I tried looking the place up by reference number and by Grafton County on the NRIS but had no luck. --Ken Gallager (talk) 13:48, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

The US 3 address was given, IMHO incorrectly, in the weekly NR listing when this property was listed on the National Register; the feature page lists it as "Address Restricted". The source I used to stub the article says it is off NH 113 (US 113 was a fat-finger on my part, of course). The US 3 address (which I Googled when I noticed the discrepant addresses) is the address of the Squam Lakes Association, the organization that managed the NR nomination process, and is probably not the address of the camp, which is described in the source as still belonging to the family. I have been unable to locate further information about its whereabouts. Magic♪piano 14:41, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh, sure enough, I should have recognized the SLA address when I looked on Google Maps. Thanks for all your work! --Ken Gallager (talk) 13:01, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Utah NRHP count[edit]

You're right that no net change occurred, but the count in the table at National Register of Historic Places listings in Utah was wrong before. Add the numbers and you'll see. The lead has the right number, and so does Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/Progress. Ntsimp (talk) 18:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

I noticed and self-reverted. Magic♪piano 18:29, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Nördliche Schutzhütte am Hasselborgsee[edit]

Zank you for ze new stub on ze Hasselborg Lake North Shelter Cabin. Now we just need a good photograph of the Nördliche Schutzhütte am Hasselborgsee. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 20:00, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Leider bin Ich nicht dieser Hütte (oder all den anderen) in der Nähe, sonst würde Ich sie fotografieren. :) Magic♪piano 20:09, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Moscow Methodist Church and Cemetery[edit]

Your recent edits to Moscow Methodist Church and Cemetery were based on the assertion that "most of the civil war material is not needed", however, there are specific references to this property having been directly involved in the Civil War:

  • Interview of the Moscow United Methodist Church.[1]
  • The Battle of Prairie DeAnn[2]
  • A Bluecoat's Account Of the Camden Expedition [3]
  • Civil War Battlefields in the State of Arkansas[4]
  • A Preservation Plan for Three Battles of the Camden Campaign.[5][6]

Also, your assertion that "there is a separate article for Moscow where it might be more relevant" is false. Such an article needs to be constructed.

Please revert your changes to this article, and/or please construct the article you specified. Please do so in such a way that both articles are properly aligned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:27, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

  1. ^ "...during the Civil War there was a skirmish there close to Moscow and a cannonball had hit that tree and that's what made that big old knot on it."
  2. ^ Thayer's troops at the rear of the column did not leave Prairie De Ann proper until the following day. Price discovered the Union deception on April 13, and hastily returned to Prairie De Ann to attack the Camden-bound Union column as it withdrew." "Thayer deployed his men along the timberline on the eastern edge of the prairie near the village of Moscow to meet the pursuing Confederates; in the four hours of combat that ensued, the 2nd Indiana Battery fired more than two thousand shots, solid and shell." "The Federals reported seven killed and 24 wounded in the 'Battle of Moscow'."
  3. ^ "We started for Camden and arrived on the 17th, having a fight with the rebels, who made an attack on our rear, just as we were leaving the prairie."
  4. ^ "The smaller Core Area represents “The Battle of Moscow," a rearguard engagement around and in the town of Moscow."
  5. ^!userfiles/editor/docs/Preservation%20Plan%20for%20Three%20Battles%20of%20the%20Camden%20Campaign.pdf The Battle of Elkin’s Ferry, The Battle of Prairie D’Ane, and The Battle of Moscow Church
  6. ^ Prairie DeAnn Sesquicentennial Reenacment - April 12, 2014
None of these sources establish a direct connection between this property and the military actions in the area; the fourth citation is a dead link. The only one that is at all geographically specific is the second citation, on the Battle of Prarie d'Ane, which says "on the eastern edge of the prairie near the village of Moscow". None of them are specific in linking the military action to the church, which is why I reduced the amount of material related to the conflict.
I acknowledge that a proper article on this particular Moscow, Arkansas, does not exist; I only noticed after I made that edit that Moscow, Arkansas refers to a different location. However, if you feel that an article on this Moscow is needed now, feel free to create it. My only attention was to this particular article. Magic♪piano 23:48, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


The first citation provides confirmation by verbal anecdote, and the source is enlisting 'common knowledge' from the local area. Her reflection bears additional credence since she "attended that church as a child." Being born in 9-5-1906,[2] Mrs. Adam's youth was not too far removed from the actual events, so it seems likely that her parents or grandparents would have been alive in 1864.

In the second citation, the volume of rounds that were exchanged at the battle is of interest, giving further credence to Mrs. Adam's recollections. (tree on church property hit by cannonball)

The fifth citation was indeed broken, and the link has been fixed. Being funded by the National Park Service American Battlefield Protection Program, this document should provide all the information needed by a researcher in regard to this matter.

Finally, I can understand and appreciate the accidental village listing, but it was your choice to adjust the original article now. That action resulted in the more immediate need for an article about Moscow itself. While I am not familiar with the procedure for creating new articles, I propose to expand upon the article if you will agree to it's initial setup . . . Moscow, Arkansas (Historic).

The anecdote in the first citation mentions a tree, but it does not say whether the tree is on church property, or somewhere else in the village: "when we moved here there was a big tree along the side of the road there by Moscow that had a big knot on it up high and the story was that during the Civil War there was a skirmish there close to Moscow and a cannonball had hit that tree and that's what made that big old knot on it. I remember that story that I heard when I was just a girl. But through the years the tree was cut down for some reason or other and it isn't there." The second citation does not mention this property, and neither do any of the others.
The things that I removed from the article are hardly critical to gaining a better understanding of this property; they were principally just a list of the major events of the Camden Expedition, and categories that are more properly suited toward articles on the actual military engagements. (For example, the list included the Battle of Poison Spring, which took place not at all near Moscow.) I removed none of the non-military history of Moscow. Magic♪piano 18:40, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

In order to understand the inclusion of Civil War references on this article, I suggest you read the Preservation Plan that was Funded By National Park Service American Battlefield Protection Program; 'A Preservation Plan for Three Battles of the Camden Campaign: The Battle of Elkin’s Ferry, the Battle of Prairie D’Ane and the Battle of Moscow Church'.[3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Very good, that is an adequate source for discussing the role of Moscow in the events of the Camden Expedition. Now, did I remove something that somehow resulted in a diminished understanding of the same? The old version made no mention that Moscow was the site of a rear-guard action on April 13, 1864, beyond linking "Action at Moscow" as a pipe to Battle of Prairie D'Ane, a deficient article that makes no mention of Moscow, and only quickly mentions that there was a rear-guard action. I would take issue with the notion that that is somehow a better characterization of the place's role than what is present in the article now. If you want to improve the article, then do so; you seem to have the resources at your disposal, but don't blame me for removing something that wasn't there. (While you're at it, you might also cover the construction history of the church, a subject obviously relevant in this article, and also present in your sources. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia.) Magic♪piano 18:27, 28 July 2014 (UTC)


Actually, the deletions included this citation, Encyclopedia of Arkansas - Action at Moscow which specifically mentions the rear-gard action, and though my notes on your page have never been intended to criticize, I did have to mention the 'Plan For Preservation' several times before it was actually read. My only suggestions would be in regard to the use of discretion before deleting content. Before deletion, for example, one might fully read and understand the existing references. Afterwards, one might consider using - {{citation needed}} - or {{Multiple issues}}. Such options as these would provide specific and understandable requests without unnecessary loss of content.

It has been my hope that our conversation would help to inform and gather a consensus on this article. Toward that end, I remain hopeful. You have presented several good ideas and critiques that seem quite logical, so I thank you most kindly for that and for your continued interest in Wikipedia. Please feel free to edit your page as you see fit.

Thank you again.


"Home sweet home"[edit]

Hi, I noticed on "home sweet home" it was last updated 3 months ago, but I was actually looking for this movie called "home sweet home" that was made in 2013 by David Morlet. I wanted to know more about it but unfortunately it was not listed with the others. I would gladly appreciate it if you can add this particular movie on to the list. Thank you so much for your time(: — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:02, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

ships passing in the night[edit]

I am highly amused -- highly -- to see that you and I were on a photo hunt in the same parts of Franklin County and Cumberland County on the same weekend. I hope you don't mind that I replaced your photo of the Little Red Schoolhouse with mine -- your pictures of Lakeside Grange No. 63 and South Bridgton Congregational Church were better than mine, so I feel like it works out.

I'm just glad now I didn't spend a lot of time trying to locate Barn on Lot 8, Range G, which was also on my list. :-) —Tim Pierce (talk) 00:57, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

(: I concur your photo of the schoolhouse is vastly better than mine. You were somewhat unlikely to find the barn -- it is reasonably well screened from the road (and thus easy to drive by), and the geolocator was in the wrong place. I only found it on my second trip down the road, and after reading the nomination form. (You would also have been seriously stumped by John G. Coburn Farm, if it was on your list.) It helps that I've been up that way several times this summer (hiking in the mountains). Magic♪piano 01:17, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Just FYI[edit]

With some exceptions, the U.S. Roads WikiProject doesn't have city streets in its scope. There's WP:WikiProject U.S. Streets for articles about city streets. I updated the banner on Beech Street Brick Street accordingly. Imzadi 1979  00:30, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Battle of the Plains of Abraham[edit]

unexplained change of cited numbers

The numbers are inaccurate. It's that simple.

Sources: — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:31, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Then you should cite the source you use and leave a suitable comment explaining why you changed them. Do understand that numerical vandalism (especially by anonymous editors such as yourself) is quite common in Wikipedia. Magic♪piano 18:37, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Can I replace your photo of The Warehouse at MIT?[edit]

I think I have a more flattering picture of the building, seen here. For reference, this is the current photo that you took. Krilnon (talk) 15:19, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

I have no objection. Magic♪piano 16:53, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Just so you know...[edit]

I noticed you started an article today on a NRHP-listed site in Maine and cited a nomination form that you requested from NPS. All of Maine's nomination forms are now online through NPS Focus; while Focus itself is down and Elkman's infobox generator hasn't been updated, you can still access the forms by manually entering the reference number into the URL, like so. (Vermont and Rhode Island are also in Focus now in case you want to progress further into New England.) TheCatalyst31 ReactionCreation 02:52, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I knew that from the discussion at WT:NRHP. I was just being lazy... Magic♪piano 12:42, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

National Register nominations, hard copies[edit]

Do you still have the forms for Fisherville Historic and Archeological District, Parris Brook Historic and Archeological District, and Sodom Mill Historic and Archeological District? If so, would you please provide a full citation, since the current ones aren't sufficient? Zimmerman Kame includes a full citation, if you don't feel like looking around for one. Nyttend (talk) 12:13, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Sure no problem. Magic♪piano 16:09, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

thanks for all the pictures[edit]

I'm getting the impression that you spent a pleasant day traipsing around Waltham taking pictures of all the historic buildings, and I feel like I've been following in your footsteps, because I've been cleaning up some of the geographical coordinates (which for NRHP locations are always a little off). But it's fun -- and very useful -- to match your pictures up with Google Street View imagery in the process of pinpointing a more precise location (all from my easy chair). Thanks for all the legwork! —Steve Summit (talk) 17:40, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Moving pages[edit]

Hi, in the future it would be better to use the built-in "move page" function rather than copying and pasting the article manually as you did with Former Gilead Railroad Station, as doing so preserves the page edit history. Thanks. vlad§inger tlk 18:31, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Normally I do, but Gilead Railroad Station, Former was not linked from places where I would have expected it to be, so I didn't notice it until after I had written (from scratch) a new article. Magic♪piano 18:35, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough. vlad§inger tlk 18:36, 15 November 2014 (UTC)


So AdamDaley doesn't get it... please watch and see if he attempts to cite anything. The sniping at your Good Article is likely an overzealous attempt. It cannot be bad-faith because the usual factor is clearly in play, but I found editors making up citations or synthing them out of thin-air when they fail to understand. Oh, and your actions in NRHP for Massachusetts and Rhode Island have thrown me off-balance. It is of great help to have the stubs started or even not red-linked, but I feel bad when I run across a page to improve and found you improving in within a day or two of my arrival! Still, NRHP is moving along well with such dedicated and problem-free editing. I peeked back into the "culture war" area I came from and shudder a little, but alas in terms of aggegrate viewers - cultural subjects get thousands of times more views and still suck unless someone improves them! For Wikipedia having 4.6 million articles, sheer the number of academic GAs outweighs the numerous FAs on easy cultural topics. I think Wikipedia should be measured by the total of both GA and FA contributions in the media. Don't you? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 07:21, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

The Cornwallis articles are all on my watchlist, so I'm definitely aware of what's happening with them. I'm trying to stay out of the fray at WT:GAN; I don't now why he chose to pursue the citation issue there rather than the article talk page.
As far as NRHP improvement, it's not my intention to step on turf. I've finished with RI for the moment (and MA, except for new listings and occasionally checking for updates to the MA MACRIS database), although I'm starting to request noms from the NPS on the RI address-restricted sites that are sub-stubby or NRIS. I had the impression you were working mostly toward GA-ing articles, and my stub work wouldn't necessarily interfere. I've started poking cautiously at CT, where the stub articles need work. NRHP has been much less contentious since Doncram got topic-banned. Magic♪piano 14:59, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
There is no turf issues here, I just been picking CT and RI because they actually have usable databases whereas NY is a mess! I also like being able to have connected GAs, where the page you start on is a GA and the next page you jump to is a GA and so on and so forth. The four Avery homes, the Groton Monument, the parks they are located in and such. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:42, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
Fun with Liberty Arming the Patriot, NRIS lists it as dating from 1896 when it was completed and dedicated in 1897. Small things, but I am glad you are tackling the NRIS-only stub issues. The more articles I work on, the more I see how NRIS listings can be inaccurate. Columbus (Providence, Rhode Island) is another Gorham work that I am glad to have completed. I still got 100+ Connecticut Civil War monuments to work on, but since they are not NRHP listed I doubt I have enough push to give them articles yet. Not enough GAs or FAs in NRHP as a whole to justify going for lower importance works still. NRHP is safe from AFD, but it doesn't mean we can slack off now does it! You've made a major dent and completed most of Massachusett's NRIS-only listings - if you get bored, can you fill in the Connecticut redlinked articles? Though I think the L.River Sites may need to be combined, but I'll see if I can ever get those archeological papers from the NRHP. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:48, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
The Massachusetts NRIS-only articles that remain are "problem" cases: there is inadequate documentation on them in MACRIS, and Massachusetts NR forms are unavailable from NPS (they are allegedly being digitized, was a response I received to a request). Quite a few are also districts, pretty much requiring the nom to get the bounds right. I periodically check MACRIS for updates that affect these articles. Although I'm looking at the CT articles now, progress on specifically NRIS-only articles is slow, becase there are also a large number of somewhat crappy articles (not always NRIS-only, not always sub-stub, but low in relevant content) that I'm also fixing along the way. (I wouldn't be surprised if more than 500 of the ~750 CT stubs are like this.) I may look at some of the CT redlinks after this pass. Magic♪piano 23:29, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, CT ones were a mess so I started with them, but quite a few digitizations have been made on the CT side whereas RI had a state site to back up the vast majority. I also got an answer that "they are being digitized", but I don't want to bug them too much. I think they know we Wikipedians are pretty ravenous in our pursuits and that we haven't really given them much reason to be "special" in a sense. After all, I still can't get enough to do Slater Mill right. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:15, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
  • I finally decided to fix the American Thermos Bottle Company Laurel Hill Plant. I was confused for awhile on what to do, but just decided that a historic district is not a burden anymore. Though sparse in details, NRHP districts typically are, this plant is not given the same care as more modern additions. Since twenty five years have passed since its adaptation began, its also really unpleasant to research the adaptation and loss of the complex which also took out one of the developers. Also... the idea of cutting off the top of part of the building and making a gym is pretty novel and shows the intention of the designers. A shame that they lampooned it, it was decayed pretty bad. NRHP districts and those which include schools and such have long given me pause. The latter now is my issue because it is not enough to do just an article on the building and leave the actual school article entirely absent if you can help it. Don't suppose you have any tips for NRHP schools? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 08:02, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
I find that nominations (at least those written post-1995 or so) for residential, village center, and rural districts to be reasonably amenable to significant elaboration. One has to wonder if the NPS or state SHPO was consulted in the alterations made to that plant. The post-listing history of these sorts of industrial properties strike me as a real challenge to research. As far as schools are concerned, I can't say I've come across any that had a particularly complicated history. Multiple uses, certainly, but usually academic, civic, or community, with larger buildings sometimes converted to condos or other living facilities. It seems to me that schools are often listed as much for their architecture (C) as their role (A), but details on school population history (for example) are not always given, whereas architecture is. I'd look through the existing NHRP GA list for schools, see how they're written up. Magic♪piano 15:37, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
There are five GAs of the educational type. Oxford College of Emory University does not cover the NRHP part and Garden City High School (Kansas) glosses right over it. Chana School was disused then turned museum, so it is free from the normal school requirements. Old Bacon Academy was used, but the school has its own article and is housed in the new building. The old building is used as an alternative education facility of which is not like a "high school" with low attendance. With the Laurel Hill Plant I can get away with a mere summary, but the school page got redirected a month ago. Shea High School won't be so easy. Also this school seems to be grossly violating logo usage for its sports because it uses the Oakland Raiders symbols on their gear for sports. Thought it was mere vandalism when someone placed it as the logo, but the more I looked into the school and saw the sourcing and it was bleak. I worry about making it a Good Article because I cannot justify having a "building article" in this case. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:31, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
Given that the school does not occupy the entire complex, I wouldn't deal with the school much beyond mentioning its role as a tenant and in its alteration the premises (i.e. more or less what you're doing now). The school as such seems to lack notability (just looking at edit history), which can be pointed out if raised at GAN. The Shea High School, when I saw that article in my pass through the Pawtucket list, immediately thought "this building needs a separate article". (I'd try to find what it is currently called and use that; failing, use "Old Pawtucket West High School".) Magic♪piano 23:10, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
The building still in use by the school. It is exactly why I can't do the "Old Pawtucket West High School" page. Doubt I could make a split for the architecture, especially with the lack of excellent survey and many many updates over the years. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:19, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I think the fact that the Integrated Day School is the present occupant of a facility with a history much longer than its own organizational history does not impose on you the burden to go in any significant detail on the school's history beyond how it uses the facilities, and a brief mention of its purpose. I think you have a bigger challenge with the Pawtucket school if the building is still in use as part of the campus. (I pray you don't run into properties like this one: a modest house, where the MPS it is part of has two pages of generic architecture and significance, and its own form is essentially a sketchy one page local inventory form. This nom would probably not pass muster at NPS today, and provides less useful text than many GAs.) Magic♪piano 13:54, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Tough to do anything with forms like that, and no - they would not pass muster nowadays. I have yet to see anything that sparse and uninvolved out of hundreds of forms that I've reviewed. I have contacted the Narragansett Bay Commission in regards to six items on the register which seem to be absent according to aerial searches. If true, this makes the actual task of completing the articles easier, but I cannot find the multiple property sheet from Focus. Also, I made a few footnotes on an article I did on the Farmington Canal State Park Trail - normally I defer to Yale, but I had to correct my sources for this. NRHP is usually good because I can often just pull from the collected sources to fact check. Do you think these types of non-intrusive footnotes are good or do you prefer the "inline note" instead? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:25, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate the work on de-stubbing the wardrooms and such, I fixed the William R. Walker & Son to William R. Walker issue for you. First Ward Wardroom and Fifth Ward Wardroom were spots I noticed so far, but I don't think there are many remaining issues (if any) of this nature. There is probably an issue with St. Charles Borromeo Church Complex (Woonsocket, Rhode Island) because it cites Patrick Keely and the MPS states as such, but that is for the complex and not the school. So I do not know what to do for now. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:04, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you're saying with the St. Charles Borromeo. The infobox (based on NRIS) says Keely, but the text only explicitly credits him with the church. You'll probably need other sources than the Woonsocket MPS to identify architects for the other buildings in the complex. Magic♪piano 13:22, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
True, the first document I had only cited Keely as well, hence the concern. Without actually doing the article in full, I guess I cannot be too concerned with this issue at the present time. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 08:01, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Siege of St. John's[edit]

Hello! Don't know if you remember me (not offended if you don't), but I assisted you in gathering a source in order for the Charles Town expedition to reach GA status a couple years back, and you noted that you were aiming to get a large number of articles related to Queen Anne's War completed to attain Good Topic status at the time. I may have time to work on gathering more sources that you could use (my work schedule may permit it due to the shifts) in the upcoming weeks, if not months. Just contact me whenever you get the chance, and I'll try to respond (and gather sources as soon as Wednesday, as that will be my next day off. Thanks for reading!LeftAire (talk) 22:41, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

--Never mind. I found the old post that I left here, and I'll get around to finding more recent sources as soon as I can!LeftAire (talk) 22:45, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Thanks for creating the new International Vinegar Museum article and for expanding Wikipedia's coverage of notable historic places and food-related topics. NorthAmerica1000 04:29, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Refnums in new NRHP listings[edit]

First off, thank you for helping to add new listings to our lists as they are announced; without editors like yourself, we could never keep our lists as up to date as they are. If I might, though, put in a request for you to double check the entries when you add them, specifically the refnums attached to each. I just ran my bot [here] and found five separate instances where you added an item to a list with an incorrect reference number. This page is the basis for the duplication statistics on WP:NRHPPROGRESS, and any false duplicate like these five can throw off those statistics. I have corrected all five of these errors now, but this is not the first time I've come across this type of thing. If you could in the future, please be a little more careful with the reference numbers when adding new items to the lists. Thanks!--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 00:07, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

I try to be uniform in the sequence of editing steps involved in making those updates (especially in cut/paste of the refnum), but errors seem to creep in anyway. It's that darn human nature... Magic♪piano 13:08, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

¿1,500 works by Schubert?[edit]

Hi! I added the "citation needed" tag to the assertion that FZ composed oer 1,500 works. I googled for quite a while and couldn't find a source for that. The reference you mention is quite far below. Are you sure it mentions that? The official catalog lists only 998. I hope you can help me with that! --Jbaranao (talk) 19:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

I would assume the cited source makes the claim, given the summary nature and content of the paragraph. On the other hand, if you have a better source (the one given is a reprint of a 1937 work, which is also not a dedicated biography of Schubert), feel free to change the number with reference to more recent scholarship. Magic♪piano 19:12, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
I believe the figure 1,500 is wrong. I just can't find it in spanish or english. Perhaps in german, but I don't speak it. But it would be VERY remarkably if it was true, consideriing how young he died, and the fact that the official catalog lists only 998 and nowhere the article explains the discrepancy --Jbaranao (talk) 03:42, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 23 March[edit]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:16, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 24[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Peter Powers House, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Newbury, Vermont (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:05, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CVIII, March 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 09:36, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Haverhill Street Milestone -[edit]

Magicpiano -

I noticed that the Haverhill Street Milestone's location is given as 434 Hverhill St. - I can see a small marker there in the area stated. But, the photo supplied looks like the one on the property of the Smith Shoe Shop located at 273 Haverhill St. - take a look on google earth - what do you think?

- Jamie — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:52, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't see anything matching the photo in the MACRIS description of this marker in Google Street View in the 434 Haverhill St. area. If you do, please supply a full URL to the Google view. You are correct that the marker I photographed is the one at 273 Haverhill; it matches the described marker, except that the painted marking appears to have worn off. Magic♪piano 00:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC),-71.087408,3a,75y,71.11h,77.11t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s6weIO1wgs52yzMcCxFuqIA!2e0

I hope one of these links work - the marker is to the right of the house at 273 Haverhill St.,+Reading,+MA+01867/@42.5385801,-71.0874784,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x89e30c853cf8b241:0xfa7ee36f514d9e79 — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:12, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

It is highly likely that the street has been renumbered since 1985, when the location of the stone was given in the National Register nomination. The map in the nomination form (available via the "NR" button at the MACRIS link above) locates the marker pretty much at what is currently number 273 (east side of the road, just south of Wakefield Street). Magic♪piano 01:38, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree, I was just pointing out that the wiki article still shows 434 Haverhill - can you update that article? Thanks for replying back so quickly tonight - I've never pointed anything out before!

The Haverhill Street Milestone is a historic milestone on Haverhill Street in Reading, Massachusetts. Located on the east side of the road near 434 Haverhill Street, it is a granite slab with a rounded top. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Yes, of course. Magic♪piano 01:50, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Milestone -[edit]

Thanks - have a great night! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:52, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

NRHP infobox generator fixed[edit]

I finally fixed the problem that you asked me about a couple weeks ago. The code wasn't creating a database connection properly if the user was querying by reference number. --Elkman (Elkspeak) 19:55, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

25 DYK Award[edit]

Dyk25CE.svg The 25 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
For all your contributions to DYK. Keep up the good work. Freikorp (talk) 06:44, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 15[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hachiman Jinja (Saipan), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Korean and Okinawan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:59, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 23[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Shiloh Historic District, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Shiloh Church (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 08:58, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CIX, April 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 06:33, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Carl Nielsen[edit]

Hi Magicpiano. Back in 2009, you completed a very useful assessment of Carl Nielsen. As several editors have since contributed to the article, you might like to look through it once more and allow us to benefit from any further suggestions you may have for its enhancement. We are trying to bring the article up to GA standard in connection with Nielsen's 150th anniversary on 9 June 2015.--Ipigott (talk) 09:31, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

I'll try to take a look in the next few days. Magic♪piano 14:29, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Former Berwick High School, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Berwick Academy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 09:56, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Rhodes Street[edit]

Argh! I go out today to get photos of the Rhodes Street HD in Providence, then come back to start uploading them and.... — Ipoellet (talk) 16:46, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Hopefully it wasn't your only target; it's not like there's a shortage of locations in South Providence. Magic♪piano 21:13, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
It wasn't, though I only had about an hour... :-) — Ipoellet (talk) 03:34, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CX, May 2015[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:03, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Article assessment[edit]

I notice that you recently assessed Meades Ranch (Kansas) as Start-class. Could I ask you for a little more detail on this? I'm under no illusion that this is ready for GA status, but judging by the WikiProject NRHP standards, I'd be inclined to say that it's reached C level. Of course, my opinion is hardly unbiased, since I did the expansion that took it beyond stubhood. Could you suggest what would need to be done to bring it up to a C or better?

Thanks in advance for responding to this—and thanks, as well, for taking on what I'm sure sometimes seems like the unappreciated task of assessing articles. If you do it often, you probably get lots of irate notes from people who want to know why their two-paragraph stub didn't rate a C or better. I hope I'm not one of those people; and if you have suggestions as to how I might move it beyond Start, I'll do what I can to implement them. — Ammodramus (talk) 00:04, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't, as a general rule, apply C-class (generally Start or B, as the case may be), and I was just skimming the article for size and general content. In this case, the article is mostly about the datum, and not the property itself, which is a problem (IMHO of course) with respect to a B assessment. If the article were actually named "Geodetic Center of the United States" or similar, that would be less of a problem. Magic♪piano 13:27, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Apologies for talk page stalking, but I looked over the article, and it looks like a C-class article to me based on the WikiProject NRHP standards (though I agree it's not B-class yet). It at least touches upon all the aspects of the property I'd expect to see, and it has detailed and sourced coverage of the property description and the history of the datum. Since I do use C-class in assessing articles, I'll go ahead and reassess it. TheCatalyst31 ReactionCreation 16:51, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks to both of you for your responses to this. I'm not crazy about the current article name, but I think that "Geodetic Center of the US" wouldn't be accurate either, since it lost its special standing with the adoption of the NAD83 datum. I'll take this up at the article's talk page. Ammodramus (talk) 00:53, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Hello from the team at Featured article review![edit]


We are preparing to take a closer look at Featured articles promoted in 2004–2010 that may need a review. We started with a script-compiled list of older FAs that have not had a recent formal review. The next step is to prune the list by removing articles that are still actively maintained, up-to-date, and believed to meet current standards. We know that many of you personally maintain articles that you nominated, so we'd appreciate your help in winnowing the list where appropriate.

Please take a look at the sandbox list, check over the FAs listed by your name, and indicate on the sandbox talk page your assessment of their current status. Likewise, if you have taken on the maintenance of any listed FAs that were originally nominated by a departed editor, please indicate their status. BLPs should be given especially careful consideration.

Thanks for your help! Maralia (talk) 19:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Photo Inquiry[edit]

Good Afternoon,

I saw a photo that you took of the Robert Treat Paine House back in 2013 ( work for a Retail Design Firm and am currently seeking a high resolution photograph of The Paine Estate to be used in a local bank in Waltham. I wanted to reach out to you to see if you happen to have a high resolution version of this photo and if you would be willing to grant us the rights to use it for a wall mural within this branch?

Any response would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance for your assistance in this matter.

MZell2015 (talk) 17:33, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the interest. Unfortunately, I do not seem to have kept the full-resolution photos for the Paine Estate. For modest compensation, I'd be happy to try to recreate that photo; I live in the area. Use the "Email this user" link to the left if you want to pursue that option. (The full resolution photo would be 4288x2848, assuming it isn't cropped.) Magic♪piano 23:37, 27 May 2015 (UTC)