User talk:Parsa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Hi, welcome to my talk page! Please be respectful. I'm only ever interested in making things better in Wikipedia. Please look at my comments and edits in this light.

Parsa 23:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Welcome Parsa[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Parsa, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  -- Jeff3000 03:39, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Greetings from Smiloid[edit]

Yes! You are correct in your intentions of having the tarot card games treating in a similar fashion as rummy and other games. There is a systemic bias at Wikipedia regarding the subject of tarot. The players of these games, as well as games in general, are outnumbered by those who have no other context of tarot besides its occult uses. Thanks for being supportive of my efforts. Yes, the article currently entitled "Tarot" should indeed be re-directed to "Divinatory tarot" or "Tarot (divination). You might want to go to the talk page of that article and also express your concerns there. Perhaps in the near future more Wikipedians will come over to this understanding and another vote can be taken on the issue. It wasn't so long ago that I was a Wiki newbie. I still am to some degree. I have found that the "Show preview" function is the newbie's best friend. So "be bold" as they say, and edit away without fear as that preview function will be your safety net. Best wishes Smiloid 01:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Please go the talk page of the tarot article and express your concerns over the Anglo-American biases.Smiloid 01:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

tags[edit]

It seems that a user Surturs has removed some of our tags and archived the discussion. This user also made some unproductive edits which I've reverted Smiloid 09:10, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Invitation to Swahili Wikipedia[edit]

If you have not yet started to do so, please consider contributing to Swahili Wikipedia. Wasalaam, Oliver, 10 February 2007

Deletion template[edit]

The one that starts with {{{3|'''Delete''', are part of the substituted template when you start a category for deletion (i.e. {{subst:cfd}}). All other comments should ideally start with a bullet. I'll fix the formatting in the discussion. Regards, -- Jeff3000 00:23, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Articles for deletion (all articles for single cards in the "minor arcana"[edit]

I've recently nominated all those roughly 56 articles! Talk about a major undertaking for the minor arcana, lol Smiloid 07:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Tarot Major Arcana[edit]

Hi there,

Just wanted to give you the heads-up that I've taken off the noncompliant tags from the Major Arcana articles. I agree with the points you made about them needing improvement, but feel that template was a too extreme, and have changed it to a clean-up request. As the articles are so similar, I suggest we discuss how to proceed with improving these articles at Talk:Major Arcana. Hope to see you there!

Cheers --jwandersTalk 22:32, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Tarot Minor Arcana[edit]

Hi Parsa and everyone! I'm a newbie here so please be nice to me. I just want to say that I was looking online for Tarot Books and most of them are based on the writer's personal interpretation of the card and also based from other books as well written by tarot readers etc. So if a tarot reader writes their own personal interpretation of the symbolism of a tarot card in their website, won't it be similar to someone writing a book about their own interpretation of a card? I just need your opinion because I would like to help add content in each of the minor arcana cards. Sweetsoul (talk) 09:30, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

about your comment about List of Bahá'ís[edit]

Per Talk:Bahá'í Faith#List of Baha'is I've reverted the mass edit out and commented that the as a general statement all these entries are sourced on their respective pages. I don't see any rule they must be sourced on the lists itself. I don't see any discussion of this issue of how things are sourced on the referenced Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Christians (2nd nomination) - additionally I don't see citation done everywhere else (I know the article about Christians suggested that this would be a start of a whole wave of changes.) See for example - United Nations member states?? No or almost no citations there. I'd appreciate your thoughts.--Smkolins (talk) 12:25, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

CFD[edit]

Hi, you previously commented on this CFD, and a similar one is up for deletion here. Please comment when you get a chance. Cuñado ☼ - Talk 06:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

tarot, again![edit]

You might be interested in this mediation of a dispute over some of my edits

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2008-06-24_Tarot#What.27s_going_on.3F

Smiloid (talk) 05:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Land Battle Chess (Te Zhi Lu Zhan Qi) or Army Chess (Lu Zhan Jun Qi)[edit]

Hi - I saw at Stratgo that you were working on Dou Shou Qi and wonder if you have interest in creating an article on LuZhanJunQi? 124.169.187.41 (talk) 14:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with that game. I have not seen it in the USA. Do you have images and information on it? - Parsa (talk) 16:51, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Parsa

Subperiods or epochs[edit]

Hi Parsa, I reverted your edits to the articles Pennsylvanian and Mississippian, but started to doubt my own edits. I began to search for refs and found you could be right, so my apologies for my reverts. There seems to be some controversy in the literature though. I find that in most ICS timescales, both are listed as epochs (or series). Yet I also found a lot of references to the Pennsylvanian/Mississippian subperiods in publications by the ICS. I am now a bit confused what to do. Do you know an official ICS publication in which the status of these two units is explained? Of course not including proposals etc. Best regards, Woodwalker (talk) 15:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Check out the following pdf file: The Carboniferous System. Use of the new official names for the subsystems, series, and stages. - Parsa (talk) 20:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Dashes[edit]

Hi! I see that you've been converting a lot of Unicode – dashes to – HTML entitites. I'm curious as to why... the Unicode character takes up less space in edit mode and (in my opinion) looks better. Help:Special characters doesn't seem to show a preference for one over the other, since they both have problems. A lot of automated editing scripts—like AutoEd, WikiEd, Formatter, and Advisor—convert HTML entities to unicode, so this seems kind of counterproductive. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 21:53, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

En dashes are generally preferred for a number range such as a date range. A regular dash is normally used for hyphenation. If it's really bothersome or causes problems, it can be set back. I was just doing it while taking care of the geologic age ranges (which were totally inconsistent across all the articles (Mya, mya, m.y.a., Ma, bya, Ga, Tya, ka, etc.).
The en dash is used to "connect continuing, or inclusive, numbers — dates, time, or reference numbers." [Chicago Manual of Style, sec. 5.115]
- Parsa (talk) 23:05, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Yes, en dashes should be used for those cases... but both of the examples above are en dashes. The first is the Unicode version of the endash, produced with the Unicode character – (it is not a hyphen, which is - ). The same ndash-length dash can be created using both – and –. For example, in Antarctica, you replaced – (not - ) with –. This makes no visual difference, as the dash already in the text was an endash and not a hyphen. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 23:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I see what you're saying. Yes, my browser renders Unicode characters directly. For instance I can simply type a star:★ without having to enter a decimal or hex form. The problem was that the existing en dashes appeared to me as a hyphen. In your post they were exactly the same length until I looked at the edit page, where they do appear longer... weird. I'm sorry for the confusion. Do the pasted Unicode characters appear properly to all users? - Parsa (talk) 23:29, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Copy-pasted characters should look okay. Weirdly, I can actually see the hypen and endash difference when reading an article but it's harder to tell in edit mode. Who knows? :) Anyway, I think that at this point most dashes in long-standing articles are the ones that they should be, although it doesn't hurt to check in new articles. If you aren't using it, WikiEd puts a little "M" or "N" symbol above each dash when in edit mode so that you can see if it is a unicode dash or a hyphen. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 23:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. - Parsa (talk) 23:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Happy to help! –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 23:40, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Commas in numbers[edit]

I noticed one of your edits which replaced commas in numbers with  , and the edit summary referred to an SI standard. I'm sure you're correct about the SI standard, but I wonder if Wikipedia has a guideline saying that such a standard should be applied here, because using thin spaces might make wikitext more complex and hard to edit. For example, an editor would see the number 1,234,567 if commas are used, but would see 1 234 567 if the thin space HTML entity is used.

I looked for a guideline on this issue and found large numbers which recommends using commas "generally". It says that   does not always render correctly, and {{gaps}} should be used if thin spaces are wanted in mathematical and scientific contexts. I haven't noticed gaps being used, but I may not have edited the kind of articles where it is wanted.

I would be interested to hear if you know of any guidelines on this issue, and what you think about it. Thanks. Johnuniq (talk) 10:59, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

I understand about the editing issue, it is indeed easier to see. However, commas can create a lot of confusion, since in scientific and mathematical uses, periods and commas are both considered decimal points. Many countries, including some english speaking countries like South Africa, use commas as decimal points. The ISO and SI standard is to avoid commas as thousands separators (ISO 31-0 international standard). The thin space is intended for number divisions larger than the 1000s. I was not aware of the gaps template, and thank you for pointing that out. I would have no objections to its use, but of course it may be as difficult to read in edit mode as the use of thin spaces. I suppose that I could convert the   into the simple Unicode character. That would look better in edit, but then the character would look like a standard space in edit mode. - Parsa (talk) 20:27, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikimania 2011 • Haifa, Israel, August 4-7, 2011[edit]

Hello dear Parsa. Are you going to visit the Wikimania the upcoming summer? I am Baha'i Wikimedian from Belarus and it would be nice to meet you during the event. --Da voli (talk) 20:51, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Discussion on X-Files season articles[edit]

Hi Parsa. I've seen you edit season articles of The X-Files concerning the listing of "mythology" episodes, so I thought I'd let you know I've started a discussion on a new way of handling them here. The project isn't exactly a busy one so I thought I'd solicit opinions by asking around relevant editors. Any input you have would be great. Thanks! GRAPPLE X 12:59, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

For the love of Buster Keaton[edit]

Good catch and edit, thanks. For many of us, this article is an absolute labor of love. Djathinkimacowboy 07:09, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

No worries. It's the kind of minor edit I always do when reading articles. Buster was great, and it's too bad how the younger generation thinks anything black and white has to be bad. I asked a student interested in film if he had ever seen a Marx Brothers movie... nope, not one. — Parsa (talk) 22:57, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

USRD assessments[edit]

I saw your note on Talk:Bankhead Highway and I wanted to explain how we assess things at USRD. We do things a little differently than most projects, but it works for us. Below GA Class, we assess articles on the presence and quality of three major sections: Route description, History, and junction list (the names may vary). An article which only has one of those three sections, regardless of how good that section is, is a Stub. Two sections is a Start. All three sections is a C. If all three sections are properly referenced and would probably pass at GAN, it becomes a B. To get GA and above, you have to go through the normal channels. There is an A-Class Review at WP:HWY, which all roads projects filter through.

Importance assessments are subjective and there are no criteria. Change them at will!

So, until Bankhead Highway gets a history section or a junction list, it remains a stub. See U.S. Route 55 for ideas on how to give an old route a junction list. –Fredddie 02:46, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I understand what you're saying in all these points. I'm just not sure the junction list makes much sense at all for a pre-1926 auto trail. Some of these roads had multiple branches, spurs, etc. Look at the map on the Dixie Highway article or my map of the Bankhead Highway for examples. These roads also drastically changed alignments over time since they were under the auspices of an auto trail association, and not any government entity (except the few that required some degree of state registration). You can't even say that one route was "official" since they officially grew and changed after various association conventions. Some of them aren't even linear. Look at this map of the National Park to Park Highway. A lot of the roads they traveled on now go through military bases, wilderness areas, or Indian reservations, and so are currently discontinuous. No real way to properly determine mileages either. So... I guess what I'm saying is that different criteria may need to be devised for an auto trail page to fulfill various class status levels. — Parsa talk 03:46, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
In lieu of a WP:RJL-style junction list, you could create a bulleted list of major cities (say, over 25,000 people) that the trails went through and what other trails they crossed. For instance, on the National Parks-to-Park Highway, you could say:
Something to show where it went and what other trails it crossed is what's important. –Fredddie 04:04, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
I've been making a list of cities on my own website for some of the pages, but it can be quite a headache, and they have caused discussions in other forums as to whether a route even actually passed through a town shown on a particular map. I suppose I could come up with at least one example for some of the late auto trails like the Lee Highway.
By the way, I've been working on a more comprehensive table of auto trails that I think would work well for a WP article, but I think we wold have to separate the list from the main article. Even the current list looks a bit long for a standard article. It's not ready for prime time, but here's what is looks like to date. The dates can be sourced to auto trails maps, books, and newspaper articles. As I find the road on older maps, I push back the dates. I make a lot of the markers and signs in Illustrator, so they can be converted to SVG, though some of the simple tricolors I made in Photoshop. — Parsa talk 04:37, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Neat. Our collection of auto trail markers is sorely lacking. I dabble in SVG graphics so I could help out with markers. Simple tricolors make simpler SVGs. If it's any use, I own a circa 1920 map of Iowa that has auto trails and the first primary highway numbers. It also shows neighboring states, northern Missouri being the most prominent. –Fredddie 04:57, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
By primary highway numbers you mean the early Iowa state highway numbers? If this is a Rand McNally or Clason map, I likely know how to date it. Give me the title and the publisher and I can tell.
I have a lot of regional and state auto trail maps from different years going back to 1918, but what I would like to have is a Rand McNally Commercial Atlas of America from 1920 (or at least 1921). I do have scans of a 1924 commercial atlas and own a little 1925 RM auto trail atlas that features "Junior" maps. The latter are inconsistent, and some roads are not shown in some states. I also had the American Geographical Society Library send me scans of 15 early auto trail maps prepared by the National Highways Association. Many are coauthored by the official trail associations, and all predate 1923 except one from 1923 that was issued by the National Park Service, making it public domain also. — Parsa talk 05:23, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
I have the date and it's a Rand McNally; I'm just going off of memory so I don't have to get it out. And yes, early state highway numbers, but primary highways is the correct term (state didn't own them yet). –Fredddie 05:52, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Hmmm... California state highways date back to at least the 1909 Bond Act. That's when the Legislative Route numbering system started. They weren't signed with shields and route numbers until after 1934, and the two auto clubs did all the signing. My 1924 atlas does say "primary highways" for Iowa, but it labels all "California state highways" with the number "1". — Parsa talk 06:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar[edit]

Original Barnstar.png The Original Barnstar
This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Barnstars[edit]

Thanks for creating one for the USH task force, but please don't get crazy in creating more just yet. As part of the consolidation of the state projects into USRD, one thought was that we'd actually delete all of the barnstar templates and deprecate them. (Obviously, we can't delete the graphics, but the templates.) We're also in the process of looking at centralizing the participants list to emphasize that we're one project, not a group of task forces. In other words, things are still in a state of flux right now, and I'd hate for the project to undo your recent hard work. Also, although the header current says "US Highways", the project is at "U.S. Routes". This was done intentionally because the "US Highways" name may be assumed by the overall project because people thing we cover every type of road in the US, when we focus on state highways, and secondarily on county roads; streets have their own project separate from USRD. Imzadi 1979  01:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. Sorry, I didn't get that the barnstar templates might be deleted, only that they were being grouped on one page. Why would the templates be deprecated? Admittedly, everyone does whatever work they can, but it's nice to give pats on the back once in a while for particularly hard work.... In regard to the title, yes, I assumed that the name of the page and "task force" would be U.S. Routes, even though the title says US Highways. I also assumed that the banner title came from the old US Highways WikiProject name. I debated on the title for the template, but in the end felt it wasn't really a huge deal for this kind of usage. Although I agree that being one overarching project is a great idea, having committees, task forces, or whatever you call them, might be useful for groups with specialized knowledge (especially in a geographic area). — Parsa talk 02:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
We might implement an updated barnstar for the USRD project as a whole, but it would be just one. We might decide that each task force will get a template. It's not that we're against the concept of the "atta boy", but more looking at how to reform what we have in light of the consolidation. (The US 66 TF is kinda unique in all of these discussions since it's technically a TF hosted by USRD that's also part of the US History project; it's retaining its own talk page banner for non-USRD articles, its own talk page and stuff.) Imzadi 1979  02:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Jefferson Highway[edit]

I'm wondering what you have on the Jefferson Highway. I'm thinking about doing an article on the JH in Iowa. The Iowa DOT has a ton of information about trails (link), so undoubtedly, I'll check there. I'll have to go to Colo and get some pictures of the rest stop there. Colo was the eastern junction of the Lincoln and Jefferson highways. So it's a pretty big deal as far as trail enthusiasts are concerned. –Fredddie 06:44, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't have any guide books or route maps specifically for the Jefferson Highway. Perhaps the modern Jefferson Highway Association (Facebook page) has some resources they would provide. I'm sure they'd want the WP article to be accurate and complete. What I do have are Rand McNally auto trail maps from 1918 to 1926. However, the earliest national RM atlas I have is 1924, and most of my maps for the Jefferson Highway states are from this period also. I'm on the lookout for a circa 1920 Rand McNally Commercial Atlas of America to use as a more definitive early source for trail paths. By the way, I have the following National Highways Association (digital) maps for specific auto trails:
  • Map of the Atlantic highway (1915)
  • Map of the Canada-Kansas City-Gulf Road (1915)
  • Map of the Pacific Highway (1915)
  • Map of the Mississippi Highway (1915)
  • Map of the Meridian Road (1915)
  • Map of the Dixie Highway (1915)
  • Map of the Pikes Peak Ocean to Ocean Highway (Midland Trail) (1915)
  • National Old Trails Road (1915)
  • Map of the Midland Trail (1915)
  • Map of the Southern National Highway (1915)
  • Map of the Jefferson Davis Memorial Highway: Borderland Trail - Border Military Highway - Gulf-Coast Highway - Old Spanish Trail - Tamiami Trail (1916)
  • Map of the Dixie Overland Highway (1918)
  • Map of the Albert Pike Highway (1919)
  • Map of the Colorado to Gulf Highway (1922)
  • Map of the Lee Highway: A Main Street of the Nation (1923)
  • Map of the National Park-to-Park Highway (1923)
  • Map of the National Old Trails Road (1923)
  • United States Touring Map (1924)
  • Touring Map of the Custer Battlefield Highway (1924) — from online
  • Map of the National Park-to-Park Highway (1927)
I also have several vintage route books for trails such as the Bankhead Highway, Lincoln Highway, National Old Trails Road, Midland Trail, Pikes Peak O-to-O, Columbia River Hwy, etc., as well as quite a few Automobile Blue Books, ALA Green Guides, Hobbs Guides, and so forth. — Parsa talk 19:11, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

USRD WikiProject Newsletter, Winter 2012[edit]

USRD Newsletter header.svg
Volume 5, Issue 1 • Winter 2011 • About the Newsletter
This edition is going out to all USRD WikiProject members (current, former, or potential) in addition to other subscribers as part of a roll call to update the participants list. Anyone that would like to continue to receive this newsletter in the future needs to update the subscription list if they are not already subscribed.
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
Imzadi 1979  22:12, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Baltimore Pike Auto Trail Marker[edit]

I loved your Balitmore Pike Auto Trail Marker image you posted. I am doing a project on Baltimore Pike and
I was wondering if you might know where I can find more examples of this Auto Trail Marker?
I have only seen it once before. Thanks!

Stonewind Stonewind (talk) 17:47, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

The only place I've seen it is on pre-1926 auto trail maps, primarily from Rand McNally. I have one source that shows some of the markers on a bit bigger scale, and it was one of these I used for the Baltimore Pike image. However, I've never actually seen a real Baltimore Pike sign. If you ever see one, photograph it and contact me. In fact, very few of these markers have physical examples. I've seen about three of the Pikes Peak Ocean to Ocean signs on web sites or ebay. The National Old Trails Road signs made by the Automobile Club of Southern California still exist, too (for example at the AAA headquarters in LA), as do Lincoln Highway porcelain pole marker signs. Images of painted pole markers are very very rare. I've only seen one vintage photo of a marker on an actual telephone pole. — Parsa talk 21:00, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

USRD WikiProject Newsletter, Spring 2012[edit]

USRD Newsletter header.svg
Volume 5, Issue 2 • Spring 2012 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
Imzadi 1979  00:15, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

USRD Summer 2012 Newsletter[edit]

USRD Newsletter header.svg
Volume 5, Issue 3 • Summer 2012 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
Imzadi 1979  23:00, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

The Center Line: U.S. Roads WikiProject Newsletter, Winter 2013[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 6, Issue 1 • Winter 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
EdwardsBot (talk) 19:47, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

WP:USRDCUP[edit]

Hello! As a member of WP:USRD, you may be interested to know that we are doing the USRD Cup contest again this year! Signups are at the above page and the contest will begin February 1. --Rschen7754 10:14, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Geologic time scale colors[edit]

There is a discussion on this here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geology#Template color changes. You may vote either side then whatever wins ALL geologic timescales templates change including Template:Geologic time scale. 24.218.110.195 (talk) 01:50 21 March 2013 (UTC) 9:50pm 3/19/2013 EDT

Hymenoclea salsola[edit]

Hi, I saw your change on the Ambrosia page. It looks as if it's time to move Hymenoclea salsola to Ambrosia salsola, with both the Jepson manual and The Plant List siding with placing it into the genus Ambrosia (the Jepson Manual has a note about the recent taxonomic update, but hasn't yet moved the species to the new name). Do you have any thoughts on that? Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:41, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it probably should be changed. CalFlora lists it under Ambrosia also. Hymenoclea should be listed as the synonym. I just wanted to make sure it was listed on the genus page as it wasn't there.— Parsa talk 13:34, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

The Center Line: Spring 2013[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 6, Issue 2 • Spring 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
EdwardsBot (talk) 22:23, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

The Center Line: Summer 2013[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 6, Issue 3 • Summer 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
EdwardsBot (talk) 22:18, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

The Center Line: Fall 2013[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 6, Issue 4 • Fall 2013 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
EdwardsBot (talk) 03:08, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

The Center Line: Winter 2013[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 7, Issue 1 • Winter 2014 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:15, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

The Center Line: Spring 2014[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 7, Issue 2 • Spring 2014 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:05, 8 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of Imzadi1979

July 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Wolfgang's Big Night Out may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • # "Yes We Can Can" (based on the "can-can" (Infernal Galop) from [[Jacques Offenbach|Offenbach]]'s "[[Orpheus in the

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:12, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

The Center Line: Summer 2014[edit]

The Center Line header.svg
Volume 7, Issue 3 • Summer 2014 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
  • None submitted
ArchivesNewsroomFull IssueShortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Imzadi1979, 21:50, 30 September 2014 (UTC)