User talk:Acdixon

WikiProject Kentucky Alerts have been posted:

• Check out our current major backlogs.
• WikiProject Bluegrass Music? Talk to Anne Delong.

Auto-generated alerts follow:

Did you know

• 09 Oct 2024 – Michael F. Adams (talk · edit · hist) was nominated for DYK by PCN02WPS (t · c); see discussion

Articles for deletion

• 05 Nov 2024 – August 2023 mid-south U.S. floods (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Tails Wx (t · c); see discussion (1 participant)
• 04 Nov 2024 – July 2023 Western Kentucky floods (talk · edit · hist) was AfDed by Tails Wx (t · c); see discussion (1 participant)

Categories for discussion

• 09 Nov 2024 – Category:People from Plum Springs, Kentucky (talk · edit · hist) was CfDed by Lost in Quebec (t · c); see discussion

Redirects for discussion

• 07 Nov 2024 – Kentuchy (talk · edit · hist) →Kentucky was RfDed by TeapotsOfDoom (t · c); see discussion

Good article nominees

• 29 Oct 2024 – Tornado outbreak and derecho of April 1–3, 2024 (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Sir MemeGod (t · c); see discussion
• 17 Sep 2024 – WKYT-TV (talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Sammi Brie (t · c); start discussion

Requested moves

• 02 Nov 2024 – 2021 Western Kentucky tornado (talk · edit · hist) is requested to be moved to 2021 Mayfield tornado by Departure– (t · c); see discussion
• 29 Oct 2024 – Louisville International Airport (talk · edit · hist) is requested to be moved to Louisville Muhammad Ali International Airport by Cerium4B (t · c); see discussion

Articles to be split

• 30 Oct 2024 – Hurricane Helene (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by 74.101.118.218 (t · c); see discussion
• 29 Jun 2024 – Thomas Massie (talk · edit · hist) is proposed for splitting by Kodiak Blackjack (t · c); see discussion

FYI

Hi,

A plagiarism query has been raised at DYK regarding Harry Toulmin (Unitarian minister).[1] MathewTownsend (talk) 20:50, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Talk:John Sherman Cooper/GA1

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:19, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	You did it again!
	Another round of congratulations are in order for all the work you did in making John Sherman Cooper a certified "Good Article"! Thank you; your work is much appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 13:28, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 18:35, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Henry Cornelius Burnett

This is a note to let the main editors of Henry Cornelius Burnett know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on January 20, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 20, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Henry Cornelius Burnett (1825–1866) was a U.S. Representative from the state of Kentucky and a Confederate States Senator. He represented Kentucky's 1st congressional district during the lead-up to the Civil War. This district contained the entire Jackson Purchase region of the state, which was more sympathetic to the Confederate cause than any other area of Kentucky. Burnett promised the voters of his district that he would have President Abraham Lincoln arraigned for treason. Besides championing the Southern cause in Congress, Burnett also worked within Kentucky to bolster the state's support of the Confederacy. He presided over a sovereignty convention in Russellville in 1861 that formed a Confederate government for the state. The delegates to this convention chose Burnett to travel to Richmond, Virginia to secure Kentucky's admission to the Confederacy. Burnett also raised a Confederate regiment at Hopkinsville, Kentucky, and briefly served in the Confederate States Army. Burnett's actions were deemed treasonable by his colleagues in Congress, and he was expelled from the House in 1861. After the war, he was indicted for treason, but was never tried. He returned to the practice of law, but died of cholera in 1866 at the age of 40. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	You are an excellent collaborator and I'm proud to call you my Kentucky articles colleague. Spacini (talk) 18:17, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Hayes

Yes, I didn't realize it until I had made the edit that it was another of your articles. Hayes and Kentucky just aren't meant to be friends. If you get to renominate the one I deleted, I'll be glad to support, it looked like a fine article. I'd also love to see Simon Bolivar Buckner on the Main Page someday -- isn't that one of yours? --Coemgenus (talk) 16:35, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Waveland State Historic Site, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Saltpeter (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) 10:38, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Acdixon,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 18:04, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Charles Scott (governor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Germantown, Pennsylvania (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) 10:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks . . .

. . . for fixing the citation template on Kentucky jam cake. How embarrassing! ^Bongo_matic 22:33, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Question about a user account

I just created my account and in the process of doing so found another account that looks a little dodgy, User:PappaSmurfPro. I asked User:Ed! about it and he suggested I talk to an administrator. I saw your name earlier today on a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States and I saw your name appears on the Administrator list. So not sure what else I need to do or if you have any questions but I'll let you decide if this user name violates any rules. Cheers! ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 18:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

While I wouldn't advise disclosing your email address on Wikipedia, it isn't explicitly forbidden. Per WP:EMAIL, "Users who have openly disclosed their email addresses can be emailed directly. However, Wikipedia doesn't encourage such open disclosure." The user page also suggests the potential for the user to violate WP:COI, since he is a promoter. On the other hand, making the disclosure up front is a good thing, and allows us to assume good faith. The editor has only a few edits, and none of them seem to run afoul of policy. Also, since the editor hasn't done anything since 2007, I think it is safe to assume he will not be a problem in the future.

If you have other concerns of this nature, you are welcome to contact me again, although I reserve the right to consult with a more experienced administrator before responding! :) Happy editing! Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 19:05, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

No biggie I just thought I would ask. I know less than nothing at the moment. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 19:27, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again. If I had some more specific questions related to editing in general or suggestions where would a good place to start be? ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 20:28, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

I have a small group of experienced editors that I frequently bounce ideas off of. Depending on the nature of your question, you might try the various incarnations of the village pump. If your question is about a specific article, you might get feedback on that article's talk page. If it is about a broader subject area, you might check out one of our gazillion or so WikiProjects and ask around. There is also a formal mentorship project whereby an experience editor helps a new editor get his or her feet wet, although I've never really investigated it much. Anything specific I can help you with right now? Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 20:38, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I am compiling a list of notes about questions and comments I haev as I go on my userpage (not sure if thats appropriate so if not please let me know). I guess a good starting point would be a couple suggestions I had regarding the creation of user accounts. When I created my account there was an easy to follow process that was excellent to a point, but seems to abruptly end the process at suggesting articles to the new editor. Once you move on, theres no going back to it. I don't know what the protocal is for this sort of thing and I don't mean to step out of line but it doesn't seem particularly clear to a new user. Here are some things that I noticed as I went through the process.

1. It asks the user to select a topic and then suggests an article, but once you go on there is no way to go back to that.
2. I think it would be helpful to a new editor if it also suggested a couple projects related to the topic/article selected.
3. I think it would be helpful if there was a couple more steps that went into a userpage creation process like the account creation process/article creation process (I used that a couple times as an IP editor). Giving new users a basic user page with some standard things to help them would be very beneficial. That way at the end of the process they have an account, some tools and a place to go with questions and a means for them to focus their efforts related to their interests.
4. When I created my account I had to go searching for information on what to do. I think it would be helpful to new users if there was something on their userpage or talk page that says Welcome to Wikipedia, here are some things you should know. Anyway just a few things I think would be helpful to new folks like me. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 20:55, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the recording of questions on your user page, I think that is a good idea, and there is nothing forbidding that at all. In fact, that's one of the reasons it is there. You will notice several users who keep to-do lists and such in their user space. If you don't want other users to see your questions as soon as they click on your user page, you can create a subpage (e.g. User:ShmuckatellieJoe/Questions, or something like that). I use subpages to work on new articles or major revisions to articles before moving them to the main space.

Regarding the rest of your questions/suggestions, I'm afraid it's outside my ability to make any of them happen. Also, I first signed up in 2006, and I'm sure the process has changed a good deal since I went through it. Still, these are really good suggestions, and I think they could be really valuable for the people who can make them happen. You might try posting them at the village pump for technical issues. Someone there can probably get them in the right hands.

If you want to get suggestions about articles you might like to edit, you might try signing up with User:SuggestBot, an automated program that examines your edit history and suggests similar articles. Of course, until you have done some editing, it may not work too well. As mentioned, you could also drop by an interesting-looking WikiProject and see what's being kicked around there, although some are more active than others. The Military History WikiProject is robust and vibrant, with lots of editors. My primary project, WikiProject Kentucky, has a dismal number of editors and very limited activity.

I also noticed a note on your user page about the plethora of policies. It's a valid point, and represents the biggest barrier to editing by new users. You are going to learn most of them from experience. The most important to know up front are WP:V, WP:NPOV, and probably WP:GNG (the last one especially if you are planning to create new articles). If you do your best to adhere to those, pretty much everything else will be forgiven as a good faith attempt, and other editors will (hopefully) help you improve as an editor. I will, of course, be happy to answer any questions or review any edits or situations you want me to. Sorry I wasn't much help on the bulk of your questions this time! Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 21:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much you were a great help. I might move those to a subpage as you suggested and I may submit my suggestions at the Village pump as well once I get a little more experience. I have noticed in my reading that it seems quite a few users can be a little excitable so I think I should probably do some more looking around before I just start showing up to the more advanced places like that. I have been reading some discussions and it seems there are a few editors that can get rather nasty so I don't want to ask the wrong one a questions and get chewed in half (I need both halves for the moment) :-). I might go ahead and give it a shot though. I noticed the Military history project, I might sign up for that one later. What are the requirements for joining a project? Do I need to sign up for a specific task or something? A couple other projects caught my eye too, what about WikiProject United States, United States History and Aviation, those seem interesting though I admit from reading WikiProject US's talk page things seem to be a bit rocky over there right now. One last question, I notice your name shows up differently, as well as some other editors I have seen. How do I do that? Well thanks again for the help. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 21:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

(outdent for readability) These I can help with. First of all, you're right that some of our editors can be off-putting, ranging from arrogant and obnoxious to downright vulgar and mean. Don't let that discourage you; post away and ignore the idiots. If it gets too bad, point them to WP:BITE and WP:CIVIL. The helpful editors will most likely still find your post and try to help, and they might even slap back at the mean folks! hehe

There are no requirements for joining a WikiProject. You just show up and sign up! And, of course, you don't have to associate yourself with any WikiProject to work on articles in their scope. WikiProjects are just a way for editors with similar interests to get together and help each other make a better encyclopedia. (At least, that's how they are supposed to work. Some have an overriding sense of ownership of particular articles, which violates WP:OWN, but happens nonetheless.) I can't speak for the U.S. History and Aviation WikiProjects, but despite its huge scope, WikiProject United States is relatively dormant. You may find a few editors there to answer your questions, but it hasn't accomplished anything remotely resembling collaboration on anything of significance for a while. And yes, there was some nastiness there that ran off Kumioko (talk · contribs), which was a shame. Both sides escalated the rhetoric to unnecessary levels, and all over which WikiProject's banner got slapped on an article's talk page. Ridiculousness, I tell you. Again, ignore the crap and write good content. I've been doing that for years, and it's worked for me. Of course, I work mostly on articles that nobody reads, but I sure have gotten a lot of them to good and featured status, and so far, that's been enough to keep me doing this!

About your signature, you can change it by going to "My preferences" in the top right, then editing the "Signature" box. Good luck, and drop me a line any time. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 22:08, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you again for your help. I looked over WikiProject Kentucky earlier and noticed a couple little things I think I can edit. If I make a change that is overstepping my role as nick the new guy please let me know so I'll learn but feel free to revert it, delete it, or otherwise. I also left a note to User:Kumioko about copying the Medal of Honor lists. Not sure what the protocol is but it seemed the right thing to do. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 00:09, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks like you're off to a good start. Those to-do list things probably should have been done long ago. I did revert one edit where you replaced the {{tl}} template with nowiki tags. {{tl}} is kind of the accepted way of referring to templates inline, but no big deal. I checked out your conversation with Kumioko, and creating basic articles for Medal of Honor recipients seems like a really good way to get your feet wet. If you create a new one and it is at least 1,500 characters of readable prose (excludes citations, tables, images, headings, and stuff like that), it will qualify for WP:DYK. Basically, it's a chance to show off your shiny new article on the Wikipedia home page and get a neat little trinket on your talk page. (I have 59 such trinkets, if you want to see what one looks like.) I recommend creating the article in your user space, then transferring it to the main space when it's ready. This does two things. First, it preserves the article's "newness" for DYK. If you don't nominate within 5 days, it doesn't qualify anymore. Second, it keeps someone from deleting, tagging, bannering, or otherwise screwing around with it while it's still under construction. That can be a frustrating thing. Seems like almost everyone's first new article gets deleted. Mine did, although I later got it restored. If you want my feedback before you throw it to the sharks... er, move it to the main space, just drop me a note. :) Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 14:49, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I just had something interesting happen and had to share, I hope you don't mind. So I mentioned earlier about giving new users a welcome message. A few minutes ago I saw a banner that said Wikipedia was being upgraded, clicked on a link and got whisked away to OZ (that's my perception of Media-wiki). Anyway as soon as I got there I got a welcome message here]. I think something like this would be very handy for here too. I didn't even know there was such a thing (and probably still wouldn't had it not been for the banner) and I assume most other users don't either and it seems if they can do that on their little known (I assume little known anyway) site then it would be even better here with many many more users. Just my simple minded opinion though. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 01:02, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Believe me, this issue of attracting and retaining editors is a big, BIG deal right now on Wikipedia, and people are looking for suggestions like this. That welcome notice at meta was dropped by a bot, I think, so that would be a pretty easy thing for a bot programmer (i.e. not me) to come up with. You could start a thread at Wikipedia:Bot requests and see if there is interest in coding such a thing. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 14:49, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments and I continue to appreciate the help, I didn't really do much with the To do lists I just copied another one that was more filled out and changed the name in a few places. I think before I start creating articles I am going to fill out some of the missing data on some of the Medal of Honor recipients already created. I did a couple edits to William McGonagle already. I have been reading a lot of discussions and I have to admit I am a little leary about going anywhere near something that looks like a community forum/blog. Every one of them seems to be a Soap opera in development but if you want to submit the idea go ahead. You can even take credit. I consider myself lucky I contacted the right person from the start that was willing to help. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 15:37, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry too much about the forums. All they can say is "no", even very rudely, but they can't take away your birthday or anything. Still, if you want to wait until you are a little more comfortable, that is cool. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 16:14, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Another edit question, I noticed when I added a Citation needed template to the William McGonagle article someone called AnomieBOT added a date to it but the date doesn't show up. Is there a reason why the dates for these templates are invisible? What purpose do they serve? Also, with the edits you reverted. Thanks for letting me know. I looked on a couple other project pages and I think I see where to do that with the tl template. Do you want me to go ahead and do that or just leave it as Kentucy? ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 15:49, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

AnomieBOT is, as the name suggests, a bot. It adds the date parameter because {{citation needed}} adds the article to a hidden category (Category:Articles with unsourced statements), and the date puts the article in a subcategory based on the date. In theory, editors interested in citing statements that need citation should work on articles that have needed cites the longest first (e.g. an article tagged since May 2006 vs. one tagged yesterday).

As for the WP:Kentucky templates, I completely missed the fact that you had changed them to {{WikiProject United States}}! I changed them back while still using {{tl}}. See, even those of us who have been around a while and have administrator status still screw up! (Some admins are loathe to admit that sometimes, but not me!) Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 16:14, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 18:01, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Questions/suggestions about the Kentucky projects

Sorry to keep bothering you with this stuff but your practically the only person I know here. I have been wandering around looking for articles to edit and its kinda funny but I am finding it easier to just bounce around and read than to pick an article and start editing. I am finding more things catching my eye in the non article places that need help. With that, and no offense intended, I am having trouble following along in many of the WikiProjects (not specifically Kentucky) layout and I think it might be beneficial to give Kentucky and the associated ones a revamp, although I am not sure I am technically capable of doing it. It seems like there are a few other projects out there that are easier to follow and a bit more eye catching and I think that might help get some more folks editing. Here are two possibile approaches if you think this is worth while.

1. WikiProject Boston and Missouri for example have a pretty good layout appearance wise and all the information essentially stays the same.
2. I also like the tabbed approach done by WikiProject's GLAM, United States, Texas and Ohio and others like Military history that seems to be pretty easy to follow. Here are a few tabs I thought might be useful if we go with that approach:
   1. Main page
   2. Assessment
   3. For creation
   4. Help
   5. Members
   6. To do
   7. Portal
   8. Recognized content
   9. Louisville
   10. KYOVA
   11. Coal fields Task force
3. The third was actually a user page I saw that I thought would also be excellent for this. I didn't see any other projects with this layout so it would stand out and it seems really organized but the coding is a lot more complex (at least thats how it seemed to me when I looked at it. The user was a member of WikiProject Military History, User:TomStar81.

What do you think about this idea? ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 21:32, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Speaking strictly about WikiProject Kentucky, I think the project could definitely use a facelift. Again, it's something you'd probably want to start in your user space and get some feedback before making drastic changes. Our project doesn't have enough active editors to collaborate on articles, much less keep the project space tidied up. That's why it is in such disrepair. I do my best to keep the Hall of Fame in decent shape, but that's because most of the articles there are ones I worked on. I, for one, would have no problem with you taking a shot at a redesign. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 21:44, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok thanks for the speedy reply. Do you have any suggestions for which of the three options would be better? ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 21:54, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I personally feel like tabs are probably the cleanest way to go. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 22:24, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Works for me, I'll see what I can do. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 22:39, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Martha Layne Collins

This is a note to let the main editors of Martha Layne Collins know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 8, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 8, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Martha Layne Collins (née Hall; born 1936) is a businesswoman and politician from Kentucky who was the state's 56th governor from 1983 to 1987. Prior to her election as governor, she was the 48th Lieutenant Governor of Kentucky, serving under John Y. Brown, Jr. She is the only woman to have been governor of Kentucky, and her election made her the highest-ranking Democratic woman in the U.S. at the time. She was considered as a possible running mate for Democratic presidential nominee Walter Mondale in the 1984 presidential election, but Mondale chose Geraldine Ferraro instead. Her administration had two primary focuses: education and economic development. She secured an increase in education funding during a special legislative session in 1985 and successfully used economic incentives to bring a Toyota manufacturing plant to Georgetown, Kentucky, in 1986. After her term as governor, she became president of Saint Catharine College near Springfield, Kentucky. Her husband's conviction on charges of influence-peddling in 1993 damaged her hopes for a return to political life. She is currently an executive scholar in residence at Georgetown College. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

A great day for the Kentucky Wikipedia Project as well as you, Craig! Congrats on having Gov Collins' article as today's featured article! Thanks for all you do to help promote the Commonwealth and our great history. --Spacini (talk) 00:30, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Another WikiProject Kentucky related question

Greetings. I think I am starting to figure this place out, still a lot to learn though. I was poking around Category:Kentucky and found a couple of things that I don't think are needed anymore. Not sure though and not sure what to do about them if they aren't; Category:WikiProject Bluegrass Region, Category:WikiProject Bluegrass Region members, Template:WikiProject Bluegrass Region and Template:User BRWikiProject-Member seem to relate to a project that was deleted long ago. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 16:04, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that WikiProject died some time ago. As an admin, I can delete these. Thanks for pointing them out. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 16:06, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I noticed that a couple still link to things like articles and user pages. Should I go ahead and remove those? Also, the templates have a couple of "redirects" so should those be deleted as well? ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 16:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I think a bot nuked the project banner from talk pages a long time ago. I went through and removed the user box from half a dozen or so user pages. If you find reference to them elsewhere, you can probably go ahead and safely delete them. If you'll point out the redirects, I'll tidy those up too. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 16:23, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

According to the What links here link there are these 2: Template:IBRWikiProject, Template:BRWikiProject. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 16:42, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Got 'em. Thanks. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 16:54, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem thank you. I'll let you know if I stumble onto anything else. For what its worth I also tagged a few articles for Kentucky and related projects pertaining to the tornado's. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 18:37, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Kentucky

I made some of the changes we talked about to the Kentucky project. I am having a little trouble with a red border showing up but other than that I got a lot of it figured out I think. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 23:38, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Looking pretty good. Every project needs a housekeeper. Unfortunately, we don't have one. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 14:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Your welcome. Frankly I don't know if I'll be here much longer either. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 14:46, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Problems? Anything I can help with? Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 15:00, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Nah its ok, just some user accusing me of being a sock of someone else. There's no reason to fight it cause frankly I don't really care that much. If they don't want me to edit and want to block me then thats fine but it does sorta lend some insight to why I saw so much drama and incivility when I started. Thanks though I'll just ride it out and see what happens. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 15:07, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I've tracked down the conversation you are referencing. Unless the user makes a formal report at WP:SPI, I think he or she is just looking for a fight with Kumioko because they've obviously had their differences in the past which have been handled badly on both sides from what I can tell. If he or she files an SPI report, he or she will have to put up or shut up with some hard evidence of sockpuppetry. Although I'm not usually involved with all that, the community doesn't seem to take well to accusations of sockpuppetry that are proven false. I think the folks at SPI have some fancy tools that can look at the technical side of things, but from your edit history and interacting with you, I'd say any case based solely on that is weak as water. I think your misfortune of jumping into the middle of one of the most bitter controversies I've personally followed since I joined Wikipedia is coloring your impression of the place. I told you there would be some folks you'd have to ignore to get along here. I think you just found one. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 15:38, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah like I said I don't feel strongly enough to fight the issue so whatever happens happens. I'm not quite sure why it was such a bitter controversy myself but I don't need to either. I do agree it seems to have been handled rather poorly all around but I am getting an understanding as to why Kumioko was getting so frustrated. ShmuckatellieJoe (talk) 15:55, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Jbfwildcat

Greetings, Acdixon. I was attracted to the John Calipari page by the notice you posted on the WP:CBBALL project talk page several days ago, and I've been following the Calipari goings-on since. I have also reverted several changes to the article when they have been contrary to WP:BIO, WP:CBBALL or WP:MOS guidelines. In the last 24 hours, I have encountered User:Jbfwildcat for the first time. Based on his talk page notes, he purports to have some semi-official relationship with the UK sports department---"a Uk basketball historian," or something to that effect. Apart from the usual anonymous IP detractors who hang around the Calipari page, most folks just want to see the bio done right. Jbf, on the other hand, apparently hasn't fully absorbed that these college basketball articles are subject to multiple rules and guidelines when it comes to content and formatting. Today, he has taken it upon himself to change the conference championship notes in Calipari's season records table. This is standard WP:CBBALL and WP:CFB formatting regarding color coding and championship notes, and I have reverted his changes on both the Calipari article and the Wildcats men's basketball main page. I have also left an explanatory note on his talk page. Given that you seem to share an interest in Kentucky-related subjects, could you please have a talk with our friend? At the rate he's going, there's a block in his near future if he doesn't learn the correct way to approach standard formatting and NPOV issues. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 22:21, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. As you can see from Jbf's talk page, my interactions with him haven't been a whole lot more fruitful than yours. In fact, I filed the first of two SPI reports on him. Your note on his talk page said everything I would have said to him. His user and talk pages, as well as Kentucky Wildcats men's basketball, John Calipari, and other pages he frequents are all on my watchlist. If he persists, a block for edit warring is likely in his near future, and since it would be his third block, it will probably be non-trivial in length. I hold little if any sway with him, so he would probably see my comments as "piling on". If you do file any kind of formal complaint where you feel my input would be helpful, do drop me a line. It's a shame; a user like this could be very helpful if he would learn to abide by policy and consensus. As it is, I think at some point he'll either end up indef blocked or will leave the project because he doesn't like the rules. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 14:35, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Anthony Davis DYK

Historically, there was no requirement that a 5x expansion had to begin as a stub. I am unaware of any new rule that it must begin as a stub.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Must have dreamed it, then. Thanks. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 20:16, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I posted at WP:RPP several hours ago.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:43, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Continued from FAC

I'm liking the Cats this year. I put myself through undergrad and grad school at Chapel Hill mostly by tutoring, and lived with and tutored the basketball team a couple of years. The stories I could tell (but won't ...) - Dank (push to talk) 14:53, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll bet. Hard not to get excited about the Cats. Best team they've had since at least 1996. Unfortunately, the best team doesn't always win the tournament, but it would be a shame to be this good an lose it. I think I want it most of all for Darius Miller. Good kid, homegrown (Maysville), and been around four years. Will NEVER forget his reach-back throwdown on an alley-oop against St. John's, after which he just walked away like "This is just what I do." Class act. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 14:57, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Constitution Square State Historic Site

Hello! Your submission of Constitution Square State Historic Site at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! – Muboshgu (talk) 18:23, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations!

		The Military history A-Class medal
		On behalf of the coordinators of the Military history WikiProject, you are hereby awarded the A-Class medal for your outstanding work on the articles James B. McCreary, John Sherman Cooper and Charles Scott (governor) which were promoted to A-class between June 2011 and March 2012. Keep up the great work! Nick-D (talk) 12:08, 11 April 2012 (UTC)