User talk:Smallbones

/Archive 1

User:Smallbones/Archive 2

What a SUPERB photo!

And I found just the place for it: Henry Jackson Ellicott.
BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 23:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

The Lipshitz and Oldenburg photos are especially good.
I find it fascinating that Ellicott spent 13-14 years in Philadelphia. He did architectural sculpture for the Centennial, so I wonder if some of the Memorial Hall corner statues are his. Also, having spent so much time here (with little known output), I wonder if he worked on City Hall. BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 15:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome on PMA. There's some juicy gossip about why Zantzinger & Borie essentially bowed out of the collaboration, letting Trumbauer's people take the lead. And Paul's Cret's blanching at Trumbauer's philistinism. I knew this 30 years ago, but have forgotten it. BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 23:19, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

SIA Edit-a-thon

Hi! Thanks for signing up to attend the Smithsonian Institution Archives edit-a-thon, today. We are located in Suite 3000, the 3rd floor, of Capital Gallery in Washington, D.C. Please bring a government issued ID, a laptop, and, if you wish, a camera. We will be taking a tour of the facility so you'll have a chance to see rare and cool things from the Archives! Any questions let us know, and we'll see you soon! Sarah (talk) 13:44, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Great pics!

Hey buddy --- just wanted to thank you for all the great pics of B'More!--Pubdog (talk) 20:58, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Hoax, humor, or a serious concept?

Take a look at Leibniz (unit) for me. Hoax, humor, or a serious concept? --DThomsen8 (talk) 22:18, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

HOAX! --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: They want the best folks

Thanks for thinking of me, I am flattered. It seems to me that it would help for any potential member to know more about the responsibilities involved. I realize that this is all being planned, but I think it would help if the potential members knew how many meetings to expect in a year (roughly) (one? three? a dozen?), how these meetings would be conducted (Skype / teleconference? travel to a central location? a mix of both?), time commitment (assume members would have to read all grant proposals ahead of time, so how many of these would there be and how long would they be?). Also what about expenses involved - if members have to travel to San Francisco (for example), would they have to cover their own travel and lodging costs or would the WMF cover these?

The other two concerns I thought of are: 1) the identification requirement. Since the proposed board would play a large role in allocating funds, it may be that the community wants to know who these people are (not just have the WMF know)(much as WMF board members are known). 2) Is there an audit process by an external auditor? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:31, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Great American Wiknic for Philly in June

Howdy! I would like to invite you to help organize the Great American Wiknic this June (maybe update Wikipedia:WikiProject Philadelphia/Wiknic for this year?) :) You can't possibly fall behind Pittsburgh! Also, please add any preliminary details to Wikipedia:Wiknic#2012 Wiknic.--Pharos (talk) 17:59, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Can we just repeat the Azalea Garden picnic just like last year? --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:51, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Re:CP award

Thanks, but I am not done yet. Still need to finish the second part of the bio, polish the article (pun intended), and bring it at least to GA class. Would you be interested in proofreading the prose in a day or so? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:45, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Photo request

I just wanted to let you know I didn't forget about your request. The weather was rather poor here in DC most of last week so I wanted to wait for a clear day where I could get a decent picture. Kumioko (talk) 19:46, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I added theh pics of the Pumping station

Per your request I took three pictures of the pumping station and added them to the article. There not great but its definately better than none. You might want to take a look and adjust them. Kumioko (talk) 01:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I also added a couple for Yards park. Kumioko (talk) 01:54, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:460 info plaque.JPG

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:460 info plaque.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. MGA73 (talk) 20:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Used some images to create montage

Just thought that I'd give you a heads up that I created a montage for the Quincy, Illinois page and used a few of your uploaded pictures to compile the montage. The final result can be seen here: File:QuincyILmontage.png. Thank you for uploading some really nice shots. I only uploaded two such as that of the Oakley-Lindsay Center and Quincy University, but nearly all the montage is of your shots. I may have licensed it wrong (as public domain as opposed to CC), but I'm sure it would be a quick fix if I made any errors. (Tigerghost (talk) 19:13, 21 June 2012 (UTC))

Photo requests for Pennsylvania and DC

I have completed a long effort on Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Pennsylvania to change all requests to specific counties. You will find that the individual counties now have far more requests than they once did, and the Pennsylvania requests are currently down to 12, mostly requests for images rather than photography, since several buildings and bridges have been demolished.

For the m:WikiMania 2012 trip, I changed all the Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in District of Columbia to Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Washington, D.C.. The D.C. list has been proposed for deletion. Let me know what you think about the lists, PA and DC.

Are you going to WikiMania? --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:08, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Slideshow

Sorry to say that I don't have any ideas better than what you've already done. The ideological blind dedication to free content over usefulness means that Commons:Commons:File types doesn't list any filetypes (at least as far as I can see) that are associated with slideshows.

Must also apologise for the delay in replying; I was on the road getting photos in far northern Indiana. I got the majority of the St. Joseph County sites, plus some in Marshall (including one HD contributing property that you've photographed), Fulton, Elkhart, and Kosciusko counties, plus the last two sites in Noble County. Nyttend (talk) 04:51, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

No, sorry. Lots more leaves on the trees than when you were there, so a view from either the northeast or the southeast was impossible, and the landowner on the western side had multiple "No trespassing" signs. What's more, with yesterday's heat (102° in the shade in South Bend, and 105° heat index), I was just going quickly and not doing a ton of work at any specific site; my priority was getting just one good photo from many different sites. I spent an uncommonly large amount of time visiting libraries to refill my water bottle, since my car has no air conditioning. All of your Marshall County images look better than mine probably will (haven't yet put them on the computer to check yet), largely due to the position of the sun when I was there. I got side views of Elkhart's Bridge Street Bridge and South Bend's La Salle Street Bridge, but that's it. Nyttend (talk) 15:47, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

See File:East Laporte Street Footbridge.jpg. Since you sounded dissatisfied with your own photo, I put in mine instead; feel free to put yours back in, of course, if you prefer it. Nyttend (talk) 19:09, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Please comment at Ya Kun Kaya Toast's ongoing peer review!

Since you have listed yourself as a peer review volunteer interested in economics articles, would you like to support the quest to counter systemic bias on Wikipedia by giving a thorough review of the short, but interesting, article about Ya Kun Kaya Toast, a multinational kaya toast chain and Singaporean cultural icon? Thanks! 谢谢！Terima kasih! நன்றி! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 09:48, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

• Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 17:33, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Tags

Please gain consensus before removing tags like {{orphan}}, {{more footnotes}}, etc. from pages. WP:So fix it doesn't apply to the problem you describe. Editors can tag page, ask for help or come later and fix the problems the tagged. -- Magioladitis (talk) 03:44, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

an article based on a single source is a serious problem that needs to be fixed. On the other hand Wikipedia has no time limits of when and by whom the problem can be fixed. Tagging is easier than creating a to-do list in userspace. Moreover, it catches attention and gets more peoeple involved in the project. Giving the impression that pages are perfect discourages participation.

The most important is that I think your understanding of WP:So fix it is against the consensus we have. There are more people who tag pages than people who actually fix them because community thinks tagging is a nice thing. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:36, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

See "This page in a nutshell: If you see something that can be improved, improve it!" Tags placed without any explanation that stay on the page for years do not improve the article. Rather the editor, if he sees a problem should just improve the page. When I see a useless tag that has no explanation and simply makes the page ugly, I improve the page by removing the tag.

I was quite surprised at Wikimania how many editors talked about tag spamming. It is clearly an issue that irks many editors. May I ask that you actually look at the next tag you see that is over 3 years old? There will be many. Is there an explanation of why the tag was placed? (likely not) If you can figure out what the problem actually was, does the tag still apply now? (likely not) Once you do this, you will likely see the problem and start removing other tag spam. Smallbones (talk) 14:10, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

amen. i would say that tags are only good as part of a process of article improvement, and removal. (see Leadership in Wikimedia) since we have a generation of article-tinklers who do not improve articles, they shout to the crowd and noone listens. "the community thinks tagging is a good thing" lol, what community would that be? i agree the consensus at wikimania was dismissive of "tag-spam". i made the comment to another tagger that i specifically do not improve tagged articles; there is so much work to do, i prefer to work with others on projects that don't need them. "single source is a serious problem" - lol just like the BLP hysteria. we have 232,000 articles without references [1]. if it is so serious, will you reference an article? i'm a couple thousand ahead of you. with that i will return to my vacation on wikisource cleaning up DNB, when i emerge from hibernation, i will have 1000+ articles to reference, and 100+ to create. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 00:10, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I partially agree with what you 2 are saying however I also have to side with Magio in part here too. I personally believe that stubs should only have specific tags (such as unreferenced) and wrote that up but was overruled. The fact is, the guidelines and policies allow and encourage these tags be used so I would suggest that if you have a problem with these being used then we should open up a RFC or something and suggest a change. We have been doing a lot of IMO good modifications to the messages to make them more useful but we still have some room for improvement. Personally I favor a smaller less obtrusive tag but I do think that we need them and should use them. Kumioko (talk) 00:17, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

i kinda don't disagree: it's not that tags are useless, but they are being used in a dysfunctional way. there is way too much faith in tags and mechanical messages, when the teahouse proves that authentic communication is what is required. now warning when taking tags down? i guess i'll never do that-even after i improve the article by mistake. i try to stay away from policy pages and commenting, (and usually from talk). i find it a waste of my time. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 00:34, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

It is quite obvious that tagging is part of a broken system of article "improvement." If a tag was put on, and the article improved within a month, I'd have no problem at all with tags. But old tags are just building up, defacing articles, and few people try to do anything about it, least of all the taggers. If taggers would try to remove as many tags as they put on - it would be one thing. But it looks to me like 1% of all editors add almost all the tags and don't remove any; about 10% of all editors very occasionally take off a tag, and the other 89% are just intimidated by tags. As I've experienced over the last few days, people will will revert my deletion of tags, without knowing why the tags do or do not belong, without putting up any explanation. It's gotten to be just a lazy habit - "I don't like the article, but I'm not willing to fix it. Somebody else has to do it." Lazy and pushy. Somebody has to tell the L&P 1% that they are not doing anybody a favor, and that they do not constitute a consensus. As far as I know there are no policies or guidelines that say you have to put a tag on an article - or can't remove one - with the possible exception of BLP tags (with BLP I'd say delete the sentence or the article, don't tag - unless its a really minor word choice type of thing). So I say that folks who don't like tag spamming should just remove useless tags - which is perfectly consistent with policy. Perhaps an essay might help. Challenging the L&P folks to justify their tag spamming with reasoning based on policy or guidelines might help. Smallbones (talk) 02:52, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

yeah, i doubt if anyone will listen. they like their twinkle twitch direction. they will fight for the right to tag. they miss how "tag" is a synonym for failed graffitti artist. leadership is not telling people what to do, it's working with others in a team. the tech types don't understand management; maybe some of them want to learn (i doubt it). there is a profound misunderstanding of communication. walls of easy to deploy tags are off putting and counterproductive. the harder to deploy, one on one conversation is required to communicate. i guess i'm too lazy to push back. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 03:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Wonderfull things happen after 5 years Check this one. -- Magioladitis (talk) 05:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

OK! Congrats! But I do have to point out that the in-line "citation needed" was used. It is very specific as it very naturally refers to only one sentence. It is also much less obtrusive than the large page-wide tags I've been talking about and removing. With the small, specific tag - this has to be rated a success. But if a large page-wide tag had been on the page for 5 years, distracting people and in effect telling people the page was inaccurate when it wasn't, then I wouldn't rate this a success. Smallbones (talk) 11:51, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I think by removing tags you want to make a WP:POINT. The use of tags is a common practise. For example the page where you removed the {{one source}} it was really based in onse source. I am not expert in article building so I usually (not always) leave this job to others. I usually presume that the people who add tags know what they are doing. The use of tags that nobody understands what they do it a problem. This is the reason I updated some tags and I was in favour of deleting "Expand" which now reappeared under the name {{Expand article}}! -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:49, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Although as I stated above I think that there are some things that should be done to the process of tagging, I agree with Magio, it is common practice. I also think that a lot of the tags like Cleanup, Expand, Copyedit and a bunch of others are useless. If the article isn't FA it goes without saying. If the article is a stub then its really pointless. I do like some of them like Citation needed, Unreferenced, Multiple issues (although I would like to see the look change to be smaller and less gaudy) and a few others because they are clear and serve a specific purpose. I also agree that just because someone can see that the article is unreferenced doesn't mean they can find a reference for it. Same with others like grammer and Copyedit. Just because I can see it needs it doesn't mean I am well suited to add it. Kumioko (talk) 13:00, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Convenience break

I confess to wanting to start a conversation on this issue, but my deletions are not against WP:POINT, simply because I'm only deleting tags that don't belong on pages - useless tags that are just making a mess of things. I'm now a bit frustrated in searching for a place to properly discuss this matter. Is there a guideline that refers to tagging? Is there any central place that the very real issues caused by tagging are normally discussed? The best place that I can see now is the talkpage at Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup

I'd think it particularly important that there be a central place to discuss this matter because taggers often are presenting their opinions on an article as if they represent accepted policy. If they are representing policy or guidelines, then there certainly should be a policy or guideline that lets folks know the proper way to do this.

An example of a tag leading folks to think that it reflects policy, when it doesn't:

The link in "single source" goes to WP:Reliable sources which does not discuss the issue of single sourcing except in round about ways. It certainly does not prohibit single sourced articles in any way. Single sourcing does present potential problems. If I were grading a college student's single-sourced paper, the maximum grade I'd give is a C- even under today's inflated grading policies. Problems include possible copyright infringement, non-neutral point of view, and notability. But there are articles in which only one source can be found (other than possible very old primary sources or inaccesible historical write-ups) that aren't copyright violations, are likely to have NPOV, and are notable. 3 quick examples: US Congressmen from the Biographical Dictionary of Congress, a few places on the National Register of Historical Places, and some articles from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica. More specific example: there are people who were elected to Congress in the early 19th century who died before taking office, the congressional dictionary (public domain) has entries on them, and a complete listing of everybody who was elected to Congress is important to the encyclopedia. Why should articles on these folks be defaced with tags? What policy or guideline has the article broken? Any discussion can be on the talk page, but taggers do not bother to do that despite what the tag says. Smallbones (talk) 16:21, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

QRpedia stats

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject QRpedia#Mass stats. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:44, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your kind words. I liked the news clip on the QR codes at Congressional Cemetery. I will ask my state park contacts (DCNR) if they want to add QR codes at the park offices. I've only seen Ganoga Lake once (when some kind people let me see the Clemuel Ricketts Mansion). I just added a panoramic picture I got of the lake in the fog to the article - does it look OK? Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:14, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at the panorama and the very kind words on the images in the article (most of which I uploaded from Flickr). I have only been to the lake once (since it is private), which was when I saw the Clemuel Ricketts Mansion. I took the photos for the foggy panorama then, but Autostitch could only put the sides together, not the whole thing. When I saw the article was going to be on the Main Page I debated driving to the lake and trying to get another panorama without fog, but did not (no permission, didn't want to trespass). Yesterday I tried Microsoft Research Image Composite Editor and it was able to stitch the panorama - I liked it, but was not sure how much of that was just the thrill of finally getting it to stitch over two years later. Then again, Ben MacDui always says not to just have photos of sunny summer days ;-) Anyway thanks for the feedback.

I will check with the rangers I know and get back to you. Most things in parks do not have separate articles (though Kinzua Bridge is a FA, and the three Historic Districts in Black Moshannon State Park have a brief article). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:08, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

ATTENTION: SMALLBONES. Thank you for the photo of one of the graves in DC's Congressional Cemetery that has had a QR code added, but it's the grave of LEONARD Matlovich not "John." Thank you very much for correcting as soon as possible.

- Michael Bedwell www.leonardmatlovich.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.200.162.181 (talk) 01:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks for the correction. Smallbones (talk) 02:37, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Teresa (ttrimm) from Wikimania 2012

Hi. I was at your NFRP presentation at Wikimania. I was in the front row taking pictures with my Nikon. I don't think I have ever commented on someone's talk page on Wikipedia.

I am going to be writing an article about contributing to the NFRP. It will be titled something like http://www.wikihow.com/Contribute-to-the-National-Register-of-Historic-Places

Could you recommend a better title or a direction to take it??

Looking forward to hearing from you.

P.S. I also met you and your wife outside of the Marvin Center the next day.

Teresa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ttrimm (talk • contribs) 04:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

• I just realized I butchered the acronym. NRHP!! Ttrimm (talk) 02:22, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Smallbones. You have new messages at SarahStierch's talk page.
Message added 17:54, 24 July 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

SarahStierch (talk) 17:54, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Photos

If you still need any jurors, I'd be happy to help: I'm an architect, a reasonably accomplished photographer, and I know my way around WP, I think (which principally involves knowing where not to go!). Acroterion (talk) 14:50, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Image needed logo

I tweaked the logo (used a different typeface) and it looks somewhat less fuzy to my eyes (you will probably need to purge the cache to see the new image - the capital "I" has cross bars at top and bottom in the new one "I", where it does not on the old one "|").

I have asked my ranger friend twice on QR codes and not heard back. It may be DCNR does not want to do that. I did think of adding QR codes to covered bridges - they usually have a paper tag from the Theodore Burr (Covered Bridge) Society inside near one of the portals anyway. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:38, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Schmucker Hall

Please take a look at Schmucker Hall, where the text says it is a NRHP building, but the article infobox and the talk page do not say that. It seems to me that it is incorrectly done, but you will know better than I would. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:18, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject Public Art

Look at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Template:WikiProject Public Art. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:33, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Image placeholders

Kindly stop harassing me on the subject. Community consensus concluded that placeholders should not be used, and every time that people pester me for my refusal to countenance this violation of WP:CONLIMITED, it makes me less and less interested in participating in a discussion with people who don't care about following projectwide consensus. The project's repeated violation of WP:NOTCENSOR regarding address-restricted sites with published locations is bad enough, but when the project insist on edit warring to enforce yet another violation, I see no point in wasting my time with reminders that their decisions are not valid without a change in project consensus. Nyttend (talk) 18:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Use of Wikipedia text by other wikis without attribution

I think I see what you mean. Readers of Wikipedia don't know that the content was written by the company, however if we can cite the content to company-written materials, than readers know that it's their history "according to them." Content can be copy/pasted to Wikipedia with a citation that means attribution. Do I have it right? User:King4057 (EthicalWiki) 18:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

You got it. You can make it a bit more complicated if you want. If it's purely non-controversial factual information, there's no need to quote, but with CC-BY-3.0 there should be an attribution, which I believe the standard attribution is just in the edit summary, just like for all Wikipedians, but putting something on the talk page is ok too. I've seen folks who want a special template on the article page but that seems extreme to me.

But if it is an opinion, then quote and the citation is the attribution. Without an official connection, we can't do that. Smallbones (talk) 19:51, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

I think I get where you're coming from now more than I did before. When PR writes contributed content or provides comment to the media, we're quoted or attributed in some way, but Wikipedia's model doesn't allow for attribution. Do you think this Talk page template reasonably satisfies that need?

{{Template:Connected contributor multi |User1=King4057| }}

The Wikipedia model doesn't allow fo self-attribution, as in "GM's PR firm said '....' " (edit summary User:GMPR)

but, if they publish it on a CC-BY-3.0 site, called, say PRpedia, and that site has different rules than us - including perhaps article ownership and public release of editor identity and some checking that the editor is who he says he is, then we can use it as is (with atribution to PRpedia in the edit summary), or quote and cite it as a ref (GM's PR firm on PRpedia). The template above looks better for use by an ordinary COI. I'd use a talk page template that say "This article has used material from PRpedia that is licensed CC-BY-3.0. The editors on this site may have a direct connection to the subject of this article."

Hope this helps. Smallbones (talk) 11:09, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Pennsylvania State Office Building‎

Hey bones --- thanks for grabbing and adding the photos of the Pennsylvania State Office Building‎. Nice pics!--Pubdog (talk) 21:52, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 19

Hi. When you recently edited Mitt Romney's tax returns, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New Yorker (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) 04:44, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Eugene Plotkin

I don't see anything on the talk page that is relevant to what I changed. If you are putting something there now, then please ignore this message. Someguy1221 (talk) 03:25, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Link colors

See Help:Link color and User:Anomie/linkclassifier for help with link colors. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:06, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

New Nom

Well, back with a splash like they say here's my first dyk attempt in a while. I learned a lot about Sally Tanner, a lovely elderly former state legislator who happens to live down the road a pace. Hope you are well and survived your trip to Ferndale, California. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:47, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Drop by to say hi!

 RexRowan  Talk  12:14, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

No, I don't misunderstand

The AFD on the tax return page's result was a "DELETE", not "DELETE & MERGE". ViriiK (talk) 01:22, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

followup at merger proposal

Could you possibly please consider the further discussion, and comment again at Talk:Abraham Lincoln Birthplace National Historical Park#Merger proposal? --doncram 21:23, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand all of the rules on Wikipedia - still learning...

But why are unregistered users allowed to add and edit content, especially on a page that should be protected (like any political page). The timing of those unregistered edits are sometimes suspiciously aligned with registered users who aren't getting their way. At least that's been my observation.Jasonnewyork (talk) 21:37, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia is "the encyclopedia that anybody can edit", always has been. Among other things that means that anons can edit, except in extreme circumstances. It was only a few years ago (afaik) that it was clarified that editing as an anon and under your user name was a violation of the sockpuppet rules. Well, you can't edit under multiple names or under a name AND as an anon. If you see strong evidence of that, you may request a sockpuppet investigation. I don't think that I've ever asked for one, but imagine that the evidence required is fairly daunting. All the best. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 21:46, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

BTW, nobody understands "all of the rules on Wikipedia!" Smallbones_(smalltalk) 21:47, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm guessing there is no way to look at IP addresses of individuals, so there is no real way to track it - unless anon users are carelessly obvious in the way they do their sockpuppeting. Thanks for the info.Jasonnewyork (talk) 22:15, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Love to get your reaction (reply)

Sorry it's taken so long to get back to you. Do you know about Wiki Loves Monuments? See www.wikilovesmonuments.us

• Not yet !! ( will look )

There a new part with California Landmarks, see California Historical Landmarks in Humboldt County, California

• I saw that, nifty. We already have some of those photos uploaded. Weren't they good enough for the new page? I'm confused.

Also, please see WT:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places#WLM_Android_App_from_WMF

• Would love to see the app but I don't have a mobile phone. I'll have to get someone with an Android phone to show me how it works.

Other stuff... Do you want me to up load photos of Seth Kinman's stuff to Commons? We didn't have opportunity to talk about it since that day ! Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:31, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm seeing that you're getting a goodly number of photos from areas far more interesting than here. I recently uploaded my first photo to commons since being accused of being a newbie and a long-term copyright violator (I never did figure out how those two fit together) and so far no one has said to delete it. I am about to put it in the relevant article and see if that brings out the angry admin. I am sorry, but I don't think I will be adding much if anything to Commons during the beauty contest. In truth, we have no really interesting buildings; they are all small and common compared to other parts of the world. Nothing here is over 150 years old and most of our "historic sites" are metal plaques and you know where that got me when I was interested in all this. I really don't need some Commons admin with a bug in his ear about copyright lawn flamingos or metal house numbers leaving me more hate mail. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:00, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Newbie seeking advice on a new article

The last section on my talk page is from a newbie who is seeking advice on a new art-related article he wants to create, but reviewers have rejected it three times. I have not put any links on your talk page, just let you know where to look. My idea is that perhaps this item could be added as a paragraph in an existing article, where the reviewers are just other editors, and not editors doing reviews of new articles. Anyway, we need to be kind to the newbies, so I hope you can help at least a little bit. --DThomsen8 (talk) 02:39, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Your last edit to {{NRHP row}}

I don't know enough about the coding to fix this myself, although it appears to me that the whole "if" string should go first. Because the button's appearing in every entry in every table whether there's an image there already or not. Daniel Case (talk) 03:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

That's what I figured (although you'll see on the template talk page that I'm not the only one confused by this. As it is, it looks like we're encouraging people to replace the existing photos (which, we know, we sometimes need to do, but not all of them) as well as submit new ones.

Re Richard M., I didn't get back to him today because I was busy with some pre-holiday weekend preparations. I'll drop him an email to that effect and see if we can connect over the weekend sometime. Daniel Case (talk) 04:37, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

GLAM: Philadelphia Museum of Art update

Hi GLAM PMA folks! I wanted to update you about some recent events related to our fantastic Museum. I met Jessica Milby, PMA Collections Information Project Manager, at Wikimania in July. Jessica was looking for ways to improve articles on Wikipedia about the Museum and its artists/collections. We followed up a few weeks later at the Perelman Building in downtown Philadelphia where we discussed ways to increase participation in the GLAM/PMA project.

• The first idea is to do some outreach to the GLAM:PMA project members, including mass messages updating you all about plans and, seeking feedback about new ideas, and hearing your thoughts about what's in the works.
• The next step is a drive to improve the main Philadelphia Museum of Art article. The article is currently 'B-Class', but Jessica was confident that with the abundance of high quality sources about the Museum that it could be improved even further. Jessica recommended this extensive source from the Museum's website.
• Another idea that came out of the meeting was a project within the Museum to assess which PMA-related topics are missing articles on Wikipedia.
• One of Jessica's ideas is to have the knowledgeable curators of the Museum provide recommended reading lists for PMA-related articles. That should be a great first step to guiding editors towards the information they need to expand and improve that content.
• Also raised for discussion were some ideas about how to engage the broader community. There is interest in setting up a tour/edit-a-thon, but this remains in the preliminary stage. Would you be interested in participating in such an event?
• We have new stats! These 24 articles are all under the PMA project. I compiled the last 90-day page views and then annualized the results. PMA-related articles get almost 800,000 view per year!

See the stats!

Article Importance Class View last 90 days Views annualized Philadelphia Museum of Art Top B 22,790 91,160 The Concert Singer High B 783 3,132 Crucifixion Diptych (van der Weyden) High C 1,500 6,000 Perelman Building High C 986 3,944 The Gross Clinic High C 12,897 51,588 William Rush and His Model High C 1,038 4,152 Nude Descending a Staircase, No. 2 High Start 26,892 107,568 Rodin Museum High Start 5,323 21,292 Soft Construction with Boiled Beans (Premonition of Civil War) High Start 11,026 44,104 The Bride Stripped Bare By Her Bachelors, Even High Start 13,639 54,556 Wedding dress of Grace Kelly High Start 5,810 23,240 Étant donnés High Stub 7,464 29,856 Bird in Space High Unassessed 10,365 41,460 Diana (Saint-Gaudens) High Unassessed 1,450 5,800 Interior (Degas) High Unassessed 2,434 9,736 The Bathers (Cézanne) High Unassessed 7,166 28,664 Three Musicians High Unassessed 9,421 37,684 The Fairman Rogers Four-in-Hand Mid C 736 2,944 Anne d'Harnoncourt Mid Stub 1,266 5,064 Lansdowne House Mid Stub 3,763 15,052 Portrait of Leslie W. Miller Mid Unassessed 362 1,448 Yellow Odalisque Mid Unassessed 817 3,268 Rocky Steps Low Start 41,341 165,364 Samuel S. Fleisher Art Memorial Low Start 304 1,216 Total 189,573 758,292 views per quarter views per year

It's exciting to have a partner in Jessica Milby and there should be a lot of good work coming out the collaboration within the next 3-6 months. Please stop by the GLAM/PMA project page and leave your thoughts. What ideas do you have? How can we move forward on the above projects? I Hope you're all well. Cheers! Ocaasi 19:05, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Re: User talk:Chevsapher#Just saw the tunnel article again.

Hello, Smallbones. You have new messages at Chevsapher's talk page.
Message added Chevsapher (talk) 21:14, 13 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Pennsylvania counties NRHP

Thanks - I got two more covered bridges today and both are my favorite kind - still in use and no steel beams added. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:42, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - I got full picture sets of seven of the Columbia County covered bridges recently (both portals, interior pano, rafters, floor, girders underneath, sides, etc.) which I am slowly uploading to Commons. I also have picturs of the Factory Bridge from a few years ago, and more detailed pics of some of the others in Union County. I hope to go back and get the rest of the remaining Columbia County covered bridges when I can - three of them on the Register are gone and one is moved to a housing development (I can pics of that one). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:14, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Brow Monument and Brow Monument trail picture deletion

hi. thanks for filling me in on the picture disappearing. i thought that i had fixed the problem with the license quite a while ago. i'd left out the dept of interior's code but went out and got it. i never got a message after september 12th, indicating that there was an issue with it. i don't know if you saw it before it was deleted but it was a pic of a coast and geodetic survey marker at the location of brow monument. should i go back and reload it and make sure all the licensing stuff is as it should be? bpolkAbearfellow (talk) 18:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

thanks. i got your response. i'll give it another try with the picture and make sure

everything is filled in. Abearfellow (talk) 19:07, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

hi. i reloaded the picture [2] and i believe that all of the licensing stuff is exactly right. could you tell me how to go about putting it back in where it was or would it be smarter for you to check it out to see if i did it right and put it back in? I'm more than glad to take a stab at it. but, as with most stabs, it will probably be bloodyAbearfellow (talk) 20:43, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

thanks so much for taking care of that. how long does it take for someone to actually become comfortable with the "language" of wiki? all of the technical stuff? seems like learning a new programming language or a new foreign language. very interesting world bill polkAbearfellow (talk) 20:54, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

ok, i added my copyright information in the license section - it seems a bit confusing. i understand that theoretically someone could own the copyright to the button and that i own the copyright to the photograph of the button - a copyright on reality and a copyright on the image of reality so to speak. how come there aren't two distinct license fields for something like that. learn something new every few minutesAbearfellow (talk) 21:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Smallbones. You have new messages at Corporate Minion's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hey. Sorry I haven't kept in touch in a while. Corporate Minion 06:46, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

OK I did something wrong again

Hi Smallbones... I uploaded the picture to the right

The Centerville Beach Cross, Centerville Beach, Humboldt County, California

but I can't figure out how to enter it in the contest. It never occurred to me there was a separate process for uploading photos for the contest, is that the only way to get them in the contest entries? If so, this one won't count. But would be good to know before I try uploading anything else. As you can see in the photo we finally got visibility over 1/4 mile. But not much. Cheers. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:29, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Signpost

Although I'm not terribly familiar with the details of this case, I was surprised to see you go the other way. I was wondering if your attitude was changing overall or if it was this case in particular. I myself have shifted over time as I gain experience on both sides. Corporate 00:41, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Smallbones. You have new messages at Thundersnow's talk page.
Message added 00:48, 30 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A barnstar for you!

The Photographer's Barnstar

Hey Peter, contratulations and deepest thanks for all your fine work on Wiki Loves Monuments! I really enjoyed participating as a volunteer in this contest, and found it a very compelling way to contribute to Wikipedia. As a result, I now plan to start articles about some of the historic sites I photographed which do not have articles yet (see examples on my profile). And in my official role as product manager at Wikimedia, I look forward to applying some of the lessons learned from this successful project to some of our other editor engagement programs. Thanks for all that you did to make this possible! Fabrice Florin (talk) 17:25, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

I especially liked your Fort Barry and Fort Baker shots. All the best. Smallbones_(smalltalk) 18:39, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey Smallbones, that was really nice of you to respond to my barnstar note about your fabulous work on Wiki Loves Monuments!

I think this is a great example of a successful editor engagement program, for a variety of reasons:

• it gives you a way to contribute to Wikipedia that is both fun and useful
• it gives you a good reason to create an account, if you haven't already
• it gives you a sense of belonging to a global movement while acting locally
• it gives you a simple to-do list of specific tasks that can be completed in a relatively short amount of time
• it gives you enough creative freedom to take the photos that you think are most relevant to the task
• it makes you feel more confident that your contribution will not be edited inappropriately
• it lets you interact with people face-to-face in the places you visit, rather than only interacting online
• it gives you an opportunity to collect data in the field that can lead to better articles
• it encourages current editors to write or expand more articles after they take the photos

I really enjoyed participating as a volunteer in this contest, and found it a very compelling way to contribute to Wikipedia. As a result, I now plan to start articles on some of the historic sites I photographed which do not have articles yet. (Thanks for your kind words about my Fort Barry and Fort Baker shots.)

And in my official role as product manager at Wikimedia, I look forward to applying some of the lessons learned from this successful project to some of our other editor engagement programs.

Thanks again for making all this possible! Fabrice Florin (talk) 19:03, 2 October 2012 (UTC)