User talk:Ser Amantio di Nicolao

To leave me a new message you may click here.

This user is the most active Wikipedian of all time.

On a quiet New Year's Eve

Carptrash (talk) 02:45, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, the wilds of American art. Did you ever discover this little section from a decade ago. I recently re-discovered it and it darn near broke my heart again. Talk:Home Building Association Bank. Carptrash (talk) 03:17, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Either Auriel Bessemer was an early case of sex-change operations or just a bad assumption on my part, the sources don't mention gender and I thought, "Who'd name their son Auriel?" it turns out Mr. and Mrs> Bessemer would. Carptrash (talk) 16:19, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Ser Amantio di Nicolao!

Happy New Year!

Ser Amantio di Nicolao,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
–Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 13:43, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy 2017!

Wishing good health and happiness as we start the new year! --Rosiestep (talk) 19:06, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year, Ser Amantio di Nicolao!

Happy New Year!

Ser Amantio di Nicolao,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Donner60 (talk) 07:58, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Happy New Year Ser Amantio di Nicolao!

Happy New Year!

Ser Amantio di Nicolao,
Have a prosperous, productive and wonderful New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

--Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 12:24, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

HNY, and a hand asked for...

Hi Ser, HNY stands for Happy New Year. Thanks for... several things, including things that made you laugh. You should be banned for that, don'tchya knoaw, that's strictly anti-political whatever (thank god for that). But this is not why I'm taking your time for. Here is the matter:

Sometime in 2014 I wrote this fr:Ferrier antique de Tannerre-en-Puisaye and translated it in my User:Basicdesign/sandbox. The word "ferrier" does not exist in English. So I asked around for help for the title, see here and in the sandbox talk page (for the research in wiki, let alone the bulk of the research elsewhere). Didn't find a solution (because there is no word that fits the case, neither bloomery (the thing is on another level altogether, a bloomery does not use 75 acres of space), nor ironworks (which implies a forge), nor anything we could think of. Submitted the article anyway. It was refused, as per ongoing rules and contrary to good common sense. Still. It's a reasonably good article, refs are ok (there is a hell of a lot worse here on that aspect) and an interesting subject that goes well beyond local interest, you'll see all that if you can find it. As the largest ferrier in western Europe (along with another one somewhere further down south of France), it's a large part of the history of the area, of the region, of the country and of Europe. Plus we usually do a nice roast of wild boar + trimmings and dessert (and veggy option too, if asked for ahead of the day), all according to Antique or Middle Age recipies, each year in September for the French Heritage Days/wkend, if ever you come nearby :) I now live nearby said place, I can see for myself that it's got more and more UK visitors, a few Americans too manage to get lost enough to find it and some days the place is packed with German visitors, most of whom speak English too. An English article wouldn't come amiss.

So the article is well up to wkpdia standards of acceptation. Remains the fact that the word ferrier does not exist in English. So what?! As if that was the first happenstance for that sort of thing. Needless to say, no-one can find a translation for a word that exists in one language only. Believe me in that I have worked on it. The only way to "resolve the language issue", as per the reason given for refusal, is to accept the French word. And that's it. I don't see the pbm in that circumstance, and that's me saying it - who near-systematically translate foreign words in the local wiki language even against the so-self-called avant-garde opinion. I'd put the word in italics in the title to be clear about its foreign origin.

I am addressing you on the basis of this: Wikipedia:Petition against IAR abuse, "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it" (I've done plenty of that, seldom intentionally/knowingly). It says that maybe you can actually really act upon your thinking and not just apply rules. So could you please-pretty-please * find the thing, * have a look at it, * perhaps take the time to check that I'm not making up any of it, * not spoil the new year with the insane demand of finding what doesn't exist, and * accept the idea that like quite a few other articles here, the title may include a foreign word? Thank you very much for at least trying. And my best wishes again :) Basicdesign (talk) 15:13, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much, for the good wishes and for looking into that. Sorry I did not answer earlier, it's logging time down here, coming back home a total wreck not even the courage to turn PC on. Day off today, hurray for mechanic trouble (for once)!! You look like a busy man too. If there are no news from you on that ferrier article when the logging is done, I'll come back to you. Have a good day meanwhile. Basicdesign (talk) 08:03, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Wikibirthday!

Wishing you a happy Wikibirthday and many more to come! I've seen your prolific presence in helping the encyclopedia function. Frankly, you're a role model for me-- if Wikipedia has such a thing. Cheers! Icebob99 (talk) 21:23, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A pie for you!

Thank you for reviewing the Whitney Chadwick article. Your keen eye is appreciated. Netherzone (talk) 17:07, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Page deletion of Nehru college of engineering thrissur .

Hello Amantio di Nicolao, I need your help to delete(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehru_College_of_Engineering_and_Research_Centre) this Wikipedia page of Nehru college. As you may know that this is not a well reputed college and infamous for violence against students. This page is deliberately created for promotion of their institution. Most people refer Wikipedia page of a particular entity in order to get some genuine information. So, those who refers this page will be lead to misguided information. Please take necessary action against this article.For more information about this college please go through below news article link.Their are a lot of news against this particular institution. http://english.manoramaonline.com/news/kerala/nehru-college-thrissur-student-suicide-torture-methods.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krishferrare (talk • contribs) 16:01, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of superfluous cat-a-lots

Hi Ser Amantio di Nicolao

Something is going very badly wrong here. Please may I ask you to give this careful attention?

I just spotted two edits by you to Rama Devi (Bihar politician) on 20 December 2015, both of which added superfluous categories.

The first of those two edits[1] was " Copying from Category:12th Lok Sabha members to Category:20th-century Indian politicians". That was un-needed, because Category:12th Lok Sabha members was already a subcat of Category:20th-century Indian politicians, and had been since Dec 2015[2] ... and per WP:SUBCAT, a page should not usually be in boh a category and its subcategory

The second edit[3] was "Category:15th Lok Sabha members to Category:21st-century Indian politicians". Again, Category:15th Lok Sabha members had been a sub-cat of Category:21st-century Indian politicians since DEc 2015[4].

Both of those edits were made using Cat-a-Lot, so I checked your contribs for that day, starting [5]. Over the next 8 or so 500-entry contribs lists, there are over 4,000 such cases of superflous categories being added to members Indian and Moldovan legislatures by term.

This causes un-neeeded category clutter on the articles. For example Rama Devi (Bihar politician) is un-necessarily in both Category:20th-century Indian politicians and Category:21st-century Indian politicians.

And it stretches even further than the 4,000+ pages mentioned above. I did a spot check of members of Indian state legislatures, and found an edit from 21 December 2016[6] to Kundanlal Dholakia, with an edit summary "Category:Bombay State MLAs 1957-60 to Category:20th-century Indian politicians". Again, this was superflous, because had been in since its creation[7] in June 2016. That suggests to me that you may have done this to all members of Indian state legislatures by term.

And how many other legislature categories did you do this to? So far, I have spotted India and Moldova, but what about others?

These superfluous categories should be removed, but they cannot be removed using Cat-a-Lot. It will require an AWB run though the members categories, which will be a huge job, with a lot of clicking the "save button", though it could be done by a bot.

Please can you get to work identifying how many such superflous cat-a-lots you did, and then start cleaning this up?

And please be more cautious in your future uses of Cat-a-Lot?

Thanks! --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:34, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl: Well...I don't agree that it is overcategorization, exactly. Because I feel that the categories in question, while they overlap, serve different purposes.

For Indian politicians, for instance: categorizing them by term of state legislature is helpful to understand their position in the context of the history of the state. Categorizing them nationally, I think, helps to relate them to other Indian politicians of the period, both local and national. The underlying reason for them to be in each category is different.

I also tend to think that placing politicians in [numbered parliament] categories (i.e., "Members of the 113th United States Congress", were that category to exist), while useful, isn't very clear or helpful to people who don't know the years covered. So putting the politician-by-century category in place is easier for the casual user to read. It encourages easier navigation, to me.

Hopefully I've explained my rationale clearly? I know what I mean and what I'm trying to say, but it makes more sense in my head sometimes. :-) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 22:27, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ser Amantio

Thanks for the prompt reply. I think you explain yourself clearly.

But look, WP:SUBCAT is a long-standing guideline, and I don't see any of the by-country-by-century categories tagged as non-diffusing, which they should be if you want to populate them like this.

I don't see any evidence that you have gained any consensus for yout decision to treat these categories as an exception to WP:SUBCAT before doing so many thousands of edits. Have I have missed some discussion, please can you point me to it?

As to the substance of your argument, the logic seems flawed to me.

After your additions, Category:20th-century Indian politicians now contains 2260 articles, which is far too big for useful navigation. Most categories of that size are subdivided, as these ones already were.

When a reader looks at the listings for a by-century, there is no indication of the years involved, so the fact that there are no years listed in the title of Category:Members of the 4th Lok Sabha is not offset by adding the articles to a broad by-century category.

In any case there are 113 by-legislature--by-term subcats of Category:20th-century Indian politicians, 100 of those do include the years ... yet it seems even so that you have copied all their contents to Category:20th-century Indian politicians. So that part of your argument is contradicted by your practice.

Looking at Category:21st-century politicians, it seems that you did this to a whole range of categories, leaving for example Category:21st-century American politicians with a whopping 10,102 articles. Navigating that makes looking for a needle in a haystack easy, as it is almighty jumble of everything from county commissioners to state legislators to members of the US Congress.

I just looked at Category:20th-century Israeli politicians, and it seems that you have done the same thing there. The worst of it is that it all appears to be simply a matter of using AWB or Cat-a-lot to copy from one category to its parent. I am not seeing any sign of any effort to categorise the people who were omitted from Category:20th-century Indian politicians ... so as far as I can see, none of this vast run category addition added any new info.

So, please, will you revert this? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:04, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl:I do agree that the categories are becoming rather large, and that was something that I considered as I began my edits...ultimately, though I have found that large categories exist elsewhere on Wikipedia and appear to be considered viable, less as navigation tools in and of themselves and more as a way to understand information as it is presented to the user. What it comes down to, in the end, to me, is what the article looks like to the reader, and the edits I made were considered with that in mind. The category tree is a useful tool...and honestly, yes, many times I am doing my best to work against overcategorization and prune it down. But sometimes I think it's counterintuitive - and this, I think, is one of those times.

The older I get, the more I find myself trying to look at articles from the perspective of what a new editor might see. Which is why I try to bring some kind of standard language to the categories that I use. Perhaps this is wrong...I just think this place can be a bit frightening and confusing as is, and I'm trying to mitigate some of that.

I will say that I used to have some questions as to the necessity of the by-century categories at all; having become more involved, in recent years, in developing metrics as part of my editing, I've come to see their use. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 01:58, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. I can see your logic, tho I don't agree with it.

However, my main concern is that you appear to have taken a unilateral decision to simply ignore the long-standing guidance at WP:SUBCAT, and in our discussion here you haven't even acknowledged it. I find it rather alarming that when we are talking about what I now realise to be tens of thousands of articles, the basic categorisation guidelines do not even appear to figure in your considerations.<sad face>

A lot of this was done using Cat-aLot, but a lot was done using WP:AWB, and WP:AWBRULES is quite clear about this: 2. Abide by all Wikipedia guidelines, policies and common practices and 2. Do not make controversial edits with it. Seek consensus for changes that could be controversial at the appropriate venue; village pump, WikiProject, etc. "Being bold" is not a justification for mass editing lacking demonstrable consensus.

It seems to me that both of those AWB rules have been broken here.

So, please can you desist from any further such categorisation while we check where consensus lies?

I will now post at WT:CAT, to ask for other editors familiar with categorisation join this discussion and give their views.

Best wishes, --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have left a note at WT:Categorization#WP:SUBCAT_and_people-by-century_categories (permalink). Let's see what others have to say. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:20, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a general problem, not limited to this editor - see my comments on the general problem at WT:Categorization#WP:SUBCAT_and_people-by-century_categories. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:29, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)Maybe so, @Mitch Ames, but this particular editor has been an extraordinarily prolific contributor to the problem.

I am trying to establish whether there is consensus to ask them to desist and revert. What's your view? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:49, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl: I agree that the category duplication is incorrect (based on checking your examples, and your explanation of the problem). "Desist" is definitely appropriate here, at least pending discussion. "Revert" is probably appropriate, unless there's some good reason not to.

(By the way, your polite "desist ... while we check" request was perfectly reasonable in any case. There's no deadline, so it doesn't hurt to pause if there's some doubt, especially given the large number of edits involved.)

Mitch Ames (talk) 13:23, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl: - no need to worry. I hadn't planned on doing any more for a while, any way. I'll wander over and try to post something in the discussion when I have a chance later today. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 12:45, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AWB glitch

Hi Ser Amantio di Nicolao

what was going on in the AWB run which led to this edit[8] to Merja Lahtinen?

It added her to Category:21st-century Finnish politicians, but the article says nothing about her being a politician. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 21:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl: She, or someone of that name, is listed as a member of the Finnish Parliament. Let me investigate a bit - it's probably someone else of that name. Thanks for the catch - I do try to get things like that out of my lists when I clean them up, but they slip through from time to time. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:25, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, not the same one - I found the politician's blog. I'll make the requisite changes. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:27, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@BrownHairedGirl: Sorted it out. Her maiden name is the same as the married name of a recent Finnish MP. It had been handled as a redirect when it should have been handled as a hatnote. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 21:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RfC Notice

There is a Request for Comment posted at Talk:New York Daily News#Request for Comment. You are being notified as one of every registered editor who has edited that article in that past year. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:07, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Abbott Island for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Abbott Island is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abbott Island until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. KDS4444 (talk) 07:14, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New Wikiproject!

Hello, Ser Amantio di Nicolao! I saw you recently edited a page related to the Green party and green politics. There is a new WikiProject that has been formed - WikiProject Green Politics and I thought this might be something you'd be interested in joining! So please head on over to the project page and take a look! Thanks for your time. Me-123567-Me (talk) 19:33, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of File talk:Nexstar Logo.jpg

File talk:Nexstar Logo.jpg, a page which you created or substantially contributed to (or which is in your userspace), has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/File talk:Nexstar Logo.jpg and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of File talk:Nexstar Logo.jpg during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Closeapple (talk) 06:53, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tenanoraoi for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tenanoraoi is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tenanoraoi until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 03:08, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Jian-Hua Zhuang for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Jian-Hua Zhuang is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jian-Hua Zhuang until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 15:02, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

February 2017 at Women in Red

February 2017
	Black Women & Women Anthropologists online editathons Faciliated by Women in Red

(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:55, 28 January 2017 (UTC) via MassMessaging[reply]

Merger discussion for Ivan Boteju

An article that you have been involved in editing—Ivan Boteju—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Dan arndt (talk) 03:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 30 January

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

On the Thora Jee Le page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Blumond for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Blumond is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blumond until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. MB 17:06, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Arasji

The article Arasji has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The title of this article is misspelled. We already have Arashi, Aruba, and I just copied there the map and info about nearby communities from here, so this is redundant, and the misspelling doesn't justify a redirect (especially since there are multiple Arashis, as in Arashi).

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Largoplazo (talk) 17:23, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes

NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67

Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news

A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
Wikipedia:Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news

When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration

The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries

JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Il marsigliese

Dearest Ser Amantio di Nicolao, how are you? Me so and so...

I've opened this new page now and I ask you some minute of your time, please, to read it and correct my poor mistakes. Thanks a lot for your precious help!

Rei Momo (talk) 23:01, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, my dear. See you soon. Rei Momo (talk) 13:36, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Liquid Air for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Liquid Air is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liquid Air until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tolstoyan at Heart (talk) 01:37, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 3 February

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

On the Jeff Sauer page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:34, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

King and Queen pictures

I just wanted to thank you for the photos you added to National Register of Historic Places listings in King and Queen County, Virginia. I spent Saturday the 21st in K&Q and surrounding counties, since weather was predicted to be good, but it was one of the foggiest days I can remember (I don't know that I've ever before encountered noontime and afternoon fog, except on a mountain), and your photos are vastly better than the ones I would have uploaded if you'd not visited those sites. I'll still be uploading some, including Northbank and Providence, but they're definitely just placeholders. Nyttend (talk) 02:25, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See the beginning of [9]. I've only once visited Hampton Roads and Richmond, and both were just driving through — I used the Bay Bridge/Tunnel to get Eastern Shore photos a month and a half ago, and I drove through Richmond on my way home on the night of the 21st. My big frustration with so many of these grand plantation houses (and even the not-so-grand ones) is that placeholders are the best we can do, given the massively long driveways, and with that bill in the House of Delegates that would restrict drone photography, I doubt we'll ever get good photos for many of them unless landowners decide to help. Nyttend (talk) 04:21, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

State parks of Brazil

Create talk pages of all articles in Category:State parks of Brazil. All appear to be created by Aymatth2. Content is {{WikiProject Brazil|geo=yes}} {{WikiProject Protected areas}}. 103.6.159.78 (talk) 15:34, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]