User talk:Drdpw

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Hello, Drdpw! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Button sig.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! —EncMstr (talk) 02:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles
Miscellaneous


TUSC token a4fceaf0933829e9c90c1f1e20708f17[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Fraternity/Sorority Userboxes.[edit]

Looks like Fraternity and Sorority Userboxes are something that you are putting a lot of work into. Let me know if there is something specific I can do to help (maybe in categorization?). Also note that there is a separate category for the Honoraries, at Category:Honor Society user templates in addition to Category:Sorority_and_fraternity_user_templates. Also, the link for Triangle should be to Triangle Fraternity.Naraht (talk) 14:23, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Decided to go ahead and add usage to everything in both categories, starting with the Sorority/Fraternity category from A.Naraht (talk) 14:44, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
Done.Naraht (talk) 19:45, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Userbox category[edit]

I reverted your addition of the Category:Wikipedian clergy to a userbox for a yeshiva student. Students are not (yet) clergy. Especially in the case of a yeshiva, which does not as a rule give rabbinic ordination, and even when it does, only to a small part of its students. Debresser (talk)

Category[edit]

Hello, Drdpw. I saw that you recently created the Category:Userboxes/Education/Collegiate sororities and fraternities and then, a few hours later, redirected it to a page you created in the Wikipedia namespace. Was this just a case of accidentally creating the page with the wrong prefix? If so, you might want to add {{db-author}} to the top of the category page, since there are no pages in the category and we normally don't allow redirects in the Category: namespace at all. Thanks. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 12:14, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I have now done just that.Drdpw (talk) 19:15, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:User Sigma Thêta Pi[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:User Sigma Thêta Pi has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. GrapedApe (talk) 14:48, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Upper Peninsula roads[edit]

Too many notes The problem, Herr Drdpw is that the Upper Peninsula has too many roads. 7&6=thirteen () 21:40, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

An Award for You[edit]

Flag map of Michigan.svg Promotion of the place where people describe where they live by pointing to a spot on their hands award
For all your great work promoting articles about our state. 7&6=thirteen () 19:58, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
P.S., it is possible to reasonably portray both Upper Peninsula and Lower Peninsula using both hands. 7&6=thirteen () 20:00, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Joseph Zettelmaier[edit]

Can you prove that Joseph Zettelmaier is notable? I mean, when I looked for notability proving sources, I didn't find much of anything. I see where he was nominated for some awards, but not really where he won anything. There's local coverage, but not much more than that. I just think that he's going to be a red link forever, as I don't think he'd ever pass notability guidelines. WP:REDLINK does say that using red links can help WP grow, but that you should try to only include red links that can show some notability and that you should eventually write the article for the writer. If you can show sources to show that this guy is actually notable enough to where someone will eventually create an article then he should be added, but I really don't see where he'd pass notability guidelines. Other than local coverage and notifications of events, there's really nothing out there to show he's notable enough to merit an entry or a mention. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:40, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

  • I've asked for a third opinion on this, as it's clear we're not going to agree. I don't think that we shouldn't have any red links ever, but the list on that page is prone to a lot of people adding a lot of nn people and I want some assertion as to why he'd pass GNG enough to merit an article. I need something beyond you saying he's notable and a link to a WP policy. Some proof is required to show that some day someone could create an article for him that would pass GNG, assuming that you don't want to. Tokyogirl79 (。◕‿◕。) 04:52, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Talkback: third opinion on red link regarding Michigan playwrigth[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Drdpw. You have new messages at Talk:List of Michigan writers.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ahnoneemoos (talk) 19:25, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

3RR...[edit]

Drpdw, you're a regular, so I won't insult you with a template, but you're over the WP:3RR at Children of Henry VIII... Hchc2009 (talk) 18:19, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 30[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Annapolis Convention (1786), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Georgia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

May 2014[edit]

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • #[[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]] (December 31, 1811

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 02:38, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

June 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of Presidents of the United States by date of birth may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • *President [[Warren G. Harding]] (born November 2, 1865} was {{Age in years and days|1860|08|15|1865|11|02}} younger than First Lady [

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:26, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Jimmy Madison[edit]

Hi, and please, if you can see anything missed on the template, please add to it. I'll talk about the Federalist Papers at some point, it seemed a good link and much easier to navigate for people looking it up than thinking of scrolling down the page, which not everyone will do. Thanks. Randy Kryn 22:55 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I found a category listing James Madison's contributions to the Federalist Papers, and added that to the template. Thank you for inspiring a better link. Randy Kryn 12:53 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Drdpw. You have new messages at Vanjagenije's talk page.
Message added 19:58, 14 July 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Vanjagenije (talk) 19:58, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Drdpw. You have new messages at Vanjagenije's talk page.
Message added 20:57, 14 July 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Vanjagenije (talk) 20:57, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014[edit]

Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Template talk:US Constitutional Tax Law, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Button sig.png) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. TJRC (talk) 16:44, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Article One of the United States Bill of Rights may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • {{quote|After the first enumeration required by the first article]of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:32, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Lynch, Jr.; the farthest two figures on the right–Thomas McKean and Philip Livingston); and one of three figures seated in the left rear–George Walton. Additionally, two

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:32, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

At U.S. Constitution[edit]

Over the last couple weeks, you are doing yeoman work in rewriting the United States Constitution article. But no consensus is established for reorganization.

It seems to me the article is losing its topical organization of the text, resulting in a mere listing. The table of contents is becoming a wall of enumeration without conveying any sensible information for the general reader. Each section heading contains only one paragraph.

I like much of your actual text writing, summarizing the description of amendments in one voice without the back and forth of previous wiki-edits. But I would appreciate any explanation or justification so I can understand why your revision is better than the previous framework.

I am happy to concur with the new outcome if I am missing something, I was just wondering what I am missing in editorial insight. Thanks in advance. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 09:44, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

@TheVirginiaHistorian: The (unquestionably major) editing I’ve done has been motivated by my desire to improve this article; it should be a good or even featured article, which , at the present time, it is not. When I first started with this, there were several sentences repeated word for word twice or three times. Looking specifically at the Amendments section, I’m struck by how random the sub-section & sub-sub-section divisions seem, and how uneven, and at times scattered, the treatment of each amendment is, and by how few citations there are. I’m also struck by how little is said about Amendments 11-27, labeled as “subsequent” amendments (leaving me, as a reader, w/the impression that subsequent means later appendages not worth a great amount of attention –which I know is not the case, it’s just how it feels).
Thanks for your input and kind words about the content of what I’ve written. Please know that, while I am of the opinion that several parts of the article appear (to me) to be tarnished by over-handling, I’m not attempting to cleanse it of the back and forth of previous wiki-edits; just polish it up a bit. That aid, I do see and concur with what you said above about the impact my editorial re-organization has had on the user-friendliness, if you will, of the article. Therefore here’s what I propose (and I’ll also post this idea on the Constitution Talk Page), I’ll trim the amendment descriptions a bit and organize them topically
“Safeguards of liberty” – amendments 1, 2, 3 & 4
“Legal protections” – amendments 5, 6, 7 & 8
“Unenumerated rights and reserved powers” – amendments 9 & 10
“Expansion of citizen rights” – amendments 13, 14, 15, 19, 23, 24 & 26
“Restriction of citizen rights” – amendments 11 & 18
“Governmental authority” – amendments 16 & 21
“Government processes and procedures” – amendments 12, 17, 20, 22, 25 & 27. Drdpw (talk) 14:41, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I may have some alternatives for categories, but we are agreed as to the need for a topical organization. TheVirginiaHistorian (talk) 19:53, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited United States Constitution, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bootlegging. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Typo in diagram at Article Five of the US Constitution[edit]

Hi there Drdpw. I loved the diagram you produced to explain the amendment process of the US Constitution (at Article Five of the United States Constitution). A (very) minor quibble - there is a repeated "t" in "twentty". Are you able to amend the image and re-upload? Many thanks. Ben (Major Bloodnok) (talk) 22:06, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

November 2014[edit]

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • ] meaning "place of the outlet" &ndash;''sag'' ({{lang-en|link=no|an opening}}) and ''ong'' ({{lang-en|link=no|place of}}."<ref>[http://www.michigan.gov/hal/0,1607,7-160-15481_20826_20829-
  • River]] to form the [[Saginaw River]]. The Refuge is entirely within Saginaw County.<ref>[*[http://midwest.fws.gov/shiawassee/ Shiawassee National Wildlife Refuge Official site]</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:15, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Tay[edit]

I see that you reverted my edit to the See also section of Tay. When intentionally linking to a disambiguation page (Taymouth), the link should be piped through the (disambigaution) redirect per WP:INTDABLINK. This allows those of us who fix links (and the bots that help us) to know that the link is intentional. -Niceguyedc Go Huskies! 06:48, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Help, please[edit]

Hi, Drdpw! I'm trying to use this timeline in the Portuguese Wikipedia using it for the Portuguese Presidents. However, there are five Portuguese Presidents who were in office less than a year. When I try to put that information in the table, the time in office doesn't show. What should I do to fix this? Thank you in advance. Joaopais 03:53, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Redistricting article - External links[edit]

Hi. I added the Redistricting Game to the External links on the Redistricting article because it is a serious educational tool about this topic. The game is used in colleges and high schools around the US year after year. It has been played 10s of millions of times. Also it is on par in terms of seriousness of purpose with the other external links. Please check out the project. If you still feel it should not appear in the External links I would appreciate an explanation as to why. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgz 1 (talkcontribs) 06:20, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Column width reversion at United States Constitution[edit]

Hello. I see that you reverted my edit adjusting the column parameters in the United States Constitution article here. You didn't explain why you changed them back, so I figured I'd elaborate on why I made the adjustment in the first place. In my Android browser, too wide a columnation parameter causes the output to overflow the article's right margin and causes misformatting of the entire article due to automatic width adjustment. It winds up looking like this:

A picture's worth a thousand words.

I'm not a fan of edit wars, so I wanted to know if there was some other problem that my adjustment had caused in your own browser, thisthus necessitating your reversion. Thanks, and have a good weekend! Ashanda (talk) 18:25, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

@Ashanda: Regarding my reverting your edit in the United States Constitution article ...
You are correct, while I gave a summary of what I did, I didn't explain why I did it. First, I'm sorry that your Android browser causes the output to overflow the article's right margin and causes misformatting of the entire article. However, the fact that this happens on your personal device does not justify changing the layout of the section. If this were a widespread problem, I'd feel different, but it's apparently not. There is no problem w/formatting or overflow on my smart phone or on my tablet, and no one else has mentioned that there's a problem on theirs. Does your device have this problem with other pages? Perhaps you could open a discussion of this on the article's talk page or elsewhere in order to gage how wide spread this problem might be amongst android users. Like yourself, I'm not a fan of edit wars and don't want one over this issue either, which is why I'm now suggesting that you open a discussion of this issue. I hope this explanation helps. Drdpw (talk) 22:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
As alluded to in MOS:ACCESS, WP:SIZE, and elsewhere, there is a general consensus to keep the encyclopedia easily readable to users with limited or differing resources. I've been correcting page width issues for years and you're the first person I've had revert me. Since you still haven't explained why you found my adjustment objectionable, I can only assume that you find the line breaks at 20em aesthetically unpleasing compared to those at 30em. The compromise solution, if this is in fact your objection, is actually quite simple -- by using the small=yes parameter of {{div col}}, we can preserve both the 30em columnation as well as the correct formatting of the page width. I've already got a corrected version on my clipboard, shall I paste it in? Ashanda (talk) 18:19, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello again. It's been a week since I made the above proposal, I've taken your lack of objection as assent, and gone ahead and implemented the change. If you are still dissatisfied with the result, please discuss it with me rather than simply reverting my edit. Thank you, and have a great weekend. Ashanda (talk) 15:53, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Sigma Tau Gamma, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Episcopal (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

British Prince[edit]

Hello, I was looking you were reverting my changes in the British Prince section, you said "When a British prince is married, his wife, if not already a princess in her own right, gains the privilege of sharing in his princely title and the dignity of being known as a British princess in his name. For example, the wife of Prince Michael of Kent is known as Princess Michael of Kent." Thats no true!!! anyone including (british princess on her own right) or any women who marry a British prince adquire the title and dignity of British princess in his name. An example is Princess Alexandra, Duchess of Fife, Who was princess in her own right, when she married his cousin Prince Arthur of Connaught she was know as Princess Arthur of Connaght. It doenst matter if is a princess of the blood royal or any women always adquire the title of british princess in his name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alex0832003 (talkcontribs) 16:41, 8 July 2015 (UTC)