User talk:Orygun

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Top High Mid Low None Total
B 0 6 28 100 1 135
C 0 1 5 30 0 36
Start 0 0 0 3 0 3
Stub 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unassessed 0 0
Total 0 7 33 133 1 174
Dyk100CE.svg The 100 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
Well done for creating 100 Did You Knows and contributing to the DYK project. This is great way to show off new articles and you have created 100 of them. You, @Northamerica1000: and @ThaddeusB: join the club that includes @GaryColemanFan:, @Czar:, @Dravecky:, @Cirt: and @Wetman:. I am sure they will welcome you, but obviously they need to watch out as you make it first to 200. Thanks from the project, me and the wiki. Victuallers (talk) 12:12, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


Oregon Wikipideans[edit]

Hello Orygun. I've read recently on that Oregon has a high number of wikipedia editors. Do you know any information outside of Wikipedia (or maybe in Wikipedia?) where I can learn more about meeting with fellow Wikipedians in Oregon? Leitmotiv (talk) 03:14, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

There are at least a dozen very active participants in WikiProject Oregon. You can find info on many of them under "Introduce Yourself" hot-button in "Participants" section on the WikiProj Oregon home page. Number of those who introduce themselves never become active, but most of the active players have signed in there. You can identify many of the active Wiki-Oregon players by following discussions on the WikiProj Oregon talk page as well. In addition, there’s a home page called About us which has some additional info on Wiki-Oregon community/players/interests. Here’s team photo from that site. Finally, there's a Wiki-Oregon Blog. It advertises an after-work "Wiki-Wednesday" get-together at the Backspace Coffee Shop in Portland. I’ve never attended since I don’t live in Oregon right now. Recommend you make some inquires either on blog site or WikiProj Oregon discussion page before showing up…just to be sure it’s still happening. Among the most active Wiki Oregon editors are:
Hope this is helpful.--Orygun (talk) 23:17, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your help Orygun! Leitmotiv (talk) 18:33, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Hillsboro Fire Department[edit]

Nice article on Hillsboro Fire Department. Saw that Hillsboro Fire and Rescue logo was very small. It's not a big deal, but I found larger version that still has very good resolution. Is there any reason I shouldn't do pull-and-replce with larger version of HF&R logo.--Orygun (talk) 05:29, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

A larger version would be great, but not too large due to FUR issues. I just went with what was on the department's web page, which is a bit small. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:30, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done--Orygun (talk) 02:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Dick Magruder and Roger Martin[edit]

  • Valfontis: Some time ago, you said you had copies of Oregon Voter magazine which including Who's Who in the 19XX Oregon Legislature editions for 1959-1973. Am finishing articles on Dick Magruder and Roger Martin who were both in House of Rep's during latter part of that period. Have enough info for 2 good articles, but am missing one of birth for both. Can document that Martin was born in Oregon, but not sure where...probably Portland or Lake Oswego. Am pretty sure Magruder was also born in Oregon...probably in Clatskanie or nearby town with hospital (St Helens perhaps), but haven’t found source to confirm that. Short bio probably won’t have that info for either, but worth checking. Also, wouldn’t mind checking your source for stray facts I missed. If you still have info, can you pass along notes from 1971 session at you conveyance...thanks! If you don't have this info any more, thanks anyway...appreciate your time!--Orygun (talk) 19:18, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
I thought these were in a box but I just looked on the shelf and the 1971 issue was on top. I'll take a look. Valfontis (talk) 19:45, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
P.S. I typed a couple of these out verbatim for Aboutmovies. I'm willing to do it again but can you check with him and make sure they weren't Magruder and Martin. I'm pretty sure I did Martin. Valfontis (talk) 19:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
I've joined the 20th Century and hooked up this scanner someone gave me! Send me an e-mail and I'll send you scans. Valfontis (talk) 21:11, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
  • That would be great. Thanks!--Orygun (talk) 21:19, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Burt K. Snyder[edit]

Orlady (talk) 16:04, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for The Oregon Desert[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 04:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Roger E. Martin[edit]

Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 16:02, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Dick Magruder[edit]

Thanks for the help Victuallers (talk) 00:37, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

USGS quad maps[edit]

  • What’s the status of Public Domain quad maps from the United States Geographical Survey when they are found on commercial topographical map web-sites? Can I use a USGS map image that is carried on a commercial web-site? One like this topozone map. If so, how is the image source recorded when it is uploaded into Wikipedia? Here's a USGS map that is available on Wikipedia Commons. It cites USGS as the source, but it doesn't say what on-line source it was taken from.--Orygun (talk) 01:32, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
  • They're simply copying PD works, so you can use them, as long as you're not copying stuff they've added; for example, I've seen websites (can't remember at the moment which one/s) that add their logo here and there over the map. The situation is analogous to a newly published book that includes PD-old text: you can copy that text all you want, since it's already in the public domain, and republication of a PD original doesn't recopyright it. Nyttend (talk) 02:22, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Great...thanks!--Orygun (talk) 06:10, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Pine Tavern[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 04:31, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Corbett State Park[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Elliott Corbett Memorial State Recreation Site at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

Howdy. Not sure if this is an issue but the citation (Oregon State Parks A Complete Recreation Guide) for your hook is not an online source. The second possible source (Atlas of Oregon Lakes) for the hook sentence does not verify the size and location of the park. Canuckle (talk) 17:22, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for comments on Elliott Corbett Memorial State Recreation Site DYK nomination. I’m 99% sure appropriately documented facts can be used in DYK hooks even if the source isn’t on-line (i.e. taken in good faith when there’s no red flag that raises doubt about the legitimacy of the source); nevertheless, I've provided an ALT hook that can be verified on-line. New hook is as follows:
ALT: "… that Elliott Corbett Memorial State Recreation Site is a wilderness park located along the southern caldera rim of Blue Lake Crater in the Cascade Mountains of Central Oregon?"
Online source says in para 1: "...Blue Lake is a small, but very deep Cascade Mountain lake, and is often called "the Crater Lake of the Central Oregon Cascades." … The lake basin is an explosion crater formed from a violent steam explosion, a result of hot volcanic rock coming in contact with underground water." (i.e. a caldera); in para 3 it says: "Elliott R. Corbett Memorial State Park (official name is Elliott Corbett Memorial State Recreation Site) includes part of the south and west shores of Blue Lake (USGS maps show its mostly on southern shore). The park is preserved as a wilderness area …"
Hopefully, this addresses your concerns. If so, request you clear DYK for release. If not, please let me know and I'll do additional follow-up as required. Thanks!--Orygun (talk) 21:57, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Symbol confirmed.svg ALT hook. QPQ resolved with above. Sorry, my error. Did not see Magnetic anomaly review on my first scan of user contributions & misunderstood the 'Reviewed:Magnetic anomaly' above to be a user named magnetic claiming to have reviewed this nomination. Oops. :) Apologies for mistake made by new reviewer. Looks good to be promoted to DYK Canuckle (talk) 19:53, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Elliott Corbett Memorial State Recreation Site[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Catlow Valley (Oregon)[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Henry L. Corbett[edit]

v/r - TP 18:41, 19 May 2014 (UTC) 18:49, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Saving on-line source[edit]

I just expanded article on Arthur Tuck. Most sources I used are on-line at U of O newspaper archive and aren’t likely to disappear. However, one of the best sources is a recent Bend Bulletin article. I think it's likely that article will sooner or later disappear from Bulletin web-site, leaving dead-link in the wiki-article. Is there any way to cash or save the Bulletin article so it will remain available for Wikipedia users?--Orygun (talk) 03:35, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, there is. I entered the URL in the Wayback Machine and clicked "Save this url in the Wayback Machine" so it should now be archived here. A handy tool for sure. Just in case, you can do the same thing to archive any other pages that you need. Jsayre64 (talk) 18:22, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Knew there must be way to save sources...thanks!--Orygun (talk) 05:33, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Arthur Tuck[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:33, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Lake County Examiner[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:08, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Trout Creek Mountains[edit]

You've probably noticed my edits to the Trout Creek Mountains article. One issue I found is that the geography section disagrees with the infobox about the range's land area. The text's mention of "811 sq mi (2,100 km2) including surrounding lowland areas" is what Peakbagger says, so that's fine, but I don't see the numbers 511 sq mi or 544 sq mi in any of the sources. Do you know where those came from? I intend to add some things and get the article to Good Article status, so that will need to be resolved. Your research has been very good for this article, as always. Jsayre64 (talk) 01:28, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Sorry I didn’t get back to you sooner … was trying to finish up new article on Fossil Lake. Recommend using 811 number since it’s got good source. Looks like 544 number may have came from Ref #3, which say area is 544 "acres" (but that’s clearly wrong). It's possible I picked up 544 "sq miles" in my notes. Regarding 511 number, think that must be combination-typo of 544 (5xx) and 811 (x11). I should have caught the errors during final edit, but I didn’t. Have changed Geography section to reflect 811 number. Good luck on GA status. If there’s anything else I can do to help let me know.--Orygun (talk) 02:10, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
  • I see. Thanks for clearing that up. Nice article on Fossil Lake, by the way. Worthy of a DYK hook. Jsayre64 (talk) 04:25, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Fossil Lake (Oregon)[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Fossil Lake (Oregon)[edit]

  • Wetman…you noted on the Fossil Lake talk page that the ground sloth fossils found at the site were probably Paramylodon harlani. I found this source after I posted the article (see p. 12). It identifies all 23 mammal species found at Fossil Lake by their scientific names. The ground sloth is identified as "Mylodon near harlani Owen" which I think is Paramylodon as you say…or at least some closely related species/subspecies. The article says Cope originally identified the ground sloth as new species, Mylodon sodalist. However, Stock later showed it was actually Mylodon harlani. Subsequent study of the very limited specimens indicate that the Fossil Lake animals were larger than the Mylodon harlani specimens found at La Brea; and therefore, are considered "near harlani" until further specimen become available for study. Based on your comments I’ve changed link to Paramylodon. Good catch!--Orygun (talk) 20:09, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks! I was intrigued to see ground sloth fossils so far north! Mylodon cf. harlani, signifying a species very comparable to M. harlani, would not be equivalent to the related genus Paramylodon, though that name does suggest "like Mylodon." --Wetman (talk) 02:56, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Chandler State Wayside[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Gerber Reservoir[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Douglas fir[edit]

  • Peter coxhead - Saw that you reversed my edit that added Douglas fir to Category:Trees of Oregon. Understand your concern that Oregon is covered by Trees of the Northwestern United States category. However, just so you understand my rationale, I thought since there’s a specific category for Oregon trees and because Douglas fir is Oregon’s official state tree and a Top-priority article for WikiProject Oregon, it would be appropriate to include it in Trees of Oregon even though it overlaps with another category. While I knew it would create category overlap, I thought this was reasonable/appropriate justification for overlap. Bottom line … I really don’t care one way or the other, but want you to be aware that there was a thoughtful rationale for putting Douglas fir into Oregon trees category.--Orygun (talk) 23:00, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
@Orygun: It's not a totally straightforward issue, I agree. There has been a problem with editors using categories such as "Trees of ..." as substitutes for articles such as "List of trees of ...", and this is not what the category system is supposed to be used for. Nor should an article be placed in a category and that category's parent. On the other hand, the category system is a mess, so it's not clear that "random corrections" like mine are really useful. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:05, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Like I said, it really doesn’t matter to me. Just wanted you to know there was rationale for creating overlap…i.e. official state tree was missing from Trees of Oregon category. Thanks for taking the time to put it right.--Orygun (talk) 22:40, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Oregon hospital articles[edit]

  • Ng.j - WikiProject Oregon does a Collaboration of the Month exercise to eliminate red-ink in specific subject categories. This month, our target was Oregon hospitals. Our COTM produced a number of new hospital articles; however, many of them were written by Aboutmovies. Since he does a large share of the assessments for the Wiki-Oregon team, most of the new hospital articles are still unassessed. I’ve got time to do those assessments, but I don’t know enough about hospitals in general to grade them…i.e. need to know required/desirable/nice-to-have elements for generic hospital articles. I noticed that you assessed several of those new hospital articles for WikiProject Hospitals. Can you point me to a good example of C-Class article and B-Class article quality hospital articles (one each) to use as a standard. Once I’ve done the new articles, I’ll go back and reassess everything else in Category: Hospitals in Oregon to bring all the Wiki-Oregon assessments up-to-date. Examples don’t need to be Oregon hospitals, as long as articles are good yardstick for assessments. If you're not the right person to ask about this, I'm sorry for bothering you. In any case, thanks for your time!--Orygun (talk) 05:31, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of American Society of Military Comptrollers for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article American Society of Military Comptrollers 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/American Society of Military Comptrollers 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. DGG ( talk ) 07:36, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Sisters State Park[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Abert Lake Petroglyphs[edit]

Saw your article on Abert Lake Petroglyphs. While you rated it a Stub, I think you effectively summarized everything that's known about that site. FYI, I know where one of the two petroglyph boulders is located and will get a photo next time I'm down that way. Will also look for the other boulder while I’m there. It’s supposed to be within 700 ft of the first, but that’s a pretty big search area when you’re looking for petroglyphs. In any case, congratulations … it’s not often someone captures most of the world’s knowledge on a given subject in a Stub article.--Orygun (talk) 17:38, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. There are a lot of bad stubs out there. While I don't usually write articles beyond the stub level, I do try to do quality stubs. It would be great if you could get a photo or two for that article sometime. My composition and darkroom skills really aren't up to doing justice to petroglyphs, and your work at Picture Rock Pass was terrific. — Ipoellet (talk) 18:56, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Not sure when I'll get out there, but its now on my official to-do list.--Orygun (talk) 19:00, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Tumalo State Park[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:04, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Redmond–Bend Juniper State Scenic Corridor[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Todd Lake (Oregon)[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:03, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Nice to see an Oregon lake on DYK today! Gaff ταλκ 03:01, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Elk Lake Guard Station[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:23, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Sisters High School (historic)[edit]

Harrias talk 00:01, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Staryl C. Austin[edit]

  • Finetooth: I've added some new text to Staryl Austin article and broken it up into sections. Since you recently did some improvement work on that article, though you might want to take a look and make sure you're ok with changes.--Orygun (talk) 22:30, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Orygun. I was hoping you'd pop in and improve the article. You did, and I think it is much better. I went over it once more with a feather duster just now; nothing big. Finetooth (talk) 00:54, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Hugh E. Conway[edit]

Hi Meno25. I saw your rating of the Hugh E. Conway article I uploaded yesterday. Can you tell me what I need to add (or change) to get it up to a C-Class article level? I thought it was a pretty comprehensive article, covering everything notable about the guy with good sources. I even tracked down hard-copy military documents to ensure all the facts were covered with solid sources. Would appreciate it if you’d take another look at the article and give me some feedback. Thanks!--Orygun (talk) 02:34, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

@Orygun: Hi. I am no expert on this subject. For more in depth review, please leave a message on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Economics. Thank you. --Meno25 (talk) 08:08, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject Economics: Hi folks! I created an article on Hugh E. Conway, a labor economist and professor. It was initially given a START rating. I contacted Meno25, the editor who did the rating, for feedback on the article rating. He replied that he wasn’t an expert on the Wiki-Project areas that applied to that specific article so he suggested that I ask you folks for a re-assessment. While it isn’t a particularly long article, I think it covers Dr. Conway’s life/career pretty well. I even tracked down some hard-copy military documents to ensure all the facts had solid sources. Would someone from Wiki-Econ please take a second look at this article rating? Thanks!--Orygun (talk) 23:17, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Hager Mountain[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:12, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Request Article Review[edit]

Aboutmovies: I occasionally do articles outside scope of Wiki-Oregon. Recently, I created article on Hugh E. Conway, a labor economist and professor from back east. It was initially given a START rating. I contacted Meno25 (the editor who did the rating) for feedback. He replied that he wasn’t an expert on any of the Wiki-project areas that he rated and suggested that I contact Wiki-Econ group for a re-assessment. I did that, but didn’t get any reply. I believe you’re Wiki-Bio member which is another relevant Wiki-project for this article. Instead of leaving note on busy Wiki-Bio page, thought I’d see if you had few minutes to take second look at this article’s rating. While it’s not long, I think it’s pretty comprehensive and has good sources. Would you do Wiki-Bio rating re-assessment when you have time? Thanks!--Orygun (talk) 23:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for re-assessing article!--Orygun (talk) 07:34, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Sourcing question[edit]

When writing a bio article about an author or academician, are the books and articles written by the individual consider primary source documents or are they secondary sources based on the fact they are published works. How about the “About the Author” section that discusses the author’s background. Those sections usually have a lot of good info…e.g. where the individual is from, academic credentials, previous works the help establish bona fides, etc.--Orygun (talk) 20:48, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I know of an example of a published author who faked many biography statements in his "about the author" sections of his writings, so we cannot assume that every such statement is reliable. On the other hand, for the typical academic author (the person I am referring is not a mainstream academic), I would ordinarily allow into Wikipedia article text any statement of the nature of "Author was born in ___ on ___" or "Author was educated at ___ and gained a degree in ____ in [year]" as worth of inclusion until proven wrong. Most authors don't cheat about stuff like that when they contribute a chapter to a collection of articles, for example. Statements by the author about the author are primary source documents in the usual case, not secondary sources about the author, and even in the case of those statements being published in another work, we can assume that usually they are passed on by the author without rigorous fact-checking by the volume editor or publisher. But that's a problem only rarely. Such statements can be rebutted by contrary statements from sources independent of the author, but can usually be trusted in the same way, and for the same purposes in editing Wikipedia article text, as statements from an author-controlled blog or other website. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 21:25, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Follow-up question[edit]

  • When including info about an author’s published works in a Wikipedia article, is an officially published book a valid secondary source that can be used to document basic info about the work and its author? For example, here’s an on-line version of a book published by National Defense University. Would this be an appropriate source to document Wikipedia text that said: “In 1996, Alan Gropman wrote a book on World War II logistics” in an article about Mr Gropman? It seems like this should be good secondary sources since it is formally published by independent third-party publishers.--Orygun (talk) 22:12, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
    • Orygun, usually these kinds of questions are best asked at WP:RSN, but the answer is easy: yes, you may use that type of a source, and also, you may use the source itself. The copyright page of a book is considered not merely "reliably", but also authoritative for information like the title, author, and date of publication. (The copyright page of the book can't tell you that said fact is WP:DUE; that's a consideration that independent sources are better at. Also, please not that WP:Secondary does not mean independent. Your source might be both secondary and independent, but it might also be primary and independent.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:51, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Possible image for John Turner article[edit]

  • Saw your article on John Turner … nice work! I’ve been sitting on a John Turner draft for long time, but decided to see if I could get it published in history journal instead of uploading it to Wikipedia. During my research, I couldn’t find an image of Turner … which isn’t surprising. However, I did find an engraving published in 1860 of a mountain man fending off a grizzly. Since that image is now Public Domain, I modified it for use in Wikipedia. The modified image shows a mountain man waiving a torch and knife. Caption would read "John Turner defending his camp" (referring to his 1835 experience on the Rogue River). While it was not originally an image of Turner, the new version would highlight one on his life events in an 1860 publication format. Do you think a modified image would add or detract from to your article? Thought I’d ask before uploading the image.--Orygun (talk) 21:28, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes, by all means. I don't think of it as my article, and any edits you make to it will be well received (it can use some help). Images are sometimes the best part of the encyclopedia. I would enjoy reading your paper when it is published. Geirfuglasker (talk) 22:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Just uploaded image to article.--Orygun (talk) 01:47, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Donald M. Kerr (conservationist)[edit]

Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:02, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Alfred H. Corbett[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:30, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK for C. W. E. Jennings[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:47, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

120+ year old photograph[edit]

  • A photo taken in the United States sometime before 1849 by an unknown photographer is now Public Domain since it was created over 120 years ago … right? If so, what is the correct media copyright tag to use?--Orygun (talk) 07:54, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Was the image published or not. If it was published before 1923 in the US, then {{PD-1923}} applies but if it was only created then and never published {{PD-US-unpublished}} will most likely apply though there are some exceptions so you should refer to c:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory#United_States for some more detail. ww2censor (talk) 12:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks!--Orygun (talk) 02:38, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Incomplete DYK nomination[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Warner B. Snider at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 00:56, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Sorry to bother you, but I have same problem as editor above. I submitted DYK nomination for Warner B. Snider article, but I got this bot notice that it was incompleted. However, the nomination shows up on main DYK nomination page on 20 Jun, just like is should. How do I get bot notice turned off without cancelling or duplicating the existing DYK nomination?--Orygun (talk) 02:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Crisco 1492 asked me about this, and I proposed my theory about what happened. Now that I look through the bot's contributions, I see that the erroneous notices (lots of them) were, indeed, sent to people whose nominations had titles late in the alphabet. MANdARAX  XAЯAbИAM 03:36, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Me too! The nomination of Solenosmilia variabilis was made on the 25 June and the hook was approved the following day. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:01, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I had this problem as well, but it sounds we can ignore it. Rjmail (talk) 13:47, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • So is Rjmail right...i.e. this is non-problem that can be ignored? Or will something bad happen (e.g. our DYK nomination being deleted) if we take no action?--Orygun (talk) 03:42, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • @Orygun: You don't have to take any action. Even when this bot operates normally, it only serves to notify you that your nomination is not completed. This normally would mean your nomination isn't visible on the template talk page for DYK, but as others have noted, it appears to have malfunctioned as a result of a recent change. The bot has just delivered an incorrect notification; it will not delete or remove your DYK nom. ~ RobTalk 04:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I think I've fixed the bot code. I'm traveling at the moment, will be able to take a closer look in ~18 hours. Mandarax's theory was correct, it's the same as the issue above. Shubinator (talk) 13:04, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Warner B. Snider[edit]

Gatoclass (talk) 00:01, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Joseph Goldsborough Bruff[edit]

Gatoclass (talk) 11:19, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Petroglyph image[edit]

Ipoellet...About a year ago, I told you I'd try to get photo image for the Abert Lake Petroglyphs article you started. Finally, got down that way and took petroglyph photo. Thought I'd let you know I just uploaded it to article.--Orygun (talk) 23:35, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Fantastic! Thank you! — Ipoellet (talk) 00:20, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for William H. Warner[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Lava Fire and Barry Point Fire[edit]

Please see Template:Did you know nominations/Lava Fire. Another reviewer believes you should have reviewed two DYK nominations instead of one. I have looked at WP:QPQ, and it all depends on what is meant by "nomination". Unless you can dispute the interpretation, I think you had better do another review and add a link to it. Moonraker (talk) 02:21, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Thanks for the heads-up. I’ve now done a second review on Tarn-et-Garonne.--Orygun (talk) 02:59, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Oregon fire articles[edit]

Thank you for working on these articles recently. They are great additions to the project! ---Another Believer (Talk) 04:29, 30 September 2015 (UTC)


I’m not member of Wiki-Bio, but I noticed a major deletion on your assessment request page … see assessment page edit history. It looks like when Mundugumor added review request on 26 Sep, the entry inadvertently deleted about a dozen other pending article assessment requests.--Orygun (talk) 20:35, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Orygun, I've fixed it now. 1bandsaw (talk) 22:12, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Lava Fire[edit]

Thanks for helping with the DYK project Victuallers (talk) 07:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Barry Point Fire[edit]

Thanks for helping with the DYK project Victuallers (talk) 07:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Trout Creek Mountains TFA[edit]

This article was recently promoted to featured status, and I have nominated it to appear as Today's Featured Article (TFA) on the Main Page. You can also view the nomination at the TFA page here. Jsayre64 (talk) 00:27, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

  • Wow...another Feature Article for Wiki-Oregon! While few people have actually visited the Trout Creek Mts, they are very interesting place. Really glad you took the time to upgrade that article...and nominated it for FA headline on Main Page.--Orygun (talk) 02:41, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
    • Thank you. I'm very interested in the topic. So I'd expect it to be on the Main Page in either November or December, once the date is set. Jsayre64 (talk) 15:51, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Crane Mountain[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

DYK for East Lake Abert Archeological District[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year[edit]

Kinderspielzeug KGM F1151a.jpg

Wishing you the very best in 2016 Finetooth (talk) 19:20, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

  • Thanks ... same for you!--Orygun (talk) 03:21, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Ben Musa[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Wiki-Oregon upgrades to High importance[edit]

The next 2 bullets were imported from the Wiki-Oregon talk page.

Now that the Top discussion is wrapping up, time to move on to the High category. On this one, we are around 400 articles off our artificial goal. Since we had about eight editors participate, if we all just go through the Mid and Low categories and randomly move up 50 based on the criteria already outlined and mixed with some personal opinions, that would get us about there, or close enough. So go forth and move some up. You don't have to do 50, and you did not have to vote or have participated in the above discussion. Aboutmovies (talk) 19:00, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

  • I did title-review of all Mid importance articles this weekend, and only found 35 I thought were upgrade candidates. I've posted them on bottom of my User page for anyone who's interested. While I'm sure I missed some, I don't think there's anywhere near 400 articles worthy of upgrade. Think we need to be careful we don't upgrading articles that aren't worthy of High importance rating. I'll wait week/so before I change any article ratings to High just in case anyone has a problem with any of my picks...just leave me note on my talk page.--Orygun (talk) 23:19, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done...the Wiki-Oregon articles below were upgraded to High based on above discussion.--Orygun (talk) 23:44, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

  • Mid to High upgrades:

Snake River, Three Sisters (Oregon), Champoeg Meetings, Edith Green, Harry D. Boivin, Henry W. Corbett, Henry Pittock, Lewis A. McArthur, James Nesmith, Oregon Maneuver, Robert Gray (sea captain), Bonneville Dam, Deschutes River (Oregon), Frances Fuller Victor, Chief Joseph, Oregon Geographic Names, Oregon Steam Navigation Company, Oswald West, Historic Columbia River Highway, John Strong Newberry, Oregon Attorney General, Oregon Blue Book, Oregon Historical Society, Oregon Secretary of State, Oregon State Treasurer, Peter Skene Ogden, Pioneer Courthouse, Thomas Condon, Warm Springs Indian Reservation, Kam Wah Chung & Co. Museum, Mary Jane Spurlin, Deschutes National Forest, Pendleton Round-Up, Paulina (Paiute leader)

  • Low to High upgrades:

William "Bill" Hanley, William Gladstone Steel, Fort Rock Cave

100DYKs - A well deserved Award[edit]

Dyk100CE.svg The 100 DYK Creation and Expansion Medal
Well done for creating 100 Did You Knows and contributing to the DYK project. This is great way to show off new articles and you have created 100 of them. You, @Northamerica1000: and @ThaddeusB: join the club that includes @GaryColemanFan:, @Czar:, @Dravecky:, @Cirt: and @Wetman:. I am sure they will welcome you, but obviously they need to watch out as you make it first to 200. Thanks from the project, me and the wiki. Victuallers (talk) 12:12, 1 February 2016 (UTC)