User talk:Safemariner

Hi

Hello Safemariner, and welcome to Wikipedia! These are some awesome guidelines to help you get started with the greatest encyclopedia on Earth. Please feel free to talk to me if you need help with anything at all. Best of luck and have fun editing!--C J King

Getting started
Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects
Getting your info out there
Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy
Getting more Wikipedia rules
Policy Library

Getting help
New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions
Getting along
Wikipedians Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Conflict resolution
Getting technical
Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Neutrality on the Secular-Progressive article

Greetings. I've removed the neutrality tags you placed on the Secular-progressive article for now, as I fail to see where this article is un-neutral (or, for that matter, where it reads like a sermon). If you'd like to return to the article's talk page and share your concerns, I'll be more than happy to consider your point. LAATi88 05:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Context tags

Hello. I reverted some of the context tags that you applied to some mathematics articles. My reasoning is that these articles are stubs, and as such need a lot of things (usually, any introduction at all, references, examples, illustrations, links to related topics, etc.). I don't think there is any reason to point out the failings of the introduction, since most stubs don't have one, and so its failings are obvious. If we all applied the appropriate tags to stubs, the articles would be full of tags. I hope this makes sense - feel free to write back on my talk page. Cheers, Doctormatt 05:24, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ok ---Safemariner 05:25, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even stubs should be comprehensible/sensible enough to make out the topic and what it is. But talk pages are a good way to be more specific about asking clarification. --MarSch 15:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and welcome :) --MarSch 15:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lighthouse Service

I'm sorry, I didn't understand your message. Are saying that the Lighthouse service was a precedent to the US Coast Guard and that therefore the stub tags should be left on? Asarelah 21:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. The lighthouse service merged with the Coast Guard in 1939. See http://www.cr.nps.gov/maritime/light/admin.htm and wikipedia articles: United States Lighthouse Service, United States Lighthouse Board, Stephen Pleasonton. --- Safemariner 23:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coney Island Light

If you don't mind, I've taken the liberty of moving your article to Coney Island Light and creating a redirect page for "Norton Point Light". Lighthouse articles are generally created under a single name; two names aren't used for article titles.

Incidentally, do you know about Wikipedia:WikiProject lighthouses? --User:AlbertHerring ^{Io son l'orecchio e tu la bocca: parla!} 00:23, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the change. I did look at Wikipedia:WikiProject lighthouses but did not see any recent activity. All activity was in two weeks in August. --- Safemariner 01:27, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed you're editing lots of USCG articles

Thanks for your attention to the USCG articles, I try to improve on them regularly, too.

If you're a Coastie, or vet, there are a few userboxes you can use on your user page, incl. a couple I've made myself.

Also, if you find any related articles (like, say, older aircraft, personnel), I created Category:United States Coast Guard Aviation which is a subcat of Category:United States Coast Guard and a few military aviation categories as well.

Bravo zulu,... David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 03:43, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. For now I am just trying to remove wiki redirection. You will notice the Category:United States Coast Guard Aviation growing soon as I find articles. I am not a Coastie but support the United States Coast Guard as a Coast Guard Auxiliarist --- Safemariner 03:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ha-ha, you've inspired me to help out tonight. I've been lazy about tagging some of the older planes that the Guard operated, no excuse since I have a fine tome on CG Aviation history. I see you tagged the B-17, not THAT'S a trivia question. I had more than a few young colleagues who didn't believe we flew a few until I pulled out pictures. Merry Christmas to you, shipmate ... David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍)

Redirects

Hi, I notice you've been "fixing" links through redirects on a lot of pages. This really isn't such a big deal, especially in the context of making other edits to a page. But in general, there isn't any need to edit a page for the sole purpose of removing a redirect. See Wikipedia:Redirect#Don't fix links to redirects that aren't broken for more information. older ≠ wiser 02:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information and links. I am trying to deliberately point to a more consistent name of the United States Coast Guard so that it displays consistently throughout Wikipedia. I am done with it. --- Safemariner 02:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PD-Gov tags on lighthouses

Please be aware that I purposely left the tags at Image:Americanshoal.JPG, Image:Ameliaislandlh.JPG and Image:Alligator-reef-lh.JPG‎ at {{tl:PD_Gov}} because there is no indication that the Coast Guard was the agency that took the photos. In many cases, the photos on Coast Guard sites about lighthouses must have been taken before the Coast Guard took over the lighthouses, and in some cases the photos were taken before the Coast Guard was created by merging the Revenue Cutter Service and the Lifesaving Service. There are even indications that some of the photos were taken by Navy personnel. -- Donald Albury 03:16, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As they are lighthouses, they are still related to the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard merged with and took over the operations of the United States Lighthouse Service along with its personnel, history, files, traditions and responsibilities in 1939. After 1939, the Coast Guard IS the Lighthouse Service! It is my understanding that the category covers not only images taken by the Coast Guard person (which a lighthouse keeper would now be called) but also any image related to the Coast Guard. The {{tl:PD_Gov}} is still appropriate. --- Safemariner 03:48, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do know that some of the lighthouse photos were taken by Navy personnel, and then turned over to the Coast Guard. As it is not clear which photos were taken by Navy personnel, PD-Gov-CD does not seem appropriate. I guess what I object to is the wording of the template. The addition of 'or its predecessor agencies' would cover a lot of ground. It still would not allow for photos taken by personnel of other agencies which were transfered to the Coast Guard. -- Donald Albury 02:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

USCG Portal

Hello, I saw where you had started doing some work on the CG portal and thought I would say hello, and offer any assistance that you may need, I'm the maintainer of the Portal:United States Navy and love working on them. Looking pretty good so far.--WilsBadKarma ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 07:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Any work you can do to improve the formatting and any information you can add to the portal would be much appreciated. I would like to get it to a state where the portal no longer needs to be in "Portals under construction" category. --- Safemariner 17:17, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I went in and changed an couple of things just to get started. I changed the color scheme to official PMS CG colors and moved a couple of things. I have a lot of things on my list tonight but I'll see if I can get a little more work done tomorrow. Let me know what you think. I you dont like it just let me know. --WilsBadKarma ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 02:31, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When your adding images try to make sure to add image credits in small type at the bottom either to the person that took to picture or if that isnt available the to the person that uploaded it. As a featured portal reviewer I can tell you it will save time for if we put it up for featured since that is a requirement. you can see examples on the Navy portal Portal:United States Navy--WilsBadKarma ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 06:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit conflicts

Hi. As part of WP:NPP i also tag articles, since I cannot see if someone else is working on it. As for edit conflicts: In case of a conflict, it will show you two edit windows, the top one with the current version, and in the bottom window the version you tried to submit. Your work is at this point still available, and just has to be copied into the right place. E.g. you can copy/paste the bottom edits into the top page to merge them. I hope this helps you the next time you have an edit conflict. -- Chris 73 | Talk 16:21, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can see if there is recent activity by looking at the article history, especially on a new article. It did not show me two windows. It said it would but it never does for me. Next time it happens I will make a PDF and send it to you. --- Safemariner 16:23, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cotlar–Stein lemma

It is my understanding that all articles have to be notable. I am just asking why this subject is notable. Also, not all Mathematics articles are inaccessible. This was one of the articles that I came across in a random search through math categories that was not a stub and I could not figure out what made this article notable. Since you have edited a lot of articles, do you know if there is a Wikipedia project page for Mathematics articles to discuss the issue of notability and accessibility of Mathematics articles? --- Safemariner 06:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly you can discuss this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. Michael Hardy 01:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fort Tompkins Light

I added some stuff to Fort Tompkins if you can you could help by adding some info.Paulm27 12:50, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you add so many blank lines above {stub}s causing a bunch of excess white space?

Like here? 71.231.107.188 00:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Becuase that is the preferred method in Wikipedia for doing so. It makes the formatting cleaner in some cases --- Safemariner 00:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please cite the page of the Manual of Style or related document that states extra blank lines are a good thing? I haven't come across it since I've been editing since early 2004. 71.231.107.188 00:49, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will get back to you --- Safemariner 00:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked the question on Autowikibrowser's talk page --- Safemariner 02:53, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:AutoWikiBrowser#Why_does_AWB_add_so_many_blank_lines_above_.7Bstub.7Ds_causing_a_bunch_of_excess_white_space.3F --- Safemariner 00:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uttarakhand-geo-stub

Hi - I see that you've recently created a new stub template due to the renaming of Uttaranchal to Uttarakhand. While I can understand this having been done, may I ask why the category and template were not taken to WP:SFD for renaming? There are now two parallel templates for the region, where there should be only one template, and making changes in stub types without any discussion with those who actually use them makes it considerably harder for us to keep stub types consistent across Wikipedia. The new stub type is now listed at WP:WSS/D - please feel free to add any comments there. Grutness...wha? 02:09, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SFD says it is for deleting, not renaming. Someone had already started down this path. It was debated in [1] and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Village_pump#New_category_speedy_rename_criterion --- Safemariner 02:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sector Commander proposed merges

Hi there, thanks for your response about my proposed merges to Sector Commander. I responded to your comment on the talk page. --Pesco 00:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Ascot

Thank you for checking my work on Nancy Astor, Viscountess Astor and removing the tags. It helps a lot, both for me and for the cleanup effort in general. -- edi 23:36, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV

Just so you know, from my understanding, POV issues do fall under the umbrella of cleanup. Cleanup is a pretty general category that applies to ALL cleanup issues, from referencing, wikifying, etc. Some of these articles that are listed are unlikely to have this issue dealt with unless we do it. Heaven knows I've cleaned out POV issues from dozens and dozens of articles that have been listed on Wikipedia:Cleanup in the past year. I'd be hesitant to just delete them off the list unless they are listed in a project pertaining to its subject and it looks likely to be dealt with. Wikipedia has a huge backlog of articles needing attention, so dumping them off on someone else isn't likely to see them get taken care off. Cheers! --Lendorien 13:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of restaurants

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Setauket-East_Setauket%2C_New_York&curid=127372&diff=166849066&oldid=166673233 your recent edit] of Setauket-East Setauket, New York added back a laundry list of restaurants, supermarkets, pizza stores and ice cream parlors, that would be very difficult to classify as encyclopedic, nor does it have any sources (which really wouldn't help). Before I remove it again, can you make any case that this list belongs here? Alansohn 00:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dumps of public domain material

Hi Safemariner - re Fraxinus profunda - please note it isn't the purpose of wikipedia to provide duplicates of public domain material that are already available elsewhere; the policy is noted at WP:NPS and WP:NOT#REPOSITORY, item 3 - thanks! - MPF 09:16, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Buffalo Lights

I'm attempting to clean up some lighthouse pages. One of the set that I've delayed is the Buffalo Lights, they were kind of confusing. Different people using different names, they've moved, etc. I've just spent some time trying to understand them, and I think there is some additions and changes to be made. You created 3 pages that seem to be based on Coast Guard pages, and I think those pages are incorrect. I have found the Map to be of great use in understanding the Buffalo Harbor and its lights.

I'd suggest that

Buffalo North breakwater East end Light is Buffalo North Breakwater Light
Buffalo (main) Light is ok
Buffalo Harbor North and South entrance Lights is really about several different things and should be broken into 2 or more pages

I'd suggest 7 pages for the 9 lights

Buffalo (main) Light - and include info about the 1818 light
Buffalo Water Intake Crib Light
Buffalo Harbor Outer Breakwater Light - for the 1963 light and the 1872 light
Buffalo North Breakwater - for then northern bottle light
Buffalo Harbor South Entrance North Side - for the southern bottle light
Buffalo Harbor South Entrance South Side - for the South Buffalo Light (with a redirect)
Horseshoe Reef Light

thoughts?

Ahwiv (talk) 15:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

I came across this today. I am sorry I didn't know about it then, I would have done my best to help you. You had the right idea. That was BS. Sorry you are no longer around :( --BirgitteSB 18:02, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:United States Coast Guard weapons

Category:United States Coast Guard weapons, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. DexDor (talk) 06:18, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]