User talk:Tim1965

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

I feel so happy now...[edit]

That was my first vandalism!!! I'm somebody now! *sniff* (Thank your for fixing my Talk page, Mikenorton.) - Tim1965 (talk)

Welcome to the club! You'll be receiving your packet in the mail. APK whisper in my ear 04:09, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
I hope it comes with a val-pak. It better... - Tim1965 (talk) 15:02, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
I can only observe in awe. Montanabw(talk) 05:54, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Round barn, want to help?[edit]

Just started Doncaster Round Barn (finally got photos!) Want to help me expand and improve it a bit? Montanabw(talk) 21:30, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do! - Tim1965 (talk) 04:32, 13 July 2015 (UTC)


You undid my changes on this page: Reportedly haunted locations in Washington, D.C. and I read your reason. However, to clarify, I left the citations that previously existed because I believe the original author used them improperly. The author used the citation after providing detail that is not true, and is not included in that work (Moeller, Gerard and Weeks, Christopher. AIA Guide to the Architecture of Washington, D.C. 4th ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006.) I'd like to correct the misinformation regarding the Pension Building - materials used, numbers of columns, urban myth about horses, etc. What do you advise oh Tim? — Preceding unsigned comment added by B william r (talkcontribs) 13:59, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Change the text in the main article. But when citing the cite, add a quotation from the cited work so that there won't be any confusion any more. - Tim1965 (talk) 20:19, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Mustangs' ancestors[edit]

Montanabw(talk), did you see this? "Wild horses: In Spain, the American mustangs' ancestral cousins live on"?? Very cool! - Tim1965 (talk) 15:40, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh! Very true! I just judged a horse show in Powell, Wyo a couple weeks ago (very close to the Pryors and a couple other HMAs) and judged a BLM Mustang who looked exactly like a Lipizzan (which is a Baroque horse breed of significant Spanish ancestry, similar to the Andalusian horse. Talked to the owner after the show and she said she adopted the horse from the BLM wild off one of the nearby HMAs (not Pryor) when he was a yearling. Very, very Spanish in type. Amazing, isn't it? Montanabw(talk) 20:17, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Double trivia time! Back in 2012, I mega-expanded the article Ben-Hur, and discovered that Andalusian horses played Ben-Hur's Arabians, while the others in the chariot race were primarily Lipizzans. :) - Tim1965 (talk) 03:09, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Isn't that amusing? I read about the Lipizzaner thing too. OTOH, the horses that should have been Arabians in Lawrence of Arabia sure didn't look like them. But the horse that Valentino rode, Jadaan, was indeed a purebred Arabian from the W.K. Kellogg ranch. Montanabw(talk) 04:51, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

A bowl of strawberries for you![edit]

Erdbeerteller01.jpg I truly appreciate the work you've put into articles about places in Washington, D.C. Paytonc (talk) 17:46, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you! - Tim1965 (talk) 18:00, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Mmm, strawberries. *nom nom nom* APK whisper in my ear 21:38, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Now, for some cream... where can I find something to pump some cream over these? :) - Tim1965 (talk) 21:55, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
thataway... APK whisper in my ear 02:36, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Ahh.... - Tim1965 (talk) 03:17, 6 August 2015 (UTC)


You do realize that anyone can be nominated for a Pulitzer. It's just an entry form. I looked at the Google Books citation for "The Pulitzer Prize Archive: A History and Anthology of Award-Winning Materials in Journalism, Letters, and Arts." and there's nothing there that shows that the work in question was "nominated." So putting that citation there does support anything. If it's a matter of the work being a finalist, then that's another matter. But the Pulitzers didn't start declaring who were finalists outside of the winners until 1980. Therefore, to keep the "nominated for a Pulitzer" style mentions, you'll need firm proof for that, which will be very hard to find, if at all. In general, any mention of "nominated for the Pulitzer" should be taken out of Wikipedia, unless there is another verifiable, newsworthy reason, such as with Literary_forgery#Fake_memoirs, where the act of trying to nominate someone for a Pulitzer resulted in an investigation into the true identity of an author.

I do see that you were the originator of the article many years back, and that the Pulitzer mention was in the very first revision. Please revisit what sources you got that from and whether they can be verified. The site does not back up anything here. Also, this piece is instructive - Journalists, Please Stop Saying You Were 'Pulitzer Prize-Nominated', By Alexander Abad-Santos June 26, 2012, The Atlantic -- Fuzheado | Talk 23:02, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

In each case, you'll notice that sources (the Fischer sources in particular) point out that Webb was on the jury's short-list. If you have a quibble with the term "nomination", then change it to "short-listed" or some other phrase or word. Or, add a footnote to the article explaining why published, unbiased sources say he was "nominated" but that this might not mean what the average lay person might think. It doesn't really matter (to me) whether the prize committee reported the finalists or not; there clearly was a short-list of finalists reported to the prize committee, and the Fischer citations very clearly cite the records of the jury and prize committee to recognize that Webb was short-listed and one of the finalists to be considered for the various Pulitzer awards he was considered for. To ignore one published source which says "nominated for a Pulitzer" (sic) in favor of another flirts (to my mind) with WP:ORIGINAL and WP:NPOV. The citation guidelines clearly say that, in cases where there is a conflict of sources, both facts should be cited and sourced and the reader should be permitted to make up their own mind. - Tim1965 (talk) 23:33, 5 August 2015 (UTC)


Just a note to explain my edit to Lacawanna Steel Company. I took out the category "Ironworks and steel mills in Pennsylvania", not because Lacawanna was not from Pennsylvania, but because it was not a steel mill; it was instead a steel company. I consider that a steel company, by definition, owns and runs steel mills, so that the "steel mill" category is redundant. But if you have a different opinion, I'll let it stand. I'm glad that someone is at least paying attention. Since you have some interest in steel, please check and edit my recent articles: Iron mining in the United States, Iron and steel industry in the United States, and History of the iron and steel industry in the United States. Regards. Plazak (talk) 01:09, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

I myself was wishing for a category "Former steel mills in Pennsylvania"... Lackawanna Steel began in New Jersey, but for half their history they were based in Scranton, Pennsylvania. They had early steel mills there by 1854, and had a Bessemer works there until 1899. Only then did they move to New York state. The last paragraph of the section "Founding and early years" talks about the move to Slocum's Hollow (now Scranton, Pa.). They had a steel puddling mill, and first pour from their new Bessmer furnace came in 1875. The sixth paragraph of the section "Growth years" talks about this. Maybe it needs to be clearer that they were in Pennsylvania? BTW, I really liked History of the iron and steel industry in the United States! - Tim1965 (talk) 02:54, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Convert ounce[edit]

I noticed this edit at Champagne stemware and am hoping you would fix the "6 to 10 ounces" and "4 to 8 ounces" converts. The problem is that {{convert}} regards "oz" as a unit of mass. The choices available are:

  • {{convert|6|to|10|impfloz|ml}} → 6 to 10 imperial fluid ounces (170 to 280 ml)
  • {{convert|6|to|10|usfloz|ml}} → 6 to 10 US fluid ounces (180 to 300 ml)
  • {{convert|6|to|10|impfloz|ml|abbr=on}} → 6 to 10 imp fl oz (170 to 280 ml)
  • {{convert|6|to|10|usfloz|ml|abbr=on}} → 6 to 10 US fl oz (180 to 300 ml)

Confusingly, "usoz" can be used instead of "usfloz" if wanted because they are equivalent. The unit names are a bit ugly but I don't think that can be avoided. Johnuniq (talk) 03:41, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Whoops! Done! Fixed! - Tim1965 (talk) 03:50, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited East Potomac Park, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rugby (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) 09:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)