User talk:Bkonrad/Archive 25

Archive 20

←

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

→

Archive 30

Pewabic Pottery

BK:

The following is a note I received from Thomas Brunk. I have not done anything with it, but we need to make some changes in the article to reflect this information.

Sat, 19 Jan 2008 08:50:41 -0500

From: "Thomas W. Brunk, Ph.D." <Brunk+CBW@SpamCop.Net> To: E-mail address deleted Subject: Wikipedia Pewabic

Dear Mr. [Name deleted]

At the request of Anne Crane I reviewed the Pewabic article at

Wikipedia.

I realize that the map on the Pewabic web page has some inaccuracies;

however, the Belle Isle Aquarium is not one of them.  The aquarium was
built before Pewabic was producing tile.  I believe that you will
discover the tile to have been made by Grueby Faience Co., Boston.

The founders were Mary Chase Perry (later Mrs. William B. Stratton) and

Horace James Caulkins.

Pewabic Pottery was deeded to Michigan State University December 21,

1965 by Horace J. Caulkins'son Henry L. Caulkins to be operated as a
school.  The pottery closed on February 28, 1969, and all Pewabic
production stopped.  It was then operated as a continuing education department
of MSU.

The Pewabic Society, Inc. (501(c)3) was formed January 25, 1979,to find

a means to operate the facility as an educational entity based on the
philosophy of the Arts and Crafts Movmement as expressed in the spirit
of Pewabic Pottery.  I was among the founding members at that time.  I
began working at MSU/Pewabic in 1974 as curator and archivist.  Later I
served as president of The Pewabic Society, Inc.

The MSU Trustees affirmed that the university could no longer continue

ownership and management of Pewabic Pottery on April 4, 1981.

The Pewabic Society, Inc. agreed to take over the pottery and the deed

was formally transferred on September 26, 1981.  Pottery and tile
production was reintroduced about three years later.  However, todays
production uses neither the same glazes nor firing techniques as the original
Pewabic.  Original molds are used to create reproduction tiles and
some molded vessels.

This distinction must be made not only between the reproduced

individual tile but the commission executed under the guise of The Pewabic
Society, Inc.

The Wikipedia list of architectural commissions has several

inacuracies.

Anne Crane's daughter did a yeoman's task in preparing and presenting

the map for our use.  We are grateful for her efforts and I am sure Anne
is please by your recognition.

I am happy to help you in any way to make the article the best

possible, and, I belive, the others on our Museum Committe feel the same.

Sincerely,

Dr. Thomas W. Brunk

BCC: Anne Crane,

I thought I'd send this on to you and to Carptrash, so that we can make some changes. I note that the article on the Belle Isle Aquarium has the same wrong information.

Best. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 22:28, 20 March 2008 (UTC)Stan

Titles as disambiguating phrases

The comment "not a title when used as a disambiguating phrase" is not true. Just as "Hush (Buffy episode)" includes a title, or "0 (Star Trek)" include titles. Titles make good dab phrases and parts of dab phrases. -- JHunterJ (talk) 02:40, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

If that is how the entry appears on those pages, I'd say they are wrong. Show me any manual of style that support such usage. When it is used as a disambiguating term, it is not a title and should not be italicized. older ≠ wiser 02:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

BTW, I've asked for input at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (titles)#Query about when italics are necessary. older ≠ wiser 03:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm of course unaware of any manual of style that deals with disambiguating parenthetical phrases outside of WP:D. :-). I've followed along to WT:MOSTITLE. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

March 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Burdock (disambiguation). Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the useless warning for a page that you are a party to. Now how about some discussion. older ≠ wiser 03:39, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll join in soon as I can. Remember your first edit counts as a revert so I suggest refraining from warring over triviality. It's not worth the block. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:43, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Please don't lecture me. I'm well aware of what the 3RR is. And so far as you are also a party to the reverting it is disingenuous (as well as tacky) to the point of irritation for you to come here and warn me about it with a generic template. older ≠ wiser 03:47, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Please don't belittle me. If you knew, then you would not be caught up edit warring in the first place. Now we can move on. I'll discuss if it makes you feel better. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

If you didn't present yourself in such an irritating manner, perhaps I would have less inclination to say things that you interpret as belittling. Please check your math. I reverted exactly twice, and with good reason. By my reading of the MOS, there is nothing that supports italicizing titles or fragments of titles that are used as disambiguating phrases. If you could be so kind, please show me exactly where that usage is recommended. older ≠ wiser 03:55, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Michigan Trunklines

Thank you for looking after Michigan trunkline articles, but your move earlier wasn't proper. According to USRD naming guidelines, there is the articles List of Interstate Highways in X, Lists of US Highways in X, etc. In both other cases, the "H" in highway is capitalized as shorthand for the Interstate Highway System or the US Numbered Highway System. In Michigan it is officially the Michigan State Trunkline Highway System as they are defined, so the list should stay at List of Michigan Trunklines since Trunkline is part of a proper name. It was moved once while I was creating the table, and yes it's very disorienting to have an article moved out from under you while creating/expanding it. I'd welcome any comments or questions you have.Imzadi1979 (talk) 05:30, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that. But did not think Trunkline was used as a proper noun in the way it was formulated in the title. How was it determined that "Michigan State Trunkline Highway System" is a proper noun? I'm not familiar with that term and have not seen it used in that form on the MDOT web site. If you look at publications such as A Citizen's Guide to MDOT 2007, "trunkline" is only capitalized in headings and when part of a name, such as for a specific fund. There are only two instances of the words "Trunkline System", and in both cases, the words are lower case.

I think I see now where the name comes from. Public Act 51 of 1951, State Trunk Line Highway System established the system. However, even within that, trunkline is not capitalized in running text. In fact, if you look closely at the title of the act, Trunk Line is actually two words. I think there needs to be more discussion about how the List of Michigan Trunklines is titled and capitalized. older ≠ wiser 11:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, under the USRD naming conventions, names of systems of hIghways are compound proper nouns. Since the 1951 enactment of PA 51, "trunkline" has been concatenated to a single word. MCL 247.953 deals with establishing the Heritage Route System and uses the combined word form. The signs posted along municipal and county boundaries regulated snowmobile traffic, such as the ones here in Traverse City, mention whether or not the machines can run on city streets or just county roads and state trunklines. Yes, the usage has been inconsistent over the years, but you'll also notice that the relevent MCL sections on the highway systems don't capitalize Interstate Highway System, or United States Numbered Interstate Highway System, or variations on the names for those two systems. That's why when I originally started to overhaul the list into an actual article and split the lists out, it was named "List of Michigan Trunklines", although it probably should be changed to "List of Michigan State Trunkline HIghways". Imzadi1979 (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Moving this discussion over to Talk:List of Michigan trunklines Imzadi1979 (talk) 16:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Patrick McNamara

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Patrick McNamara, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Patrick McNamara seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Patrick McNamara, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 15:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

{{MInoaccess}}, {{MImplex}}, {{MIdecomd}}, {{MIunbuilt}}, {{MIclosed}}

I dont know by the summaries like "nest" you want to take away the pink tag. Why? This is duplicate template, and is not use. they should be delete by now. Or I suppose to use {{rfd}} one and start the debate.--Freewayguy (Webmail) 19:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

What I meant is that somewhere or another the templates were still being used. I don't quite understand the template syntax, but it made the junction lists at several Michigan highway articles look horrible, with numerous nested calls to these templates broken by the placement of the tfd template. I really don't care whether these templates are kept or not, but the process should uglify articles any more than necessary. older ≠ wiser 00:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikistalkers

I'm being wikistalked by Barek and HU12. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 23:05, 27 March 2008 (UTC)Stan

watertown ct page

yea dont delete bill finneran as mentioned he actually is a big deal he does exist its not a legend or a joke and bill fest is a real concert in which many local bands play in it is a big deal for the town and please do not delete our customs i am from watertown trust me he belongs on the page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.198.187.202 (talk) 03:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikistalkers by erstwhile administrators deserve severe sanction.

Dear BK:

Thank you.

However, this has soured me, and I will cure myself of my wikiaholic behavior. I quit. They've achieved their victory, and Wiki will lose my modest contributions.

That being said, I think you should look close at what they edited, and come to your own conclusion. They gutted whole articles. This was WIKISTALKING and they went FAR beyond what they complained about. This was search and destroy, pure, simple and unvarnished. It was a clear abuse of power. I will not abide an abuse of power, and will not let this rest without their being brought to justice -- they are bullies, and this was wrong.

I for one would not stand silently and idly by while the Wehrmacht makes the Jews disappear into the railroad cars.

Moreover, their actions showed an intent (and attempt) to bully me into silence about their misconduct. It was a cover up.

Accountability in this system is important. Those who abuse their powers do not deserve to be trusted to hold the reins. They deserve the severest sanctions, and should be stripped of administrative privileges.

What they did here was very destructive of the goals of an organization that depends on the good will and volunteer efforts of contributors.

7&6=thirteen (talk) 10:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Stan

Coincidentally, Hu12‎ chose this interregnum of completely delete (archive) his user talk. This is after he was unmaking history and deleting my accusations of misconduct, which I put back on his page This is a Watergate style cover up. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Stan

I would just like to make a stand with 7&6=thirteen. I can't believe these "admins" treated him this way. He is a dedicated and prolific Wikipedia editor, and has done tremendous work on many articles. Trying to add a link which provides valuable information, he is labeled a spammer. Trying to defend his actions, he is blocked. What are we doing here if this is how the good guys are treated?----Asher196 (talk) 11:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I'm sorry about the situation. If you'd like to file a complaint about Hu12, the place to do that is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Hu12's block of you was precipitous and the blind reverts unwarranted. However you did accuse him of being a sock puppet and make what could be interpreted as a vague threat. I might note that Hu12 consistently archives talk page messages -- although this is an annoying practice, it is not prohibited and it is not necessarily evidence that the user was trying to cover up anything. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, including editors with limited social skills. Unless their behavior clearly crosses the line and becomes disruptive, it is best to simply avoid engaging with such persons. older ≠ wiser 12:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikistalkers by erstwhile administrators deserve severe sanctions

I have been wikistalked by an administrator Hu12 and his coconspirator, Barek. The dispute arose because I had put in a link to a Central Michigan University timeline on lighthouses in Michigan in an article on Marquette, Michigan the link was perfectly appropriate, and was not a commercial site or spam. I received a note from Barek saying he had deleted the link on the Discussion page. I told him it was a perfectly fine link and that his action was ill-advised. The next thing I knew, Hu12 intervened. The two of them started Wikistalking me together, removing not just the link, but removing the link from every page where I had put it. Additionally, they started doing blind "Undos" and obliterating large portions of articles that I had contributed. There was no reason for any of this. When I protested their course of action, they suspended my editing privileges. This was done precipitously. BK Conrad has investigated this matter, and deems the blind edits to be 'unfortunate.'

I complained to BK Conrad, an administrator. He undid the suspension, but did not deal with my substantive complaint about this administrator. He suggested that I could contact you.

I would also add that Hu12 deleted my complaints to him from his talk page (I put them back), and has now (conveniently) archived the pages.

Additionally, one of my correspondents, Asher196, had noted in the history section of an article that the deletion was unwarranted. I contacted him and reported the Wikistalking.

Indeed, what you will uncover, should you choose to look, is that Hu12 and Barker were engaged in wholesale eradication of my contribution from articles, sometimes to the point where the article virtually disappeared. There was no excuse for this. It is the very definition of Wikistalking.

As I said, when I protested this, I was suspended.

I have done a whole lot of editing here. -- Many thousands of edits. I have never before been accused of spamming the system. I wasn't doing this here, either.

While I agree with BK that it would be best if I could just avoid these bullies, the matter is not so easily resolved. They sought me out. They attacked me. They abused their administrative privileges.

While I could turn a blind eye to this, it will only encourage this untoward behavior. When Czeckoslovakia falls, Poland can't be far behind. Someone needs to report this and stop this untoward and unspeakable behavior. Based on my reading of Hu12's talk page (before it disappeared), the man has attitude problems that have surfaced before.

Wikistalking by administrators will frustrate the contributors, and cause them to quit Wikipedia. They've already done that to me. Let there not be a repetition. The very lifeblood of your organization is at stake.

I have attacked copies of my correspondence to and from BK Conrad and Asher196.

If you need further information, please advise.

I will send this to Asher196 and BKConrad, so they are informed of my complaint. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 17:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Stan

BK: Thank you.

However, this has soured me, and I will cure myself of my wikiaholic behavior. I quit. They've achieved their victory, and Wiki will lose my modest contributions.

That being said, I think you should look close at what they edited, and come to your own conclusion. They gutted whole articles. This was WIKISTALKING and they went FAR beyond what they complained about. This was search and destroy, pure, simple and unvarnished. It was a clear abuse of power. I will not abide an abuse of power, and will not let this rest without their being brought to justice -- they are bullies, and this was wrong.

I for one would not stand silently and idly by while the Wehrmacht makes the Jews disappear into the railroad cars.

Moreover, their actions showed an intent (and attempt) to bully me into silence about their misconduct. It was a cover up.

Accountability in this system is important. Those who abuse their powers do not deserve to be trusted to hold the reins. They deserve the severest sanctions, and should be stripped of administrative privileges.

What they did here was very destructive of the goals of an organization that depends on the good will and volunteer efforts of contributors.

7&6=thirteen (talk) 10:10, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Stan

       Coincidentally, Hu12‎ chose this interregnum of completely delete (archive) his user talk. This is after he was unmaking history and deleting my accusations of misconduct, which I put back on his page This is a Watergate style cover up. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Stan

           I would just like to make a stand with 7&6=thirteen. I can't believe these "admins" treated him this way. He is a dedicated and prolific Wikipedia editor, and has done tremendous work on many articles. Trying to add a link which provides valuable information, he is labeled a spammer. Trying to defend his actions, he is blocked. What are we doing here if this is how the good guys are treated?----Asher196 (talk) 11:17, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

               Hi, I'm sorry about the situation. If you'd like to file a complaint about Hu12, the place to do that is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Hu12's block of you was precipitous and the blind reverts unwarranted. However you did accuse him of being a sock puppet and make what could be interpreted as a vague threat. I might note that Hu12 consistently archives talk page messages -- although this is an annoying practice, it is not prohibited and it is not necessarily evidence that the user was trying to cover up anything. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, including editors with limited social skills. Unless their behavior clearly crosses the line and becomes disruptive, it is best to simply avoid engaging with such persons. older ≠ wiser 12:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Gustin Township

BK:

I note you've gone over a bunch of my former territory.

As you clean up the links, you might want to keep in mind that they are useful to readers (a lot of these are real sparse articles to begin with) and that they might be of use to future editors, who might use them as a basis for more article, and then line citations.

As to Mr. Killmaster, I am good friends with his granddaughter, and he is buried in a private cemetery on the top of the hill to the west of the Harrisville Airport. Trying to find a "source" for that is difficuilt. at best. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 20:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)Stan

A couple observations. InfoMI is in general a very poor quality source. The particular information referenced in the article was taken from Romig -- without any attribution of that fact from InfoMI. Also, I noticed that I forgot the closing </ref> tag in my last edit, so some of the text went into the footnote. That should be fixed now. As for the www.traveljournals.net link, it provided nothing more than coordinates and a map (and from the looks of it at present, it is simply re-processing information from GNIS, which is a higher quality source. Regading the burial location of John Killmaster, I don't see that that information was in the article before I edited it. In any case, there is a rule of thumb -- if a reliable source cannot be found for something, then chances are good that the information is not encyclopedic and shouldn't be included. older ≠ wiser 20:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

BK:

That was not meant as a criticism, particularly. And you are right that the mere fact that something is true (like Killmaster's burial place -- I could take you there) doesn't make it encyclopedic.

My main concern upon my retirement is that the 3000 townships, the 83 counties, the myriad cities and villages, and all the historic sites be fostered. I worked hard to get some others involved, and we actually put together some good articles Northern Michigan and the Thumb, for example, that are worthwhile additions. WikiProject Michigan needs good sources and good editors, and part of that is leaving a bread crumb trail for those who follow to amplify on the articles in the future.

I wish you well. Best. 21:30, 29 March 2008 (UTC)Stan

Courtesy call

I have quoted you here, I hope you don't mind. if you disagree with the way I have used your remark or if you have any other comments, I am sure you will say so. Apologies if this is not the correct way to do business. :)Abtract (talk) 12:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Baraga County template

Thanks for fixing the Baraga County template; I occasionally commit this error, forgetting to change the county seat when I copy code for a new template.

Since you've been adamant in defending your position on Michigan's county templates, would you be willing to create and apply more of them? I believe that there are 65 counties with no templates, and it would be quite helpful if you'd be willing to help reduce that number. Nyttend (talk) 12:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'd be happy to, but I tend to work somewhat sporadically, splitting my attention between several ongoing projects here. The thing is, as I create the templates, I also like to create and update info on the various unincorporated communities, which can take take a fair bit of time for each. older ≠ wiser 13:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Tip of The Thumb Heritage Water Trail

Why would the Huron County Template be inapropriate for Tip of The Thumb Heritage Water Trail? It tells the reader the towns located in Huron County and would allow him to plan his trip better.

Thanks --HB Edit (talk) 19:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Customary usage of the county templates is on the articles listed in the template. older ≠ wiser 19:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

So... does this mean I can make an uncustomary use by putting it back in?--HB Edit (talk) 21:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't. Such templates are navigational aids placed on the articles in the template. Also, Wikipedia is not a travel-planning website. Any information relevant to the water trail should be in the article itself. older ≠ wiser 21:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your help--HB Edit (talk) 21:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Moving Oracle to Oracle (disambiguation)

Hi Bkonrad,

I see you reverted my move of Oracle to Oracle(Person) with the message that it has not been discussed prior to making the change, which i have to admit was indeed a bit uncalled for. The main reason i did not discuss the move was because i generally only move my own user subpages, or pages with typo's in its title around. I think you can imagine those don't actually need a great deal of discussion :).

Now to do things right, i opened a discussion on the oracle talk page. Since you were involved in my previous move, you might be interested in commenting there (Or perhaps not). Either way, Happy editing, and a good day to you! Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 18:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, you should also list the page at requested moves, to alert others of the proposal. older ≠ wiser 18:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice on this, i will list it over there. Excirial ^{(Talk,Contribs)} 20:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Pointe Aux Barques Township, Michigan

Hi Bkonrad,

I apologize for my clumsy undo. I will be more careful next time. Thank you very much for cleaning up my mess. Long night in front of the keyboard is my only, and lame, excuse...

Thanks again,

Global777 (talk) 12:02, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Debbie Stabenow edit war brewing

There is a dispute developing as to whether the scandal involving Debbie Stabenow's husband Tom Athans should be including in the Debbie Stabenow article. I say no. What do you think? Steelbeard1 (talk) 00:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the scandal has anything to do with Stabenow's job, and shouldn't be discussed here. --HB Edit (talk) 13:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Marquette Harbor Light, St. Helena Island Light, Crisp Point Light‎, Eagle Harbor Light, Cheboygan Crib Light , Granite Island (Michigan) and Old Mackinac Point Light

I'm back. My friend Barek and I have been working on this. Needs a better infobox. Thanks if you can find the time. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 7&6=thirteen (talk) 17:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Stan

primary topics on mos:dab

Hey, Bkonrad, thank you for taking time to comment on the primary topic thread I started on the talk page of MOS:DAB. I am truly bothered by this gap. Do you have any suggestions on how to address this in a way that folks would be happy with? I'd appreciate your thoughts. Gwguffey (talk) 19:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

just because you can't substantiate something doesn't mean it isn't true. get off of your high horse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.229.190.231 (talk) 00:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Huron Lightship

BK: I've extensively rewritten this article. I'm sure you could clean it up nicely. Also, I do think that it would be good to find a more up to date icture that had "Huron" on the side. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 11:43, 5 April 2008 (UTC) Stan

Sicily

How can a move putting a world power which is mentioned in the bible, at its correct location be "controversial"? This is a most simple and obvious move. - Gennarous (talk) 17:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Gennarous. Please reply there. older ≠ wiser 17:45, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

3 Revert Rule

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. erc ^{talk/contribs} 18:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the warning, but you know you should look into the context a bit before slapping the silly templates around. It is really rather irritating. The reverts were repairing cut and paste moves that are clearly contrary to policy. Second, the moves, even if done properly, were controversial moves that have been the subject of extensive discussion in the past and should have gone through WP:RM and not simply implemented unilaterally. older ≠ wiser 18:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:3RR states the only exceptions are clear obvious vandalism. Page moves were not clear and obvious and have a disruptive effect on wikipedia. The warning is appropriate. I warned both sides of this issue - after all, when 3rd parties (like me) are able to see the extent of the disruption, it IS disruptive, is it not? erc ^{talk/contribs} 18:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps so, but the problem was primarily due to a misunderstanding (a lack of awareness of the controversial nature of the move and the inappropriateness of cutting and pasting), which appears to have been resolved. In any case, 3RR is a blunt instrument that IMO is bandied about a little too eagerly by some (hence my irritation with the generic warning). I don't mean you in particular, it seems more of a cultural thing. There's always an element of discretion in applying 3RR blocks. I'll grant you that if User:Gennarous and I continued on in the same pattern, it would clearly have been disruptive regardless of right or wrong. So I suppose a warning to both of us was not a bad thing. I guess I just don't really care much for that template. older ≠ wiser 18:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

-Shrug- It's annoying to get warnings. User:Gennarous has already removed his warning. I'm not minded to un-do it either, because it IS his talk page. I'm not a fan of removing warnings from your own talk page - I consider it vandalism, but policy doesn't give me the latitude to go about undoing it. I think the spirit of 3RR is in the right place, but I think everyone realizes that an arbitrary limit is stupid, which is why people can still be banned even if they don't break the technical limit of 3 reverts/day. In any case, I'm glad that you guys found a way to end your warring. I had a report ready to send to WP:AN3. Guess I won't need it anymore erc ^{talk/contribs} 18:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Harbor Beach Government

I had a need to write my congressman on a issue. I had a little trouble finding the address of them. I thought it would be usefull to readers to have this information.--HB Edit (talk) 12:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC) --HB Edit (talk) 12:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Red links on dabs

Hi there! Just curious if you are still interested in continuing to participate in this discussion? There's been a few interesting developments (and I've just noticed that I fed you a wrong link when answering your question—now corrected). Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:51, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

HP MfD

My apologies; this was my first time processing one, and I had followed the cue of another editor who added it to the HP dab page. I have since found out he was wrong toadd it, and I was wrong to select the miscellany for deletion. I apologize if my mistake harshed your calm. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 19:20, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

HP dab

With respect, JHunterJ chased out many of the others with insisting on an addition of Harry Potter-related dab. He did it enough he was blocked for 3RR and edit-warring about it - a clear sign that he's not thinking with the right mindset here. HP appears nowhere in a reliable source as a substitution for Harry Potter - that is to say, no newspaper, academic article or film review or analysis use HP as a substitution for the words Harry Potter. The words Harry Potter always appear when the term is used - clearly, it isn't notable enough to stand on its own, unlike in articles on subject where the dab term appears For example, in an article about printers, HP doesn't have to refer to the full name of the company; indeed, the acronym is incorporated into the logo, and articles on those subjects rarely, if ever, use the full name of the company. In gaming, HP refers to health points or it points. Almost never will you ever see an article dealing with the subject matter wherein the full term actually appears. In every cited reference for literature or films, HP never stands alone, but always has the full term in the article, so as to support the shortform when it is used within the article to shorthand matters. That an article about Harry Potter never uses the acronym all by itself, it isn't notable.

I hope that explains matters better. As JHunterJ hasn't (I was going to say 'hasn't bothered', but I am trying to keep agf alive) to present a reference that has the notability that Hewlett Packard's or Hit Points' acronyms does, it isn't a notable term outside fan forums, and we don't cater to them. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 06:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Sources have been provided many times over. You repeatedly deny them. I fail to understand why you are so obsessed with denying that there are people (and even some in reputable sources) who sometimes us HP as a shorthand reference to Harry Potter. older ≠ wiser 00:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

More redirects?

I know that you often create redirects to townships for small communities in Michigan that aren't likely to get decent-sized articles anytime soon. I've gotten a copy of the deleted List of ZIP Codes in Michigan, cut out the communities with articles, and posted the rest on this user subpage. Would you be willing to go through it and create at least some of them as redirects? Nyttend (talk) 16:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I will look into these as I am able. older ≠ wiser 00:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Alexander Hamilton

Two users are insisting that the lead of Alexander Hamilton must say that he was all of first Secretary of the Treasury of the United States, lawyer, Founding Father, American politician, leading statesman, political economist, financier, and political theorist because someone, somewhere has called him each of them. A lot of these seem to me WP:PEACOCK, and political economist and financier both appear to refer to his actions as Secretary of the Treasury. (Either might be justified, but both?)

Am I going too far? Would you comment, at Talk:Alexander Hamilton? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Warren, Michigan

BK: Please take a look at the talk page, discussion about gangs. The April 10 revert of the main article that I am concerned about is: XLinkBot (Talk | contribs) (16,570 bytes) (BOT--Reverting edits by 68.62.59.23 to revision 202239188 (\bmyspace\.com)) 7&6=thirteen (talk) 09:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC) Stan

The gang issue was resolved upon my invitaiton by Barek. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 20:00, 20 April 2008 (UTC) Stan

American Museum of Magic

New Michigan Museum to add to your beat. 7&6=thirteen (talk) 20:00, 20 April 2008 (UTC) Stan

Less of the "In"

Hi, I notice you removed the "In"s from Baykal headings, an action I heartily applaud but one which is against mos:dab as I read it. Is my reading wrong? ... or will you propose a change to guidlines? I would certainly support the latter. Abtract (talk) 00:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

The examples given on MOSDAB are examples only, not a direction that "In" is required. I would modify the page, but the actual examples currently used are not very amenable to a quick reformulation. But I'm not about to start a crusade for changing the guideline. Now that you mention it, I actually prefer an earlier version with section headings instead of the faux headings. older ≠ wiser 00:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Putnam (surname)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Putnam (surname), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Putnam. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 14:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the bot is once again confused. Sigh. older ≠ wiser 14:59, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Soul reaper

Was wondering if you could help. See, this dab is much too small to have a page so I'm pondering whether it should be outright deleted, or redirected to Soulreaper and tagged with {{db-disambig}}. Thoughts? Please reply on your talk page, which I've watchlisted. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

In a case such as this, where there are currently only two topics to disambiguate, it makes sense to redirect to the musical group. The hatnotes provide appropriate navigation between the two topics. As for whether the disambiguation page should be deleted -- perhaps it should be moved to either soulreaper (disambiguation) or soul reaper (disambiguation). That would largely depend on the likelihood that there would ever be articles about other topics. For example, the Guild Wars action of Soul Reaping, or topics that might be confused, such as Reaper (TV series) or Death (personification) (the Grim Reaper). older ≠ wiser 12:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

So which option? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Conclusion: Image placeholders centralized discussion

Hi. I'm sending this to you because you participated in the Centralized discussion on image placeholders that ended on 23 April.

That discussion must produce a conclusion.

We originally asked "Should the addition of this box [example right] be allowed? Does the placeholder system and graphic image need to be improved to satisfy policies and guidelines for inclusion? Is it appropriate to some kinds of biographies, but not to others?" (See introduction).

Conclusions to centralized discussions are either marked as 'policy', 'guideline', 'endorsed', 'rejected', 'no consensus', or 'no change' etc. We should now decide for this discussion.

Please read and approve or disapprove the section here: Conclusion --Kleinzach (talk) 11:26, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Please note this message conforms to WP:CANVASSING and has not been sent to anyone has not already participated in the centralized discussion.