User talk:Elkman/Archive14

Archives

Thank-you notes for RFAs have been archived here. August 6, 2005 - May 25, 2006 May 25, 2006 - July 23, 2006 July 24, 2006 July 24, 2006 - September 1, 2006 September 1, 2006 - December 24, 2006 December 31, 2006 - April 28, 2007 April 12, 2007 - September 12, 2007 September 11, 2007 - December 5, 2007 December 6, 2007 - March 23, 2008 March 24, 2008 - July 1, 2008 June 27, 2008 - November 4, 2008 November 5, 2008 - February 11, 2009 April 1, 2009

Hi. This is my talk page. If you ask a question here, you're most likely to get a response here, so you might want to put this page on your watchlist.

restricted location sites

Hi Elkman. The Anome's Anomebot has tagged numerous archeological sites, including restricted location ones, for missing coordinates, effectively calling for coordinates of them. In a short new conversation at User talk:The Anome#request pause in tagging NRHP articles, including archeological sites, User talk:Doncram#Historic sites and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#Geotagging of historic sites. Could you possibly please comment, probably best at the latter place? I believe it would be most helpful if you could provide a list of the NRHP sites for which NRIS shows address is restricted, so that the corresponding articles for those sites, at least, could be kept free of coordinates needed tags. doncram (talk) 07:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Sock

I had already mentioned it to Chris. In the post right above yours, actually. ;)

Incidentally I was also worried I might have the wrong person. HAZardousMATT^toxic 20:04, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Your infobox generator

Could you make a simple change to the infobox generator, to move the NRIS reference? To see what I mean, look at Doncram's edit here — in my mind, and apparently in his too, it looks better to have the reference on the same line as the refnum. Nyttend (talk) 16:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Who says "Feed your bike biscuits.'

The time is near, that vandal is coming back1 how do i know, cos he told me on another website, he said he loves it. Stop him!

I can't do a thing about it any more, since I lost my adminship. Ask one of the professional wrestling fans to do it. They know a lot more than I do and they're all much better editors than I am. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 23:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Deleted article

Hi there, I noticed you deleted the article List of "largest" articles and the reason given was "(R2: Redirect from mainspace to user, image, or any talk namespaces)". I hadn't checked in on this page in a while, but last time I checked this article was a list, not any type of redirect. Did you check the history to see if this article was moved before you deleted the redirect? I'd like some more information on what happened. Thanks. -Bonus Onus (talk) 22:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

It's now at Wikipedia:List of "largest" articles. I had to view all of the logs for the deleted page to determine that User:B.Wind moved it from List of "largest" articles (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) to Wikipedia:List of "largest" articles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) on January 2. Then, on January 3, I deleted it as a cross-namespace redirect. Then, on January 15, I caused a huge fiasco with the professional wrestling fans and lost my adminship as a result, but that's another story. Needless to say, I won't be speedily deleting any pages any more. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 23:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I figured out that it had been moved there, but I'm not too familiar with the policy that got it moved there, or what I should do to somehow get it back in the main namespace (maybe through a redirect or a link). I feel like it won't be useful to normal Wikipedia users where it is. Perhaps it doesn't qualify as a standard article, but it still is pretty interesting and useful. Thoughts/advice? -Bonus Onus (talk) 21:55, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

You'd probably be better off talking with B.Wind (talk · contribs), who originally proposed it for deletion and then moved the article to Wikipedia namespace. Or, you can talk with DGG (talk · contribs), who removed the WP:PROD tag. Or, bring it up at Wikipedia:Village pump or some place similar to discuss what should happen with this. My involvement with the article was mainly in housekeeping, in cleaning up the cross-namespace redirect. Needless to say, I won't be doing any more article deletion any more. In fact, there's a lot of maintenance I can't do any more, and a lot of regular article editing I'm no longer motivated to do. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 22:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Minnesota Historical Society

Hi Elkman,
In regards to your question on my user discussion page. I am and we do. In general, we are posting material (and correcting material from MHS archives that has been posted) which is clearly out of copyright and properly referencing it with the negative and location ID number and a link back citing the original image. We are also experimenting posting contemporary images we have created of some of our objects and have released under the Creative Commons license. Feel free to contact me if you wish at: Joe.hoover (at) mnhs.org.
--Mnhs (talk) 04:23, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Why?

It has come to my attention that you have been deleting certain pages related to background information on the Warhammer 40k Universe? Namely certain Weapons vehicles and possibly some books. Any reason? Just curios why so many are being deleted by you. Sfdrf (talk) 09:52, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I haven't deleted anything since January 15 or so, when I lost my admin privileges. That was two months ago. You'll have to go back to check the deletion log for any pages I deleted before that date so you can see my reasoning. After January 15, I decided largely to mind my own business and not stick my nose into areas that I'm not supposed to be involved in. Within the last few weeks, I've pretty much lost interest in contributing any major content altogether, because there's no real need for the kind of articles I've written. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 13:31, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I see i see... It would have been about that long ago i noticed it first... only noticed it was you on others a few days ago... Cant find the deletion logs thats all....

Sfdrf (talk) 07:33, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

invitation

You're invited to sign up as a founding member, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#WikiProject Historic Sites ! :) doncram (talk) 05:21, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Historic Sites is opened up. I took the liberty of assuming your support for the wikiproject meant you wanted to join as a member, and I copied your signature to the Members list on the main page. Please visit and add to, or remove, your listing there. It would be great to hear about what you're interested in the Wikiproject becoming, in your member comment and/or at the Talk page, shortcut wt:HSITES. Thanks for your support! doncram (talk) 17:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

The Barnstar of Diligence

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your hard work on List of National Historic Landmarks in Minnesota and other articles. -download | sign! 22:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Some incorrect coords

Hi Elkman. I'm filling in some of the photography gaps in National Register of Historic Places listings in Wright County, Minnesota and noticed that two entries in Delano, Minnesota that you photographed have incorrect coordinates. They show a N latitude of 43 degrees. Since you know where the buildings are, could you try to find the correct coordinates? Thanks.--Appraiser (talk) 15:29, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, those were pretty far off. I've fixed those coordinates. Let me know if there are any others. Oh, and if you're looking for the Albertville Roller Mill, you might have to explore around a bit. I tried to get a picture of that one last summer, and the address I found was a bar on the main street, which didn't look right. I wonder if the actual building is closer to the BNSF tracks. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 16:15, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

new NRIS download

Hi! Seemingly in response directly to inquiries i made, a new version of the NRIS database has been made available. Specifically, I am told there is a new NRIS data in the detail.exe file at the download center at www.nr.nps.gov. This addresses corrections to the address restricted field. From what I understand it will include other updates to the NRIS database, too, not sure whether it includes new listings from 4/2008 up to some more recent time or not. Also, there is a new copy of coordinates for unrestricted properties now available in the spatial.mdb database. It no longer includes coordinates for some address restricted properties that were accidentally released, previously. Would it be possible for you to update your system supporting generation of NRHP infoboxes, etc., using this new data? I would greatly appreciate it if you would.

Also, it would be very helpful if you could identify changes by differences in the old vs. new database. I guess wherever there is a change, it is possible that corresponding NRHP articles and list-articles ought to be updated in wikipedia, or at least checked. This would include some important updates, such as dropping coords which should not be displayed. I'd also simply like to be able to see what address changes, etc., may have been implemented into NRIS in response to the 200 or so correction/question items submitted recently, covered at wp:NRIS info issues. I don't know if it would be straightforward or not for you to detect and report all changes. There could be a different approach to identify these changes; perhaps the National Register could provide changes reports on some of these instead.

I'd be happy to share all related correspondence if you would email me separately. Hope you are well. Cheers, doncram (talk) 22:46, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I saw that they posted an update recently. (This was a few days ago when I was trying to query their broken database to find Multiple Property Submissions.) I'll see if I can get around to importing the new database at some point, though I'll have to see if I remember how to import it. Also, since my enthusiasm for editing Wikipedia is just a small fraction of what it was before the wrestling fiasco (and before I found out that pop culture articles are much more relevant than articles about architecture and crap), it might take a while for me to motivate myself to do it. Oh, that reminds me -- I should have watched Dancing with the Stars (U.S. TV series) to see who got eliminated tonight and then to update the article. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 03:15, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Please let us know if you'd like any help doing it. I know the other crap can be infuriating, but hey, we appreciate you! dm (talk) 03:25, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually i am told that the updated version includes new listings through 3/13/09. So that is a good amount of additional listings, since 4/2008. I've been working recently on the List of RHPs in OR and not long ago on List of RHPs in DC. On their Talk pages you can see evidence of the tedious process of identifying and backfilling the newer-than-4/2008 listings. If a new version comes on-line in your system, I will push myself and ask others to make a push to get the remaining 15 or so state list-articles "table-ized" quickly, so they can then be maintained with just the new weekly listings. doncram (talk) 17:03, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

New Rochelle discussion notice

New Rochelle problem discussion notification: I've opened a new discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Long-running problem with respect to New Rochelle area articles.

This relates to the 4 part proposal i opened on March 26, which was closed on March 27 and archived at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive187#Proposal for unban, apology, amnesty for Jvolkblum and related others, and topic ban for Orlady.

This is a courtesy notice to all parties who had more than a one word comment in the previous discussion. I think it is a problem that won't go away, and I hope that you will be part of the solution, whether or not you and I have agreed previously. I hope that we can at least clarify the problem, if not immediately agree upon a solution. If anyone thinks this is inappropriate canvassing, I am sure they will express that. I don't anticipate too many separated discussions on this topic, but if this one is closed and a new one opens, I'll probably notify you again, unless you ask me not to. doncram (talk) 03:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

As a general warning to anyone reading: Don't ever canvass me about policy problems again. Clearly, it's obvious that I have no business participating in policy discussions, because that's what makes me such a bad editor on Wikipedia in the first place. (Like that whole professional wrestling fiasco in January.) I'm only good at editing articles, and clearly I'm not very good at that. Leave the article work for WP:PW. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 05:39, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I think the followup by you and further followup by Doxtrob (sp?) clarified the situation adequately, and I think/hope should be accepted as removing the unfriendliness that came out. I really honestly do want your participation there. I believe that in previous discussion at wp:NRHP on this, that your comments about how to solve the situation, and about the articles not being worth much, etc., were speaking for many others. It is a reasonable-to-hold-perspective that I used to agree with, but don't still agree with. I would value your continued participation. You do have a policy role and perspective to play there, and I think that an overall solution will be reached sooner with your involvement. Although i disagree somewhat with what i think your views are now, i think it is helpful to have other NRHP participants and you in particular there. I am actually afraid that some NRHPers will choose not to be involved for simple reason they don't want to be involved in negativity or some such reason, so I appreciate your courage in being there. I do think that it involves a lot of negativity, but i hope to have the double-negative effect of getting rid of a negative problem. Of course it may go easier if we and others don't use sarcasm and over-statements for effect, but, even with such, i think we can cope. There are different valid ways of expressing things. :) Cheers, doncram (talk) 06:42, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

I pretty much said no to the RFAR, before seeing your note further above and ur change at wp:NRHP. I thot i had asked a fair question, the last thing i put to you. I don't want to toy around about this, but your request has attraction, and i didn't think we were done. doncram (talk) 21:53, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Request for arbitration - Unjustified ban of users

I have filed a request for arbitration regarding recent bans of user accounts from which no activities could be found that dispupt Wikipedia. The arbitration request can be found here: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Block of editors related to sockpuppet Jvolkblum You are not mentioned as an involved party, I send you this message as a courtesy for your information, and I hope that your opinion there can contribute to solve the issue. Thank you! doxTxob \ ^talk 22:46, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Jvolkblum-related request

Having read your statement to Doncram, re. the "uncomfortable and unreasonable decision", I was quite alarmed — why must something like this be a possible reason for you to end your participation with WP:NRHP? As someone who has seen this controversy from outside for some time without having participated, I understand that it means more to you than to me; however, wouldn't it be possible for you simply to withdraw from participation in these discussions/debates/arguments, and to tell the involved parties that you'll ignore any further requests to add an opinion? As a newer-comer to the project, I've heavily depended on your work, and I'm not excited about the possibility of this Jvolkblum controversy leading you to cease working with the project; without flattery I say that I greatly appreciate your editing in every way that I have seen it. Nyttend (talk) 02:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Ditto for me....I use your tools often, and would at the very least do much less without them. I really hope you'll return after a break. Lvklock (talk) 01:35, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for this edit, and for ones such as this and this. Nyttend (talk) 18:47, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the recent Ron-vert

I dunno why he keeps trying to convince me that he's Baseball Bugs and retiring. Ron is such a loony. Anyhoo, danke. :) --Ebyabe (talk) 00:55, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neptune Island (Long Island Sound)

thanks for cleaning up after me. :-) I was more concerned with writing the close than doing the mechanics. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:42, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Notice to fairly or unfairly banned/blocked users

If you are a banned or blocked user, go away. You aren't welcome here. Also, I've eliminated New Rochelle from my copy of the NRIS database. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 19:57, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Hennepin County NRHP list

I reviewed it only superficially, but I think this list article looks like an excellent candidate for WP:FL. It's very impressive, with all those photos and blue links. However, I see several changes needed before it can be an FL. I fixed a couple of things on the page, but here are some more items to address before nominating it:

1. The second sentence, "The preservation of these historic sites commemorates salient developments in Hennepin County's history" (I realize you didn't write it....), is arguably inaccurate on several counts. These are not all "historic sites," listing is not equivalent to "preservation," and not all listings "commemorate salient developments in Hennepin County's history." It would be better to provide some sort of summary of what listing means (from NRHP sources) and of the actual reasons for the Hennepin County listings (i.e., some are indeed significant to the history of the county or a specific area of the county, but others are noteworthy for their architecture, significance in state history, significance in fast-food history, or other distinctions). For example, List of National Historic Landmarks in Alabama (a featured list) says "Five of the NHLs in the state have military significance, eight are significant examples of a particular architectural style, six are archaeological sites, five played a role in the African American struggle for civil rights, and five are associated with the development of the U.S. Space Program." I personally don't think it's necessary to count the listings by property type or reason for listing, but it would be useful to summarize the types of properties listed and the types of reasons for listing them, and to highlight anything particularly noteworthy about the list (for example, if the county list includes a large number of buildings representing architecture from a particular era). Perhaps a variant version of the last paragraph of the "Background" section belongs in the lead section.
2. Because the article needs to stand alone as an encyclopedia article (outside the context of the NRHP Wikiproject), there needs to be a legend explaining the colors used in the first column of the table. A legend was created for List of National Historic Landmarks in Alabama, but this list uses more colors and needs a more extensive legend.
3. It's not clear why there are two "See also" links to the state list. I'm not sure which one of them should be kept.
4. Separate the explanatory notes for the table from the notes for references cited. For one example of how this could be done, see how List of cities and towns in Tennessee is set up. (The annotations on that page were largely done by featured list reviewers.) List of New York Yankees seasons is another example.
5. The heading "National Register name" leaves me looking for a definition for the term "National Register name." If the point is that this is the name recorded in the NRIS, that should be explained in an explanatory note for the table. On the other hand, maybe this could be changed to "Property or district name" (or something like that).
6. The "Location" column does not sort in a meaningful manner. I think it does not need to be sortable. (Note that the Alabama NHL list combines locality with coordinates, both in one column.)
7. The heading "Current listings" makes me wonder whether there are any former listings that should also be acknowledged in the article.
8. In the references section, insert subheadings to separate the general references from the notes. See List of New York Yankees seasons for an example.

Good luck! --Orlady (talk) 20:22, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I thought the FL review of List of NHLs in AL forced it into a heavy-handed use of an upfront color-coding key, while a more understated key, to appear later in the list-article, would be better. I had the perception that the main reviewer on that particular point was forcing the issue too much based on how important it was to define terms, in advance, for somewhat different list-articles on sports statistics. In the historic sites articles, the color coding is not so important for understanding that these are sites. It is more "Extra for experts" to understand a distinction between historic districts vs. other NRHP listings, so I think the key should appear later and with less emphasis. The guy who is changing some NHL list articles to include a new NRHPdts template was also introducing a different approach, which somehow provided an extra bottom line in the table which provided for a key and/or footnote type information, which should be considered. I really would prefer for a less obtrusive presentation of color-coding key, rather than introducing a key before readers get to the historic sites. It is really not essential for readers to understand upfront, they should be allowed to see the various interesting historic places in the list and to investigate, if they really want to, later, what is some subtle distinction between types of historic places that we choose to provide with different colors. Note, the distinction between historic districts vs. other is often arbitrary. There are many cases where a listing could be presented as a historic district or just an individual listing.

Also, Orlady, thank you for taking time to provide your comments. doncram (talk) 06:14, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Doncram: The same review standards apply across all candidates for featured list status. Any featured list that uses color-coding needs to explain the meaning of the color coding (unless the meaning is obvious from the context, as in List of Czech submissions for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film). Reviewers often use sports and entertainment articles as examples because they account for the majority of FLs, but you will see keys to the color in featured list articles about other topics, such as List of Bay Area Rapid Transit stations and List of Caltrain stations (a pair of related lists).

I may respond later, somewhere else, and after your RfA is closed, to communication style / implications / interpretation issues about your comment about my comment here. On one level of the content of what you say, thank you for pointing to some other examples with keys. doncram (talk) 20:20, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Your comment reminds me of something I forgot when I wrote that message to Elkman: if color is used to communicate information, for accessibility reasons it is also necessary to provide another means of indicating the same information. I recall that this is why the funny little symbols were added in the key for List of National Historic Landmarks in Alabama. --Orlady (talk) 14:52, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

FYI: I copied this conversation to Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in Hennepin County, Minnesota, where it probably ought to continue. --Orlady (talk) 15:01, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Discussion now off the table

I am no longer seeking featured list status for this article, per discussion with DoxTxob (talk · contribs). --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 05:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

And, apparently, I'm too fucking clumsy to spell his username correctly. That, in itself, is an act of clumsiness that should earn me a block. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 05:24, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Shucks, and I was looking forward to that list becoming an FL. --Orlady (talk) 05:39, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to put down your work; just thought that it wasn't necessary to reference this list any differently from other lists. Please don't think that I don't value your work; I'm always using the infobox generator and the table generator! Nyttend (talk) 10:36, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Editor review for doxTxob

Hey Elkman,

I am losing faith in the good sides of Wikipedia and my confidence in the project, too. There is too much fighting and not enough discussion, that can drain your reservoir of good spirits at some point, even if you have started with an ocean of good spirits. I saw that you requested an editor review a while ago because you lost confidence in Wikipedia. That is a good idea and I follow your example. I have requested an editor review for myself and I would be happy if you could voice your opinion there. There is only one condition: Do not try to be nice, be brutally honest! ... and sign your name there with four tildes.

Thank you Elkman! doxTxob \ ^talk 06:48, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

You are a party to this fighting. Do you remember writing calling me a sissy and taunting me for being de-adminned? As far as your editor review goes, there's nothing I can say there that I haven't already said, and nothing I can say there that would meet your standards anyway. So I won't participate. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 12:28, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Possible friend

Giano II (talk · contribs) is good on historic buildings and writes well. He'd make a good friend, especially as he will happily join you in venting about occasional silliness around the project. Guy (Help!) 12:12, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Automatic processing of your editor review

This is an automated message. Your editor review is scheduled to be closed on 21 April 2009 because it will have been open for more than 30 days and inactive for more than 7. You can keep it open longer by posting a comment to the review page requesting more input. End of line. DustyBot (talk) 03:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Little confused

Just curious, why do you think that we don't need the reqphoto on the Montana NHL list? Nyttend (talk) 01:48, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Because I screwed up. Apparently, every list item should have a photo. Apparently, I didn't realize that I was screwing up when I made that edit. In fact, one might assume that I LIKE to screw up, and I do NOTHING to stop myself from screwing up. Otherwise, I wouldn't screw up any more. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 03:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, I wasn't thinking that you made an error: otherwise I would have reverted. Nyttend (talk) 04:13, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure someone out there could consider it an error. For example, doxTxob (talk · contribs) would be more than happy to consider it an error. Anyone at Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional Wrestling would consider it an error and a serious mistake. Actually, even if nobody else out there considers it a mistake, I consider it to be a mistake. And there's no way in hell I should accept my mistakes, screwups, fiascoes, or anything else I do wrong. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 04:30, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Table generator

I just was told by Doncram that you weren't the only one to develop the county tables. Ah well, thanks for helping — and thanks above all else for the generator! Nyttend (talk) 21:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

NRHP database?

I'm a bit confused, but I think Doncram was trying to tell me that you have an NRHP database. Could you please tell me how to access it? I think there may be some misinformation about the Idora Park Merry-Go-Round. Thanks!--BFDhD (talk) 21:23, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

You are great! Thanks for the cheery and witty explanation. Since delisting doesn't always seem to be automatic-- look up reference #86001930, a building that, of all things, was a large part of the United States' case against disgraced ex-Congressman James A. Traficant, Jr.-- I feel your pain. The building in this case (86001930) has been gone for a while, but it doesn't come up as "RN," because some person actually has to file a request to get the building delisted. Your tools are particularly excellent, so thanks again for the hard work, the interest, and the helpful explanations!--BFDhD (talk) 14:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

a Minnesota stub

Yikes, my ears are burning, noting other mentions of my name above. Thanks for helping about the carousel info.

I visit to let you know i just created a Minnesota NRHP stub article at Sacred Heart Cathedral, Sacred Heart School and Christian Brothers, actually 3 sentences this time. I often generate short stub articles in order to settle issues in disambiguation pages, and this is one taking care of two names that could appear in the Sacred Heart Cathedral disambiguation page. Also, I often generate stub articles when table-izing a state NRHP list, in cases where there is indication of a boundary increase in the "old list", as I think it is better to create the article and to capture the boundary increase info into the state list's location entry. It happens this one is a boundary increase case too, and I'll check if List of RHPs in MN needs any related revision, too. I wonder if you would be so kind as to develop the article a bit more, and/or to understand why I started such a short stub article. Would be happy to discuss more. Regards, doncram (talk) 22:25, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Wendelin Grimm Farmstead

On May 5, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Wendelin Grimm Farmstead, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 03:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Important

Hey Elkman, Manelk, whatever your name is. I'm just wondering why you deleted the article "Nozomi Cruz" I created a while back, on October the 24th of 2008. Your reason for the deletion of this article was the following "(Doesn't indicate importance or significance of a real person)". Well for your instance you asshole, she is a real person, why don't you try checking your sources? Whats up with the procedure, I'm pretty sure the wiki doesn't tolerate this kind of behaviour? Did you even go around and try to double check your sources? Probably not jackass, well you shouldn't make such statement if it's not true. You fucker, get a life, and get a better screenname. Elkman, what the fuck does that even me, fag.

Well basically fuck you, and get off this wiki if you don't know how to abide by protocol.

hasta luego bitch - Holamat (talk) 11:07, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd respond in kind, but I lost my adminship back in January for responding with foul language. Since I lost my adminship, I can't even look into deleted revisions of an article to determine why I deleted it or what it said before I deleted it.

If you want a more enlightened answer, I'd suggest one of the following sources:

• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard, where some administrator can check into the deleted history of your article and see what it actually said. Some other administrator can determine whether it should have been kept. Another administrator can also verify your claims that I'm an asshole, that my behavior isn't tolerated, that I didn't check the sources, and that I'm a jackass, a fucker, a fag, and that I don't know how to abide by protocol. Other admins can also determine whether I should get off Wikipedia.
• Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention, since you don't like my user name here.
• User talk:Tiptoety and User talk:Barneca, two of the admins who said I was no longer fit to be an admin in the January incident
• User talk:Kalajan, User talk:Raaggio, User talk:Kaizer13, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional Wrestling. They have some real problems with me being an admin. Oh, wait, I'm no longer an admin, so they got what they wanted.
• User talk:doxTxob, who defends sockpuppets and other downtrodden on here and basically thinks I'm not suitable to be an admin, let alone an editor
• MyWikiBiz, which accepts articles on any real person, whether they're notable or not, as long as Greg Kohs gets a cut of the profits
• Wikipedia Review, where nothing will be done, but at least you can gripe about it there

There is nothing more I can do to help you out in this matter. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 13:23, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, I see that you just registered your account this morning. You might have to provide your old user name so they can see who created the original page. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 13:26, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I have looked at the log, and I can confirm that the deletion was appropriate. The deletion reason "Doesn't indicate importance or significance of a real person" probably gave the article more credit than it deserved, as the article was basically nonsense. --Orlady (talk) 16:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

The creator was IFeltFedlt, who has only made three contributions — one creating this article, another modifying it, and a third creating a userpage. Nyttend (talk) 23:22, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Just one missing picture

I've noticed for some time that the Dakota County NRHP list has no picture for the Good Templars Hall, which has been moved from its original location. I was curious — were you unable to get a picture? Or did you believe it best not to get one, since it's not in its historical location, or something like that? Nyttend (talk) 23:28, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I've figured that Appraiser had most of the photos pretty much finished for National Register of Historic Places listings in Dakota County, Minnesota, so I haven't done much in the way of photo touring down there. I'm not really sure that the Good Templars Hall has been moved, though. The article here says that the Good Templars Hall was moved to the Little Log House Show site, but when I check their map, it says that the Nininger Town Hall was moved to the village, not the Good Templars Hall. Also, the book Minnesota Treasures and placeography.org both have current pictures of the building. I'll have to ask Appraiser for clarification. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 03:35, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I think the Placeography article is outdated based on the plaque in Nininger. That was the last picture I needed, and I didn't have time on the day I found the plaque to go to the village. And I just haven't been motivated to go find it. Please do so if you are inclined.--Appraiser (talk) 17:29, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Now I'm motivated to go there, but I don't think I'll have time today...the trip from Ohio is just a little far :-) Nyttend (talk) 14:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

A note on your infobox generator

Hi. I'm currently writing an article about the Yolo County Courthouse. According to several sources, it is an NRHP, but it isn't listed on the .gov website. This place lists it, the courthouse's history page, and several local history books I own say that it is an NRHP. I plan to contact the courthouse directly tomorrow, but I had a question about what this message means (From your infobox generator): "This property may not actually be listed on the National Register - listing code is DR" More specifically, what DR stands for, and how it knows that. I got the NRHP # from the first EL I provided above. I'm working on the article in my userspace here but it might get moved here by the time you read this (I don't know when I'll finish). Killiondude (talk) 04:17, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

"DR" means "Date received/pending nomination". Apparently, the documentation was submitted in 1986, but it wasn't actually listed on the National Register on that date. I'm not sure why it wasn't listed separately. I found this list of contributing properties to the Downtown Woodland Historic District, and the Yolo County Courthouse is listed as a contributing property. Doing a query by city for Woodland gives reference number 99000471 for the district, so I'd use that. By the way, I found a photo on Flickr of the courthouse. It's licensed under a Creative Commons noncommercial license, so we can't use it on Wikipedia unless the author is willing to remove the noncommercial part. You could always ask him if he's willing to do so. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 12:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. I tried calling the courthouse right now, but they don't have operators, its just an automated message that doesn't allow for general inquiries. So I emailed the courthouse as well as a local historian whose books I use to cite a lot of local history information. That flickr image was on commons for years, but I just requested its deletion yesterday since it had the wrong license info. There's another picture of the courthouse that I moved to commons yesterday from Wikipedia, but its not as good of quality as the Flickr image. I live somewhat near the courthouse, so I'm going to try and take a picture one of these days. Thank you for your help! Just a quick note---I love your infobox generator. I've used it on 6 articles I've created now. Killiondude (talk) 16:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I just wanted to give you an update on this strange situation (in case you were interested). The local author/historian I contacted was actually the filing party for this submission over 20 years ago. She said for all these years they thought it was actually on the register and everything was taken care of. She has sent out several emails to the NRHS and other parties, trying to find out what's going on. Strange that I'm the first person to raise the issue in the 23 years it has supposedly been on the list. Killiondude (talk) 01:42, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if it could have been "listed" by announcement, but then not entered into NRIS. That happened for several Oregon NRHPs, which I and others uncovered when doing a big reconciliation between an Oregon state document vs. wikipedia/NRIS. The NRIS data entry missed several other states' items too, off of the same weekly announcement being entered. You could try to find the announcement of this one, back in the old weekly listing documents (which are all available). doncram (talk) 03:28, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

It was listed on the National Register on February 26, 1987, as can be seen on page 26 of the 144 page PDF file of NRHP listings during 1987. Which you access by clicking on "1986" (not 1987) on the NRHP announcements page [here]. I believe that then there was an NRIS data entry error, namely the omission of this item, which should be added to wp:NRIS info issues's California section, towards reporting to the National Register for correction. doncram (talk) 03:51, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

MPS documents list

Hi Elkman -- I wonder if you'd be willing to generate a list of the MPS/TR/MRA documents and their URLs, which I believe all use their numeric reference numbers, as a reference source, or to make available a query that would allow one to find out a given MPS's reference number and hence enable one to derive the URL for the actual report.

I believe that they are all available online, but currently the NRIS search tool for covers, at http://www.nr.nps.gov/nrcover.htm , is broken and does not work. It is possible that the search tool works under some old browsers perhaps including old versions of Microsoft Internet Explorer. But it does not work using Firefox browser and it also does not work now using Microsoft Internet Explorer (at least the version 9 i think, which I have). So, it is effectively broken for most wikipedia editors and other possible users, I believe, and to find any one cover's URL requires a separate request to the NPS.

As a one-time request, I wonder if you could please provide a list of all the covers and their URLs? I think this might possibly be a small revision to apply to your cover list tool that you previouslyy set up, but that query tool did not output the reference numbers needed. I actually requested a list of the URLs or reference numbers from the NPS directly already, but eventually got the following in reply (excerpt):

You are correct that the multiple property search is broken most of the time in that old server environment in which it is stored. Within the next few months I would like to move the multiples over to nrhp.focus.nps.gov where they would work correctly. When that happens all the urls will then change.

So, it's not worth too much effort, as the URLs may change at some point, but I'd just like to have reference access to them now and all along. Not a big problem if this does not interest you, but it would be a help and I would appreciate the favor.

regards, doncram (talk) 00:23, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the Multiple Property Submissions have reference numbers that are in the NRIS database. All of the NRIS reference numbers start with the year they were assigned, which at the earliest is 66000001. The reference numbers for the Multiple Property Submissions are all in the 64000000 range, which makes them look like they're reference numbers in a table in the NRIS database, but they aren't in the "propmain" table that contains the regular information on individual properties and historic districts. For example, Walnut Street Historic District (Chaska, Minnesota) is in the Carver County MRA, "reference" number 64000345, but that reference doesn't appear in the "propmain" table or any other tables in the NRIS download. (There might be some other table that contains these references, but I don't think it's part of the downloadable data.) There's a table named "doemain" that contains reference numbers in the 65000000 range, but I think those are for Department of Energy and other federal projects. I don't think those correspond to MRAs.

So, the short answer: I'd write a database query for the Multiple Property Submissions if I had that data, but I don't have that data. Or if I do, I don't know where to find it. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 20:14, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Ah, thanks very much for your detailed explanation. I'll be back in touch with the NPS again then and will let you know if i find out anything more. Thanks! doncram (talk) 04:37, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

architecture in infobox

Hi, i've been aware of some apparent glitches in your NRHP infobox generator for handling architecture categories. In the architecture categories added for some NRHP sites, there is often double-reporting of Category:Queen Anne architecture, for example. Also sometimes different categories than appear in the infobox are given. For example, refnum 87000614, Southern Pacific Freight Depot (Yuma, Arizona), has infobox reporting architecture= Stick/Eastlake, but the category added is Queen Anne architecture, which looks wrong. I previously thot that your generator was giving larger categories for which there are wikipedia articles, but I think now that Stick/Eastlake should have its own category. I could give further examples if it would help you diagnose any problem. doncram (talk) 19:25, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Also about railroads, i'm done cleaning up Southern Railway Depot disambiguation page, but have left an awkward section titled "Other NRHP ones with 'Southern Railway' in name, possibly related or possibly from other railways", because i am ill-informed about railways. I wonder if you would interpret/present info from that section differently? If they are all fairly presented as from the same Southern Railway, then certainly those entries should be merged into the by-state list above. If you have a chance and are more comfortable about this subject area. doncram (talk) 22:04, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I took a look at the Southern Railway Depot page and cleaned up the depots that are Southern Railway (U.S.) depots versus those that aren't. As far as Stick/Eastlake versus Queen Anne is concerned, it seems like Stick, Eastlake, and Shingle are subcategories of Queen Anne Style architecture from an architectural standpoint. Wikipedia has a category Category:Queen Anne architecture, but it doesn't have one for Stick/Eastlake. Moreover, since our article here defines Stick and Eastlake as separate styles, I don't think we should define one common category for both, even if the National Register database lumps them together. In fact, the National Register database lists many structures as being both in Queen Anne and Stick/Eastlake. Chatham Train Station is one such example. I have a table that maps the NRIS style categories into Wikipedia categories, but it has always mapped Queen Anne (their category 45), Stick/Eastlake (their category 44), and Shingle (their category 46) into one common Category:Queen Anne architecture. Nevertheless, I've seen the duplicate category listing before, and it's been bugging me. I finally just fixed the problem by using the SQL "select distinct" clause, so Queen Anne will only be listed once. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 02:33, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

About architecture, i have all along understood Shingle to be a substyle of Queen Anne. If it's not a separate wikipedia category it should be one, though, we should just make it so. I have been / am a lot less clear on Stick/Eastlake vs. Stick vs. Eastlake vs. Queen Anne. Thanks! doncram (talk) 00:59, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

The Shingle Style deserves its own category. The Queen Anne/Eastlake/Stick Style continuum appropriated some of Shingle's devices and materials, but the Shingle Style is all about the building's skin. I really need to get out my copy of Vincent Scully's The Shingle Style Today and write a proper article on its own. Acroterion _(talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Category:Shingle Style architecture started now, following naming/other aspects of Category:Queen Anne Style architecture. Splitting out Shingle Style or Shingle Style architecture from the Queen Anne Style architecture would be good to do, it deserves an article. doncram (talk) 03:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

About railroads, thanks, also! The Southern Railway Depot disambiguation article looks a lot better. If you want, you could also take a look at new disambiguations for Rock Island Depot and Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Depot, although i currently think the way i've got them makes adequate sense. They're related though, because apparently Rock Island Railroad is just another name for Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad. So i set up See also links. The railway article about the two of them could be clearer, though, about all the earlier and later names of the railway. Or were they really two separate railroad companies? Just because one is a successor to the other doesn't mean there should be only one merged article. But again, this is out of my area. Regards, doncram (talk) 00:59, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

NRHP delisting codes

Forgive me if you've already done this, but...Could you post a list of the listing codes (such as DO, RN, etc.) for possibly non-listed properties with reference numbers? Nyttend (talk) 14:27, 30 May 2009 (UTC)