User talk:Sanfranman59/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Sanfranman59! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 10 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 13 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Rick Aponte - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Craig Colbert - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
3. Pierre Arsenault - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
4. Doug Mansolino - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
5. Luis Silverio - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
6. Mike Barnett - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
7. Steve Soliz - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
8. Jim Skaalen - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
9. Steve Liddle - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
10. Jim Lett - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 04:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

New Kansas listings

Sorry for the confusion; I didn't realise that you weren't done. Nyttend (talk) 03:12, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

trolls and stuff

This is an invitation to discussion. - --Gbaor (talk) 08:42, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion. I thought about to put it back, but at the end I decided not to do so, mainly because of the overly (melo)dramatic commentary. --Gbaor (talk) 15:37, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Arkansas

Sorry about forgetting to split the Pulaski County line in the Arkansas statewide list; I was busy on Wednesday and got distracted periodically, so it was a wonder that I was able to complete the split at all. You removed bad coords for a cemetery in Washington County; if the GNIS ever starts working (it's not going anywhere from the search screen at the moment), I'll try to get coords from it. Nyttend (talk) 05:47, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, the impression I get from the profile on the Arkansas historical preservation website is that it's an abandoned part of a little-known ghost town; I cited the profile to establish that it was part of the ghost town and cited the GNIS for coords for the ghost town itself, since the area surely can't be too large and we know that the ghost town's coords will be approximately correct. Thanks for the reply. Nyttend (talk) 06:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

NRHP

Where did you come up with Louis P. and Clara K. Best Residence and Auto House at? CTJF83 pride 06:26, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

It's one of the listings announced by the NPS 6/4/2010. Strange name, to be sure, but that's the way it's listed. Do you know it by another name? --sanfranman59 (talk) 06:38, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

....Not that I know of, I'd have to see what it refers to. I just thought it odd to be adding to the NRHP, but I guess, as your source points out, they do add more places to the list...thanks for the update! CTJF83 pride 06:42, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 21:42, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

NRHP Coordinates in Patchogue, New York

Is there any way you can fix the coordinates for the United Methodist Church (Patchogue, New York)? It's right across the street from the Union Savings Bank (Patchogue, New York), but is incorrectly geotagged a lot further to the southeast, as I described on the talk page. ----DanTD (talk) 05:01, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

I've tried EarthTools & Geocoder in the past, and it didn't work for me. The thing gave me an error message when I added coordinates for Greenfield Village (Amtrak station) and Google Maps themselves has the location too far to the west. As for UMC of Patchogue, you're work puts it much closer, but the address is wrong. The official website claims they're on 10 Church Street, and looking from Google Street View the address they give is 90 South Ocean Avenue. ----DanTD (talk) 14:39, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

National Register of Historic Places listings in Sonoma County, California

Locating a house with 0.01-second (one-foot) precision looks to me like excessive precision. --Stepheng3 (talk) 16:55, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Now I can focus my efforts on articles that are located with sub-micron precision :) While I have your attention, let me note that I admire and appreciate your photographic contributions at Wikimedia Commons. Cheers, --Stepheng3 (talk) 17:27, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

National Register of Historic Places listings in Citrus County, Florida

Thanks for adding the new one. I try to keep the Florida ones updated, but once in a blue moon a listing slips by. Another to add to the photo list. At least it's not that far. Cheers! :) --Ebyabe (talk) 16:49, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Cushing Homestead

Hi, yes, this is my source on that: the Hingham Historical Society, which is usually pretty reliable.[1] MarmadukePercy (talk) 22:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I'll try to doublecheck it in a bit, thanks. MarmadukePercy (talk) 22:32, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm more accustomed to dealing with the National Register of Historic Places list, which I use regularly. I note that the Cushing Homestead in several sources is listed as a Massachusetts Historic Landmark [2], but this is not the same as a National Historic Landmark. So I fear I've conflated the two. Also, I notice, as you point out, that the Cushing Homestead doesn't show up on that NHL list, as do the Benjamin Lincoln House and Old Ship Church, both entries I've had something to do with. So my apologies for any mix-up on my part. MarmadukePercy (talk) 22:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I'll remove it this evening, thanks. MarmadukePercy (talk) 23:09, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Stark County, Ohio

Nice to see more pictures! I've only been to Stark County a couple of times in my life, so I've never had the chance to add to its list like I have for lots of counties in western Ohio. Nyttend (talk) 02:55, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I've previously noticed that you'd taken lots of Stark County photos, so I figured you had something to do with the area. I went to college in Beaver Falls (Beaver County, Pennsylvania), so I got a decent number of Columbiana County photos while in school, but you know it's just a little too far to bicycle to Stark County from Pennsylvania in a schoolday :-) Nyttend (talk) 03:29, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Template:NRHP date for lists/dates

After chatting with the admin that protected this page, I've reduced it to semiprotection so that you can edit it if you want. Nyttend (talk) 02:29, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Up for a split?

The National Register of Historic Places listings in Hartford County, Connecticut article is getting unwieldy again, bumping up against 100K. I've made some recent additions, and have more planned, so it would be good to break it out into subarticles. I'm writing to you because I believe you did the breakout of the city of Hartford from the full county listing.

Is this something you are willing to do? I could give it a shot, but it looks tricky, so I thought it would made sense to check with someone who has done it before. I have some thoughts on what should be done, but let me first find out if you are interested in doing it, or can suggest someone who might be better.--SPhilbrickT 14:24, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Sphilbrick asked me for comment as well. Here are the number of listings per municipality, minus Hartford of course; although there are 289 listings outside Hartford, properties that are split between municipalities I've included separately on each list, so the total is rather more than 289.

• Barkhamsted: 1
• Hazardville: 1
• Kensington: 1
• Meriden: 1
• Sharon: 1
• South Glastonbury: 1
• Stafford: 1
• Unionville: 1
• Warehouse Point: 1
• Hartland: 2
• Marlborough: 2
• Avon: 3
• Berlin: 3
• Canton: 3
• South Windsor: 3
• Manchester: 4
• Plainville: 4
• Windsor Locks: 4
• Burlington: 5
• Enfield: 5
• Rocky Hill: 5
• Bloomfield: 6
• East Granby: 6
• East Windsor: 6
• Wethersfield: 6
• Simsbury: 7
• Granby: 9
• Newington: 9
• East Hartford: 10
• Glastonbury: 10
• Farmington: 11
• Suffield: 12
• Bristol: 14
• New Britain: 17
• West Hartford: 32
• Southington: 39
• Windsor: 41

What would you think about splitting Windsor, Southington, and West Hartford? Nyttend (talk) 14:57, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Those three would add up to 112, leaving 169177 (approx), which seems like a more workable size, plus the 4th place is much smaller, so yes, this makes sense to me.--SPhilbrickT 15:07, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

You missed Simsbury.My bad - I saw Markvs88 post that Simsbury had 17, but that was a typo. (I really should know, as I went out and photgrpahed every one of them.)(OK, I guess my counting and memory skills are deficient. I see 16 for Simsbury).--SPhilbrickT 23:04, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't have a magic wand and doubt that I'm any better equipped to do it than anyone else. It's a laborious and time-consuming task that involves a bunch of cutting and pasting and a lot of renumbering of rows. I do have a short-cut for the latter that involves pasting the information into a spreadsheet and manipulating it there. But I'll see what I can do. --sanfranman59 (talk) 05:43, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

It is really is a manual task, then there's no special reason you should have to do it - I saw you did it before, and hoped that maybe you had a semi-automated way to do it. I can get from a spreadsheet to a wikitable (although I haven't tried with images in the table, not sure whether that poses and challenges.) I haven't figure out how to get from a Wikitable to a spreadsheet easily - I've done it with a small table, but empty cells create problems. Can you tell me how you do it?--SPhilbrickT 11:38, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

(Sorry for the delay in responding ... the hard drive on my home computer crashed and I'm just now getting back online with a computer borrowed from my office). I find it easier to manipulate the tables in Excel. I cut and paste the main content of each table (from the edit window ... not the Wikipedia rendering) into a spreadsheet. I create an index column that numbers the rows from 1 to however many rows of data there are. This allows me to put the rows back into their original order by sorting on that column. I also create a column that labels each row with the type of information stored in that row (separator, row number, site, image, date, address, locality and summary). By sorting on that column, it groups all of the rows with the same type of data together. From there, I can cut, paste and manipulate the data in a variety of other useful ways. I'm going to go ahead and work on the Hartford County table now. By the time you read this, the work may already be done. --sanfranman59 (talk) 23:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Done (please feel free to check my work!) --sanfranman59 (talk) 01:22, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Commons versus en.wikipedia

I've taken a few pictures recently, and have been adding them to Commons. I thought the preference was to upload to Commons when possible, but I checked a few NRHP images, and they are in en.wikipedia. Is there a reason for this? Should I be uploading to en.wikipedia?--SPhilbrickT 14:55, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Since I'm already here on the previous thread, I'll answer for you :-) You should always upload free images to Commons. The images you found are either by people who weren't aware of Commons or people who really don't like Commons for some reason or another. For example, tons of images on the Pittsburgh and the surrounding Allegheny County, Pennsylvania lists aren't on Commons: they were taken by someone who wishes that he could restrict his images to Wikipedia-only use, and since he knows that he can't do that, he uploads them only to Wikipedia to make them less visible overall. Nyttend (talk) 14:59, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I completely agree with Nyttend on this. I upload all of my photos to Commons and make them available to anyone who wants to use them. I don't think I'd be thrilled if I were to find out that someone else took credit for them, but I don't think that's really much of a risk. I'm by no means a professional photographer. --sanfranman59 (talk) 05:46, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

San Francisco Bay Area NRHP Photos

Being a total newbie at Wikipedia, I'm not sure of the protocol for responding to your inquiry on my User Talk page regarding my Bay Area NRHP photographs. My primary emphasis is posting to my own website. Right now, I have no plans to make Wikipedia postings for any Bay Area counties or Monterey County. Any NRHP photos that I post will probably be for sparsely populated rural counties in northern California, southern Oregon, Nevada, Utah and New Mexico.NoeHill (talk) 00:12, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

CT info

Thanks for your generally great work maintaining and developing NRHP list-articles nation-wide! I notice your mention of contact with a Ms. Vairo of Connecticut SHPO office. I wonder if I could be put in touch to submit all the other accumulated Connecticut changes needed. I have been meaning to submit the Connecticut stuff identified at wp:NRIS info issues CT, and would be glad to try starting with a state office, rather than submitting to National Register in D.C., which has not proven very successful yet for another state. Let me know, perhaps by email to me (i have email enabled and an email-to-me box at my user page). Thanks! --doncram (talk) 21:08, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for going ahead and splitting the County of Hartford NRHP register page into Southington, Windsor, W Hartford and the rest. Helps to make it much more manageable.--SPhilbrickT 12:07, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Milk plant

I can't explain it 100% satisfactorily, but I suspect a copy/paste error. I suspect the cryptic edit summary was the result of hitting the "Enter" button by accident; I probably meant to type an apostrophe to get "There's" but went a little too far to the right. If you look across all of the Mississippi listings, you'll see that I improved descriptions and expanded headers and footers for counties statewide around this time; this wasn't an isolated edit. Look at the edits I made to that article individually: you'll see that I replaced the milk plant with First Methodist Church, and the next edit was simply removing the duplicate entry for the church. Most likely I copy/pasted the church over the milk plant by accident, failed to observe that I'd gotten rid of a listing, and then removed the duplicate church and changed the total to 18, assuming that the 19 total was due to my own error in miscounting the listings. You'll see that I've now restored it. Thanks for the pointer! Nyttend (talk) 12:52, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

New listings in Summit County

Thanks for fixing the Ghent HD issue; it's been long enough since I added a new listing that I didn't think of fixing the color. At least I didn't chop out any milk plants :-) Nyttend (talk) 21:40, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Look at the section above this one. Nyttend (talk) 21:51, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Also — sorry about not letting you know; I was just about done when I realised that it was time for me to leave for church this morning, and (thanks to some people who invited me to lunch) I didn't get back until a little bit ago. Nyttend (talk) 21:54, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

No, none; it's simply that they were Ohio. If there were any Indiana or Pennsylvania included, I might, but there aren't. Thanks for checking. Nyttend (talk) 21:55, 19 December 2010 (UTC)