ClairSamoht decided to leave Wikipedia in October, 2006.

You deleted information in Lancaster County wikipedia entry saying it is POV and unverifiable. Which sections are unverifiable and/or POV? For the sake of discussion, please point out which of the following sentences are POV or unverifiable/untrue:

"Lancaster County's politics have often not been in sync with the rest of Pennsylvania or with the Northeast as a whole. Even when Pennsylvania strongly supported Andrew Jackson and his Democratic Party, Lancaster was something of a Whig Party stronghold. The town and township of Clay are even named after the famous Whig politician Henry Clay. Lancaster supported the Presidential candidacy of native son (and Democrat) James Buchanan in 1856, but has been a Republican stronghold ever since, in spite of the many shifts in party loyalties and geographic bases across the US as a whole in the past 150 years. Thaddeus Stevens, the noted Radical Republican, was Lancaster's representative in the House of Representatives until his death in 1868."

It would seem to me that politics would be a minor part of a general description of Lancaster County. It would seem that a very long table listing every single state and federal representative would be overkill.

I didn't write the section about political history. I just happened to read it and to me it was interesting. The township Clay being named after Henry Clay? Lancaster being Whig, while Pennsylvania supported Andrew Jackson? Thaddeus Stevens being a member of 4 political parties being from Lancaster?

Then I saw that section replaced with a long table simply listing current politicans, with the interesting stuff deleted, I was suprised. I'm all for refrences and verifying data, and will search for sources to list to back up this data.

Thanks for the feedback, references added to piece. User:Civicsight

Thanks for suggestion of using a NPOV tag on the Fingerprinting discussion. I inserted the paragraph that had been eliminated and no one has removed, so that now it is reasonabley balanced. I guess I just have to monitor it since those with professional interests in exagerating the accuracy of their forensic evidence would like this dose of reality to go awayArodb 17:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The PR guys for the fingerprinting expert witness association are not going away. They keep reverting my version that discusses the controversy over the validity of fingerprinting as forensic evidence. I need some help in getting arbitration on this.Arodb 03:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

G'day Clair, was wondering if you'd be interested in joining the latest footy project we have going on, WikiProject AFL. Cheers, Rogerthat 06:10, 20 January 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That was a very nice addition you made to the article, but it really cries out for references. Could you please list your sources in a References section at thye bottom of the article. Don't worry about the format, just provide enough information so that others can identify the source. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability as well. -- Dalbury^(Talk) 12:21, 20 January 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi. You did a nice job on the article for Bill "Tiger" Johnson. There're a lot of sources that he attended Tyler Junior College, but could you tell me where you got the information that he attended Stephen F. Austin State University? I haven't been able to find anything about that on the internet. This site indicates that he played college football at Texas A&M, though both could be true. Thanks. ×Meegs 14:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank's for that link. I'm not certain calling Heinz would get us very far, and I'm fairly content just to have something written to cite (even that rah-rah web site). I think the article & talk page are in good shape now, and others will will come-along and expand it. ×Meegs 18:22, 26 January 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your additions! Could you please cite your sources? Thanks! -SCEhardT 03:16, 31 January 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lots of edits in only 2 months. Your excellent edits at Fort Wayne, Paulding, & Lancaster suggest the possibility of a personal geographic trajectory from the Maumee valley to SE Pa, just like Lincoln Life & at least one other editor. alteripse 15:36, 5 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, i have been trying to progressively add the box to the major cities in the state. BTW nice work on Pennsylvania related articles, keep it up. As for the the inqusition, it basicaly i dont see eye to eye with how this is run, if your here long enough and watch the operations of the site, you'll see the hipocracy of it. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 19:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just was curious over your comments on the food section, was curious if it was partaly in jest. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 08:15, 25 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

oh ok. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 08:38, 25 February 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for the barnstar, though I must say I don't feel I deserve it. There was a vandal going around attacking people's user pages, mine included, all I did was follow him around until he was banned and reverted his work. But thank you very much anyway. Ben W Bell 08:09, 1 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's nice to know that you found this work valuable and of quality. I haven't been around enough to see your work but I hope to soon. To me, everybody who does good work here is an asset against ignorance, falsehood, and propaganda. That is what I like about open source collaborations.Anacapa 04:18, 5 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would like to inform about the Arbitration request concerning the long discussion on Talk:Dutch language.

[The link to the Arbitration request will follow soon, as I have to inform you before posting]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Statement_by_Sander_on_Talk:Dutch_language

Sander 10:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello ClairSamoht. I noticed that you did not cite any sources in your Harry Baals article. After a few Google searches, it seems that a number of sentences in the articles are very similar to those in some exernal sites. Please cite the sources you used, and I would encourage you to rewrite some of those sections. Thanks. ~MDD4696 23:42, 15 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've started a page with a more comprehensive list of vegetable oils. I think it would benefit from a bit of structure, but I'm not sure what would work best. We could classify them by source (almond oil, walnut oil and cashew oil all seem to go together...), or by use, or... Any comments or suggestions are more than welcome. Waitak 16:14, 16 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, now you've done it... you went and made a bunch of concrete suggestions, and I took you up on it. Now you're going to have to go look and see if what I did made any sense. See what you've gotten yourself into? :-) Waitak 10:04, 24 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just wanted to let you know that I've finished List of vegetable oils. Looking forward to hearing what you think of it. thanks again for your suggestions. Waitak 04:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, I realize that I'm courting an intervention here... ("back away from the keyboard, sir...") but I, um... kind of kept working on it... a little... I mean, at first it was only an image or two... and then I thought, some comments on the references wouldn't really hurt anybody... it was all in good fun, honest. Then I noticed that there was a lot of red on the page, so I started on... page redirects. Yes, it's true. I made redirects for all of the oil pages that aren't written yet. That's not even the worst of it. I even started^[1] using references! Anyway, you can look at the results for yourself. It may be too late for me, but maybe others can be spared my sad fate. Waitak 11:36, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please don't create duplicate articles like City of Lancaster. Pennsylvania which is a copy of Lancaster, Pennsylvania. Redirect instead. Thanks Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 03:47, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, you have tagged this image with ((PD-ineligible)). However, it is clear that this tag is not proper. It could be used for say, simple chemical structural formulas, but not for photos! Please read Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. If no proper license will be added in seven days, the image will be re-tagged with ((no source)) and deleted. Please ask on my talk page if you have any questions. Renata 05:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You created an article at ClairSamoht/sandbox but I've moved it to User:ClairSamoht/sandbox, your userspace, just so you know. --W.marsh 19:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've recently written Ben oil and Amaranth oil. I also spruced up Behenic acid a bit. My general plan is to move through list of vegetable oils, replacing redirect pages with real pages on oils that don't already have one. I'm pretty far out of my depth here on these subjects, though. Mind taking a quick look to see if they're up to snuff? Your chemistry - and knowledge of fats and oils in particular - is way better than mine. Gotta say that I'm learning an awful lot doing this, though... Thanks! Waitak 12:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:BenDavisRookie.gif. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:06, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Nice to see you back in these parts. Waitak 13:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just thought you'd be interested in knowing that I've nominated List of vegetable oils for Featured list status. If you're interested, you can lodge a vote or an opinion here. Waitak 12:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As of this morning, List of vegetable oils is a featured list! --Waitak 05:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:CiderPress.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 00:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Wonderful! That's a great resource to have. I've moved it to its own article, since the existing list was focused on pressed oils, and had gotten pretty long. I'll have a closer look at the new list when I'm back in front of my own computer in another few hours. Thank you! --Waitak 08:13, 1 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've been mulling over an idea for the last few days that I wanted to run by you. There are a lot of articles surrounding the general topic of vegetable oils:

• Vegetable oil
• List of vegetable oils
• Essential oils
• List of essential oils
• List of macerated oils
• Drying oil
• Cooking oil (not just about vegetable oils, but mostly)
• Biodiesel
• Fatty acids

• Saturated fat
• Monounsaturated fat
• Polyunsaturated fat
• Trans fat

And probably others that I'm not thinking of right now. What would you think of a "section template" that could get added to all of them, as a first step toward tying the whole sorry lot together? The template would go into the top right hand corner of all of the related articles. I realize that it'd all benefit from a reorganization, but that wouldn't be any harder for having put the existing articles into some sort of order.

Here's a first draft of what it might look like: ((Vegetable oils))

What do you think? --Waitak 08:26, 2 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Excellent points. Hmmm. There are certain things that I kept running into, again and again, when writing the stubs for the oil pages in preparation for the featured list candidacy. Things like:

• Major classes of use
• Places that produce the most
• Fatty acid composition
• Smoke point, for cooking oils

Those are more or less off the top of my head, but I'm sure we could abstract out some common set of attributes that apply to a good many oils. We could also leave room for a picture at the top, since there are pictures of the plants from which a good fraction of the oils are derived. Haven't thought about how it might apply to essential oils. My gut feeling is they're sufficiently different to require their own infobox.

Good grief, you've done it again, haven't you?

Oh, by the way... remember that lame attempt at comedic relief that I left in your talk page back in May or so? Well... during the last stage of the FL review, one reviewer asked me to provide sources for a statement that I made in a reference, at the request of another reviewer. I was able to assert with confidence that no, I do not want to put a recursive <ref> call into the article. The similarity to the posting that I left on your talk page was a little scary. --Waitak 15:03, 2 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the comments. Not trying to strongarm you, but would you have time to make the changes you suggested to the template? I think they're all very reasonable. I'd much rather that it not be a one-editor show. I've got to say, I'm absolutely delighted to see discussions going on in the talk page in which I'm not a major participant! --Waitak 03:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for that link - are youi interested in starting a stub or at least correcting the disambig bit? SatuSuro 07:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Someone's removed the essential oil links from the template that I was chatting with you about, saying that essential oil isn't oil. I reverted the changes pending a discussion (but left the template out of Essential oil) for the moment. I'd love to have your view on the question. I've started a talk page so that interested parties can discuss it. --Waitak 15:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's an excellent idea. I was trying to look over the whole cluster of articles from the point of view of somebody who cares about something other than vegetable oil (fat). I can see the point, in part, but I'm not sure what to do about it. I think the disambiguation is a good start, anyway. What do you think of the name change of the template? Oh, and I heartily approve of you not learning anything further about divorce. 8-o I've been married almost 27 years now. --Waitak 13:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why don't you check with the city of Fort Wayne building department. The building was set to be leased when upon further inspection it was found that there was mold growing in the building. The reason, the new owner of the building turned off the air flow to save money. The building has a very wet crawl space and because of the lack of air flow mold grew on most of the inside walls. Clair knock this off Neighborhood Code Inforcement doesn't condemn buildings the building department does. You sir are a real A-----. WOWO Historian

You made an edit stating that Granite had defaulted on its June 1st 2006 payment. This is not true. Actually, they were able to make the payment through a "Senior credit facility". This was kind of a short term loan that made the June payment. But they have to pay it back short term as well. This is where the problem lies right now. They thought with the sale of the San Franscisco station they would pay the short term loan. In any case, as part of an agreement with their creditors they have gone into a restructing agreement which has be done by the end of August. It's complicated but if you go into their stock quotes and look at all the newswire and disclosures you can figure it out. It certainly looks like bankruptcy and it is agreed by most that that may be the next step. This is a mandatory process that resembles bankrupcy but is not legally bankrupcy. [Joseph Blowhard} http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060703/nym043.html?.v=61

This guy likes leaving angry messages, doesn't s/he? I made a pseudo-user page (User:WOWO Historian) to track his/her IP addresses and contributions, and modified your user talk page slightly (sorry). Anyway, be careful he doesn't bait you into violating WP:3RR... I've got WISE-TV on my watchlist, so I'll try to help keep it vandalism-free. --AlexDW 16:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are some 1900's dates mixed in with this article. (I am trying to sort out a Canadian Kenneth McKenzie who was a fur trader and came across your guy.) Happy editing! Stormbay 20:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I believe there is a Manitoba connection with my guy..(as there is with myself). I would have corrected the dates but it would have been on assumption....it all worked out, and, I read another good article.  :-) Stormbay

This is sociological theory. I didn't make this up, yes you have a point, but the best everyone should do is do their best in terms of gender equaltiy.100110100 20:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I asked myself the etymology of person. I searched it up a few months ago found it was from latin, 'persona'. With the case of woman, I guess it was just the addition of the extra first sylable that makes the semantic different.100110100 21:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ok, I looked into the definition of dogma. How is it dogma?100110100 21:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So I have to drop my fight for gender equality.....[?]100110100 01:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure you can address me in Hex, if that's convienent! Hhhmmmmm, I see..... I see your point. I guess I should drop my vendetta. It's so unfortunate they don't teach you this in soiciology, or, at least school. Thanks. It feels great to have revolutionized your worldview. Thank you for it.100110100 09:25, 5 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thought you'd want to see this. Waitak 05:24, 15 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for the help Clair, I will try to put up sufficient number of creidtable references for the article. I knew about how to make those references links still thanks for all the help you offered me.

About Camille Anderson, well I just saw her picture on the site of my ISP and I felt I should read about her here. Didn't know her notability was in doubt.

Well thanks again for help mate, hope to stay in touch.

Unitedroad 16:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:ChuckTaylorFirestone.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clair, thanks for your work on the Johnny Appleseed article. When it started out it was just a copy of the 1911 Britannica. Note that copyediting is understood to be fixing spelling, grammar, or formatting, without changing the sense of the text, adding to it, or deleting it. Please be more accurate in your edit summaries, to avoid any suggestions that the summaries could be misleading. --Blainster 14:53, 18 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just took a quick look and it seems fine - I made a minor edit (got the refs to list by number - removed the asterisk) and I changed the rating to B (next is Good Article, but that is a separate process that has to be submitted to WP:GA). Two quick ideas - can the businesses be moved to either a separate "list of" article or maybe put in a paragraph (not a list)? Also I would rather have the list of cities, boroughs, Twps, and CDPs back in the article and the nav box (template) gone if I had to choose. I will look at it more closely and try to add the decennial census figures (from 1900 on tonight). Ruhrfisch 12:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I read it more closely and like the changes (I also like that you took a lot of the list-y things out of the Pennsylvania article and made them separate lists / articles). I made the census table quickly and put it in so you could format. In theory it could be extended to include data from before 1900, but I need a source to do that. I also put the city, boroughs, Twps, and CDPs back in as every other PA county article has them, and moved the map down. I took the nav box / template out but Verruckte Dan (who made all the AP templates and put them on all gazillion articles) put it back. I think the Poitics history section could be axed and put partly into the History section (especially Buchanan and Stevens). Refs can likely be found for most of the notable residents on their articles. If the unreferenced sections can be cleaned up, I think it is fairly close to submitting for WP:GA.[[

By the way the maps look harder to do than they are - http://factfinder.census.gov has very tweakable maps (I copied them and then colored and labeled them). I found the PA Dept of Ed maps as a check and the PA Tax lists of school districts by county online too - let me know if you still need these links. I started doing PA school district maps to replace 4 copy vio maps I found and turned in at WP:PUI and wound up doing all PA counties with more than one school district in them. I agree on Wikipedia - if you are going to do something on it, do it right. Take care, Ruhrfisch 04:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks again for all your work on Lancaster County. I also like the Dart article, but may try tweaking the non-related people section (the info on the two non-related folks is fine, but it seems like too much on them for the article on something they have nothing to do with except accidentally have the same last name). I would not pay for the census data - a free library must have it if the museum does (this from someone who has bought books and maps for article research). The Ohio decennial census data back as far as it goes for each county is on the web, but from Ohio govt. publications. I tried moving the map down and reducing the number of columns in Townships. I must admit I never check articles at other than my computer's resolution. If the map is much smaller than 300 pixels wide it is hard to read any of it (although it can always be clicked on). Could the films be moved to the PA films article, with a (Lancaster County) identifier following them? I am facing a lot of work in the real world, and so will be editing a bit, but not as much as I would like - a semi wiki-break (although I will still check my watchlist and talk page). Enough random thoughts. Take care, Ruhrfisch 21:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I made some little edits to Lancaster Co. and the Dart Container articles - hopefully they are OK. Thanks for moving the comments on LC to an archive - I like the message left there. I have been through WP:GA and a peer review. It is useful to look at some articles undergoing peer review and Featured Article candidates to get an idea what they will object to / want cleaned up / want added. The lead paragraph should mention every section in some way. Let me know how I can help - I will check my talk and watchlists. Keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch 02:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I cleaned up the political tables - introduced the Congressional District red link (sorry), but there are articles on several of the PA congressional districts as models. FA candidates seem to have more books as refs and some books may also address your concerns. I think the flavor of Lancaster Co. could come from Lancaster Co. / Amish / PA Dutch cookbook(s) maybe[1]. The "Garden Spot" book (the top ref I added) looks as if it addresses at least some of your additional concerns, especially 1 and 3 - it has a picture of a horse and buggy in front of WalMart on the cover, and the first page is about how an Amish boy is married to the land at age 10. There is probably some tourist guide for Lancaster Co that may address 1 as well. I must confess I am not entirely sure what the "puppy controversy" is - I assume that farming is like owning a puppy - it is yours for life? (I know on the West Branch Susquehanna there was an Amish puppy mill farmer who was sent to jail, but I don't think that is it.) I also wonder if books on the Amish today might have something about 3 and 4 (anti-plain sentiment). I will see if I can make a Congressional District stub. If I have time I will also make school district stubs.

By the way, I had a peer review for Larrys Creek and it took almost a month. I am going to add a few things to it and submit it for FA. Reading other peer reviews (and the FA guidlelines) was very helpful. Ruhrfisch 03:27, 23 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I took the plunge and nominated Larrys Creek for FA today. Took way more time than I planned - got nice feedback from one person so far, but two things they said were to expand the Name section and add more on pollution (thought you might think that was funny given your earlier comment on my kitchen sink approach to the article). When I write articles to fill in red links they also tend to be stubby - see Lycoming Valley Railroad (it crosses Larrys Creek) or the 7 other railroads mentioned in that article, or Great Shamokin Path (it crossed...). If you want I can add watershed and railroad info to Lancaster County. Is there a good general history of the county? That might be useful as a ref. Also there are two refs with no text showing in the bottom (#20 and #45). As for the puppy mills, can you quote from newspaper / magazine articles that give both sides? That is one way to be NPOV (give all POV). Sounds as if it may be harder to find the pro-amish side. Here's a model PA Congressional district article Pennsylvania's 8th congressional district. Hope you feel better and rest well, take care, Ruhrfisch 03:57, 24 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, just wanted to say thanks for answering my question! Ryancolm 08:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This file may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:LancasterCountyHeart.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Fritz S. (Talk) 10:55, 24 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

D'Oh!!!! Thanks for catching my error on the Quick Facts racial data being from 2004. Someday I must learn to read. I like the new Tourism section on Lancaster County - do you want me to add a few sentences on rivers and railroads (besides Strasburg RR on the tourist trap part)? I also wondered if we could get pictures of some of the unique rural things you mentioned (the buggy stand at WalMart, etc.)? I can look in Commons or could ask on WikiProject PA if anyone is near to get a picture... Take care, Ruhrfisch 21:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I reverted the PA demographics vandal - let me know if you run into potential WP:3RR trouble. Take care, Ruhrfisch 01:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I left a note on the PA demographics vandal's talk page and said to cite refs. They did - the difference is white vs. white non hispanic. I have not reverted - seems like the best thing is to list both. I have asked on WikiProject US Counties if there is a standard on census data but got no reply. I wonder if the changing IP address is just a function of the "vandal's" ISP? Take care, Ruhrfisch 03:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I like the expanded history section - one question, the Wyoming Massacre link is to the July 3, 1778 massacre, not the 1760's one. I am not sure if Paxton, PA should link to Paxtang, PA or one of the Paxton Townships in Dauphin County (they split the original Paxton Twp into Upper, Middle, and Lower Twps.) (and that sentence in the article needs to be cleaned up a bit). I like the census data - congrats for finding it online. I also like the chart comparing population growth you made, but would identify the US vs LC by color in the caption. I am still working on rivers and transportation (rail and highway).

I am not sure what else to photograph - you had mentioned the cow cam and auctions too. Are there common images - a buggy along a road? Some of the food you mentioned? I put a Fraktur image in, and there are others that could be added to the article. There is one of the Paxton Boys massacre already on WP for that part, or several possible on WP of Buchanan or Stevens or Wheatland. Whatever you photograph, don't 'shoot' Cheney either - he shoots back ;-). Ruhrfisch 04:22, 27 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I see you reverted our LC 'friend' (after I reverted him earlier today). I'll be the carrot (User talk:164.156.228.229) and you be the stick. ;-) My real life is crazy / busy right now, so more later. Take care, Ruhrfisch 21:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Larrys Creek made Featured Article today - I promise to do the LC rivers, highways and railroads soon. Keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch 04:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cool, thanks for the reply. Nice seeing you to. Is this account your sock puppet?100110100 07:22, 28 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've checked out the definition, but I don't see where it says that 'craftsman' is genderneutral.100110100 07:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey I see that your back, congrats on your award! No comment on the above?100110100 06:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey!!!!?????...........!!!!!! Are you there?!?!?!?!100110100 05:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Huh, what, perit? Huh, '...person is masuline...'?????? Sorry, by the way for my unrully behaviour. But regarding the definition, I did't se where it says that 'craftsman' is genderneutral.100110100 09:24, 5 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well actor is masculine, actress is feminine. The thing is certain suffixes and prefixes mean male, and others mean female.100110100 09:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've thrown in the towel on the Plant oils/Vegetable oils issue. I've basically become convinced that there isn't an ideal solution, and this one is less likely to attract flak than most of the others. Sigh. I didn't rename ((Vegetable oils)), but I did change the title to Plant oils. There's probably a bit more mop-up to do, but that'll happen along the way, I suppose. Sigh, again. Waitak 10:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your work removing vandalism and spam from the Amish article. In the Amish spirit of Demut, I hereby award you the rusty plow.

Thanks so much for the donut star - my first award - unfortunately the image isn't showing up :-( Ruhrfisch 11:41, 31 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• The picture is there now and luckily it is lunch time as I am now hungry for donuts for some reason. Thanks again and keep up the good work. I got a ton of historcial RR info from User:Choess for LC. Ruhrfisch 15:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I added a lot to the Geography section - can also add something on rocks etc if you think it is worth it (and the historical RR will be beefed up considerably). I will work on stubs for the red link creeks - Conowingo is so small I can delete it if you think no one knows it. Let me know what you think and edit away, Ruhrfisch 04:53, 3 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I appreciate all you do. I made starts (a step above stubs) for Chickies Creek and Cocalico Creek, and Choess I see has made a stub for Conowingo Creek. I will add stuff to that and make any other creek redlinks into starts hopefully tomorrow, then start working on all the PA Highways I dumped into the article (thanks for catching my name error and fixing it all 21 or however many times). The highways in Larrys Creek are stubs I made so I will use those as models and they have decent refs (online too), although I think back then I was still putting refs into External Links if they were online. I keep forgetting to offer this, but I have the javascript for running the automated peer review, so if you ever want to see what LC or any other article would get at WP:PR, ask and I will put it into a subdirectory for you. Take care and keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch 03:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! You put this in the script code:

# This script is NOT subject to the GNU Free Documentation
# License, as it expressly prohibits alteration, and this
# script will be useless if NOT altered.

I'm not sure terminology will work that seems to forbid any changes to the page. WP is against any "no derivatives" licensing, or licensing for WP only. As the edit page says: If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it. Gimmetrow 11:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, I guess you know what you're doing. I'm just going this off WP discussions I've had about images I wanted to license forbidding derivative works. Here I took "it" to refer to the script license. Gimmetrow 21:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are now 52 pages linking to the template including the state project page, so I think they're all in. I noticed that you split the fields in the files based on the quotes rather than commas. Numbers less than 1000 aren't in quotes, so these numbers get missed. Not a big deal, but for instance District of Columbia#Demographics should list around 0.14% for NHPI. CSV parsing modules like this one could be used. If the numbers are parsed right, it leads to another question. It may be interesting that hispanic NHPI forms .03% of DC, but it might be misleading to note this grew -34% (176 to 115). Perhaps the $base should be at least 200 or 500 ? Gimmetrow 17:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I notice that in at least this North Dakota article where you just added a template demographics table, the state and national tables now everlap so one table cannot be completely read. Please check all states and fix. Thanks Hmains 21:48, 2 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		To ClairSamoht: for diligent and numerous contributions of the highest quality to a wide variety of articles, especially Lancaster County and Pennsylvania, and for building a better encyclopedia by constantly adding references and removing unreferenced junk. Given in grateful admiration by Ruhrfisch 02:45, 4 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If confirmation can be found that this is linked to the Philadelphia and Columbia, it would actually make the perfect transition. "As one of the first railroads in Pennsylvania, the Philadelphia and Columbia was not universally welcomed. It was bitterly opposed by many local farmers for destroying the wagoning business, ruining the farms it crossed, and bringing in rowdy Irish immigrants as construction laborers, circumstances commemerated in the folksong The Wagoner's Curse on the Railroad. Among the peculiarities of railroading in those early days was that the railroad was regarded as a sort of public highway..." (Then go on to mention the use of horses on the P&C until 1844.) The picture is great — after all, the Strasburg Railroad is probably Lancaster County's most famous railroad. Choess 04:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello CS: I have posted a discussion topic on Talk: Minnesota concerning the demographics table you added by your recent edit. Would you care to weigh in on it? (I don't think the table is as user-friendly as the former list but I want to see what you as the editor and others have to say on it.) Thanks for your input. Kablammo 04:25, 4 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is easy to get burnt out - a break (even reduced activity) is good to both recharge your batteries and to allow some perspective / distance on articles (after not looking much at something for a week or so, I am amazed at what I find to clean up). It is also good to find things you really like to do - for me that is making creek articles or making them better. The two starts I made last night took me less than an hour but did me a world of good. Take care and take care of yourself, Ruhrfisch 12:09, 4 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Quick question - I am bogged down in trying to name articles on the two Conewago Creeks (Lancaster / Dauphin border, plus Adams and York across the Susquehanna). Do locals differentiate between them in any way that you know of? Their mouths are less than two miles apart on opposite banks of the Susquehanna. See here for discussion: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rivers#Naming_Help I finally sorted out Chiques/Chickies Creek and put pictures on some others in LC (all with covered bridges). Thanks in advance, Ruhrfisch 03:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks very much - I also did not know until I checked that there were two Conewago Creeks (and of course USGS lists Conewago as an alternate name for Conowingo Creek). Even my usually reliable 1984 Pennsylvania Gazzetteer of Streams omits one of them in the index (though not the book itself - I am sure they thought it was a repetition typo and axed one). I may try making one article and see how it works. I think both are named for the Conewago rapids in the Susquehanna River (just downstream of Three Mile Island) as the name means at the rapids and their mouths are there. The problem I see is if I do one article, someone will come along and propose splitting it and then give us some horrendous name like Conewago Creek (Susquehanna River Tributary, right bank, mouth in York County, Pennsylvania). Everyone I ask says try one article, so even I sometimes see the point. I love the name Cocalico, by the way. As for Chickies Creek, I prefer that spelling as it also gives the pronunciation better. I go by USGS as it is a standard I can point to, but not always one I agree with (I think Larry's Creek is a better name, but there are only 5 USGS names with apostrophes, one is Martha's Vineyard). OK, off to bed. Take care and thanks, Ruhrfisch 04:19, 7 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I like the Lancaster County, Pennsylvania schools page. Do you want to add two sentences to the table section explaining what the PSSA and SAT tests are (especially for non-PA and non-USA folk)? I am a little unclear on two things: 1) two levels (making Progress and Warning) are both described as one step below meeting standards. Is this right? 2) I am very unclear on what the numbers in parentheses are for, i.e. "Burrowes School (10/13)". As far as the school district pages themselves, I try to put in the townships and boroughs served. Looking at this I found a small error in my Lancaster County municipalities map, so I will fix that next (left a label for York County in by mistake). I made the Conewago Creek dab page (which took a lot longer than it should have) and the Conewago Creek (east) page (I put lots in it so no one could argue it is not notable). Still need to make the Conewago Creek (west) page, which will be stubbier. Then I will work on LC highway stubs and the native american trails. When do you want to put LC up for good article? I think it would make it easy, although it needs to be stable (not lots of recent major changes). Also Peer Review would be great before FA. I think I said this before, but I have the software to do the semiautomated peer review if you want to try a pre-test before the real thing. I could not find the Washington Boro page on the German Wikipedia - is it the PA Dutch Wikipedia by chance [2]? Hope you got some rest, and take care, Ruhrfisch 15:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • The software is javascript that produces the templates, so when you paste the semi automated peer review result into a new page (your sandbox or other subpage) it comes up as the automated peer review suggestions. When I installed it I found a more detailed description on AndyZ's talk page, but here's the link User:AndyZ/peerreviewer.js and ask if this is not obvious (with 5 servers it is probably very clear to you ;-)). I can try to remember how I did it (you have to add it to your monobook skin). Whenever I edit, "peer review" appears to the right of "log out". I looked over Johnny Appleseed - learned a lot, and may do a few copyedits if I get the chance.
      • I think one reason why I se the cite templates for refs is that they are hard to argue with. Ruhrfisch 01:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Don't worry about it, I received plenty of those error messages myself today, and I also nearly overwrote my own edits in the Orson Scott Card article, so I understand completely :) --Lethargy 00:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to Georgia (U.S. state), are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks.

You should know better by now. --Storkk 03:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can work on it, it is just that it has to go on a backburner for now. I also worry as most of the paths would be redlinks needing stubs (like the LC PA Route highway stubs haunting my dreams). Plus I have Lycoming County path starts to write or fix (Wyalusing trail is pure copyvio from Wallace's book). If I make a paths article, my understanding is that a summary (a few sentences) is left in the article if there is a see bigger article tag.

I am leaning more towards 2 articles for the 2 Conewagos - thanks for your offer to institute a merge, but I think I will decline. I am frazzled. More later, Ruhrfisch 03:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

PS I made three paths / trails articles so far: Culbertson's Path, Great Island Path, and Great Shamokin Path Ruhrfisch 03:49, 8 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you vey much for your work on Olivesburg, Ohio. It is very much improved from the version with a speedy tag from a few days ago. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 23:07, 8 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, thanks for your comments....Yeah, it's pretty hard not to just RAVE about her. It still makes me sad that she's gone. NickBurns 12:18, 11 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No need for thanks, it's my pleasure. "Country" Bushrod Washington 19:47, 11 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You know, that's the first time I've ever actually laughed out loud at a comment in Wikipedia. Keep up the splendid work. --Pussy Galore 23:03, 11 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am little late, but I responded to your point on Wikipedia talk:What is a good article?. I'd like to hear your point-of-view. Thanks. RelHistBuff 08:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey. Since I deleted much of what was, no doubt, an exhaustively researched section about the many, many motor-sports arenas in Pennsylvania, and since you are among the most frequent editors of the Pennsylvania page, I figured it would be only fair of me to give an explanation.

In short, the Sport & Recreation section is, in my opinion, poorly written, and detracts from the page itself. It comes across as nothing more than a list of racetracks. A major rewrite is needed.

Some ideas:

I would create two sections; “Professional Sports” and “Recreation” (the two together is far too broad for a single section). I would do away with the table of professional teams – it’s a nice concept, but makes any subsequent discussion of the teams seem redundant. Instead I would have a paragraph that starts something like this:

“Pennsylvania is home many professional sports teams, including the Philadelphia Eagles and the Pittsburgh Steelers of the National Football League . . . (listing all of the major league teams and their respective conferences). . . . These teams have won a combined 5 Super Bowls, x World Series Champions, x National League Pennants. . . .” Et cetera.

Something along those lines. I would include a link to a list of professional sports teams in Pennsylvania, which would then include everything which is currently listed in the table.

As far as the motor-sports section, a claim that motor-sports are popular in the state deserves a citation. I dispute the idea that it is more popular than all of those other sports (Okay, I only dispute the idea that it is more poplar than Football). As far as the list of raceways goes, how about something like this:

“Notable raceways in Pennsylvania include the Pocono Raceway, host to the Pennsylvania 500 and the Pocono 500. . . . ” Et cetera.

We could do this with every notable raceway. That way, the list will be limited to only those notable enough to host marquee events, which would an easy test that would separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak. Again, we could if needed, include a link to all raceways in Pennsylvania.

Or we could do as you say about making a separate page for professional sports. Nonetheless, I would still have a few token words about them on the main page.

As for recreation, I would broaden the scope of it. Include not only amusement parks, but perhaps places like Allegheny National Forest, Ringing Rocks, the Civil War Museum, Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, Gettysburg, Presque Isle State Park, et cetera. There are tons of places like this in the state; hence why it is deserving on its own category.

Now, these are only a few ideas. I’m not throwing this all on you; as I get the time, I intend to work on rewriting this entire section. Don’t expect anything necessarily soon, but I will try to work on it when I can. I’ll probably do it in my Sandbox, so you can check my progress if you want.

I appreciate the fact that you want to make the Pennsylvania article the best it can be, and I also appreciate all of the effort you put into looking up all of those rinky-dink raceways and the like. Your efforts are laudable, and you deserve thanks for all of your highly constructive edits. However, this article needs a thoughtful look at Sport and Recreation, not a big fat list that blurs together upon reading it.

Keep up the good work. "Country" Bushrod Washington 05:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I can appreciate your desire to add information to the article, but why did you remove the section that discussed historical black majorities in southern states? This is entirely valid information, and I would appreciate if you would restore it. Cheers! bd2412 T 05:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Well, for starters see Great Migration (African American). bd2412 T 05:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You rv'ed my minor edit to the Lancaster County, Pennsylvania page, saying "That reference doesn't support the fact that he was mennonite, but that it's the oldest surviving building." But the reference in question, http://www.hansherr.org/, says in its first content paragraph: "Both Hans Herr and Christian Herr were bishops of the Mennonite faith." Could you please explain (or undo) your speedy deletion in light of this? --ScottMainwaring 19:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Glad to copyedit JA (and LC schools) a bit and hope I did not mess anything up. I might try rewording the JA use of pack animals / conversion sentence as the way it is now worded seems to me to be a bit too close to Original Research. I originally did more copy edits and got an edit conflict so I just went back and did the most memorable ones section by section - I will take a look at it again when I can and see if anything else could use a pass of the editing sandpaper to smooth its edges (one time being abrasive is good). Sorry to be slow responding - conked out last night and feel as if I am getting a cold now. Take care, Ruhrfisch 21:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why do you keep reverting to remove the link to the film of the same name (Johnny Appleseed (film)? The alternative would be to have Johnny Appleseed as a dab page, with links to what would become Johnny Appleseed (person) and Johnny Appleseed (film)... but a simple "see also" would seem to be the best approach, I feel. Robwingfield ^(talk) 15:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

...I am very pleased and quite surprised to hear that, as I usually consider myself a rather "too fast shooter" and a stubborn person, and I found it rather hard to express my intentions clearly in this very discussion and not have them obscured by the overabundance of detail. I was also wondering whether you have been reading the last fragment of my discussion with Pschemp - I admit I was quite upset by her tone and behavior, and perhaps let the emotions take over... I decided to leave it like it is to see the reactions of the others, so what is yours? Bravada, talk - 03:46, 15 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clair, seems like your WikiStress level got even higher than mine... Anyway, I understand you totally, sometimes being 100% right and having sound logics behind you you still find it hard to win on WP. I believe WP has been founded and is run by intelligent people, however (otherwise I wouldn't waste another sleepless night on it), and all will be good in the end, we must just stay strong and rechtop in de wind, as the Dutch would say (this is in reply to your Gilbert and Sullivan list, which I didn't quite get what it is, I've only seen Pirates of Penzance once on video... :D ). I left some comments on the talk page, as I cannot imagine what else I could do to support you. Let's just take a deep breath and not let emotions overbear us... Bravada, talk - 04:55, 15 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could I ask you to Assume Good Faith? I've just noticed the following as a result of your AfD on Johnny Appleseed (2007 film):

Been having a problem with another user. I have Johnny Appleseed up for GA, and another user just created a page called Johnny Appleseed (film), about a film which was never made and will never be made. He put a seealso at the top of the page, and I added a section to the bottom of the page, talking about people trading on JA's name, moving it there. He put another seealso at the top, and I finally figured out that he wanted a disambig notice, so I put one there, and took a look at the other article, looked at what's out there, and found out it's NN. I rewrote the JA(f) article to be about the 1948 Disney cartoon. Then he comes along, moves that page to "JA film (1948)", and hijacks the "JA (film)" page as a redirect to his "JA film (2007)" page.

Best as I can figure, this clown is trying to get a nice mention in Wikipedia because he has a financial interest in dumping the script onto some sucker. I've augmented the page he did with a ton of detail, mostly pointing out that the film project has been deader than a doornail for a couple of years, and it'll never get made. I've AFD'd it, but this clown is really annoying me. Like I said, I have a little list....

Hey, if you have five minutes to spare, take a quick look at Johnny Appleseed, and tell me if I've missed anything. ClairSamoht - Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world 04:14, 15 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I created the article as a result of looking at the main Johnny Appleseed article, and doing a small amount of research found that there was an upcoming film of the same name. IMDB lists the film as due for release next year. Maybe I didn't do enough research - I hold my hands up to that. I won't challenge the AfD as I actually agree with you, but what I don't appreciate is you vandalising the page, and making personal attacks as above - please see WP:NPA. I'm not a clown. I have no financial interest in the script. If you look at my user page, you'll see I'm a Systems Designer for a financial company. Not a film executive! I don't appreciate your personal comments above, so please could you try to be a bit more civil in future, and actually explain to people why you disagree with what they've done, rather than just plough right over what they've done, then insult them behind their backs. Kind regards... Robwingfield ^(talk) 09:00, 15 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:ConestogaWS-logo.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:05, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

• Hi Clair, I saw this and put a speedy delete tag on the image. See Template:db. Ruhrfisch 03:32, 16 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will work on LC highway stubs next and put infoboxes on the LC creeks without them (although only Conestoga R. seems likely to have discharge info as it seems to be the only one with a USGS stream gauge). I got a Did You Know out of Conewago Creek (west), so that made up for some of the hassle of 1 vs 2 articles and what to name them. I will also put State Forest and state parks (Susquehannock) and State Game Lands on LC in a few sentences. Most of the Native American paths radiated out from the village of Conestoga, so that is how to start that section - will work on it too. Probably a paragraph on paths in LC and where they ultimately lead, with links to the articles detailing each path, esp. outside LC.

PedanticallySpeaking, founder of the Ohio Twp project, is checking the state register on Kelleys Island so we should know soon. Since the official Erie Co. page does not list it as a twp, I think it is at best a former twp now absorbed into the village. Take care, Ruhrfisch 15:28, 16 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Added a protected areas section to LC, made a start for Susquehannock State Park so no redlink. Tweak away. Do you think I need to go and look up where all the State Game Lands are and add their townships (wikilinked of course)? Ruhrfisch 01:58, 17 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

FYI: Your recent copyediting of the Indiana article removed any reference to African-Americans from the Demographics section. ^BlankVerse 00:37, 17 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I only ended up on the Indiana page only because an anon editor had edited the demographics data in the Los Angeles, California article. As I traced back their vandalism, I found that they had done the same thing to a couple of small Indiana cities, as well as the state article.

My initial guess had been that you had not noticed the vandalism when you had done your edits, and had inadvertently lost the data for African-Americans in your rewrite.

The percentage of African-Americans is 8.6% [3], making them by far the largest minority group in a fairly monochromatic state. ^BlankVerse 09:02, 17 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

FYI, the "Google ratio" of Dillerville to Dillersville is 986/184, all of which appear to refer to the town or the road leading to the town. Choess 04:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Some days, it seems like the world hasn't read the Manual of Style, doesn't it? ;-) At least it's better than the variations on Chiques Creek. I take it from the boxcar photo that you're a Lancaster-area resident? Choess 07:48, 17 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll be dang. Never seen a fleaker before. Come to think, I'll have to hit up the Fisher rep for one of the "Caffeine" mugs when I get a chance. Anyway, I'm afraid I'm not quite that familiar with Lancaster — I grew up in Chesco, in mushroom country, but I'm now in exile beyond Hudson for graduate school. Dad and I go railfanning in the Lancaster area sometimes when I visit home, so perhaps we'll bring something off yet. It's been a pleasure to fall in with you and Ruhrfisch here; your dedication to *quality* articles really shows, and it's tremendously inspiring. Choess 08:12, 17 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Thanks for the kind words - I agree that it is a pleasure working with the two of you. Turns out there was an orphan fleaker stub, so I linked it, took a picture of some fleakers in lab and added that and a ref (for Clair ;-)), as well as expanded the article a bit. Just curious, can you guess what state and county I am in? Ruhrfisch 04:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I think we all need userboxes that say "This user is an extraterrestrial who passed PChem and is therefore fairly intelligent, willing to work hard, and highly motivated. Surrender to me or risk having your species domesticated for agricultural purposes" ;-D Ruhrfisch 00:25, 19 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • PS Did you ever get the javascript for Peer Review to work? It is in my page here User:Ruhrfisch/monobook.js and I found the directions again: "add ((subst:js|User:AndyZ/peerreviewer.js)) to your User:ClairSamoht/monobook.js, and while editing an article click on the peer review link right next to the log out button (the responses come in template form though", so you have to paste them into a page to see what they are). Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch 01:03, 19 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • PPS As king of citations, what do you think of waht I did here: Allegheny Islands State Park (last ref)? Chemistry articles cite Personal Communications all the time, but I was not sure about WP. Ruhrfisch 01:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Glad to hear the automated Peer Review is working. I will take the information back out of the article and ask that the parks update their webpage so it is 'published' or let me know where this has been published (if it has been). Sigh. Thanks, and take careRuhrfisch 03:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, I had a feeling I was leaving out at least one qualifier. I was about to just say "gender-neutral pronoun", but they works in that case, and what I really meant was "standard gender-neutral third person singular pronoun that can refer to a person". —Keenan Pepper 19:49, 17 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello again Clair,

Appreciating your no-fuss and principle-based approach to discussing Wikipedia policies, guidelines and such, as well as your tough stance on attempts to dilute the aims and principles of WP, I would like to invite you to join the discussion on the External Links guideline that is currently going on, and taking a dangerous course, being dominated by users wanting to relax rather than tighten the requirements regarding those and subject them even more to users' subjective decisions. As we see increasing amount of linkspam around, I believe there is a need for more users to take part in this discussion to prevent any changes in the guideline that would have potentially catastrophic consequences.

Regards, Bravada, talk - 04:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In all fairness, I'll try to be reasonable here. Please explain to me (on my talk page, if you would) why you arbitrarily failed FLCL with no review of quality. -Litefantastic 18:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Understood. Thank you - I'll be back. -Litefantastic 22:43, 18 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • You've crossed the line from criticism to harassment. If you think you can do a better job editing this article, then do it. I deleted the trivia section because it was (almost) totally unverified. Nobody else was looking for references, and I have a real life to attend to when I'm not tinkering with what used to be a fun hobby. My solution was a poor one, but it was a solution. User:Gwern wants to see the trivia section kept, which is fine, but he/she has made no response to my offer for he/she to actually look into them. I read your comments. I tried to be polite (I'll admit it was a rather strained attempt, but I tried). I'll admit I didn't try hard enough, but this was supposed to be a hobby, dammit. I was motivated by the fact that I enjoyed doing this. I tried to push Duck and Cover to FA, and they knocked me down, but they were polite about it. I quit. -Litefantastic 01:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem, I suspected that :) Happy editing! Seicer (talk) (contribs) 03:08, 23 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are four articles being threatened by a merge proposal. The details are listed here Wikipedia:WikiProject_Pennsylvania#Announcements. Would you mind weighing in (hopefully in support) of keeping the articles. --evrik 01:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I removed your tag from the article. Before you slap it back on there, please explain on the talk page why you think the article has troubles. It5 may not be the best written article ... but I don't know if it has the NPOV problems you alleged. --evrik 13:48, 25 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Clair, a start at a Lancaster County Native American paths article / section is here. Comments are welcome - it would probably fit in the historical roads part of Choess' article on Transportation in LC (as I follow Wallace in trying to list modern highways that follow these paths). I still have a fair amount to add, but wanted some feedback. I also left this message on Choess' talk page. Take care, Ruhrfisch 04:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Congrats on JA's GA and thanks - I have one more Conestoga path to add (Paxtang Path north to Harrisburg and on to Shamokin) plus several other little paths. I agree it needs a map, but part of the problem is how big to make the map. Should it just show LC and have room around the edges for arrows labeled "to Philadelphia", "to Harrisburg", etc. or should it try to show the destinations? If it is that big (Frederick, MD in SW, Philly E, Shamokin N) then it will be hard to show detail in LC. I am leaning towards a small map (LC only) as the focus of the article is LC. Then the question becomes am I adding too much detail outside LC (compare Great Minquas and Monocacy Paths). It also seems that if I am making a map for this, there should probably be one for railroads and another for highways. Highways are easier as I can use Census maps. Modern RR are on the census maps as well, but not historic ones. I can use Wallace's maps as a basis for NA Paths maps, but would need more info for a RR map. Another alternative is to just make a large locator map for LC with every place mentioned in the article on it and the creeks and river. Then people could look at that and mentally add the routes of the paths, highways, and RRs. I have been and will be pretty busy with life outside of WP, so this will be slow (especially a new map). I did send you my 'IRS info' via this. Let me know if you did not get it and I will try other means. As far as Conestogas / Susquehannocks / Minquas / Andastes, I try to avoid redirects so I used Susquehannocks. No one knows what they called themselves, so maybe we should just translate all of their names into English and call them the "treacherous people of the muddy river at the place of the immersed pole" (still doesn't work as I can't find the meaning of Andaste). Oh well. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 13:07, 26 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I added to the Frog page - let me know what you think. I like the idea of expanding the refs for LC (date accessed, etc.) and think it can only help the article. Would you want to go full tilt and use cite web? Also are you going to go for FA on Johnny Appleseed? Let me know if you got my email, otherwise I will send my IRS details some other way. Take care, Ruhrfisch 04:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I looked at maps more closely and changed the Conestoga location description a fair amount, hopefully making it clearer, plus some general cleanup. If you look at the PennDot LC map, there is an Indiantown in Manor Twp, and it is about 4 miles SW of Millersville. This Indiantown is also on the USGS GNIS system, so I added it (but not its latitude and longitude). Native American villages tended to wander over time according to Wallace (there is one he won't even try to locate on maps in western PA). They also changed names sometimes, so Shamokin (village) became Fort Augusta, and is Sunbury, Pennsylvania today, but is not in the same place as Shamokin, Pennsylvania, although they are all in the same county (Northumberland). I can think of two ways to do the map - one is a Lancaster County only map with every place named in the paths and Choess' trains, canals and roads article (which this will become a part of), plus named Creeks and the Susquehanna of course (so the reader could look at the map to see the course of a path or RR via mental dot to dots but it would not be marked as such). The other is a regional map for just the paths showing northern MD and DE, and much of SE PA, with the paths drawn in by hand and major places for paths marked (Lancaster, York, Conestoga, Gap, Peach Bottom) but not all places marked. I think I prefer the former as it would be just one map and there is a program I want to try that gives you a map with accurate dots with labels if you enter the coordinates and name for the label.
    • Hope your FSCK went well. Before you put JA up as a FAC, I would get a peer review (it is expected) and write a new lead section which has no or very few refs in it - it is like an abstract on a chemical pub and refers to all important things in the article. Every header / subheader should be mentioned in the lead in a sentence or phrase. If you want I can also look it over again for minor copyedits. Ganymede is boring so I am thinking of moving to Europa (in Missouri, of course) [4]. Then even I won't be able to find me. Take care, Ruhrfisch 18:35, 27 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • My frog is done. It needs to be cleaned up a bit probably, and I want to try and put where canals and RR followed paths. If you have the time and inclination, any thoughts on maps would be appreciated, as would proofing it. Also for your very long term to do list: if you happen to be tooling around LC and are near them and want to take pictures of Chickies Rock, Conewago Creek (east) (or west) and Conowingo Creek, that would be helpful for those articles. No hurry though. Take care, Ruhrfisch 04:49, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I do seem to attract them don't I. It's like when I sit in the park and feed the ducks, all the local loons seem to come out of the woodwork and sit beside me. If I had a pound for everytime someone told me they had a nuclear bomb in their taty old bag I've at least be a few pounds richer. :) Ben W Bell talk 07:05, 27 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm curious why, when you reverted the recent vandalism to Jack Moran, you chose to revert my edits also? All I had done was to improve the formatting of the article, return the name John E. Moran (removed in an older act of vandalism), correct a couple of obvious errors, and make a few other unobjectionable additions. What was your rationale for undoing those changes? --ShelfSkewed 13:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I had a feeling that was the case. All better now. I'm still researching the John/Jack/Jackie connection. No luck yet. --ShelfSkewed 03:43, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Have a look at the Southern Dialect article, the Scots Irish article, and the Southern USA article. This information is consistent with them. Ultron Hubbard 21:30, 27 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clair - Thanks for your quick review of texas hold 'em. I don't know if your still watching that page or not, but I have left a few comments/questions on the talk page. Could you take a look at them when you get a chance? Thanks! --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 03:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for explaining what was going on with the Face value page. Very helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Riedl (talk • contribs)

Is quite insulting. Insinuating that scientists aren't writing articles with resources by their side is pretty ridiculous. I write with something close to 200 resources by my side. Demanding that we cite elementary facts is preposterous, presumptuous, and ignorant when one could find the fact in the majority of these references and they are listed at the bottom of the article. You have this fanciful vision that every Wikipedia editor should be paraphrasing and quoting sources when that's not how encyclopedic writing happens. Frankly, if you don't broaden your horizons and take a look at science and math articles at Wikipedia and how they are written, I don't think your comments deserve consideration. --ScienceApologist 17:53, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wow, you really don't get it. What's the big deal about inline-citing 100 references? Why don't you try it sometime. --ScienceApologist 18:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You don't understand. I'm not saying I have 100 in-line references. I'm saying I have 100 sources for a single fact. --ScienceApologist 18:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm telling you that one source per fact is not okay when there are hundreds of possible sources from which to choose. Single-source attribution acts effectively as an edorsement and advertisement for the source chosen by the editor, it is amateurish and is in violation of relevant Wikipedia policies regarding neutrality. This problem with citing common knowledge facts has been acknowledged by editors in science and math related articles for some time. It would be best that you dealt with it directly rather than going off on tangents about how we don't want the rules applying to us (which is totally ridiculous considering the actual practices of the editors). --ScienceApologist 20:19, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I found Denver quite tolerant as well as Crestone. Fred Bauder 20:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your recent actions delisting redshift from good articles and pasting noncompliance notices on science article talkpages are uncivil. Please stop

--ScienceApologist 21:49, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clair, when you delist articles, you have to write a note on their talk page explaining why you've delisted them :/. Homestarmy 22:58, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are adding the "unverifiable" template to articles like Creationism which have copious references. What exactly are you trying to communicate? --Fastfission 23:48, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You apparently have different definitions of what is an amount of acceptable references. Without getting into the question about whether or not you are correct or not, it is important to note that if you expect to not communicate your message — and I think in this case you can definitely be expected to not communicate correctly, since the template says the article does not have references and this is clearly false, as there are lots of footnotes in the first sentence and extended sub-headings of actual references — then you need to really take the time to explain what you specifically think is wrong with the article on the talk page. Otherwise you are being rude, crass, and, in the end, completely ineffective if your goal is to actually improve articles. You need to take the time to explain yourself if you expect people to find your actions worth paying attention to, much less if you actually expect them to be helpful to the project. --Fastfission 00:55, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Adding that noncompliance tag or whatever you call it to article pages without specifying in the talk page what your objections are is absurd. Then you call its removal vandalism? In my view placing such an ugly tag on a stablized article with no discussion is closer to vandalism. Please explain - both here and on tha talk page of the article. Vsmith 23:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your canned response removed from my user page, please respond here - not on my user page. I now have this page on my watchlist. Vsmith 01:13, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. --Salix alba (talk) 00:03, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seriously Clair, you are not supposed to delist articles without leaving a reason on the talk page, its part of the instructions. Homestarmy 00:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Homestarmy, the pages were delisted for violations of WP:V, and I've pointed out on the talk pages that the articles weren't meeting that standard. It's not that they aren't Good Articles, but that they aren't even acceptable articles.

The noncompliant tag warns readers that the article does NOT meet Wikipedia standards for content. It alerts editors that the article needs work. Both are highly admirable goals. The noncompliance tag is not disruptive of Wikipedia's goals; untrustworthy articles are, however. ClairSamoht - Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world 00:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Then why did several of those articles (redshift and creationism for example) have previously stable versions that a number of editors generally agreed upon? Would you be the only one in the army with the right step? Could it be that the absence of references in several points in those articles be due to the editors using the same material for a significant part of the article and them thinking it would be more appropriate NOT to repeat the same reference twenty times over in the article? Have you even discussed this (apart from quoting policy) on the relevant articles' talk pages?--Ramdrake 00:44, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clair, the "reviews" were more like arguments on all of those articles, and there's no way those articles only require better citations to be improved, I know several of them have weasel-word things in them, (I checked) you've got to demonstrate that you're clearly reviewing the article to delist it or its hard to figure out what exactly your doing. Homestarmy 00:56, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, I think you are clearly violating WP:POINT. I have noted this on the administrators' noticeboard. Please feel free to comment. –Joke 00:45, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I removed inappropriate tags that you placed on several articles. For instance, you placed ((unsourced)) on Kentucky, which states that the article "does not cite its references or sources"; in fact, they are listed at Kentucky#References. I realize you would like to have extensive inline citations for all articles, and while that may be a criterion for good article or featured article status, it is certainly not a requirement for articles in general. Please do not misuse tags in this manner; support is clearly lacking for this position. — Knowledge Seeker দ 02:08, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I applaud your efforts to improve Wikipedia's referencing, but I don't feel you are going about it in the correct way. Just because something is permitted by or is consistent with a policy doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. Having articles well-referenced is a laudable goal, but you must realize that most articles are not currently written that way. You can't just stick a "violation" template on or remove the bulk of the article and then move on, expecting people to patch it up. I realize that it's difficult to get people to reference articles better, and I think that's part of why featured and good articles require good citations. Another side to it is that there are different opinions on just how many citations there should be. Someone mentioned Pennsylvania as an example of an over-cited article, and I tend to agree. Perhaps a new solution to be able to hide superscripts or such is needed. Finally, I can't speak for other editors, but something like the date and order of statehood I would consider common enough knowledge to not require citation. That's just my opinion, but I feel that basic information like that does not need a specific, inline reference.

As for what you can do, the most important thing is to discuss with other users and work collaboratively. I think your attitude towards this put a lot of editors off. I'm not sure how best to get everyone to use extensive inline citations the way you would like. For a specific article, you can work with the article's editors on the talk page, perhaps listing major points that you feel should be explicitly cited. Doing it as part of a push for featured status could be especially productive. Try to be non-confrontational about it. This would be a slow, article-by-article project, but I don't think you'll be able to just tag a bunch or articles and hope they improve. I hope this helps a little; please let me know if I can be of further assistance. — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please don't use automated rollback [5] to revert anything but vandalism and your own edits. To rollback without an explanation simply because you disagree with an edit is considered rude. Thanks. --W.marsh 02:34, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ya know, accusing admins of vandalism probably isn't the best way to get ahead around here. If you actually want to improve the encyclopedia, great. But right now it looks like you're more interested in painfully literal interpretation of policy and stirring things up. That's not very helpful. I think you need to step back and consider that perhaps your current approach might not be that wise. --W.marsh 02:56, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actual attempts to lower the quality of the article. --W.marsh 03:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The following is a quote from WP:VAND:

Improper use of dispute tags

Dispute tags are an important way for people to show that there are problems with the article. Do not remove them unless you are sure that all stated reasons for the dispute are settled. As a general rule, do not remove other people's dispute tags twice during a 24 hour period. Do not place dispute tags improperly, as in when there is no dispute, and the reason for placing the dispute tag is because a suggested edit has failed to meet consensus. Instead, follow WP:CON and accept that some edits will not meet consensus. Please note that placing or removal of dispute tags does not count as simple vandalism, and therefore the reverting of such edits is not exempt from the three-revert rule.

I have highlighted the pertinent line for your consideration. Vsmith 03:32, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, WP:VAND does not state that "removal of a dispute tag before resolving the problem is vandalism". Even if you believed so, it is abundantly clear from the edit summary of this edit that the editor was of the opinion that there was no problem, so you should have taken it to the talk page. Please try to be less blunt in your righteous quest for quality control. You have made many quality editors quite upset in a short period of time, and I do not think the net effect of your efforts improves the quality of Wikipedia.  --Lambiam^Talk 13:18, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Jack Woodall wrote Our Food is Dying back in March. It was quite an eye-opener. Among other things, he says:

Bean pod mottle virus caused significant [soybean] crop losses in 2005. Yields from infected plants were lowered by 10%-40%, and grain quality was reduced both in oil and protein. BPMV is spreading in the North American region but has also been reported in Iran, suggesting that infected seed may have been used for planting there. Southern bean mosaic virus causes severe symptoms in beans and other important leguminous food crops. It has been reported from Africa, North America, South and Central America, France, and Iran. Soybean decline means less animal feed, which has an impact on meat and dairy supplies.

Any comments? Waitak 05:22, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please review and follow WP:POINT. Thank you. JBKramer 13:52, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you're Stephen Hawking, and you're having trouble typing because of your disability, I'd fight for the policy to be changed, allowing you to have software that automatically inserts <ref>Because I say so. Stephen Hawking</ref> after every period that's followed by a space.
Again, I do have to apologize for my role in bringing this brew-ha about. I do believe that a great deal of positive after-effects will come out of this as the focus has been turned squarely onto the needs of WP:V and WP:CITE. It's just unfortunate that it is coming at a price of so many headaches and vented frustrations. The above comment was by far, the funniest thing I've read out of this whole ordeal and it was nice to see some humor interjected into this ordeal. In my opinion, that deserves a barnstar. Agne 22:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		To Clair, for finding a ray of humor admist some trying times. Agne 22:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am not defending what Clair did in removing Good Articles without discussing it first. I understand why people are upset, but I wanted to point some things out that seem not have been mentioned in all this.

I have worked with Clair and his passion for getting citations and references has improved my articles and made me a better editor (I plan to go back and add more / better refs to articles I have worked on before I was as careful about references as I now am). I also value his overall contributions to Wikipedia. For two examples discussed here and elsewhere, take a look at Pennsylvania or Lancaster County, Pennsylvania before Clair started working on them and compare their content now (I know some people feel they are over cited, but look at their content). They are much better articles for his work on them.

Finally, I checked 21 random articles (1 was a disambiguation, so I didn't count it). 70% had nothing labeled as a reference or footnote or source (of these 7 (35%) had no references or external links, 7 (35%) had only external links (but at least there's something outside the article referred to)). Of the 6 (30%) that had references, 4 (20%) had only one reference and 2 (10%) had two references. Some of the articles with refs also had external links, but I did not keep track of that. Given the fact that verifiability is supposed to be a key factor in Wikipedia articles, I think complaints about too many references are a bit misplaced, don't you? Ruhrfisch 16:17, 30 September 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Hey Clair, I know you haven't contributed for a week but I hope you are still reading this - please come back. Email me if you'd rather talk that way. Take care, Ruhrfisch 04:24, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• The same. You're missed. Choess 17:48, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• 'sides, you can't quit - you owe me a reply to the "Our Food is Dying" post on your talk page! And who's going to be my veggie oil cohort if you take off? :-) Waitak 01:43, 7 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah don't live Wikipedia over inline citations, your heart was in the right place. I hope you come back and contribute. --W.marsh 00:38, 29 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clair, take a look at the first paragraph of the "Slavery and the Christiana Incident" section. The last sentence is missing a verb: "However, the situation (missing verb) when the Fugitive Slave Law was passed as part of the Compromise of 1850." It looks like you originally wrote this text, so I imagine you would be the best person to offer the most appropriate verb here. Richwales 17:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello Clair!

Since you reviewed and turned down my request for GA for New Jersey State Constitution about 20 days ago, I would like to request you re-review it now that it is fixed up to the concerns you had previously. Especially the notes, and I know you are a stickler about authoritivity. Thanks for your time. I hope that the article finally reaches good article status, as it has taken a lot of work. --Evan^{(Salad dressing is the milk of the infidel!)} 21:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Clair - I have made a series of changes to Texas hold 'em and I have renominated it for a GA. I thought I'd let you know. Thanks again for all your help. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 06:05, 28 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Clair, thanks for the messages on my talk page. I keep thinking you are gone, so I'm not sure if you will read this (which is part of why I haven't written before). Thanks for the happy Yule/Christmas/Saturnalia wishes and the same to you too (I celebrate Christmas, but the others sound fun as well). In addition to this one, I watch a fair number of your pages (JA, LC and the school districts in it, plus the templates for these). Let me know if there are others you want me to keep an eye on.

My understanding is that Jimmy Wales just resigned as chair of the Wikimedia Foundation board, but is still a member of the board and is still associated with Wikipedia and its sister projects (see here). You are missed. Take care, Ruhrfisch 03:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Drano.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add ((Replaceable fair use disputed)), without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ---SCEhardT 22:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In case you hadn't noticed, Peppers and Rogers Group has been proposed for deletion. NickelShoe (Talk) 14:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:TurkeyHillDairy.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 19:20, 28 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

May I steal this and credit you?--Tomtom9041 00:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clair, Nice job with the origional submittal of the Diabetes control and complications trial article. mbbradford 19:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have added a "((prod))" template to the article Dutch Wonderland, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Simesa 19:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, see my discussion. It would be nice if the article could be saved. Simesa 19:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:ChuckTaylor.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 06:34, 3 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This form message is being sent to you either due to your membership with WikiProject Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. A new drive has been started requesting that all members review at least one article (or more, if you wish!) within the next two weeks at GAC to help in removing the large backlog. This message is being sent to all members, and even members who have been recently reviewing articles. There are almost 130 members in this project and about 180 articles that currently need to be reviewed. If each member helps to review just one or two articles, the majority of the backlog will be cleared. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :((GAReview)) underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the GAC talk page. --Nehrams2020 00:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:MrMuscle.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add ((Replaceable fair use disputed)), without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Longhair\^talk 06:30, 17 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A new elimination drive of the backlog at Wikipedia:Good article candidates will take place from the month of July through August 12, 2007. There are currently about 130 articles that need to be reviewed right now. If you are interested in helping with the drive, then please visit Wikipedia:Good article candidates backlog elimination drive and record the articles that you have reviewed. Awards will be given based on the number of reviews completed. Since the potential amount of reviewers may significantly increase, please make sure to add :((GAReview)) underneath the article you are reviewing to ensure that only one person is reviewing each article. Additionally, the GA criteria may have been modified since your last review, so look over the criteria again to help you to determine if a candidate is GA-worthy. If you have any questions about this drive or the review process, leave a message on the drive's talk page. Please help to eradicate the backlog to cut down on the waiting time for articles to be reviewed.

You have received this message either due to your membership with WikiProject: Good Articles and/or your inclusion on the Wikipedia:Good article candidates/List of reviewers. --Nehrams2020 23:14, 10 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Behold.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. MER-C 08:48, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DonaldEKraybill.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:02, 11 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have tagged Image:Edwin_metcalfe.gif as ((no rationale)), because it does not provide a fair use rationale. If you believe the image to be acceptable for fair use according to Wikipedia policy, please provide a rationale explaining as much, in accordance with the fair use rationale guideline, on the image description page. Please also consider using ((non-free fair use in|article name)) or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. Thank you. Rettetast 18:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On the off chance that you drop by once in a while... was thinking about you today. There have been a few things popping on some of the oil pages, and I really miss your input. Sigh. Waitak 15:49, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I miss you too - just reverted more vandalism at Johnny Appleseed. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:46, 1 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It figures, the day I finally just stop chopping out "Apple Computers uses Johnny Appleseed in many of its ads" and just added a ((fact)) tag, you show up! Seriously, always good to hear from you and hope you drop by again soon, take care, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The November 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the December 2007 issue. Dr. Cash 01:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 00:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:ConestogaWoodSpecialties.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:ConestogaWoodSpecialtiesLogo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DonaldKraybill.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:CSClogo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:MiltonHersheySchool.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Hercologo3.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:MsntvLogo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:JohnnyAppleseed1948.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:23, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:JournalGazette.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Happy New Year! Here is the latest edition of the WikiProject GA Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 03:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter Volume I, No. 3 - January 2008 December issue | February issue Project News There are now 3,301 Good Articles listed at WP:GA. With 1,789 current featured articles, that brings the total of good and featured articles to 5,090! The most recently promoted articles are: Hurricane Daniel (2006), Tarbosaurus, The Murders in the Rue Morgue, Wicca, Seth MacFarlane, Stanley Internment Camp, Hurricane Karen (2007), Interstate 155 (Illinois), Tropical Storm Ingrid (2007), Brian Sings and Swings, Winston Churchill, Mzoli's, John Kefalas, and Elizabeth Cady Stanton. The backlog at Good Article Nominations has recently exploded to 236 unreviewed articles! Out of 264 total nominations, 17 are on hold, 10 are under review, and one is seeking a second opinion. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance! The oldest unreviewed articles are: Attachment disorder, Byzantium under the Palaiologoi, Byzantium under the Angeloi, Wowowee, Tyrone Wheatley, Mina (singer), Jon Burge, Mercury Hayes, William Lowndes Yancey, and Toni Preckwinkle. The top five categories with the largest backlogs are: Sports and recreation (47 articles), Film and cinema (25 articles), Television and journalism (16 articles), Art and architecture (15 articles), and Politics and government (14 articles). The backlog at Good Article Reassessment currently stands at 17 articles up for re-review. If every participant of WikiProject Good Articles could review just one article in the next week, the backlog would be almost eliminated! Reviewer of the Month Dihydrogen Monoxide is the GAN Reviewer of the Month of December, based on the assessments made by Epbr123 of the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Dihydrogen Monoxide hails from Brisbane (which, incidentally, is almost a GA, kids ;)) and has been editing Wikipedia since August 2006. He mostly likes to review articles relating to music, Australia, or anything else that takes his fancy! He also has two articles waiting, and notes that there's still a huge backlog,... so get cracking! Other outstanding reviewers recognized during the month of December include: Awadewit (talk · contribs) Canadian Paul (talk · contribs) Derek.cashman (talk · contribs) Drewcifer3000 (talk · contribs) Elcobbola (talk · contribs) Jackyd101 (talk · contribs) Kane5187 (talk · contribs) M3tal H3ad (talk · contribs) Nehrams2020 (talk · contribs) The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) VanTucky (talk · contribs) Wassupwestcoast (talk · contribs) Member News There are now 166 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to the 7 new members that joined during the month of December: Majoreditor (talk · contribs) Bernstein2291 (talk · contribs) The4325 (talk · contribs) Pepsi2786 (talk · contribs) Monowi (talk · contribs) Rankun (talk · contribs) This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all! GAReview Template Lots of you that frequent WP:GAN have undoubtedly seen the articles under review, marked with "Review - I am reviewing this article. ...". The articles have been marked as being under review by an editor using the ((GAReview)) template. The purpose of this template is essentially to prevent two editors from reviewing the same article at the same time, so it's essentially a common courtesy notice to other editors so that they don't pass or fail an article while you're in the midst of collecting and writing comments. However, just because an article is marked, shouldn't preclude another editor from contributing to the review. If you'd like to review it, go ahead; simply collect your comments and write them down on the article's talk page – but don't pass or fail the article – leave that to the other reviewer. To use this template yourself, simply write "#:((GAReview)) ~~~~" on the line immediately following the article's nomination at WP:GAN. You can even leave additional comments as well (e.g. "#:((GAReview)) I will finish my review in the next 24 hours. ~~~~"). Reviewers marking articles with this template should also observe some common etiquette; please don't mark more than 1-3 articles as being under review at a time, and please try and finish your review within 3-5 days of marking the article. GA Sweeps After openly requesting the community for more participants into the Sweeps, we have 3 more members on the board. They are (in no particular order) Canadian Paul, VanTucky, and Masem. Canadian Paul will be sweeping "Middle East and the World" articles. VanTucky will be sweeping "Religion, mysticism, and mythology" and "Literature" articles. Masem will be sweeping "Television episodes". We're still looking for more reviewers. Interested individuals should contact OhanaUnited for details. At this moment, participation in the sweeps project is by invitation only, as we desire experienced reviewers who have a thorough and extensive knowledge of the criteria. This is to ensure that articles that have "fallen through the cracks" would be found and removed, and that additional articles don't fall through the cracks during the sweep. Currently, there are 16 members working on the project, and we have reviewed 74 articles in December 2007. Of those that are swept, 275 articles are kept as GA, 126 articles are delisted, and 5 promoted to FA. Did You Know,... ... that the total number of good and featured articles is now over 5000? ... that GA was formed on October 11, 2005 and was formerly called "Half-decent articles"? ... that there is a bot (StatisticianBot) that gives a daily report on GAN? ... that many discussions were made over the years on whether GA should have a symbol placed on the main article space, yet at the end always removed? ... that there was a proposal to change the GA symbol to a green featured star? From the Editors Happy New Year, everyone! I'm just filling in for Dr. Cash as he's busy (or away) in real life. This explains why I wasn't prepared for a full-length article on GA process, and instead I resort to a tiny DYK for GA. OhanaUnited Happy New Year as well! I'm still here, and haven't totally disappeared. I had to cut back on editing and reviewing during the month of December as I made the transition from Flagstaff, Arizona to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. But I should be about settled in the Keystone State, so I'll be contributing more to Wikipedia again in the new year. Thanks to OhanaUnited for putting together much of the content for this newsletter! He's been working hard with the Sweeps, and the 'Did You Know' section is also a great idea, so I think that will become a regular feature now! I also figured out how to have a collapsible newsletter, so that will change our delivery options a bit. Cheers! Dr. Cash Contributors to this Issue Dr. Cash (Lead Editor, Distributor) OhanaUnited (GA Sweeps correspondent) Improving Wikipedia one article at a time since 2005! WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia. Nominations: Premiership of Maurice Duplessis (talk | history | start review) • Mis Mejores Canciones – 17 Super Éxitos (talk | history | start review) • Star Trek: Lower Decks (season 1) (talk | history | start review) • Raymond Flynn (talk | history | start review) • History of philosophy (talk | history | start review) Reassessment: Vector space • Lundy • Max Weinberg • Battle of Antietam • Kraków • Roman Empire • Saadanius • Task forces: Project quality • Sweeps • GAN Backlog Drives • GA Cup WikiProject Good articles newsletter (last updated January 2013) Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations list | edit

Thanks for uploading Image:Senor frog.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:RayChandlerBook.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:01, 24 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"JerryP requested this picture replace unflattering one previously used."
For what it's worth. The "unflattering" picture was replaced 3 days ago, but if he wants to rip on me for trying to help, then I guess I won't anymore. If you're going to consider his statement a release under a free license, you might at least consider uploading the picture from this page so the resolution isn't so horrible. --Onorem♠Dil 03:52, 27 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:TurkeyHill-1967.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:TurkeyHill-1993.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:TurkeyHill-1999.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:TurkeyHill-2004.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:VirgilPartch.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Vanish.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 02:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:AssociatedOil.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Carlos-n-charlies.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DartContainer.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DaveLefever.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DutchWonderland.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:40, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:LancasterCountyHeart.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:LancasterLaboratories.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Lancfarming1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 22:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:WebtvLogo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 04:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:DefianceYellowJackets.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it may be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 13:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:BattleOfBrownstown.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 23:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another editor has added the ((prod)) template to the article Nancy Nall Derringer, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the ((prod)) template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 15:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for uploading Image:MarianneWiggins.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a Newsletter for WikiProject Ohio. Click [show] to reveal the letter.
The Ohio WikiProject Newsletter Issue I - Month 2008
From the editor This is the first issue of WikiProject Ohio's newsletter. The newsletter is intended to help all members of the project to keep up with new developments and coordinate new collaborative efforts. If you would like to suggest something to be included in the next newsletter please see:The Newsdesk Project News *New features have been added to the project banner. All articles now need to be assessed for importance as well as class. There are approximately 60,000 articles under Category:Ohio that still need the banner added to their talk pages as well. Editors and Contributors Needed *We are in need of editors for this newsletter. If you are interested please visit:The Newsletter Project Page. Also, the The Ohio Portal is seeking Wikipedians to nominate selected articles, sports teams, biographies, and images. The portal is also seeking maintainers. Areas needing attention Assessment requests: There may be Requests for assessment needing to be answered. To see new assessment requests as they come in, you can watch the assessment page. Article assessment: Unassessed Ohio article need you help visit Category:Unassessed Ohio articles & Category:Unknown-importance Ohio articles Featured and Good Articles Recently a number of Ohio related articles have achieved featured status. We at WikiProject Ohio would like the editors of those pages for their hard work. Featured Jack Warner, William Tecumseh Sherman, and Superman Good Articles Halle Berry and Jack Nicklaus Contributors Stepshep 23:44, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This newsletter is delivered by bot to all project members of WikiProject Ohio. If you do not want to receive this newsletter in the future, please note this at the unsubscribe page. Thank you, §tepshep - Newsletter Bot Talk 00:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC) The above newsletter was delivered by Newsletterbot as per a request by StepshepReply[reply]

I sure wish that Wikipedia had more editors like you. Say hi if you're in the neighborhood. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 21:43, 14 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I pretty much agree with your stance on verification. It makes me very sad to see how awful the quality of Wikipedia is in practice, and how rare the will to seriously improve it. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 14:53, 5 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Issue II - May 2008

From the editor: Here's Issue II of the project newsletter. We're trying to decide if this is sinking or floating. If you would like to contribute to next month's newsletter please jump right in at the News Desk! Have a great May. The Ohio Portal The maintainers of the Ohio Portal are looking to get it to featured status. They would like to ask all project members to help improve it any way they can. What needs to be done most is the supplying of selected articles and images. Selected Article: Indian Head Rock There is a eight ton rock in Ohio that was removed from the Ohio River. This rock is known as the Indian Head Rock Dating back to the early 1800’s, this rock was seen sticking out of the Ohio River and used as a navigational mark for barges along the river. The names of citizens from the town of Portsmouth, Ohio are carved into the rock from the late nineteenth a early twentieth centuries. Some of the names were of well known families from Ohio. They would swim out to the rock, have their picture taken with it or simply carve their names into it. With the advent of the Locks and Dams along the Ohio River, the rock eventually was submerged, but the legend lived on. A gentleman from Ironton, Ohio located the rock after searching a very long time for it, and he and a crew of scuba divers recovered the rock and took it to the shore to be donated to Ohio for historical value. After hearing the news about the rock being removed, Kentucky introduced legislation against the removal of the rock. They also want the diver who found it to be prosecuted for removing the rock. Kentucky owns the greatest part of the land the river runs on. Even the Army Corp. of Engineers got involved as to how to move the rock without damaging it. Kentucky wants to have it returned to the river. Billy Massie Article Assessment Reedy Bot and ShepBot are currently hard at work tagging all of the Ohio articles. We may need to have an assessment drive when the bots are finished. Think of it as a late spring cleaning. Please note your opinions on the project talkpage if you would be interested in helping! Over 10,000 articles have been tagged with ((OH-Project)) Article Achievements New Featured and Good articles Ohio was listed as a Good Article nominee; the result of the nomination was Not listed. Please help get Ohio to GA status! Port Columbus International Airport was listed as a Good Article. WikiProject Ohio Barnstar of Merit If you know of a Wikipedian who has contributed a lot of effort to Ohio articles feel free to award the new Ohio Barnstar of Merit by placing the following code on their user talkpage. ((subst:The Ohio Barnstar of Merit|message)) Contributors Stepshep & Billy Massie

Open Tasks

Open tasks for WikiProject: Ohio. Edit or discuss these tasks. Ohio Shortcuts: Categories | History | Portal Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Main listing Cleanup : Ohio articles needing attention ( 80 ) Add city infobox to all town/city articles missing one. Add appropriate bio infobox to all Ohio bio articles missing one. Ohio articles needing cleanup Expand : To Good Article status: Ohio Columbus, Ohio Cincinnati, Ohio Toledo, Ohio Akron, Ohio Mansfield, Ohio Featured article candidates : No results were found. Featured list candidates : No results were found. Featured sound candidates : Project Content template contains the following errors: No content type parameters found Unable to generate results. See documentation for help Good article nominations : John A. Roush Geographical coordinates : Ohio articles missing geocoordinate data ( 61 ) Infobox : Ohio articles needing infoboxes ( 54 ) Maintain :  Ohio portal Map : Requested maps in Ohio ( 16 ) Merge : Schools, Articles to be merged in Ohio Photo : Requested photographs in Ohio ( 338 ) Add a picture to an article in the list of requested photographs in Ohio ( 338 ) (Most towns in Ohio are still on the list) or improve one of the articles with no images. Stubs : Stub-Class Ohio articles ( 10,725 ), Category:Ohio stubs Unreferenced : Unreferenced Ohio articles ( 7 ) Other : Lists to de-redlink: List of Registered Historic Places in Ohio, List of Members of Governors Cabinet of Ohio Lists to complete: List of Ohio state symbols Coordinate with Ohio Portal to provide quality articles for use. Place the ((WikiProject United States|class=|importance=|OH=Yes|OH-importance=)) banner into Ohio related articles and assess

This newsletter is delivered by bot to all project members of WikiProject Ohio. If you do not wish to receive this newsletter in the future, please note this at the unsubscribe page. Thank you, §tepshep Delivered by ShepBot (talk) 19:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi ClairSamoht. You currently have yourself listed as a participant in the Pennsylvania WikiProject. If you are still active in the project then ignore this message. However if you are busy or no longer wish to be involved, please remove yourself from the list so we can get an updated count on the number of active members. Thank you! Monobi (talk) 19:40, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The WikiProject Ohio Newsletter

Issue III - June 2008

From the editor: This is the third edition of the WikiProject Ohio newsletter. If you have any project announcements feel free to drop them by the NewsDesk. It's request that you watchlist our talk page; so you can chime in on current discussions. Have a great June! The Ohio Portal The maintainers of the Ohio Portal are looking to get it to featured status. They would like to ask all project members to help improve it any way they can. What needs to be done most is the supplying of selected articles and images. Getting the Project Moving WikiProject Ohio as an entity doesn't have as much action as other state projects. For this reason it has been proposed that the inactive WikiProject Ohio Townships be added as our taskforce. There is a !poll going on at WT:OH and your opinion is essential in the matter! Stepshep has also proposed sending an invite to everyone in Category:Wikipedians in Ohio with an invite to join the project. If you are already a member you would not receive the notice of course. Once again, please note your opinion on the project talkpage. Selected Article: Central Avenue Historic District (Dayton, Ohio) The Central Avenue Historic District is a nationally recognized historic district located at 201 to 338 Central Avenue in Dayton, Ohio. It consists of late 19th and 20th Century Revival-style houses as well as late Victorian-style houses, which were all originally single-family residences. On December 16, 1982, it was added to the National Register of Historic Places. Each month a new Ohio related stub is the selected article. If you have a new stub created feel free to nominate it at the NewsDesk. Article Assessment Reedy Bot and ShepBot are currently hard at work tagging all of the Ohio articles. We may need to have an assessment drive when the bots are finished. Think of it as a late spring cleaning. Please note your opinions on the project talkpage if you would be interested in helping! 'Over 15,000 articles have been tagged with ((OH-Project)) We have 5,000 articles that need to be assessed for class! Article Info Good Article Nominees, FAR, FLC List of Governors of Ohio was nominated for featured list status. Teh result was promote. Bruce Johnson (politician) underwent a featured article review. The result was demote. William Henry Harrison underwent a GAN The result was promote. Paul Tibbets underwent a GAN. It is currently undergoing review. Columbus Blue Jackets underwent a GAN It is currently undergoing review. Articles for Deletion Results Afd W. S. McIntosh Memorial Leadership Award was nominated at Afd. The result was Delete Homer E. Woodling and Robert F. Busbey were nominated at Afd. The result was Keep All Ohio High School Conferences were nominated at Afd. The result was no consensus keep. There is an effort to improve these articles here. Ohio Barnstar of Merit If you know of a Wikipedian who has contributed a good deal of effort to Ohio articles feel free to award the new Ohio Barnstar of Merit by placing the following code on their user talkpage. ((subst:The Ohio Barnstar of Merit|message)) Article Importance Scheme A new article importance scheme has been proposed at the assessment talk page. Please comment on the propsed system. Ohio NHLs Tabulated The 25 of Ohio's 69 National Historic Landmarks that were red-links all got articles this month, as part of a WP:NRHP drive to finish beginning the 2,430 or so NHL articles needed for nation-wide coverage. WP:OHIO members Stepshep and Sanfranman59 were busy. Contributors Stepshep, Clariosophic, & Doncram

Open Tasks

Open tasks for WikiProject: Ohio. Edit or discuss these tasks. Ohio Shortcuts: Categories | History | Portal Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Main listing Cleanup : Ohio articles needing attention ( 80 ) Add city infobox to all town/city articles missing one. Add appropriate bio infobox to all Ohio bio articles missing one. Ohio articles needing cleanup Expand : To Good Article status: Ohio Columbus, Ohio Cincinnati, Ohio Toledo, Ohio Akron, Ohio Mansfield, Ohio Featured article candidates : No results were found. Featured list candidates : No results were found. Featured sound candidates : Project Content template contains the following errors: No content type parameters found Unable to generate results. See documentation for help Good article nominations : John A. Roush Geographical coordinates : Ohio articles missing geocoordinate data ( 61 ) Infobox : Ohio articles needing infoboxes ( 54 ) Maintain :  Ohio portal Map : Requested maps in Ohio ( 16 ) Merge : Schools, Articles to be merged in Ohio Photo : Requested photographs in Ohio ( 338 ) Add a picture to an article in the list of requested photographs in Ohio ( 338 ) (Most towns in Ohio are still on the list) or improve one of the articles with no images. Stubs : Stub-Class Ohio articles ( 10,725 ), Category:Ohio stubs Unreferenced : Unreferenced Ohio articles ( 7 ) Other : Lists to de-redlink: List of Registered Historic Places in Ohio, List of Members of Governors Cabinet of Ohio Lists to complete: List of Ohio state symbols Coordinate with Ohio Portal to provide quality articles for use. Place the ((WikiProject United States|class=|importance=|OH=Yes|OH-importance=)) banner into Ohio related articles and assess

This newsletter is delivered by bot to all project members of WikiProject Ohio. If you do not wish to receive this newsletter in the future or would like to receive it in a different format, please note this in the appropriate section at the NewsDesk. Thank you, §tepshep

Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) 15:00, 26 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Introducing WikiProject United States Government...[edit]
	Hello ClairSamoht, Are you interested in Politics, Law or the United States? Do you enjoy expanding, creating or maintaining articles relating to those subjects? Or do you enjoy the small stuff? Or maybe you like learning about the United States Congress or the Commander in Chief. Well, wait no longer, because we have a project for you! WikiProject United States Government is where all the cool Wikipedians who watch C-SPAN hang out! Join the project today and help us get it off the ground and flying. Thanks in advance, « Diligent Terrier Bot (talk) 21:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC) Reply[reply] This message has been delivered by Diligent Terrier Bot on behalf of WikiProject United States Government. You have received it because you are a member of a related WikiProject or you have said you are interested in your userspace. Message written by Leonard^Bloom and Diligent Terrier.	Help us get the project off the ground and flying.

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Donald Kraybill (disambiguation), by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Donald Kraybill (disambiguation) is a disambiguation page that only points to a single article, or no articles at all.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Donald Kraybill (disambiguation), 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) 08:11, 21 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Most restaurants per capita in the United States has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced (I'm guessing the 2003 consensus but the link is broken) and generally just trivia.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((dated prod)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing ((dated prod)) will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ricky81682 (talk) 04:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pennsylvania has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:41, 17 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello ClairSamoht! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. 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 this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 1,807 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the ((unreferencedBLP)) tag. Here is the article:

1. William R. Johnson - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 00:15, 9 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:BenDavisRookie.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Mosmof (talk) 04:32, 29 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:StrasburgRR.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as ((non-free fair use in|article name)) or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mosmof (talk) 04:36, 29 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Minnewawa.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 04:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mosmof (talk) 04:40, 29 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:HarryBaals.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mosmof (talk) 04:41, 29 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of US states by number of restaurants per capita. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of US states by number of restaurants per capita. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:04, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Endust.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 17:37, 18 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, ClairSamoht! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 03:28, 4 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 05:24, 5 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Good to see you pop your head up. We're doing a major overhaul of List of vegetable oils at the moment if you'd like to stick your oar in. The references have gotten a bit musty over the years, and some of them never were very good. It'll be good to get the list back up to the quality that it ought to be. Hope all's well. Waitak (talk) 21:02, 21 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also glad to see your name pop up again on my watchlist. Take care, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 23:40, 21 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:LancasterLaboratories.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a ((helpme)) template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add ((bots|deny=DASHBot)) to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:51, 7 January 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Drackett.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. MGA73 (talk) 18:48, 21 February 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]